Webmaster blog

The government’s Localism Bill was published yesterday, as was a guidance document. The latter confirms that power will be devolved to the community and that data will be made public for the scrutiny of that power.

“The Big Society is what happens whenever people work together for the common good. It is about achieving our collective goals in ways that are more diverse, more local and more personal.

“The best contribution that central government can make is to devolve power, money and knowledge to those best placed to find the best solutions to local needs: elected local representatives, frontline public service professionals, social enterprises, charities, co-ops, community groups, neighbourhoods and individuals.”

Central to this is a continued commitment to releasing public data for the public to use:

“Public access to public data provides the evidence base for public pressure and action, both on the part of those proposing new ways to deliver services and on the part of service users thus enabled to make an informed choice. This is what we mean by ‘transparency’: the ability to see how government actually works - or doesn’t work.

“…there can be no local innovation without local control of resources. Nor can local decision- making succeed without access to the government data on which informed judgement depends”.

The approach is to “focus on outcome, not process, and to release such knowledge into the public domain as raw data - so that anyone can analyse and visualise the information, spot trends and make connections that would otherwise go unseen”.

I haven’t yet seen anything that puts an expectation on the voluntary sector to release data, and to do so in an open format, but if they are to deliver services that the public are expected to scrutinise then inevitably it will need to happen. And it will, rightly, need to happen across the board - regardless of whether an organisation is delivering a public service or not.

The question then is what data should be released, and how? NCVO is already encouraging charities to release data and Open Charities has opened up the charity register; the Charity Commission itself, however, seems to be lagging behind at the moment.

I expect it won’t be allowed to lag for long though. The voluntary sector may well be about to find itself under a lot more scrutiny, not just from government and funders but the general public too.

There is more discussion around open local data on the Open Local Data Blog.

I’ve just been alerted to the Voluntary Sector Datastore, launched recently by NCVO to encourage the voluntary sector to match government in its release of data to the public.

NCVO, the National Council for Voluntary Organisations, has put its ‘toe in the water’ by publishing some of its data to the new datastore in a bid to encourage others to do the same.

‘Essentially, we’d like to see the sector match government in opening up what we’ve got so that society as a whole can realise the benefits of sharing and mashing data together and then visualising it. This space is our toe in the water to start pulling that together.’

Ordnance Survey recently released the boundary data for council wards so that anyone can use it. On Saturday we built a demonstration of what can be achieved by combining it with other public data.

A bunch of us gathered in Birmingham to spend a day looking at data and mapping, at Andrew McKenzie’s Mapitude event on Saturday. It was hosted at Aquila TV and sponsored by Digital Birmingham.

Although there were a number of presentations from the likes of OpenStreetMap, Mappa Mercia and OpenlyLocal, I spent the bulk of the day helping to build a demonstration of what can be achieved by combining sets of data that are available from Ordnance Survey and National Statistics.

The brief, which had been suggested by Gavin Wray, was to choose a ward and layer information over it. Dan Slee was keen to map St Matthew’s in Walsall, and the group agreed that we should try and compare it against an adjacent ward if possible. While the others searched for datasets, I threw together a web page; Stuart Harrison and Chris Taggart worked on the hard task of writing code.

We ended up with this: http://www.pezholio.co.uk/mapitude/.

Now this might look like we’ve simply drawn a boundary on a couple of Google maps and embedded them in a web page; and in a way we have: the difference is that the plotting of points and drawing of lines is done automatically, and the information about the wards is pulled in automatically.

In other words, Stuart wrote some code that automates the tasks of:

1. finding the boundary coordinates from Ordnance Survey OpenData;
2. plotting the boundary on a Google map;
3. interrogating National Statistics for our choice of data.

Then the map is simply embedded in a web page. Which, in a fully working application, would also be done automatically (or rather, on the whim of whoever visits the web page).

There are loads of other things I’d like to see, such as users choosing boundaries based on their own understanding of geography (administrative boundaries for religious groups or sports organisations, for example) as well as the official civic ones, and comparisons over time.

But remember this was just a demonstration: surprising as it may sound, this hasn’t really been done before. Prior to 1 April 2010, UK ward boundary data were simply not available for public use; groups of fools like us could not have spent our free time building this tool for the public good.

We’re not the only people exploring how we can make good use of public data, plenty of others are too. The point is that this stuff is game-changing, and it’s being done by volunteers for the sake of it (and a free lunch, if one’s available). People are creating their own ways of making sense of the world around them – of understanding and engaging with civic society – and offering it to others. As a result it is even harder these days to pin down where people are getting their information from, how critical they are in analysing it and what level of engagement they have.

The opening up of public data is not a magic bullet of course, but it is an exciting development. With public data now freely available I suspect civic engagement will become much messier and harder to define than it was before: and arguably a lot more democratic.

On Monday the Local Public Data Panel held a workshop in Birmingham with local council officers, bloggers and activists to address the challenges of releasing local data for anyone to use.

The aim of the workshop was ‘to generate ideas and understanding about what is needed to drive the local public data initiative at a local level’.

When people get their hands on raw data they can develop tools and services that the custodians of that data either don’t have the time and skills to do or would never have dreamed of anyway. DayNurseriesUK, for example, has built a tool for people to find full-day child care, and Adrian Short has built a tool for people in Sutton find their election candidates.

Releasing data also enables members of the public to point out errors, such as an incorrectly mapped bus stop, which - if fed back effectively - enriches that data to the benefit of society. Although there will always be people who want to point the finger, it creates a wonderful opportunity for citizens and state to work collaboratively on issues of social concern.

Obstacles though are complex and numerous: risk aversion, personal agendas (such as job retention), concerns about quality control and fear of how the data might be used are just some of the challenges that need addressing. But challenges they are, and everyone on Monday seemed more than happy to confront them.

By the end of the day we had come up with a list of things we think are needed (this list is from my personal notes and not the official record of the meeting):

• Data disclaimer for everyone to use;
• Clarity and guidance on the release of data;
• More clarity on ‘derived data’ (what it is, etc);
• Training;
• Repeats of this sort of workshop event;
• Business case;
• Stories of good stuff being done, that everyone can relate to, and presented accessibly;
• Research on usage and numbers;
• Budgetry incentives;
• New legislation, or better use of existing legislation, to encourage the opening up of data;
• Untangling of overlapping and seemingly contradictory legislation;
• A statutory right to data.

I have set up a blog for those involved to collaborate on this work: http://localdata.citizenshipfoundation.org.uk.