Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
marine_colab:workshop_20151125 [2015-12-03 10:32] – [Mission / MIX] maja | marine_colab:workshop_20151125 [2015-12-03 12:20] – [Planning 2016] maja | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 178: | Line 178: | ||
To do in 2016 → look at values based campaigning [[http:// | To do in 2016 → look at values based campaigning [[http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Next steps== | ||
+ | * Giles to compile a proposal for a mission statement based on these reflections and the materials from Lisbon. | ||
Line 208: | Line 211: | ||
What are the values of Marine CoLAB? Could **shared values** be Marine CoLAB’s focus at all times and across all projects? | What are the values of Marine CoLAB? Could **shared values** be Marine CoLAB’s focus at all times and across all projects? | ||
- | How to begin using a values based approach in Marine CoLAB: **learn by doing**: | + | How to begin using a values based approach in Marine CoLAB: **learn by doing**! |
+ | |||
+ | ==Next steps == | ||
* invite speakers | * invite speakers | ||
* share readings | * share readings | ||
Line 264: | Line 269: | ||
{{> | {{> | ||
+ | Ocean Engagement: gaming approaches | ||
- | * (cross reference with Sandy's notes) | + | "We're close to a tipping point on ocean experience games" |
- | * ideas that have surfaced | + | |
- | * challenge; how/when to engage the pubic to change rules / process | + | Challenge: "how can we change perception of the value of oceans through digital media?" |
- | * concluded that the first experiment | + | GameOn is an experiment to test the hypothesis |
- | * perhaps | + | |
- | * two main options | + | Several ides have surfaced, all with challenges and opportunities. The common |
- | * " | + | |
- | * influence exiting | + | The first [[game on experiment]] focused on public engagement with rules related to oceans, which might be less game focused, perhaps more suitable as a training tool. Instead, it might be better to focus on more general 'ocean awareness' |
- | | + | * __Develop |
- | * coached | + | * __Influence |
- | * develop | + | |
- | * develop | + | If Marine CoLAB would develop a game, different approaches are possible: |
- | * BBC docos, google ocean, natgeo, etc | + | * **Coached |
- | * mainstream marine conservation game (cf. beyond (..?) rising tide - maxis?) | + | * Develop **add-ons to existing games** |
- | * games can also be used as fund-raising vehicles | + | * Develop |
- | * simple experiments | + | * Develop a full-blown |
- | * possible direction | + | |
- | -> sim city like versions | + | |
- | | + | Out of these directions, the group distilled |
- | * small lab games (c.f fish hackathon) | + | |
- | * advantage; | + | == Small Lab Games== |
- | * disadvantage; | + | |
- | * full on game | + | * Disadvantages: |
- | * advantage; AR tech becoming cheaper | + | |
- | * disadvantage; | + | ==Marine Conservation Game== |
- | * questions; target audience? SIM-MPA? | + | * Advantages: Making such a game would connect digital and conservation worlds; There is possibly large impact and educational opportunities, |
- | * marine game/film leadership | + | * Disadvantages |
- | * advantage; | + | |
- | good time for BBC Oceans, influence through others. how to maintain contact with influencers | + | ==Influencing Game Developers== |
- | * disadvantage; 'Nemo effect' | + | * Advantages |
- | * ZSL project, virtual Chagos, funding during 2016. British, controversial, | + | * Disadvantages: |
- | * interest | + | |
- | * giles, testing assumptions, | + | |
- | * heather, perhaps as a masters project for students {Exeter uni, Chagos project) | + | ==Next steps== |
- | * mirella, perhaps | + | * more preliminary research to see which option is most promising |
- | * MSC, existing contacts (octonauts) potential test audience. | + | * Sandy, Sue & Heather: Potential |
- | * next steps; | + | * Heather: connect this experiment to the ZSL project on virtual Chagos (British, controversial, |
- | * potential | + | * Sue/MCS, probe existing contacts (Octonauts) as potential test audience. |
- | * sandy, sue & heather | + | |
| | ||
+ | (cross reference with Sandy' | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
====Plastics project==== | ====Plastics project==== | ||
Line 310: | Line 319: | ||
{{> | {{> | ||
- | | + | |
- | * mayoral election in may 2016 | + | Working session of the now fully funded (CGF & OAK Foundation) Marine CoLAB project: campaign to make London free of Single Use Plastic Bottles. |
- | * focus as a marine project rather than just about ' | + | |
- | * " | + | Three topics to touch on: |
- | | + | |
- | * required; project implementation plan, timeline, external deadlines. kickoff meeting (before xmas) | + | * Reality check (commitments, |
- | * collaborative | + | |
- | * 2 ppl full time - project mgmt at ZSL (via Project Oceans), narrative & communication TEP | + | |
- | * FF interns | + | ==Values== |
- | * governance? overview committee, advisory group | + | |
- | * connections with existing NGOs working in ' | + | What will make individuals change behaviour (intrinsic, economic…)? |
- | * Emma Cunningham re. stakeholder interviews, industry, NGOs, etc | + | |
