serendipityoucity

My friend’s Dale, Mark and I are going to see this space weapons documentary at the Mayfair next week!

Please vote - Open Access to Canada’s Public Sector Information and Data. This is part of the Industry Canada Digital Economy Consultation.

Please take some time to vote and distribute within your networks and institutions! It just takes a few seconds. This is also posted at datalibre.ca

We are at a tipping point on this issue in Canada and your few seconds of your time could open up our data resources. You will also see a complimentary Research Data and improved access to publicly-funded data submissions that could also use some votes while you are at it!

Below is the text. If you have ideas that can be added for a formal submission, I would be really glad to hear from you!

Create a data.gc.ca for Canada’s public sector information (PSI) and data in parallel with the excellent NRCan GeoConnections model (e.g. GeoGratis, GeoBase, Discovery Portal).

These PSI & data should be shared at no cost with citizens, be in accessible and open formats, searchable with standard metadata, wrapped in public domain or unrestricted user licenses, delivered within an an open architecture infrastructure based on open standards, specifications and be interoperable. It should be governed with open government principles whereby data & PSI are shared first and arguments to restrict are made only for legitimate privacy and security reasons which should also be disclosed. It should have a permanent home and include both the right combination of multi-departmental (e.g. CIC, INAC, HRSDC, NRC, NRCan, etc.) inputs, trans-disciplinary human resources (e.g. Librarians, archivists, scientists) along with IT specialists & engineers. It should be built in consultation with Canadians to ensure it is designed with user needs and useability in mind. (This is how the GeoConnections program built the Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastructure).

The Government of Canada produces administrative data for the purpose of program delivery (e.g. Canada Student Loan, location where new Canadians land, the number and location of homeless shelters, etc.), and it produces data for the purpose of governing for example: the data collected by Statistics Canada (e.g. Census & Surveys, National Accounts); Environment Canada (e.g. air & water quality, location of brown sites); Canada Centre for Remote Sensing (e.g. satellite and radar imagery); Industry Canada (e.g. corporate registry); Canada Revenue Agency (e.g. Charities dbase); National Research Council (e.g. Scientific data); SSHRC (e.g., social science research data) and more. These data have already been paid for by Canadians via taxation, and the cost of selling these data back to citizens on a cost recovery basis is marginal or more expensive (e.g. Cost of government to government procurement, management of licences, royalties, government accounting and etc.) relative to the benefits & reduced overhead of delivering these data at no cost . Furthermore, Canadians often pay multiple times for the same data, since each level of government also purchases the same data, federal departments purchase these data from each other and there are examples where a municipality purchased the same data multiple times from Statistics Canada. This is not only a waste of taxpayer money it goes against the principle of create once and use many times and avoid the duplication of effort.

Data & PSI are non rivalrous goods where sharing and open access to these does not impede other from doing so. Open access stimulate research and IT sectors who will have the resources they need for the creation of new data R&D products (e.g. Applications) and services (e.g., web mapping), evidence based decision making (e.g. Population health), and informing public policy on a number of key Canadian issues (e.g. Homelessness, housing, education). In addition, evidence from Canadian City Open Data Initiatives (e.g., Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, and Ottawa) have demonstrated that the cost and time to find and access data & PSI within government have been greatly reduced since finding these are easier and negotiating access becomes a non issue, which in turn brings savings to citizens and greater efficiencies within these institutions. Finally, participatory and deliberative democracies include active engagement and inputs from citizens, civil society organizations, the private sector, and NGOs along with their government. Making these data available increases the collective knowledge base of Canadians and stimulates public engagement, improves efficiencies, and stimulates innovation.

These are already our (citizen’s) data & PSI, why not share share them with us and to enable citizens and the government to work together to stimulate Canada’s economy, create innovative industries and formulate evidence based public policy

Australopithecus sediba

The US 2010 Census is in progress.  I was surprised to discover how much influence elected officials have over the Census in the US and how little power the director has.  According to this NYTimes article Count Us in Favor, the director (not a chief statistician) is appointed by each president and does not have the power to speak freely. 

