Yesterday, we saw as the EU, finally gave the green light to measures of support (bailout, unfortunate name, I believe) to shore up the battered financial budgets and the battered Greek (not to mention the structure of public services). This is the culmination of a series of big mistakes (not the plan itself) on how to get to a destination that seemed in this way, but that no institution was willing to assume.
And now, the situation is irreversible. The Greek situation is if the sum of a series of historical conditions that led to this situation, and that however much you want to match a certain Anglo-Saxon press, is not comparable to the rest of the that this "serious" and "brainy" press wants to do with the rest of what they named, contemptuously, as PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain).
The situation becomes Greek from its early entry into the EU in 1981 (then EEC), mostly because of American pressure within NATO to bring the natural boundaries of this organization to the eastern Mediterranean and control access step the Soviet fleet in the Bosporus and the Caspian.
Therefore, these requirements did not require a thorough overhaul of its economic and institutional structures, as they were called later to Spain and Portugal as we enter 1986. And here come some of the current problems. That and the demonstrated tendency of all Greek governments of the last two decades of whitewashing over their public accounts (which is well known in all the gossip of Brussels). But this is not the point I want to bring up in this post.
The point is that the Greek situation is left worse because no institution has sought to address the situation. From 11 February to 25 March, there have been no high-level meeting of the EU or bilaterally with other countries which did not refer to the Greek crisis to try to minimize it and try to seek the confidence of the markets. And here again our heroes encounter. Europe is not only to convince the markets, Europe is also convincing the public. And this is again a deficit.
Europe's population does not perceive a need to rescue together. Moreover, many voices (who mistakenly complain) that are against what each country will contribute to the rescue, with a 5% loan of 30,000 million euros (on a plan for a period of 18 months). A citizenship have to explain what that means, telling it without restrictions, without demagoguery and without treatment so childish.
These moments are to be used for citizenship, to seek a joint involvement of 27 and to remind the rest of the world, the worth of building a common space based on solidarity, respect and the joint construction of a future. And in this back to fail.
We have seen that there have been threats of resort to the IMF, if the 27 did not come to help (I refuse to use the word rescue, dear Eurosceptic media) to Greece, and this can not be. The EU has returned to give the impression of drift. Drift, because it believes in one of his associates, and that the bulk of the population sees it, since from the Standing Commission and the Presidency have not taken steps in this regard.
The lesson: Europe must draw a clear consequence of this situation. Irremediable situations, they demand a forceful response to the pair of integrator which would give confidence to the population and not throw the "ghost" of the interim decisions, which are the leitmotiv of the current Barroso Commission. Urge the EU to be able to cope with a strong intergovernmental decision-making mechanism (the Treaty of Lisbon, have these devices) and a o-Gov, that sense of security and transparency to the public.
The future of EU institutions pass through them "visible" and "transparent" to the people, otherwise we will face a chimera, that as the Greek case is just, I fear, the First Act.

Still not over the debate between the Minister of Culture, Mrs. Sinde, and a group of bloggers and specialists in what we call orbit 2.0, but there is a question inescapable: 11:30 am on the Minister has withdrawn from the meeting to attend the inauguration of a museum.

I imagine that Ms. Sinde should not have to be a tasteful dish having to deal with a small representation of the wider community, representing at that time, according to an emerging movement in the net in the last 48 hours . Certainly a collective, without pretending to be, represents many more and is more plural and has a stronger social base that another group of "red logo."

And is that when public objectives are confused with the media, this is the disaster which it originated. The stubbornness in wanting to see a "reality" that does not really reflect the true citizen, even with the current debate that emerges in the collective cultural management professionals in this country, is a wave that leads to frustration and the barracks "winter" of certain oligarchs and "shouting" of the nineteenth century as far as ICT and civic attitudes are concerned.

The point is that something has changed, despite the amount of egos hurt and humiliated that we saw in the hash tag # show on Twitter.

That change is the possibility that citizens have the power to encourage discussion, to the incorporation of the public agenda of citizen initiatives by 2.0 collaborative tools and of course the possibility of "real" to intervene in public debate.

I'm used to hearing about oGov by our public representatives in this first great occasion, the Government had a great opportunity to see a new social communicative context and the misses. I am more than convinced that this is because from the communication department of the Ministry of Culture has been downplayed, but the truth is that it is a shame. Culture hoped that at least they were more sensitive to change.

Moncloa I hope that we see the great potential that this represents as a tool of social information (I know that in other ministries and see this as a potential and not a threat, and are working on measures to respect, as we will see results over 2010), and not try to overshadow such as the alleged "threat" that some believe to see. (Especially in settings of communication offices).

It is clear that the fact "Twitter" live a meeting with institutional representatives worldwide, without interference, without being "cooked" in a subsequent intervention or "appearance" joint, will certainly change the perception of information and Information reality. And this is good news.

Finally, we will begin debating the new systems of representation in collective interests through social networks and collaborative tools that are already in full control and public use within the clou computing. And this is the real challenge of eParticipation and oGov so that in the future be used in a full and transparent to society.

I hope your opinions ...

PS: About 11:54 everything seems to go wrong and that positions the Ministry of Culture are not conciliatory. Will report more slowly when you have more material and can reflect on it.

Let me begin this post with a starting date with the Green Paper on Innovation from the European Commission in 1996. Although 13 years have passed, his life is full to the economic and social times we live in:

"Innovation is not just an economic mechanism or a technical process. First, it is a social phenomenon through which individuals and societies express their creativity, their needs and desires. Thus, regardless of its purpose, its effects or its methods, innovation is closely interwoven with social conditions in which it occurs. The history, culture, education, political organization, institutional and economic structure of each society determine, ultimately, its ability to generate and accept the news. This is one more reason to pay more attention to the implementation of the principle of subsidiarity in policies to promote innovation. "

Having said that, as part of political strategies that drove the great statesman and visionary Europe that was Jacques Delors , I begin by clarifying what is meant by Social Innovation , a term that is becoming stale in the fields and soon to be 2.0 reduced to a minimum when canabalizado intellectual by populist politics in which we are immersed in this end of the decade.

Social Innovation is about new ideas citizens, who work in delivering new social and collaborative goals, making the case that social innovation to meet social needs by developing new products, services and organizations. That is generating a new mark on the territory of a cross and a horizontal hierarchy at the level of ideas. This is the base of eParticipation and o-Gov.

Thus social agents are behind it, not only are individuals: they are private organizations and public administrations and enterprises, governments, associations and, finally, city (I will call this phenomenon has metacity ).

And what means the Social Innovation?

Well, almost everything: the demographic and ecological sustainability, the new "hubs" of communication 2.0, knowledge innovation applied to the generation of new economic and social projects, climate change, unemployment and ways to combat the aging population and health resources. In short, the Social Innovation is the seed of social change by and for citizenship and therein lies its strength as an engine of social change, which should help to change many pre-assigned roles, after decades of stagnation in the environments of administration, government and citizen relations.

That said, how can we chart a path that leads us to carry out a strategy that falls to develop our projects, under the direction of social innovation. I propose these 10 steps to be followed so that we can establish a permanent social process of innovation in our projects:

This is what I estimate as a proactive Decalogue to the Social Innovation. Develop tools for our projects that meet these criteria, under the main criterion of readiness for constant change and adjustment, not to mention the objectives and long-term goals (in substitution for methodological criteria) are a strong guarantee for Innovation a powerful engine for social change in our surroundings.

The question is: Are our organizations ready for it?