Re: CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 58, Issue 11
Locked
Re: CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 58, Issue 11
 
|
Please remove me off your email list. Thank you, Carol Charalambous Facilities Services Representative Asset Management Services 1151 Bronte Road Oakville, ON L6M 3L1 905.825.6000 x7241 -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of [hidden email] Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 11:29 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 58, Issue 11 Send CivicAccess-discuss mailing list submissions to [hidden email] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [hidden email] You can reach the person managing the list at [hidden email] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CivicAccess-discuss digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Evaluating Municipal Open Data Initiatives (David Eaves) 2. Re: Open Government Partnership and CanadianCivil Society (michael gurstein) 3. UK: Eight top tips for those stepping into data journalism (Tracey P. Lauriault) 4. Re: Open Government Partnership and CanadianCivil Society (James McKinney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 22:48:12 -0700 From: David Eaves <[hidden email]> To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Evaluating Municipal Open Data Initiatives Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Hi Liam, I've been talking to a few academics about this topic so happy to hop on the phone to chat - my email is [hidden email] cheers, dave > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] *On Behalf Of > *Liam Currie > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:35 AM > *To:* [hidden email] > *Subject:* [CivicAccess-discuss] Evaluating Municipal Open Data > Initiatives > > Hi everyone, I have been lurking here for a while now and I am > hoping that you can help me out. > > I am interested in evaluating Canadian municipal open data > initiatives as catalysts for open government and civic engagement. > Right now I am trying to develop a laundry list of evaluation > criteria in terms of a city's open data portal as well as any > other related engagement tools (discussion boards, blogs, > sponsored development sessions, etc.). > > Does anyone have any ideas about what would be useful to include > in such an evaluation? I am open and flexible and would love to > get some informed opinions. > > Somebody posted an article a few weeks back that evaluated > government open data sites in Europe which I found helpful, but > it was far more tech oriented than what I am after. This > (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2012489) paper > by Yu & Robinson that was posted a few months ago is one that I > really liked. If anyone can point me to more sources like this > I'd be very appreciative. > > Feel free to contact me at [hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]> > > Thanks, > -Liam Currie > > > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20120509/ 8624a19c/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 04:38:27 -0700 From: michael gurstein <[hidden email]> To: "'civicaccess discuss'" <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Open Government Partnership and CanadianCivil Society Message-ID: <383F9675DF3446D994C3DC2551A315FE@UserVAIO> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi James, I have a feeling that it might be a good idea for a broad coalition of those with an interest in discussing these areas to begin discussions well in advance of the time for undertaking these evaluations if only to find common ground on which to conduct such evaluations. At least that seems to be the case among several of the groups/individuals I've mentioned this to outside of those for example, represented on this list. M -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of James McKinney Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 8:12 PM To: civicaccess discuss Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]; [hidden email] Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Open Government Partnership and CanadianCivil Society I think for now these discussions are happening on this list https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/ogp-civil-society Once the timelines become clearer, there can certainly be a Canada-specific list to avoid flooding the main OGP Civil Society group. In the meantime, we need to wait and see what the government does. It's too early to start evaluating them on their commitments, since they've only just made them. On 2012-05-09, at 1:48 PM, michael gurstein wrote: I had the privilege of attending the Inaugural meeting of the Open Government Partnership in Brasilia in April as a researcher but in addition I was asked to contribute (participate on a panel) as a member of Civil Society. Among many observations that I came away with from the meeting were several concerning Civil Society and specifically the very significant role that Civil Society is being expected play in the on-going OGP, and the consequent need for CS in this sector to become effectively organized and structured at both the national and the global levels. Since the intention is that the OGP is a "member" organization, with a requirement on governments to ensure participation in all aspects of their OGD planning and implementation there is very considerable pressure for national civil societies to organize themselves into some sort of coherent body i.e. a body that is capable of acting as an effective interlocutor with government -- not necessarily speaking with one voice but at least being able to formulate a coherent response/intervention to government initiatives. It is already clear from the lead up to the Brasilia meeting, the meeting itself and the fall-out from the meeting that creating a framework out of which this coherent voice might come will not be an easy or uncontested process either globally or nationally. But just because it will be difficult doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done. For we CS in Canada, the pay-off could be significant as it would give us a voice and access to (the Federal) government as it develops its OGD policies and equally as it evolves its structures in response to the opportunities and risks that OGD presents. Given the very non or even "anti" "Open" policies of the current Federal government this "access" and legitimized/formal platform for comment and consultation is a not inconsiderable opportunity. On casual observation there are a number of streams (dare I say silos) currently in Canadian CS with an interest in Open Government Data--the folks around the civicaccess list, the very powerful and significant municipal data movement (and its champion the CCSD), the FOI folks, the open app/hackathon community, the community access community (Telecommunities Canada and others), the open democracy group and I'm sure I've missed many others and of course there are overlaps and double counting among all of these. I think it is not too early to be beginning a process of discussion among all of these groups in anticipation of the next meeting of the OGP which will be in London next year (I'm not sure if a date has been established). However, whatever that date, Canadian OGD CS has a number of tasks/opportunities in anticipation of that meeting including 1. developing a means to monitor and assess the commitments made by the Canadian government to the OGP in Brasilia 2. undertaking that monitoring and developing a means for reporting back on that monitoring 3. developing a common framework for Canadian CS in participating in the OGP