Alternatively in Canada, the separation of politics and the statistical agency is sacrosanct.  Without it how would you trust the results!  The results affect provincial and territorial transfer payments, +/-80 Acts make reference to it, a number of program funding programs depend on them, and the decennial census population count determines the size and shape of Federal Electoral Boundaries. Canada’s representative democracy requires that the Census be free of partisan politics.  The Chief Statistician is appointed for an unlimited term, Ivan Fellegi for instance was in Office for 25 years.  This provides the Chief time to gain experience and oversee full census cycles, which takes about 7-8 years from consultation, testing, operations, conducting, data entry, analysis and dissemination.  The new Chief Statistician is recommended by the former Chief and the Minister of Industry Canada appoints him/her by an order in council based on the former Chief’s recommendation.  Census questions are also submitted to the governors in council, approved by an order in council and then published in the Canada Gazette.  Census results have never been contested, as far as I know questions have always been approved, and the Chief Statistician has the right to speak the results freely and orchestrates the announcement of results which all Canadians receive at the same time. 

In the US, the Director of the Census is appointed by partisan politics, his/her office lasts as long as the government who appoints them, and they are not encouraged to report results the government does not want to hear.  How do US Citizens trust the results?  The director may also not get to see a full census cycle, even with the latest change, the post is for 5 only years. While the Census is one of the government’s greatest instruments of social control and power, a form of panopticism & biopolitics, I believe it has the higher purpose of providing the data we need for the functioning of our political system.

I like that the oldest words so far is image (1440), map (1527), fact (-1539), followed by geography (1542). Infrastructure does not appear as a word, statistics shows up in the 18th century and Canada in its first official incarnation not until 19th century. According to the dictionary that is… The first known statistics on Canada were 1666, shortly after the word data comes into usage, and the first map? Certainly Canada was first imagined way before 1666 so there must be some early representations. to be continued… The definition for Canada however, and the etymology of that word is best described in the Canadian Encyclopedia.

The following definitions are from: Onions, C. T. ed. 1957, Oxford International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged, Toronto: Leland Publishing Company.

Data, Infrastructures and Geographic Imagination: Mapping Data Access Discourses in Canada

notes: 1st date is the first occurrence, -date the latest limit of an obsolete word, ad.=derived by adaptation, t = obsolete, dist=distinguished, Arch.= from architecture, ME.=middle English, f. = formed on, L.=Latin, F.=French, Gr.=German, cf.=compare, transf.=in transferred and figurative use., exc.=except, onf.=old northern french,

Datum - PL. data, 1646, [L., neut, pa. pple. of dare] A thing given or granted; something known or assumed as fact, and made the basis of reasoning or calculation. Out of what Data arises the knowledge T. H. [Hale]. p.455

Fact - 1539, [ad. L. factum thing done, , f. facere. See also Feat]. 1. A thing done or performed: t a. an action, deed. Also in general-1815, t b. An exploit; a feat -1730, c. an evil deed , a crime. Now obs. exc. in after, before the f. etc. 1539 td. An action cognizable in Law Bacon. t2. The making, doing, or performing - 1808. 3. Something that has already occurred or is the case; hence, a datum of experience, a dist. from conclusion 1632. 4. Loosely, Something that is alleged to be, or might be, a ‘fact’ 1729, 5. (Without a and pl.) The circumstance and incidents of a case, as dist. from their legal bearing. p.667

Infrastructure - not in this dictionary!

Geographic - 1610 [ad. GR. Cf. F. geographique] A. adj. Of or pertaining to geography; of the nature of geography. Now rare. B. Geographics (rare), geographical science; t. a treatise on this 1610. p.787

Geography - 1542, [a. F. geographie, ad. L. a. Gr. Geo (earth)-+writing]. 1. The science that describes the earth’s surface, its form and physical features, its natural and political divisions, its climates, productions, etc. Also transf. b. The subject-matter of geography; the range or extent of what is known geographically 1737., 2. A treatise on this science 1559. p.787

