argument for charging
Locked
 
|
hi, I would like to create a simplified yet detailed graphic visually demonstrating (read: implicitly ridiculing) this cost recovery logic/ argument. any data/info subscribers have would be highly assistive. thanks, Morgen On 2010-05-22, at 12:00, [hidden email] wrote: > 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: The open data dilemma (Glen Newton) > 2. Re: The open data dilemma (john whelan) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 12:47:58 -0400 > From: Glen Newton <[hidden email]> > To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> > Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] The open data dilemma > Message-ID: > <[hidden email]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Hi Tracey, > > My mistake: I assumed that no one needed to be convinced on this list > that Open Government Data (real Open Data, not like the > 'almost-but-not-really-open-data as released by the city of Ottawa > recently: see also 'Free Beer') at granularities useful for > communities, NGOs and individuals to make decisions in and about their > communities. > >> Bref, the NGOs I am talking about need public demographic and >> administrative >> data, and they need those in formats they can use, with >> unrestricted easy to >> understand licensing, and at not cost. They also need to find >> those data >> and they need the boundaries for the different administrative units >> standardized into a framework (e.g. health districts, census, >> wards, federal >> electoral boundaries, etc.). These are the data I am talking about. > > Yes, that StatsCan (There, I've named them!) sells its data to > Canadians (with an extremely restrictive license) is absolute opposite > of Open Government Data and something I find offensive. I worked at > NRCan in the early 90s and railed against the selling of > geo-referenced data to the public, and over a number of years we have > seen the release of these data sets for free, with proper a Open Data > license[1]. I am hoping that a similar effort to change policy at > StatsCan will eventually take hold. > > -glen > [1]http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/licence.jsp > > On 21 May 2010 12:18, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Many of the NGOs have the tools they require to work with the data >> in house, >> although not all have the Geo software (Ted on the list can talk >> about those >> challenges in Ontario) the issue is the cost of the data, the time >> it takes >> to negotiate for data and the licensing, the grief in finding those >> data and >> the HR to use the tools. >> >> OSM is generally not the tool of choice for the NGOs I am talking >> about >> since they already have street network files from the feds, they >> are doing >> data analysis and not just descriptive statistical? >> representations.? Also >> many of the groups? are just starting to learn to do geo analysis.? >> And when >> they do, often the licenses preclude them from sharing. >> >> In addition, most of the community research groups are doing data >> analysis >> and then the data representation of those analyzes, and those >> representations (mostly but not always not very fancy ones) are >> normally in >> the form of reports. There is not that much 'webby' stuff, except >> for the >> big kids like Amnesty and GreenPeace, the local planning councils >> generally >> do not have access to large international pools of funds to do that >> work, >> also the resources to do that work in a sustainable way are not >> always >> available.? A couple of groups are doing some web mapping. >> >> Bref, the NGOs I am talking about need public demographic and >> administrative >> data, and they need those in formats they can use, with >> unrestricted easy to >> understand licensing, and at not cost.? They also need to find >> those data >> and they need the boundaries for the different administrative units >> standardized into a framework (e.g. health districts, census, >> wards, federal >> electoral boundaries, etc.).? These are the data I am talking about. >> >> That is why with open data we are not quite there yet as we are not >> thinking >> in those terms, as there are very different groups at the table.? >> With time >> I hope to see more bridging. >> >> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Glen Newton >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> There are open source tools for some of the technology parts of this >>> problem: >>> >>> SAS, SPSS --> R[1] >>> data mining tools --> Pentaho[2], WEKA[3], RapidMiner[4] >>> >>> I use all of these tools for data mining, analysis, visualization, >>> transformation, clustering, dimensionality reduction, etc. >>> >>> -Glen >>> http://zzzoot.blogspot.com >>> >>> [1]http://www.r-project.org/ >>> [2]http://www.pentaho.com/ >>> [3]http://www.r-project.org/ >>> [4]http://rapid-i.com/content/view/10/69/lang,en/ >>> >>> >>> On 21 May 2010 07:41, john whelan <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> I think its more complex.? To get the most out of the data you >>>> need the >>>> data >>>> mining tools which is what Walmart uses.? You also need big >>>> databases >>>> that >>>> include a lot of information about points of