The Power of Information: An independent review by Ed Mayo and Tom Steinberg
This report reflects the views of the external authors and is not a statement of government policy.
Executive summary
This is an unusual review in that it is a story of opportunities rather than problems. It
takes a practical look at the use and development of citizen and state-generated
information in the UK. For example, information produced by the government (often
referred to as 'public sector information') includes maps, heart surgery mortality
statistics and timetables, while information from citizens includes advice, product
reviews or even recipes.
Public sector information underpins a growing part of the economy and the amount is
increasing at a dramatic pace. The driver is the emergence of online tools that allow
people to use, re-use and create information in new ways. Public sector information
does not, however, cover personal information, such as credit record and medical
histories. This is the first review to explore the role of government in helping to
maximise the benefits for citizens from this new pattern of information creation and
use.
When enough people can collect, re-use and distribute public sector information,
people organise around it in new ways, creating new enterprises and new
communities. In each case, these are designed to offer new ways of solving old
problems. In the past, only large companies, government or universities were able to
re-use and recombine information. Now, the ability to mix and 'mash' data is far more
widely available.
The review was conducted through a wide-ranging literature review, three in-depth
case studies and interviews with over 60 decision makers, website operators, and
users inside and outside government. There are social and economic benefits to new
ways of making and sharing information, whether involving government, citizens or
both, for example:
- In medical studies of breast cancer and HIV patients, participants in online
communities understand their condition better and generally show a greater ability
to cope. In the case of HIV, there are also lower treatment costs.
- Studies of 'wired' local communities demonstrate that there are more neighbours
who know the names of other people on their street.
- Sharing restaurants' food safety information in Los Angeles led to a drop in food-
borne illness of 13.3% (compared to a 3.2% increase in the wider state in the same
time frame). The proportion of restaurants receiving 'good' scores more than
doubled, with sales rising by 5.7%.
- By providing clear information when dispensing medication, pharmacists can
improve patient adherence/persistence with medication advice by 16—33%.
Since 1990, when the World Wide Web first made the internet usable by mass
audiences, the number of users has risen from virtually none to 61% of the UK adult
population. The impacts of this transformation are diverse and profound. TV
consumption is falling and internet usage is rising fast, and as many prospective
online shoppers now consider a search engine as important as talking to a trusted
friend when making purchasing decisions.
The largest websites are now often those that bring together information created by
the people who use them. The proportion of people using such sites to help
themselves and others is now on a par with the friendly societies and mutuals of the
nineteenth century.
A wide range of user communities have emerged whose goals align closely with those
of different parts of government. In education, for example, these range from small
self-help groups of a few dozen students with Asperger's Syndrome to over 8 million
posts on TheStudentRoom, about issues such as homework and university
applications. Parenting websites like Netmums operate as an online community, with
275,000 users providing advice to prospective and current parents. In the consumer
field, MoneySavingExpert now has 2.5 million unique users per month with many
sharing information on the latest money saving tips and tricks.
Government itself produces a vast amount of highly valuable information, and the
internet increases its potential social and economic value. In terms of scale, the
Ordnance Survey, for example, estimates that it underpins £100 billion per year of
economic activity in the UK. Direct revenues from public sector information are only
a fraction of the wider value that this information creates. Revenues to government
from the sale and licensing of public sector information are around £340 million, and
the total market for public sector information stands at £590 million per year. The
Office of Fair Trading estimates that this could double to £1 billion per year if
reforms are implemented.
This report argues that government could now grasp the opportunities that are
emerging in terms of the creation, consumption and re-use of information. Current
policy and action is not yet adequate to grasp these opportunities. To this end, the
report recommends a strategy in which government:
- welcomes and engages with users and operators of user-generated sites in pursuit
of common social and economic objectives;
- supplies innovators that are re-using government-held information with the
information they need, when they need it, in a way that maximises the long-term
benefits for all citizens; and
- protects the public interest by preparing citizens for a world of plentiful (and
sometimes unreliable) information, and helps excluded groups take advantage.
This review makes 15 practical recommendations in line with this strategy. These are
designed to achieve a step change in the way that government acts in relation to
public information and user-generated websites. Noting that clear leadership is
required to effect the proposed changes, the review also proposes that the Cabinet
Office, in conjunction with the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI), report to
the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Electronic Service Delivery (PSX(E)) by December
2007 on departments' plans for implementing this report's recommendations, and
report again on progress and results by December 2008.
Recommendations
Exploring new opportunities
Recommendation 1. To improve service delivery and communication with the public, the
Central Office of Information (COI), in partnership with the Office of Public Sector
Information (OPSI), should coordinate the development of experimental partnerships
between major departments and user-generated sites in key policy areas, including parenting
advice (Department for Education and Skills), services for young people, and healthcare
(Department of Health).
Recommendation 2. To reduce unnecessary duplication of pre-existing user-generated sites,
COI should update the guidelines for minimum website standards by December 2007;
departments should be strongly advised to consult the operators and users of pre-existing
user-generated sites before they build their own versions.
Recommendation 3. Departments, monitored by COI, should research the scale and role of
user-generated websites in their areas, with a view to either terminating government services
that are no longer required, or modifying them to complement citizen-led endeavours.
Recommendation 4. To encourage innovation in the re-use of information by non-
commercial users, UK trading funds should, in consultation with OPSI, examine the
introduction of non-commercial re-use licences, along the lines of those pioneered by the
BBC's Backstage project and Google Maps.
Recommendation 5. To promote innovation, Ordnance Survey should, by the end of
December 2007, launch its Open Space project to allow non-commercial experimentation
with mapping data.
Recommendation 6. To promote innovative use of public sector information, the Department
for Transport, with the support of the Chief Scientific Adviser's Committee, should
complete the partially undertaken scoping and costing of a 'data mashing laboratory' and
advise the Cabinet Committee of Science and Innovation on appropriate next steps.
Recommendation 7. To improve understanding, effective usage and take-up of government
services, COI should examine options for more self-help fora for public services and publish
guidance for departments on how and when to set up such fora by December 2007.
Improving access to public sector information
Recommendation 8. To improve government's responsiveness to demand for public sector
information, by July 2008 OPSI should create a web-based channel to gather and assess
requests for publication of public sector information.
Recommendation 9. By Budget 2008, government should commission and publish an
independent review of the costs and benefits of the current trading fund charging model for
the re-use of public sector information, including the role of the five largest trading funds,
the balance of direct versus downstream economic revenue, and the impact on the quality of
public sector information.
Recommendation 10. To ensure the most appropriate supply of information for re-use,
government should consistently apply its policy of marginal cost pricing for 'raw'
information to all public bodies, including trading funds, except where the published
economic analysis in recommendation 9 shows this does not serve the interests of UK
citizens.
Recommendation 11. To improve the supply of government information for re-use, the
Better Regulation Executive should promote publication of regulatory information, and
should work with OPSI to encourage publication in open formats and under licences
permitting re-use.
Recommendation 12. To ensure that OPSI can regulate the public sector information market
effectively, government should review the fit between OPSI's functions and funding, and
recommend options that will ensure it is fit for purpose.