Geographer - 1542, One who is versed in, or writes upon, geography. p.787

Image - sb. ME. [a.F. image, earlier imagene, ad. L. imago, imaginene; app. f, same root as imitari to imitate]. 1. An artificial imitation or representation of the external form of any object, esp. of a person a. A statue, effigy, sculptured figure. (often applied to figures as objects of worship.). b. (less usually) A likeness, portrait, picture, carving or the like. (now rare or obs. exc, in allusion to Matt. xxii. 20). t c. applied to the constellations as figures etc., -1674, d. fig. 1548. 3. abstractly. Appearance, form;, semblance, likeness (Now only with reference to biblical language exp. Gen. 1. 26, 27). ME. Also concr. (Obs. pr arcj.). 1530 4. A counterpart copy, ME. A symbol, emblem, representation 1566, a type, typical example, embodiment 1548, 5. A mental representation of something, a mental acute or impression : an idea, concept ME. 6. A vivid or graphic description 1522. 7. rhet. A simile, metaphor, or figure of speech 1676.

Image - v. 1440, [f. Image sb. earlier a. F. Imager]. 1. trans. To make an image of; to represent by an image, to figure, portray, delineate. Also fig. 1790 2. To reflect, mirror 1792. 3. To copy (rare) 1611; to represent (rare) 1701. 4. t a. to devise, plan -1460, b. to imagine, represent to oneslef 1708., 5. To describe (esp. vividly, graphically) 1628. 6. To symbolize, typify 1816.

Imagination - ME. [a.F. ad. L. imaginationem.]. 1, The action of imagining, or forming a mental concept of what is not actuall present to the senses (cf. sense 3.); the result of this, a mental image or idea (freq. characterized as cain, false, etc.). t2.The mental consideration of actions or events not yet in existence. a. scheming or devising; a device, scheme, plot; a fanciful project. Obs. exc. as a biblical archaism. ME. b. expectation, anticipation -1654, 3. That faculty of the mind by which we conceive the absent as ig it were present (feq. including memory); the ‘productive imagination’ ME. 4. The power which the mind has of forming concepts beyond those derived from external objects; the ‘productive imagination’. a. Fancy ME. b. The creative faculty; poetic genius, 1509, 5. The operation of the mind, thinking; thought, opinion. Now rare or obs. ME. p.958

Map - sb. 1527. [ad. L. mappa in class L. table-cloth, napkin, but in med. L. used transf. in mappa mundi Mappemonde.]. 1. A representation of the earth’s surface or a part of it, its physical and political features, etc. or of the heavens, delineated on a flat surface of paper. etc. according to a definite scale of projection. 2. fig. A detailed representation in epitome; a circumstantial account of a state of things. Now rare or obs. 1586. tb. The very picture (of virtue, vice, character, etc.). (so sp. mapa.)-1698 p.1204

Map - v. Onf. mapped, mapping, 1586. [Map sb.]. I. Trans. to make a map of; to represent on a map 1602. Also, transf. and fig. 2. M.Out a. To represent in detail on a map 1656, b.fig. to record minutely 1619; to plan out (a course of conduct, one’s time, etc.) 1883. c. To divide (a country) into districts, as by lines on a map 1860.

Cartography - also Charto-,1863, [f. F. carte, or L. charta, carta+Gr.] The drawing of charts or maps. p.269

Statistic - a. and sb. 1789 [as. G. statistik sb., statistisch adj. ad. mod.L. statiscus, f. *statista Statist] A. Adj. I.=next. Now rare. 2. O or pertaining to status 1871, b. sb.I.=statistics I rare 1796 2.=statistician 1804. p. 2007

Statistics - 1787 [pl. of statistic] 1. Construed as sing. In early use, that branch of political science dealing with the collection, classification, and discussion of facts bearing on the condition of a state or community. In recent use, the department of study that has for its object the collection and arrangement of numerical facts or data, whether relating to human affairs or to natural phenomena. 2. Construed as p. numerical facts or data collected and classified 1837. p. 2007

Statistical - a. 1787. [f.prec.+-AL I.] Of or pertaining to statistics, esp. with reference to economic, sanitary, and vital conditions. b. Of a writer, etc.: dealing with statistics 1787. The moral and s. features of the period 1841. b. some respectable s. writers 1787. Hence Statistically.p. 2007

