Search

Blogblog-2015IM16Impact

Open data for indigenous communities

June 5, 2015 IODC

A guest post from Ahmed T Rashid & Ruhiya Kristine Seward.

What does open data mean for 370 million indigenous people in 70 countries across the globe? The history of the collection of data on indigenous people has been a problematic one in part because of the census-taking methods which have failed to capture important differences in indigenous communities. This coupled with underlying sometimes spurious motivations for collecting information in the first place have had the effect of alienating indigenous people from census processes and from official data collection activities. For instance, indigenous people often live in multiple settlements and in undefined jurisdictions which do not fit into census sampling and has led to inaccuracies in vital statistics. This has regularly happened in the U.S.A., where statistics used to estimate life expectancy or any other health indicator are often inaccurate or non-existent for indigenous communities across the country. According to presenters on the indigenous data and open government panel, this ‘lack of data’ is puzzling given that indigenous people are often skilled gatherers and analyzers of data, for example on the natural surroundings in which they live.

Panelists provided concrete examples of how indigenous data collection – and sovereignty over that data – is changing. One example is the Cheyenne River VOICES Research project in the Lakota nation reserve in South Dakota, USA. The project collected qualitative and quantitative data from nearly a 1,000 households on finances, economic challenges and community concerns (see a YouTube video on the project here). In contrast with extractive data gathering, the survey results from the VOICES project are being taken back to the community in order to support new strategies for economic development – vital for a community with some of the highest poverty levels in the country. The project highlighted some of the major differences in data collected by governments and data collected by tribal communities – with the latter drawing in much greater household response and offering much more contextualized, relevant information.

An emerging theme during the discussion is the political nature of open data and data more generally. For the collection, use and storage of data on indigenous people, the need for ‘data sovereignty’ to protect culture and values is deeply significant. For indigenous communities, it is critical to ensure that any data collected is preserved and protected in ways that respect the rich diversity of indigenous cultures and languages. Understanding these concerns could become the basis for more equitable partnerships between governments and indigenous peoples.

Some of the tweets from the session give further insight into the discussions

 

 

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015IM1Impact

Once you can #FollowTheMoney you need to find ways for citizens to #LeadTheWay

June 5, 2015 IODC

A guest post by Eva Constantaras on the Data + Public Money panel at IODC15.

Together the open data community has come together to #followthemoney and liberate the data needed to stamp out corruption. Now they are finding out how to get citizens to #leadtheway.

Understanding how public money is spent is a fundamental goal for many open data projects. You could go so far as to say that how public money is spent has been at the heart of much open data advocacy. But the release of data alone doesn’t automatically create the citizen engagement and accountability that open government advocates are seeking. Beyond making data available, next step is to get people to care and to act with it. To work on connecting data and action:

  • Bond launched the Aid Attitude Tracker to get citizens of the United Kingdom to pay attention to how development aid is being spent.
  • La Nación of Argentina crowd-sourced the manual entry of MP expenses through scrapathons to raise awareness of government corruption.
  • The Open Knowledge Foundation trains CSOs in the use of the Global Open Data Index.
  • Open Data Lab Jakarta produce infographics that run in local media to bring fiscal data to citizens.
  • The Slovak Open Government Partnership created opendatanode.org to engage stakeholders in open data publication & exchange in Slovakia.
  • Reboot tries to get inside the heads of government officials to figure out what threats and opportunities exist to push a data-driven policy agenda.

All of these groups faced a common challenge. They had liberated the data, but nobody was using it. Whether their target users were citizens, civil society or government, data dissemination was not happening. The experiences below show some of the different strategies groups have taken:

As Mor Rubenstein of the Open Knowledge Foundation explained, after going through all the trouble of tracking down elusive spending data, their user base never fully materialized. The Open Data Index is crowdsourced from civil society and seeks to assess the quality of open data supply in order to bridge the gap between what civil society wants to see, and what government wants to offer, in terms of spending data. But despite a design based on user-input, uptake has been low: “Budget data can be difficult and boring so hard to engage citizens in analyzing data.”

