You are browsing the archive for Press Release.

Sweden to adopt Ukraine’s procurement practices

- April 21, 2020 in Press Release, pressmeddelande

April 21, 2020 – Sweden is working on a potential project to launch an online platform with open data on procurement. As part of the joint project, Transparency International Ukraine will share experience of launching the Prozorro system in Ukraine and engaging the public in monitoring as it has been done with the DOZORRO community.

The OpenProcurement portal will be constructed based on the same model as the Prozorro public procurement system, which inspired this project, according to the organizers of Open Knowledge Sweden and DIGG. Full blog: https://ti-ukraine.org/en/news/sweden-to-adopt-ukraine-s-procurement-practices/

In the midst of corruption scandals, Sweden stands without key data

- March 19, 2020 in Press Release, pressmeddelande

March 19, 2020 – Sweden has no open datasets in key anti-corruption areas shows a study carried out by Open Knowledge Sweden. Sweden also ranks the lowest on open data release compared to other Nordic and Baltic countries, according to a report by the partner organisation Transparency International Latvia.

Sweden is perceived as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, ranking among top-5 on the Corruption Perceptions Index (2019). However, recent years have seen a spike in high-end cases of financial crime, abuse of power and conflict of interest in the allocation of public contracts. Our research suggests that corruption is thriving in different forms and at various levels of Swedish government, while the legal framework for political integrity is not up to international standards. A key area of concern is procurement, where the value of public purchases is estimated at about SEK 683 billion (EUR 64 billion or 1/6 of the Swedish GDP). Over time, procurement has become more international, the number of private providers of public services has grown and there is a greated labour mobility between private and public sector. At the same time, Sweden lacks a national database for public procurement advertisements and there is no authority that collects information on public procurement conducted in the country.

In the framework of their study, Open Knowledge Sweden has conducted research specifically on the challenges and opportunities for harnessing open data in five key political integrity areas (public procurement, beneficial ownership, lobbying, conflict of interest/asset disclosure and financing of political parties). Our findings show that Sweden has no open datasets in the five areas under study.

The research carried out in parallel by our partner organisation, Transparency International Latvia, reveals that other Nordic and Baltic countries are also lagging behind in opening data but, in comparison, Sweden ranks the lowest on data release.

These findings are in line with Sweden’s ranking on the OECD’s OURdata 2019 Index (Open-Useful-Reusable Government Data Index). Of the 33 countries assessed by OECD, Sweden ranks 32nd, being at the bottom both in terms of the amount of data and their accessibility. In Sweden, many public authorities are not aware of the importance of open data for transparency and lack the necessary expertise to release the data, while a comprehensive open data strategy and the leadership that could drive the issue forward in Sweden is yet to emerge.

In our report, we suggest the government to develop a coherent strategy, to support civic initiatives in the area, and to invite the emergence of clear strategy and leadership in this area. We also propose a set of concrete recommendations to both public officials and the non-governmental ecosystem. Given Sweden’s strong digital competencies and human capital, as well as the openness of the Swedish democracy, there are good opportunities to make progress in this area.

Link to our report: https://sites.google.com/view/oksweden/publications

The study was carried out within the framework of the project “Building an Anti-Corruption Data Ecosystem in the Baltics and the Nordic Countries” with the financial support of the Nordic Council of Ministers. The content of the study is the responsibility of the project leaders and does not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Nordic Council of Ministers.

Contact:

Alina Ostling, co-chair of Open Knowledge Sweden: alinost@gmail.com

Open data and the fight against corruption in Latvia, Sweden and Finland

- December 7, 2018 in Press Release, pressmeddelande

December 7, 2018

This blog has been crossposted from the Open Knowledge Foundation blog.

Transparency International Latvia, in collaboration with Open Knowledge Sweden and Open Knowledge Finland, has published a new study on open data and anti-corruption policies in Latvia, Sweden and Finland, showing that governments in the three countries could do more to leverage the potential of open data for anti-corruption policies and public accountability.

The study comprises an overview report summarising the overall findings and identifying opportunities for knowledge transfer and regional cooperation as well as specific reports assessing to what extent governments in Latvia, Sweden and Finland have implemented internationally agreed-upon open data principles as part of their anti-corruption regime, providing recommendations for further improvement at the national level.