Protecting the public interest
Recommendation 13. To maximise the potential value of civil servants' input into online
fora, by autumn 2007 the Cabinet Office Propriety and Ethics and Government
Communications teams should together clarify how civil servants should respond to citizens
seeking government advice and guidance online.
Recommendation 14. The Digital Inclusion Team should explore the potential for promoting
digital and social inclusion through the partnerships proposed in recommendation 1 and
report to the Sub-Committee on Electronic Service Delivery (PSX(E)), in line with
recommendation 15.
Follow-through and next steps
Recommendation 15. The Minister for the Cabinet Office, in conjunction with OPSI, should
report to PSX(E) by December 2007 on departments' plans for implementing these
recommendations, and by December 2008 on progress and results.
Chapter 1: Introduction
- This is an external review by Tom Steinberg, Director of mySociety, and Ed
Mayo, Chief Executive of the National Consumer Council, produced with support
from the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit.
- The arguments and recommendations are those of the authors only, and do not
reflect government policy.
- The review is about information created both by citizens and government and is
not about individuals' private information, such as medical or credit records.
1. In February 2007, following a Policy Review seminar on 'The Power of
Information', the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Hilary Armstrong, asked Tom
Steinberg, Director of
mySociety, to take forward a rapid review with Ed Mayo,
Chief Executive of the National Consumer Council. Support for the review has
been provided by the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit (see Appendix 1).
2. The commissioning of this review is consistent with issues raised by the Policy
Review on Public Services and the recommendation that:
'The government should support the development of new and innovative
services that provide tailored advice to specific groups (for example the
netmums.com website which provides a discussion and advice forum for
mothers). These are outside government's direct influence, but government
has a role to play in supporting them — for example by ensuring that they are
not undermined by government programmes or websites with similar
objectives, and have easy access to publicly available information.'
3. The terms of reference for the review are provided in Box 1 below.
Box 1: Power of Information Review — terms of reference:
To explore new developments in the use of citizen- and state-generated information in the UK,
and to present an analysis and recommendations to the Cabinet Office Minister as part of the
Policy Review.
Sub Questions:
- What is already going on? How significant is it?
- How can government catalyse more beneficial creation and sharing of information, and
mutual support, between citizens?
- What can be done to improve the way government and its agencies publish and share the
data they already have?
- Are there any notable information opportunities or shortfalls in sectors outside government
that those sectors could work to rectify?
4. To inform the recommendations in this report, the review team has undertaken:
- interviews with over 60 stakeholders in central and local government, business
and public bodies (see Appendix 2);
- a literature review into the current and potential benefits of online
communities of support, political engagement and communication; and
- three in-depth case studies to illustrate the costs and benefits of more online
public sector information exchange. The topics were: the benefits of health
communities (see Appendix 3), the impacts of publishing restaurant food
safety 'scores' (see Box 16), and options for an online income tax self-
assessment advice facility (see Appendix 5).
5. This report represents an external analysis of the issues, and does not represent
government policy or the views of the Government. While the following analysis
is informed by a UK and global context, many recommendations relate to policy
issues that are devolved. Because of the need to focus, such recommendations in
this report apply to England only. However, many of the underlying issues — for
example, about the rise of online communities and the opportunity for public
services to engage in new ways online — will apply in equal measure to all parts of
the UK. The Review hopes this work will be a resource for each of the devolved
administrations, as they explore specific strategies appropriate to their context.
Chapter 2: Changes in the use and availability of information
- New tools online mean it is now as easy to create and distribute information
online as it is to consume it.
- Two groups of citizens have emerged as a consequence of the rise of the internet:
people who make use of user-generated websites, and people who mix and 'mash'
data to create valuable new information and services.
Use of the internet has become widespread, impacting on citizens in
diverse ways
6. The majority of the population of the United Kingdom now uses the internet,
albeit with some important exceptions (for example social excluded groups and
those without access). Internet usage has grown from virtually zero in 1990, when
the World Wide Web first emerged, to approximately 61% today. This is
considerably faster than the historic growth rates of comparable communications
technology, like radio or the PC. Furthermore, the UK now has the fifth largest
broadband population in the world, with 12 million broadband households.
Box 2: Historic growth rates:
'It took just 40 years for the first 50 million people to own a radio;
just 16 years for the first 50 million people to own a PC;
but just 5 years for the first 50 million to be on the internet.'
Remarks by the Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer, to the Government
eaders Forum Europe, at the Scottish Parliament, 31 January 2007
7. The internet has started rapidly and profoundly to affect social and economic
relations in the United Kingdom. There is no better way to demonstrate the
significance of the internet than to look at television. TV, resistant to moderation
or abstinence campaigns from teachers and parents for 50 years, is now becoming
measurably less and less popular among internet users. TV consumption is
falling and internet usage is rising fast.
8. This change in the way people use their time is affecting other things, such as the
ways in which they make decisions. Internet users now consider search engines as
important when researching products and services as personal recommendations
from trusted friends. A recent research report by the Pew Internet and American
ife research programme called 'The Strength of Internet Ties' found that 60
million Americans claimed that 'the internet has played an important or crucial
role in helping them deal with at least one major life decision in the past two
years'.
Figure 1: UK trends in internet take-up
CommentOnThis.com note: Figure missing. See comments for a link
Source: Ofcom Communications Tracking Survey conducted by
Ipsos-Mori. Base: All adults Q4 data for 2001—06.
Increasingly citizens are making their own information on the
internet, and consuming information made by others
9. Popular internet sites make it as easy to create information as to consume it. These
tools include:
- fora and chat rooms that allow people easily to post questions and get answers
on issues of common concern (e.g. The Thorn Tree travel forum );
- social networking tools that allow people to keep track of the interests and
activities of their friends (e.g. MySpace and Facebook);
- blogging and video sites that allow citizens easily to become writers,
publishers and video producers (e.g. YouTube, Blogger); and
- wiki-based sites that enable joint creation of large and diverse repositories of
user-generated information on particular topics (e.g. Wikipedia).
Box 3: Wikipedia — an example of collaborative production
Wikipedia is one of the best-known and best-used sites on the internet. It is an online encyclopedia that
anyone can edit. Wikipedia is available in 249 different languages. Users employ a technology known
as a 'wiki' to allow visitors to the site to add, remove, edit and change available entries, easily and
quickly. Other wikis in a variety of areas are blossoming around the web, such as one for the 2007
World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Previously, online collaborative systems were the preserve of specialist or professional communities.
The changing use of technology has made collaborative production much easier and cheaper. In 2006,
the English language Wikipedia registered its one millionth user account, and passed the 1.5 million
mark for English articles.
There has been much debate about the accuracy of information published on Wikipedia. A qualitative
comparison of the online Britannica and Wikipedia has been published. On 14 December 2005, the
scientific journal Nature reported that, within 42 randomly selected general science articles, there were
162 mistakes in Wikipedia versus 123 in Britannica. However, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.
characterised Nature's study as flawed and misleading, and called for a 'prompt' retraction.
10. Using these tools, citizens have increasingly changed their role from passive
recipients of information provided by experts, to active producers of information
themselves, and consumers of information made by other citizens. This
information varies from recipes and photos to parenting advice, tributes and
eulogies at times of bereavement.
