GeoData Policy

The report announced below focuses extensively on public spatial data policy. You are welcome to redistribute liberally. – Paul +++++++++++++++++++

Dear Colleague,

While governments throughout the world have different approaches to how they make their public sector information (PSI) available and the terms under which the information may be reused, there appears to be a broad recognition of the importance of digital networks and PSI to the economy and to society. However, despite the huge investments in PSI and the even larger estimated effects, surprisingly little is known about the costs and benefits of different information policies on the information society and the knowledge economy. By understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the current assessment methods and their underlying criteria, it should be possible to improve and apply such tools to help rationalize the policies and to clarify the role of the internet in disseminating PSI. This in turn can help promote the efficiency and effectiveness of PSI investments and management, and to improve their downstream economic and social results. The workshop that is summarized in this volume, organized by the U.S. National Committee for CODATA and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, was intended to review the state of the art in assessment methods and to improve the understanding of what is known and what needs to be known about the effects of PSI activities. The report, The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks, is available freely online at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12687

Questions or comments about this volume may be sent to me at the contact information below.

Paul Uhlir

Paul F. Uhlir, J.D. Director

NRC Board on Research Data and Information, and IAP Program on Digital Knowledge Resources and Infrastructure in Developing Countries The National Academies, Keck-511 500 Fifth Street NW Washington, DC 20001 USA

Web: http://www.national-academies.org/brdi

Web: http://www.interacademies.net/CMS/Programmes/4704.aspx

Comparison of the PSI Re-use (2003) and INSPIRE (2007) Directives, by Roger Longhorn.

Posted to the GSDI Legal-Econ listserv Vol. 50, Issue 1, on February 19, 2009.
http://lists.gsdi.org/pipermail/legal-econ/attachments/20090219/cf259bb3/attachment.pdf

How GIS Aids Local Government and First Responders in Crises

Available for free?until February 28, 2009 [9.5 MB]
A new case-study guide illustrates how local government and utility first responders are using geospatial information in large-scale emergencies. Published by the Public Technology Institute and GITA, Geospatial Systems That Support Emergency and Disaster Operations: A Case Study Guide for Local Government and Utility First Responders is available until February 28, 2009 at no charge. After that date, the publication will be sold through the PTI Store. http://gita.org/ciper/PTIGeospatialSystems.PDF

One more step was taken toward the judicial resolution of the dispute between advocates for access to government GIS basemap data and Santa Clara County, which contends it has the right to withhold government geodata from the public or sell it at a high price. On January 15, 2009, the California Court of Appeal (Sixth Appellate District) heard oral arguments from Santa Clara County, the “petitioner” appealing the California Superior Court’s decision in favor of the California First Amendment Coalition’s (CFAC) demand for the County’s data. The Appeals Court also heard arguments by CFAC, the “real party of interest,” that the California Public Records Act (CPRA) requires unfettered distribution of the County’s data.

Ten months after the Superior Court’s order that the County must distribute its data according to the CPRA (May, 2007), the Court of Appeals agreed to consider the County’s appeal of the decision. And ten months after that, the appeal was heard in Court. The Court of Appeal must now issue its decision within 90 days.

Source: Bruce Joffee, January 27, 2009

Prior blog posting on Santa Clara: http://geodatapolicy.wordpress.com/2008/05/25/are-government-parcel-gis-data-subject-to-open-records-law/

Kate Lance passed along the following article:

Ordnance Survey takes on Google
UK national mapping agency, Ordnance Survey, is making moves to mark out its copyright territory in an attempt to keep its data out of the hands of internet search engine giant Google. This seems to have encouraged some advocates of free data to line up behind Google, which is usually seen as the antithesis of free data.

In a document titled Use of Google Maps For Display and Promotion Purposes and circulated to local government, OS prohibits the use of any OS-derived data for display on Google Maps.

http://www.freeourdata.org.uk/docs/use-of-google-maps-for-display-and-promotion.pdf 

It states that OS data or data derived from OS data can only be supplied to a third party in ?limited circumstances? – which do not include display on Google Maps.

“[W]e believe the terms of the Contractor’s Licence are wholly inconsistent with what we understand to be Google?s standard terms and conditions,’ the document states. ‘Therefore, you cannot pass such information to Google for display on Google Maps, and we must remind you that provision of data to Google in this way would be in breach of Crown copyright.”

Web link to full article: http://www.asmmag.com/news/ordnance-survey-takes-on-google

Kate Lance passed along the following information:

The European Commission has published a summary report on the Consultation undertaken by the European Commission on the impact of the Public Sector Information Directive 2003/98. The Commission has also published the submissions made (where these have been approved for publication) to the consultation.

Results of the online consultation of stakeholders “Review of the PSI Directive” (6 pages)

Stakeholders – Online consultation (the submissions received)

The analysis report states:
The Commission received 37 responses to the stakeholders’ consultation. These embrace the different actors present in the PSI value chain: content holders (governmental agencies), commercial associations, private firms, public?private and non profit associations, private individuals, and 2 others that do not fall into any particular category (a political party and a PSI thematic network).

The responses from the different associations and other re-users cover to a considerable degree the different active sectors of the information reuse market. Input was received from important reusers of legal and administrative and business information and the main European publishing and broadcasting associations. The ICT industry associations in Germany, Austria and Italy, representing the interests of the operators in their respective markets, also provided their views. The response of the PSI Alliance, which represents the views of an important group of private sector companies and associations active in the PSI field, should also be noted. Finally, the contribution of the ePSIplus network takes stock of a large consultation process through their network of stakeholders and national correspondents.

