SPFApplication Richard Janda 25-11b draft · 2015. 3. 2. · 1...
15
1 Sustainability Project Fund Application Applicant/Project Leader: Richard Janda, Associate Professor; Hydro Quebec Scholar Sustainable Development Law, Associate Member, McGill School of Environment Contact Information: Name: Richard Janda Email: [email protected] Daytime Phone: 5143985097 Project Title: McGill Social Score Platform Budget Requested: $75,000 for year 1 Project Group Please include the names and contact information of all group members Richard Janda, Jeremy Cooperstock ([email protected]), Juan Pinto ([email protected]), Shy Kurtz ([email protected]), Robb Miler ([email protected]), Jeff Blum ([email protected]), MarcÉtienne Brunet (marc [email protected]) TBC, Dror Etzion ([email protected]), Allison Christians ([email protected]) TBC and others TBD I. Project Overview Project summary: • Provide a brief background, describing the project, objectives and outcomes. Our objective is to test the hypothesis that members of the community will act in measurably more sustainable ways if they are given real time feedback in the form of a social score. Law students from the Richard Janda’s Sustainable Development course conducted a social score experiment this past semester that produced encouraging results (see attachments). A group of 116 participants at a Faculty event agreed to have their choices recorded. They were presented with posters identifying the score they would receive for various choices (e.g. beverages, food, use of plastic cups and utensils or napkins, use of recycled cups, disposal of trash, recycling). Scores were based principally on carbon footprint information. They were not told that their collective score would be displayed on a screen at the event. This was done using 20 observers positioned at various stations throughout the event where choices were made. The entries made by observers were recorded on a Google docs sheet, which in turn generated a needle that moved in response to changing score. The needle was set up so as to move in relation to the results of the previous week, at which the data on aggregate outcomes were gathered after information had been provided to the community about impacts. At the end of the evening, the needle had moved significantly in the positive direction, which corresponded to a measurable change in aggregate outcomes. We are aiming to establish a platform and service for the community that could generalize the results of our Law Faculty experiment. Since observers cannot be deployed throughout a Faculty or campus, we would seek to gather information through the deployment of QR codes and sensors, and provide an interface to participants on smart phones and on a website recording their score both individually and in the aggregate. Initially we are seeking to set up a prototype for this service that would be deployed in three Faculties: Law, Engineering and Management. We would seek the participation of students and staff. There are two sets of questions we want to explore using the prototype. The first concerns what sorts of incentives will work best in getting participants to improve their score? Can rivalry among faculties be channelled positively? Can modest individual incentives (e.g. eligibility to receive a basket of vegetables at the McGill Farmers’ market) produce significant improvements? Can shifts in scoring increments in response to improving performance help to ratchet up outcomes? The second set of questions concerns the best methodologies for gathering data on users. For example, we would seek to test the use of existing data sources at McGill (such as the data from uPrint to track paper use and possibly the hood sash sensors being tested at labs by Facilities Operations and Development), from phone sensors to track transportation (with the user prompted to verify predicted transport means), from active sensors and scanners (e.g. at cafeterias) over which a user QR code or bar code could be swiped, and from passive QR Code tags placed at various stations (e.g. recycling bins).
Transcript of SPFApplication Richard Janda 25-11b draft · 2015. 3. 2. · 1...
