1 / 40

ePSI plus Thematic Network: Towards the 2008 review

funded by e Content Plus. ePSI plus Thematic Network: Towards the 2008 review. Chris Corbin ePSI plus Analyst Oxford, UK, 12 th November 2007 UK Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information Annual seminar: Taking Public Sector Information Seriously. ePSI plus - Presentation structure.

cullen
Télécharger la présentation

ePSI plus Thematic Network: Towards the 2008 review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. funded by eContentPlus ePSIplus Thematic Network:Towards the 2008 review Chris Corbin ePSIplus Analyst Oxford, UK, 12th November 2007 UK Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information Annual seminar: Taking Public Sector Information Seriously

  2. ePSIplus - Presentation structure • Brief overview of the ePSIplus Thematic Network • How ePSIplus supports the EC review of Directive 2003/98 • Europe - PSI Directive implementation status report (12 November 2007) • The way forward • Summary & conclusions www.ePSIplus.net

  3. 1: ePSIplus - Purpose The ePSIplus Thematic Network: • Supports the implementation of the European Directive on PSI re-use. • Facilitates the major opportunities for business to develop value added products and services based on PSI. • The network will be active for 30 months*. • Cover all Member (EU, EEA, EFTA) and candidate states. • Covers all PSI domains. • Will focus on five major themes. * Commenced on the 1st September 2006 and will be operational through to 28th February 2009. (which covers the period leading up to the PSI Directive review in 2008 by the European Parliament.) Has now been operational for 14 months and during that time has established network links with Australia, Canada, Southeast Asia and the OECD. That is the topic is a global one not just European or national. The unpaid network Champions. www.ePSIplus.net

  4. 1: ePSIplus - Major themes 1. Legal and regulatory progress and impact (including implementation of the Directive) 2. Public sector organisation and culture change (including compliance with the Directive) 3. Encouraging PSI re-use business 4. The financial impact of the Directive: pricing and charging (including impact on public sector costs and budget) 5. Information management, standards and data quality www.ePSIplus.net

  5. 1: ePSIplus - Meetings - Thematic priorities 1 Network kick off meeting held in Prague, 30/31 October 2006 15 Thematic cross-border meetings (3 per thematic area) • Legal & Regulation theme • Meeting 1: 16 February 2007, Hague, Netherlands (Report published) • Meeting 2: 10 - 11 September 2007, Paphos, Cyprus • Meeting 3: Slovenia • Public Sector Organisation theme • Meeting 1: 11 April 2007, Prague, Czech Republic (Report published) • Meeting 2: 8 October 2007, Bratislava, Republic of Slovakia • Meeting 3: ? • Encouraging PSI re-use business theme • Meeting 1: 31 August 2007, Copenhagen, Denmark • Meeting 2: 19 October 2007, Brussels, Belgium • Meeting 3: ? • Pricing impact theme • Meeting 1: 19 - 20 April 2007, Helsinki, Finland (Report published) • Meeting 2: 1 - 2 November 2007, London, UK • Meeting 3: April 2008, To be arranged • Standards theme • Meeting 1: 5 July 2007, London, UK (Report published) • Meeting 2: 26 - 27 November 2007, Riga, Latvia • Meeting 3: Italy All the materials from the meetings are available on the ePSIplus web site Red - means the meeting has taken place or is taking place www.ePSIplus.net

  6. 1: ePSIplus - Meetings - National Accumulative attendance: 386 35 National, Federal and Cross-border meetings • Cyprus 20 February 2007 (Report published) • France 14 June 2007 (Report published) • Iceland 5 September 2007 • Netherlands 27 September 2007 • Finland 2 October 2007 • Ireland 25 October 2007 • UK 30 October 2007 • Slovenia 7 November 2007 • Hungary 21 November 2007 • Germany 6 December 2007 • Belgium 11 December 2007 • Czech Republic 23 January 2008 • Latvia 25 January 2008 • Malta 8 February 2008 • Austria 20 February 2008 Final Conference (May 2008, Brussels) All the materials from the meetings are available on the ePSIplus web site Red - means the meeting has taken place or is taking place www.ePSIplus.net

