Open Data Cities and Transport Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Open Data Cities and Transport Presentation

on

  • 654 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
654
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
654
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • FutureEverything is a not for profit Festival, Conference and Living Lab embedded in the arts, digital media community, very much looking at the societal impact of technology. It is about enabling people to understand, explore and use technology. It has strong links to the universities in and around Manchester and sees itself as a place to try out new ideas. It is a festival very much about the city.
  • Proposition: How would a city evolve if all data were made open? Would it develop with the same asymmetries that we see in the modern cities of today or would it create an environment for people to understand, participate in and utilise the city? We looked around globe to see if there were any cities that were had adopted an open and free data environment. At that time Vancouver was adopting the Open 3 principles and the approach the administration and the actors within city and this gave inspiration to how we would develop the Open Data Cities project
  • From the start we decided that the Open Data Cities project would focus on the Conceptual idea of the city rather than the administrative. The population of the metropolitan region is 2.6 million people with 10 local authorities and many pan regional public bodies. Each with their own structures. Advantages were that working with the pan-regional bodies like transportation would have greater impact, and potential market for services and applications. It would also create a safer environment for Local Authorities to dip their toes in the water. Disadvantages it meant that we were working with 10 local authorities all with their own structures and methods.
  • Identifying people to speak to within the pan-regional authorities was relatively easy, within the local authorities was more difficult and it meant that we had to dig and investigate into how the local authorities delivered services and how they coordinated themselves - if at all across the metropolitan area. This meant identifying practice groups and speaking to them and creating narratives that could be understood. Through this process we gained many friends who helped advocate or disseminate the Open Data Cities project
  • There is a very engaged developer/activist community in Manchester and by working with them to create the Open Data Manchester community we were able to create a demand side case for Local Authorities to release data. The community meets every month and has developed into one that includes developers, journalists, public officials, policy people, artists, activists…
  • Part of the Open Data Cities project was to create a porous interface between the city and developers/citizens. Hackdays and Grand Challenges enable the city to suggest problems and issues that may need to be tackled. It is hoped that this can be developed to one where these events are incentivised.
  • Hackdays are a means of leverage so we'd go to data holders and say this event is happening and wouldn't it be great if you released some data so that they can work on. This worked in some cases but not all. It was noticed early on that many of the applications that were getting developed where proof-of-concept rather than finished products. Although the data released enabled others to create interesting applications and services
  • The Open Data Cities paved the way for the creation of DataGM - The Greater Manchester Datastore. A partnership between FutureEverything and Trafford Council. The structure of DataGM reflected the needs of perceived needs of the stakeholders
  • Ultimately the project intended to create an ecology where components feed into each other. This is starting to happen but is happening slowly.
  • Although we are finding that the Open Data Manchester community is being used by public bodies to ask questions, poll demand and get advice on data release.
  • Through this process of communication business models and arguments are starting to be formed. TfGM stated at the end of 2010 that it wanted to make as much data open as it could. Citing that in the economic climate it made sense to release data such as real time bus data for people to build applications on rather than spend money on fitting passenger information displays to bus stops. There is a lot of information needed by a lot of people to understand this
  • Trafford Council could see how open data could help them internally. This is the predicted figure that they arrived at for Greater Manchester although this can’t be verified.
  • Over the weekend 23rd June 2012 San Francisco Chief Innovation Officer Jay Nath Tweeted this. Business Models potential SF City County 800,000 Urban 3,000,000 Metropolitan Area 4,000,000
  • Helsinki metropolitan region has a population of approx 1.3 million people across 7 municipalities and it is served by Helsinki Regional Transport Authority 5 transport modes: bus, metro, commuter train, tram and ferry. 1700 vehicles, 24 000 daily departures on 300 routes, 336 million journeys/year
  • They created journey planner and realtime apis and then launched a couple of apps challenges. 700 expressions of interest, over 60 ideas submitted ranging from augmented reality, route rating, multimodal comparison..
  • And over 30 apps were created. This created application that would of probably never seen the light of day. I find it amazing this amount of talent. In a meeting with HSL Jari Honkonen from HSL stated that we must look after our developers for they are our super heroes and he is not wrong. Is this amount of output unique to Helsinki/Finland one has to wonder with the a country that derived 1.6% GDP 16% exports in 2009 from one company founded in 1865
  • By creating neutral spaces and conversations with people. Information and initiatives can be disseminated more easily. Allowing people to adopt practice rather than it being imposed.
  • By creating an eco-system and community around open data gives the city the capacity to participate in larger EU initiatives. CitySDK is an ICT-PSP project that aims to create lightweight standardised interfaces on the back end of city data infrastructure, this can potentially enable the creation of apps/services that can be used across EU cities.
  • The community is also a space for new ideas such as Open Data Cooperatives, Internet of Things and EC apps contests