11. Such creation and sharing of information across electronic networks is not new.
Rather, it is a phenomenon that has only just achieved a scale of consequence for
policy makers. Online communities have existed since before the World Wide
Web as far back as the 1970s. They included email communities of self-help in
the fields of health, education, job searching and so on, normally shared between
experts in a few universities.
12. What used to be of esoteric interest to a handful of academics is now a
mainstream part of the lives of millions of Britons. User-generated sites like
YouTube, Bebo and MySpace regularly occupy slots in the league tables of
top websites in the UK. Even major sites that have a heritage of professionally
authored work, such as the BBC and the newspaper websites, now all contain
varying amounts of user-created information.
13. Amid this explosion of user-generated sites there is much that is of little or no
relevance to government: online chat about bands, films, socialising and so forth
is rightly considered none of the public sector's business. But there are sites that
clearly relate directly to major government agendas and that are highly popular.
MoneySavingExpert, for example, is a site dedicated to helping people save
money and get better deals on all sorts of goods and services. Its forum has
180,000 members and millions of visitors each month: easily on the scale of
friendly societies or trade unions. One of the principal catalysts for this review
was the need to find out how government should learn to live in a world that
contains such remarkable new bodies.
The internet is increasing the value of information created by
government
14. The over 100,000 public bodies in the UK produce a huge range of information.
These vary from school league tables to tide timetables, and from the Tube map to
the Census.
15. Computers allow public sector information to be re-used and combined to make
new services that were never envisaged when the information was originally
collected. This generates social and economic value of diverse kinds.
16. One of the most remarkable examples of how much new value can reside inside
what is essentially old information is the seemingly mundane field of postcodes.
Originally, postcodes were allocated and recorded simply to help the Post Office
deliver letters and parcels. These days the database describing which postcodes
are to be found where in the UK underpins countless websites, from that of
National Statistics to those of pizza-delivery companies. Every day new uses are
found, generating extra value at no additional cost to the public sector.
These two changes have created two new groups of citizens
17. The changes described above have facilitated the rise of two new groups of
citizens. The first group comprises people who create information on the internet.
The second group is composed of people who take information from various
sources, including government, and mix it together to make new tools and
services. The next two sections look at these two groups.
The first new group comprises people who take part in user-generated websites
18. The diversity of issues and activities covered on user-generated websites is more
or less as great as the diversity of the people who use them. Some human needs
are very common, though — for example, the experience of raising children — and
consequently some very large user-generated websites have grown up around
these. Two such sites in the UK are Netmums and Mumsnet (see Box 4).
Box 4: Netmums (
www.netmums.com) and Mumsnet (
www.mumsnet.com)
Netmums is an online community for mothers and fathers with (or expecting) young children. The site
claims 275,000 registered users spread across a 'family of local websites', in which 'each local website
is edited and maintained by a local mum with support from a central team'. The founders argue that
local content is important because only 'local mothers can truly access and provide the local
information essential to life as a mum to young children'. The site provides advice and support for
parents about bringing up their children, along with local listings of other services.
The site is similar to Mumsnet, another popular online site providing parenting information, along with
reviews of products and services. Mumsnet claims around 10,000 posts and comments on an average
day. Janice Turner, a columnist for The Times, wrote recently that she could not 'see how the
Government could improve on Mumsnet. Indeed, the fact it is run from one woman's back bedroom in
North London makes it infinitely more trustworthy.'
Box 5: Consumer advocacy - extract from a report by the Welsh
Consumer Council (forthcoming)
'The nthell:world web forum is one of the earliest examples of an independent effort mobilised by
consumers against the actions of a single company. Formed in 2000 by NTL customer Frank
Whitestone, it is a consumer lobby community, which set out to provide a public sounding board for
customers disgruntled by the company's service. Currently numbering over 25,000 members,
nthell:world became an influential force because its focus concentrated, laser-like, on just one service
provider (now Virgin Media), offering a space for customers to vent, share and highlight poor-quality
provision. In what has become a public relations risk, company representatives who type "[Company
Name] sucks" into Google will often find that just such grassroots campaigns have been started against
them.
'Although the body of customer experience passing through the nthell:world represented bad publicity
in high definition, in recognition of the positive contribution the site's users were making to improving
its services, NTL's CEO Simon Duffy met the site's owners in 2005 to discuss integrating nthell:world
into the company's own customer service offering — ensuring urgent problems highlighted on the
forum were routed into the organisation's existing infrastructure. Founder Whitestone later sold the site
to NTL and joined the company as staff.'
19. People become regular users of such websites because the sites contain the sort of
things they need to run their own lives: hints, tips, suggestions, moral support,
stories, reviews and so on, written and shared with other members of the public.
Often advice dispensed in such fora trumps official guidance in terms of
popularity simply because it is written in language that means something to users
and has the name of a real person attached.
20. Parenting is not the only area where user-generated sites are helping people to
help each other. Communities encountered by this review ranged from one with
just a few dozen people using email to share and manage the experience of being a
student with Asperger's Syndrome to another called TheStudentRoom, which
had over 8 million posts, mainly about homework and university applications.
The second new group is people who re-use information to build new
tools and services (including government)
21. Another new group of citizens that has emerged out of the rapid technological
change in the last half decade consists of information re-users, more colloquially
and widely known as 'data mashers'. This group includes businesses, non-profit
organisations and normal internet users who want to mix and combine information
to generate valuable new forms of information and new services.
22. Some of the most desirable information for this new group is data generated by
government, especially geographic information, which can often be used like a
glue to bind together disparate information.
23. Certain of these re-users are companies, some of which have grown to
considerable size. The internet company uSwitch, founded in 2000, helps people
compare utilities providers. It combines private sector information with quantities
of public sector information to deliver its services. It was recently bought for over
£200 million.
24. At the other end of the scale is mtraffic, a minimalist yet highly useful site for
accessing the BBC's traffic reports on a mobile phone, which registers over
10,000 visits a month. It was built as a volunteer project by programmer Tom
Dyson, one of the 1,300 members of the BBC's Backstage project. Backstage uses
non-commercial data licences to encourage a community of data mashers who
exist outside the commercial market.
25. The key challenge demonstrated by these examples is that the value inherent in
certain sorts of information is now recognized as changing every day, and, largely
speaking, is increasing. It is no longer true that only a big department or large
company can generate important benefits using information. The cost-benefit
calculations that historically underpinned what information is collected, who can
use it, and how it is paid for are rapidly becoming outdated.
Chapter 3: Why these changes matter
- The changing value of public sector information matters to government because
there are substantial potential economic and social benefits to citizens from
exploiting it.
- Engaging with user-generated sites and data mashers can help government deliver
better services, and help citizens to help themselves.
Information produced by the public sector has economic
value
26. Public sector information can generate economic value of two broadly different
kinds:
- direct value: revenue generated for government by selling access to public
sector information; and
- commercial value: revenue generated by companies who make use of public
sector information.
27. One of the most easily measured forms of economic value generated by public
sector information is the direct revenue earned by parts of the public sector selling
information. In 2006, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) estimates revenues from
the public sector information market at £590 million per year.
28. Companies pay for public sector information because it helps them make or save
money. The Met Office, for example, is aware that 'every year UK companies
lose thousands of pounds because of the weather — from late or absent staff,
delayed deliveries, surplus or insufficient stock to cancellation of projects'.
