Top-ten mobile apps that can make the world a better place Q2 2011

Top-ten mobile apps that can make the world a better place Q2 2011

Visit www.transformative-applications.net and get a glimpse of a better future

Embargo: 2011-06-18

Today Transformative-Applications.net present the top-ten list for the second quarter 2011. Each quarter ten transformative applications that address some of the most pressing challenges in our society, and five initiatives that support the development and uptake of such applications are presented.

In the second assessment the following applications are included (in alphabetical order):

• Biblion
• EveryTrail
• Health Enhancement Assist Service
• iKiva
• Leafsnap
• Plugshare
• Realtimecongress
• RedPhone
• Runkeeper (Health Graph update)
• Seasonal Harvest Lite

Areas such as health (where we through leading mobile applications can see a move from central institutions addressing symptoms once people are already sick to a decentralized system with focus on a healthy life) are developing fast. EveryTrail, Health Enhancement Assist Service and Runkeepers update with an “health graph” are all interesting examples.

Direct and open connections are also getting a lot of attention among entrepreneurial developers with iKiva, RedPhone and Sesonal Harvest Light covering different aspects, from free communication to the ability to connect to those that produce things we use.

- The response has been fantastic and we want to make sure that the page highlight a diverse set of applications and supportive initiatives that address, or have the potential to address, today's and tomorrow's most important challenges, said Dennis Pamlin, who is coordinating the initiative. It is very interesting to see that it is mainly independent entrepreneurs that are moving the transformative agenda forward.

The five supporting initiatives Q2 2011 are:

• Access
• Apps for Development
• Investigative Dashboard (ID)
• Prix Pictet
• Zilok

- Very few of the major stakeholders today are doing anything transformative. They seem to see mobile application and the increased connectivity more as a threat than an opportunity. If they do anything at all they just transfer existing data and ways of operating into apps. We will now send out a questionnaire to leading stakeholders and ask how they support transformative applications.

For more information and the list of transformative applications please visit: www.transformative-applications.net

Top-ten mobile apps that can make the world a better place Q2 2011

Top-ten mobile apps that can make the world a better place Q2 2011

Visit www.transformative-applications.net and get a glimpse of a better future

Embargo: 2011-06-18

Today Transformative-Applications.net present the top-ten list for the second quarter 2011. Each quarter ten transformative applications that address some of the most pressing challenges in our society, and five initiatives that support the development and uptake of such applications are presented.

In the second assessment the following applications are included (in alphabetical order):

• Biblion
• EveryTrail
• Health Enhancement Assist Service
• iKiva
• Leafsnap
• Plugshare
• Realtimecongress
• RedPhone
• Runkeeper (Health Graph update)
• Seasonal Harvest Lite

Areas such as health (where we through leading mobile applications can see a move from central institutions addressing symptoms once people are already sick to a decentralized system with focus on a healthy life) are developing fast. EveryTrail, Health Enhancement Assist Service and Runkeepers update with an “health graph” are all interesting examples.

Direct and open connections are also getting a lot of attention among entrepreneurial developers with iKiva, RedPhone and Sesonal Harvest Light covering different aspects, from free communication to the ability to connect to those that produce things we use.

- The response has been fantastic and we want to make sure that the page highlight a diverse set of applications and supportive initiatives that address, or have the potential to address, today's and tomorrow's most important challenges, said Dennis Pamlin, who is coordinating the initiative. It is very interesting to see that it is mainly independent entrepreneurs that are moving the transformative agenda forward.

The five supporting initiatives Q2 2011 are:

• Access
• Apps for Development
• Investigative Dashboard (ID)
• Prix Pictet
• Zilok

- Very few of the major stakeholders today are doing anything transformative. They seem to see mobile application and the increased connectivity more as a threat than an opportunity. If they do anything at all they just transfer existing data and ways of operating into apps. We will now send out a questionnaire to leading stakeholders and ask how they support transformative applications.

For more information and the list of transformative applications please visit: www.transformative-applications.net

Eco-innovation in Europe: Not very innovative, or are the "experts" looking in the wrong direction?

Right now I’m looking for data in the project "transformative low-carbon leadership" for GeSI. A friend sent a report about Eco-innovation, “The Eco-Innovation Challenge; Pathways to a resource efficient Europe”, and was surprised about the lack of innovation in it. It is not the first time and the report is not particular bad (actually a bit better than a lot of other report that talk about innovation), but this time I decided to look a bit closer.