1
Sustainability Project Fund Application Applicant/Project Leader: Richard Janda, Associate Professor; Hydro Quebec Scholar Sustainable Development Law, Associate Member, McGill School of Environment Contact Information: Name: Richard Janda Email: [email protected] Daytime Phone: 514-‐398-‐5097 Project Title: McGill Social Score Platform Budget Requested: $75,000 for year 1 Project Group -‐ Please include the names and contact information of all group members Richard Janda, Jeremy Cooperstock ([email protected]), Juan Pinto ([email protected]), Shy Kurtz ([email protected]), Robb Miler ([email protected]), Jeff Blum ([email protected]), Marc-‐Étienne Brunet (marc-‐[email protected]) TBC, Dror Etzion ([email protected]), Allison Christians ([email protected]) TBC and others TBD I. Project Overview Project summary:
• Provide a brief background, describing the project, objectives and outcomes. Our objective is to test the hypothesis that members of the community will act in measurably more sustainable ways if they are given real time feedback in the form of a social score. Law students from the Richard Janda’s Sustainable Development course conducted a social score experiment this past semester that produced encouraging results (see attachments). A group of 116 participants at a Faculty event agreed to have their choices recorded. They were presented with posters identifying the score they would receive for various choices (e.g. beverages, food, use of plastic cups and utensils or napkins, use of recycled cups, disposal of trash, recycling). Scores were based principally on carbon footprint information. They were not told that their collective score would be displayed on a screen at the event. This was done using 20 observers positioned at various stations throughout the event where choices were made. The entries made by observers were recorded on a Google docs sheet, which in turn generated a needle that moved in response to changing score. The needle was set up so as to move in relation to the results of the previous week, at which the data on aggregate outcomes were gathered after information had been provided to the community about impacts. At the end of the evening, the needle had moved significantly in the positive direction, which corresponded to a measurable change in aggregate outcomes. We are aiming to establish a platform and service for the community that could generalize the results of our Law Faculty experiment. Since observers cannot be deployed throughout a Faculty or campus, we would seek to gather information through the deployment of QR codes and sensors, and provide an interface to participants on smart phones and on a website recording their score both individually and in the aggregate. Initially we are seeking to set up a prototype for this service that would be deployed in three Faculties: Law, Engineering and Management. We would seek the participation of students and staff. There are two sets of questions we want to explore using the prototype. The first concerns what sorts of incentives will work best in getting participants to improve their score? Can rivalry among faculties be channelled positively? Can modest individual incentives (e.g. eligibility to receive a basket of vegetables at the McGill Farmers’ market) produce significant improvements? Can shifts in scoring increments in response to improving performance help to ratchet up outcomes? The second set of questions concerns the best methodologies for gathering data on users. For example, we would seek to test the use of existing data sources at McGill (such as the data from uPrint to track paper use and possibly the hood sash sensors being tested at labs by Facilities Operations and Development), from phone sensors to track transportation (with the user prompted to verify predicted transport means), from active sensors and scanners (e.g. at cafeterias) over which a user QR code or bar code could be swiped, and from passive QR Code tags placed at various stations (e.g. recycling bins).
jjones38
Typewritten Text
Appendix 1
jjones38
Typewritten Text
2
Students from campus sustainability groups, including those from Law, Engineering and Management, would be involved in performing inventories of locations at which community behaviour could be scored. Students from the McGill School of Environment would be invited to provide studies of scoring methodology consistent with McGill’s overall sustainability indicators and with existing recognized scorecard methodologies. In particular, the Sustainability Consortium, which has developed scorecard methodologies for large organizations, would be approached for assistance. Students from Engineering doing computing design projects would be invited to work on specific aspects of program development under the supervision of the Project Manager for the project, Robb Miller, with the assistance of Jeremy Cooperstock. Nevertheless, the main programming work will be done using professional services. By the end of the year we will prepare a report on documenting the results of our work with the prototype and proposing a strategy for its enhancement and expanded use. The ambition of the project is to work toward developing a platform for the entire McGill community, staff and students alike, which could connect improvement in McGill’s overall performance footprint with that of individual users. If successful, this might ultimately be extended to sister universities and indeed other communities. Project eligibility:
• How will the project contribute to building a culture of sustainability on campus? A culture of sustainability requires shifts in behaviour. Information campaigns can only achieve such shifts to the extent that the message is both retained and translated into decision-‐making outcomes. However, there is often a significant lag between the provision of information and the point in time at which a decision is made. Furthermore, choices are overburdened by a range of often-‐incommensurable factors that are weighed with partial information and imperfect recollection of information. This produces the phenomena economists call satisficing and bounded rationality. In markets, this is usually accompanied by a substitution of price signals, which are clear and typically immediate, for more difficult weighing of impacts of collective goods. However, if a reliable and immediate signal were sent to decision-‐makers about the impacts of their choices on collective goods, if those individuals could see how their choice ranked relative to others, and if aggregate community impacts and choices were signalled as well, a propitious context for shifts in behaviour would be created. This is precisely what we are seeking to enable and test for. Technological platforms operating in real time offer a new possibility for overcoming some of the inertia in individual choices that impedes the emergence of a culture of sustainability.
