Open linked governmental data for citizen engagement
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Open linked governmental data for citizen engagement

on

  • 1,898 views

Open Linked Governmental Data for Citizen Engagement – A workshop about the benefits and restrictions of open linked governmental data and the role of metadata in citizen engagement (Anneke ...

Open Linked Governmental Data for Citizen Engagement – A workshop about the benefits and restrictions of open linked governmental data and the role of metadata in citizen engagement (Anneke Zuiderwijk, Marijn Janssen, Keith Jeffery, Yannis Charalabidis) #cedem12

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,898
Views on SlideShare
1,898
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
20
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

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
  • - Introduce ourselves.- Let participants shortly introduce themselves? (depends on the amount of participants) Otherwise ask for working fields (e.g. science/universities, government, other)
  • - Especially in the last years considerable attention is focused on the demand of opening up governmental data within politics, companies, scientific communities, and citizen communities (European_Union 2010). - An important event within the trends of the last years is the release of the EU Public Sector Information (PSI) directive, in which a common legislative framework was presented which regulates making data of public sector bodies available for re-use (European_Commission 2003). - In this report the European Commission argued that a general framework “is needed in order to ensure fair, propotionate and non-discriminatory conditions for the re-use of [PSI]” (p. 1) and that “PSI is an important primary material for digital content products and services” (p. 1). - After the launch of the EU-directive, also referred to as the PSI-directive, many directives and implementation guidelines followed. - For example, in 2006 the European Commission developed a policy for the reuse of her own information sources which includes the statement that all general accessible data of the European Commission should become available for everyone, usually for free (European_Commission 2011a). - Another important event with regard to the development of open data policies is the statement of the Obama Administration in 2009 that has as primary goal the establishment of an unprecedented level of openness of the Government (Obama 2009). The Obama Administration published an Open Government Directive some months afterwards (The_White_House 2009). Building on former policies, the European Commission has recently presented an Open Data Strategy for Europe, in which more evident rules on making the best use of government-held information are presented (European_Commission 2011b). - An important change of the Open Data Strategy of 2011 compared to directives and guidelines that were released by the EC before, is that “it will be made a general rule that all documents that are made accessible by public sector bodies can be re-used for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, unless protected by third party copyright” (p. 1). Another important change is that “public bodies should not be allowed to charge more than costs triggered by the individual request for data (marginal costs)” (p. 1). The European Commission will lead by example; the EC will open its PSI for free through a new data portal (European_Commission 2011b).
  • What are open governmental data? Mention definition Geiger & Von Lucke.We adopt this definition as it excludes the publication of data which must remain confidential, are private or contain industrial secrets.Also, this definition shows that open data should be accessible without restrictions on usage and distribution.Examples of open governmental data. The MEPSIR study defined six main domains for investigation:1. Business information, including Chamber of commerce information, official business registers,patent and trademark information and public tender databases;2. Geographic information, including address information, aerial photos, buildings, cadastralinformation, geodetic networks, geology, hydrographical data and topographic information;3. Legal information, including decisions of national, foreign and international courts, nationallegislation and treaties;4. Meteorological information, including climate data and models and weather forecasts;5. Social data, including various types of statistics (economic, employment, health, population,public administration, social);6. Transport information, including information on traffic congestion, work on roads, and publictransport, and vehicle registration.
  • This potential can be exploited by viewingpublishing open data as a process . - The figure shows the start of the opening of data on the left side resulting in the publishing of open data on a website. - Next, the data are released and can be used. - The public (citizens, businesses, but also other government organizations) takes over the data by searching for it and finding , processing, visualizing and discussing the outcomes of this process. - The outcomes might affect the government, which may result in recommendations for the government. - In turn, the government can listen to the recommendations, become involved in the discussion about what should be done or clarify its point of view. As the figure shows this part is largely underdeveloped and we did not find any clues about these kind of mechanisms.
  • Although the open data movement is guided by PSI-directives, strategies and national policies, open data policies of organizations are accompanied by many impediments. Current open data policies seem not to facilitate the effective and successful use of open data.The ENGAGE project was started because of these barriers. This happened in June 2011. I will tell more about current barriers in my presentation later during the workshop.Framework Programme 7 shows that attention of the European Commission for Open DataENGAGE is part of FP7Mail goalThe ENGAGE-project aims to create an e-infrastructure to open up public sector data to researchers and citizens. By using the e-infrastructure, researchers will be able to submit, acquire, search and visualize diverse and distributed public sector datasets from all the countries of the European Union.