  7. The meeting Setting the scene Sampling experiences (gathering evidence) Considering Comparing Concluding Draft QA Publish Meeting report 1. ePSIplus Meetings: The process Thematic meetings completed: 9 out of 15 National meetings completed: 8 out of 35 Assigned ePSIplus Analyst Assigned ePSIplus Analyst Accumulative Total Accumulative Total 85 Presentations 63 Presentations 303 experts 386 experts • Combined accumulative total: • - 148 presentations • 689 experts attended meetings • By end of project estimate 2600 Assigned ePSIplus Analyst Experts that attended meeting ePSIplus - One stop shop to PSI The evidence base (web site) www.ePSIplus.net

  8. 1: ePSIplus - Publications - Quarterly update Quarterly Update (Newsletter) available on the ePSIplus web site www.ePSIplus.net

  9. 1: ePSIplus - The One Stop Shop to PSI Live: 27.09.06 Home page Total number of news items posted: 525 www.ePSIplus.net Objective: To become the first port of call for information on PSI re-use

  10. 1: ePSIplus - Encouraging PSI re-use business • Current categories • Aeronautics (2) • Companies & Finances (3) • Energy (3) • Land & Property (1) • Law & Regulation (4) • Public tenders (2) • Traffic & Transport (5) • Weather & Environment (6) • Target 150 products www.ePSIplus.net

  11. 1: ePSIplus - Summary Assess and report on the impact of the Re-use PSI Directive. Demonstrate (through the network) the improved understanding of re-use of PSI across Europe Report and propose recommendations for the PSI Directive Review. www.ePSIplus.net

  12. funded by eContentPlus Presentation section 2 How ePSIplus supports the EC review of Directive 2003/98

  13. 2: ePSIplus supports EC Directive 2006/111/EC ePSIplus MEPSIR Political Review ePSINet + ePSINetCee Estimate as to when all EU27 will have Transposed the PSI Directive We are here! EU PSI Directive (broad) 1.07.05 Member States comply 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSI directive came into force 31.12.03 EC Info Soc monitoring via contracts and projects such as ePSIplus Started in 1987 may achieve its objectives by 2017: 30 Years! www.ePSIplus.net

  14. ePSIplus thematic network (active) ePSIplus EP Day 2: ePSIplus and the PSI Directive review Purpose of Review: Has the Directive 2003/98 had the desired impact? European PSI Association Annual Review of Lisbon Strategy Report: Political statement? Annual Review of Lisbon Strategy Summer Recess EC Commissioned Sector studies EU Co-decision process ePSIplus & EC Conference Contract Awarded EC Online Consultation EC Analysis of Consultation EC Communication European Commission Meteorological sector study European Council Legal sector study European Parliament Geographic Information sector study July 2007 Jan 2008 April 2008 July 2008 Oct 2008 Jan 2009 EU Elections May 2009 www.ePSIplus.net

  15. funded by eContentPlus Presentation section 3 Europe - PSI Directive implementation status report (As at 12 November 2007)

  16. 3: The European Union 490 Million people Multi-lingual (23+ Languages) Multi-cultural 900,000+ public sector organisation’s (Employs 50+ million people) 25 million SME’s (Employs 75+ million people) Euro Zone (2007) www.ePSIplus.net

  17. 3: Establishing the PSI framework Status as at 12th November 2007 Year MS Transposed 2003 15 12 2004 25 10 2007 27 2 Total 27 24 EFTA 2007 4 1 Grand Total 31 25 Current prediction: January 2008 - 27 July 2008 - 28 www.ePSIplus.net

  18. 3: Establishing the PSI framework Number Percentage 28 months www.ePSIplus.net

  19. Stage 1 Re-use PSI EU Co-Decision Process 5.06.02 31.12.03 19 Months 1.07.05 18 Months Transposition EU27 = 46+ Months Stage 2 Compliance Member States Member State Public Sector compliance Stage 3 28+ months Time to Reach Critical Mass Impact on Current PSI re-users Stage 4 3: Establishing the PSI framework European Parliament, Commission, Council Review July 2008 www.ePSIplus.net

