Comments for Government 2.0: The Government as a Platform

Government 2.0: The Government as a Platform

2008-05-23T19:14:12Z

TechPresident points to and interesting article today from the Yale Journal of Law & Technology (draft version of article set to appear in 2008-2009 Fall Issue) that proposes a new form of open government that encourages the closure of government web sites. The idea is that US government web sites are so notoriously bad, they should just be torn down in favor of private sector alternatives. But this is more than just a privatization push, this is about turning the government into a data platform.

]]> "Rather than struggling, as it currently does, to design sites that meet each end-user need, it should focus on creating a simple, reliable and publicly accessible infrastructure that "exposes" the underlying data," says the draft version of the article (emphasis theirs). In other words, the government should become a data platform, exposing their vast amounts of data to the public -- i.e., via API -- and let the private sector mash it up to make helpful services for people.

The authors say that an open government data platform would lead "toward an ecosystem of grassroots, unplanned solutions to online civic needs." Eventually, the authors think that data mashup tools will become so commonplace and easy to use that people will no longer need third parties help them consume the information they seek. Instead, they'll be able to tap into the open government data layer and create custom applications with it on their own time. Think: Dapper for government.

That's a compelling vision of the future of open government, and one that makes a lot of sense. The idea is something like CSS -- which separates the display code of a web site from the content. A government data platform would separate the content from the task of displaying it, which the commercial and non-profit spaces are likely better suited for than the government itself.

Better online access to government data is something that all three candidates still in the US presidential race support, though Barack Obama seems most receptive to a radical idea like this one, saying on his web site that he plans to make "government data available online in universally accessible formats to allow citizens to make use of that data to comment, derive value, and take action in their own communities."

Easy access to the massive amounts of government data would very probably lead to some compelling mashups and consumer services. We recently wrote about a new massive scale data mashup called PolicyMap that could likely benefit from something like this, for example. What do you think? Does a government data platform make sense? Should the government get out of the web site development business? Let us know in the comments.

Comment from Adrian Holovaty on 2008-05-23

2008-05-23T19:50:17Z

This is something we've been advocating at EveryBlock.com, where we compile a lot of government records for a number of cities. I hadn't heard about this new article yet; it seems like this movement is getting more momentum every week or so!

On a related note, a bunch of organizations got together a couple of months ago to write "8 Principles of Open Government," which you might find interesting: http://resource.org/8_principles.html

Comment from Jovan on 2008-05-23

2008-05-23T20:08:20Z

This makes a lot of sense. Even though I can not imagine dismantling government web sites, this API layer can provide a lot of possibilities for third party services as mentioned in the text.

Comment from Keith on 2008-05-23

2008-05-23T21:11:42Z

There are more than three candidates left in the race.

Comment from will on 2008-05-23

2008-05-23T21:16:44Z

I strongly disagree, the argument by Yale is narrow-minded and one-sided. The Yale write obviously doesn't understand the bureaucracy of the federal government systems. Also quoting Obama, Clinton, and McCain is nonsense, they'll say anything on the campaign trail.

Comment from Josh Catone on 2008-05-23

2008-05-23T21:33:25Z

@Keith: Technically, yes. But don't kid yourself: the US is a two party system.

Comment from jon on 2008-05-23

2008-05-23T23:28:48Z

pretty cool and thought provoking article, thanks.

Comment from Bob Uva on 2008-05-23

2008-05-24T00:04:50Z

I moderated a session on Citizen Journalism at BarCampPortland earlier this month where we had a spirited discussion about the need for data openness from governments at all levels. In Oregon, in fact, we're concerned that copyright privileges were claimed for the titles of legal statutes by the state govt! I also want to point out that what Adrian Holovaty referred to in an earlier comment is a significant step forward. Having standards & guidelines for the format and programmatic access to govt data is critical if we are to be an open society in this century.

Comment from Daniel Tenner on 2008-05-24

2008-05-24T10:13:09Z

Sounds like a very good idea, but don't underestimate the government's incredible capacity for botching up very good ideas...

Also, some services rely on information that needs to remain private (social security/taxes/health care...). Exposing that in a public API would be impossible due to those concerns, so the potential for companies or non-profit to, say, build a better ad-hoc gateway for entering your tax returns would be limited.

Daniel

Comment from Erik Jonker on 2008-05-24

2008-05-24T11:49:35Z

At least a good idea to talk about. However especially in europe governments want to control "how" services are delivered to various groups within the population. Ofcourse you could argue the mix of private and non-profit service providers should able to do that. I have some doubts however.
That does not mean that besides delivering services, the government should not be a platform as mentioned. From a transparancy/democracy point of view that should be the case anyway.

Erik

Comment from Angel on 2008-05-24

2008-05-24T21:28:43Z

Obama co-sponsored a bill in 2006 (with Tom Coburn) known as 'Google for Government.' http://obama.senate.gov/press/060908-senate_passes_c/

Of course it's a government project right now and is the usability of its current form is marginal.