When bridging the gap between budget data supply and demand using the media is often an important part of a full strategy, and intermediary tools can help journalists to dig into otherwise impenetrable datasets. Jan Gondol, part of the team workong on Slovakia Open Government Partnership Action Plan, explained how in Slovakia government bodies and private companies are publishing their financial data, and civic hackers are analyzing that contractual data and tipping off journalists to potential stories to investigate. Facilitating that process is Open Data Note, an open source tool that allows the exploration of both public and private through a user-friendly interface that can be used internally or externally. Even so, they realize the need to further pilot the tool and involve a range of different intermediaries between techies and the public.

La Nación of Argentina turned that process on its head. Inspired by the Guardian’s MP Expenses app, it enlisted 1,000 volunteers from universities and civil society in a gamified series of ‘scrape-a-thons’ to open 10,000 PDFs worth of senate expenses in a project called Voz Data (Voice Data). Following the success of that project, Flor Coelho explained that they are now crowd-sourcing tagging of audio-files surrounding the controversial death of a public prosecutor Alberto Nisman, who accused Argentinian President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner of an Iranian bomb cover-up. The idea is not only free labor through micro-tasking, but a public that sees a role for itself in accountability.

Eko Prasetyo from Open Data Lab Jakarta explained they face the constant challenge of low awareness among CSOs regarding data; methods for submitting freedom of information requests and tapping into open data channels. Their system to overcome these barriers include identifying transparency champions, mentoring and training these groups, monitoring their individual projects, learning and evaluating results and ensuring that findings come out not only online but also in traditional print media to get the message out.

Reboot struggled to convince the Nigerian government to release and use data to fix its own public spending problem. Panthea Lee explained that after coming to understand that a lot of procurement is driven by trust networks to overcome weak capacity and financial insecurity, Reboot was able to develop data visualizations to help government understand how they could improve spending processes and economic planning in that context. Achieving culture meant proving to a couple of ministries that data could help them reach their immediate public service priorities.

Together the open data community has come together to #followthemoney and liberate the data needed to stamp out corruption. Now they are finding out how to get citizens to #leadtheway.

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015IM6Impact

Open Data + Agriculture

June 1, 2015 IODC

A guest post by Laura Husak reflecting on the Data+Agriculture session.

Responsible, efficient and transparent open data is an incredible lever for agriculture, but careful attention will be needed to bring the benefits to smallholder farmers.

With the movement for open data gaining momentum across sectors, the Third International Open Data Conference in Ottawa generated discussion and debate on how to unleash data and who benefits from the opening of data. While aspirations of availability, accessibility, efficiency, and transparency were espoused by panelists across sectors, the case studies that were shared demonstrated both gains and challenges in actual implementation. The benefits of open data are expected to mount as more institutions adopt open access and data policies, and as more tools are developed and used. The responsibilities of those who own and use data are to not only develop new data tools and practices, but also to connect with other actors that can translate data into practical solutions and business models for improving agriculture and nutrition.

The Data + Agriculture session, moderated by Dr. Catherine Woteki, GODAN (Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition) and USDA Chief Scientist, was a well-attended session of 6 speakers and 6 panelists from sectors including, the Open Data Institute, a multi-national corporation, NGOs, government agriculture research departments, and international donor institutions. The examples shared were mostly drawn from ongoing projects grounded in efforts to solve real problems and engage with entrepreneurs, governments and the private sector. The role of GODAN is largely as a convening body for 120+ agriculture and nutrition organizations that are using open data.

Making the raw data available by opening data sets is the first step toward open data. The next is to convert it into a format that can be used and manipulated (note that PDF does not mean open data). In order to effectively use open data to improve food and nutritional security, it must be linked to finding solutions to local or regional problems where someone ‘owns’ the problem. This is where data on population, droughts, pest and disease data, geo-spatial data, weather information, and prices can play a role: from policy-making to farm level decision-making. The challenges facing the application of open data are not only technological, but also related to trust, power, and the responsibility to do no harm.

