Why we’re failing to get the most out of open data


Victoria Lemieux at the WEF Blog: “An unprecedented number of individuals and organizations are finding ways to explore, interpret and use Open Data. Public agencies are hosting Open Data events such as meetups, hackathons and data dives. The potential of these initiatives is great, including support for economic development (McKinsey, 2013), anti-corruption (European Public Sector Information Platform, 2014) and accountability (Open Government Partnership, 2012). But is Open Data’s full potential being realized?
news item from Computer Weekly casts doubt. A recent report notes that, in the United Kingdom, poor data quality is hindering the government’s Open Data program. The report goes on to explain that – in an effort to make the public sector more transparent and accountable – UK public bodies have been publishing spending records every month since November 2010. The authors of the report, who conducted an analysis of 50 spending-related data releases by the Cabinet Office since May 2010, found that that the data was of such poor quality that using it would require advanced computer skills.
Far from being a one-off problem, research suggests that this issue is ubiquitous and endemic. Some estimates indicate that as much as 80 percent of the time and cost of an analytics project is attributable to the need to clean up “dirty data” (Dasu and Johnson, 2003).
In addition to data quality issues, data provenance can be difficult to determine. Knowing where data originates and by what means it has been disclosed is key to being able to trust data. If end users do not trust data, they are unlikely to believe they can rely upon the information for accountability purposes. Establishing data provenance does not “spring full blown from the head of Zeus.” It entails a good deal of effort undertaking such activities as enriching data with metadata – data about data – such as the date of creation, the creator of the data, who has had access to the data over time and ensuring that both data and metadata remain unalterable.
Similarly, if people think that data could be tampered with, they are unlikely to place trust in it; full comprehension of data relies on the ability to trace its origins….”

In an emergency, apps locate nearby first aiders


Springwise: “In the case of a sudden accident or health problem, a matter of seconds’ difference in the response times of emergency services can be the difference between saving a life and losing one. The irony is that there could even be trained first aiders nearby, but there’s usually no way of letting them know they’re needed. Now two apps — GoodSAM and PulsePoint — both let those with life-saving skills to receive alerts when an emergency happens close by.
The GoodSAM app comes in two versions — the Alerter and Responder. Those facing an emergency can use the Alerter app to instantly send a call for help to any responders in the vicinity, along with their exact location. At the same time, the country’s emergency number is also called. Those who have first aid or medical experience can download the Responder app, which pushes a notification to their device whenever someone needs help. If they’re unavailable, they can choose to reject the request and the Alerter will be notified. If accepted, the app offers a map and directions to the location of the incident and the two parties can communicate through an in-app messaging service.
Watch the video below for a demonstration of how the system works…
The PulsePoint Respond app works in much the same way, although is mainly focused on sudden cardiac arrests and those who can offer CPR resuscitation. Additionally, anyone in the community can use the app to track emergency activity in their neighborhood. Local authorities can also implement the PulsePoint system across their jurisdictions, with community outreach strategies and project management services included starting from USD 5,000….”

'How We Got to Now' by Steven Johnson


Book Review by Philip Delves Broughton in the Wall Street Journal: “Theories of innovation and entrepreneurship have always yo-yoed between two basic ideas. First, that it’s all about the single brilliant individual and his eureka moment that changes the world. Second, that it’s about networks, collaboration and context. The truth, as in all such philosophical dogfights, is somewhere in between. But that does not stop the bickering. This controversy blew up in a political context during the 2012 presidential election, when President Obama used an ill-chosen set of words (“you didn’t build that”) to suggest that government and society had a role in creating the setting for entrepreneurs to flourish, and Republicans berated him for denigrating the rugged individualists of American enterprise.
Through a series of elegant books about the history of technological innovation, Steven Johnson has become one of the most persuasive advocates for the role of collaboration in innovation. His latest, “How We Got to Now,” accompanies a PBS series on what he calls the “six innovations that made the modern world.” The six are detailed in chapters titled “Glass,” “Cold,” “Sound,” “Clean,” “Time” and “Light.” Mr. Johnson’s method is to start with a single innovation and then hopscotch through history to illuminate its vast and often unintended consequences….
Mr. Johnson calls this “long-zoom” history, an examination of what he refers to as the “hummingbird effect” in history. Back in the Cretaceous age, he explains, flowers evolved colors and scents to alert insects to the presence of nectar. Hummingbirds evolved their peculiar flying mechanics to hover beside a flower like an insect in order to extract nectar. From flowers to nectar to insects to an innovation in avian flight. Mr. Johnson professes to be agnostic about the innovations he describes, but the hummingbird effects he believes in are so hard to predict that taking the long view means withholding negative judgments on the present. One may not like the Facebook of today, for example, but who knows what benefits its social network might yield in decades to come?
Mr. Johnson’s ideas are popular in Silicon Valley, and it is easy to see why. He is an optimist about technology and its possibilities. In his section on “Light,” he links the discovery of neon lighting to the growth of Las Vegas and then to the post-modernist movement in American art and architecture. A more raffish mind might have gone from Las Vegas to Siegfried and Roy, Wayne Newton, and the Nevada flesh trade. But Mr. Johnson is too upstanding for that. He believes that the arc of technological history may be long but that it bends toward good.”

