Aspects of NZDIMP not found in ODC

CF Cam Findlay Public Seen by 356

In phase 1 of the consultation we put together a handy comparison document that looked at which principles of the NZ Data and Information Management Principles (NZDIMP) were covered by the Open Data Charter (ODC) and where there were gaps in the NZDIMP.

It has been suggested through the public submissions that a reverse gap analysis be looked at too, that is, looking at what is missing from the ODC that is in the NZDIMP.

If anyone has looked over both the principles documents, the initial gap analysis and would like to let us know some of the aspects of NZDIMP that are missing from ODC and are valuable to retain, please comment here in this thread.

We'll work out the gaps together and then include them in an update of the analysis document. :thumbsup:


Cam Findlay Fri 2 Sep 2016 1:12AM

For one, we lose the explicitly named New Zealand policies (Privacy Act, OIA, NZGOAL etc) however the ODC does mention to "observe domestic laws..." which eludes to the policy context here in NZ.

Perhaps if we did adopt the charter, we'd need some guide on the operationalisation of the ODC that would name these particular policies in use? Thoughts?


Aaron McGlinchy Mon 5 Sep 2016 1:21AM

Another useful exercise I think would be to look at ODC (which is more comprehensive than NZDIMP) and identify aspects that would be generic core principles that all govt agencies should buy into, and recognise that other aspects may only be applicable at the higher government level (e.g. so individual organisations are not signing up to deliver upon things that they either cannot practically do, and/or that results in duplication of effort, or is simply not relevant to their situation...).

See also my comments at https://www.loomio.org/d/V84EyGBu/statistics-from-phase-1


Cam Findlay Mon 5 Sep 2016 3:37AM

@aaronmcglinchy cheers for the reply, so what you are saying is to look at having something more operational, where as the ODC is a more strategic level policy? :thumbsup:

Can you some suggestions of those aspects in the ODC you'd consider core and some examples of the aspects you think should be only applicable to higher government level as you suggest?


Aaron McGlinchy Sun 11 Sep 2016 11:14PM

OK, responding to @camfindlay re my previous comments about some aspects of ODC not being applicable 'at the coal face'. And prefacing this by saying that I actually have no problems with ODC per se it reads as a a perfectly fine set of principles for a Government to adopt. My concerns come in contrasting ODC with NZDIMP, and the implication that ODC could/should outright replace NZDIMP. A key thing to understand my concern is that Government organisations are "directed" (Ministries/Departments) or "encouraged" (e.g. CRIs) to follow/adopt NZDIMP. The content of NZDIMP is such that there aren't any/many practical impediments to doing this. However ODC is more all encompassing, so if there was a similar directive/encouragement to follow ODC (in full), then that raises issues e.g.:

Principles 1-3 are largely OK/generic. There are some fine details that could be an issue in some contexts e.g. CRIs walking a tight-rope between making all date freely available, and govt requiring to operate like a company and make profit. No registration to access data - ODC seems to assume registration is a barrier, however for some of our collections we may require (free) registration so we can keep tabs on usage (and thus report on value of us making data freely available), can undertake the engagement with users that ODC encourages...

This part of 3 is not something an individual organisations can take responsibility for:

"Ensure wide data reuse through awareness raising and improved citizen data literacy."

Principle 4: Comparable and interoperable

  • Data should be structured and standardised to allow comparison and interoperability across sectors, locations and time.
  • Implement Open Standards data formats and common identifiers when collecting or publishing open data.
  • Engage with domestic and global standards setting bodies to ensure new standards are interoperable.
  • Map and publicly share local standards and identifiers to emerging global standards.

We do some work on standards, but much of this sort of stuff would need a National lead on it, rather than devolving to individual organisations (each of which will have greater or lesser understanding and capability...).

Lots of P5-6 are high level/out of scope for individual organisations providing the data.

Principle 5: For improved governance and citizen engagement

  • Engagement and consultation with citizens helps government understand high demand data and improve data release prioritisation.
  • Anticorruption information is released as open data.
  • Provide training to increase capability of public servants to use open data for evidence based policy development.
  • Align proactive release of open data with government obligations to release on request through engaging with freedom of information community.
  • Engage with citizens and private sector to determine the data needed to effectively hold government accountable.
  • Protect those using open data to identify corruption or criticise government.

Principle 6: For inclusive development and innovation

  • Recognise the existence of the “digital divide” and limits on access and use of open data for marginalised people in society.
  • Government actively support innovation based on reuse of open data.
  • Encourage a richer open data ecosystem by empowering all sectors (citizens, businesses, academia, government employees) to release and innovate with valuable open data.
  • Engage with education sector to improve data literacy curriculum.
  • Share knowledge with other governments internationally and share technical expertise.
  • Carry out research on the social and economic impacts of open data.

So, if the Govt adopts ODC, I think they would need something sitting beneath that to give guidance to individual organisations as to what the govt expects of them (and govt would need to acknowledge that it is taking on some of the specific responsibilities (cannot just say to everyone 'do it'...)).


Jay Daley Sun 11 Sep 2016 11:44PM

Hi @aaronmcglinchy Your posts highlights to me one of the key differences between ODC and NZDIMP and why I believe the former should replace the latter - it's about the switch to a citizen-centric set of principles.

For example, with registration to receive data, I understand entirely your perspective that registration brings you benefits, but from a data user point of view it is a barrier for the following reasons:

  • The first issue is one of principle, why should I have to give any identifier to use that data? I don't need to accept a license, I don't need to have my usage agreed, in fact I have the right to access that data entirely anonymously.
  • The second is one of practicality, say I wish to automate access to the data and registration is required - does that mean I now need to get an API key to prove I've registered and what happens to the data around my access using that API key?

The ODC recognises that as a barrier because it takes a citizen-centric approach, which is so important for agencies to adopt regardless of what benefits they get from a more restrictive approach.


Jay Daley Sun 11 Sep 2016 11:52PM

Also @aaronmcglinchy your recognition that Principle 4 of the ODC may require a national lead in some areas of data interoperability is, to my mind, a significant benefit of the ODC because

  • Users of the data benefit by getting the data in a more joined up way so that they can look at it on the basis of the subject of the data regardless of the agency sources.

  • Agencies that publish data benefit as it makes relating their data to that of other agencies much easier.

  • A higher level of government benefits as it can now get a joined up picture of that related data across multiple agencies.


Aaron McGlinchy Mon 12 Sep 2016 12:33AM

I agree, establishment of a national lead in some areas would be a good thing.


Deleted User Thu 8 Sep 2016 11:24PM

@camfindlay1 I've set up a test polis page here https://pol.is/5htvcrxtu9 which you might want to try out. It's a much easier way to derive consensus from a broader range of people and preserve minority opinions (see http://docs.pol.is/welcome/Overview.html). For example some people might get turned off by reading long comments here on loomio and the amount of time it takes to get up to speed (I know I was!), but polis's simplicity can give people with just 1 second or 1 minute of time to contribute.

At the moment I've only got the first 2 principles from the ODC seeded, and with anonymous voting enabled for full open access, but you might want to control that, I'd be happy to admin that poll, but I reckon you and your team should handle the moderation/authentication aspects of it. Let me know if you need any help setting things up.


Cam Findlay Thu 8 Sep 2016 11:49PM

Thanks @weijileong appreciate you taking the time to set that up. Let's not get too caught up in tooling at this stage. What's important here is the people aspect of participation, dialogue and knowing where to go to engage. Fragmenting the conversation further might mean people get less opportunities to interact with each other (because they are spread across different tools). In saying that, if you'd like to drive a citizen lead polis space and get some meaningful data, you could feed this back to us as input (even use it to inform your discussions here on Loomio?).


Deleted User Fri 9 Sep 2016 12:02AM

I was thinking of polis as more of a supplementary role than as a competitor, and yes, it's something that can be an interesting side project for now. The actual discussions would still take place at loomio of course, but I think that any tool that reduces friction in participating will have a place in implementing democratic policy. On another note, there is also the element of scaling up. How would you summarize all the discussions if there were hundreds if not thousands of participants? Would love to hear more of people's thoughts on this.

Load More