For researchers and governments seeking to use open data to improve agriculture, food and nutrition, the integration of the open data approach will largely depend on the quality of the data and the cost-effectiveness of turning it into a usable format. Building a shared vocabulary and standards around data collection will facilitate this. Agri-business and private sector actors are also playing important roles, in some cases by opening their data sets, and in other cases using open data approaches to drive innovation and expand markets by identifying farming populations with low yields and then facilitating access to inputs and services to improve yields.

Open data has potential to transform understaffed and under-resourced agricultural extension programs to support farming populations. But the question is how extension services will be accessible to farming populations. Even as cell phones are becoming ubiquitous, access to smartphones and apps are still less so. The use of open data by entrepreneurial start-ups to offer services to farmers can be expected to target larger farmers cultivating higher value crops for markets or commodity crops. Subsistence farmers may be within the target domain of social enterprises, but trust will be crucial, since subsistence farming practices may rely on knowledge systems that have very different sources of data and knowledge.

As it stands, the benefits of open data are largely accrued to those with the resources to access data and the capacities to analyze it. The concentration of benefits toward those with power, resources, and access to ICTs will be important considerations for applying open data in agriculture and nutrition sectors. The realities of agrarian change, the mass exoduses out of agriculture in many countries, and the ownership of land and resources will influence who benefits from the application of open data. The gendered agricultural practices and access and control over resources also mean that applications may need to specifically be designed and target women smallholders.

As open data become more of a norm across sectors, there is huge potential for it to be applied solve the challenges facing agriculture, but the benefits are not guaranteed to reach smallholder farmers or marginalized communities. While there is great potential for new business models to be created, questions of equity will need to remain central to debates and discussion. Who benefits? This is a query that will need to be reflected upon by those working to improve the conditions of food and nutritional security of smallholder farmers around the developing world.

Further Reading

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015Impact

IODC concludes with a focus on action

May 29, 2015 IODC1

Action Tracks
Over the course of today, conference delegates have been charting a course for future open data collaboration: taking part in interactive workshop sessions that will contribute towards a roadmap for action.

In the final plenary, representatives of the eight action area themes were on stage, outlining plans to: increase data supply; to build capacity of leaders, data suppliers and users; to develop more effective practice around data standards; to improve open data measurement; and to support networks and collaboration on using open data for social good and economic value.

The slides here capture some of the key themes in these final presentations.

These action points draw not only on workshops today, but also on input from the research symposium, unConference, leaders summit, data standards day, and many other pre-events, as well as impact and plenary panels from yesterday. Over the coming weeks we’ll be writing up the hundreds of post-it notes on which more detail is captured, looking through the tweets, and reading reflections and blog posts shared by delegates, to work towards a full roadmap report.

Delegates were also invited to share their actions using the hashtags #iodc15 and #myaction. Some of the actions shared are found below:

If you have reflections to share from an action session, you can add them to the comments below. And keep tweeting your #iodc15 #MyAction take-away steps.

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015IM3Impact

Reversing the “resource curse” with open data

May 29, 2015 IODC

A guest post from Ahmed Tareq Rashid on the Data + Extractives impact panel.

Too often we hear about the conundrum that countries that are rich in natural resources are the poorest in the world- a phenomenon known as “resource curse”. Africa, for example, is home to a third of the planet’s mineral reserves and produces two-thirds of the diamond. One of the major problems in extractive industries is poor regulatory frameworks and lack of transparency in the way information about financial transactions and, more importantly, the impact on people and communities affected by extraction activities. Can open data help to change that? The panel on Data+Extractives showcased some new innovative initiatives and platforms from Canada, India, Indonesia, Ghana, Mexico and United States, that are going a long a way towards addressing these problems.

Sharing data between industry and governments — a two-way street

Many developing country governments do not publish usable data on extractive industries due to lack of awareness, capacity, and legislative mechanisms, as evident in India and Ghana. While Mexico has better legislations on open data, it is lagging behind in the practice of sharing data. However, the onus of disclosing information is not just on the governements- but everyone involved in the value chain of resource extraction. This is the focus of Publish What You Pay – a global coalition of civil society organisations advocating for an open and accountable extractive sector through publication of critical information like contracts, revenue payments and receipts. Global movements in setting standards for governance in the extractive sector such as Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) ensures full disclosure, albeit on a voluntary basis of taxes and other payments made by oil, gas and mining companies to governments.