Consequently, it offers services, built on public sector information, that help
businesses make informed decisions that prevent the loss of company money. The
taxpayer gets better value for money to the availability of information.
29. Companies that use or re-use public sector information can generate revenue, part
of which is later paid to government in the form of corporation tax. Estimating
how much is paid in tax, or how much could be, is difficult but important.
According to an economic study commissioned by Ordnance Survey, its
geographic information underpins an impressive £100 billion of activity in the UK
economy. It is easy to see that without good-quality mapping, postcodes or land
ownership information, large parts of the economy would be unable to function at
all (i.e. anything that required delivery, or sale, rental or purchase of property).
Innovative use of public sector information has social value
30. It can be easy to forget that government releases and uses public sector
information to help large numbers of people. This review has identified a range of
studies in which the direct benefits of high quality information were measured.
31. In a study involving 200,000 patients, it was shown that, by providing clear and
useful information when dispensing medication, pharmacists could improve
patient adherence and persistence with medication advice by 16—33%. This both
increased the welfare of patients, and saved government downstream costs of
further unnecessary treatment.
32. A recent study of the effects of publishing heart surgery mortality rates showed
the effect on later mortality rates to be at worst neutral and at best helpful to
26,000 patients studied.
Information created by citizens has economic value
33. Several studies have shown that using the internet increases customer knowledge
and collective consumer power, leading to improved quality of goods and
services, innovation and often lower prices. Research in 2003 found that use of
price-comparison sites yielded an average saving of 16% on electronic goods .
Similarly, much of the travel holiday industry has been transformed by the
internet, driven by the effect of information on consumer decisions (see Box 6).
Box 6: How the internet has transformed the holiday industry
A Burst Media survey of over 2,000 web users who planned to travel in the next three months
found that nearly half (47.2%) of respondents who intended to use the web to plan their upcoming
travel said the internet would be their primary travel resource. In 2006, 20.1% of UK survey
respondents booked their most recent holiday online, compared to 16.8% in 2005 and 12.4% in
2004. These changes are reducing the need for travel agents and improving the direct
information base on which travellers are able to plan. Furthermore, the emergence of new
websites allowing traveller feedback on certain travel venues and experiences can place pressure
on the providers to improve over time.
Information created by citizens has social value
34. There are few historical precedents for the hundreds of thousands of people who
come together out of a shared interest on single websites like Netmums. The
precedents that do exist — corporations, friendly societies and trade unions — have
all clearly had impacts on, and have raised questions about, the role of
government. Despite the huge technological changes over the past 150 years, it is
possible to detect the echoes of these earlier social institutions in current
development, for example in helping:
- parents to raise healthy, well-educated, socially well-adjusted children;
- shoppers to avoid paying more than the going market rate for goods and
services; and
- the sick to recover, or cope with and manage their conditions.
35. Various academic studies have examined whether participation in different sorts
of user-generated websites, normally online communities, has any positive impact.
Most of the studies that have any measurable outcomes have shown some positive
effect of participating in user-generated websites. For example, one study found a
positive correlation between the amount of participation on online communities of
fellow patients and the psychosocial well-being of women with breast cancer.
36. Similarly, a US Health Department study found that use by HIV patients of their
Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System 'not only helps HIV
patients keep track of their condition and alert their doctors when they are having
problems, but it also has helped lower their average treatment costs by $400 a
month'.
37. Furthermore, and contrary to expectations, a study of 2,500 users of a Swedish
commercial parenting site found that it was disadvantaged parents who received
most support via the website. This support came in the form of finding people
they could trust and ask for advice. A remarkable 68% of users in the survey
identified themselves as at or below average national income.
38. Of course, the objectives of citizens who operate user-generated websites do not
match the objectives of government. Indeed, much of the media coverage of user-
generated sites has focused on cases in which user-generated websites display
information perceived as harmful or illegal. This review is aware of the potential
to use any technology for good or bad purposes. Appendix 4 provides some
examples where the creation and distribution of information online can actually be
harmful. While this potential for harm does exist, it does not negate the potential
for the same technology to be used in ways that promote positive social and
economic outcomes.
Chapter 4: The challenges facing government
- There are significant new opportunities for government to capitalise on the new
widespread ability to collect, re-use and distribute information.
- Government has not yet fully engaged with the new generation of ordinary
citizens wishing to use its information as ingredients in a new range of services.
- Government can contribute indirectly to improve the lives of citizens by doing
more to supply its information to the operators of user-generated websites.
- Government needs a new strategy and vision for engaging with citizens and re-
users of its information.
Government efforts to respond so far
39. Government is aware that the internet is changing the face of the UK economy
and society. Various government agencies are looking into issues around
information use and re-use (see Box 7 below) and government has already made a
number of policy changes in response to the evolving nature and value of
information, including:
- Cross Cutting Review of the Knowledge Economy (2000), which made
recommendations regarding information subject to Crown copyright, and
encouraged a shift to marginal cost pricing as a default position for the sale of
information.
- Transformational Government: Enabled by Technology (2005), which
made recommendations to design IT services more around the citizen, and
move to a shared services culture.
- Service Transformation (Varney Review) (2006), in which Sir David
Varney advised the Chancellor on ways to make the channels through which
services are delivered more responsive to users, including improving
Directgov and Businesslink so they become the primary information and
transactional channels for citizens and businesses.
- Commercial Use of Public Information (2006), in which the Office of Fair
Trading made a number of recommendations, including changing accounting
practices to ensure that public sector information providers generate as
competitive a market as possible in information.
- Electronic Government Services for the 21st Century (2000), in which the
Performance and Innovation Unit took a strategic view of which public
services should be delivered by electronic means and looked at the options for
securing delivery of these services, including the respective roles of the public
and private sectors.
Box 7: Parts of government with information policy remits
- The Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI) advises on and regulates the operation of public
sector information re-use, including the management of Crown copyright.
- The Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information (APPSI) advises ministers on information policy
issues that will encourage and create opportunities for greater re-use of
public sector information.
- The Ministry of Justice is responsible for the 'digital dialogue', which is examining how central
government can strengthen consultation and interaction with citizens using
ICT.
- The Department of Transport is responsible for the Science and Innovation Ministerial
Committee's Data Grand Challenge on realising the benefits of (particularly real-time) data within
and outside government.
- The Better Regulation Executive is looking at information as a regulatory tool, including focus-
group work and a series of case studies.
- The Government Communications Group is analysing the government's digital and social media
capability.
- The e-Government Unit is responsible more generally for ensuring that IT supports the business
transformation of government itself, so that government can provide better, more efficient public
services.
40. Despite these positive moves, this review has found that there remains a need to
push through reforms to ensure that the full benefits of information creation and
re-use outside of government are exploited.
Government has so far interacted little with user-generated websites
41. To date, government has not yet adequately engaged with most user-generated
sites or non-professional re-users of its information. Part of the reason for this
low level of engagement is likely to be risk aversion in light of the less controlled
environment that user-generated websites present. Websites on which anyone is
allowed to participate are, by definition, less controlled than sites to which only
the operator can contribute. This means that users may use sites in ways that are
incompatible with government objectives or ways of operating. For example,
civil servants may fear that, by providing relevant information for the users of a
site, they might attract criticism toward government or themselves. Similarly, civil
servants may be concerned that engaging in less controlled online fora may mean
that bad or anti-social behaviour by other users could reflect poorly on
government.