The study is the outcome of a project funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers. The aim of the project was to gain a better understanding of how Nordic and Baltic countries are performing in terms of integration of anti-corruption and open data agendas, in order to identify opportunities for knowledge transfer and promote further Nordic cooperation in this field. The study assessed whether 10 key anti-corruption datasets in Latvia, Finland and Sweden are in line with international open data standards. The datasets considered in the frame of the study are:

  • Lobbying register

  • Company register

  • Beneficial ownership register

  • Public officials’ directories

  • Government Budget

  • Government spending

  • Public procurement register

  • Political Financing register

  • Parliament’s Voting Records

  • Land Register

Within this respect, Sweden has made only 3 of 10 key anti-corruption datasets available online and fully in line with open data standards, whereas Finland have achieved to make 8 of these datasets available online, six of which are fully in line with open data standards. As for Latvia, 5 of them have been found to be available and in line with the standards. When it comes to scoring these three countries with regard to anti-corruption datasets, in Sweden, the situation is more problematic compared to other two countries. It has the lowest score, 5.3 out of 9, while Finland and Latvia have scored 6.1 and 6.0, respectively. Similarly, there are some signals that transparency in Sweden has been worsening in recent years despite its long tradition of efficiency and transparency in the public administration, good governance and rule of law as well as being in the top-10 of the Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) for several years.

The problem in Sweden stems from the fact that the government has had to cope with the high decentralization of the Swedish public administration, which seems to have resulted in little awareness of open data policies and practices and their potential for anti-corruption among public officials. Thus, engaging the new agency for digitalisation, Agency for Digital Government (DIGG), and all other authorities involved in open data could be a solution to develop a centralised, simple, and shared open data policy. Sweden should also take legal measures to formally enshrine open data principles in PSI (Public Sector Information) law such as requiring that all publicly released information be made ‘open by default’ and under an ‘open license’.

The situation in Finland and Latvia is more promising. In Finland, a vibrant tech-oriented civil society in the country has played a key role in promoting initiatives for the application of open data for public integrity in a number of areas, including lobbying and transparency of government resources.

As for Latvia, in recent years, it has made considerable progress in implementing open data policies, and the government has actively sought to release data for increasing public accountability in a number of areas such as public procurement and state-owned enterprises. However, the report finds that much of this data is still not available in open, machine-readable formats – making it difficult for users to download and operate with the data.

Overall, in all three countries it seems that there has been little integration of open data in the agenda of anti-corruption authorities, especially with regard to capacity building. Trainings, awareness-raising and guidelines have been implemented for both open data and anti-corruption; nonetheless, these themes seem not to be interlinked within the public sector. The report also emphasizes the lack of government-funded studies and thematic reviews on the use of open data in fighting corruption. This applies both to the national and regional level.

On the other hand, there is also a considerable potential for cooperation among Nordic-Baltic countries in the use of open data for public integrity, both in terms of knowledge transfer and implementation of common policies. While Nordic countries are among the most technologically advanced in the world and have shown the way with regard to government openness and trust in public institutions, the Baltic countries are among the fastest-growing economies in Europe, with a great potential for digital innovation and development of open data tools.

Such cooperation among the three states would be easier in the presence of networks of “tech-oriented” civil society organisations and technology associations, as well as the framework of cooperation with authorities with the common goal of promoting and developing innovation strategies and tools based in open data.

Openness of academic publishers evaluated for the first time

- January 31, 2018 in academic publishing, arviointi, avoimuus, avoin tiede, benchmark, elsevier, Featured, Finished projects, nodealnoreview, Open Science, openness, Press Release, Project report, tiedekustantajien avoimuus, tiedon hinta, tiedote

Open access to research publications and the transparency of research are cornerstones of the scientific progress. Supporting openness and open science is an essential goal in Finnish and international science policies. However, there is a lot room for improvement in the practices and policies of key international academic publishers, finds the “Opening Academic Publishing” report, published today. The report, commissioned by the Open science and research initiative (ATT) of the Ministry of Education and Culture, evaluated the implementation of open science principles in the practices and policies of key international publishers and developed a systematic evaluation framework, or scorecard,  for benchmarking. The largest publishers have significant impact on the research and innovation fields, but systematic tools for assessing openness have not been previously available. The published report highlights key areas and improves the possibilities to monitor and develop the practices for open science and academic publishing. The evaluation project was implemented by Open Knowledge Finland with Oxford Research and it studied nine large academic publishers in detail. The score for openness ranged between 30-70% as compared to the target level. There are clear differences between the publishers and some publishers score far below the target levels. The report highlights key development areas for the publishers to improve on.

