by 
Earlier this year the City of Melbourne embarked on a collaborative process using a wiki for the Future Melbourne project.
It is a really positive sign that a City Council should make such a strong committment to public participation that it undertakes such an innovative initiative. This demonstrates an openess to innovation that is sadly lacking in many of our public institutions.
Unfortunately the process has not been without its detractors. I cannot claim any inside knowledge about this process but I have heard a number of criticisms. My view is that it is important to step back and critically analyse the process becasue by doing this we learn and develop best practice. BUT if they hadnt tried it we would not have learned antyhing. New approaches will always have detractors but they shouldn’t be allowed to stifle innovation. I only hope that the findings are shared in the same open manner flagged by using the wiki in the first place.
There is a nagging question in my mind about the use of wikis for open processes. The nature of a wiki, with anyone able to replace anyone elses contribution can be very frustrating with interesting inputs and information often lost and replaced with perhaps less informative content. I heard that in the Melbourne process a transport expert spent some time setting out some detailed proposals only to fnd that they had been deleted and replaced with something, shall we say less expert, a few hours later.
It may be that all this comment was collected by the Melbourne staff but if others in the community are deprived of the ability to view this content then the opportunity for community participation is reduced.
In Melbourne’s defence the wiki was backed up with discussion forums and a blog so there was plenty of interaction. I wonder how the results tallied with more traditional consultation methods such as public meetings and submissions. There is a great deal to be learned from the whole process – perhaps someone could comment here??
Incidentally, while we are on the subject of Melbourne, Crispin is on his way there to set up a Bang the Table presence in the city from which we will service Victoria, SA and WA.
This work by Bang the Table Pty Ltd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License.
Hi Matt, and thanks for your post on Future Melbourne. During the 4 week public consultation period we received over 30,000 page views by some 7000 individuals. Over 200 edits were undertaken to the plan by members of the public. Compared to traditional town hall style meetings we were incredibly happy with the level of engagement. Although we’re quick to note that the wiki was just one in a suite of many consultation tools, including face to face meetings with the public, on and offline forums, mailings and the opportunity to respond via post or email.
As per standard wiki functionality, every edit made to the plan by the public (and City of Melbourne) was archived for posterity, and remains available for anybody to view by selecting the ‘history’ link at the bottom of each page. Sometimes comments or suggestions received during consultation can involve State or Federal Government responsibilities beyond the reach of City of Melbourne. Both during and following the completion of the consultation period, the Future Melbourne team, along with key experts, reviewed the contributions made and endeavoured to organise, refine and incorporate the range of ideas in the most practical and inclusive way possible.
If you’re interested in further information about Future Melbourne you may want to check out our recent involvement in One Web Day 2008. Video of our event, including a presentation on the Future Melbourne wiki, is available here.
Thanks again!
The Future Melbourne Team
http://www.futuremelbourne.com.au