interest.? SAS and >>>> SPSS >>>> will >>>> work but they are expensive.? At the other end you need to make it >>>> easier >>>> for end users to access the data.? Web apps only work if you can >>>> find >>>> the >>>> web site and have Internet access. >>>> >>>> Recently I've been looking at Maperitive a PC based tool that can >>>> process >>>> OpenStreetMap (OSM) format data and render it.? I've built a >>>> couple of >>>> .bat >>>> files that will fire up Maperitive rendering a particular area >>>> showing >>>> selective points of interest such as children's playgrounds etc >>>> so they >>>> stand out.? So basically click on an icon on the desktop and up >>>> pops the >>>> map.? It can be made to work in French as well displaying French >>>> street >>>> names.? It looks as if it should be possible to right click the >>>> icon on >>>> the >>>> map and see the tag data as can be done with the web based >>>> version of >>>> OpenStreetMap and a couple of other tools.? So hours of opening >>>> etc.? It >>>> needs the data from somewhere but that could be a DVD or the hard >>>> drive >>>> at >>>> the library. >>>> >>>> The big problem at the moment is getting the data into OSM, both >>>> resource >>>> wise and the license on the data.? Once its there then I think >>>> you'll >>>> see >>>> more interesting uses start to happen.? We can have areas by the >>>> way and >>>> you >>>> can tag the areas with data.? Copy the data from the OSM POI tags >>>> into a >>>> relational database (MYSQL?) and you can start to do some of the >>>> things >>>> you >>>> can do in SAS but at a much cheaper cost. >>>> >>>> Cheerio John >>>> >>>> On 20 May 2010 12:12, Michael Lenczner <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> My thoughts on this is that it is just too early and that it will >>>>> come. But education, or conscientization, along the lines of what >>>>> you're doing, Tracey - building bridges between techies and the >>>>> community sector needs - is what is required. ?Thanks for >>>>> keeping the >>>>> doors open. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, communication on the side of community groups / policy >>>>> advocates and academics could be improved also. ?Developers >>>>> aren't the >>>>> only people that need to reach out. ?There's no reason why the >>>>> people >>>>> doing projects like this can't also build nifty iPhone apps. >>>>> http://sites.google.com/site/enviropol1/ >>>>> >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> relevant story >>>>> >>>>> Sask. developer builds apps for charity - May 10, 2010 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/05/10/sk-iphone-applications-charity-hackathon.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault >>>>> <[hidden email]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The open data dilemma >>>>>>> Where are the gains of Toronto's open data? >>>>>>> By Joshua Errett >>>>>>> http://www.nowtoronto.com/daily/story.cfm?content=175064 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would add a 4th issue to this article, and that is the fact >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> initiatives are too app & developer driven/targeted and there >>>>>>> has >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> yet >>>>>>> been the leap into the data using communities such as social >>>>>>> planning >>>>>>> councils, united ways, civil society groups, neighbourhood >>>>>>> associations, >>>>>>> poverty groups etc.? who actually use public data and public >>>>>>> administrative >>>>>>> data for social policy of evidence based decision making.? It >>>>>>> is as >>>>>>> if >>>>>>> there >>>>>>> are two clearly distinct demographics/groups that use data and >>>>>>> there >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> little or no overlap. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Last week for instance I attended one of the 4 day session of >>>>>>> intergovernmental, FCM and CCSD meeting on community access to >>>>>>> data, >>>>>>> and not >>>>>>> one app person or developer was there.? I go to the Hackfest or >>>>>>> Change >>>>>>> Camp >>>>>>> in Ottawa and none of the aforementioned community members are >>>>>>> there. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> community groups are not that interested in an iphone app >>>>>>> about bus >>>>>>> schedules, they are interested in ensuring the poor can afford >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> get >>>>>>> onto >>>>>>> the bus in the first place. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have always worked on access to public data for the community >>>>>>> decision >>>>>>> making aspects, for groups to be at the decision making table >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> right >>>>>>> information in their hands to argue for good policy for the most >>>>>>> vulnerable >>>>>>> in our societies.? The Open Data groups have missed that.? The >>>>>>> closest >>>>>>> I saw >>>>>>> to that was the play group finding idea at the Ottawa >>>>>>> Hackfest, the >>>>>>> green >>>>>>> space alliance app and the access to mp or councilor voting >>>>>>> apps. >>>>>>> They >>>>>>> were >>>>>>> about making information transparent and helping families and >>>>>>> saving >>>>>>> parks. >>>>>>> I understand that apps that inform me about which Canal >>>>>>> entrances >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> open >>>>>>> or the where the good restaurants are, are fun and useful for >>>>>>> some, >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> work on those apps could lead to skill or code that could be >>>>>>> used in >>>>>>> other >>>>>>> unintended ways.? Concurrently, I would love to see app >>>>>>> developers >>>>>>> work >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> civil society groups to help people afford to go to the good >>>>>>> restaurants or >>>>>>> demonstrate a need for disabled access to the Canal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am not sure how to go about it, if you have ideas let me know. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Tracey P. Lauriault >>>>>>> 613-234-2805 >>>>>>> https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Tracey P. Lauriault >>>>>> 613-234-2805 >>>>>> https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> http://michaellenczner.ca >>>>> http://twitter.com/mlenc >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> - >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >> >> >> -- >> Tracey P. Lauriault >> 613-234-2805 >> https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss >> > > > > -- > > - > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 19:12:31 -0400 > From: john whelan <[hidden email]> > To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]> > Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] The open data dilemma > Message-ID: > <[hidden email]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >> >>> Bref, the NGOs I am talking about need public demographic and >> administrative >>> data, and they need those in formats they can use, with >>> unrestricted easy >> to >>> understand licensing, and at not cost. They also need to find >>> those data >>> and they need the boundaries for the different administrative units >>> standardized into a framework (e.g. health districts, census, wards, >> federal >>> electoral boundaries, etc.). These are the data I am talking about. >> >> Yes, that StatsCan (There, I've named them!) sells its data to >> Canadians (with an extremely restrictive license) is absolute >> opposite >> of Open Government Data and something I find offensive. I worked at >> NRCan in the early 90s and railed against the selling of >> geo-referenced data to the public, and over a number of years we have >> seen the release of these data sets for free, with proper a Open Data >> license[1]. I am hoping that a similar effort to change policy at >> StatsCan will eventually take hold. >> >> -glen >> >> > I worked at Stats for about ten years before I retired. The corporate > culture is cost recovery. Basically the organisation consists of > lots of > surveys, each survey has a project manager whose performance is > basically > judged on managing the money. They are very reluctant to share data > unless > they get a share of the profits from the new survey. The culture has > advantages and disadvantages, give the project managers a new > cheaper way to > process their data and you don't have to sell it past the first > one. The > rest come pounding on the door to know when they can switch. The > disadvantage is the data you are after for free will go free over the > project managers dead bodies. > > Forget the official OSM database for the moment, based on my work with > databases, my professional opinion is it isn't it isn't reliable > enough for > what the NGOs want. However it does have a tool set and people have > spent > time building scripts to import data and export. It uses XML tags > to make > it easy to transform the data. I think what the NGOs need is some > standardised processes and procedures to make the existing data > easier and > cheaper to use. The census data, wards, etc are all "places" in OSM > terms. > They can overlap and have data tags. PCs these days can have > terabytes of > disk attached, quad core processors and with the nVidia Tesla GPU > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_Tesla as well that gives them more > processing > power than many old mainframes. If we can show a couple of decent > projects > then I think it will become easier to get the data released with the > licenses required in a format that can be processed. > > However recognise that I'm of a technical bent so others are > probably better > at presenting the case. I can be rather blunt sometimes. > > Cheerio John > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20100521/1937eb47/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss > > End of CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 34, Issue 19 > *************************************************** |
|
|
How would you fund Stats Canada? Remember that more than 50% of its income comes from outside sources such as MacDonalds wanting to know the best location for their next store etc. If don't don't provide another source of income then you've just cut more than half of Stats Canada. They may not think this is in their best interests and have some very good specialists at presenting data to support their point of view.