  • Framework Programme 7 shows that attention of the European Commission for Open DataENGAGE is part of FP7Mail goalThe ENGAGE-project aims to create an e-infrastructure to open up public sector data to researchers and citizens. By using the e-infrastructure, researchers will be able to submit, acquire, search and visualize diverse and distributed public sector datasets from all the countries of the European Union.
  • At this moment, the deposition, access and use of open public sector data is often cumbersome and should be improved. The purpose of this survey is therefore to find out your needs regarding to the use of public sector data, such as deposit, access and use needs. You are asked to participate in this survey, because you might (potentially) use open public sector data. Even if you do not use data, you could be a potential user and your answers will be helpful to us.The results of this survey will be used to develop and further specify the requirements of the ENGAGE e-infrastructure for open data.  
  • - Completion of this survey is voluntary and the information provided by you participating in this survey is treated in a confidential way. Completing the survey will take about 10-20 minutes of your time. The survey consists of 14-23 questions.
  • - Ask all participants to fill out the questionnaire. I will present some first results after they filled out the questionnaire.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • - Using open public sector data seemstobevery important foralmostallpurposes.- Especiallystatistical analysis, academicpublicationsand datalinking are seen are very important.- News reportinganddailyoperation in workwereassessed as less important.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Most actions are assessed as ‘difficult’ or as ‘notdifficultbut alsonoteasy’. Onlysearchinganddownloading are seen as easy by the majority of respondents.Nevertheless, all actions are assessed as veryusefulby the majority.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Processing bytransforming, visualisingandanalysing is oftenassessed as easy.Most actions are assessed as difficult.The actions linking,providing feedback by putting needsanduploading are probablynotperformedveryoften, becausequitesomepeoplesaidthattheydon’tknowwheterthis is currenlty easy or difficult.All actions wereassessed as useful or veryuseful.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • Ask which results the participants expect.
  • - The respondentsstatedthattheywouldliketousemany types of metadatawhentheyuse open public sector data.- Percentagesabove 80 are highlighted.- Funding informationand parameters usedby software are seen as less important.
  • An important event within the trends of the last years is the release of the EU Public Sector Information (PSI) directive, in which a common legislative framework was presented which regulates making data of public sector bodies available for re-use (European_Commission 2003). In this report the European Commission argued that a general framework “is needed in order to ensure fair, propotionate and non-discriminatory conditions for the re-use of [PSI]” (p. 1) and that “PSI is an important primary material for digital content products and services” (p. 1).
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpediments and 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpediments and 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpediments and 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpediments and 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpedimentsand 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpediments and 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Based on a literatureoverview and twouse-cases the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are analyzed and categorized in fourcategories: 1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments, 2) data access impediments, 3) data depositionimpedimentsand 4) data useimpediments. - The impediments are categorizedusing a fishbone diagram.
  • Another way toorganize the restrictions is by the use of a fishbone diagram.In thisdiagrams the impedimentsthat open data policiescurrentlyencounter are categorizedaccordingto the followingcategories:1) political, economical, technical and socialimpediments2) data access impediments3) data depositionimpediments4) data useimpediments
  • Rectify fragmentation by creating a single shop for PSI. A central, complete overview of data sets should be created. The pure existence of this overview is not sufficient when scientific communities are unaware of it, therefore awareness should be created by using dissemination strategies. Services should include the possibility to request access to PSI on this central website in case that special permission for the access to the PSI is needed.Create open access for all users. Open Data as a philosophy requires that certain data are freely available, without copyright, patents or other mechanisms of control in a timely and accessible way with few or no impediments. Therefore, open data platforms should consist of free access to PSI or access on marginal costs. The access should be realised for all users of open data. When there are issues with access, for instance privacy issues, solutions may be found for these issues. Besides, there should be clear uniform use agreements that do not differ per data set. Furthermore, easy access to all web content should be created, including applications of integrated content. In addition, the future should be taken into account: users should get information about which new data will become available in the near future and about structural updates.Create interoperability and provide users with possibilities to analyse data. It appears to be very important that users of public sector data can obtain metadata to create interoperability; they should be able to obtain data about the data. The metadata are used for discovery, for understanding the data in context and for detailed processing of the dataset(s). These metadata should include clear descriptions of the (quality of the) data and should have an evident structure, so that interpretation issues will be reduced as much as possible. Meta-tagging can be used in order to ensure that PSI can be reused without resource-intensive and cumbersome steps that need to be taken.Create an infrastructure for processing PSI. Data users should be able to use tools to track, (statistically) analyze and visualize the PSI they want to examine. Users should get information about the ontological categories of the data, so that they can make sense of it. The support and advice of experts in the field and other contacts will also contribute to this direction. The infrastructure should be based on a dialogue between data-producing public bodies and data users.

