Masters Research (M Public Policy) Ideas
Summary
- There are 10 posts — by 9 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by andrew at 2010 Jan 11 14:54 NZDT
Hi all, Some of you may know that I'm undertaking a Masters of Public Policy at Victoria's School of Government. I would like to do my research component on open data. This will be about 6-9 months of part-time research If anyone has any ideas on what may be worthwhile looking into, please discuss on the list. At the moment, I think there are two main areas that might be worthwhile looking into. One would be identifying the barriers of facilitating open data. The other side may be an investigation of the (positive - hopefully) externalities of releasing data. Also, If you would like to be approached for an in-depth interview, please also get in touch off the list. Not that I have ethics approval or a concrete idea yet, but it would be great if I could have an indication of people's willingness to volunteer. Both ICT and public sector responses are much appreciated. Many thanks! Tim McNamara @timClicks p.s. I may be slow to respond - have just moved and am without an Internet connection.
Tim, Fantastic to hear about your proposed Masters project on Open Data. My take is that the barriers are more well understood than the benefits. I also think benefit oriented arguments and sound economic analysis are more useful to government, as they're not too bad at identifying the barriers themselves. My recommendation would be to go for the investigation of the externalities of releasing data. There's a lot of scope there, in terms of financial benefit (to departments, to researchers, to entrepreneurs, to the overall economy), social good, and environmental benefit. There's also sectoral analysis, i.e. how do the benefits differ across health, justice, education, transport, environment etc. Only a limited amount of work has been done in this space so far, to my knowledge. There's the LINZ report: http://www.geospatial.govt.nz/assets/News/spatial-information-in-the-new-zealand-economy-2009.pdf I'd also imagine there's economic analysis that's been done within particular ministries (MoRST, MED, DIA, SSC etc) that hasn't been released publicly. It wouldn't surprise me if some was done as part of the business case for data.govt.nz. All the best, Julian
-- Julian Carver Seradigm Limited PO Box 30042 Christchurch 021 684 147 03 982 1105 www.seradigm.co.nz
I agree with Julian's comments. I would add that we probably need some MPP level thinking about information assets and national information infrastructure. I dont believe those concepts are agree by Treasury; whilst other countries are starting to develop the ideas. Regards Mike On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Julian Carver <
<email obscured>> wrote: > Tim, > > Fantastic to hear about your proposed Masters project on Open Data. > > My take is that the barriers are more well understood than the benefits. I > also think benefit oriented arguments and sound economic analysis are more > useful to government, as they're not too bad at identifying the barriers > themselves. > > My recommendation would be to go for the investigation of the externalities > of releasing data. There's a lot of scope there, in terms of financial > benefit (to departments, to researchers, to entrepreneurs, to the overall > economy), social good, and environmental benefit. There's also sectoral > analysis, i.e. how do the benefits differ across health, justice, > education, > transport, environment etc. > > Only a limited amount of work has been done in this space so far, to my > knowledge. There's the LINZ report: > > http://www.geospatial.govt.nz/assets/News/spatial-information-in-the-new-zealand-economy-2009.pdf > > I'd also imagine there's economic analysis that's been done within > particular ministries (MoRST, MED, DIA, SSC etc) that hasn't been released > publicly. It wouldn't surprise me if some was done as part of the business > case for data.govt.nz. > > All the best, > Julian > > -- > Julian Carver > Seradigm Limited > PO Box 30042 > Christchurch > 021 684 147 > 03 982 1105 > www.seradigm.co.nz > > ----------------------------------------- > Full text of this topic in The Open Government Ninjas: > http://groups.open.org.nz/r/topic/17MpOv6gtnzzcTB5POJIBd > > To leave The Open Government Ninjas, email > <email obscured>?Subject=unsubscribe > > Start your own free groups and site with > OnlineGroups.Net http://onlinegroups.net > > Host your own online groups site with > GroupServer http://groupserver.org > -- Mike Pearson +64 21 631 731 http://www.linkedin.com/in/mikepearsonnz
On 11/01/10 11:22 AM, Julian Carver wrote: I agree in the main, but: > > I'd also imagine there's economic analysis that's been done within > particular ministries (MoRST, MED, DIA, SSC etc) that hasn't been released > publicly. Don't imagine things - it only leads to disappointment. I'm not aware of any particular research in this area. > It wouldn't surprise me if some was done as part of the business > case for data.govt.nz. > It would surprise me, actually, but I'm open to being surprised ;-)
~mark
Tim Suggest you do some searching of StratML (Strategic Markup Language) - see email below from Owen Ambur the chair of the StratML committee (under AIIM). StratML is all about the language used by government strategies and the content of such strategies - rather than focusing purely on "data". However, I sense there could be considerable overlap with your thesis. Owen will be in ChCh 23-25th February - if you thought his interests aligned with your Masters then I'm sure we could arrange an introduction. If anyone else wishes to meet with Owen (see his credentials below) when he's here please let me know and I'll see what I can organise. Our OpenStrategy team will be meeting with him, probably late on the 23rd February. Kind regards Phil Dr Phil Driver, CEO, OpenStrategies Limited p (NZ)+64 (0)3 337 6641 | m (NZ) +64 (0)21 0236 5861 w http://www.openstrategies.com p (UK)+44 (0)1865 321 032 If this email isn't for you, I apologise. I'd be grateful if you'd let me know by replying with "received in error" in the subject box and deleting the email. It is private and confidential. Retaining it, copying it, disclosing or distributing any of its contents or attachments without our permission is prohibited. Many thanks.
