Open Government Implementation Model - Internal Data Monitoring - CeDEM 2012


Published on

Enhancement of the Open Government Implementation Model (Lee/Kwak 2011). Internal Data Monitoring for public agencies to as decicion support for disclosing information to open data portals.

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Open Government Implementation Model - Internal Data Monitoring - CeDEM 2012

  1. 1. www.kdz.or.atInternal Data Monitoring forOpen Government3. May 2012CeDEM 2010, KremsBernhard Krabina
  2. 2. IntroductionKDZ – Centre forPublic AdministrationResearchNGO, founded 1969Competence centre for  Public Management/Public Governance  Public Finance and  City ManagementResearch, consulting andtrainingKnow-how transfer fromresearch to 2
  3. 3. Open Gover nmentImplementation Model(Lee/Kwak 2011) nment-vor 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 3
  4. 4. 4 phases of the model phase 1 – Incr easing Data Tr anspar ency  increasing transparency of government processes and performance by publishing relevant data online and sharing it with the public. phase 2 – Impr oving Open Par ticipation  improving open participation of the public in government work and decision making through various methods and tools. phase 3 – Enhancing Open Collabor ation  public engagement in complex tasks or projects that aim to produce specific outputs and co-create value-added services. phase 4 – Realizing Ubiquitous Engagement  take transparency, participation, and collaboration to the next level of public 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 4
  5. 5. Phase 1: Open Gover nmentData two most impor tant tasks :Identifying high-value, high-impact data for the publicImpr oving and assuring data quality in ter ms ofaccur acy, consistency, and timeliness80/20 r ule: top 20% of data that would most benefit thepublic:qW hat have we alr eady published? (think about for mats,licenses, por tal,…)qW hat have other s (national/inter national) alr eadypublished?qW hat does the community want? (sur veys, meetings)qW hat else can we publish ? -> Data 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 5
  6. 6. Phase 1: inter naldata monitoring Questions  What data do we have?  What data can be published?  On what criteria do we base our decision? Metrics  starting point: services catalogue  10 criteria incl. description and & metrics  assessment in scores 0 – 5 (0 = K.O.) 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 6
  7. 7. Criteria 1/3Criterion Description Metrics (0-5) pointsnon- Is the data subject to 0: non-disclosure obligation non-disclosure 1: restrictions exist, are hardly changeable (e. g. EU restrictions)disclosure/legal obligations or other 2: restrictions exist, changeable (e. g. regional or district councilrestrictions legal restrictions? with extraordinary resolution) 3: restrictions exist, easily changeable (e. g. regional or district council with simple majority) 4: restrictions exist, very easily changeable (e. g. internal rules and practices) 5: no restrictionspersonal Does the data include 0: personal referenced data personal references 1: data cannot be made anonymous, missing approval hardlyreferences or can individuals be obtainable identified? 2: data cannot be made anonymous, missing approval obtainable 3: approval obtained (e. g. subsidies) 4: data can be made anonymous 5: no identification of individuals possiblecompany Does the data include 0: company referenced data company references 1: data cannot be made anonymous, missing approval hardlyreferences or can individual obtainable companies be 2: data cannot be made anonymous, missing approval obtainable identified? 3: approval obtained (e. g. subsidies) 4: data can be made anonymous 5: no identification of individual companies possible 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 7
  8. 8. Criteria 2/3Criterion Description Metrics (0-5) pointscopyright Is the agency sole 0: copyrights of third parties prohibit disclosure possessor of copyright? 1: subject to license fees and approval 2: subject to license fees, approval obtained 3: no license fees, subject to approval 4: no license fees, no approval needed 5: sole possession of copyright ensuredvalue How high is the 0: no value estimated value of 1: very low value disclosure (for the 2: low value public, for companies, 3: medium value for other agencies…) 4: high value 5: very high valuecost How high is the cost of 0: unjustifiable cost disclosure? 1: very high cost 2: high cost 3: medium cost 4: low cost 5: very low costcontent- How high is the data 0: data quality unjustifiable quality? (timeliness, 1: data quality very lowrelated data completeness, 2: data quality lowquality accurateness, 3: data quality medium faultiness) 4: data quality high 5: data quality very high 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 8
