It would seem to me, that it would be beneficial if open data cities produced the necessary data to enable the production of these types of indicators, in lieu of just a bunch of random datasets that a few people have deemed useful to them.
When I look at the OKN census, the Barometer and the G8 Open Data Charter, and a host of other open data like indicator systems, the list of data by which a nation is measured to be open or not so open, are not necessary socio-economic data that lead to sustainable cities, healthy cities, or liveable cities. The OECD report that was just released, mesures nations in multiple ways using a wide variety of data. If we went fishing for those data in our open data portals to create comperable city indicators, we would not be able to.
The FCM Quality of Life Indicators System for example tracks 10 major indicators that are broken into 110 variables requiring about 200+ datasets from over 50 government institutions across 24 cities. Open data portals do not contain those data either.
It is nice that near real time transit data are the number one ask, but that is because those data can be commercialized in some way, and yes it is true, that projects like Zone Cone do help alleaviate getting trapped in traffic which increases the well being of commuters, these data do not lead to lets say, apps to improve a city's environment.
In other words, it would be great to re-orient some of our asks toward data that can be used to inform public policy in myriad other ways.
http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=62436
Yes I know! Friggin' ISO is ....
_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
Locked