meetings both nationally and internationally 4. and others such as for example developing a Canadian OGP declaration to match the global OGP declaration Perhaps others might want to comment on this note. If there is sufficient interest it might be useful to develop a separate electronic space (e-list?) for carrying this discussion forward or perhaps the civicaccess list is the proper venue for the discussion in which case others with an interest might wish to join the list. Comments, discussion etc.etc. Mike Gurstein (here speaking in a personal capacity and as a Board Member of Telecommunities Canada) _______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20120510/ 600b4280/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 09:34:46 -0400 From: "Tracey P. Lauriault" <[hidden email]> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> Subject: [CivicAccess-discuss] UK: Eight top tips for those stepping into data journalism Message-ID: <CAPT_w+=kFTH9uhu3U=v=sQQFjOBm0USUmLsarPkx=[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" http://www.journalism.co.uk/news-features/eight-top-tips-for-those-stepp ing-into-data-journalism/s5/a549130/ -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20120510/ 9c1a0c82/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 11:25:37 -0400 From: James McKinney <[hidden email]> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Open Government Partnership and CanadianCivil Society Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In that case, to answer your earlier question, I suppose others on this list should chime in as to whether or not civicaccess should host these discussions. For my part, I think it makes sense to start a new list. On 2012-05-10, at 7:38 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > Hi James, > > I have a feeling that it might be a good idea for a broad coalition of those with an interest in discussing these areas to begin discussions well in advance of the time for undertaking these evaluations if only to find common ground on which to conduct such evaluations. At least that seems to be the case among several of the groups/individuals I've mentioned this to outside of those for example, represented on this list. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of James > McKinney > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 8:12 PM > To: civicaccess discuss > Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]; [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Open Government Partnership and > CanadianCivil Society > > I think for now these discussions are happening on this list > https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/ogp-civil-society > > Once the timelines become clearer, there can certainly be a > > In the meantime, we need to wait and see what the government does. It's too early to start evaluating them on their commitments, since they've only just made them. > > On 2012-05-09, at 1:48 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > >> >> I had the privilege of attending the Inaugural meeting of the Open >> Government Partnership in Brasilia in April as a researcher but in >> addition I was asked to contribute (participate on a panel) as a >> member of Civil Society. >> >> Among many observations that I came away with from the meeting were >> several concerning Civil Society and specifically the very >> significant role that Civil Society is being expected play in the >> on-going OGP, and the consequent need for CS in this sector to become >> effectively organized and structured at both the national and the >> global levels. Since the intention is that the OGP is a "member" >> organization, with a requirement on governments to ensure >> participation in all aspects of their OGD planning and implementation >> there is very considerable pressure for national civil societies to >> organize themselves into some sort of coherent body i.e. a body that >> is capable of acting as an effective interlocutor with government -- >> not necessarily speaking with one voice but at least being able to formulate a coherent response/intervention to government initiatives. >> >> It is already clear from the lead up to the Brasilia meeting, the >> meeting itself and the fall-out from the meeting that creating a >> framework out of which this coherent voice might come will not be an >> easy or uncontested process either globally or nationally. But just >> because it will be difficult doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done. >> For we CS in Canada, the pay-off could be significant as it would >> give us a voice and access to (the Federal) government as it develops >> its OGD policies and equally as it evolves its structures in response to the opportunities and risks that OGD presents. >> >> Given the very non or even "anti" "Open" policies of the current >> Federal government this "access" and legitimized/formal platform for >> comment and consultation is a not inconsiderable opportunity. >> >> On casual observation there are a number of streams (dare I say >> silos) currently in Canadian CS with an interest in Open Government >> Data--the folks around the civicaccess list, the very powerful and >> significant municipal data movement (and its champion the CCSD), the >> FOI folks, the open app/hackathon community, the community access >> community (Telecommunities Canada and others), the open democracy >> group and I'm sure I've missed many others and of course there are >> overlaps and double counting among all of these. >> >> I think it is not too early to be beginning a process of discussion >> among all of these groups in anticipation of the next meeting of the >> OGP which will be in London next year (I'm not sure if a date has >> However, whatever that date, Canadian OGD CS has a number of >> tasks/opportunities in anticipation of that meeting including 1. >> developing a means to monitor and assess the commitments made by the >> Canadian government to the OGP in Brasilia 2. undertaking that >> monitoring and developing a means for reporting back on that >> monitoring 3. developing a common framework for Canadian CS in >> participating in the OGP meetings both nationally and internationally >> 4. and others such as for example developing a Canadian OGP >> declaration to match the global OGP declaration >> >> Perhaps others might want to comment on this note. >> >> If there is sufficient interest it might be useful to develop a >> separate electronic space (e-list?) for carrying this discussion >> forward or perhaps the civicaccess list is the proper venue for the >> discussion in which case others with an interest might wish to join the list. >> >> Comments, discussion etc.etc. >> >> Mike Gurstein >> (here speaking in a personal capacity and as a Board Member of >> Telecommunities Canada) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20120510/ 196e135a/attachment.html> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss End of CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 58, Issue 11 *************************************************** _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ This message, including any attachments, is privileged and intended only for the person(s) named above. This material may contain confidential or personal information which may be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act. Any other distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, fax or e-mail and permanently delete the original transmission from us, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you |
«
Return to CivicAccess
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |