Skip to main content

The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies: Workshop Summary (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

5. Achieving Fair and Open Access to PSI for Maximum Returns
Pages 17-24

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 17...
... In all countries the reactions from PSI holders to proposals for reuse vary from holder to holder. For example, the Environment Agency in the United Kingdom has stated that while it could create a list of the agency's PSI and make it available to potential users, such a move would cost money which may be better used in flood defenses.
Read the entire page →
From page 18...
... First, there are direct and indirect costs to the public sector, which are generally not measured. If efficiency improved in the public sector by only 1 percent as a result of free or improved access to the geospatial element of PSI (e.g., in the United Kingdom, the Ordnance Survey or the Met Office)
Read the entire page →
From page 19...
... This could certainly be a problem for the policy community with regard to the economic exploitation of information online. PARTICIPANT: I think the 2007 Power of Information report in the United Kingdom really has some very good examples of the big potential of networks, of new uses, and of matching up information.
Read the entire page →
From page 20...
... Is it really about going back to Parliament to debate this and getting them to fund the PSI activities out of a general purpose tax? Michael Nicholson said it would cost £1.25 per head in the United Kingdom to open up the data held by the Ordnance Survey.
Read the entire page →
From page 21...
... PARTICIPANT: Actually, there is very little hard statistical evidence to back up this assertion. PARTICIPANT: Well, there is absolute evidence that in the United Kingdom the cost of the organizations would go down if licensing were not a factor.
Read the entire page →
From page 22...
... Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that because of the way that the GI is published, there is no license required between governments, and anybody in the public services can reuse the shared data and information. So it would be very interesting to find out what the management costs savings have been from both sides, that is, both from the geographical mapping agency and also from other government bodies that do not have to enter into any sort of licensing mechanisms.
Read the entire page →
From page 23...
... If the reuser partly finances the production of data, then the reuser has a right to say something to the producer of the data about the quality, because they are bearing part of the cost. This negotiation has a cost, but it is also a way to bring together the data producers and service providers so that they can work together.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • psi holders
  • sector organizations
  • creative commons
  • service providers
  • information online

  • natural monopoly
  • pricing policies
  • sector information
  • public bodies
  • ordnance survey

  • public services
  • digital information
  • service provider
  • information automatically
  • data producers

  • data provider
  • existing information
  • value creation
  • commons attribution
  • commons license

  • finance ministry
  • fund public
  • public tasks
  • including public
  • france public

  • own public
  • data held
  • sector pricing
  • commons licensing
  • psi holder


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.