As States General Association of Innovation we have undertaken several initiatives both to support the development of a strategic plan for innovation both to highlight and connect the many valuable experiences that are taking place in the area, starting from the assumption that it is "from the operational sphere of those who innovate" that a process of global participation of all stakeholders must be started ( politics, administrations, businesses, universities, research centres, the third sector, private citizens), aimed at building a shared perspective for Italy and for an effective change in innovation policy.
The provisions on the subject of the Digital Agenda approved in the legislature have represented important steps forward, but an organic strategic plan continues to be missing and various fundamental chapters (such as electronic commerce, digital literacy) are still to be significantly addressed. Much still needs to be done.
So we thought of promoting one Italy's Charter of Intent for Innovation, such as the indication of the programmatic priorities for the innovation policies on which the commitment of those who are candidates for the government of the country is requested.
We ask everyone (citizens, organisations) to collaborate to improve the Charter of Intent on the wiki that we have prepared, in view of the Conference that will take place in Rome on February 4th (mark this date in your diary) and during which we will ask the candidates from the various political forces to sign the Charter and undertake to implement it.
7 thoughts on “Una Carta d’Intenti per l’Innovazione dell’Italia”
I think that a real innovation can be addressed and achieved if it affects behaviors, habits, public traditions and customs that time and misuse have corroded and made counterproductive.
From a practical point of view, I don't know how the following two ideas can become part of the Charter which, like all program documents, indicates several trends and seeks to initiate general virtuous cycles.
I propose them in this comment, just as I have tried to launch them on other occasions… gutta cavat lapidem the Latins said and “the Chinese drop” is the operative translation.
These are the proposals.
TRANSPARENT LAWS: All new laws or changes to previous ones must be SELF-CONSISTENT.
They must start with an article stating which previous laws are repealed.
They must contain only complete rules without references to previous laws.
To understand a new law, it should not be necessary to go back to the 10 commandments and then go down through successive variations and additions in a jungle of references.
The “new” law clearly states what NOT to do…everything else is allowed.
Finally, if possible, a law must always be complete, i.e. there must be no need for implementing regulations, letters of clarification, interpretations and various bells and whistles.
TRANSPARENT COMPETITIONS - OPEN COMPETITIONS. . Today, before a tender, some experts build a perfect specification with a lot of cost and quality metrics.
Then the tender takes place and, after a year, the winner is also awarded with reductions of 30% as well.
After another year, due to appeals and quibbles, work began.
The first payments to companies arrive after another 6-12 months.
From Specification to execution, due to normal inflation, costs increased by at least one more 5-6%.
Clear and obvious result: impossibility of respecting the forecasts.
Proposal: Armored specifications, tenders "at the minimum increase on the specifications", ARMORED construction cost, scheduled and secure payments, an increase is expected only on the basis of the delays between the Specifications and the start of work and calculated only on the basis of legal inflation.
If the tender is deserted, removal from the register of the experts who wrote the specifications from the Register of EXPERTS.
Perennial and personal cancellation of all the companies, with their administrators, relatives and collateral, which after winning the tender, do not respect the contract.
Criminal offense for all Public Administrators called upon to monitor the progress of works and who do not report discrepancies, defaults and the like, even if not linked to "economic considerations" (read bribes)
Pingback: I (not) vote for you! Civil society goes to the elections | Media virology
Pingback: Civil society goes to the elections « NONPROFIT BLOG by Elena Zanella
Pingback: I (not) vote for you! – marcobinotto
Pingback: Will it be the year of transparency and participation? | Laquila99.tv
Pingback: I (not) vote for you! | marcobinotto
Pingback: The community of innovative politicians - Digital Agenda