In my home town, a large riverside area of disused factories in wasteland has the potential for equitable housing and economic regeneration in the midst of natural beauty. How exactly to achieve this goal has been the subject of debate for many years. Recently, to much local rejoicing, the debate was finally resolved in favour of community proposals.

This took an extraordinary level of commitment and perseverance from key individuals. A particular focus of the effort was to explain in plain language the real implications of the proposals put forward by property developers. It was not at all clear what their large, complex documents would really mean for local people.

Fortunately, some of the stakeholders passionate about the future of the town had expertise in architecture and planning, as well as enough dedication to spend untold hours examining the proposals with a fine-tooth comb. They were able to explain to the rest of us about road widths, traffic congestion, access points, building heights, housing densities, and other details that were not at all obvious to ordinary mortals – including planning technicalities such as “reserved matters” that the developers can reapply to undo after gaining planning permission.

With the aid of such input, local people were able to mount a successful campaign to reject commercially-driven proposals in favour of one that will guarantee the town a healthy and happy future. Will every town enjoy such success?

A very similar challenge is emerging worldwide with climate adaptation. It is likely that increasing pressure on mayors, councils, and planners to mitigate the impacts of climate change will lead to the implementation of new technologies at scale and pace. But which technologies? Some will be put forward by large, well-funded companies with impressive marketing materials. Other solutions that may provide better outcomes for community members, while being equally or even more effective at reducing emissions, may not have the funding for such promotion.

Another example is new law and regulations. Even members of parliament struggle to understand the legislation they are responsible for voting on. It can hardly be easier for councillors, let alone those citizens who are consulted, to understand the implications of proposals to introduce or change statutes.

As a society, we need a better way to reveal and critique the arguments made in large, complex documents. This is exactly what Dedoctive provides in its new “Analyse Argument” feature. This can convert the claims made in a document, of any size, into a simple visual format that shows the:

1. Claims made (Goals) and how they break down into sub-claims
2. The situation, environment, or circumstances in which each claim is made (its Context)
3. The argument made for each claim (its Strategy)
4. The evidence for the argument (its Solution)
5. Justifications for using the evidence
6. Assumptions underpinning the argument

Each node in the resulting diagram is hyperlinked directly to details, including commentary that highlights where the argument may be weak – for example, lacking evidence, or presented in a way that is inconsistent with other aspects of the document. This makes it possible for an ordinary mortal to get an overview of even the most complex document at a glance, then zoom in on its possible flaws without necessarily being a subject matter expert.

The six elements of an argument used to generate these diagrams are drawn from the standard notation Goal Structuring Notation (GSN). GSN was developed at the University of York during the 1990s to present “safety cases” – the formal document used by engineers to assure stakeholders that a system is acceptably safe for a specific usage in a specific operating environment. GSN become popular as a method of presenting safety assurances but can be applied to any type of argument. It was standardized in 2011, and has been used not only to manage safety in the healthcare, aviation, automotive, rail, traffic management, and nuclear power industries but also in other contexts such as security, law, negotiation, and mediation.

There are other notations for representing arguments as pictures, but none combine expressiveness with simplicity as well as GSN:

Dedoctive’s feature “Analyse Argument” is the next step in our mission to democratize information. By making even the largest and most complex documents understandable to ordinary mortals, we are enabling public participation in decision-making that is informed and thus effective.

The new level of scrutiny enabled by Dedoctive will lead to better decisions – not by handing over the decisions to AI, but by giving ordinary people the ability to contribute with insight and discernment. Dedoctive will empower the people who actually live in a place (and thus have the most skin in the game) to help shape their future. To find out more, contact us.