WRITTEN ON October 25th, 2006 BY William Heath AND STORED IN Foundation of Trust, Identity, What do we want?, Wibbipedia/MindtheGap

Pretty damn sensible: check it out here. I can’t wait to give this work the time and attention it deserves…
This is DTI-supported work done with HP and BT

Trustguide takes a “citizen-centric” approach to understanding the beliefs and needs of users in relation to trust, security and privacy in ICT mediated activities. It has established a dialogue with the public through facilitated focus group discussions among selected groups across the UK. Topics covered in these groups include:
• Trust versus risk
• E-Commerce: Risk and Responsibility
• Factors that impact on risk taking
• Mitigated risk
• ID cards: An aid to security?
• Use of Biometric data
• Privacy and health information
• E-Government and Public Sector IT
• Awareness and education
• Use of public access terminals

So, exactly what we need really before we start spending billions a year on public sector IT aimed at hhelping the public. And better late than never!

While there are a number of different issues presented within the report, there is one cross cutting theme that emerges. While an initial hypothesis may be that people do not engage with online services because they do not trust them, our findings have shown that trust is not as significant a measure as first thought. What is more important to understand is that people are willing to take risks online, as long as they are informed, and it is clear how consequences will be addressed. People use specific services not because they trust them, but because they in some way provide a benefit to the individual and they know that if something goes wrong, restitution will be made.

I think this will expose the fallacy that government is there to solve the problem of people’s trust in the Internet. because government is already part of that problem, and set to get far worse unless it changes tack in a big way and fast.

We present compelling evidence that challenges current thinking on how to engage individuals with ICT mediated services. People are sceptical about technology, and rightfully so. However, if empowered and allowed to experiment, they tend to adopt solutions that are socially beneficial. The changeover will not happen overnight, but it should be driven by people’s ability to correctly ascertain the extent of trust they can extend towards technology. Education and assurance are the foundation stones upon which trust is built and understanding the risk-trust-privacy-responsibility-restitution equation is fundamental to increasing confidant use of ICT mediated services and emerging technologies. These problems will require constant and meticulous research if we are to achieve Government’s vision of everyone in our country confidently enjoying the benefits that increased use of ICT can undoubtedly bring. We need to understand the issues of today and those that may arise in the near and more distant future and we must ensure that we address the most appropriate research questions and gaps in understanding… We can conclude that security is neither a trivial nor a static problem and cannot be treated as a separate or distinct issue from trust given that it is intrinsically linked to the issues that impact on adoption, acceptance and confidant use of both new and existing technologies. Mobile technologies, pervasive computing, broadband etc. bring many challenges not only to managing security or reliability as such, but first and foremost, to the perception of how trustworthy a system actually is. ‘Doing security properly’ in order to enhance trust and privacy concerns is simply no longer sufficient. Trust is a construct that calls for interdisciplinary research. We feel that a fruitful way forward to ensure that we are addressing the most relevant and appropriate research questions is to draw together a community of people from different backgrounds and disciplines to work on this together so that we can employ different sources of expertise including security, community, and social scientists.

Or, as we would put it here at Ideal Gov:

The Wibbi Wouldn’t it be better if this great change started on a basis of empathy with those whom we’re trying to help. We need “integrative complexity” – the ability to listen to other disciplines. We need to be Chaospilots, not authoritarian ranting commissars shouting like banging gongs, sounding brass, tinkling cymbals etc about what a good job we’re doing (meanwhile failing to listen to the abundant willing purveyors of good sense knocking on our doors).

The most excellent authors of this work are called {encode=”hazel.v.lacohee@bt.com” title=”Hazel Lacohee”}, {encode=”stephen.crane@hp.com” title=”Stephen Crane”} and {encode=”andy@jack.see.plymouth.ac.uk” title=”Andy Phippen”}. I’m minded to send them a thank-you letter on all our behalf.