Open Data Cities and Transport Presentation Open Data Cities and Transport Presentation Presentation Transcript

  • Open Data Cities & TransportJulian Tait - @julianlstar @opendatamcr @FuturEverything OpenData Manchester
  • Proposition:How would a city evolve if all data was made open?
  • Conceptual over administrative model of city Rochdale 206,500 Bolton Bury 262,400 183,300 Oldham 217,273 Wigan 305,500 Salford 218,000 Tameside Manchester 215,500 483,800 Trafford 211,800 Stockport 281,000Ten Local AuthoritiesTwo cities, two aspiring cities Population 2.6 millionFour pan-regional bodies
  • Identifying communities r te t e e es or id l m da rd rd kp ch n es an ha fo lto ch lfo ry oc an m ig af ld Ro Bo Bu Sa Ta St W M Tr O Policy and improvement Planning Freedom of information Pan Greater Manchester
  • Building communities
  • Themed Hackdays and Grand ChallengesOpenData Manchester
  • DataGM Structure Lead Partners Local Authorities Trafford FE Advisory Body Pan-GM Organisations Voting Steering Group OpenData Manchester10 GM Local Authorities - Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Trafford, Tameside & WiganPan - GM Organisations - TfGM, GMP, GM Fire and Rescue & Strategic Health Authority NWNon Public Sector Organisations - FutureEverything & OpenData ManchesterAdvisory Body - Marketing Manchester, New Economy, MDDA, Open Knowledge Foundation & Others
  • Business Case - Transport (1) TfGM 14,000+ Bus Stops 15 Bus Stations 50+ trams stops – soon to be 100+ 200+ Train Stations 2,000+ Bus Routes 300,000,000 passenger journeys 40+ Bus Operators As well as highway infrastructure
  • Business Case - GM Local AuthoritiesEach day there are an estimated up to 600 staff in thepublic sector in Greater Manchester looking for data,trying to access databases and converting data intosingle formats for cross analysis….Cost estimated at £8,500,000 p.a.
  • Business Case- Transport (2)
  • Business Case Transport (3)
  • ReittiGPS, 1st Prize (everyday solutions) RouteClock , 1st Prize (GUI inventions) Seutuseikkailu ,1st Prize (concepts) Markus Halttunen / Essentia Solutions Janne Käki Tuomas Husu & team AudioReitit , 2nd Prize Rate a Ride (GUI inventions) 2nd Prize (concepts) Juho Kostiainen Teemu LaineTässä.fi 2nd Prize (everyday solutions) Markus Tallgren & team / Addfore Technologies Andropas, Honorary Mention Aki Lehtinen Kyyti, Honorary Mention Ilkka Pirttimaa
  • • +30 mobile apps -> larger service portfolio -> better service to passengers• Positive feedback from passengers and media.• 1/6th of Journey Planner request comes via API. Focus is turning on mobile services.• Large developer base• Benchmarking and ideas to HSL service development• List of apps: http://www.hsl.fi/FI/aikataulutjareitit/avoimentiedonpalvelut/Sivut/ default.aspx• Developer resources: developers.reittiopas.fi
  • Business Case - Planning Data? ! There are more...
  • CitySDK22 Partner, 30 month CIP projectHelsinkiRome Domains ofManchesterLisbon Smart mobilityBarcelona Smart participationAmsterdam Smart tourismLamiaIstanbul
  • THE CITY OF THINGS a TSB ‘Internet of Things’ Convergence project Apps4EuropeOpenData Manchester