Open linked governmental data for citizen engagement Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Open Linked Governmental Data for Citizen EngagementA workshop about the benefits and restrictions of open linked governmental data and the role of metadata in citizen engagement Anneke Zuiderwijk*, Marijn Janssen*, Keith Jeffery**, Yannis Charalabidis*** *Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands **Science and Technology Facilities Council, United Kingdom *** University of AEGEAN, Greece CEDEM 2012, May 3-4
  • 2. Agenda0 Introduction0 The ENGAGE project0 Questionnaire0 Discussion about questionnaire and first results0 Presentations 0 Anneke Zuiderwijk - Benefits and restrictions on the use of open linked governmental data from the ENGAGE project 0 Keith Jeffery - The use of metadata for citizen engagement0 Discussion CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 3. Introduction0 Considerable attention is paid to open governmental data (e.g. EC PSI-directives, national open data platforms, local initiatives)0 EU Public Sector Information (PSI) directive (European Commission, 2003) 0 “A general framework is needed in order to ensure fair, proportionate and non-discriminatory conditions for the re-use of *PSI+” (p. 1) 0 “PSI is an important primary material for digital content products and services” (p. 1)0 Many directives and implementation guidelines followed0 Obama administration  “establishment of an unprecedented level of openness of the Government” (Obama, 2009)0 Open Data Strategy for Europe (European Commission, 2011) 0 “It will be made a general rule that all documents that are made accessible by public sector bodies can be re-used for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, unless protected by third party copyright” (p. 1) 0 “public bodies should not be allowed to charge more than costs triggered by the individual request for data (marginal costs)” (p. 1) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 4. Introduction0 Open governmental data can be defined as “all stored data of the public sector which could be made accessible by government in the public interest without any restrictions on usage and distribution” (Geiger & Von Lucke, 2011, p. 185).0 For example, public sector data can be: 0 Geographic data (e.g. cadastral information) 0 Legal data (e.g. courts decisions, legislation) 0 Meteorological data (e.g. climate data, weather forecasts) 0 Social data (e.g. population, public administration) 0 Transport data (e.g. traffic congestion, work on roads) 0 Business data (e.g. chamber of commerce, patents) (MEPSIR study, Dekkers et al., 2006) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 5. Introduction0 Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have the potential to improve the responsiveness of governments to the needs of citizens and scientific communities0 Example: feedback loop (derived from Janssen & Zuiderwijk, forthcoming) government public data make available? publishing Open data searching finding processing using discussing ? participation recommending CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 6. The ENGAGE project0 However, significant barriers hinder the effective exploration, management and distribution of the vast amounts of available public sector data  ENGAGE project0 ENGAGE (FP7): An Infrastructure for Open, Linked Governmental Data Provision towards Research Communities and Citizens (http://www.engage-project.eu)0 Main goal: the development and use of a data infrastructure, incorporating distributed and diverse public sector information (PSI) resources. CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 7. The ENGAGE project0 The ENGAGE project: 0 Opens up diverse government data to researchers 0 European Level (all countries of the EU) 0 Establishes Metadata Standardization framework 0 Provides access and discovery on cross-country datasets 0 Provides feedback back to public data agencies0 The ENGAGE platform will enable researchers and citizens to: 0 Discover and browse datasets across diverse and dispersed public sector information resources (local, national and European) in their own language 0 Download the datasets 0 Perform geospatial search of datasets 0 Visualize properly structured datasets in data tables, maps and charts CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 8. The ENGAGE Project0 A European Infrastructure0 Integrating Public Sector Data0 Providing Public Sector Information (PSI) to Research Communities and Citizens CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 9. The ENGAGE Project - Questionnaire0 The deposition, access and use of open public sector data should be improved we conduct a questionnaire to find out needs regarding to the use ofpublic sector data (e.g. deposit, access and use needs).0 You are asked to participate in this survey, because you might (potentially) use open public sector data0 The results will be used to develop and further specify the requirements of the ENGAGE e-infrastructure for open data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 10. The ENGAGE Project - Questionnaire0 The information provided by you participating is treated in a confidential way0 Completing the questionnaire will take about 10-25 minutes of your time (14-23 questions)0 Receive the results of the questionnaire (please leave your contact details at the end)0 Attention: each time that the term open data is used in the questionnaire, this refers to open governmental/public sector data! 2nd ENGAGEWorkshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2011 CEDEM Meeting, Haifa, Nov 14-15, 2012