Statistician - 1825, [f. Statistic+-ian.] One versed in or engaged in collecting and tabulating statistics. p. 2007

Access - ME. [In sense 4 a. Fr. acces; in other senses, direct f. L. accessus. Access is now usual]. 1. Approaching or being approached in various senses (see Quots). ME. 2. A way or means of approach/ lit. and fig. 1605. 3. A coming as an addition (replaced by accession0 1576. 4. A (sudden) coming illness, anger, etc. a fit ME. t.spec. in ague fit -1751.p.10-11

Accessible - a. 1610. [a.Fr.; see accede.]. 1. Capable of being used as an access (to). 2. Capable of being entered or reached; get-a-ble 1642; fig., open to the influence of (const. to), 1818. p.11

Discourse - sb. ME. [a.F. discours, ad. L. discursus, f. discurs-, ppl. stem of discurrence; see next]. t 1. onward course;=Course -1612, t 2. ‘The act of the understanding, by which it passes from premises to consequences’ (J.); reasoning, rationcination; reason, rationality. (obs. or arch). ME. 3. Communication of thought by speech; talk, conversation (arch.) 1559, t b. the faculty of conversing -1641, c. (with a and pl.) A talk; a conversation (arch.) 1632. t. 4. Narration; a narrative -1647. 5. A spoken or written treatment of a subject at length; a dissertation, treatise, sermon or the like. (The prevailing sense) 1581. t6. Familiar intercourse 1602. tb. Conversancy (in) 1604. p.522

Discourse - v. 1547. [f. Discourse sb.; prob. affected by F. discourir to discourse of]. t 1.intr. to run or travel of a space, region, etc, transf. to extend -1555 t 2. To pass from premises to conclusions (J.); to reason, -1700, Also ttrans. 3. intr. to hold discourse, to talk, converse, to discuss a matter, confer 1559. 4. intr, To speak or write a length on a subject 1564. 5. trans. To go through in speech; to treat of in speech or writing to talk over, to talk of to tell 1563. b. to utter 1602 6. To converse with; to talk to to discuss a matter with, to address. (obs. or arch) 1677. p.522

Canada - The name of a British dominion in N. America, used attrib. in names of plants, animals, products, etc. p.255

Canada (Canadian Encyclopedia) -

Canada, a name derived from the Huron-Iroquoian kanata, meaning a village or settlement. On 13 August 1535, as Jacques CARTIER was nearing Île d’Anticosti, 2 Indian youths he was bringing back from France informed him that the route to Canada (”chemin de Canada”) lay to the south of the island. By Canada they meant the village of Stadacona, on the future site of QUÉBEC CITY. Cartier used the word in that sense, but also referred to “the province of Canada,” meaning the area subject to DONNACONA, chief at Stadacona. The name was soon applied to a much larger region. The “Harleian” world map of c 1547, the first to show the discoveries made on Cartier’s second voyage, applied it to an area north of the gulf and river St Lawrence, and by 1550 maps were also placing the name south of the river.

Canadian - 1805 adj. Of or belonging to Canada or its people. sb. A native or inhabitant of Canada. p.255

Dominion - ME. [a. obs. F., L. Type * dominionem, deriv of dominium, f, dominus]. 1. The power or right of governing and controlling; sovereign authority; sovereignty; rule; control. Also fig. 2. The domains of a feudal lord. b. The territory subject to a king or a ruler, or under a particular government control. Oftern in pl. 1512. Also fig. 3. Law, ownership, property; right of possession. 1651. 4. Domination 1611. Applied to countries outside England or Great Britain under the sovereignty or suzerainty of the English crown. Designating the larger self-governing British Dominions. Name given by the British to Canada in 1867 and New Zealand in 1907. In the statute of Westminster (1931) the term includes the Dominion of Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia, the Dominion of New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, The Irish Free State, and Newfoundland. p.551

Addendum:

There is a 48 hour grace period for submissions until midnight Tuesday.