Lets ride the wave of open data… for those who matter most..

It is clear from the panel that open data is gaining ground in the extractive industries. In Ghana, Catalyzing Open Data for Extractives project is using open data to better link betwen extractive revenues and human development outcomes. A pilot project in West Kalimantan province of Indonesia is using spatial analyis to show law violations by mining companies that are having negative effect on the environment and the lives of indigenous communities. Climate Finance Integrity Project by Transparencia Mexicana aims to reduce corruption in resource allocation in climate change actions by examining climate financing.

A message that specially echoed in this panel is that when it comes to open data it is less about apps, high- tech solutions, but more about the people impacted by resource extraction. In many contexts, the local people do not have access to mobile phones and other technologies to take advantage of open data. It is here the role of civil society actors is critical in mediating the information in a way that make sense to people, thereby empowering them. Open data initiatives driven by community needs and based on the ethos of community ownership will go a long way in ensuring that the people benefit from resource extraction, and that their rights are protected.

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015ImpactSharing

Donors create fund to support Open Data for Development

May 29, 2015 IODC

Open Data offers an important opportunity to support development goals and spur new social innovation. Recognizing the need for open data work that enhances global cooperation, reduces duplication, and supports the scaling of development solutions that work, a group of Donors have joined together to support a program that funds innovative open data initiatives around the developing world.

The initial donors comprise of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), UK’s Department for International Development (DFID), the World Bank (WB), and Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD). The Fund, managed by IDRC, has firm commitments for a total value of $6.8M (CDN) for the next 2 years.

The Fund builds on the OD4D program coordinated by IDRC, which is a platform for funding a diverse array of open data research and action. The OD4D program objectives for 2015-2016 are:

  • To help developing country governments, entrepreneurs, and civil society create and implement national and global action plans to harness open data for development;
  • To support developing country governments to plan, execute, and manage national open data initiatives;
  • To increase re-use of open data in developing countries by supporting appropriate data standards, guidelines, solution-driven applications, and demand-side capacity, helping to bring about social and economic innovation;
  • To better understand the relationship between open data initiatives and socioeconomic development, informing the quality and reach of future open data initiatives; and

In addition, four main principles guide the network and its members:

  • Research and learning,
  • Empowerment of leadership from developing countries
  • Efficient coordination and,
  • Creation, access and reuse of global public goods and assets.

The Open Data for Development network is already global network which includes important players in the open data community such as The Open Data Institute, Open Knowledge, and the World Wide Web Foundation, the Latin American Open Data Initiative and Caribbean Open Institute, as well as collaboration with the Open Data Working Group of the Open Government Partnership.

Other funders are welcome and encouraged to participate in the OD4D programme, either by adding resources to the Fund or to engage and align their efforts by joining the Donors’ committee, established to coordinate efforts and create a space of exchange.

Building on the results of the International Open Data Conference in Ottawa, the expectation is that the greater engagement and coordination of donors in this new mechanism will help to close knowledge gaps on the use of open data for development and accelerating cross fertilization amongst the research community, technical experts and governments in developing countries.

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015ImpactPP2

Impact and infrastructures: reflections from the emerging impacts panel

May 29, 2015 IODC

A guest post from Sherwin Ona, reflecting on the Emerging Impacts of Open Data panel.

The panel discussion highlighted two main points namely: a) the difficulty of measuring open data impacts and b) the opportunities on how to measure its impacts.

According to the discussions, the difficulty of measuring open data impacts can be traced to the following: its different definitions, its nature and its application areas. Various disciplines have contrasting views and context in their use of open data, thus contributing to a multitude of meanings. Another reason is the nature of data itself. Frequently regarded as intangible resources, measuring data impacts now becomes a part of its perceived effects. If measured using its effects, quantitative (e.g. Time, satisfaction index, etc.) and qualitative factors (e.g. Perceived benefits, relevance, etc.) come into play. This results to complexities caused by the lack of models and frameworks that can guide its measurement.