Comment from Joe on 2008-05-24

2008-05-25T03:51:05Z

I would hope that someone could make the Medicare site more useful. Medicare is a bit nuts.

They send crazy paper documents to tell you they are going to charge your account for the Part B premium. Why not an email reminder?

They hold your paper explanation of benefits for three months after they pay the provider. That leaves me guessing how much I owe. OR I can go to their site and check to see if they paid anything recently. But the site has crazy footnotes that do not agree with the paper when you do get the paper.

Well, if it has to be that way, why not provide an RSS feed to let me know that a new item has been paid? Or, and email?

They send paper checks if the provider does not participate with Medicare. Why not deposit to my account? The same account they take the premium from?

BUT the paper explanation of benefits comes with the checks and so the conclusion is: If you don't want to wait for three months find providers that do not participate in Medicare.

They could care less about billing errors. I got charged more than $550.00 for diapers by a hospital (I was there 23 hours). OH! I used no diapers. There is no online way to report the error. The hospital says it makes no difference in the amount they received from Medicare.

They encourage online feedback about their site but the people that get the feedback tell you to call the dreaded 800 number. Why provide the feedback?

Then there is IRS.gov. That is a very good site. Easy to find "stuff."

But the Electronic Funds Transfer Payment System (EFTPS) operated by the IRS is terrible. Cumbersome to use. Not sure why it has to be that way. The argument is security. Some bank, like LNG, could help them improve security and be more user friendly.

The Library of Congress site (loc.gov) is another good site. Works well.

The U.S. Census Bureau site (census.gov) works very well too. I like the ability to download data into a spreadsheet to use as needed.

Ummm, there must be a trend here. If the data is "personal" the sites are very bad. If the data it simply drawing stuff of a non-personal nature, the sites work very well.

Comment from gregory on 2008-05-24

2008-05-25T04:14:19Z

", it should focus on creating a simple, reliable and publicly accessible infrastructure that "exposes" the underlying data,"

and so should facebook

and @ #5, you are off by 1, too high

Comment from Amarendra on 2008-05-25

2008-05-26T04:32:47Z

It's highly appreciable to have such a Platform where all the information pertaining to individuals will be used to build useful applications by third party (private sector) organizations. But herein lies the threat that how could the integrity of data would be retained and resisted from all the probable misuse ???!!!

Comment from Graham C on 2008-05-26

2008-05-26T09:11:29Z

Great to provoke the debate. Good to trial the concept. Yes, Gov information is shockingly silo based and moderately managed at best. Would the resulting situation not risk commercial enterpises using only that data which makes them money (by charging us), thus opening the divide between have's and have not's? Would we not just end up with a mess of websites on the private side? Wouls smart use of existing data require us to redefine what 'public' means?
Is Government brave enough to do this? Are we responsible enough to manage things properly on our side? We'll never find out without trying.

Comment from Mike on 2008-05-28

2008-05-29T00:21:00Z

The New Zealand government has embraced a policy of making information available easily, widely and equitably since 1997 (see URL).

Some observations about the implementation challenges that governments (in general, not US, or NZ specifically) face:-

Technology channels are diversifying, and the users are fragmenting across them, increasing the cost to make information widely available.

Technology "standards" are evolving at a rate that outstrips the typical government IT system lifecycle - governments traditionally build systems that last 10-15 years.

Scoping, budgeting and delivering a new IT project in a government environment, with its accountability checks/balances typically takes 3-5 years, by which time the realised benefits may be less than originally expected.

So governments are working on it, but it takes time. They have to get it right, because government serves as a trusted source of information. Trust enables transactions (business / social). Government have built that trust over centuries (and it can be destroyed in minutes).

One of the topics I would be interested in, is what is the economic argument for making government information available at marginal cost?

Many governments in the 1980s, 1990s moved to a commercial model and privatised data sets such as weather, geospatial, science.

Is the argument that making it available in an "open source" manner, means anyone (in the world) can use it to innovate?

Comment from Rudy on 2008-05-30

2008-05-30T16:07:15Z

I manage a local government Web site in the U.S. I think the basic idea here is very exciting and well worth more discussion and development. One huge aspect I see is that many people don't know what agency provides what services, but a mashup of available information will make that irrelevant. But there are some real-world issues that will slow this idea down.

For one thing, there is an assumption that gov. agencies have lots of records and data available electronically that could be made available via these APIs. In my experience gov. agencies are far behind the private sector in that regard. Lots of useful stuff is available, but there's still lots in unstructured and poorly indexed documents. When I start talking about semantics or document structure here, gov. people just aren't ready for that.

Another is that most citizens just aren't tech-savvy enough to create their own mashups or even figure out how to search for info they need. They want to go to the gov agency Web site and find exactly what they are looking for on the home page. We can imagine this will change over time, but I'm not so sure. I hear a lot from younger, supposedly technology-oriented users, who are too dense to figure things out on their own.

I see data providers supplementing gov. Web sites, but never replacing them.