I also submitted the following addendum to my earlier submission based on a discussion on CivicAccess List between Jennifer Bell and Russell McOrmond and public education work over at Visible Government. Thanks to both of you!

Another solution to improve Canada’s Copyright law is to abolish crown copyright all together and follow the lead of the NZ Government Open Access and Licensing (NZGOAL) framework. Wherever Crown Copyright would be used, Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) would be used instead. The proposal argues:

“Now more than ever is there a very present need to bring information the Government holds on behalf of its people into the public domain so that it may be used in ways that stimulate innovation, generate cultural creativity, social interaction and dialogue, while also kick starting economic growth.”

This is very interesting and could be very helpful for the dissemination of government data. Also, the 2009, UK government’s Power of Information Task Force final report found that Crown Copyright was a major barrier to the re-use of Public Sector Information, and recommended that Crown Copyright be changed to a ‘Crown Commons’ license to encourage re-use.

The creation of progressive unrestricted use licenses by some government departments has moved the access discourse toward citizen participation, these are not global enough across government, but are an extremely innovative and creative step in the right direction.

Today is the last day!

Below is my submission to the copyright consultation. I read a number of submissions, and clearly, I am more of a novice on the topic than I thought. I am not at all an expert in this area, but spoke about what I know, in my own language and hope other non experts will also add their view. I saw that many submissions are about art related content and have not yet come across science nor data topics. If you come across any can you point me to them?

Public Sector Information, Government Data, Government Digital Maps, Publicly Funded Research Data - belong to citizens.

Author: Tracey P. Lauriault

Contact information: tlauriau@gmail.com

I am a researcher and a geomatician. I have worked for many years with a number of community based organizations, not-for-profit groups, research groups and the private sector to create evidence based maps, indicators, tables, analysis, and reports for decision making. I have worked in housing and homelessness, environment, quality of life indicators, child care, education, public health, social planning, etc. I am also a founding member of CivicAccess.ca and a co-author of datalibre.ca.

The greatest impediment to my work has been the high cost of public sector data & information and restrictive licensing regimes that surround these. A few examples help illustrate this: Statistics Canada Data is cost prohibitive and data pricing seems arbitrary; Vital Statistics Data are very expensive; the database that links postal codes to electoral ridings is cost prohibitive; postal code base maps are very expensive; non-private health data from CIHI are very expensive again; there are arbitrary reasons for not releasing non private non security risk data from numerous federal governmental agencies, and there are very restrictive use licenses for public sector information in general and especially the aforementioned Federal organizations.

High costs, restrictive licensing, arbitrary policies and practices, and the government acting as a monopoly on access to public sector data - data citizens have already paid for with taxation - has greatly affected the kinds of research I can pursue, has strained the pocket books of charity organizations and has left citizens and community based organizations marginalized in democratic debates since they do not have access to the data they need to formulate their arguments.

I have tried, as a citizen to analyze the characteristics of my neighbourhood, compare those with others, develop a business plan, investigate the socio-economic profiles of school catchment areas and school closures, or do a spatial location analysis for a new park. I have the skill, knowledge and tools to do this work, however, the cost of the data and use restrictions either a) make it to expensive to do this work or b) restricts how I can disseminate the results.

There seems to be a lack of coherence from the Federal Government of Canada regarding access to and fair use of public data by the public. These are data that the public has paid for already. Crown Copyright and cost recovery for public data impede participatory democracy and puts citizens, community groups and small businesses at a disadvantage when it comes to evidence based planning. It also thwarts innovation since instead of focussing on value added activities, businesses, researchers, non-profit groups and citizens are scrambling to pay for and to adhere to multiply conflicting licenses as opposed to a license that makes it easy to use these data, share these data and add value to them.

To include citizens in the process of decision making I recommend an unrestricted user license such as that developed by two Federal Government programs GeoBase and Geogratis. Also, the government should act less as a monopolist regarding its public data and more as a public agency and abolish cost recovery policies, and create an infrastructure to share these data with their necessary metadata and licenses. We also need to consider the long term preservation of these to ensure they can be disseminated for the long term. This I believe will enable and facilitate the process of citizens and the Government working together. This will also provide a way for us to think together, particularly on troublesome issues such as homelessness.