  • 11. The ENGAGE Project - Questionnaire0 Taking the questionnaire.0 The results of this questionnaire will be used to find out your needs regarding the use of public sector data and to develop and further specify the requirements for the ENGAGE e-infrastructure for open public sector data.0 Your response is very valuable to us. Thank you very much for participating in this survey. CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 12. Questionnaire - Approach0 Target groups: 0 (Potential) Users of open public sector data 0 Researchers and citizens from all fields of research and all EU- countries0 Questions 0 Based on interviews and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) 0 Background questions (gender, age and function) 0 Current use of open public sector data (use, type of data, frequency, websites, purpose, ability, usefulness) 0 Metadata (use, benefits, restrictions, needs) 0 Statements about use (perceptions of easiness, expectations, voluntariness, intentions) 0 Other (comments and contact details) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 13. Questionnaire - Approach0 Questionnaire was put on line and: 0 Sent to e-mail lists of conferences (e.g. the E-GOV list) 0 Put on the ENGAGE project website 0 Sent to contacts via LinkedIn 0 Sent to contacts directly (e.g. via the ENGAGE contact list) 0 Sent to organizations that employ researchers that probably work with open data 0 Sent to contacts working for open data platforms and asked them to put the link to the questionnaire on their website (e.g. EPSI-platform and Dutch governmental open data websites)0 Questionnaire was printed on paper and used for: 0 Workshops 0 Handing out to conference participants CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 14. Questionnaire - Approach0 Aim: at least 246 respondents finishing the questionnaire (taking into account the confidence level and a margin of error)0 On April 19, 2012, 129 people started the questionnaire and 60 people (24% of aim) finished the questionnaire CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 15. Questionnaire – Results – Background Gender (%) (N=120)100 80 75 60 40 25 20 0 Man Woman Age (%) (N=120) 30 28 27 25 20 16 15 12 9 10 7 5 2 1 0 Under 18 18-21 22-25 26-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61 or over CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 16. Questionnaire – Results – Background Working field (%) (N=118)45 4240353025 2020 15 1415 810 5 0 Social sciences Natural sciences Non-scientific Non-scientific Other industry Social sciences* (N=47)35% 32%30% 28% 26%25%20%15%10% * Multiple5% answers possible0% Economics Political science Sociology CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 17. Questionnaire – Discussion0 Did you ever use open public sector data? 0 More or less than 75 percent? 0 And which types of open public sector data are used most? (geographic, legal, meteorological, social, transport, business or other?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 18. Questionnaire – Results – Type of use Did you ever use open data? (N=113)90% 85%80%70% Two paths: 0 Potential users60%50%40% 0 Users30%20% 13%10% 2%0% Yes No Dont know Which types of open public sector data?* (N=94) 80% 76% 70% 65% 60% 54% 50% 47% 40% 37% 29% 30% 20% 12% 10% * Multiple 0% answers Geographic data Legal data Meteorological Social data Transport data Business data Other data possible data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 19. Questionnaire – Discussion0 How often do you use open public sector data? 0 What did the majority say? (yearly, monthly, weekly, daily?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 20. Questionnaire – Results – Type of use How often? (N=93)45% 39%40%35%30% 24% 24%25%20% 14%15%10% 5% 0% 0% 0% Never Yearly or a few Monthly or a few Weekly or a few Daily or multiple Dont know times per year times per month times per week times per day CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 21. Questionnaire – Discussion0 Which of the following non-European Union open public sector data sources/websites have you used in the past? 0 What did the majority say? (E.g. data.gov? Which other websites?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 22. Questionnaire – Results – Websites Use of non-EU websites (N=78) % 65% United States: www.data.gov Canada: www.data.gc.ca 12% New Zealand: http://www.data.govt.nz/ 6% Australia: http://data.australia.gov.au 14% Morocco: http://data.gov.ma/ 0% Moldova: http://data.gov.md 1% Albany: http://open.data.al 0% Israel: http://data.gov.il 0% Kenya: http://www.opendata.go.ke/ 4% Other, namely: 12% None of these 28% I do not remember 6% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 23. Questionnaire – Discussion0 Which of the following European Union open public sector data sources/websites have you used in the past? 0 What did the majority say? (E.g. data.gov.uk? Which other websites?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 24. Questionnaire – Results – Websites Use of EU-Websites (N=80) % Europe: www.epsiplatform.eu 25% United Kingdom: www.data.gov.uk 53% France: www.data.gouv.fr 5% Greece: www.observatory.gr 4% Netherlands: www.data.overheid.nl 13% Luxembourg: www.statistiques.public.lu 0% Italy: www.dati.gov.it 6% Belgium: http://data.gov.be 1% Norway: www.data.norge.no 4% Denmark: www.digitaliser.dk 1% Estonia: http://www.opendata.ee/ 1% Spain: http://datos.gob.es 8% Other, namely: 13% None of these 14% I do not remember 5% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 25. Questionnaire – Discussion0 Which other data sources/websites of open public sector data have you used in the past? 0 Many other websites? Which websites? CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 26. Questionnaire – Results – Websites Use of other websites (N=88) Eurostat CBS (Dutch statistics office) United Nations World Bank http://diavgeia.gov.gr http://geodata.gov.gr http://www.gsis.gr OECD Land Registry Historic weather data UNESCO http://daten.berlin.de/ www.norway.no http://data.wien.gv.at/ http://www.denhaag.nl/opendata Openstreetmap.org www.joinup.eu http://offeneskoeln.de/ maps.geoportal.gov.pl www.eubusinessregister.com www.e-practice.eu And many other websites… CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 27. Questionnaire – Discussion0 To which extent are the following purposes important for your use of open public sector data? 0 Which purposes were mentioned most? (academic publications, statistical analysis, policy research, non- scientific and non-policy investigations, political and policy-making decisions, data linking, news reporting, daily operation in work, curiosity/recreation, other?