View
194
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
FP7-‐INFRASTRUCTURES-‐2011-‐2, FP7-‐ICT-‐283700
CeDEM Workshop, Krems, Austria, 22 May 2013
E-infrastructures for Open Data
Anneke Zuiderwijk, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands Keith Jeffery, euroCRIS, United Kingdom
Spiros Mouzakitis, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Agenda
0 Introduc.on – Anneke Zuiderwijk (10 min) 0 Presenta.on of open data infrastructures – Anneke Zuiderwijk
(10 min) 0 Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data
infrastructure – Keith Jeffery (15 min) 0 Demonstra.on of ENGAGE e-‐infrastructure – Anneke
Zuiderwijk (30 min) 0 Discussion – all (20 min)
Agenda
0 Introduc.on – Anneke Zuiderwijk (10 min) 0 Presenta.on of open data infrastructures – Anneke Zuiderwijk
(10 min) 0 Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data
infrastructure – Keith Jeffery (15 min) 0 Demonstra.on of ENGAGE e-‐infrastructure – Anneke
Zuiderwijk (30 min) 0 Discussion – all (20 min)
Data providers Data users
6. Policy feedback analysis
5. Provide feedback on policies
5. Provide feedback on
data
7. Discuss feedback
8. Improve policy-‐making
1. Creating Data
2. Opening data
3. Finding data
4. Using data
Introduc.on – Open Data as a Process
Introduc.on -‐ Advantages Open Data Process (ODP)1
0 Poli.cal and social benefits: 0 Transparency 0 Obtaining new insights in the public sector 0 More par.cipa.on and self-‐empowerment of users
0 Economical 0 Economic growth 0 S.mula.ng innova.on 0 Counterac.ng unnecessary duplica.on of costs (public money)
0 Opera.onal and technical 0 Being able to scru.nize data
+ many more!
1 Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y. & Zuiderwijk, A. (2012). Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. In Vol. 29. Information Systems Management (pp. 258-268)
Introduc.on – Problem Statement
0 However, merely pu[ng data on the internet (step 1 and 2 of ODP) does not result in the realiza.on of these advantages2
0 Other steps in ODP are missing
0 Step 1 and 2 should be performed in such a way that the other steps (3-‐8) become possible Ø Contextual informa.on and
linkage to other data is necessary
Data providers Data users
1. Creating Data
2. Opening data
3. Finding data
2 Zuiderwijk, A., & Janssen, M. (to be published in 2013). Open data policies, their implementa.on and impact: A comparison framework. Government Informa-on Quarterly.
Introduc.on – Problem Statement
0 There is a need for e-‐infrastructures that aim at improving the ODP (current à ideal)
0 These infrastructures can s.mulate the realiza.on of the advantages of open data3,4
0 Examples of open data infrastructures: 0 European Commission Open data portal (open-‐data.europa.eu) 0 Na.onal Open data Portals
0 US Open Data Portal (data.gov) 0 UK Open Data Portal (data.gov.uk)
0 Local / Municipal Open Data Portals 0 + ENGAGE Open Data Infrastructure
3 Charalabidis, Y., Ntanos, E., & Lampathaki, F. (2011). An architectural framework for open governmental data for researchers and citizens. In M. Janssen, A. Macintosh, J. Scholl, E. Tambouris, M. Wimmer, H. d. Bruijn & Y. H. Tan (Eds.), Electronic government and electronic participation joint proceedings of ongoing research and projects of IFIP EGOV and ePart 2011 (pp. 77-85). Delft 4 European_Union. (2010). Riding the wave: how Europe can gain form the rising tide of scientific data. Brussels.