Sincerely Tracey

I was discussing the use of remote sensing images for a variety of purposes with my academic advisor who recalled a book about magicians who staged a variety of illusions to fool air photographers during WWII. We also discussed the time stamps on remotely sensed images and how some were nefariously used during the first Iraq war to show how the Iraqis were encroaching on Kuwait - photos going to the border but not the photos showing a turn around and move away from the border that were taken shortly after.

Things are not always as they seem and you cannot believe everything that you see!

Tracey P. Lauriault, Sebastien Caquard, Christine Homuth, and Fraser Taylor (Carleton), 2009,  Pilot Cybercartographic Atlas of the Risk of Homelessness in Canada.  May 27 W36 Urban Geography II – Social Session Canadian Association of Geographers portion of the SSHCR Congress.

The Pilot Cybercartographic Atlas of the Risk of Homelessness renders in maps and interactive graphs well defined and accepted Canadian homelessness risk indicators. When these indicators are visualized in an engaging manner readers can more readily distinguish trends, patterns and issues that cannot be conveyed in static data tables. More importantly, they can influence public policy. The Atlas is a partnership project between the Geomatics and Cartographic Research Centre (GCRC) at Carleton University and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Quality of Life Reporting System (QoLRS) in collaboration with the City of Toronto, the Communauté Métropolitaine de Montréal (CMM) and the City of Calgary. Atlas modules include the visualization of indicators across time at three scales: Canada, 23 municipalities and 3 featured cities/metropolitan areas. The City of Toronto provides data to show their aging social housing stock; poverty and the disproportionate spending on rent are explored in City of Calgary neighbourhoods while la CMM tells the story of social housing and housing affordability for lower-income renting populations. The presentation will discuss how the atlas was developed, data access restrictions and costs, the importance of innovative partnerships and collaborations with cities.

Lauriault, Tracey P. and Gitte Lindgaard, 2009, Scented Cybercartography: Exploring Possibilities. May 30 s44 Urban Geography VIII – Cultural Session Canadian Association of Geographers portion of the SSHCR Congress.

Olfactory cartography is part of the emerging discipline of cybercartography (Taylor 2003), a transdisciplinary endeavour that investigates, among other things, the integration of multimedia, multi-sensory, and multimodal data into digital atlases and maps. The physiology and psychology of the olfactory system, its special characteristics, its influence on performance and memory, and some of the issues that make the study of olfaction difficult are addressed. Characterizing, classifying, and labeling scents is problematic, and it is recommended that methods from other communities of practice be adopted and adapted by cartographers. Literature from a wide range of disciplines, including olfactory geography, is reviewed, and a number of innovative ideas are provided. In addition, olfactory applications in different areas such as marketing, art installations, film, and virtual environments are described, as are a range of currently available olfactory diffusion devices. These, however, have not been explored in a cartographic context, nor have they undergone usability testing. We conclude that it is too early to provide cartographic guidelines and methods but that scented applications, odour diffusion technologies, and olfactory data collection methods provide knowledge that can be applied toward developing a scented cartography.

Tracey P. Lauriault, Peter L. Pulsifer and Fraser Taylor & Barbara L. Craig. 2009. The Preservation and Archiving of Geospatial Digital Data: Challenges and Opportunities for Cartographers. May 30 S33 Cartography and Spatial Data Session Canadian Association of Geographers portion of the SSHCR Congress.

In terms of preserving our digital cartographic heritage, the last quarter of the 20th century has some similarities to the dark ages. In many cases, only fragments or written descriptions of the digital maps exist.  In other cases, the original data have disappeared or can no longer be accessed due to changes in technical procedures and tools. Where data has not been lost, as with the Canada Land Inventory, the cost of recovery has been high.  Based on experience gained through participation in a major research project focused on preservation, the development of several digital cartographic frameworks, systems and artifacts (e.g. Maps and atlases), multidisciplinary work with archivists, data preservationists, data librarians, public officials and private sector cartographers, the authors discuss possible strategies toward the preservation of maps, geospatial data, and associated technologies – cartographic heritage.