• Provide any supporting information that demonstrates a need for the project on campus. There has been growing sophistication on campus in gathering, processing, and transmitting data about our campus footprint. Shining examples of this are the McGill Energy Dashboard and the work of the McGill Energy Project. Yet the growth of information about the overall footprint of buildings and facilities does not yet have a systematic feedback mechanism to the choices made by individual members of the campus community, except to the degree that they are aware of that information and can find tangible ways to relate to it. The need for such a feedback mechanism is what we seek to fill. This ties in to a number of Vision 2020 goals, including to “develop mechanisms and accountability measures through a multi-‐stakeholder engagement process to ensure that social sustainability is adequately addressed on campus.” Timeframe/Milestones:
• Indicate the anticipated project timeframe, providing key milestones for deliverables. Please specify projected project start and finish dates.
Project start date: January 1, 2014 Phase I: Launch and Scoping January 1, 2014 – February 1, 2014 (student activities to April 30, 2014): Meetings and focus group sessions with campus stakeholders including from Law, Engineering, Management, MOoS, and the McGill Energy Project to identify precisely the functionality that we are seeking for our platform. Robb Miller will use this process to prepare a business requirements document (BRD) establishing programming specifications for our prototype. Engineering students from the Design Lab will be selected by Robb Miller and Jeremy Cooperstock to participate in semester long “hackathon” contributing concepts to the eventual platform.
3
McGill School of Environment students will begin work on a semester long project under Juan Pinto’s supervision to culminate in specific proposals for scoring methodology. Students from Environmental Law McGill will begin work under Juan Pinto’s supervision to develop privacy protocols that will be tested with the McGill Research Ethics Board Office as well as protocols for governance of the platform. Phase II: Prototype development February 1, 2011 – April 30, 2014: We will put out Robb Miller’s BRD for tenders, although some preliminary contacts are already in place. Depending on the scoping exercise, this could have data services and algorithm dimensions, an iPhone app component, an Android app component, and a website/webapp component. During this phase approximately 200 “alpha” test participants will be recruited among staff and students of Law, Engineering, Management, MOoS and other relevant groups. Phase III: Prototype testing May 1, 2014 – June 30, 2014 The low-‐fidelity prototype will undergo preliminary testing and exploration of design questions. Phase IV: Pilot scoring applications July 1, 2014 – August 30, 2014 We will build one or more preliminary pilot applications of the prototype to specific scoring contexts on campus. This might include, as needed, the broader deployment of QR codes and sensors. Phase V: Proof of concept September 1, 2014 – November 15, 2014 Our pilot applications will be tested during the Fall semester with a view to showing that the sustainability footprint of users was measurably improved. A Report will be prepared with a view to a re-‐submission to the fund if our results are successful and a plan can be formulated to move from prototype “alpha” phase to “beta” phase.
• What performance indicators may be used to gauge the success of the project? Two sets of performance indicators are relevant to this project. The first has to do with the capacity and robustness of the designed platform to fulfill specifications identified in the scoping phase. The second has to do with measurable improvements in sustainability footprint by users according to agreed upon metrics. Kathleen Ng of MOoS has agreed to be a resource person in identifying and confirming the latter.
• How will the outcomes be shared with the community?
There will be a Report from the project in the last phase and as the robustness of the platform is proved, we will consider spreading its availability and indeed publicizing its results. Stakeholders:
• Other than the project team, who will have a stake in your project? Please list the other individuals, groups or departments affiliated or affected directly or indirectly with your project.
Kathleen Ng, MOoS Environmental Officer. Student Groups and Associations, including SSMU (notably its Sustainability Coordinator and Environmental Commission), PGSS, Law Students Association, Engineering Undergraduate Society, Management Undergraduate Society, Sustainable McGill Project, Greening McGill, and Environmental Law McGill. Facilities Operations and Development, University Services, especially through the McGill Energy Project. The Hydro-‐Québec Sustainable Development Scholars Fund at the Faculty of Law. Potentially campus staff associations, including MAUT, MUNASA and MUNACA.