42. It is possible that government has not adequately engaged with user-generated
sites simply because these new, large-scale user-generated sites have emerged too
quickly for government to establish ways of connecting to them. For example, the
managers of two different user-generated sites interviewed as part of this review
each reported over 20 meetings with parts of government that wanted to engage
with them but that simply did not yet have the contracting policy, processes and
guidelines in place for collaborative work.
There are barriers to re-using information produced by government
43. Research from the Statistics Commission and the Office of Fair Trading shows
that many users of public sector information report barriers to accessing the
information that they need in order to add value.
44. Common sorts of barriers include:
- information that is too hard to find;
- information that is in the wrong format, making it hard or impossible to re-
use;
- information not being made available when it is needed;
- not knowing that a certain piece of information exists in the first place;
- use of the information being constrained by licensing terms; and
- information that is too expensive.
Box 8: Example of a barrier to re-using public sector information
'I got in touch with the Stern report team, because I wanted to re-publish it in a format that
people could easily read and discuss on the internet. I couldn't make the person at the other end
of the phone line understand why I didn't want the report in 600 page PDF format. So I said I
wanted to be able to read it on my phone. He told me to get a better phone.'
45. These barriers create costs, as well as other problems for both information users
and government. The Office of Fair Trading estimates that improved availability
of information to re-users could double the direct market value of public sector
information to £1.1 billion per year, and has made a detailed series of
recommendations to help government do this — recommendations that this review
endorses.
46. Much of this improvement is expected to come from better exploitation of public
sector information that is already available at marginal cost, but that may not be
very widely known or easy to access. Public sector information is often not
considered valuable because the public sector body that creates it does not
perceive its value and so does not try to make it easily available. Similarly, it is
often not considered valuable or exploited because nobody outside government is
aware that the valuable information exists.
47. The review also uncovered other reasons for under-exploitation of information:
- unhelpful officials lacking knowledge, which leads to blockages or delays in
processing requests because they are seen as low priority and difficult to
follow through; and
- confusion about the copyright status of public bodies and their information,
and where to apply for a licence; this can delay negotiations.
48. Reiterating the importance of these factors, a research paper commissioned by
the Department for Transport has identified a 'silo mentality' in government that
can impede better exploitation of public sector information (i.e. the inability to see
the benefits of distributing information to others). Genuine concerns include data
confidentiality, loss of formal and informal controls over data access, and data
integrity. Despite these concerns, this review did also discover instances of good
practice, one of which is described in Box 9.
Box 9: The Statute Law Database
The Statute Law Database, created by the Department of Constitutional Affairs (now the Ministry
of Justice), is an official and authoritative online database of revised UK primary legislation and
is available free of charge to the public. The database can be found at:
www.statutelaw.gov.uk
aunched in late December 2006, it contributes to the new Ministry of Justice's aims of
improving access to justice.
In this case, the government department in charge reached the decision that the social value that
accrued from the public being readily able to find out the laws under which they are governed
outweighed the possible direct revenue generation from selling access.
Through strong departmental leadership and an innovative approach, which considered the long-
term public benefit, the Department of Constitutional Affairs, now the Ministry of Justice, both
created a public asset and brought acclaim for the department. It acted responsively to public
demand, and the decision was applauded by information and law campaigners. The decision was
described as a 'sea-change' in the way government information is made available to the public.
A new vision and strategy
49. This report argues that government needs a new approach to public information of
all kinds. If it is to capitalise on the emerging opportunities described above,
government needs a clear vision and strategy. This review proposes a simple
vision: that citizens, consumers and government can create, re-use and
distribute information in ways that add maximum value.
50. The proposed strategy for achieving this vision involves government both
addressing the barriers described above and actively taking the opportunities
arising from the recent developments in the evolution of the internet. This report
recommends a strategy through which government:
- welcomes and engages with users and operators of user-generated sites in
pursuit of common social and economic objectives;
- supplies potential re-users with the public sector information they need, when
they need it, in a way that maximises the long-term benefits for all citizens;
and
- protects the public interest by preparing citizens for a world of plentiful (and
sometimes unreliable) information, and helps excluded groups take advantage.
51. Figure 2 below shows how the vision, strategy and specific recommendations of
this report relate to one another. Each of the following chapters covers one of the
key strategic areas.
[CommentonThis.com note: Figure will be added below in the comments]
Chapter 5: Exploring new opportunities
Government should explore emerging opportunities to empower and benefit citizens
in partnership with user-generated website operators and users.
To begin this process, government should:
- pilot 'Power of Information' partnerships between major departments and user-
generated websites to explore the potential benefits for citizens;
- introduce standard non-commercial licences to encourage more innovation in the
re-use of the most valuable sorts of public sector information;
- explore the possibilities for establishing or commissioning a government 'data
mashing laboratory'; and
- introduce more self-help fora to improve understanding, effective usage and take-
up of government services by users, particularly among the most disadvantaged.
52. The previous chapters suggest that there are various opportunities for better
exploiting information to benefit UK citizens. This chapter makes
recommendations about experiments to develop an understanding of how
government can usefully participate in the new world of information production
and distribution.
Government should experiment with 'Power of Information'
partnerships with suitable and interested user-generated sites
Recommendation 1
. To improve service delivery and communication with the public, the
Central Office of Information (COI), in partnership with the Office of Public Sector
Information (OPSI), should coordinate the development of experimental partnerships
between major departments and user-generated sites in key policy areas, including parenting
advice (Department for Education and Skills), services for young people, and healthcare
(Department of Health).
53. There are several types of collaboration between government and the operators of
major user-generated websites that could potentially be of real value to the users
of those sites. These include, but are not limited to:
- gathering feedback on different aspects of service provision;
- consulting citizens on different options for changes in service delivery;
- signposting information and services to specific groups of users who indicate
particular needs;
- developing a citizen-friendly language; and
- identifying gaps in service delivery.
54. The idea that there might be mutual benefits is not new. Many user-generated
website operators have never had much involvement with government. However,
there are some who have tried many times to engage, finding that government
departments are unable to respond quickly and flexibly — even if only for
experimental partnerships. The Central Office of Information (COI), in
partnership with the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI), should
coordinate the development of experimental partnerships between major
departments and operators of major user-generated websites in key policy areas,
including parenting advice (Department for Education and Skills (DfES)), services
for young people, and healthcare (Department of Health) to realise the benefits
listed in the paragraph above.
55. COI and OPSI should liaise with the relevant departments to form a small project
panel, whose task it would be to approach the managers of these web communities
to discuss the possibility of collaboration. The exact details of the collaboration
should not be predetermined by OPSI, COI or the relevant departments.
Departments should carry out detailed discussions with the user-created website
operators and identify mutually beneficial options. Government should not
prejudge the exact nature of mutual benefits and should approach negotiations
with an open mind.
56. In carrying out these discussions, departments should:
- work carefully with the operators and users of pre-existing sites to develop
appropriate forms of interaction between government and users, and strongly
heed any warnings about engagements that might deter users or harm the sites;
- engage primarily through named civil servants who are open about whom they
work for, and who become regular members of communities over a period of
time;
- consider how to fund initial engagements — some large sites are run by very
small, overstretched organisations, and it should not be assumed that they can
afford even to make the time to discuss engagement without some support;
and
- evaluate these engagements in realistic time frames (i.e. no less than one year
from start).
