Enabling timely gathering of remedial collective intelligence

Enabling Collective Intelligence in Response to Emergencies (Part #3)

It appears to be the case that the disciplines, and the bodies through which their technologies and expertise are applied, are to be understood as dysfunctionally fragmented in practice -- at least in terms of tapping collective intelligence to offer indications of potential remedies.

A distinction needs to be made between:

the considerable expertise available in the light of experience -- distilled into codes of best practice, possibly associated with various forms of regulation, inspection and oversight
the expertise which may prove to be relevant in the face of unforeseen disasters, namely in the course of the disaster -- as illustrated by the BP oil spill. Other expertise may however then be relevant, as is evident from the repeated failures of best practice and the highest expertise in response to that oil spill -- with all the innovative insight that the oil industry could bring to bear, whatever the cost.

If the lines of communication for assembling expertise are adequate in the first case, the question is whether the process of gathering collective intelligence is "fit for purpose" in the second case.

The concern here is how remedial suggestions get elicited and gathered and whether this is adequate to the challenge -- especially when delays clearly aggravate the disaster. For how much time is it appropriate to rely on the arrogant promise of conventional expertise and its application when people and environments are hurting?