Wikimedia Deutschland/Evaluation/Legal and Social Framework Model

This page is maintained by Wikimedia Deutschland's Evaluation Unit. It provides a plattform for the continued development of the change model used in the Legal and Social Framework Program.

Program Goal

All the activities within the legal and social framework program pursue a joint long-term goal:

Society’s decision-makers improve the general conditions for free knowledge.

Decision-makers in society can change the general conditions for the creation, collection and dissemination of free content through legislative acts, institutional rules and specialist recommendations. Wikimedia Deutschland wants to help to increase the influence that the Wikimedia movement has on these decision-makers, so that the legal and social framework for free knowledge does not worsen, but, in the best case, improves. By that, we to secure that people will be able to continue increasing quality and quantity of content in the Wikimedia projects.

Change Model

A change model presents the program’s goal and the means by which it is to be achieved. It provides the theoretical basis for planning and evaluating projects. We illustrated this change model using an arrow diagram, which presents the dependence between individual intermediate goals (green). Marked in red are the points at which Wikimedia Deutschland will take action in order to achieve the intermediate goals.

The diagram can be read in two ways:

1. Read from top to bottom, the diagram presents the necessary conditions (in green) for the successful implementation of each intermediate goal. All the conditions belonging to an intermediate goal are always ordered one level beneath the corresponding goal.
2. Read from bottom to top, the diagram indicates the points at which Wikimedia Deutschland will take action (red) in order to achieve the intermediate goals (green).

Direct Products

The direct products of Wikimedia Deutschland list details the measures WMDE will take in order to achieve its intermediate goals. The bracketed figures in the diagram indicate the points (red) at which WMDE will implement the measures described here and the intermediate goals (green) along the causal chain that are to be achieved through these measures.

Developing content-related skills

• (1) Analyses of the current state are documented within the Wikimedia movement.
  • Analysis of the copyright conditions, starting with the areas of state-owned works and freedom of panorama
  • Analysis of the funding mechanisms of scientific institutions

• (1) Our position on Open Educational Resources is available.

• (2) The Wikimedia movement has formulated its key issues.
  • Work has been intensified on state-owned works, freedom of panorama, Open Educational Resources and Open Education.
  • Relevant key issues within the Wikimedia movement have been discussed and accepted.
  • Products have been developed for specific target groups (e.g. information material and events).

• (2) Written information or studies on two key topics are available.
  • 1. Why more state-owned works should be in the public domain.
  • 2. A comparison of the range of regulations concerning freedom of panorama in the EU.

Improving processes in the Wikimedia movement

• (2) The Wikimedia movement has established binding decision-making processes and appointed expert contacts.
  • A proposal on common guidelines for all community members has been developed, as have positions.
  • The common guidelines were accepted by all community members (particularly within Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia chapters).
  • The accepted guidelines are complied with during work on the joint project (i.e. they must be feasible and binding).

• (2) Increased exchange of information on our key issues within the international Wikimedia movement
  • Blueprints have been published within the Wikimedia movement on the basis of completed projects (e.g. articles on best practices on the WMF blog).
  • Regular communication and supply of information to the Wikimedia movement (e.g. monthly newsletters, quarterly reports, Chapters Dialogue)

• (2) The development of networks between actors in the Wikimedia movement has been furthered.
  • e.g. Chapters Dialogue
  • Grassroots organizing: number of participating communities, number of training courses

Developing monitoring structures

• (2, 5) Monitoring structures have been set up.
  • Accreditation with institutions
  • Regular participation in consultations and events (hearings, committee meetings etc.)
  • EU monitoring
  • Talks with offices of members of parliaments
  • Exchange of information with allies that have monitoring structures (e.g. edri)
  • Getting to know the political arena (e.g. alliance partners)

Developing networks

• (2, 5) Education think tank
  • Academic reputation and number of appointed experts

• (5) Networks of allies have been developed.
  • Free Knowledge Advocacy Group (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy)
  • Collaborative projects on free teaching and learning materials are available and there is a visible network.

Target-group based external communication

• (4) Visibility for decision-makers in the science and education sectors and at EU level has been increased through communication designed to reach the relevant target groups (e.g. clear and precise for people with little time).
  • Handouts (policy papers, flyers etc.)
  • Events (e.g. expert roundtables, parliamentary evenings, meet & greets)
  • Personal contact (especially by telephone)
  • Effective PR (e.g. press mailings, media events).
  • Position papers
  • Catalogues of key questions

Indicators

The indicators proposed here will continually undergo prioritization and further development.

• (GOAL) The general conditions for free knowledge have improved.
  • Indicator: Monitoring of the most important conditions in the areas of copyright, culture, education, economy and science that concern the creation, collection and dissemination of free content.

• (A) Decision-makers have created legislative acts, institutional rules and specialist recommendations that facilitate the creation, collection and dissemination of free content.
  • Indicator: Monitoring of the most important legislative acts, institutional policies and specialist recommendations that concern the creation, collection and dissemination of free content.

• (B) The Wikimedia movement has influence on decision-makers and influential institutions.
  • Indicator: The frequency with which decision-makers and representatives of influential institutions use the Wikimedia movement’s arguments in their publications.
  • Indicator: The frequency with which experts include/cite from Wikimedia movement products.
  • Indicator: Enquiries about key issues from decision-makers and representatives of influential institutions (e.g. statements, consultations or professional discussions).

• (C) Decision-makers and influential institutions perceive the Wikimedia movement as an advocacy group for free knowledge.
  • Indicator: Enquiries about key issues from decision-makers and representatives of influential institutions (e.g. statements, consultations or technical discussions).

• (D) The Wikimedia movement is part of a network of allies.
  • Indicator: Number and influence of the Wikimedia movement’s allies.
  • Indicator: Scope of cooperation with the allies (amount of contact and communication density).
  • Indicator: Areas of mutual agreement and disagreement have been identified.
  • Indicator: Scope of our cooperation in the allies’ operational and tactical projects.
  • Indicator: Number of joint products.

• (E) The Wikimedia movement is capable of taking swift joint action to communicate with the outside world.
  • Indicator: The number and quality of joint statements.
  • Indicator: The time taken to publish a joint statement from the date it is requested.

• (F) The Wikimedia movement has improved its specialist knowledge and method-based skills.
  • Indicator: Specialist knowledge within the Wikimedia movement.
  • Indicator: Method-based skills within the Wikimedia movement.
  • Indicator: Number of activists in the Wikimedia movement.

• (G) The Wikimedia movement has identified regulatory problems.
  • Indicator: The Wikimedia movement has open access to regulatory problems.