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 28. Questionnaire – Results – PurposeWhich purposes are important for use? Very unimportant Unimportant Neutral Important Very important Dont knowAcademic publications 7% 5% 15% 22% 47% 4%Statistical analysis 4% 4% 10% 23% 56% 3%Policy research 3% 9% 13% 33% 40% 3%Investigations (non-scientific, non-policy) 4% 10% 19% 43% 21% 3%Political and policy-making decisions 7% 9% 12% 41% 30% 1%Data linking 1% 7% 14% 29% 47% 3%News reporting 13% 17% 28% 19% 20% 3%Daily operation in work 7% 11% 28% 24% 27% 3%Curiosity/recreation 6% 9% 23% 33% 26% 4%Other 1% 0% 4% 4% 7% 4% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 29. Questionnaire – Discussion0 To which extent are you currently able to perform the following actions when you use open data?0 To which extent do you find the following actions useful for your use of open public sector data? 0 Which actions were mentioned as difficult/useful by the majority of respondents? (searching, searching by using an API, finding, finding by the use of metadata, finding linked material, discover and browse datasets on different levels in the own language, downloading, downloading supplementary data?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 30. Questionnaire – Results - RequirementsCurrent ability to perform the following actions when using open public sector data (N=70) Very difficult Difficult Neutral Easy Very easy Dont knowSearching 9% 23% 22% 28% 16% 3%Searching by using an API 7% 28% 19% 13% 4% 27%Finding (getting data) 11% 31% 27% 21% 5% 5%Finding by use of metadata 11% 24% 29% 26% 5% 6%Finding linked material 17% 21% 30% 15% 6% 11%Discover and browse datasets (different levels, own language) 18% 26% 25% 19% 4% 7%Downloading 9% 17% 25% 28% 17% 4%Downloading supplementary data (e.g. metadata) 16% 19% 34% 16% 4% 10%Assessment of usefulness of performing the following actions when using open public sector data (N=56) Very useless Useless Neutral Useful Very useful Dont knowSearching 2% 7% 7% 25% 56% 2%Searching by using an API 2% 2% 15% 25% 36% 20%Finding (getting data) 2% 4% 11% 17% 65% 2%Finding by use of metadata 2% 4% 13% 22% 48% 11%Finding linked material 0% 5% 11% 39% 43% 2%Discover and browse datasets (different levels, own language) 5% 5% 15% 29% 44% 2%Downloading 0% 4% 13% 22% 59% 2%Downloading supplementary data (e.g. metadata) 2% 0% 16% 29% 42% 11% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 31. Questionnaire – Discussion0 To which extent are you currently able to perform the following actions when you use open data?0 To which extent do you find the following actions useful for your use of open public sector data? 0 Which actions were mentioned as difficult/useful by the majority of respondents? (processing, processing by transforming data/linking data/linking metadata, visualizing, analyzing, feedback by rating, feedback by putting needs, uploading, uploading processed data, viewing usage statistics, getting training?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 32. Current ability to perform the following actions when using open public sector data (N=61) Very difficult Difficult Neutral Easy Very easy Dont knowProcessing 6% 15% 32% 25% 13% 9%Processing by transforming data 5% 18% 15% 32% 13% 17%Processing by linking data 15% 24% 22% 17% 5% 17%Processing by linking metadata 16% 23% 21% 11% 12% 18%Processing by visualising data in tables, maps and charts 5% 13% 25% 27% 23% 7%Processing by analysing data 5% 20% 20% 38% 12% 5%Providing feedback by rating the data 20% 27% 25% 12% 3% 12%Providing feedback to the data producer by putting needs 15% 25% 20% 15% 5% 20%Uploading datasets 14% 24% 19% 12% 7% 24%Uploading processed, enhanced, extended, annotated 19% 22% 22% 5% 2% 31%and/or linked datasetsViewing usage statistics 12% 25% 25% 8% 7% 22%Getting training on the use of open data 12% 35% 23% 13% 5% 12%Assessment of usefulness of performing the following actions when using open public sector data (N=53) Very useless Useless Neutral Useful Very useful Dont knowProcessing 2% 4% 8% 38% 44% 4%Processing by transforming data 2% 4% 13% 37% 40% 4%Processing by linking data 2% 4% 20% 33% 37% 4%Processing by linking metadata 2% 4% 20% 27% 35% 12%Processing by visualising data in tables, maps and charts 0% 6% 12% 20% 59% 4%Processing by analysing data 0% 4% 6% 33% 53% 4%Providing feedback by rating the data 2% 4% 29% 29% 29% 8%Providing feedback to the data producer by putting needs 4% 8% 19% 23% 40% 6%Uploading datasets 2% 9% 26% 32% 19% 11%Uploading processed, enhanced, extended, annotated 2% 9% 19% 38% 19% 13%and/or linked datasetsViewing usage statistics 4% 8% 22% 33% 20% 14%Getting training on the use of open data 8% 10% 23% 29% 25% 6% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 33. Questionnaire – Discussion0 Do you currently use metadata in the context of your work or for other activities? 0 How many respondents used metadata? More or less than 90%? CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 34. Questionnaire – Results - Metadata Use metadata? (N=56) 90% 82% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 14% 10% 4% 0% Yes No Dont know CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 35. Questionnaire – Discussion0 When you use metadata for open public sector data in your current practice, how often do you personally obtain the following benefits from it?0 When you use metadata for open public sector data in your current practice, how often do you personally notice the following problems? 