Nevertheless, the panel presented possible opportunities in evaluating impact. Using a developing country perspective, the panel proposed that measuring open data impacts can be linked to development issue such as hunger, education, health, among others. The idea of linking impacts to development issues is further connected to the delivery of services. Although practical, this may oversimplify the meaning of impact and trivialize the role of open data.   I think that caution must be exercised when performing this.

Mechanisms must be set in place to ensure that impact measurements go beyond statistics and should focus on development outcomes such as improvement in the quality of life, transparency, participation and collaboration. Furthermore, the idea of viewing open data as infrastructure is an innovative and bold proposition. In my opinion, this may contribute to a change in paradigm regarding the use of data in addressing socioeconomic and political challenges.

Indeed the panel has unpacked many issues regarding open data impacts. Today the challenge for open data advocates is to directly confront these concerns. I believe that the 17- country ODDC case studies mentioned in the discussion provides an excellent opportunity to identify the possible impact factors. Certainly, these are challenging, but exciting times for open data and its stakeholders.

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015IM1Impact

A Visualization to Follow Money and Spark Collaboration

May 28, 2015 IODC

A guest post from Jed Miller on understanding data on financial flows.

When we present data and information, the medium is often the message. “Download our full dataset (19MB),” sends a different message than “New figures suggest the oil spill would cover Lake Erie.” The tension between data depth and clear narratives is not a simple one, though. Sometimes the most important story data tells is in the relationships between data sets.

In the oil, gas and mining sector, a complex web of relationships governs the flow of money from private companies to governments to the local communities that benefit from government spending and services. Groups like Publish What You Pay and NRGI are in Ottawa discussing better tools to promote accountability in the extractive industries by extracting data on these fiscal flows, which can also include foreign aid and local taxes, among other things.

The World Bank has been working with colleagues from these fields to draft a tool that can illustrate the web of relationships in the extractive sector, and serve as a visual backdrop for posting data in context.

The first sketches are now available and we are pleased to present them below—as a work in progress—for feedback from the IODC community. Comments from our open data colleagues will help guide how we develop the tool from a simple image to a flexible system that can explain fiscal flows in a particular country, or can track gaps in data availability or disclosure rules.

We want to build from a “base image,” to collaboratively define a range of uses and adaptable “layers,” as the example layers illustrate.

Working with John Emerson, a veteran designer in the human rights field, we’ve deliberately begun modestly with a static picture not a fancy tool, in order to test our assumptions with users in the open data and Follow the Money communities. We believe that over time we can add layers that show harder-to-follow flows such as illicit and “gray” payments, political influence, and extra-national flows through corporate ownership structures and tax havens.

Michael Jarvis, Extractive Governance lead for the World Bank, says that the oil and mining sectors are an ideal starting point for “following the money,” because extractives dominate the budgets of many less developed countries, and a map like this can help donors and advocates link areas of current and potential work to several points in the system. “We hope it can be a conversation starter to bridge the work of people looking at the management of extractives with those thinking about public financial management, investment and procurement in resource-rich country settings.”

In open data circles, when someone says they’re making a visualization, your first thought might be a picture that’s beautiful but rather complicated, or a web tool that promises a windfall of analysis if you have the time and expertise.

By starting with a simple visual vocabulary, we think we can more clearly convey these fiscal systems to a wider group. We can also give government officials, international campaigners and open data advocates a tool to make the case for open data policies and good practices.

By making the tool flexible for future uses, we can help a range of different advocates and experts to explain and disseminate their work more easily, and hopefully save time and money rebuilding the wheel each time they create a new visualization.

Most importantly, we believe that by making a visualization that can be repurposed for different uses, we can give the groups that use it a channel for collaboration—or at least a common reference point to worked to greater interoperability of data.

Please note that these images are works in progress. The Base Map is generic, the sample layers have real data, but it has not been exhaustively compared to other sources. We know there’s no such thing as a generic map. The value for people comes when the image is populated with the flow or overlay that applies to them.