Evaluating openness is crucial for understanding the impact and costs of research

The publishers can adopt many ways to support open science, and the evaluation strived for covering central areas of those principles. The evaluation employs seven key factors, which were scored on a scale from 0-3. The publishers were evaluated by investigating the fraction and costs of open access publishing; license policy; the support for self-archiving, open citation and text and data mining, as well as the accessibility of information on open access publishing. There was variation between the publishers, yet each of the publishers scored below the target level in more than one of the seven key factors.   The lack of transparency and variation in pricing schemes made the evaluation more difficult. The practices of the publishers differ within their journal portfolio, and for example across disciplines on pricing and licenses. This needs more scrutiny in following studies. Some of the newcomer publishers apply principles of open science across their offering, not only individual publications. This is a practice we would like to see also with the more traditional publishers”, states academy researcher Leo Lahti, who has been coordinating this report. “Some of the more recently-formed publishers apply principles of open science across their portfolio of publications, not only in individual publications. This is a practice we would like to see also with the more traditional publishers”, states academy researcher Leo Lahti, who has been coordinating this report. The contributions to the realisation of open science principles are reflected in the pricing for license agreements, however, they potentially also increase the effectiveness and impact of research at the same time. The scorecard introduced in the evaluation enables a systematic comparison between publishers with regard to their support for openness. “The openness of license agreements, to which those negotiating them have already been committed to in Finland, will make it easier to compare openness of publishers and the total costs of open access publishing. This will help improve the negotiating position of research institutes and result in notable savings”, concludes Lahti.   Download the Opening Academic Publishing report here http://avointiede.fi/keskeiset-julkaisut Direct URL https://avointiede.fi/documents/10864/12232/OPENING+ACADEMIC+PUBLISHING+.pdf/a4358f81-88cf-4915-92db-88335092c992   Further information Leo Lahti, Docent / Academy Research Fellow University of Turku & Open Knowledge Finland ry. leo.lahti@iki.fi / +358 40 5655 872 http://www.iki.fi/Leo.Lahti Teemu Ropponen, Executive Director, Open Knowledge Finland ry. teemu.ropponen@okf.fi / +358 40 5255153 Anna Björk, analyst Oxford Research Oy anna.bjork@oxfordresearch.fi / +358 44 203 2013 Open Knowledge Finland promotes free access and reuse of knowledge and advocates for a transparent and inclusive society in Finland. It is the local chapter of The Open Knowledge Network, which already operates in over 30 countries. Open Knowledge Finland was registered as a Finnish non-profit association in 2012. The Open Science Working Group received the Finnish Ministry of Culture and Education award for openness on 2017 for its persistent work in advancing open science. Web: www.okf.fi Oxford Research is a specialized knowledge company with offices in Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Latvia. OR combines academic competence with strategic vision and communication, supporting decision making in such areas as knowledge and innovation systems, development of municipalities and regions, and social, educational, and labour market policies. Web: www.oxfordresearch.fi The post Openness of academic publishers evaluated for the first time appeared first on Open Knowledge Finland.

Tiedekustantajien avoimuus kartoitettiin ensimmäistä kertaa

- January 31, 2018 in academic publishing, arviointi, avoimuus, avoin tiede, benchmark, elsevier, Featured, Finished projects, nodealnoreview, Open Science, openness, Press Release, tiedekustantajien avoimuus, tiedon hinta, tiedote