• In what capacity will they be involved? How they will be contributing to the project, i.e. immediate funding, future/ongoing funding, technical expertise, in-‐kind donations, etc. Letters of commitment may be attached.
4
Kathleen Ng will assist us in ensuring that our metrics for scoring connect seamlessly to sustainability indicators chosen for McGill. She will also sit on our Advisory Committee. Student groups and associations will be involved in scoping of the project, will be drawn from in work on programming, the scoring algorithm, privacy protection and generating a group of 200 “alpha” users. The McGill Energy Project, which is a leader in measuring the campus energy footprint and deploying sensors to improve energy conservation, will help us to identify potential deployment of energy scoring. We would also seek the good offices of the Associate Vice-‐Principal University Services to identify relevant sources of data for potential scoring applications. The Hydro-‐Québec Sustainable Development Fund administered by Richard Janda would contribute $21,500 to this project for equipment and some salary. Hydro-‐Québec would also be approached for its expertise on smart metering. Staff groups on campus are potential stakeholders as we seek to generate our group of “alpha” users and eventually to generate support and interest for the project across campus.
• Who will be otherwise affected by the project? Have they been consulted? Please summarize their reactions. Letters of support may be attached.
Richard Janda has approached Kathleen Ng, Marc-‐Étienne Brunet, and the students of Environmental Law McGill, to whom he has presented the project for their support (a support letter is being sought). Juan Pinto has approached PGSS and as part of his responsibilities will be coordinating with student groups. Richard Janda is a Past-‐President of MAUT and will raise the project informally with the current MAUT Executive as it becomes ripe. II. Project Implementation Tasks and Responsibilities:
• Indicate clearly all activities associated with the proposed project, the person responsible and the length of time each task is expected to take.
Type of Activity – Task Estimated Time Required Group Member in Charge Project Leader • Overall responsibility for project activities & outcomes • Responsibility to Advisory Committee and MOoS
Full year Richard Janda
Campus Coordinator • Stakeholder Engagement • Sustainability Metrics • Student Involvement Coordination • Infrastructure & communications • Secretary of the Advisory Committee
Full year Juan Pinto
Project Manager • Oversight of prototype design & development • Initial Scoping & BRD • Pre-‐app engagement • MVP determination • Student Involvement Coordination (Programming)
Full year but 80% of effort concentrated in January 1 – April 30, 2014 to ensure prototype delivery.
Robb Miller
Data services & algorithm developer February – April 30, 2014 Robb Miller (supervising) iPhone app developer February – April 30, 2014 Robb Miller (supervising) Android app developer February – April 30, 2014 Robb Miller (supervising) Website/webapp developer February – April 30, 2014 Robb Miller (supervising) Student development & website assistance January – November, 2014 Robb Miller and Jeremy
Cooperstock (supervising) Student scoring protocol research January – November, 2014 Juan Pinto (supervising) Student privacy & platform governance research January – November, 2014 Juan Pinto (supervising) Advisory Committee • Meetings at the end of each phase • Informal advice throughout the project
January – November, 2014 Richard Janda (chair) Kathleen Ng, Jeremy Coopertock, Jeff Blum, Dror Etzion, Shy Kurtz, Allison Christians, Marc-‐Étienne Brunet
5
III. Financials
• Critical Date: Please state if there is a critical date by which funding is required Our start date is January 1 in order to have access to students at the beginning of next semester.
• Funds this year: if your project is multi-‐year, please specify how much you are requesting before December 31, 2011.
