| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 61
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
PART THREE
14.
Measuring the Social and Economic Costs and Benefits of Public Sector Information Online: A Review of the Literature and Future Directions
Paul F. Uhlir, Raed M. Sharif, and Tilman Merz
The second day of the workshop was devoted to a discussion of the issues by all of the participants, first in two breakout sessions and then in a combined, plenary format. The two breakout sessions were preceded by a presentation entitled Measuring the Social and Economic Costs and Benefits of Public Sector Information (PSI) Online: A Review of the Literature and Future Directions, which was prepared by Paul F. Uhlir, Raed M. Sharif, and Tilman Merz.1 The topics covered by this presentation included: (1) the benefits of access to and reuse of PSI; (2) government policies; (3) a review of the literature about measuring the PSI reuse market and linking outcomes to access regimes; (4) a critique and challenges of current measurement approaches; (5) suggestions for future directions; and (6) questions for further discussion.
First, access to and reuse of PSI in the online environment has direct and indirect economic and social benefits. By developing new markets online, the information industries help enhance the efficiencies of other industries, and, consequently, individuals are empowered as economic actors. Moreover, performance within the public sector is improved, and innovative research projects are fostered. Making PSI available online benefits society through improved political transparency, enhanced educational and research opportunities, and the support of personal decision-making capabilities.
Second, different governments vary markedly in their policies and approaches to dealing with PSI online. In the United States, access to government information is established by a number of laws, including the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act, the Sunshine in Government Act, and the Freedom of Information Act. (See the summary of the presentation by Nancy Weiss.) In the European Union, many countries and government institutions use a cost recovery model and limit the reuse of PSI by applying intellectual property protections. At the same time, there is an emphasis on producing higher-quality and less restricted information, following the 2003 PSI Directive. There are also various hybrid models adopted in the EU and other countries.
In determining PSI policy, the best approach is clear: (1) equal treatment and competition; (2) minimizing the transaction costs necessary to obtain PSI; (3) transparency of access conditions and data characteristics through the availability of good metadata; and (4) accountability. Beyond that, PSI policy is governed by a variety of complex interrelations that reflect the scope of public sector activity in information provision, information quality, access and discoverability, and pricing. Which policy is best under these various conditions is less clear and may be context-dependent.
1
Found at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/42/40170933.ppt
OCR for page 62
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
Third, in analyzing open access and cost recovery policies, there have already been a number of studies that have resulted in assessments and empirical measurements. The resulting literature review, which is not comprehensive, is summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1 Assessments of PSI Activities in Chronological Order, 2008-1998
Study Title
Author(s) and year
Models of Public Sector Information Provision via Trading Funds2
David Newbery, Lionel Bently, and Rufus Pollock. 2008.
EcoGeo Project3
Stéphane Roche, et al. 2007.
Fair Use in the U.S. Economy: Economic Contribution of Industries Relying on Fair Use4
Thomas Rogers and Andrew Szamosszegi. 2007.
The Power of Information: An Independent Review5
Ed Mayo and Tom Steinberg. 2007.
The Socio-Economic Impact of the Spatial Data Infrastructure of Catalonia6
Pilar Garcia Almirall, Montse Moix Bergadà, and Pau Queraltó Ros. Edited by Max Craglia. 2007; published 2008.
Benefits of the New GPS Civil Signal: The L2C Study7
Irving Leveson. 2006.
The Commercial Use of Public Information (CUPI)8
Office of Fair Trading, United Kingdom. 2006.
Developing Geographic Information Infrastructures: The Role of Information Policies9
Bastiaan Van Loenen. 2006.
Economic Impact of Open Source Software on Innovation and the
Rishab Aiyer Ghosh, et al. 2006.