TIEDOTE Julkaisuvapaa 31.1.2018 Tutkimustiedon avoin saatavuus ja tutkimuksen läpinäkyvyys ovat tieteellisen prosessin kulmakiviä, ja tieteen avoimuuden tukeminen on keskeinen tavoite niin kotimaisissa kuin kansainvälisissä tiedelinjauksissa. Suurten kansainvälisten tiedekustantajien toimissa avoimen tieteen edistämiseksi on kuitenkin vielä runsaasti parantamisen varaa, arvioi tuore “Opening Academic Publishing” -selvitys. Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön Avoin tiede ja tutkimus -hankkeen tilaamassa selvityksessä kartoitettiin avoimen tieteen periaatteita kansainvälisten tiedekustantajien toiminnassa ja kehitettiin systemaattiset kriteerit kustantajien avoimuuden vertailuun. Suuret kustantajat vaikuttavat voimakkaasti alan tutkimus- ja innovaatiotoimintaan, mutta systemaattisia välineitä avoimuuden arviointiin ei ole ollut aiemmin saatavissa. Tuore selvitys kiinnittää huomiota avoimuuden keskeisiin osa-alueisiin, sekä parantaa mahdollisuuksia järjestelmällisesti seurata ja kehittää avoimen tieteen kannalta keskeisiä toimintamalleja. Selvityksen toteuttivat Open Knowledge Finland ry ja Oxford Research Oy ja se koski yhdeksää suurta tiedekustantajaa. Kustantajien avoimuus vaihteli 30-70% välillä tavoitetasoon verrattuna. Erot kustantajien välillä ovat huomattavia ja jäivät usein jälkeen tavoitetasosta. Selvitys auttaa tunnistamaan avoimuuden kannalta tärkeitä kehityskohteita kaikkien kustantajien toiminnassa.

Avoimuuden arviointi merkittävää tutkimuksen vaikuttavuudelle ja kustannuksille

Kustantajien toiminta voi tukea avoimen tieteen periaatteita monella tavalla, ja selvityksessä pyrittiin kattamaan avoimen tieteen kannalta merkittävimmät osa-alueet.  Selvityksen rungon muodostavat seitsemän kriteeriä, joita arvioitiin neliportaisella asteikolla: Kustantajia arvioitiin mittaamalla avoimen julkaisemisen osuutta ja hintaa, lisenssiehtoja; rinnakkaistallennukseen, avoimiin viittauksiin ja tiedonlouhintaan osoitettua tukea, sekä avoimuuden arvioinnin kannalta oleellisten tietojen saatavuutta. Lähes kaikilla arvioiduilla osa-alueilla havaittiin puutteita kustantajasta riippuen. Hinnoittelun kirjavuus ja läpinäkyvyyden puute vaikeuttivat arviointia. Suurten tiedekustantajien käytännöt myös vaihtelevat lehtikohtaisesti ja aloittain esimerkiksi avointen lisenssien ja hinnan osalta. Tähän tulee kiinnittää huomiota tulevissa selvityksissä. “Osa uudemmista kustantajista soveltaa avoimen tieteen periaatteita koko toimintaansa yksittäisten lehtien sijasta. Tämän toivoisi yleistyvän myös perinteisempien julkaisijoiden toiminnassa”, toteaa selvitystyötä koordinoinut akatemiatutkija Leo Lahti. Panostukset avoimen tieteen periaatteisiin heijastuvat lisenssisopimusten hintoihin, mutta voivat samanaikaisesti lisätä tutkimuksen tehokkuutta ja vaikuttavuutta. Arviointiasteikko mahdollistaa nyt tältä osin kustantajien systemaattisen vertailun. “Lisenssisopimusten avoimuus, johon neuvottelijat ovat Suomessakin jo sitoutuneet, tulee entisestään helpottamaan kustantajien avoimuuden ja kokonaiskustannusten vertailua, parantaisi tutkimuslaitosten neuvotteluasemaa ja voisi tuoda merkittäviä säästöjä“, Lahti arvioi. Raportti “Opening academic publishing” on ladattavissa osoitteesta: http://avointiede.fi/keskeiset-julkaisut Suora URL: https://avointiede.fi/documents/10864/12232/OPENING+ACADEMIC+PUBLISHING+.pdf/a4358f81-88cf-4915-92db-88335092c992 Lisätietoja selvityksestä: Leo Lahti, Dosentti / Akatemiatutkija Turun yliopisto & Open Knowledge Finland ry. leo.lahti@iki.fi / +358 40 5655 872 http://www.iki.fi/Leo.Lahti Teemu Ropponen, toiminnanjohtaja, Open Knowledge Finland ry. teemu.ropponen@okf.fi / +358 40 5255153 Anna Björk, YTT, analyytikko Oxford Research Oy anna.bjork@oxfordresearch.fi / +358 44 203 2013 Open Knowledge Finland ry. (OKFI) on vuoden 2012 lopussa perustettu yhteisölähtöinen voittoa tavoittelematon organisaatio, joka toimii osana kansainvälistä Open Knowledge -verkostoa. Yhdistys edistää tiedon avoimuutta, avoimen tiedon hyödyntämistä, sekä avoimen yhteiskunnan kehittymistä. Yhdistyksen Open Science -työryhmä palkittiin opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön avoimuuspalkinnolla avoimen tieteen ansiokkaasta edistämisestä vuonna 2017. Web: www.okf.fi Oxford Research Oy on pohjoismainen, vuonna 1995 perustettu yritys, joka toimii Suomen lisäksi Tanskassa, Norjassa, Ruotsissa ja Latviassa. Yrityksen toiminnan ydintä on akateemisen osaamisen, strategisen näkemyksen ja viestinnän yhdistäminen. Oxford Research Oy tuottaa päätöksentekoa tukevia selvityksiä mm. ministeriöille, aluehallinnoille, asiantuntijaorganisaatioille, kunnille ja kaupungeille. Web: www.oxfordresearch.fi Avoin tiede ja tutkimus -hanke 2014–2017 oli opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön hanke tiedon saatavuuden ja avoimen tieteen edistämiseksi. Tavoitteena oli, että vuoteen 2017 mennessä Suomi nousee yhdeksi johtavista maista tieteen ja tutkimuksen avoimuudessa ja että avoimen tieteen mahdollisuudet hyödynnetään laajasti yhteiskunnassa. Lisäksi tavoitteena oli edistää tieteen ja tutkimuksen luotettavuutta, tukea avoimen tieteen ja tutkimuksen toimintatavan sisäistämistä tutkijayhteisössä sekä lisätä tutkimuksen ja tieteen yhteiskunnallista ja sosiaalista vaikuttavuutta. Web: www.avointiede.fi The post Tiedekustantajien avoimuus kartoitettiin ensimmäistä kertaa appeared first on Open Knowledge Finland.

