Recommendation # 8: Resource Allocation for Securing Diversity in International Collaborations
Q 1 What is your Recommendation?
We propose changing the resource allocation structure in order to secure diversity and make it easier to process at a bureaucratic level.
Q 2 What assumptions are you making about the future context that led you to make this Recommendation?
In the Wikimedia movement, there are already a lot of diversity projects that benefit from international collaboration. However, these projects face administrative problems when trying to include diverse contributors because resources can be restricted by the funder of resources or local laws. This has been reported by community feedback and has happened to many stakeholders and community leaders.
Resources given to diversity projects should be periodically reviewed and there is a need for a structure in place for oversight. Resources can be many things: equipment, staff time, merchandise, in-kind donations etc, but in this recommendation it refers to monetary resources. This recommendation is about how resources are allocated across national borders, and not about the amount of resources being allocated.
- We assume that international collaboration as part of diversity projects is an important way of including underrepresented groups and their viewpoints. This needs to be stimulated by flattening the path.
- Likewise, the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge: parts of the world are not included or involved in the Wikimedia movement. If allocations of resources are not made more flexible, this will continue. International collaborations should be encouraged and supported.
With many and new movement stakeholders all over the world, the Wikimedia movement need a decentralized administrative structures for resource allocation. This could help the growth of the local communities much as we assume some communication channels might more fluent and some processes may be easier to automatize.
Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
Misuse of resources?
Q4b. What could be done to mitigate this risk?
System of transparency?
Q6. How is this Recommendation connected to other WGs?
It relates to Resource Allocation, Roles and Responsibilities, Partnerships, Community health
Q7. Does this Recommendation connect or depend on another of your Recommendations?
Yes, the recommendation: Partnerships to increase diversity on and off wiki, ++
Q^. What is the timeframe of this Recommendation in terms of when it should be implemented? 2020, 2021, etc. Does it have an urgency or priority? Does this timeframe depend on other Recommendations being implemented before or after it?
The implementation of the recommendation depends on the recommendations of other working groups and when and how they will be implemented, particularly the recommendations from the Resource Allocation Working Group.
Q10. What type of Recommendation is it?
Complicated– this recommendation is about solving practical issues, but also about agreeing on how resources should be prioritized. Which is maybe a Complex discussion.
Q12. What are the concerns, limiting beliefs, and challenges for implementing this Recommendation?
Challenges in implementing this Recommendation are:
Practical issues in transferring resources to countries like Iran.
Continuing to be transparent about how movement resources are spent.