2
Found at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/advice/poi/models-psi-via-trading-funds.pdf
3
Web site: http://ecogeo.scg.ulaval.ca
4
Found at http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/uploads/1/FairUseStudy-Sep12.pdf
5
Found at http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/cabinetoffice/strategy/assets/power_information.pdf
6
Found at http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reports/Study_reports/catalonia_impact_study_report.pdf
7
Found at http://www.insidegnss.com/auto/0706%20Benefits.pdf
8
Found at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/advice/poi/oft-cupi.pdf
9
Found at http://repository.tudelft.nl/file/107024/088301
OCR for page 63
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
Study Title
Author(s) and year
Competitiveness of the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Sector in the EU10
MEPSIR, Measuring European Public Sector Information Resources11
Makx Dekkers, Femke Polman, Robbin te Velde, and Marc de Vries. 2006.
Economic Value of the Nova Scotia Ocean Sector12
Michael Gardner, Robert Fraser, Mike Milloy, and James Frost. 2005.
Estimating Economic Benefits from NOAA PORTS® Information: A Case Study of Tampa Bay13
Hauke Kite-Powell. 2005.
Estimating the Economic Benefits of Regional Ocean Observing Systems14
Hauke Kite-Powell, Charles Colgan, et al. 2004.
The Value of Snow and Snow Information Services15
Richard Adams, Laurie Houston, and Rodney Weiher. 2004.
The Economic Benefit of the BGS (British Geological Survey)16
Roger Tym and Partners. 2003.
Borders in Cyberspace: Conflicting Public Sector Information Policies and Their Economic Impacts17
Peter Weiss. 2002.
Economic Framework for Meteorological Service Provision
Don Gunasekera. 2002.
Economic Value of Current and Improved Weather Forecasts in the U.S. Household Sector18
Jeffrey Lazo and Lauraine Chestnut. 2002.
10
Found at http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/policy/doc/2006-11-20-flossimpact.pdf
11
Found at http://www.epsiplus.net/reports/mepsir_measuring_european_public_sector_resources_report
12
Found at http://www.mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pande/ecn/ns/e/ns-e.pdf
13
Found at http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/publications/Estimated_Economic_Benefits_from_NOAA_PORTS_report.pdf.
14
Found at http://www.nopp.org/nopp/project-reports/reports/04powell.pdf.
15
Found at http://www.economics.noaa.gov/bibliography/econ-value-snow-final-report.doc
16
Found at http://www.bgs.ac.uk/downloads/start.cfm?id=380
17
Found at http://www.epsiplus.net/reports/borders_in_cyberspace
18
Exec. summary: http://ftp.wmo.int/pages//prog/amp/pwsp/documents/JeffLazo_Household_Value_Study_ExecSumm.pdf
OCR for page 64
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
Study Title
Author(s) and year
Canadian Geospatial Data Policy Study19
Garry Sears. 2001.
Environmental Data (various studies)
U.S. National Academy of Sciences. 2001.
Prosperity Effects of Different Pricing Models for PSI
Dutch Ministry of the Interior. 2001.
Economic Effects of Open Access Policies for Spatial Data
Dutch Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2000.
Economic Framework for the Provision of Meteorological Services
John Zillman and John Freebairn. 2000.
Commercial Exploitation of Europe’s Public Sector Information20
Pira International Ltd., University of East Anglia, and Knowledge View Ltd. 2000.
The Economic Contribution of Ordnance Survey GB [Great Britain]21
OXERA, Oxford Economic Research Associates Ltd. 1999.
The Dissemination of Spatial Data: A North American-European Comparative Study on the Impact of Government Information Policy
Xavier Lopez. 1998.
Table 2 provides an overview of the data collection and measurement techniques used in these studies.