  9. 9. Criteria 3/3Criterion Description Metrics (0-5) pointstechnical 0: data available on paper only vailable data 1: data available electronicallyavailability formats, open 2: data available in machine readable format standards, 5-Stars- 3: data available in OGD formats Model, OGD 4: data available with URI / as RDF formats 5: data available as linked datasynergy 0: not yet published s the data /are 1: published on the agency’s website services being 2: published/to be published on external portals (e. g., made available for Centropemap etc.) other purposes?  3: published/to be published under regional/national laws (e. g. WGeoDIG) 4: published/to be published due to EU regulations (e. g. INSPIRE, SEIS, Directive 2003/4/EG…) 5: published/to be published for external customers due to contracts (e. g. economic chamber …)compliance 00: OGD principles cannot be met (less than 5 principles) an the OGD 1: OGD principles partly be met (5 - 7 principles)with OGD principles be met? 2: OGD principles largely met (minimum of 8 principles), exemption notprinciples granted 3: OGD principles cannot be met (less than 5 principles), exemption granted 4: all OGD principles can be met by exemption to principle 1 5: all OGD principles can be met 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 9
  10. 10. Technical availability  5-star model of Ber ner 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 10
  11. 11. OGD principles 1. Completeness 2. Primacy 3. Timeliness 4. Ease of Physical and Electronic Access 5. Machine readability 6. Non-discrimination 7. Use of Commonly Owned Standards 8. Licensing 9. Documentation (instead of Permanence) 10. Privacy (instead of Usage Costs) 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 11
  12. 12. Changes of principlesPer manence Dokumentation … should be  … ar e documented available online in compr ehensivel y by ar chives in medatata and per petuity. available online over …should r emain a long time period. online, with Once disclosed data appr opriate ver sion- is published with tr acking and appr opriate ver sion- ar chiving over time. tr acking and ar chiving over time. 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 12
  13. 13. Changes of principlesUsa ge costs PrivacyNot needed in Austria, as Per sonall y identifiablethe Cr eative Commons infor mation will not beAttribution- disclosed.NonCommer cial- If ther e might be aShar eAlike 3.0 Austria possibility to dr awLicense was chosen conclusions to a per sonalexplicitl y excluding usa ge level, the OGDcosts. competence center is to be infor med to decide on w heter or not to disclose the data. 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 13
  14. 14. Planning of disclosur e… 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 14
  15. 15. Setting up an OGDcompetence centr e V ir tual or ganisation as inter nal steering committee and exter nal contact point Actions like  initiate pilot pr ojects  car r y out contests, giving out awar ds  ask stakeholder s  or ganise events (e.g. barcamp)  set up gover nance str uctur es for data disclosur e  mana ge cultural change (e. g. ideas competition)  channell use of social media  define metrics to measure success  watch over adherence to OGD principles  initiate community of practice: „Cooper ation OGD Austria“ 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 15
  16. 16. Set up of an OGD por tal Naming convention: CKAN Austria: of Austrian data por tal  Harmonise meta data  Single point of contact to the EU data portal EU data por tal 2012/2013… 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 16
  17. 17. OutlookOpen Gover nment is mor than Open Data!Transparency?  Austria is last! Par ticipation?  E-Participation?  Participartory Budgeting?Collaboration?  Realizing Ubiquitous Engagement?  Co-Commission, Co-Design, Co-Deliver, Co-Assess… 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 17
  18. 18. Tr anspar ency thr ough thir dpar ties……civil society is lining up Meineabgeor verwaltungsr efor refor diemutbuer demokratiebe gehr plattfor … 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 18
  19. 19. Open Gover nment in V ienna… 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 19
  20. 20. W hat is left to do? Open Gover nment Implementation Model  Work out other phases, including:  remove banning of social media platforms  social media guidelines and trainings  participatory projects  … Fur ther topics to be considered  Open Source / Open Commons  Knowledge Management and Social Media? (Knowledge Management 2.0)  New structures for working/leading/organising/governing?  … 2. Mai 2012 · Seite 20
  21. 21. Contact  KDZ – Centre for Public Administration Research  Bernhard Krabina      Seite 21