I think there are three main reasons for these kinds of studies being so bad when it come to what I call innovation (substantial change or difference versus more incremental changes):

• First, they look at changes (and often incremental changes) in existing systems, not new ways of providing services. This result in a situation where they are seldom looking at anything really innovative.
• Second, they have a problem perspective where the final emissions/pollution/waste is the focus. Many seem to be experts in waste/pollution and are probably threatened by actual solutions, as these will make their knowledge redundant.
• Third, they are funded by/targeting current polluters, not tomorrow’s solution providers. Or else it is just tragic that they keep ignoring tomorrow’s solution providers.

A simple Google search shows that there are reasons to be optimistic. New areas are not far after other areas when searched for together with “eco-innovation”, maybe this is because people outside Europe are more open to tomorrow’s solutions, or maybe there are better experts in Eco-innovation than the people who put the study above together (see above for the result/focus of that report).

Solar are already on the level of the older/traditional areas, and ICT will probably move into mainstream soon. Nanotech and Robots are two areas I think will grow very fast over the next five years and biotech is already a priority. It is amazing that a study that claim to talk about innovation manage to ignore solar, ICT, biotech, nanotech and robots...

One of the challenges is to ensure that academia move the focus from incremental eco-innovation to transformative eco-innovation. On the web people like to link transformative with eco-innovation, but that is not what is happening when we look at scholarly articles (see below).

This is one of the images in the EU study that (as most studies in the field) almost totally ignored innovative solutions used a problem approach. Beside the fact that solution sectors are not included the graph show little more than the fact that the use of the term "eco-innovation" is becoming increasingly popular.

Eco-innovation in Europe: Not very innovative, or are the "experts" looking in the wrong direction?

Right now I’m looking for data in the project "transformative low-carbon leadership" for GeSI. A friend sent a report about Eco-innovation, “The Eco-Innovation Challenge; Pathways to a resource efficient Europe”, and was surprised about the lack of innovation in it. It is not the first time and the report is not particular bad (actually a bit better than a lot of other report that talk about innovation), but this time I decided to look a bit closer.

I think there are three main reasons for these kinds of studies being so bad when it come to what I call innovation (substantial change or difference versus more incremental changes):

• First, they look at changes (and often incremental changes) in existing systems, not new ways of providing services. This result in a situation where they are seldom looking at anything really innovative.
• Second, they have a problem perspective where the final emissions/pollution/waste is the focus. Many seem to be experts in waste/pollution and are probably threatened by actual solutions, as these will make their knowledge redundant.
• Third, they are funded by/targeting current polluters, not tomorrow’s solution providers. Or else it is just tragic that they keep ignoring tomorrow’s solution providers.

A simple Google search shows that there are reasons to be optimistic. New areas are not far after other areas when searched for together with “eco-innovation”, maybe this is because people outside Europe are more open to tomorrow’s solutions, or maybe there are better experts in Eco-innovation than the people who put the study above together (see above for the result/focus of that report).

Solar are already on the level of the older/traditional areas, and ICT will probably move into mainstream soon. Nanotech and Robots are two areas I think will grow very fast over the next five years and biotech is already a priority. It is amazing that a study that claim to talk about innovation manage to ignore solar, ICT, biotech, nanotech and robots...

One of the challenges is to ensure that academia move the focus from incremental eco-innovation to transformative eco-innovation. On the web people like to link transformative with eco-innovation, but that is not what is happening when we look at scholarly articles (see below).





















This is one of the images in the EU study that (as most studies in the field) almost totally ignored innovative solutions used a problem approach. Beside the fact that solution sectors are not included the graph show little more than the fact that the use of the term "eco-innovation" is becoming increasingly popular.

Super Sad True Love Story by Gary Shteyngart

This is the first book I have read that take on the decline on the US through the “entertainment”/connectivity development we see now. It is an interesting example on how many western people see China as a "threat" that are beyond the control of anything the west (US) can do. The part where US wants to impress the visiting person (the head of China's Central Bank and "probably the most powerful person on the planet") by showing that the US can still innovate is brilliant.

In many ways I would describe this book as the Bukowski version of Daemon (the brilliant book by Daniel Suarez that everyone interesting in technology should read). The need to stay connected and the focus on instant gratification is not very sophisticated, but therefore also very effective. Letting all key characters (almost) be outside the main events in society is and efficient way to create a feeling of lost control. A feeling that seem to drive many in our society into situations where they work without much reflection or thought about any broader consequences of their actions.

The main character is such a sad person that it is hard not to see him as the perfect caricature of a US "intellectual" today.

Sometimes it feels a little to much focus on sex/nudity, but then you realise that this is where we are heading if media/PR/TV continue on the path we are on today.  I hope people in the PR/lobbying/entertainment sector think a little about where things are heading and if they are helping to make a "super sad true love story" a reality.

Maybe even take the time to read Simmel, perhaps The Philosophy of Money.