Tiedekustantajien avoimuus kartoitettiin ensimmäistä kertaa

- January 31, 2018 in academic publishing, arviointi, avoimuus, avoin tiede, benchmark, elsevier, Featured, Finished projects, nodealnoreview, Open Science, openness, Press Release, tiedekustantajien avoimuus, tiedon hinta, tiedote

TIEDOTE Julkaisuvapaa 31.1.2018 Tutkimustiedon avoin saatavuus ja tutkimuksen läpinäkyvyys ovat tieteellisen prosessin kulmakiviä, ja tieteen avoimuuden tukeminen on keskeinen tavoite niin kotimaisissa kuin kansainvälisissä tiedelinjauksissa. Suurten kansainvälisten tiedekustantajien toimissa avoimen tieteen edistämiseksi on kuitenkin vielä runsaasti parantamisen varaa, arvioi tuore “Opening Academic Publishing” -selvitys. Opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön Avoin tiede ja tutkimus -hankkeen tilaamassa selvityksessä kartoitettiin avoimen tieteen periaatteita kansainvälisten tiedekustantajien toiminnassa ja kehitettiin systemaattiset kriteerit kustantajien avoimuuden vertailuun. Suuret kustantajat vaikuttavat voimakkaasti alan tutkimus- ja innovaatiotoimintaan, mutta systemaattisia välineitä avoimuuden arviointiin ei ole ollut aiemmin saatavissa. Tuore selvitys kiinnittää huomiota avoimuuden keskeisiin osa-alueisiin, sekä parantaa mahdollisuuksia järjestelmällisesti seurata ja kehittää avoimen tieteen kannalta keskeisiä toimintamalleja. Selvityksen toteuttivat Open Knowledge Finland ry ja Oxford Research Oy ja se koski yhdeksää suurta tiedekustantajaa. Kustantajien avoimuus vaihteli 30-70% välillä tavoitetasoon verrattuna. Erot kustantajien välillä ovat huomattavia ja jäivät usein jälkeen tavoitetasosta. Selvitys auttaa tunnistamaan avoimuuden kannalta tärkeitä kehityskohteita kaikkien kustantajien toiminnassa.