19
Executive summary: http://www.geoconnections.org/programsCommittees/proCom_policy/keyDocs/KPMG/KPMG_E.pdf
20
Exec. summary: http://www.ekt.gr/cordis/news/eu/2001/01-01-19econtent/econtent_study2.pdf
21
Found at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/aboutus/reports/oxera/oxera.pdf
OCR for page 65
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
TABLE 2 Data Collection and Measurement Techniques Used in Assessments of PSI Activities
Data Sources
Data Collection Methods
Techniques
Methodological Approaches
Primary sources: Industry, government, end users
Desk research
Estimate of overall PSI market size based on estimates of respondents
Market based approaches
Web survey
Normative or prescriptive decision-making models
Online questionnaires
Estimate of overall PSI market size based on turnover
Secondary sources: Mainly government data (e.g., GDP, household income, employment, payroll, and exports) and industry reports
Interviews
Review of relevant documents, literature and international trends
Self-reporting
Descriptive behavioral response methods
International comparisons
In-depth case studies
Contingent valuation method
Social surplus approach (difference between the willingness to pay for PSI minus the cost of supplying it)
Focus groups
Conjoint analysis
Delphi technique or expert opinion
Economy-wide analysis
Application of Bayesian decision theory
Projection, scenario analysis, expert opinion, and team consensus approaches
General equilibrium model
It should be noted that most of these studies did not explain in detail why a certain technique or approach was used. Collectively, the conclusion was that the economic and equity arguments concerning access to and reuse of PSI are complex and deserve considerably more analysis and policy attention. Thus specific estimates should be looked at with caution.
Fourth, in extending this critique to identify ongoing challenges in measuring PSI in the online environment, current methodological approaches have several weakness. The scope of these studies is limited, for example, and more country, regional, and global scale studies, as well as more comparative analyses at the country and regional levels, are
OCR for page 66
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
needed. There are also few longitudinal studies, which are needed in order to make comparisons across countries or over time. Furthermore, the existing studies have often used top-down approaches to determine the values of PSI products, overestimating the true value of PSI to the economy by ignoring the substitutes available in the absence of PSI. In effect, this methodology can only demonstrate the “value that can be linked with PSI” rather than the value of PSI itself (Office of Fair Trading, United Kingdom, 2006 at http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/consumer_protection/oft861.pdf).
Further academic and empirical research is needed to supply what is lacking in these existing studies—in particular, a multidisciplinary or multidimensional approach and a focus on individual reuse of PSI. Future studies should also work on improving reliability by addressing the lack of strong theoretical foundations and robust data collection. For example, the longstanding difficulty of securing the quality data needed to separate PSI-dependent sectors from the rest of the information economy (e.g., in national accounts and industrial or product classifications) remains a problem, complicated even more by the heterogeneity of PSI. Consequently, the economic value of PSI is hard to measure via shares of GDP, as substitutes for PSI-derived products lead to an overestimation of such contributions.
Fifth, in suggesting future directions, one worthy goal could be to develop a manual for data collection and analysis of PSI policies. This manual could involve statisticians (e.g., EUROSTAT), national accountants (e.g., from the government finance ministries), and other PSI experts. A similar model was used successfully in 1999 by OECD in cooperation with EUROSTAT to produce a manual on data collection and analysis in the environmental goods and services industry.
Other possible goals include creating a digital repository of PSI-related content and promoting and facilitating academic-focused research that is informed by well-established theories and methodologies. Involving young scholars and scientists in this process is essential. Such research also needs to pay special attention to more individual uses of PSI.
Finally, the authors proposed several questions as essential for ongoing discussion:
What are the commonalities and differences among the various analytical methods identified and presented?
What are the most effective metrics or indicators for the assessment of particular kinds of information and policies? What approaches and metrics or indicators can be used to effectively measure the network effects of the use of PSI online?
What are the main strengths and weaknesses of these approaches, including such factors as their accuracy, comprehensiveness, relevance, validity, and reliability?
What still needs to be learned about applying these methods to the evaluation of public information policies in the online environment?
What theoretical frameworks, models, and best practices used in assessing other information products or services can be applied to the assessment of the policies of access to and reuse of digital PSI?
OCR for page 67
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
What future directions might be pursued for the better study and measurement of access to and reuse of PSI online?
What other questions or issues should be raised in this context?
OCR for page 68
The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies - Workshop Summary
This page intentionally left blank.
Items in cart [1]