We are planning a one-‐year project with a view to re-‐applying with the results of the first year. • Please provide details of the budget that is being requested
Detailed expenses: Expense description Estimated cost Campus Coordinator $10,000 (including McGill benefits) Project Manager $20,000 Data services & algorithm developer $12,500 iPhone app developer $11,500 Android app developer $7,500 Website & webapp developer $5,000 Student developers and research assistants ($20/hr) $15,000 (including McGill benefits) Server, sensors, scanners, QR Code production & other equipment $15,000 Detailed revenues: Revenue Source Amount Requested Confirmed? Sustainability Projects Fund $75,000 No Hydro-‐Québec Sustainable Development Fund
$21,500 Yes
IV. Additional information:
• Provide supporting information regarding the qualifications and/or related experience of the project leader and other project members
Richard Janda is currently conducting research on “real time law” – the use of feedback mechanisms within regulatory processes. A Partnership Development Grant application is currently being made to further work on this theme with a network of colleagues partnering the Faculty of Law of McGill University and Sciences Po in France. This project will be a case study for the broader research agenda. This work flows from prior work on sustainability metrics and corporate social responsibility. He is also a member of the Quebec Government’s Table de concertation sur les indicateurs de développement durable. Juan Pinto is a doctoral student working under Richard Janda’s supervision. His doctoral work focuses on the governance of social scoring mechanisms. He coordinated the Coffee House social score experiment conducted this semester. Robb Miller is a tech entrepreneur and Canadian lawyer. He has led the development of several award-‐winning data and technology projects and in particular has worked on apps for energy pricing in the renewable energy sector. He has a broad range of experience running data-‐driven projects. Jeremy Cooperstock is an associate professor in the department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, a member of the Centre for Intelligent Machines, and a founding member of the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology at McGill University. He directs the Shared Reality Lab, which focuses on computer mediation to facilitate high-‐fidelity human communication and the synthesis of perceptually engaging, multimodal, immersive environments, and also leads the theme of Enabling Technologies for a new Networks of Centres of Excellence on Graphics, Animation, and New Media (GRAND). Shy Kurtz is a graduate of the Faculty of Law of McGill University who is a tax consultant and social entrepreneur. He has been working with Richard Janda for the last four years on the social scoring concept and co-‐wrote with him an op-‐ed piece on the subject for the Globe and Mail in November, 2011. Dror Etzion is an assistant professor of strategy and organizations at the Desautels Faculty of Management, and an associate member of the McGill School of the Environment. He joined McGill in 2008, after completing his Ph.D. studies at IESE Business School in Barcelona, Spain. Previously, Dror worked for 5 years in the Israeli software
6
industry, and also spent a year at The Natural Step, an international non-‐profit research and consultancy organization focused on sustainable development. Dror's research program focuses on environmental metrics: how we decide what we measure, how new metrics diffuse in the organizational landscape, how accurately the measures used actually capture the reality of impacts on the environment, and how, if at all, metrics influence future behavior. Jeff Blum is a doctoral student in the Shared Reality Lab, holding a B.S.E. in Computer Science from Princeton University. He has experience in mobile application design and development, most recently on the In Situ Audio Services (ISAS) project, which provides an audio augmented reality system to blind users via a smartphone platform. Allison Christians is the H. Heward Stikeman Chair in the Law of Taxation at the Faculty of Law. Her research and teaching focus on national and international tax law and policy issues, with emphasis on the relationship between taxation and economic development and on the role of government and non-‐government institutions and actors in the creation of tax policy norms. She has an interest in the connection between social scores and taxation. Marc-‐Étienne Brunet is cofounder of the McGill Energy Project and 2013 winner of the Emerald Key Catalyst Award for outstanding and enduring contribution to sustainability at McGill.
• Any other pertinent information may be appendicized (e.g., detailed budget, detailed timeline, survey results, examples of similar projects, confirmations of funding, etc.)
The following Appendices include poster information about the Coffee House Score experiment as well as support letters from Jeremy Cooperstock, Shy Kurtz, Jeff Blum, Dror Etzion, Allison Christians (TBC) and Marc-‐Étienne Brunet (TBC). The Globe and Mail op-‐ed piece written by Richard Janda and Shy Kurtz is also included. This proposal was drafted by Richard Janda with the assistance of Juan Pinto and Robb Miller, and hence letters of support are not provided from them.