Avoimuuden arviointi merkittävää tutkimuksen vaikuttavuudelle ja kustannuksille

Kustantajien toiminta voi tukea avoimen tieteen periaatteita monella tavalla, ja selvityksessä pyrittiin kattamaan avoimen tieteen kannalta merkittävimmät osa-alueet.  Selvityksen rungon muodostavat seitsemän kriteeriä, joita arvioitiin neliportaisella asteikolla: Kustantajia arvioitiin mittaamalla avoimen julkaisemisen osuutta ja hintaa, lisenssiehtoja; rinnakkaistallennukseen, avoimiin viittauksiin ja tiedonlouhintaan osoitettua tukea, sekä avoimuuden arvioinnin kannalta oleellisten tietojen saatavuutta. Lähes kaikilla arvioiduilla osa-alueilla havaittiin puutteita kustantajasta riippuen. Hinnoittelun kirjavuus ja läpinäkyvyyden puute vaikeuttivat arviointia. Suurten tiedekustantajien käytännöt myös vaihtelevat lehtikohtaisesti ja aloittain esimerkiksi avointen lisenssien ja hinnan osalta. Tähän tulee kiinnittää huomiota tulevissa selvityksissä. “Osa uudemmista kustantajista soveltaa avoimen tieteen periaatteita koko toimintaansa yksittäisten lehtien sijasta. Tämän toivoisi yleistyvän myös perinteisempien julkaisijoiden toiminnassa”, toteaa selvitystyötä koordinoinut akatemiatutkija Leo Lahti. Panostukset avoimen tieteen periaatteisiin heijastuvat lisenssisopimusten hintoihin, mutta voivat samanaikaisesti lisätä tutkimuksen tehokkuutta ja vaikuttavuutta. Arviointiasteikko mahdollistaa nyt tältä osin kustantajien systemaattisen vertailun. “Lisenssisopimusten avoimuus, johon neuvottelijat ovat Suomessakin jo sitoutuneet, tulee entisestään helpottamaan kustantajien avoimuuden ja kokonaiskustannusten vertailua, parantaisi tutkimuslaitosten neuvotteluasemaa ja voisi tuoda merkittäviä säästöjä“, Lahti arvioi. Raportti “Opening academic publishing” on ladattavissa osoitteesta: http://avointiede.fi/keskeiset-julkaisut Suora URL: https://avointiede.fi/documents/10864/12232/OPENING+ACADEMIC+PUBLISHING+.pdf/a4358f81-88cf-4915-92db-88335092c992 Lisätietoja selvityksestä: Leo Lahti, Dosentti / Akatemiatutkija Turun yliopisto & Open Knowledge Finland ry. leo.lahti@iki.fi / +358 40 5655 872 http://www.iki.fi/Leo.Lahti Teemu Ropponen, toiminnanjohtaja, Open Knowledge Finland ry. teemu.ropponen@okf.fi / +358 40 5255153 Anna Björk, YTT, analyytikko Oxford Research Oy anna.bjork@oxfordresearch.fi / +358 44 203 2013 Open Knowledge Finland ry. (OKFI) on vuoden 2012 lopussa perustettu yhteisölähtöinen voittoa tavoittelematon organisaatio, joka toimii osana kansainvälistä Open Knowledge -verkostoa. Yhdistys edistää tiedon avoimuutta, avoimen tiedon hyödyntämistä, sekä avoimen yhteiskunnan kehittymistä. Yhdistyksen Open Science -työryhmä palkittiin opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön avoimuuspalkinnolla avoimen tieteen ansiokkaasta edistämisestä vuonna 2017. Web: www.okf.fi Oxford Research Oy on pohjoismainen, vuonna 1995 perustettu yritys, joka toimii Suomen lisäksi Tanskassa, Norjassa, Ruotsissa ja Latviassa. Yrityksen toiminnan ydintä on akateemisen osaamisen, strategisen näkemyksen ja viestinnän yhdistäminen. Oxford Research Oy tuottaa päätöksentekoa tukevia selvityksiä mm. ministeriöille, aluehallinnoille, asiantuntijaorganisaatioille, kunnille ja kaupungeille. Web: www.oxfordresearch.fi Avoin tiede ja tutkimus -hanke 2014–2017 oli opetus- ja kulttuuriministeriön hanke tiedon saatavuuden ja avoimen tieteen edistämiseksi. Tavoitteena oli, että vuoteen 2017 mennessä Suomi nousee yhdeksi johtavista maista tieteen ja tutkimuksen avoimuudessa ja että avoimen tieteen mahdollisuudet hyödynnetään laajasti yhteiskunnassa. Lisäksi tavoitteena oli edistää tieteen ja tutkimuksen luotettavuutta, tukea avoimen tieteen ja tutkimuksen toimintatavan sisäistämistä tutkijayhteisössä sekä lisätä tutkimuksen ja tieteen yhteiskunnallista ja sosiaalista vaikuttavuutta. Web: www.avointiede.fi The post Tiedekustantajien avoimuus kartoitettiin ensimmäistä kertaa appeared first on Open Knowledge Finland.