Government should ensure it does not duplicate the efforts of pre-existing
user-generated sites
Recommendation 2
. To reduce unnecessary duplication of pre-existing user-generated sites,
COI should update the guidelines for minimum website standards by December 2007;
departments should be strongly advised to consult the operators and users of pre-existing
user-generated sites before they build their own versions.
57. The corollary of embarking on partnerships with existing successful user-
generated sites is that government does not attempt to replicate them and crowd
them out of the market. The community of professionals who run user-generated
websites in the UK has provided the review team with various examples where
parts of the public sector have attempted to replicate their work (see Box 10).
Box 10: Duplication from the perspective of user-generated site operators
,p>Netmums describe a sense of frustration that government departments have tried to 'pigeon-hole'
them as potential contractors or promoters of government services, rather than seeing them as
partners in providing a better service. Also DfES operates a user-generated parenting site called
ParentsCentre which Netmums see as duplicating their service to some
extent.
The non-profit organisation Patient Opinion, which seeks to enable patients' sharing of healthcare
experiences and to influence health policy, has expressed concern that government may be
replicating their service. They report that the first time they heard about the parallel and
government-led 'user voice' function was through a published article.
58. This is poor practice, for several reasons:
- Building a community of users on websites is a slow, difficult process with a
very high failure rate. Duplicating efforts means investing in a very risky
proposition.
- This may be considered to be anti-competitive behaviour, which can make it
harder for companies to attract capital, or for non-profit organisations to attract
volunteers or funding.
- Government could often achieve its own aims of working with service users
more cheaply by working with pre-existing sites.
Recommendation 3
. Departments, monitored by COI, should research the scale and role of
user-generated websites in their areas, with a view to either terminating government services
that are no longer required, or modifying them to complement citizen-led endeavours.
59. Given the spectacular growth in the number and size of user-generated websites, it
seems unlikely that every government information service is now as essential as it
once was. In order to reduce future duplication of online services between
government and user-generated sites, the review recommends that relevant
departments, monitored by COI, should research user-generated websites in their
areas, with a view to either terminating government services that are no longer
required, or modifying them to complement citizen-led endeavours.
Government should promote innovative re-use of public
sector information by granting non-commercial licences
Recommendation 4
. To encourage innovation in the re-use of information by non-
commercial users, UK trading funds should, in consultation with OPSI, examine the
introduction of non-commercial re-use licences, along the lines of those pioneered by the
BBC's Backstage project and Google Maps.
60. The internet has created a new group of information users: people who mix and
combine information to create new services of benefit to society. This culture of
'data mashing' has been led by enthusiasts and small businesses, empowered by
visionary information-access programmes from internet pioneers like Google and
the BBC. In the past, few individuals or small organisations had the technology or
skills to access and re-use public sector information. Today, the power of cheap
computers and the wide availability of free software makes mixing and mashing
information quicker and easier.
Box 11: Data mashing
'Data mashing' is a process of re-using information. It entails merging of different types of data
(e.g. mapping and transport data) to produce new products or services. 'Mash-ups' most
commonly combine mapping data, such as that provided by Google, with data from another
source. For instance, the website Chicagocrime combines mapping data with information from
the Chicago police department to create a free, automatically updated map of crime incidents in
the city.
In the same way, the innovative American retail website Zillow combines mapping data with
information on local land value and house price sales to create a service that accurately estimates
the value of a home at a given address.
61. Two things are worth noting about this new group of users. First, by virtue of their
status as individuals or organisations wishing only to experiment, not build final
products ready for market, they often do not have the resources to pay for
expensive data. Second, in the past, larger organisations have found it difficult to
engage with small numbers of individual developers. These developers want
information delivered rapidly and possibly with no ultimate business use in mind.
This difficulty has been exacerbated by the tendency on the part of some public
sector information providers to seek licence negotiations, rather than simply sell
information from a price list.
62. However, private sector technology companies decided a new approach was
needed to engage with these groups of enthusiasts and developers. Seeing these
individuals as a potential source of innovation for new products and services, they
began to open up their internal information to individuals for free, using non-
commercial licences. Examples include Google Code, the Yahoo Developer
Network, and Flickr Services.
63. Online retailer Amazon was among the first to spot this opportunity. An article in
Business Week describes the early 'epiphany' of founder Jeff Bezos: 'If the new
computer set up allowed folks inside to be more creative and independent, why
not open it up to outsiders, too?' Consequently, in 2002, Amazon began offering
outside software and website developers access to selected Amazon data, such as
pricing trends, gradually adding more and more. Now Amazon is in a situation
where it sees constant innovation from more than 200,000 outside web
developers, up 60% from a year ago.
64. Innovation in this area need not be limited to the private sector. The BBC is
frequently cited as an innovator. In 2005, it launched a project, called BBC
Backstage, to encourage non-commercial re-use of various types of information
normally unavailable to outsiders. Popular types of content provided by the BBC
as part of Backstage include traffic reports, weather data and the TV programming
guide. The site has a development community of around 1,300 users and has
resulted in a number of innovative projects, including a mobile phone traffic news
system in the UK, mtraffic.
65. The BBC justifies its investment in BBC Backstage because it encourages
innovation, and because the service helps to develop 'niche applications' that the
Corporation itself might not develop. It provides the various types of content
through easy-to-use non-commercial licences.
66. Ordnance Survey has also begun experimenting with non-commercial licensing.
In October 2006, the organisation announced the creation of OS OpenSpace, a
service that would have allowed users to apply to gain access to OS mapping data
for 'non-commercial use only'. At the time of the announcement, OS claimed that
the application would 'minimise barriers for individuals to access high quality
data' while also exposing OS data 'to a wider community' and would allow 'the
development of new ideas targeted at niche groups'.
67. However, the service was never launched, and is currently on hold. Interviews
with OS suggested that the major barrier to launching the application came from
its relationships with smaller suppliers, who resented the possibility of non-
commercial re-users obtaining free access to information that they had had to pay
for as part of their commercial arrangements.
68. Similar barriers will exist for other public sector information holders, and in
particular other UK trading funds, in attempting to experiment with non-
commercial licences. Ordnance Survey found that those consumers already
licensing their mapping data strongly objected to the idea of similar information
being given away for free to others, even if on a non-commercial basis. The same
objections are likely to be found elsewhere, and a mechanism will have to be
found to migrate non-commercial licence users onto commercial licences if they
decide to use the information for commercial gain.
69. These concerns about competitiveness are serious and deserve attention. However,
there are significant counterarguments that have led this review to continue to
press for non-commercial licences.
70. The first argument is that the cost-recovery policy for trading funds already
encourages and allows de facto price discrimination. For example, companies are
charged different amounts for the use of certain Ordnance Survey datasets,
depending on how many users they will have within the purchasing body. It does
not actually cost Ordnance Survey more to serve more terminals, so price
discrimination based broadly on the size of an organisation is already accepted
policy.
