This story appeared
on Network World at
http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2013/051513-bradner.html
Federal
requirement for open access: Seeing what you paid for
'Net Insider By
Scott Bradner, Network World
May 15, 2013 10:57 AM ET
In early May President Obama signed an
executive order that makes ÒOpen
and Machine Readable the New Default for Government InformationÓ.
This new order continues a process the
President started on his first day in office with a memorandum to executive
departments and agencies that stated an official openness
policy for his administration. (An observation: the referenced web page is
on whitehouse.gov but does not include a date for the memo - something I think
would be required to have a complete history.) While the Obama push is a
welcome one, not everyone is pleased with the progress to date.
The most recent
executive order was accompanied by a memorandum
that "requires agencies to collect or create information in a way that
supports downstream information processing and dissemination activities."
And to do so "using machine-readable and open formats,
data standards, and common core and extensible metadata for all new information
creation and collection efforts," while reviewing the information for
privacy, confidentiality and security.
The Obama administration's primary
information sharing portal is data.gov, which was
established just about four years ago. The site provides access to data
files on all sorts of things (including President
Obama's executive orders). There is a lot of data on data.gov, but much of
it is in raw files that need to be downloaded before they can be used.
The new orders direct that more work be done to create APIs that would
enable interactive access to the information.
Getting direct access to zillions of
bytes of information on what the government is doing with (or to) our money is
a good thing, even if the modes of access could be made better. But
perhaps as important are the rules John Holdren, the
head of the White House Office of Science and Technology, published
in late February.
The U.S. government spends about $30
billion per year in support of basic research. That sounds like a lot of
money but it is almost a round-off error on the over $3.5 trillion federal
budget. Still, that round-off error supports a lot of researchers at
places like Harvard.
Traditionally, researchers would
publish their results in peer-reviewed scholarly journals. Libraries would buy
subscriptions to the journals, often for hundreds of dollars per journal per
year. The journal publishers use the revenue to support the publishing and
peer review processes. In addition, for-profit journal publishers also would
like to make some money. Even though federal rules have, for years,
required researchers to provide access to their raw data so other researchers
could verify their work, this data has been generally hard to get a hold of.
Holdren's
new rules require that most federal funding agencies develop plans to require
easy Internet-based access to research papers and to the raw research data
within a year or so of the publication of a paper. The delay will let the
publishers of scholarly journals preserve their existing business models since
the maximum value of a paper tends to be greatest in the year after
publication. The rules do permit some wiggle room on when the papers need
to be made available, but the fact that independent researchers, and the
general public (read taxpayers) can get reasonably quick access to the results
of the research we pay for is a Good Thing.
Some universities, including Harvard, have been pushing for this type
of open access for years It is good to see the feds
working for the same goals.
Disclaimer:
The above-mentioned efforts and rules generally apply to information, not
processes. I will not opine on whether the Obama administration is transparent
-- in the understanding-how-decisions-are-made sense -- as well as open.
All contents
copyright 1995-2013 Network World, Inc. http://www.networkworld.com