Which “Public”? Whose “Interest”?
Simplified SNAP applications
Texting crisis lines
Addressing root causes of homeless
Implicit in the public
The common denominator
The unobjectionable
A Lindblomian Vision of Democracy
The place of the analyst
Public Interest → Thoughtful Partisanship
Feasible Solutions → Liberation from Impairments in Thought
Needs of Officials → Assistance to Ordinary Citizens
Recommendations → Tailored for Critical Needs
A Detour to Toxics Policy
TSCA Searching for (Epistemological) Harmony in the Universe
“Public interest” analysis is wickedly hard
TURI
Thoughtfully partisan action absent consensus on the public good
Liberation from impaired thinking regarding detoxification
The Scientific vs. the Self-Guiding Society
“Democratization” → Deliberating?
Limits of “Government by Discussion”
From search for the public good → Problem solving
“The fundamental, lasting, ever-present, long-term requirement for good problem solving is…to create—not to discover, but to create—opportunities for collective action that did not exist before”
“They might believe…in the possibility that they…could find harmony in the universe, each person potentially no longer in conflict with others, the intellect consequently capable of discovering ‘correct’ solutions”
Who Needs What Public-Interest Technology?
Technologies that facilitate and advance disagreement
Technologies to help citizens better grasp and navigate that disagreement
In a sense, an expansion of UX
An Example: Housing
Main Public Feedback
Not exactly what democracy looks like
Comments?