7
8
9
10
On 11/19/2013, 7:59 PM, test wrote Hi Richard, I really have no idea what would be appropriate as funding for student-‐developers who are participating in the project in the context of a Design Project, for which they receive credit. Although I've floated that idea of a modest stipend for some project possibilities, I've never actually done so myself. This is probably something best discussed with Roni Khazaka, who coordinates the projects. However, if you're looking to hire a student-‐developer outside the context of graded coursework, then a figure of approximately $20/hour is a ballpark I'd suggest unless the student was exceptionally experienced/qualified. I'm attaching our proposal to the Office of Sustainability -‐-‐ the large budget was based on the scope of activity that we had been requested to submit, and unfortunately, that was one of the biggest factors that killed it. I suspect that your figure of $50k as a request would be much more palatable an ask. Keep in mind that a role just as important as a project manager for something of this nature is someone who can observe and test users trying early prototypes of the system, and based on these results, guide incremental improvements to the design with the objective of an improved user experience. That's a lot of what we do in my Human-‐Computer Interaction class, so I may be able to find you some students from there to help with such an activity. And of course, I'd be happy to play whatever advisory role you think would be most appropriate. I'll be running around all of tomorrow afternoon but should be able to speak with you in the morning if that suits your schedule; otherwise, Thursday is currently wide open. Best, -‐ Jeremy On 11/19/2013, 6:05 PM, test wrote: Jeremy, Further to this, we will put in an application to the Office of Sustainability on Monday. If you would like to be part of it in any way that would be great — even especially if you would like to participate directly, but I know how busy you are. I would like to build in a component to fund some student-‐developer work and to work with Electrical and Computer Engineering students. Could you give me a general sense of what can or should be earmarked for such student involvement? Is it too much to ask to see the budget you had earlier developed for your proposal to see your cost estimates? I am looking at a $50,000 request roughly with $10000 to $15000 thrown in from a separate Hydro Quebec fund I have. I am imagining using the $10000 for a project manager who will develop the specs for the app and that the app should function in fact as a platform to test the success of a few possible methodologies — I guess in the lingo it would be the alpha version of an eventual app. Richard From: Jeremy Cooperstock <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, 14 November, 2013 12:05 PM To: test <[email protected]> Subject: re mobile apps for sustainability Hi Richard, To follow-‐up on this: In terms of possible student-‐developer resources, I've sent a query to the coordinator if the Electrical Engineering design projects to find out whether there are any groups starting in January. I confirmed yesterday with the projects coordinator that there are, indeed, a sizable number of project groups who begin their activities in January. If you wanted to run something through Electrical and Computer Engineering, I'd be happy to help. Best, -‐ Jeremy
11
From: Shy Kurtz <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Confirmation of participation on McGill Social Score Platform Advisory Committee Date: November 24, 2013 6:13:46 PM EST To: Richard Janda, Prof. [email protected] Dear Richard, Yes, I confirm that I agree to sit on the Advisory Committee of the McGill Social Score Platform. It is a great privilege, and an even greater cause. I will forward you a bio ASAP. Sincerely, Shy Kurtz LLB, BCL On 25 בנוב 2013, at 00:16, "Richard Janda, Prof." <[email protected]> wrote: Dear Shy, I am writing simply to get your formal confirmation that you agree to sit on the Advisory Committee for the McGill Social Score Platform. Since our discussions have been the basis of the social score experiment that was conducted at McGill this fall and since your ideas about social scoring methodologies have been an ongoing source of inspiration to me, your participation in this project is of course crucial to its success. For the purposes of documentation, I would be grateful if you could provide a brief bio. Thanks in advance and I greatly look forward to the success of our common endeavour. Richard
12
From: Jeff Blum <[email protected]> Subject: Re: re "social score" project Date: November 21, 2013 1:58:45 PM EST To: Richard Janda, Prof. <[email protected]> Cc: Juan Pinto [email protected] Prof. Janda, I'd be delighted, no arm twisting necessary! -‐jeff On 13-‐11-‐20 10:00 PM, Richard Janda, Prof. wrote: Jeff, I really enjoyed our meeting. I am hoping to twist your arm a tiny bit to be on an Advisory Committee for our project. Jeremy is on board. I would keep this non-‐onerous -‐-‐ maybe three meetings to review what we are doing and make suggestions. Are you game? Richard
13
