http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC54203.pdfPublic Services 2.0: The Impact of Social Computing on Public ServicesPS21Openness and Trust[Build trust by] embarking on an open process of actively sharing data and information.Citizens more readily express and discuss their preferences with others when using social computing. This occurs on a basis of trust, among users in a social computing community and between the community and the platform 'providers'. For government to engage in this process in order to learn and discuss the needs of citizens, similar levels of trust will be required. A key ingredient in building trust is information symmetry. By embarking on an open process of actively sharing data and information, government can establish the required levels of trust.2Service DeliveryConsider including (financing, facilitating) a user generated approach in order to address new and old challenges in service delivery.Government organisations used to be the only agents delivering public services and they dominated public value creation. Now that social computing platforms are liberating the energies of the ‘masses’, they are increasingly directed at the public service domain. Communicated via the social connection, this enormous energy materialises in the form of information and news (blogosphere), knowledge (Wikipedia), creative content (Creative Commons, YouTube), social goods (social networks, online communities), virtual goods (Second life, MMOs) and even ICT ‘hardware’ (processing cycles, hard disk space). In each domain (or ‘sphere’), public resources proliferate: social and legal counselling, environmental monitoring and crime-watch, virtual urban planning, etc, etc. With so much potential for usercreated public value, public sector agents and agencies should very seriously consider including (financing, facilitating) a usergenerated approach in order to address new and old challenges in service delivery.3Citizen ParticipationMobilise the energies of users (citizens) by allowing them to quickly and intuitively pool their resources and direct them at a particular challenge.Social computing networks very effectively mobilise the energies of users (citizens) by allowing them to quickly and intuitively pool their resources and direct them at a particular challenge, all via the social connection. Even the smallest groups ('niches') of scattered users succeed in reaching critical mass and thereby become more visible. By employing social computing strategies (and ‘tools’), government can enlist important niche audiences and leverage their insights. Overall this would contribute to a higher resolution of ‘ground truth’ to underwrite policymaking. In order to employ these strategies and tools, civil servants would need to become very familiar with them and the values of social computing communities.4Third PartiesOpen up public service to third-party participation.Where 'public' value and 'public' service are being generated or directed outside the usual sphere of influence of government, the role of government is radically changing. To ensure that core values and rights continue to be respected, the government needs to enter this new participative public realm. One way to do this is to open up public service to third-party participation. This would ensure a continuing – albeit more facilitating – role in the design and delivery of public services.5SecurityEmploy a staged approach whereby the use and scrutiny of user-generated data is guided by required security levels.Crowdsourcing (e.g. mashups, wikis) techniques and online communities (e.g. activist and interest groups) can enhance the knowledge of government practitioners in a particular field and therefore strengthen the evidence and argumentation for new policy (many examples in the policing area, tracking and tracing of criminals). However, advanced technologies enable people to easily manipulate content (e.g. change photos, videos, formal writings) that is disseminated through the networks. To deal with the limitations in accuracy, the government could employ a staged approach whereby the use and scrutiny of user-generated data is guided by required security levels. Only sensitive uses would demand certified sources, while general-purpose applications would draw on wider, public databases.6EducationCritical analysis and cyber behaviour should be taught through formal, informal, lifelong-learning and vocational learning systems when appropriate and relevant.(Groups of) citizens are empowered by social computing technologies, which enable them to express their personal interests and preferences. However, the downside of citizen expression on social networking platforms is the growing number of cases of privacy infringements. Citizens may become more empowered to express themselves but at the same time they become more vulnerable to privacy violations (e.g. cyberbullying, happy-slapping, etc.). Any privacy infringements could be easily traced back to the perpetrator by enacting new legislation. However, this very legislation may set us on a course towards further potential privacy infringements, accidental or intended, this time by or through government agencies and third parties operating at arm’s length in sensitive public-service domains such as health and education. Any new datagathering approach or act should therefore be preceded by a cost-benefit analysis that includes an element for assessing the shortterm and long-term impact on privacy. Monitoring should address, in particular, any cumulative effects. To create awareness of these issues, critical analysis and cyber behaviour should be taught through formal, informal, lifelong-learning and vocational learning systems when appropriate and relevant (e.g. ICT courses).7RisksContinuously monitor the potential risks of participation in social network sites and inform citizens about these risks.Social computing trends may, on the one hand, stimulate digital competencies as evermore learning communities emerge and there may be a potential for learning digital skills in online communities. On the other hand (and this evidence seems stronger), social computing trends may – at least in the short term– contribute to a wider digital divide when, in particular, the digital literates are empowered by social computing platforms while digital illiterates lag behind. Over the years, however, this problem will decrease as new interfaces are increasingly embedded and intuitive and can cater for an ever-wider section of the population. However, studies show that although new generations will be more experienced in using social software and software will be more user-friendly, users will not necessarily have the skills to understand the implications (e.g. social or legal) of their behaviour on social network sites. The government needs to continuously monitor the potential risks of participation in social network sites and inform citizens about these risks, for example through awareness, information and/or education programmes.8Self-RegulationPromote social computing architectures and governing models that facilitate self-regulation.There is much anecdotal evidence that social computing technologies enable (groups of) elderly and citizens with special needs to support each other, mobilise and organise (e.g. silver surfers, seniorweb). Social computing technologies enable selforganisation and self-regulation. With fewer options to orchestrate and regulate in an increasingly connected world, governments should stimulate the emergence of these mechanisms, particularly where they support key public values and goals. One way to do this is by promoting social computing architectures and governing models that facilitate self-regulation. Principles of good governance that apply to traditional government should extend to social computing initiatives when these initiatives cross into the realm of public-service delivery.