71. Second, and more broadly, government already recognises the unique value of
projects undertaken on a non-profit basis, and rewards such activity through tax
reductions for registered charities. Charities might be economically characterised
as organisations that produce disproportionate levels of public good and positive
externalities from resources deployed. Information turned into new public services
by non-commercial users is at the extreme end of such possible good, because its
benefits can be shared almost infinitely at no marginal cost.
72. This review found little evidence that other UK public sector information holders,
apart from Ordnance Survey, were attempting to follow the BBC and private
sector organisations in pursuing not-for-profit licences to promote innovation.
This is a substantial missed opportunity, which will only get bigger as it becomes
easier to mix and re-use information on the internet.
73. This review recommends that UK trading funds, in consultation with OPSI,
examine the introduction of non-commercial re-use licences, along the lines of
those pioneered by the BBC's Backstage project and Google Maps.
74. Finally, given the central importance of mapping data in this area, Ordnance
Survey should find ways to address the concerns of its existing customers, and
launch its OpenSpace project. If timing permits, the launch of the OpenSpace
project could be a way of piloting the proposed non-commercial re-use licensing
approach prior to wider adoption.
Recommendation 5
. To promote innovation, Ordnance Survey should, by the end of
December 2007, launch its OpenSpace project to allow non-commercial experimentation
with mapping data.
Innovations within government
Recommendation 6
. To promote innovative use of public sector information, the Department
for Transport, with the support of the Chief Scientific Adviser's Committee, should
complete the partially undertaken scoping and costing of a 'data mashing laboratory' and
advise the Cabinet Committee of Science and Innovation on appropriate next steps.
75. As well as encouraging innovation and data mashing by non-profit organisations,
government could establish or commission its own efforts in these areas. Various
proposals for a government 'data mashing laboratory' have been circulating since
2006. A government data mashing laboratory would establish a dedicated
environment for the sharing of public sector information inside government and
the experimental generation of new value from pre-existing information.
76. The idea of establishing such a laboratory has been considered as part of the
Department for Transport's Data Grand Challenge. This is a project of the Science
and Innovation Ministerial Committee, designed to realise the benefits of
(particularly real-time) data within and outside government and, in particular,
improving access to data held across different government departments and from
external sources. A detailed paper on the data mashing laboratory was produced
by officials at the Department for Transport (DfT) during 2006. It suggested the
creation of a £10 million, two-year pilot project. Currently this initiative has
stalled .
77. Following the initial proposal, a DfT-commissioned paper examined the concept
of a data mashing laboratory. The resulting research identified a number of
barriers to good information sharing within government. The paper's author,
Chris Marsden, suggested that the concept came from the observation that many
of the more pioneering approaches to exploiting information in the private sector
were too advanced for government. Instead, government needed a 'safe space'
where officials, public sector information holders and outsiders could access
public sector information and information from the private sector, and experiment
with the creation of new data products.
78. This review recommends that, as the Department for Transport re-examines this
issue, it should bear several factors in mind:
- Any successful innovation space must have fluid links to individuals and
bodies outside government.
- Given the extremely low cost of data mashing, it should consider whether the
full £10 million is absolutely necessary at the start.
- It should consider whether the lab actually needs to be a physical place at all.
- It should consider whether participants in the lab need themselves to be civil
servants.
Self-help fora for government services online
Recommendation 7
. To improve understanding, effective usage and take-up of government
services, COI should examine options for more self-help fora for public services and publish
guidance for departments on how and when to set up such fora by December 2007.
79. Earlier chapters of this report have demonstrated the significant potential for
engaging citizens as users and co-producers of public services. Government is
aware of this issue. Numerous reports have made the case for engaging more
closely with the consumers of public services by allowing them more 'voice' and
the ability to shape the services they are using. Sir David Varney's recent review
on service transformation argued that:
'deep insight into customer needs, behaviours and motivations, plus the ability
for citizens and businesses to have better information on the services on offer,
are all important for the design of public services that support the
Government's desired policy outcomes'.
80. Equally, the Government's Policy Review document Building on Progress:
Public Services argued that:
'The Government has an important role to play in helping citizens to make the
most of their ability to influence the way in which they receive services. This
includes using the internet and other technologies to enable citizens to shape
services in ways and at times convenient to them.'
81. This review is particularly interested in ways of providing opportunities, using the
internet, to help citizens help each other to use public services online. Charles
eadbeater, an expert on these issues, recently wrote that 'reform should start to
be guided by an ethic of participation and self-management'.
82. One way of putting these principles into practice is to examine the possibility of
investing in online self-help fora. In particular, there is good evidence from the
private sector that technology companies have led the way in providing online
spaces and fora. On these fora, their customers can discuss how to use their goods
or services. Examples of firms using content generated by users to improve their
customer focus and service include Google's numerous Google Groups about its
various services and Microsoft's Knowledge Base. If the companies do not
provide or host such a service, third parties or enthusiasts are likely to fill the gap.
Put simply, if you have a problem with a computer or a mobile phone, there is
probably a forum, run by users of that product, that can help you fix it.
83. Private companies see three main benefits from engaging with and supporting
online fora that discuss their products. First, such fora help consumers: web-based
fora have become an excellent source for users of a service to provide useful tips,
advice and support to other users. Second, such fora save companies money: users
who find help online are less likely to call expensive phone lines. Third, fora
improve innovation: online areas in which users can provide feedback, complain
or identify problems allow companies to identify and fix problems in their
products more quickly.
84. There is a significant opportunity for government to use online fora to allow users
of services to help each other navigate and understand public services. Such fora
could either be hosted by a government agency, or run independently but
facilitated with relevant materials to help customers. Citizens frequently find
public services confusing to navigate and understand. This is especially true of
administrative tasks, such as filing tax returns, acquiring a driver's licence,
applying for benefits, making a planning application or finding the right entity to
complain to about a service.
85. Online self-help fora offer citizens a number of potential benefits. First, they could
help users who are having difficulty coping with a complicated form or process —
for filling in tax returns or applying for a benefit. Second, they can provide
reassurance that any such process has been completed correctly. Third, they can
provide an extra source of advice for significant decisions, in which users simply
wish to talk to someone who is 'like them', making the same decision. Finally,
they allow users to comment on the quality of the service itself.
86. There are a number of administrative tasks that could benefit from user fora. In
particular, there are opportunities to introduce such online fora in various specific
public services, including:
- HM Revenue and Customs self-assessment tax returns (see Appendix 5);
- driving licence applications;
- benefits and tax credit applications;
- user complaints about government services;
- application for or renewal of car tax.
Chapter 6: Improving access to public sector information
- Government should provide better access to the public sector information it holds.
- To help government respond to rapidly changing demands for public sector
information, a web-based channel for aggregating information requests should be
set up.
- Government has a policy of charging very little (i.e. 'marginal cost') for providing
public sector information to those that want to re-use it. However, trading funds
(like Ordnance Survey) are excluded from this policy.
- There are arguments for and against moving to a different charging regime for the
re-use of public sector information held by trading funds; economic analysis is
required to determine whether a change would be appropriate.
- Except where this economic analysis suggests otherwise, government should
consistently apply its policy of marginal cost pricing.
Revealing the demand for public sector information
Recommendation 8
. To improve government's responsiveness to demand for public sector
information, by July 2008 OPSI should create a web-based channel to gather and assess
requests for publication of public sector information.
