[epsi-coord] PSI Scoreboard

[Tom Kronenburg]

Dear all, hereby my new text for an e-mail to Juan, please review. (BTW: I have also added his list of indicators.)

Dear Juan,

14 days ago we e-mailed about a bunch of stuff, amongst others the PSI-Scoreboard that will feature on the new EPSI platform. In this e-mail i'd like to discuss the PSI Scoreboard.

I have set up a new list of indicators.
Legislative Indicators

 *   Has the Member state transpositioned the PSI directive into national law and does the EC have no (0) infringement procedures against the Member State regarding the PSI directive?
 *   Has the Member state implemented a marginal cost policy, providing a clear framework that can be used to determine the price of information?
 *   Has the member state implemented a licensing framework that does not feature restrictions on commercial or non-commercial re-use?
 *   Does the member state waive any Intellectual Property Rights for PSI datasets?
 *   Has the member state implemented at least 1 redress procedures into law on a national level?

PSI Reuse Stimulation Indicators

 *   Open Data initiatives in at least C of the 50 largest cities in the nation who have developed or stimulated development of B or more working apps using Open Data aimed at improving democratic control.
 *   At least C news-outlets produce 20 or more news items based on data journalism annually.
 *   At least D national or inter-regional events are held annually to promote PSI Reuse.
 *   At least E websites aimed at Open Data and PSI reuse publish at least weekly (average) on PSI reuse issues and have an active user base (commenting, retweeting etc).
 *   At least F PSI-datasets, no more then 1 years old, are provided to the public in standardized, machine readable formats.

The indicators you send have been considered and implemented. I do however have a few questions on them:

-  Why would you like to have the question on the PSI directive's transposition in here? All MS have implemented the directive? For now I have combined the indicator for transposition with the indicator for ongoing infringement procedures. I believe it would not be very good to 'punish' MS for past infringement procedures, as they have since bettered their ways.
-  Is it already EU policy to have MS' implement a Marginal Cost Policy?
- Is it already EU policy to have MS implement a licensing framework that does not feature restrictions on noncommercial and commercial reuse?
- Is it already EU policy to have MS' waive all IPR for psi data?

I would be more then happy to implement these indicators in the framework, but we have so far hesitated in doing so because we thought these specific choices had not been made yet.

As far as your concerns about the Reuse-stimulation indicators, i do believe that most of them are part of the indicators we propose here. Others (such as the indicator for teaching materials) we don't like to put in, because it is more of a proxy for reuse activity then an indicator measuring activity. We focus now on: Local initiatives and apps, Data Journalism, Events, Websites with PSI-news and Published Datasets. We could switch the datajournalism indicator for something like commercial activity if you like!

I really like to limit the set of indicators to 10. The previous PSI scoreboard had approximately 60 or so, and it was very confusing for both MS, companies and citizens trying to analyse where their own country stood.  Therefore we really try to keep the indicator set concise. We believe that focussing on these 10 indicators would make the scoreboard much more usable and also

We also would like to value each indicator in the same way. All will therefore be valued as 1/10th of the total possible score.

I have added the total working document again, as i have also added to the set of principles.

For most indicators, we will maintain a small list of links that 'prove' whether or not the MS earns the indicator's points. We are planning on building an application to showcase the indicators, the lists with links and the total scores in a very attractive looking web environment. We have given the contractor the demand that the look and feel of the website should be like the look-and-feel of the app with Europe's energy Data. We will give them final go for building once we have concluded this discussion on what the indicators should be. Therefore we would love it if you could respond to this mail somewhere next week.

Kind regards, Tom








Tom Kronenburg

Zenc | Focus op oplossingen
Alexanderstraat 18
2514 JM Den Haag
KvK:  27190312
Tel:  +31 70 3626944 of +31 6 55778353
Fax:  +31 70 3921835

tom.kronenburg at zenc.nl<mailto:tom.kronenburg at zenc.nl>
www.zenc.nl<http://www.zenc.nl>





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110513/39589cd4/attachment-0003.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MS scoreboard.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 24064 bytes
Desc: MS scoreboard.doc
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110513/39589cd4/attachment-0002.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110513/39589cd4/attachment-0004.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PSIScoreboardprinciplesandindicators.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 49152 bytes
Desc: PSIScoreboardprinciplesandindicators.doc
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110513/39589cd4/attachment-0003.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/epsi-coord/attachments/20110513/39589cd4/attachment-0005.htm>