  20. Public Body 1 Public Body 1+z 3:PSI Directive Transposition process (Open loop) EU MS Federal (x) Local (y) Member State 1 The diffusion effect Member State 2 Directive 2003/98/EC Sensor: The Re-user (PSI) Harmonisation achieved through: EU reviews, Complaints, Court Cases Member State 3 27+(1*x)….+(1*y) Variants of the Directive Issues: Methods of reducing variance. Lack of EU enforcement. Member State 27 Cause The democratic process lag! The harmonisation process lag! www.ePSIplus.net

  21. 3: Establishing the PSI framework www.ePSIplus.net

  22. 3: Establishing the PSI framework www.ePSIplus.net

  23. 3: ePSIplus - Scorecard Maximum score for Legal Theme is 20 www.ePSIplus.net

  24. ePSIplus Scorecard Theme 1 Transposition Implementation Support Awareness Enforcement 3: ePSIplus scorecard www.ePSIplus.net

  25. 3: UK timeline Govt. Responds To CUPI & PoI 25.06.07 HMT Study Public Sector lag: Between 15 to 20 years PoI Report CUPI Report ePSIplus 1.07.05 UK Transposed Political Review 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 PSI directive came into force 31.12.03 www.ePSIplus.net

  26. funded by eContentPlus Possible ways forward to meet PSI Vision (Objective) Presentation - section 4

  27. 4: PSI Directive - the way forward Principle 1 Directive 2003/98 is the minimum level of harmonisation. Member States may if they wish go beyond the requirements of the Directive. There is evidence that a number of Member States have gone beyond the requirements of the Directive and a number are now moving to do so in the area of charging. These tend to be the smaller Member States. www.ePSIplus.net

  28. 4: PSI Directive - the way forward • Objective 1 • To support any recommendations for improving the implementation and enforcement of the framework requires evidence. The ePSIplus Thematic Network is one source of such evidence but there are other sources. Once collated the evidence needs to be categorised as to whether the evidence is only from one Member State or is similar across a number of Member States. Where the evidence indicates a problem exists is there evidence that demonstrates that this is not the case else where? Are there examples of good practice - within Europe and globally? Is the good practice portable? • Objective 2 • If the evidence shows that some form of action is needed to improve the implementation and enforcement of the framework, then any recommendation for action needs to: • Improve the implementation and enforcement of the framework in the shortest time frame possible. • Be at the appropriate level. E.g. European Union, Member State or below. www.ePSIplus.net

  29. 4: PSI Directive - the way forward • Consideration 1 • Deciding whether to amend a Directive the following maybe taken into account, which would include amongst others: • The cost benefit analysis. The cost of taking an amended Directive through the co-decision process now that there are 27 EU Member States is high. • European elections will occur in 2009, in the final months there is pressure for European Parliamentary time. Is the amended Directive likely to gain a slot and would it move to a safe position prior to the election process starting? • Is there is a risk that certain Member States would lobby hard and either kill the Directive or considerably reduce the base level of the framework outlined in the Directive? For example the INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC that was finally agreed in November 2006 following reconciliation. The other example is Directive 2003/4/EC - the revision of the Freedom of Access to Environmental Information that was revised came out of the co-decision process weaker than when it went in to the co-decision process. • Have all Member States transposed and implemented the Directive effectively? For example Germany and a number of other countries have poorly implemented the Directive. • Have Member States nominated a public sector body to lead and take responsibility for implementing the Directive effectively?  The UK OPSI is unique in the EU at the current time. • Are the regulators enforcing the current Directive framework? www.ePSIplus.net

  30. 4: PSI Directive - the way forward • Consideration 2 • If the evidence indicates that the issue appertains to the majority of Member State’s and it definitely impedes the development of cross border business built on PSI re-use, is it due to: • the Directive itself? or • the practical issue of implementation? • For example PSI Asset registers are missing all across Europe should the Directive be changed to make the implementation mandatory? • The answer is probably NO as other initiatives may resolve or assist, for example: • eGovernment (seamless government); • INSPIRE; • work being undertaken by public and private bodies to address the issue which may lead to a solution. www.ePSIplus.net