How could a visual tool like this be most useful to you? Which elements should be clickable and “expandable” to help your own work? Which measurements and assessments of money—and of data—can inform your own analysis or advocacy?

We encourage everyone in the IODC and open data communities to send input, feedback and ideas for potential uses of this visual tool. You can email us at [email protected].

Like open data itself, a tool that gets shared encourages links between the people sharing it. More links encourage more dialogue, which can make future collaborations more likely and more efficient.

Disclaimer: All images are works in progress. The layout is intentionally hypothetical and the Base Map does not represent any single country. The sample data is real, but neither complete nor verified against multiple sources.

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015Impact

Open Data in the Open Government Partnership

May 28, 2015 IODC

A cross post from the Open Government Partnership blog, highlighting research launched at IODC15.

The Independent Reporting Mechanism of OGP is one of the initiative’s key accountability components. IRM national researchers in OGP countries assess the ambition and completion of OGP commitments. But the IRM does not only carry out assessment, it also synthesizes information on key topics in OGP action plans. Authors Sonia Khan and Joseph Foti are taking a closer look at OGP commitments in open data. (See here for our general technical/synthesis paper and here for a paper on public participation in Latin America.)

For the release of the IRM’s third synthesis paper “Aligning Supply and Demand for Better Governance: Open Data in the Open Government Partnership,” we present a Q&A for the reader-on-the-go.

Top Ten Take-Aways From the Report

1. Why open data? Why do this paper now?

Open data is the third most popular topic in OGP action plans – after participation and access to information. (About 240 of 2000 commitments use the phrase “open data.” Of course, there are almost definitely more, but we only included the ones that explicitly use the phrase, as we cannot be sure what other commitments are clearly open data.) We wanted to know how successful these commitments are and decided to call on Tim Davies, formerly of the World Wide Web Foundation, to help us analyze the data. This is the third in a series of papers prepared by the IRM to help synthesize the most popular topics in OGP as shown in the working groups. See here for a copy of the data base and here for a definition of tags. Please feel free to try our new OGP Explorer here which allows users to search the database according to country, commitment, or policy area.

2. Is open data becoming more or less popular in OGP?

Open Data commitments continue to grow in popularity; of the countries with two action plans, all saw absolute or relative increases in open data commitments. The trend might be divisive, with proponents stressing open data’s potential for tremendous impact, while others fear open data commitments are often nothing more than empty promises made by “closed” governments. This is why it is so crucial that we that we create powerful open data commitments.

3. What can be done to make open data commitments more powerful?

The United Nations Development Programme says it best-access to information works when it is useable, useful, and used. Most of the open data commitments so far have been focused on usability (for example, making data available, discoverable, machine readable). A smaller group of commitments actually set in motion processes to ensure that the data being released is high-value for the various publics that would use data. Most importantly, though, OGP commitments can be made really impactful by ensuring that, where they put out governance data, that there are actually open, participatory forums where members of the public and officials can apply the data to make government more efficient, effective, and accountable.

4. Are the open data commitments in OGP actually increasing transparency and accountability?

This is a complex question. What we know is that open data commitments are being implemented at roughly the same rate as other commitments. At the same time, IRM researchers have assessed the commitments as being potentially more impactful than the average OGP commitment. Of course, this only speaks to how much the commitments are affecting open data policy in a given sector or as a policy area itself. Judging how well an action plan has a macro-impact in a country is, at the end of the day, a bigger question than IRM reports can answer.

5. What are the most common types of open data commitment?

So far, the majority of commitments focus on tools-technical building blocks such as open data platforms, machine-readable formats and open standards. Licence and re-usability permissions were slightly less popular as were efforts to promote open data within governments. While some might say that governments should build the system first, and then set priorities on what should be published, others would argue that the the question of “what” should be tackled before the “how.” A couple of countries have moved from a first action plan which emphasized infrastructure to a second plan with growing emphasis on matching public demand with supply. But this is probably too small of a number. Too many other governments are using the “if you build it they will come” approach, hoping they’ll get lucky and citizens will use the data presented to them.