Agenda
0 Introduc.on – Anneke Zuiderwijk (10 min) 0 Presenta.on of open data infrastructures – Anneke Zuiderwijk
(10 min) 0 Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data
infrastructure – Keith Jeffery (15 min) 0 Demonstra.on of ENGAGE e-‐infrastructure – Anneke
Zuiderwijk (30 min) 0 Discussion – all (20 min)
Presenta.on of open data infrastructures5
0 Inves.gate the open data infrastructures of: 0 European Union 0 Junar 0 ENGAGE
0 Examine the complementarity of these infrastructures concerning different characteris.cs
5 Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Parnia, A.: The complementarity of open data infrastructures: An analysis of functionalities 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (dg.o 2013), Quebec, Canada (2013)
European Union
Junar
ENGAGE
0 Iden.fied 35 elements of OD infrastructures
Elements of OD infrastructures5
5 Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Parnia, A.: The complementarity of open data infrastructures: An analysis of functionalities 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (dg.o 2013), Quebec, Canada (2013)
Presenta.on of open data infrastructures5
0 All three infrastructures have similar basic funcKonaliKes for uploading and managing data, but all have different specific features to support the goals of the infrastructure. 0 Examples similar func.onali.es: downloading data, type of metadata provided,
data on various government levels 0 Examples different func.onali.es: visualiza.on tools, tools for monitoring data
use and feedback, tools for linking data, tools for user support, elabora.on environments
0 Differences originate from a focus on different target groups (different func.onality and data needs) and from different project scope: open-‐data.europa.eu is a single point of access to data from the EU bodies Junar is a cloud service for data collec.on and sharing ENGAGE is a pladorm and a community focussed on data cura.on
5 Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Parnia, A.: The complementarity of open data infrastructures: An analysis of functionalities 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (dg.o 2013), Quebec, Canada (2013)
Presenta.on of open data infrastructures5
0 The difference in focus and provided func.onali.es suggests that for users these open data infrastructures complement each other.
0 Can be enhanced if all infrastructures would provide open interfaces to enable users to take advantage of the strengths of each infrastructure à connect infrastructures and exchange informa.on
0 At this moment, the ENGAGE open data infrastructure seems to be the most open system, as: 0 The publica.on and use of data in this infrastructure can be conducted by
anyone 0 Many tools that support all the steps in the open data process are provided 0 All func.onali.es are available for free
5 Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Parnia, A.: The complementarity of open data infrastructures: An analysis of functionalities 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (dg.o 2013), Quebec, Canada (2013)
Agenda
0 Introduc.on – Anneke Zuiderwijk (10 min) 0 Presenta.on of open data infrastructures – Anneke Zuiderwijk
(10 min) 0 Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data
infrastructure – Keith Jeffery (15 min) 0 Demonstra.on of ENGAGE e-‐infrastructure – Anneke
Zuiderwijk (30 min) 0 Discussion – all (20 min)
Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data infrastructure 0 ENGAGE-‐project (FP7): An Infrastructure for Open, Linked
Governmental Data Provision towards Research Communi.es and Ci.zens (www.engage-‐project.eu)
0 Main goal: the development and use of a data infrastructure, incorpora.ng distributed and diverse public sector informa.on (PSI) resources. 0 Go beyond PSI (data.gov) sites in number of datasets, diversity of datasets,
quality of metadata
0 The vision of the ENGAGE infrastructure is to highlight, promote and enhance the re-‐use value of PSI Ø by moving from low-‐structured, isolated, and difficult to find datasets
to highly-‐structured, easy-‐to-‐link, easy-‐to-‐process datasets.