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is Live

- December 9, 2015 in News, Press Release

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is out now. Each year, governments make more data available in an open format. The Global Open Data Index tracks whether this data is actually released in a way that is accessible to citizens, media and civil society and is unique in crowd-sourcing its survey of open data releases around the world. Each year the open data community and the Open Knowledge Network produces an annual ranking of countries, peer reviewed by local open data experts. You can read the press release below. We are excited to announce that we have published the third annual Global Open Data Index. This year’s Index showed impressive gains from non-OECD countries with Taiwan topping the Index and Colombia and Uruguay breaking into the top ten at four and seven respectively. Overall, the Index evaluated 122 places and 1586 datasets and determined that only 9%, or 156 datasets, were both technically and legally open. The Index ranks countries based on the availability and accessibility of data in thirteen key categories, including government spending, election results, procurement, and pollution levels. Over the summer, we held a public consultation, which saw contributions from individuals within the open data community as well as from key civil society organisations across an array of sectors. As a result of this consultation, we expanded the 2015 Index to include public procurement data, water quality data, land ownership data and weather data; we also decided to removed transport timetables due to the difficulties faced when comparing transport system data globally. Open Knowledge International began to systematically track the release of open data by national governments in 2013 with the objective of measuring if governments were releasing the key datasets of high social and democratic value as open data. That enables us to better understand the current state of play and in turn work with civil society actors to address the gaps in data release. Over the course of the last three years, the Global Open Data Index has become more than just a benchmark – we noticed that governments began to use the Index as a reference to inform their open data priorities and civil society actors began to use the Index advocacy tool to encourage governments to improve their performance in releasing key datasets. Furthermore, indices such as the Global Open Data Index are not without their challenges. The Index measures the technical and legal openness of datasets deemed to be of critical democratic and social value – it does not measure the openness of a given government. It should be clear that the release of a few key datasets is not a sufficient measure of the openness of a government. The blurring of lines between open data and open government is nothing new and has been hotly debated by civil society groups and transparency organisations since the sharp rise in popularity of open data policies over the last decade. odi-600 While the goal of the Index has never been to measure the openness of governments, we have been working in collaborations with others to make the index more than just a benchmark of data release. This year, by collaborating with topical experts across an array of sectors, we were able to improve our dataset category definitions to ensure that we are measuring data that civil society groups require rather than simply the data that governments happen to be collecting. Next year we will be doubling down on this effort to work in collaboration with topical experts to go beyond a “baseline” of reference datasets which are widely held to be important, to tracking the release of datasets deemed critical by the civil society groups working in a given field. This effort is both experimental and ambitious. Measuring open data is not trivial and we are keenly aware of the balance that needs to be struck between international comparability and local context and we will continue to work to get this balance right. Join us on the Index forum to join these future discussions.

