[open-government] Economic benefits of open data

[Fabrizio Scrollini]

Hi all,

I am not a big participant on the list, but I do follow your debates which
are very interesting. I am following some of them in my research. So far
there seems tobe a clear argument about reusing public information and
creating commercial value
http://www.epsiplus.net/psi_library/reports/commercial_exploitation_of_europe_s_public_sector_information_pira_study
I<http://www.epsiplus.net/psi_library/reports/commercial_exploitation_of_europe_s_public_sector_information_pira_study%20I>have
not looked to this study in great detail, the connection seems quite
sensible. Helen's paper on Beyond Access gives a hint on this, and also
Rufus Pollock's  works on the subject set a framework to understand the
economic value of public data.

Having said this, I think that the link between proactive publication of
public information in reusable formats and commercial value, could also be
stated. As a matter of fact as I am arguing in my research proactive
publication is indeed a key "rule of the game" to develop any open
government data initiative, hence the important of establishing it. An
hypothesis to test, would be that the more information is out there in  in
machine readable reusable format, the less chances you have of an actual
backlash.

Best,

Fabrizio.





On 15 November 2010 16:59, <toby at law-democracy.org> wrote:

>
> I agree that this argument has advocacy potential, hence my 'admission'
> that I use it myself.
>
> I am becoming concerned, however, that it will create a backlash in due
> course. Already in Canada I would say one tends to get little mileage out
> of such arguments.
>
> So I would like to see two things:
>
> 1) Solid economic arguments based on evidence (I know about the UCL
> Constitution Unit's work but I don't think it amounts to this). This could
> either be generic studies about the value of proactive disclosure or more
> focused studies on the economic benefits of open data. It would be great
> if Tim's proposed session for London could go ahead.
> 2) More rights based arguments that do not depend on cost (sort of along
> the lines of your second para. below). I think there are interesting
> opportunities here (eg along the lines of proactive disclosure delivering
> the right to information more effectively, as some posts to this list have
> argued, and also deliver it in a more egalitarian way).
>
> Best, Toby
>
>
> > I can only speak for the UK. There is a study by the University College
> > London's Constitution Unit, that tracks FOIA request types, quantity and
> > cost and has been doing this from 2006.
> > http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/foi/publications.htm
> > There is a real concern by people who deal with FOIA requests that by
> > making things open will bring on an onslaught of requests but so far from
> > what I hear, this hasn't manifested itself as of yet. There are web based
> > request sites that make the process of request easier whether this is
> > having an effect I don't know.
> >
> > The law gives certain rights to information and compliance has cost. It
> is
> > whether you have the information wrenched from you which costs or that
> you
> > have a mechanism so people can 'self-serve' which also costs but probably
> > less.
> >
> > I suppose in the current climate we are getting more traction from public
> > bodies by giving them a cost saving argument rather than an innovation
> > one.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > On 15 Nov 2010, at 15:34, toby at law-democracy.org wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Right to information activists, including myself, routinely make the
> >> argument that proactive disclosure will reduce the burden of processing
> >> requests for information, and in some countries (eg India), this is even
> >> built into the law. However, I%
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-government mailing list
> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
>



-- 
Fabrizio Scrollini
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-government/attachments/20101116/d98f5d69/attachment-0001.html>