0 Enable cross-‐country comparisons
Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data infrastructure
0 Data related services 0 Requests for dataset cura.on / conversion / enrichment (e.g. I am
looking for the elec.on results in Greece in XLS) 0 Requests for data verifica.on (e.g. do you think this dataset is valid?) 0 Improved data set search, also from external sources 0 Data set download/upload and simplified meta-‐data defini.on 0 Seamless interoperability with popular open data repositories for data
and metadata impor.ng (e.g. CKAN portals) 0 Display of dataset provenance informa.on 0 Freedom of Informa.on Requests (i.e. data set request from data
publishers such as public authori.es)
The situa.on today
0 Open government data / PSI / data.gov sites: 0 Limited number of datasets 0 Majority of sites just provide a ‘click to download’ list 0 Majority of files in pdf, next most popular xls or csv (Excel) 0 Some in RDF 0 Majority have very poor metadata – at best CKAN/DC
0 Publicly funded research datasets 0 Very many datasets 0 Portal sites provide commonly more than just a list
0 Advanced processing facili.es 0 Majority of files in structured (commonly rela.onal database) format 0 Commonly with associated or linked textual files for descrip.on /
explana.on 0 Majority have good metadata – although commonly detailed and
domain-‐specific
Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data infrastructure
0 Bring together open government and publicly funded research dataset resources 0 With rich contextual metadata 0 From which generate discovery metadata 0 And which points to detailed, domain-‐specific metadata
0 Integrated tools 0 Google Refine 0 ScraperWiki 0 Data visualisa.on
0 Social networking services, such as: 0 Forma.on of end user groups/ communi.es 0 Comments and discussions on original or derived datasets 0 Approval/disapproval and ra.ng of datasets as a quality indicator 0 “Research Karma” to reward par.cipa.on and peer acceptance
Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data infrastructure
1. DISCOVERY(DC, eGMS…)
2. CONTEXT(CERIF)
3. DETAIL(SUBJECT OR TOPIC SPECIFIC)
Generate
Point to
Linked open data
Formal Information Systems
Figure 1: The Three-layer Metadta Architecture
6 Zuiderwijk, A., Jeffery, K., & Janssen, M. (2012). The potential of metadata for linked open data and its value for users and publishers. Journal of e-Democracy and Open Government, 4(2), 222-244.
Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data infrastructure7
Middleware API
ENGAGE UI
CERIF database
Database Connector
Java Middleware
Engage Metadata Back-‐end 2.0
Files
File Store API
Triplestore / RDF
CERIF to RDF
SPARQL API
CERIF to CKAN, eGMS, DCAT
CKAN, eGMS, DCAT export/API
Database 1Database 1Database
Database API
METADATA DATA
Detailed metadata
Discovery metadata
Contextual metadata
CKAN, eGMS, DCAT sources
CERIF XML
7 EuroCRIS. (2011). ENGAGE metadata back-end 2.0.
Agenda
0 Introduc.on – Anneke Zuiderwijk (10 min) 0 Presenta.on of open data infrastructures – Anneke Zuiderwijk
(10 min) 0 Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data
infrastructure – Keith Jeffery (15 min) 0 Demonstra.on of ENGAGE e-‐infrastructure – Anneke
Zuiderwijk (30 min) 0 Discussion – all (20 min)
Development plan
www.engagedata.eu
Development plan
Social media and ENGAGE
0 Use the ENGAGE pladorm for your open data needs! 0 Par.cipate in the ENGAGE-‐project and help us to improve the
open data infrastructure!
0 Register on the data pladorm: www.engagedata.eu
0 Join us on: 0 LinkedIn: ENGAGE eInfrastructures Project on Open Data
0 Facebook: engage.project
0 Twirer: engage_eu
0 Visit our project website: www.engage-‐project.eu
Agenda
0 Introduc.on – Anneke Zuiderwijk (10 min) 0 Presenta.on of open data infrastructures – Anneke Zuiderwijk
(10 min) 0 Background and architecture of ENGAGE open data
infrastructure – Keith Jeffery (15 min) 0 Demonstra.on of ENGAGE e-‐infrastructure – Anneke
Zuiderwijk (30 min) 0 Discussion – all (20 min)
Discussion
0 What is the value of exis.ng open data pladorms?
0 What is the value of ENGAGE? Advantages, disadvantages?
0 Which addi.onal features do (poten.al) users of open data want open data pladorms to have?
Ø Feedback will be used for further development of and improvements on the ENGAGE open data infrastructure
[email protected] [email protected]
http://www.engage-project.eu
Join Us
Thank you for your attention!