Antidisciplinary


Joi Ito at LinkedIn: “One of the first words that I learned when I joined the Media Lab was “antidisciplinary.” It was listed an a requirement in an ad seeking applicants for a new faculty position. Interdisciplinary work is when people from different disciplines work together. An antidisciplinary project isn’t a sum of a bunch of disciplines but something entirely new – the word defies easy definition. But what it means to me is someone or something that doesn’t fit within traditional academic discipline­­­–a field of study with its own particular words, frameworks, and methods. Most academics are judged by how many times they have published in prestigious, peer-reviewed journals. Peer review usually consists of the influential members of your field reviewing your work and deciding whether it is important and unique. This architecture often leads to a dynamic where researchers focus more on impressing a small number of experts in their own field than on taking the high risk of an unconventional approach. This dynamic reinforces the cliché of academics–learning more and more about less and less. It causes a hyper-specialization where people in different areas have a very difficult time collaborating–or even communicating–with people in different fields. For me, antidisciplinary research is akin to mathematician Stanislaw Ulam’s famous observation that the study of non-linear physics is like the study of “non-elephant animals.” Antidisciplinary is all about the non-elephant animals.
The Media Lab focuses on “uniqueness, impact and magic.” What our students and faculty do should be unique. We shouldn’t be doing something that someone else is doing. If someone else starts doing it, we should stop. Everything we do should have impact. Lastly, things should induce us to be passionate and should go beyond incremental thinking. “Magic” means that we take on projects that inspire us. In the Lifelong Kindergarten group, researchers often describe the “Four Ps of Creative Learning” as Projects, Peers, Passion and Play. Play is extremely important for creative learning. There is a great deal of research showing that rewards and pressure can motivate people to “produce,” but creative learning and thinking requires the “space” that play creates. Pressure and rewards can often diminish that space, and thus, squash creative thinking….”

Open Source Governance—A More Ambitious Cousin of Collaborative Governance


New paper by Ani Matei & Sergiu Ioan Irimia in the International Journal of Public Administration: “Open source represents a model generally known for its success in software production. The objective of this article is to establish a new strategic approach of using open source development principles for managing collaborative arrangements between citizens and public administration. The identity of open source governance is developed by highlighting how it is different from its main “competitor”—collaborative governance, and from other two popular concepts—open government and e-democracy. The other sections are designed to answer to public managers regarding why and what to adopt from this governance model for public sector services.”

Smarter video games, thanks to crowdsourcing


AAAS –Science Magazine: “Despite the stereotypes, any serious gamer knows it’s way more fun to play with real people than against the computer. Video game artificial intelligence, or AI, just isn’t very good; it’s slow, predictable, and generally stupid. All that stands to change, however, if GiantOtter, a Massachusetts-based startup, has its way, New Scientist reports. By crowdsourcing the AI’s learning, GiantOtter hopes to build systems where the computer can learn based on player’s previous behaviors, decision-making, and even voice communication—yes, the computer is listening in as you strategize. The hope is that by abandoning the traditional scripted programming models, AIs can be taught to mimic human behaviors, leading to more dynamic and challenging scenarios even in incredibly complex games like Blizzard Entertainment Inc.’s professionally played StarCraft II.

Brighter Futures Together


“Welcome to the Brighter Futures Together toolkit! It contains lots of information and ideas to help you improve and grow your community. It covers lots of issues like the environment, climate change, health, safety, and involving children and young people….
There are lots of factsheets on all sorts of issues and each factsheet features step-by-step advice, and explains where to go to get further help. You can look through each of the factsheets individually, click on a category on the right to browse the factsheets, or use the search function in the top left hand corner to find a particular factsheet. We hope you find it useful….
Map assets in your community

Participatory budgeting in your community…”

 
 

