Management-by-Pritzker, Governance-by-X Prize...

...beats Munchausen-by-proxy, everytime.

[Was turfing thru archives for the book and found the below 8/10/05 post. I still like the idea and the math...]

In comments to the earlier Mars ice/Space Program post, Mike of Spooky Action fame has an excellent point:

The $6 Billion the US wastes on those programs annually would go a lot further if put it up as X Prize style bounty for real space exploration advancements.

Absolutely. One place I unreservedly think money in the hands of government is a powerful tool: incentivising people to build things and stretch for us all (i.e.: DARPAnet, Mercury-Gemini-Apollo and, with some urbanist and people-centric reservations about method, the Interstate Highway System.)

And, hey, prizes are cheap, relative to the way things are done now:

Detroit News: "Congress approves $286.5 billion transportation bill"

National Taxpayers Union: Last week, the House passed the $286.4 billion Transportation Bill by a vote of 412-8. Whenever you see a vote count like that, grab your wallet, because government is without a doubt picking your pocket. And that's certainly the case here. This bill has about 6,000 "earmarks", i.e. politicians taking your money for their pet projects....

Two of the most egregious wastes of our money are bridges in Alaska; the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Don Young (R) is from Alaska. One bridge, which will cost $231 million, will be named for Representative Young and another bridge which will cost $223 million goes to an island with 50 people living on it. Let's get this right: a bridge to a small island in Alaska at a cost of about $3 for every American income tax payer and $4,500,000 per island resident. And that's the cheaper of the two bridges for Don Young!

Okay, then. Pardon my french but, if one is so inclined, please hold the return serve about "impractical tax and spend liberals" while I posit a more practical use for our money on something other than a bridge to what must be 50 very lonely and fragile people:

Take that $4.5 mil times 50 and dot it around the countryside in the form of prizes incentivizing, say:

• Ear-buds that actually remain in your ears when the head thye're attached to suddenly moves.
• Active RfID chips that allow you to initiate a small shock from the comfort of your kitchen to the nads of the manager of the grocery store which just sold you a moldy loaf of bread.

Or, to be serious, take a single 4.5 million and divide it by 10. You get $450,000 grants x 10 for roving salsa bands or free fashion advice or impromptu performance art in select city centers which, in turn, compete for 4.5 million in distributable arts grants--awards which prove their worth by showing that micro-funding, rather than $100+ million cultural arts centers, creates the seed-bed and vitality/interest critical mass for urban centers which, in turn, pulls in less adventurous development types. Presto! Silk from burlap.

Salsa bands or free fashion advice?

Most assuredly so. Those things, or things like them, are people- and feeling centric. That matters because people in many cases feel uninvolved or estranged from their everyday environments. Bricks and mortar do not move or attract them, experiences do. And experiences that draw us in as thinking, feeling individuals are powerfully magnetic. Experiences available in certain spaces make those spaces more valuable and attractive, but it's important to remember the spaces and places are only bookmarks--the venue for a feeling, not the feeling itself.

But the above suggestions are soft and cumulative. That is where the Don Young's of the world fuck it up: He would have been far better off--and a definitive statesman, to boot--if he'd asked for a meager $4.5 million prize to incentivize those 50 islanders to think up an idea, other than a $232 million bridge, to connect themselves to their potential, and they, to the world. That's the magic, and the exponential ROI.

That route, and metaphorical bridge, is one that's going begging for countless micro-communities who face the same challenge.

But no. All the "smart" and "responsible" people who bore us with the mantra of "you can't just throw money at problems" do precisely what? They throw money at problems. Or find piles of it upon which to stand, in order to feel taller. That's not leadership, it's a Halloween costume.

Okay, I've wandered some as usual, but earlier I mentioned One place I unreservedly think money in the hands of government is a powerful tool: incentivising people to build things and stretch for us all.

The only requirements...

1. High bar of expecation/ambition
2. Low barriers to entry. (merit-based, unconventional-friendly and virulently anti-cronyist)
3. Real (numeric+emotional+highly symbolic) ROE, ROI rewards for those doing the stretching for *all* of us.

What did I miss?

###

More Silk from Burlap?

The Pritzker Architectural Prize
The X-Prize
Orteig Prize (Lindbergh won)
Prize-a-palooza - wiki's list of famous prizes, medals and awards