6. Do OGP commitments address particular sectors of government or are they meant for all parts of government? Do we see any differences in approaches?

About one third of OGP’s open data commitments address specific sectors. In order to be more useful, open data will need to have on-the-ground impacts for citizens. Most civil society groups are concerned with specific issues and work in “sectors” often dealing with particular ministries like health or environment. The most popular sector by far is budgeting, followed distantly by health, natural resources, and aid. There is a long tail of other commitment areas covering just a few things. An interesting finding is that sector-specific data sees a higher rate of completion than whole-of-government reforms.

7. A number of notorious open data programs have been launched to much fanfare, but haven’t been updated in months or years. Can OGP solve that?

In order to join the OGP, countries are asked to endorse the aspiration of the Open Government Declaration, which asks for the creation and implementation of mechanisms for request and prioritization of data as well as updated, regular production of information. One of the paper’s most important findings is that OGP stakeholders, especially the Open Data Working Group, can play a role in helping to share model commitments that support these types of arrangements.

8. What is open-washing and are OGP governments participating in it?

Open-washing is the attempt by a government, corporation or civil society organization to give the appearance of being “open” while actually keeping the most important decisions and actions closed. In many first OGP National Action Plans, countries included open data goals which looked very impressive due to size or content area, but there was little evidence effective use or impact. OGP can change this by encouraging governments and civil society to create open data commitments based on citizen’s real needs and demands.

9. In order to ensure that citizens living in developing countries are able to benefit from the sale of natural resources, civil society groups been calling for greater transparency in field of natural resources. Has the OGP been used towards this end?

Nine open data commitments (fourteen percent) relate to natural resources, with the overwhelming majority (almost 90%) focusing on extractives. With more African countries joining the initiative, this figure will likely grow.

10. Were current concerns about surveillance and privacy reflected in the OGP’s open data commitments?

Seven commitments (three percent) made by five countries set limits on the release of personal and private data. Among these countries’ commitments to privacy, many mentioned health care in particular.

– See more at: http://www.opengovpartnership.org/blog/joe-foti/2015/05/27/aligning-supply-and-demand-better-governance-open-data-open-government#sthash.vRA1pubr.dpuf

CONTINUE READING
Blogblog-2015Impact

Announcing the beta launch of the Open Data Impact Map

May 28, 2015 IODC

A guest post from the Center for Open Data Enterprise.

Today, we are proud to announce the beta launch of the Open Data Impact Map a project of Center for Open Data Enterprise, as part of the Open Data for Development (OD4D) network. The Map is a searchable centralized database of hundreds of open data use cases from over 50 countries. The Map includes examples from the Center’s research, previous studies, and a growing network of 18 Regional Supporters in 18 countries who are helping to collect use cases.

The Map visualization allows you to view the world of open data use cases in a way that has not been possible before. You can begin with a global view showing the location of different organizations and zoom in to see how open data is being used in a particular region, country, or city. You can also use the Map’s filters to visualize the organizations that use open data to help improve agriculture, or education, or operate in any number of other sectors. Other filters let you view these use cases by type of organization (for-profit, nonprofit, or developer group for example), by the type of data they use, and so on.

The Map is designed to support other researchers’ work and analysis. You can view all of the data in tabular form and sort by each column. However you use the filters, the stats tab will show you the total number of countries and organizations that you are viewing. And of course, all of this data is available for download as a CSV or JSON file.

The Open Data Impact Map gives policy makers, international organizations, open data advocates, researchers, and entrepreneurs a central place to search through the many ways open data is being used around the globe. Through collaboration and information sharing, we can not only create this Map together – we can also identify and share different experiences, examples, and best practices in open data use.

We encourage you to check out the Map, fill out the survey to add information about your own organization, and talk to the Open Data Enterprise team at our conference booth or afterward to learn more about this initiative and how you can contribute to this global resource.

To view the Map visit: www.opendataenterprise.org/map

CONTINUE READING

Older Posts