0 Which benefits are mentioned by the majority of respondents? (metadata can make reuse, interpretation, searching and browsing and linking easier) 0 Which problems are mentioned by the majority of respondents? (difficult to interpret, insufficient data about data quality, data gathering and data measuring, no structure, difficult to search and browse?) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 36. Questionnaire – Results - MetadataAssessment of noticing benefits when using open public sector data (N=47) Never Rarely Sometimes ften O Always Dont knowMetadata can make reusing data easier 0% 2% 18% 42% 36% 2%Metadata can make interpretation of data easier 0% 2% 13% 33% 50% 2%Metadata can make searching and browsing data easier 0% 9% 16% 18% 56% 2%Metadata can make linking data easier 0% 11% 13% 33% 33% 9%Assessment of noticing problems when using open public sector data (N=53) Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always Dont knowInsufficient metadata and therefore difficult to interpret the data 0% 7% 25% 57% 5% 7%Insufficient data about the data quality 0% 0% 35% 47% 14% 5%Insufficient metadata about data gathering and measuring 0% 0% 30% 49% 16% 5%Metadata have no structure and are therefore difficult to search and browse 0% 14% 27% 36% 14% 9% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 37. Questionnaire – Discussion0 Which of the following metadata would you like to use when you use (e.g. search, browse, retrieve and evaluate) open public sector data? 0 Which metadata? (e.g. description of dataset, title, creator, publisher, country, source, type/theme/category, format, language, keywords/tags, geographical/spatial coverage, temporal coverage, release data, license, linked datasets, organizations and persons involved, projects related, funding, data collection period, helpdesk, quality, completeness, parameters used by software) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 38. Questionnaire – Results - MetadataType of metadata % Type of metadata %Description of dataset 95% Linked datasets 86%Title of dataset 88% Organizations involved in creating the dataset 70%Creator of dataset 74% Persons involved in creating the dataset 60%Publisher of dataset 70% Projects related to the dataset 65%Country where the dataset was created 79% Funding information of the dataset 47%Source of dataset 86% Data collection period (from-to) 84%Type/theme/category of data 74% Helpdesk for the dataset 58%Format of dataset 81% Quality as declared by the data provider 74%Language used in dataset 72% Quality as declared by the data user (feedback) 74%Keywords/tags in dataset 84% Completeness of the dataset 81% Parameters used by software accessing and 93% 53%Geographical or spatial coverage of dataset processing the datasetTemporal coverage of dataset 81% Other metadata, namely: 21%Release date of dataset 77% Dont know 0%License of dataset 67% CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 39. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: Using open public sector data is of benefit for me CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 40. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: Using open public sector data is of benefit for me Using open public sector data is of benefit for me (N=56) 80% 67% 70% 60% 50% 40% 31% 30% 20% 10% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Dont know disagree agree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 41. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: Using open public sector data will enable me to accomplish my research more quickly CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 42. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: Using open public sector data will enable me to accomplish my research more quickly Using open public sector data will enable me to accomplish my research more quickly (N=56) 60% 51% 50% 40% 35% 30% 20% 9% 10% 5% 0% 0% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Dont know disagree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 43. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: I have the resources necessary to use open public sector data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 44. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: I have the resources necessary to use open public sector data I have the resources necessary to use open public sector data (N=56) 40% 38% 35% 30% 25% 20% 20% 18% 16% 15% 10% 4% 4% 5% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Dont know disagree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 45. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: A specific person or group is available for assistance with difficulties concerning the use of open public sector data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 46. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: A specific person or group is available for assistance with difficulties concerning the use of open public sector data A specific person or group is available for assistance with difficulties concerning the use of open public sector data (N=56) 35% 33% 30% 25% 20% 20% 18% 15% 15% 11% 10% 4% 5% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Dont know disagree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 47. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: It will be easy for me to become skillful at using open public sector data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 48. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: It will be easy for me to become skillful at using open public sector data It will be easy for me to become skillful at using open public sector data (N=56) 50% 45% 45% 40% 35% 30% 24% 25% 20% 20% 15% 10% 7% 5% 2% 2% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Dont know disagree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 49. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: People who are important to me (e.g. colleagues) think that I should use open public sector data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 50. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: People who are important to me (e.g. colleagues) think that I should use open public sector data People who are important to me (e.g. colleagues) think that I should use open public sector data (N=56) 35% 31% 30% 24% 24% 25% 20% 15% 11% 10% 7% 4% 5% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Dont know disagree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 51. Questionnaire – discussion0 Statement: I intend to use open public sector data in the future CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 52. Questionnaire – first results0 Statement: I intend to use open public sector data in the future I intend to use open public sector data in the future (N=56) 60% 55% 50% 40% 40% 30% 20% 10% 4% 2% 0% 0% 0% Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Dont know disagree CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 53. Presentations0 Anneke Zuiderwijk - Benefits and restrictions of the use of open linked governmental data from the ENGAGE project0 Keith Jeffery - The use of meta-data for citizen engagement CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 54. Presentations (1) - Benefits0 Literature overview and two use-cases to identify benefits of the use of open linked governmental data for the ENGAGE project CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 55. Presentations (1) – Benefits (user perspective)Category BenefitsPolitical and social Obtaining new insights in the public sector Creating new ways of understanding problems and interpreting data Easier to participate in policy making More participation and self-empowerment of users Improvement of policy-making processes New (innovative) and/or improved governmental services for users Improving citizen satisfaction Improving life-quality of user CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 56. Presentations (1) – Benefits (user perspective) Category Benefits Economical Economic growth Stimulating innovation Stimulating scientific progress Less dependency on other (governmental) organizations Development of new products and services Easier to perform research Easier to do job Reuse of data and therefore not having to collect the same data again Counteracting unnecessary duplication of costs (public money Availability of information for investors and companies More competition CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 57. Presentations (1) – Benefits (user perspective) Category Benefits Operational and Being able to scrutinize data technical Creating new data and obtaining new knowledge by merging, integrating and mashing public and private data (linked data) Fair decision-making by enabling comparison Sustainability of data (no data loss on the long term) Cooperation with data provider Ability to use the wisdom of the crowds CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 58. Presentations (1) – Restrictions (user perspective)0 However, there are also many restrictions of the use of open linked governmental data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 59. Presentations (1) – Restrictions (user perspective)Categories BarriersTask complexity Not able to discover the appropriate dataand access The data are (temporarily) not available/openrestrictions Not having access to the original data (only processed data) Difficult to search and browse; few central websites No information about the way access to data may be obtained No/few central website(s) to request access to data Prior written permission is required to get access to and reproduce data Not being free to creatively reuse data because of licences Registration required before being able to download the data Having to pay a fee for the data Language issues Data about the data (metadata) are not available Not being aware of the potential use of data Data are available in various forms resulting in discussing what is the right source No tooling support or helpdesk Focus is on making use of single datasets, whereas the real value might come from combining various datasets Contradicting outcomes based on the use of the same data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 60. Presentations (1) – Restrictions (user perspective)Categories BarriersUse and No incentives for usersparticipation Public organizations do not react on user input No time to make use of the open data Lack of knowledge to make sense and therefore to make use of data Lack of capabilities – users do not have the information capabilities necessary No statistical knowledge and understanding of the potential and the limitations of statistics Data are poorly annotated Data format is not reusable Insufficient metadata available No explanation of the meaning of data Invalid conclusions based on the reused data Data formats and datasets are too complex to handle and use easily Barriers stemming from laws and guidelines Risk on privacy violation Risk on dispute and litigations; threat of lawsuits or other violations Unclearness because there is no uniform policy for opening data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 61. Presentations (1) – Restrictions (user perspective)Categories BarriersInformation Lack of informationQuality Accuracy/imprecise information Obsolete data Information may appear to be irrelevant or benign when viewed