From: Dror Etzion <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Draft Sustainability Projects Fund application Date: November 25, 2013 8:44:07 AM EST To: Richard Janda, Prof. [email protected] Hi Richard, thanks again for thinking of me. I am happy to have my name listed. Full disclosure: I am on the SPF committee so will recuse myself from the discussion about this proposal. The following sentence which covers some of my research interests may be useful to include in my bio: Dror's research program focuses on environmental metrics: how we decide what we measure, how new metrics diffuse in the organizational landscape, how accurately the measures used actually capture the reality of impacts on the environment, and how, if at all, metrics influence future behavior. Dror -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐Original Message-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐ From: Richard Janda, Prof. Sent: November-‐25-‐13 12:32 AM To: Juan Pinto; Robb Miller; Kathleen Ng, Ms.; Jeremy Cooperstock; Jeff Blum; Shy Kurtz; Dror Etzion; Marc-‐Etienne Brunet Subject: Draft Sustainability Projects Fund application Dear all, Please find attached the draft sustainability projects fund application. Your comments are welcome although the submission must be made today (November 25). I am particularly keen to ensure that you are all comfortable with the description of your role in the project and the description of your relevant bio at the end. With the exception of Juan, Robb, Jeremy and Kathleen, your only role would be to sit on the Advisory Committee. Juan is Campus Coordinator. Robb is Project Manager. Jeremy has been kind enough to agree to help select and supervise any Engineering Media Lab students involved (together with Robb). Kathleen has kindly agreed to help us ensure that our scoring mechanism interconnects properly with McGill sustainability metrics. Dror and Marc-‐Étienne are still indicated as TBC and I hope that on seeing the application they will allow their names to be on the application as members of the Advisory Committee. Richard
14
JANDA AND KURTZ
Accounting for the new philanthropy RICHARD JANDA AND SHY KURTZ Contributed to The Globe and Mail Published Friday, Nov. 04 2011, 2:00 AM EDT Last updated Friday, Jun. 15 2012, 4:24 PM EDT
The new philanthropy asks social entrepreneurs to make the business case for public goods. Its premise is simple: Governments face overwhelming pressure to control debt and lower taxes, while social and environmental challenges are mounting. Thus, corporate and individual gifts must take up the slack.
Britain’s Big Society initiatives exemplify this new regime: Rather than fund public programs directly, the state will incentivize private investment in public outcomes. After all, since markets are inadequate to meet public needs and create many “externalities” – unpaid social costs – the exchange market for private goods should be corrected by a kind of gift market for public goods.
But this formula exposes a deeper problem with our existing economy: It has no clear signal for valuing public goods. Public goods are those we share. Private goods are those we keep for ourselves. Yet, public goods enable private goods. The “market” itself is an example. Without shared access to the market, there would be no market economy.
What the new philanthropy still lacks is generalized accountability for the production and depletion of public goods. True, it generates “performance indicators,” but it’s still at a stage analogous to systems of accounting before double-entry bookkeeping. The new philanthropists try to keep a single ledger of what’s paid for and received. But the economy, which tracks the exchange of private goods so closely, fails to track how each transaction depletes or contributes to public goods.
15
What would a generalized system of private good/public good debits and credits look like? Imagine that indicators of social impact were applied automatically throughout the supply chain to all transactions. Imagine that each transaction had a social impact score. Imagine that every company and every individual carried their own social score resulting from the aggregate of their transactions. Rather than using charitable tax credits to channel philanthropic behaviour, the tax system could become a more general system of accounting for public goods.
Consumption tax, for example, could be scaled upward for negative social impact and downward for positive impact. Social score would thus become a systematic signal of impact on public goods. And social entrepreneurship could be oriented toward flowing resources to positive social scores. The tax system would then seek to guarantee that the combination of public finance and social entrepreneurship provided public goods.
Emerging efforts to put a price on ecosystem services presage a general social score. The problem with such efforts is they’re often based on internalizing the costs of public goods within the price of a transaction without having an independent signal for public good impacts themselves. And some public goods can’t simply be traded against private goods. There’s no quantity of widgets to exchange for a healthy climate.
Oscar Wilde offered a biting critique of the old philanthropy when he proclaimed that “the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good.” For the new philanthropy to escape this critique would require a systematic change making us all accountable for the social impact of our choices. The new philanthropy should point toward a philanthropic economy in which the gift market is balanced against the exchange market in every transaction. Such a dramatic transformation, unthinkable even a decade ago, is becoming possible through Web technologies.
Richard Janda is a law professor at McGill University. Shy Kurtz is a tax consultant on social entrepreneurship and philanthropy.