Cheerio John On 22 May 2010 12:13, Morgen Peers <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Re: argument for charging
|
|
Discussing cost recovery is really important.
StatCan does not need to be the target but should be used as an example of the outcome Treasury Board policies on revolving funds & cost recovery in the bureaucracy. The pressure should be on the Treasury Board and Cabinet. In addition, StatCan is an Industry portfolio, therefore the industry minister should also be a target. If StatCan were funded properly it would not have to recoup costs. Morgen, I have some stuff kicking around that might help, and it would be good if we could learn more about how to mine Treasury Board cost accounts online. Those would tell us about revenues and maybe about costs, but perhaps at the level of granularity we would like. Here are some the reports for StatCan (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/about-apercu/reports2-rapports2-eng.htm). Is there anyone on the list who knows how to mine these documents and who can read gov speak accounting? StatCan in its last program review proposed to improve efficiencies in some areas in order to make CANSIM (http://cansim2.statcan.gc.ca/cgi-win/CNSMCGI.PGM?LANG=Eng&Dir-Rep=CII/&CNSM-Fi=CII/CII_1-eng.htm) for free. The Harper government thanked them for the efficiencies and turned down their proposal to disseminate these data at no cost to Canadians. The Census is a national moment for us, it is the one of the few times where all Canadians are contacted by the government, and it is a key nation managing project, and its yield belongs to all of us and we should all have access to it. We do, but that access is cost prohibitive. StatCan started to release community profiles (http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-591/index.cfm?Lang=E). But those are not helpful to do analysis in an easy way. It is however a useful information source and a start. Also we need to recall that it was the Mulroney government that cut Statistics Canada's budget by $100 million dollars in the mid 80s and was going to cancel the quinquennial 1986 Census. The Statistic Act and the constitution prevented him and the Tories from doing so. It was the mid 80s where we saw everything at StatCan go up for sale and has been since. The target is higher than StatCan, it is Treasury Board and sitting government in Cabinet. The Auditor General should also investigate the cost of cost recovery. For instance, how much does it cost to market, account, manage royalties, monitor licenses, all the procurements paper work that spins into action each time data are purchased at all government levels in Canada, including between and among federal departments, versus the revenue generated. Revenue is tracked but not the cost of generating that revenue. Is it worth it? I also heard that the Treasury Board quashed an internal government initiative led by officials at NRCan, Environment Can and StatCan who were developing a data.gc.ca. Treasury Board apparently claimed that this was their jurisdiction and that it was not the business of these other departments to take this on. Yet it is these Departments who have the expertise to do this work. Bref, pressure should be on the Treasury Board and Cabinet. StatCan is an example of an agency that could do so much more if it were properly funded. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM, john whelan <[hidden email]> wrote: How would you fund Stats Canada? Remember that more than 50% of its income comes from outside sources such as MacDonalds wanting to know the best location for their next store etc. If don't don't provide another source of income then you've just cut more than half of Stats Canada. They may not think this is in their best interests and have some very good specialists at presenting data to support their point of view. -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
|
|
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> wrote: The target is higher than StatCan, it is Treasury Board and sitting government in Cabinet. The Auditor General should also investigate the cost of cost recovery. For instance, how much does it cost to market, account, manage royalties, monitor licenses, all the procurements paper work that spins into action each time data are purchased at all government levels in Canada, including between and among federal departments, versus the revenue generated. Revenue is tracked but not the cost of generating that revenue. Is it worth it? I like this way of framing the issue, and it's a natural for the AG to investigate. Is the cost recovery accounting actually accurate? Another important element is economic and strategic: how much benefit could we expect from having this data publicly available? I'd be surprised if the tax revenue didn't increase enough to cover the shortfall - if there even is one.