in isolation, but when linked and analyzed collectively it may add value Too much information to process and not sure what to look at (Essential) Information is missing Similar data stored in different systems yield different resultsCategories BarriersTechnical Restrictions on data format for deposition and use Absence of standards (e.g. for architecture) Lack of metadata standards No standard software for processing open data Fragmentation of software and applications CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 62. Fishbone diagram (Zuiderwijk, Janssen & Choenni, forthcoming) Data access (A)Political, Economical, Social, Technical (PEST) Only a part of the Access requires written Data are covered by No information about data is available permission (1) copyright (act) and structurally updating data in Access requires registration other regulations (1) the future Data are currently or becoming a member not available (2) Legacy system complicates Threat of lawsuits or other violations No uniform set of the opening of data (1) No access to original data licensing terms for reuse (only processed data) (3) No or few visualization Access requires a fee (2) facilities No access to recent data, Access requires (filling a only out-dated data No awareness of data (3) form for) a data request (4) No funding Access requires Few central websites accepting a variety No dialogue between the data- Data-infrastructure is not (fragmentation of of use agreements producing public body and data user (4) easily expandable when sources) (5) Access is limited to No information about which data will PSI-amount increases Data cannot be found (5) professionals be published in the future massively Impediments of current open Little knowledge about data quality (1) Unfamiliar with data format data policies Deposition requires registration or becoming Use (especially comparability) requires data (Essential) Information is missing a member transformations (2) Language problems Limited types of data Downloading data requires a lot of disk space (3) Users lack capabilities to use data formats accepted Users cannot make sense of data and Data about the same topic are extract the knowledge contained within (4) displayed in different ways Data deposition (D) Use (especially linking data) requires domain Difficult to search and browse data expertise (5) Losing track because of size of dataset No tooling support or helpdesk (6) Insufficient metadata (7) Reproductions must comply with standard conditions Metadata have no structure (8) Too few concessions to statistical needs Little attention paid to data gathering Unfamiliar with format of metadata Unfamiliar with (meta)data language Complex to understand data provenance Data use (U) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 63. Presentations (1) – Main challenges0 Rectify fragmentation by creating a single shop for PSI0 Create open access for all users0 Create interoperability and provide users with possibilities to analyse data0 Create an infrastructure for processing PSI (Zuiderwijk, Janssen & Choenni, forthcoming) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 64. Presentations (2) – Metadata for citizen engagement0 The survey shows that a key technology for making open data available is metadata0 The metadata is used for 0 Discovery (finding appropriate datasets) 0 Contextualising (the data was collected for what purpose, which project(s), how funded, by whom, which organisations, any related publications…. 0 Data processing: here detailed domain (or even project) specific metadata is used to link the software used for analysis / reporting / visualising to the dataset CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 65. The Vision: Metadata for Data Model DISCOVERY Linkedopen data (DC, eGMS…) Generate CONTEXT (CERIF) Formal Point toInformation Systems DETAIL (SUBJECT OR TOPIC SPECIFIC) CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 66. Models for an infrastructure0 The data model with its metadata described is only one relevant model0 The other models are 0 User model 0 Processing model 0 Resource model CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 67. The Vision: The Models User Model Processing Model Data Model Complete cohort of users Complete ICT environment for PSI CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 68. Models0 User Model: controls the way in which the end- user interacts with the e-infrastructure. 0 User profile, security certification, privacy; 0 Device and interaction mode preferences (keyboard/mouse through voice and gesture to brain-connected), language preference; 0 Resource preferences (including contacts) with directories;0 METADATA CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 69. Models0 Process Model controls the way processes are constructed and executed in the e-infrastructure. 0 Services 0 Described for discovery, described for functional and non-functional (security, privacy, performance) properties 0 Mobile (deployed in distributed / parallel execution environments) 0 Open source where possible 0 Service composition 0 Dynamically (re-) composable during execution0 METADATA CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 70. Models0 Resource Model catalogs the available computing resources in the e-infrastructure 0 This allows virtualisation so the user neither knows nor cares from where the data comes, or where the processing is done, as long as quality of service is maintained; 0 Requires updating by resource owners – together with conditions of use0 METADATA CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012
  • 71. Discussion0 I do not have difficulty in explaining why using metadata for open public sector data may be beneficial0 I clearly understand how to use metadata for open public sector data CEDEM Workshop, Krems, May 3-4, 2012