[open-government] Public assessment of the OGP national plans

[Daniela Mattern]

@Mor:

+1 on syncing with the Census work.

There has been some suggestion around providing more background information
around the country that is evaluated in the census, for instance

- existence and quality of FOIA
- existence of OGP
- existence of national Open Data Portal

To my mind a good place for this information would be a wiki, apart from
this we can of course have spreadsheets for comparison between countries.
In the census we then could have a link to a wiki page ...

I am happy to participate.

Daniela


On 6 August 2014 16:24, alberto abella <alberto.abella at okfn.es> wrote:

>  I think that apart from the raw databases that IRM provides Alan has
> done most of the job, to gather a summarize data about the commitments.
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tFdLFTvo5cHlVJ3rjM17YYMgXc6UFrPrgJsN_dgMUMc/edit#gid=1090828196
>
> Don't you think that further treatment (visualization) on these data (kind
> of rank) would be an incentive for best practice sharing between countries?
>
> I know that Tim has much more experience than me (possibly Alan and Igbal
> you too) but it seemed to me a good idea ;-D
>
> Alberto
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 05:49 -0400, Alan Hudson wrote:
>
> Definitely worth being in touch with Paul Massen on this. He's been giving
> some thought to ways of making the excellent IRM data more accessible and
> useful - visualisations, platforms etc.
>
>
>
>  My post from May includes some links that people might want to explore
> too re IRM data and analysis
>
>
>
>  http://alanhudson.info/?p=11589
>
>
>
>  best
>
>  alan
>
>
>
>  On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Tim Davies <tim at timdavies.org.uk> wrote:
>
>  Hey Alberto, Igbal
>
> Have you see the dataset that the Open Government Partnership Independent
> Reporting Mechanism team are working on?
>
> http://www.opengovpartnership.org/independent-reporting-mechanism
>
>
>   They are currently working on coding up the commitments made by
> countries, and then sharing this data for others to analyse. Carrying out
> an analysis of this data might be a good first step.
>
>
>   They have been tagging commitments for level of ambition, as well as
> theme etc.
>
>
>
>   Because of the way the OGP works (voluntary commitments by countries,
> supposed to be based on consultation with civil society in country), I'm
> not sure a general ranking is possible or desirable - as countries should
> be encouraged to improve their levels of ambition and their engagement with
> local civil society, rather than to compete against some externally defined
> set of important open government ideas.
>
>
>   However, it might be possible to use tools like the Open Data Index to
> scrutinize open data commitments in particular - checking that all the
> datasets countries commit to publish are checked for those countries that
> commit to them. This sort of civil society provided evidence of meeting
> commitments would potentially feed well into the Independent Reporting
> Mechanism.
>
>
>   An alternative approach would be to take the commitments data, and try
> and create a platform to allow more public engagement with the commitments,
> crowdsourcing views on whether they are (a) ambitious enough; and (b) being
> applied and delivered on.
>
>
>   All the best
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Igbal Safarov <iqbal1986 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>   Dear Alberto,
>
>
>
>    It is very good idea to compare and do raking between countries.
> Additionally, It is possible to develop "best practice" guideline based on
> the good experience of countries. This guideline can help the experts to
> meet and improve real situation.
>
>
>
>    Thank you,
>
>
>
>    On 5 August 2014 04:41, alberto abella <alberto.abella at okfn.es> wrote:
>
>     I've talked with Laura James and in the local coord list that it
> would be good to assess globally all the national action plans that the
> different countries submit to the OGP.
>
> It is true that some assessment is done in OGP but the results are not
> ranked, neither clearly published. We (the coordinator of Ireland and
> Spain) agree that our national plans were 'quite improvable' (bullshit is
> another equivalent word to describe them but I want to be polite)
>
> We thought that because of the network of OKFN we could arrange such
> public assessment and make comparisons between countries.
>
> What do you think.
>
> Alberto
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-government mailing list
> open-government at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-government
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-government
>
>


-- 

Daniela Mattern

Open Data Project Manager | skype: e1aste2000

*Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org> *

http://okfn.org/  |  @okfn <http://twitter.com/OKFN>  |  OKF on Facebook
<https://www.facebook.com/OKFNetwork>  |  Blog <http://blog.okfn.org/>  |
Newsletter <http://okfn.org/about/newsletter>


<http://okfn.org/about/newsletter>

*Become a sponsor <http://2014.okfestival.org/support/> for next year's
OKFestival!*



*Open Minds to Open Action*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-government/attachments/20140806/c0bc7839/attachment-0003.html>