A new generation of Openaid.se


Openaid.se: “We are happy to launch the new version of the Swedish aid transparency tracker Openaid.se. This tracker brings a lot of new features – both visible and in the backend system. We have focused more on the professional user and making the site a quick but powerful tool to find the data you need.
The top navigation is structured like a sentence which filters the data. It states from who, to whom, via which organisation, for what purpose, and in which year – giving you the basic tools needed to filter the data, which then can be grouped and sorted below. You can also make a comparison with another such sentence by adding comparative data.
openaid-se-top-menu
The new Openaid.se presents either a graph that shows data over time or a map that gives a quick geographical overview. Depending on your choice of recipient (the “to whom”) and/or organisation you will also be presented with overview data on the recipient/organisation in the right column.
You can always choose to view a full list of all the activities, that can range from one to several thousands, depending on your filtering choices. You can also, at any time, choose to download a csv-file containing all the activities.
export-button
More information, including a smaller graph, is shown when you dig into the details by clicking on an activity. You can also choose to look at the full activity sheet, where you will find any document links available at the activity level.”

Data-based Civic Participation


New workshop paper by C. A. Le Dantec in  HCOMP 2014/Citizen + X: Workshop on Volunteer-based Crowdsourcing in Science, Public Health and Government, Pittsburgh, PA. November 2, 2014:  “Within the past five years, a new form of technology -mediated public participation that experiments with crowdsourced data production in place of community discourse has emerged. Examples of this class of system include SeeClickFix, PublicStuff, and Street Bump, each of which mediate feedback about local neighborhood issues and help communities mobilize resources to address those issues. The experiments being playing out by this new class of services are derived from a form of public participation built on the ideas of smart cities where residents and physical environments are instrumented to provide data to improve operational efficiency and sustainability (Caragliu, Del Bo, and Nijkamp 2011). Ultimately, smart cities is the application to local government all the efficiencies that computing has always promised—efficiencies of scale, of productivity, of data—minus the messiness and contention of citizenship that play out through more traditional modes of public engagement and political discourse.
The question then, is what might it look like to incorporate more active forms of civic participation and issue advocacy in an app- and data-driven world? To begin to explore this question, my students and I have developed a smartphone app as part of a larger regional planning partnership with the City of Atlanta and the Atlanta Regional Commission. The app, called Cycle Atlanta, enables cyclists to record their ride data —where they have gone, why they went there, what kind of cyclist they are— in an effort to both generate data for planners developing new bicycling infrastructure and to broaden public participation and input in the creation of those plans…”
 

How social media is reshaping news


Monica Anderson And Andrea Caumont at Pew Research Center: “The ever-growing digital native news world now boasts about 5,000 digital news sector jobs, according to our recent calculations, 3,000 of which are at 30 big digital-only news outlets. Many of these digital organizations emphasize the importance of social media in storytelling and engaging their audiences. As journalists gather for the annual Online News Association conference, here are answers to five questions about social media and the news.
1 How do social media sites stack up on news? When you take into account both the total reach of a site (the share of Americans who use it) and the proportion of users who get news on the site, Facebook is the obvious news powerhouse among the social media sites. Roughly two-thirds (64%) of U.S. adults use the site, and half of those users get news there — amounting to 30% of the general population….
2 How do social media users participate in news? Half of social network site users have shared news stories, images or vidoes , and nearly as many  (46%) have discussed a news issue or event. In addition to sharing news on social media, a small number are also covering the news themselves, by posting photos or videos of news events. Pew Research found that in 2014, 14% of social media users posted their own photos of news events to a social networking site, while 12% had posted videos. This practice has played a role in a number of recent breaking news events, including the riots in Ferguson, Mo
3 How do social media users discover news? Facebook is an important source of website referrals for many news outlets, but the users who arrive via Facebook spend far less time and consume far fewer pages than those who arrive directly. The same is true of users arriving by search. Our analysis of comScore data found visitors who go to a news media website directly spend roughly three times as long as those who wind up there through search or Facebook, and they view roughly five times as many pages per month. This higher level of engagement from direct visitors is evident whether a site’s traffic is driven by search or social sharing and it has big implications for news organizations who are experimenting with digital subscriptions while endeavoring to build a loyal audience.
4 What’s the news experience like on Facebook? Our study of news consumption on Facebook found Facebook users are experiencing a relatively diverse array of news stories on the site — roughly half of Facebook users regularly see six different topic areas. The most common news people see is entertainment news: 73% of Facebook users regularly see this kind of content on the site. Unlike Twitter, where a core function is the distribution of information as news breaks, Facebook is not yet a place many turn to for learning about breaking news. …
5 How does social media impact the discussion of news events? Our recent survey revealed social media doesn’t always facilitate conversation around the important issues of the day. In fact, we found people were less willing to discuss their opinion on the Snowden-NSA story on social media than they were in person. And Facebook and Twitter users were less likely to want to share their opinions in many face-to-face settings, especially if they felt their social audience disagreed with them.”