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM, john whelan <[hidden email]> wrote: How would you fund Stats Canada? Remember that more than 50% of its income comes from outside sources such as MacDonalds wanting to know the best location for their next store etc. If don't don't provide another source of income then you've just cut more than half of Stats Canada. They may not think this is in their best interests and have some very good specialists at presenting data to support their point of view. -- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault _______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
|
|
In reply to this post by john whelan
Dear John,
I do agree with your observation: 1. even countries eager to adopt open data, do require years to adapt their funding regime. Especially in times tight public budgets. 2. Some statutory registers include up to 30 per cent false or inaccurate data. Decreasing public funding would not facilitate that situation. The basic challenge in my mind is that most eGovernment action programmes were based on NPM and lacked any coherent data policy regime. kind regards, Gerhard At 18:31 22.05.2010, you wrote: How would you fund Stats Canada? Remember that more than 50% of its income comes from outside sources such as MacDonalds wanting to know the best location for their next store etc. If don't don't provide another source of income then you've just cut more than half of Stats Canada. They may not think this is in their best interests and have some very good specialists at presenting data to support their point of view. |
|
|
On Sat, May 22, 2010 1:58 pm, Content Research wrote: > > The basic challenge in my mind is that most > eGovernment action programmes were based on NPM > and lacked any coherent data policy regime. Please expand the NPM acronym. -- Catherine Roy http://www.catherine-roy.net |
|
|
In reply to this post by Tracey P. Lauriault
> StatCan is an example of an agency that could do so much more if it were properly funded.
It actually collects more data now than it used to when fully funded by government. It never interprets data since it tries to be neutral to government policy and embarrassing the hand that feeds you isn't a particularly intelligent thing to do. However when you say it cost recovers that is exactly what it does. It has a number of overhead costs so the more surveys it can do the lower the cost per additional survey. The funding cuts were interesting in that other agencies, charities etc needed our data and had additional questions they wanted asking so they paid Statcan to run more questions etc. On the big surveys the costs can run $10,000 per minute of survey question. You probably get a lot more value from Stats Canada being funded as it is than you would if it was totally funded by vote from the government. Currently it is recognised as being independent. Basically if some one wants a survey doing Stats Can will do it. The results might well embarrass the government into taking some action which is one reason why many charities use Stats Can. In the UK where Parliament totally funds the stats over a ten year period there were thirty different definitions of who was unemployed. Each definition had showed fewer unemployed persons. If you are a charity try asking one of the UK government agencies to run some questions for you. Basically the surveys are directed. I'm quite suprised at some of the data they have released. For example a list of all the houses in Canada. That's currently being imported into OSM at the moment. It used to cost Stats about 2 million dollars a year to keep it up to date and the list is the backbone of selecting a random sample. Also the commercial users of Stat Can data are more likely to find that some how more costs are assigned to their survey. For example a number of lap tops may need replacing or software licenses purchased, the time charged for the interviewer may well include the time to travel to ask the questions. For charities some how the laps will do fine, the interviewer time charged will probably be the incremental time to ask an additional question. The cost to the charities is less than the cost of running their own survey and the "brand" name of Stats Can helps authenticate the results. Oh and the project managers running the surveys for commercial clients don't try quite so hard to cost recover internally from other surveys. Which lowers costs once more. Currently its trusted, for example I seem to recall one question was have you taken cocaine in the last x days. The answers correlated surprisingly well with cocaine seized by police forces on the street. One other thing it does is sell data that has been rehashed, or data mined. The original data may well have been released publicly but it adds value by combining it in different ways using to a large part SAS whilst still retaining privacy. If you free the data and make Stat Can dependent on government funding probably 70% of the current surveys wouldn't get done, and that hurts everyone. The overheads of a team of six people dedicated to computer security for example would mean that cutting its income by 50% would mean the same overheads split over fewer surveys. Better to try to get the 25% of the data that Stats is prepared to release than close a good chunk of Stats Can down. Cheerio John |
Re: argument for charging
|
|
Interesting points John;
Statistics Canada is an excellent agency. But much important research is not done as the data are unaffordable. What does it cost us as a society to have only large organizations, the private sector and the government with the resources to do research, and what research are those organizations not doing? Further government cannot lobby government, so how do advocates have the data they need for evidence based decision making? Who is doing the hard research on the big issues? On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 7:54 PM, john whelan <[hidden email]> wrote:
-- Tracey P. Lauriault 613-234-2805 https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault |
|
|
In reply to this post by Morgen Peers
Good points, Tracey.