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is Live

- December 9, 2015 in News, Press Release

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is out now. Each year, governments make more data available in an open format. The Global Open Data Index tracks whether this data is actually released in a way that is accessible to citizens, media and civil society and is unique in crowd-sourcing its survey of open data releases around the world. Each year the open data community and the Open Knowledge Network produces an annual ranking of countries, peer reviewed by local open data experts. You can read the press release below. We are excited to announce that we have published the third annual Global Open Data Index. This year’s Index showed impressive gains from non-OECD countries with Taiwan topping the Index and Colombia and Uruguay breaking into the top ten at four and seven respectively. Overall, the Index evaluated 122 places and 1586 datasets and determined that only 9%, or 156 datasets, were both technically and legally open. The Index ranks countries based on the availability and accessibility of data in thirteen key categories, including government spending, election results, procurement, and pollution levels. Over the summer, we held a public consultation, which saw contributions from individuals within the open data community as well as from key civil society organisations across an array of sectors. As a result of this consultation, we expanded the 2015 Index to include public procurement data, water quality data, land ownership data and weather data; we also decided to removed transport timetables due to the difficulties faced when comparing transport system data globally. Open Knowledge International began to systematically track the release of open data by national governments in 2013 with the objective of measuring if governments were releasing the key datasets of high social and democratic value as open data. That enables us to better understand the current state of play and in turn work with civil society actors to address the gaps in data release. Over the course of the last three years, the Global Open Data Index has become more than just a benchmark – we noticed that governments began to use the Index as a reference to inform their open data priorities and civil society actors began to use the Index advocacy tool to encourage governments to improve their performance in releasing key datasets. Furthermore, indices such as the Global Open Data Index are not without their challenges. The Index measures the technical and legal openness of datasets deemed to be of critical democratic and social value – it does not measure the openness of a given government. It should be clear that the release of a few key datasets is not a sufficient measure of the openness of a government. The blurring of lines between open data and open government is nothing new and has been hotly debated by civil society groups and transparency organisations since the sharp rise in popularity of open data policies over the last decade. odi-600 While the goal of the Index has never been to measure the openness of governments, we have been working in collaborations with others to make the index more than just a benchmark of data release. This year, by collaborating with topical experts across an array of sectors, we were able to improve our dataset category definitions to ensure that we are measuring data that civil society groups require rather than simply the data that governments happen to be collecting. Next year we will be doubling down on this effort to work in collaboration with topical experts to go beyond a “baseline” of reference datasets which are widely held to be important, to tracking the release of datasets deemed critical by the civil society groups working in a given field. This effort is both experimental and ambitious. Measuring open data is not trivial and we are keenly aware of the balance that needs to be struck between international comparability and local context and we will continue to work to get this balance right. Join us on the Index forum to join these future discussions.

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is Live

- December 9, 2015 in News, Press Release

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is out now. Each year, governments make more data available in an open format. The Global Open Data Index tracks whether this data is actually released in a way that is accessible to citizens, media and civil society and is unique in crowd-sourcing its survey of open data releases around the world. Each year the open data community and the Open Knowledge Network produces an annual ranking of countries, peer reviewed by local open data experts. You can read the press release below. We are excited to announce that we have published the third annual Global Open Data Index. This year’s Index showed impressive gains from non-OECD countries with Taiwan topping the Index and Colombia and Uruguay breaking into the top ten at four and seven respectively. Overall, the Index evaluated 122 places and 1586 datasets and determined that only 9%, or 156 datasets, were both technically and legally open. The Index ranks countries based on the availability and accessibility of data in thirteen key categories, including government spending, election results, procurement, and pollution levels. Over the summer, we held a public consultation, which saw contributions from individuals within the open data community as well as from key civil society organisations across an array of sectors. As a result of this consultation, we expanded the 2015 Index to include public procurement data, water quality data, land ownership data and weather data; we also decided to removed transport timetables due to the difficulties faced when comparing transport system data globally. Open Knowledge International began to systematically track the release of open data by national governments in 2013 with the objective of measuring if governments were releasing the key datasets of high social and democratic value as open data. That enables us to better understand the current state of play and in turn work with civil society actors to address the gaps in data release. Over the course of the last three years, the Global Open Data Index has become more than just a benchmark – we noticed that governments began to use the Index as a reference to inform their open data priorities and civil society actors began to use the Index advocacy tool to encourage governments to improve their performance in releasing key datasets. Furthermore, indices such as the Global Open Data Index are not without their challenges. The Index measures the technical and legal openness of datasets deemed to be of critical democratic and social value – it does not measure the openness of a given government. It should be clear that the release of a few key datasets is not a sufficient measure of the openness of a government. The blurring of lines between open data and open government is nothing new and has been hotly debated by civil society groups and transparency organisations since the sharp rise in popularity of open data policies over the last decade. odi-600 While the goal of the Index has never been to measure the openness of governments, we have been working in collaborations with others to make the index more than just a benchmark of data release. This year, by collaborating with topical experts across an array of sectors, we were able to improve our dataset category definitions to ensure that we are measuring data that civil society groups require rather than simply the data that governments happen to be collecting. Next year we will be doubling down on this effort to work in collaboration with topical experts to go beyond a “baseline” of reference datasets which are widely held to be important, to tracking the release of datasets deemed critical by the civil society groups working in a given field. This effort is both experimental and ambitious. Measuring open data is not trivial and we are keenly aware of the balance that needs to be struck between international comparability and local context and we will continue to work to get this balance right. Join us on the Index forum to join these future discussions.

The Global Open Data Index for 2015 is Live

- December 9, 2015 in News, Press Release