  31. 4: PSI Directive - early indicators for consideration • Implementation: • Very poor across Europe as a whole - little political or public sector commitment • Member States resource allocation is low • Regulation across Europe as a whole is almost non existent • Where regulation exists decisions are not always enforced • The spirit of the PSI Directive is not evident - approach often one of denial or resistance - partly a cultural issue but also due to competition between public and private bodies with public using dominant position. • In some Member States public sector raising legal challenges over Authority of regulator • Member State competition authorities have been so far slow to react and take action • Member State Data Protection (Privacy) Information Commissioners decisions not harmonised. • Task of compliance left to the Re-user of PSI! • The value chain is complex and is not simply public sector upstream everyone else down stream. www.ePSIplus.net

  32. 3: ePSIplus Theme: Impact on prices and charges The diffusion effect • Similar processes: • Internally within an organisation • Within Private Sector • Private Sector Company Group • EU legislation best practice for • Company Groups operating in EU Public Body 1 Annual Report Public Body 2 Annual Report Standard Annual Report (Financial) All Public Sector Annual Report 1+x Variants of the Standard Annual Report Public Body 3 Annual Report • Example of issues: • The structure of the public sector • Enforcement • Transparency • Information loss • Scaling problem • Level playing field between Public and private reporting Set (Reviewed) annually by Ministry of Finance Public Body x Annual Report www.ePSIplus.net Question: Why are Public Bodies Accounts Commercial in confidence?

  33. 3: ePSIplus Theme: Impact on prices and charges Effective policy: Open loop or closed loop? Policy (Financial) Public Sector Information Holder PSI Re-user Feedback Process Regulator? www.ePSIplus.net

  34. funded by eContentPlus Summary Presentation - section 5

  35. PSI Re-users PSI Public Sector PSIH’s Framework PSI Re-users 5: The Directive CONFIDENCE FRAMEWORK FOR THE RE-USER COST EFFECTIVE FOR THE PUBLIC SECTOR Boosts the knowledge economy www.ePSIplus.net

  36. 5: PSI Directive - the WIN WIN framework The key to success is to KEEP IT SIMPLE! Keep in mind the demographic change in society: simplification is one of the options www.ePSIplus.net

  37. 5: Summary • The PSI Directive framework was established to: • minimise the burden on the public sector of enabling the re-use of public sector information to occur without resources being diverted from the public task.(apart from the establishment resource costs) • provides confidence to the potential re-user in that it provides a balance between the public sector defacto monopoly and the micro and small enterprises. • is simple and easy so that it encourages micro and small enterprises to re-use PSI. • time is of the essence • allows innovation to occur • The ePSIplus scorecard states it well: • Europe so far has not met the objective, but there are now signs of movement towards the objective www.ePSIplus.net

  38. 5: PSI Directive - summary • Transposition: • Is taking a long time and harmonisation even longer • The purpose of the Directive has been misinterpreted in some Member • States (considered to be an access law rather than an economic framework) • Member State lead bodies often do not understand their responsibility • (they see their task as a narrow one of transposition and not more) • There is clear a need for action - at the current time the action appears to be moving towards a form of Good Practice that should be followed by all Member States and to back this up by the European Commission using the powers that they have to encourage Member States to comply. The EU wide action to be combined with action within Member States to address the issues appertaining to their country. www.ePSIplus.net

  39. 5: Summary • Is the EU PSI Directive in Europe as at 12 November 2007? • Entrepreneurial positive • (it has encouraged innovation and entry into the market) • Entrepreneurial neutral • (it has not stimulated innovation and entry into the market) • Entrepreneurial negative • (it has discouraged innovation and entry into the market) +100 On balance currently here as at 12.11.07 0 -100 www.ePSIplus.net

  40. funded by eContentPlus Thank you for your attention Interested in PSI? Then why not visit: www.ePSIplus.net

More Related