A couple of thoughts: Any data collected by the Canadian taxpayer should be freely available to all. Why should McDonald's be able to pay for data to find the best location for them, while a poor social service agency looking for similar information be denied? Or a startup Canadian entrepreneur also looking for a fast food location, for that matter. If Statistics Canada is selling their services to do survey research, are they using the Stats Canada name? From my perspective, this is completely inappropriate. best, Heather Morrison On 22-May-10, at 8:49 PM, Tracey P. Lauriault wrote: > Interesting points John; > > Statistics Canada is an excellent agency. > > But much important research is not done as the data are unaffordable. > > What does it cost us as a society to have only large organizations, > the private sector and the government with the resources to do > research, and what research are those organizations not doing? > Further government cannot lobby government, so how do advocates have > the data they need for evidence based decision making? Who is doing > the hard research on the big issues? > > On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 7:54 PM, john whelan <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > StatCan is an example of an agency that could do so much more if > it were properly funded. > > It actually collects more data now than it used to when fully funded > by government. It never interprets data since it tries to be > neutral to government policy and embarrassing the hand that feeds > you isn't a particularly intelligent thing to do. > > However when you say it cost recovers that is exactly what it does. > It has a number of overhead costs so the more surveys it can do the > lower the cost per additional survey. > > The funding cuts were interesting in that other agencies, charities > etc needed our data and had additional questions they wanted asking > so they paid Statcan to run more questions etc. On the big surveys > the costs can run $10,000 per minute of survey question. > > You probably get a lot more value from Stats Canada being funded as > it is than you would if it was totally funded by vote from the > government. Currently it is recognised as being independent. > Basically if some one wants a survey doing Stats Can will do it. > The results might well embarrass the government into taking some > action which is one reason why many charities use Stats Can. In the > UK where Parliament totally funds the stats over a ten year period > there were thirty different definitions of who was unemployed. Each > definition had showed fewer unemployed persons. If you are a > charity try asking one of the UK government agencies to run some > questions for you. Basically the surveys are directed. > > I'm quite suprised at some of the data they have released. For > example a list of all the houses in Canada. That's currently being > imported into OSM at the moment. It used to cost Stats about 2 > million dollars a year to keep it up to date and the list is the > backbone of selecting a random sample. > > Also the commercial users of Stat Can data are more likely to find > that some how more costs are assigned to their survey. For example > a number of lap tops may need replacing or software licenses > purchased, the time charged for the interviewer may well include the > time to travel to ask the questions. For charities some how the > laps will do fine, the interviewer time charged will probably be the > incremental time to ask an additional question. The cost to the > charities is less than the cost of running their own survey and the > "brand" name of Stats Can helps authenticate the results. Oh and > the project managers running the surveys for commercial clients > don't try quite so hard to cost recover internally from other > surveys. Which lowers costs once more. > > Currently its trusted, for example I seem to recall one question was > have you taken cocaine in the last x days. The answers correlated > surprisingly well with cocaine seized by police forces on the street. > > One other thing it does is sell data that has been rehashed, or data > mined. The original data may well have been released publicly but > it adds value by combining it in different ways using to a large > part SAS whilst still retaining privacy. > > If you free the data and make Stat Can dependent on government > funding probably 70% of the current surveys wouldn't get done, and > that hurts everyone. The overheads of a team of six people > dedicated to computer security for example would mean that cutting > its income by 50% would mean the same overheads split over fewer > surveys. Better to try to get the 25% of the data that Stats is > prepared to release than close a good chunk of Stats Can down. > > Cheerio John > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss > > > > -- > Tracey P. Lauriault > 613-234-2805 > https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault > > _______________________________________________ > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
|
|
In reply to this post by Tracey P. Lauriault
Yes that's definitely the point I was trying to make earlier. I'm not sure if my message got through even. I was trying to say that nobody was doing the hard research on the big and sometimes hidden issues. Sure, stats canada is great for getting easy uncontroversial info that people are willing to share freely, people who are in their list that is. But who's delving into the deeper issues, the ones that could make or break this society yet aren't even on the surface for public debate? There is only one person I know of.
Cheers, ~D On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> wrote: Interesting points John; |
«
Return to CivicAccess
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |