Keya Dannenbaum is the founder and CEO of ElectNext, which powers a suite of tools for publishers that more deeply inform readers and engage them on issues. ElectNext is also a Knight Foundation grantee. Below, Dannenbaum writes about the new report from Knight, “The Emergence of Civic Tech: Investments in a Growing Field.” Photo credit: Flickr user The DEMO Conference.

As the founder of a civic technology company, I feel the energy and excitement of a new and burgeoning civic space every day. With the last two presidential cycles turning on technology, and the establishment of Code for America as a hub for open government innovation, there is an unquestionable mood of growth and momentum among civic technologists.

Knight Foundation’s survey of the civic tech landscape adds heft and data to that feeling. In particular, as I find myself thinking about how to attract more creative, probing minds to commit their technology prowess towards civic ends, there are two features of the report that jump out.RELATED LINKS

“Pulling back the curtain on civic tech” by Jon Sotsky on Knight Blog

“New tools produce better understanding of investments in civic tech” by Sean Gourley on KnightBlog

“The Emergence of Civic Tech: Investments in a Growing Field” on Slideshare.net 

“Civic Tech Directory.xslx,” a landscape list of civic technology projects by Jon Sotsky (updated 2/28)

“Knight Foundation’s civic tech report: why it matters” by Tom Steinberg on KnightBlog

“Strange bedfellows or yin and yang” by Stacy Donohue on KnightBlog

“Urban neighborhoods take small steps into ‘civic tech‘” by Patrick Barry on KnightBlog

First, the space is much larger, and growing much more rapidly, than even I had believed. My company, ElectNext, began in the “voting” cluster, as defined in the report, so I tend to routinely interact with the limited number of fellow organizations and funders circulating in our small community. What the report excitingly helps clarify is that there is a much broader landscape of civic tech, far beyond what my day-to-day myopia allows me to see.

From this observation, then, is an opportunity to foster more cross-cluster community and collaboration. As the network map in the report shows, Open Government and Community Action organizations tend to have little overlap. Breaking out of these silos has the obvious benefits of exchanging knowledge, ideas and solutions. But doing so also has the added benefit of multiplying that feeling of energy and excitement that comes with being part of a large, growing and impactful community, and attracting even more people to the space.

The second fact that jumped out at me from the report is the average age of civic tech organizations: about 4 years old.  That explains why we have yet to see a “breakout success”—a Facebook or a DropBox –of civic technology; we simply need more time.  And the challenge here is that without that success story to point to, the potential upside that would attract both entrepreneurs and investors to the space is simply not as obvious. (Note that in the peer-to-peer collaboration cluster, this is less of an issue, as Getaround and AirBnB are those breakout successes, and have helped attract investors and entrepreneurs to that cluster in droves.)

Accompanying that challenge, though, is a clear opportunity, in particular for investors, as the report highlights. With large addressable market sizes, small average investment sizes and lack of a dominant market leader in most clusters, entering the field now positions one well to be that breakout success. And, in the case of civic tech, that success can take the form not just of healthy financial returns, but also of impact, as pioneers of the future of civic society.