- | * how to ensure 'best advice' | + | * How to avoid industry backlash? |
- | * strategy for mayoral candidates | + | * How to make it sustainable? |
- | * establish | + | * Focus as a marine project rather than just about ' |
- | * any upcoming 'big things' | + | * Have to have a closer look at what has failed |
- | * start compling hideous facts about single use bottles | + | * how to ensure 'best advice' |
- | * potential case studies (selfridges, | + | * start compling hideous facts about single use bottles |
- | * how do we explicitly test values based research? | + | * Design campaign to include values as an essential part of it: continue discussion at the brainstorming meeting in December. |
+ | * How to explicitly test values based research? | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == Reality Check == | ||
+ | |||
+ | The funding proposal was successful: now a few urgent things to do: | ||
+ | * By 11 December 2015, All: Re:read the proposal, agree on commitments and/or adapt if needed. | ||
+ | * ASAP: Heather, Steve, Louisa: paperwork | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Collaborative | ||
+ | * Project management | ||
+ | * Governance: overview committee, advisory group - needs to be finalised | ||
+ | * Recruiting: By 16 December: Heather | ||
+ | * January: interview applicants | ||
+ | * Compile a project team ASAP | ||
+ | * Giles/FF: has staff for research & background, active mapping process. Connect FF’s interns to work on researching case studies (Bristol (tap friendly, public fountains…) Selfridges, ZSL, etc), C40, cities as chanpions, COP, tourism, Blue Bell… | ||
+ | * (Longer term): Form advisory group with different stakeholders (Sue has ideas) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Implementation plan | ||
+ | * 16 December: Initial startup meeting: Heather, Mirella, Amy, Giles, Louisa | ||
+ | * 12 January (from 2pm) Full planning meeting with other experts from organisations | ||
+ | * After January plan at least one meeting per month | ||
+ | * Short term focus: Mayoral election in May 2016: need strategy for mayoral candidates - Campaigns are written NOW (Louisa has a few people who should be engaged in this): | ||
+ | * How to get a meeting? Exploratory conversations to identify what is the opportunity for the candidates. | ||
+ | * Offer solutions/ | ||
+ | * Longer term: Systems Mapping exercise and stakeholder conversations (linked to advisory group) | ||
+ | * Identify target groups (from systems mapping) | ||
+ | * Outsource research: to e.g. frameworks research - additional funding will be available for this research from CGF. Which questions need asking? | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Link to related initiatives, | ||
+ | * Research | ||
+ | |||
====Planning 2016==== | ====Planning 2016==== | ||
- | * 10 days of time is covered | + | 10 days of time per organisation |
- | * how best to structure the time? | + | |
- | * smaller, structured meetings around particular topics/ | + | ==Marine CoLAB as a collaborative network== |
- | * aggregating projects (mapping), specific project (plastics) | + | * What does a lab community look like? |
- | * discuss learning which emerges from projects | + | * Collaboration |
- | * what can we teach each other | + | * Added value of open thinking space, facilitated structure |
- | * sometime for thinking about wider issues, larger context, incubation of vague ideas. | + | * Further work required |
- | * time to proactively communicate, | + | |
- | * better integration of partners into project proposals -> more explicit collaborations | + | |
- | * clarify evidence base for the lab, both process and projects | + | |
- | * collaboration | + | |
- | * how can new/other partners get involved in the future? | + | |
- | * more focus on strategy, strategy | + | |
* 4~6 days of meetings of entire group | * 4~6 days of meetings of entire group | ||
- | * (cf. global strategy for sharks) | + | * some time for thinking about wider issues, larger context, incubation of vague ideas (cf. global strategy for sharks) |
- | * added value of open thinking space, facilitated structure | + | * What can we teach each other? Discuss learning which emerges from projects |
- | * further work required | + | * More focus on strategy, strategy |
- | * circulate set of objectives, further ideas | + | * To do: circulate set of objectives, further ideas towards a governance structure, business and operational models (next workshop early 2016) |
- | * what does a lab community look like? | + | |
- | * strategy for engagement? | + | == Marine CoLAB Activities / Projects == |
- | * clear criteria for 'a lab project'? | + | * Smaller, structured meetings around particular topics/ |
+ | * Aggregating projects (from existing/ | ||
+ | * Clarify | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Communication and stakeholder engagement == | ||
+ | * Time to proactively communicate! | ||
+ | * Clarify evidence base for the lab, both process and projects | ||
+ | * How can new/other partners get involved in the future? Strategy for engagement? | ||
+ | * Better integration of partners into project proposals -> more explicit collaborations | ||
+ | |||
====Next Steps==== | ====Next Steps==== |