Tim Sorry, I missed out Owen's email and its StratML links - see below: From: StratML <email obscured>] On Behalf Of Owen Ambur Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:36 PM To: <email obscured> Subject: StratML Committee Meeting Notes Although we didn’t get a quorum for an official StratML Committee meeting this morning, Adam, Art, Allyson, and I had a good working session. Pending further consideration by the committee, we agreed to change the name of the schema for Part 2 to PerformancePlanOrReport.xsd http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#PerformancePlanOrReport Art proposed that an attribute be used at the root level to indicate whether the instance document is a plan or a report. Basically, the only difference is that a performance plan sets forth a <Target> level of results whereas a performance report indicates the <Actual> level achieved. http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#Target & http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#Actual With respect to the <ValueChain>, we also tentatively decided to make use of the <Outcome> element mandatory and use of the <Input> element optional. The <Output> element would also be mandatory but with a default value of “To Be Determined” (in the event the organization may not yet be ready to specify the level of output(s) it plans to produce in pursuit of the target outcome). http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#ValueChain & http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#Outcome & http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#Output & http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#Input Art will revise the schema based upon our discussion this morning and Adam will update the graphic accordingly. As soon as they are ready, both will be posted, as usual, at http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#WorkResults The next telecon is scheduled for Wednesday, January 20, but we agreed to change the time to 1:00 p.m. to accommodate Adam’s schedule. In the meantime, please be on the lookout for opportunities to raise awareness and promote use of Part 1. BTW, earlier this morning, on the W3C eGov IG’s telecon, Joe Carmel raised the need to demonstrate how to convert XML data into RDF and George Thomas of HHS (formerly with GSA) suggested using the StratML collection in such a demonstration. Joe has already put up some good StratML demos at http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#Carmel and is working on an XForm form for StratML Part 1. Since most folks don’t understand the potential benefit of RDF, much less how they can contribute to its usage, I told my colleagues on the IG that I thought it would be wonderful if the StratML collection could be used to foster greater understanding along those lines. Owen Ambur Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee Co-Chair Emeritus, xml.gov CoP Communications/Membership Director, FIRM Former Project Mananger, ET.gov Invited Expert, W3C eGov IG
I support Julian and Mike's comments. It would be great to have some MPP work in this area and for it to complement the work we are doing under the auspices of the cross-government Data and Information Re-use CEs Steering Group. At present the focus in on completing the NZ Government Open Access and Licensing (NZGOAL) framework, assessing barriers for suppliers, moving to barriers for users, reviewing cross-government policy principles, and continuing the data.govt.nz pilots. We are finalising our work priorities for the next 6 months, plus developing the 2010/11 work programme. Would welcome discussion on this
Regards Keitha -- Keitha Booth Senior Advisor, ICT State Services Commission DDI: +64 4 495 6731 Mob: 027 445 4616 Fax: +64 4 495 6669 <email obscured> www.ssc.govt.nz | newzealand.govt.nz New Zealand's State Services Commission: Leading the state sector to world class performance ............................................................................................ Caution: If you have received this message in error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this message along with any attachments. Please treat the contents of this message as private and confidential. -----Original Message----- From: <email obscured> <email obscured>] On Behalf Of Mike Pearson Sent: Monday, 11 January 2010 12:29 p.m. To: <email obscured> Subject: Re: [ninjas] Masters Research (M Public Policy) Ideas I agree with Julian's comments. I would add that we probably need some MPP level thinking about information assets and national information infrastructure. I dont believe those concepts are agree by Treasury; whilst other countries are starting to develop the ideas. Regards Mike On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Julian Carver < <email obscured>> wrote: > Tim, > > Fantastic to hear about your proposed Masters project on Open Data. > > My take is that the barriers are more well understood than the benefits. I > also think benefit oriented arguments and sound economic analysis are more > useful to government, as they're not too bad at identifying the barriers > themselves. > > My recommendation would be to go for the investigation of the externalities > of releasing data. There's a lot of scope there, in terms of financial > benefit (to departments, to researchers, to entrepreneurs, to the overall > economy), social good, and environmental benefit. There's also sectoral > analysis, i.e. how do the benefits differ across health, justice, > education, > transport, environment etc. > > Only a limited amount of work has been done in this space so far, to my > knowledge. There's the LINZ report: > > http://www.geospatial.govt.nz/assets/News/spatial-information-in-the-new-zealand-economy-2009.pdf > > I'd also imagine there's economic analysis that's been done within > particular ministries (MoRST, MED, DIA, SSC etc) that hasn't been released > publicly. It wouldn't surprise me if some was done as part of the business > case for data.govt.nz. > > All the best, > Julian > > -- > Julian Carver > Seradigm Limited > PO Box 30042 > Christchurch > 021 684 147 > 03 982 1105 > www.seradigm.co.nz > > ----------------------------------------- > Full text of this topic in The Open Government Ninjas: > http://groups.open.org.nz/r/topic/17MpOv6gtnzzcTB5POJIBd > > To leave The Open Government Ninjas, email > <email obscured>?Subject=unsubscribe > > Start your own free groups and site with > OnlineGroups.Net http://onlinegroups.net > > Host your own online groups site with > GroupServer http://groupserver.org > -- Mike Pearson +64 21 631 731 http://www.linkedin.com/in/mikepearsonnz ----------------------------------------- Full text of this topic in The Open Government Ninjas: http://groups.open.org.nz/r/topic/65kNlcVRmJxkdDxXXjGSQ7 To leave The Open Government Ninjas, email <email obscured>?Subject=unsubscribe Start your own free groups and site with OnlineGroups.Net http://onlinegroups.net Host your own online groups site with GroupServer http://groupserver.org
> Don't imagine things - it only leads to disappointment. I'm not aware of > any particular research in this area. > http://wiki.open.org.nz/Economic_Benefits_of_Open_Data Not much there unfortunately...
+1 for investigating on the benefits and justifications for doing releasing data. One of the actions of the open govt barcamp last year in Wellington was to create case studies and examples of how open govt data has been beneficial. I'm not sure where this effort has got to, but it would certainly be supported by the actions of someone doing masters research on it. Cheers, Sigurd Magnusson
On 11/01/2010, at 1:37 PM, Mark Harris wrote: > On 11/01/10 11:22 AM, Julian Carver wrote: > > I agree in the main, but: >> >> I'd also imagine there's economic analysis that's been done within >> particular ministries (MoRST, MED, DIA, SSC etc) that hasn't been >> released >> publicly. > > Don't imagine things - it only leads to disappointment. I'm not > aware of > any particular research in this area. > >> It wouldn't surprise me if some was done as part of the business >> case for data.govt.nz. >> > It would surprise me, actually, but I'm open to being surprised ;-) > > ~mark
Tim, Here's a UK page on economic benefit studies done: http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/businesslaw/competition/market-studies/public-information/page39978.html The study on economic models of making available public sector held information , done by several economists at Cambridge University: http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file45136.pdf - worth looking at if only for the references at the end which may assist your literature review. It may also be helpful to read the Guardian's 'Free Our Data' blog, if you haven't already come across it. It recently reported (http://www.freeourdata.org.uk/blog/category/cambridge-study/) that the UK Department of Communities and Local Government has launched a public consultation on making available geographic information held by Ordnance Survey: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/ordnancesurveyconsultation The department has done an Impact Assessment in association with consultation paper. You can access it online here: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/ordnancesurveytia
Cheers, Andrew
Loading…
Privacy | Acceptable Use | Terms of Service | About OnlineGroups.Net | Contact OnlineGroups.Net
Start an OnlineGroups.Net site for easier email collaboration in your organization.
Powered by GroupServer, the open source web-based mailing list manager.