Source: http://www.epsiplus.net/news/news_highlights/ec_psi_consultation_report_published

The Data Licensing Guide Working Group, on behalf of GeoConnections, has issued version two of  The Dissemination of Government Geographic Data in Canada – Guide to Best Practices on November 28, 2008.

This updated version of the Best Practices Guide enhances the initial version in several ways. First, it expands the types of licensing templates commonly used in Canada. As with the first version, you’ll find licensing templates for the end-user model, the reseller model, and the value-added reseller model. But you now get an unrestricted-use model template as well. Second, the new guide reflects the rapid development and technological advances in web-based services, distributed computing, and other user applications. In other words, the revised guide is more Internet friendly and intuitive. It also accommodates changes in government data dissemination policy. And finally, the new version offers standard legal clauses that allow you to customize your data-licensing agreeements, should you want. These clauses deal with topics such as intellectual property rights, source protection and acknowledgment, fees, royalties, reporting, representations, warranties, and indemnities.

To access this guide, go to
http://www.geoconnections.org/en/resourcelibrary/keyStudiesReports

November 26 2008

On behalf of GeoConnections (Canada), the Data Licensing Guide Working Group recently issued version two of The Dissemination of Government Geographic Data-Best Practices Guide. This updated guide enhances the initial version in several ways.

First, it adds a fourth data-licensing model-an unrestricted-use template-to the existing end-user model, reseller model, and value-added reseller model. Both the end-user and new unrestricted models come in two varieties: fee-based and non-fee based.

Second, the new guide is more Internet friendly and intuitive, reflecting the technological advances in web-based services, distributed computing, and other user applications. It also accommodates changes in government data dissemination policy.

And finally, the new version offers standard legal clauses that allow users to customize data-licensing agreeements.

The Wisconsin Land Information Association regional meeting on October 16-17, at the Heidel House Resort in Green Lake, focused on ”Building the case for GIS and return on investment (ROI).” Doug Adams gave a dynamic presentation on a ROI case study conducted by Baltimore County, Maryland. For more information on their efforts, see the following links:

• GIS saves Baltimore County, MD $4 million dollars annually (Government Technology, August 2008)
• Baltimore County’s GIS Strategic Plan Reveals a Significant Return on Investment (ESRI, Sept 2008)
• Baltimore County’s GIS Strategic Business Plan (Revised February 2008)

Baltimore County’s GIS Benefit*

• 119,377—Hours saved with the use of GIS
• $4,052,895—Money saved with the use of GIS (total number of hours saved at $33.95 per hour)
• $606,626—Other benefits realized from the use of GIS (e.g., agriculture preservation program, savings derived from performing work in-house as opposed to using consultants, and revenue collected from data request fees)
• $4,659,521—Total annual benefits realized from the use of GIS
• 121.03%—Percentage of annual benefits realized from the use of GIS after its cost is subtracted
• 221.03%—Percentage of money saved with the use of GIS

Read the rest of this entry »

Barack Obama’s Technology Position

In his Technology position, U.S. Presidential candidate Barack Obama comments on need to ensure an open Internet and on the importance of creating a transparent and connected democracy. This includes:

Making goverment data available online in universally accessible formats to allow citizens to make use of that data to comment, derive value, and take action in their own communities. Greater access to environmental data, for example, will help citizens learn about pollution in their communities, provide information about local conditions back to government and empower people to protect themselves.

Establishing pilot programs to open up government ecision-making and involve the public in the work of agencies, not simply by soliciting opinions, but by tapping into the vast and distributed expertise of American citizenry to help goverment make more informated decisions.

Interactive, dynamic web-mapping anyone? Looks like a great opportunity for those in the field of participatory mapping and public participation GIS (PPGIS)!

Obama also commented on the need to protect our privacy in an age of increased computing power, decreased storage costs, and huge flows of information. Obama supports updating surveillance laws, and notably remarks on the need to protect our location privacy.

Obama will also work to provide robust protection against misuses of particularly sensitive kinds of information, such as e-health records and location data that do not fit comfortably within sector-specific privacy laws.

John McCain’s Technology Position

U.S. Presidential candidate John McCain’s Technology Position emphasizes the need to encourage investment in technological innovation, to improve high-speed Internet access for under-served communities, to ensure an educated workforce in science and technology – in which we’re lagging behind China and India, and to keep the Internet free from unnecessary goverment regulation.

McCain’s Personal Security and Privacy Position comments on the role of government and industry in protecting citizens’ personal security and privacy:

Government — Government must promote a culture of personal security through consumer education initiatives, incentives for the development of secure technologies, and stronger enforcement of laws to protect our citizens, particularly children.

Industry — American industry must continue to lead the world in the development of more secure technologies and responses to new threats. Among other things, industry must exert appropriate efforts to protect sensitive personal information and prevent unintentional loss or theft. Industry also must pursue effective self-regulation and continue informing and educating consumers about the collection and use of personal information.

Report on Presidential Science Advice

Also worth looking at is a new report on Presidential Science Advice, published by the Center for the Study of the Presidency, Study Group on Presidential Science and Technology Personnel and Advisory Assets.

The Center for the Study of the Presidency has completed its report Presidential Leadership to Ensure Science and Technology in the Service of National Needs: A Report to the 2008 Candidates. The report contains a number of recommendations intended to be seriously considered by the presidential candidates’ staffs before and during transition planning, in order to strengthen the S&T advice provided to the President and federal agencies.

Source: AAAS Policy Alert, August 20, 2008