87. It is relatively easy to suggest changes that would give citizens and organisations
better access to information held by government. These include:
- republishing information in open standards or as web services;
- changing when information is published to suit the needs of those requesting
it;
- rewriting licences in situations where they currently prevent innovative re-use;
and
- presenting databases in ways that suit the needs of re-users.
88. The problem is not how to make information available, but rather where to
allocate scarce resources in order to do so. This review argues that mandating all
government departments or agencies to publish information in a certain way is
likely to be expensive, unreliably implemented, and of dubious value for money.
Instead, government should endeavour to improve the speed and efficiency with
which they respond to demands from individuals and organisations to publish
information.
89. Currently there are few incentives for individual government agencies to ensure
that the information they produce is being widely and productively used. This is
partly because they must bear the cost of sharing, and partly because few public
organisations are primarily set up to provide information. To address this, the
review recommends that OPSI create a single web-based channel to aggregate and
openly publish requests for public sector information. The channel should be a
new part of a pre-existing website, rather than a whole new site. It should work as
a low-cost, open way of bringing together all the publicly filed requests for
changes in the publication of public sector information.
90. This kind of web-based channel would allow users to read and endorse other
requests for government information. There could also be an option to leave
supporting evidence for why the information would be valuable. Furthermore,
OPSI should carry out a rolling assessment programme of the requests filed. In
cases where releasing information would seem to be in the public interest, OPSI
should write to the information holder in question and ask for a response to the
proposal, including the cost implications. OPSI would also ideally report, as part
of its annual review, on the number and nature of requests and the responses from
information holders.
91. This approach would have the following effects:
- motivating government agencies to be more transparent about the choices they
face around resource allocation;
- helping government agencies to be more transparent about the publication
decision-making processes; and
- helping government agencies prioritise their responses to requests for
information over time, allowing them to plan and budget accordingly.
92. The web-based channel would also help reveal where previously untapped value
lies in the information held by government. In order to achieve all these goals,
OPSI should ensure that public sector information providers link to the new
channel.
93. The longer-term benefits of a web-based channel revealing the demand for public
sector information are likely to include:
- users and organisations building products and services, free or paid for, that
would not otherwise have existed (i.e. more innovation);
- better business and personal decisions made through wider availability of
information in forms people want; and
- clear demonstrations of how working with information re-users
(demonstrating a 'co-production' approach) can work in practice, possibly
resulting in other analogous approaches across government.
Reconsidering information charging policy
Recommendation 9.
By Budget 2008, government should commission and publish an
independent review of the costs and benefits of the current trading fund charging model for
the re-use of public sector information, including the role of the five largest trading funds,
the balance of direct versus downstream economic revenue, and the impact on the quality of
public sector information.
Recommendation 10
. To ensure the most appropriate supply of information for re-use,
government should consistently apply its policy of marginal cost pricing for 'raw'
information to all public bodies, including trading funds, except where the published
economic analysis in recommendation 9 shows this does not serve the interests of UK
citizens.
Current policy on charging for public sector information
94. There is an ongoing debate over the extent to which government should charge
citizens, NGOs or businesses for a licence to re-use the public sector information
it collects. At present, government policy is that public sector information
holders that choose to make public sector information available should charge for
re-use of 'raw' data (see below for definition) at 'marginal cost'. In situations
where government produces information that has been modified to add value,
departments are required to charge at market rates. Recommendations 9 and 10
above pertain exclusively to the pricing of raw data.
Box 12: Defining 'raw' data
'Raw data' waas defined in the Review of Government Information as "information collected,
created, or commissioned within Government which is central to Government's core
responsibilities. The supply of selected components of a raw data package, exactly as in the
package is raw data supply, but the supply with further analysis, summarisation etc, or of data at a
different level of aggregation to that used by Government, is not raw data for the purposes of this
report but is value-added information." Raw data is not synonymous with raw material, or with
unchecked data. For example, the raw material for value-added services may, or may not, be raw
data.' (HM Treasury, 'Charges for information: when and how' (2001))
95. The policy of charging marginal cost for the bulk of government information is
relatively new, and originated in the Government's 'Cross Cutting Review of the
Knowledge Economy' (2000). The rationale for a policy change was that:
'The current policy of average cost pricing creates a significant barrier to the
re-use of information because it requires parts of government, where this is not
core business, to make assessments and attributions of relevant costs and
negotiate individual contracts in an area in which many departments and
agencies are ill-placed to operate. Marginal cost pricing would remove this
burden from both the department concerned and the private sector.'
96. An exception to this policy is made for a class of public bodies known as trading
funds. The Cross Cutting Review of the Knowledge Economy concluded that
marginal cost pricing was appropriate for 'departments and agencies (other than
trading funds)' but not for trading funds. Because of the decision to exempt
trading funds from marginal cost pricing and other historic decisions, there are
some bodies that charge for most of their information (e.g. Ordnance Survey)
which appear similar to other bodies (such as the Office of National Statistics) that
do not charge.
Trading funds
97. Trading Funds collect most of the useful and economically valuable UK public
sector information, with the Cross Cutting Review suggesting that they currently
take in 92% of all government public sector information revenue. The largest
trading funds by revenue are Ordnance Survey, the Met Office, the UK
Hydrographic Office, HM Land Registry and Companies House.
98. In common with other trading funds, these bodies operate on a 'cost recovery'
basis. This means they are required to partially fund their operations and the
collection, maintenance and updating of public sector information by charging
their users for the re-use of the public sector information they hold. Because they
charge, they do not have to be supported entirely by the taxpayer. This review
estimates that sales by trading funds to non-government customers generate
between £100 million and £200 million a year, including revenue from both
statutory and non-statutory information services.
99. There are various different funding models for UK trading funds. Ordnance
Survey funds almost its entire operations from direct commercial revenue,
although diverse parts of government make up about half of its clientele by value.
The Met Office, on the other hand, relies on a subsidy from the Ministry of
Defence for around half of its income.
Indirect economic benefits of sharing public sector information
100. The amount of money generated by direct sales from trading funds is thought
to be much smaller than the wider value of public sector information to the
economy. Whenever an organisation or an individual uses some public sector
information to generate a service that is then sold on, public sector information
generates new economic value, although not necessarily for UK-based companies.
101. In its recent report, the Office of Fair Trading argued that there was some
£500 million of untapped economic value in the whole UK public sector
information market, on top of the £590 million currently generated. According to
the study and to interviews conducted by the review team, this is a 'conservative'
estimate, and is certainly considerably smaller than other estimates that put the
value at between 0.8% and 8% of the entire economy (c. £10—100 billion).
Arguments for and against charging for public sector information
102. It has been argued that lowering the cost of accessing and re-using some or all
public sector information could generate tax returns from new business that may
exceed the direct revenue lost through forfeiting a proportion of the licence fees.
This review recommends that this important, but as yet unsubstantiated, argument
be examined through the proposed independent review of the costs and benefits of
the current trading fund charging model. This section sets out some of the
competing factors that need to be examined.
Box 13: Arguments for moving to non-cost-recovery pricing for raw information
- Rapid technological changes since 2000 have made it much easier and cheaper to re-use public
sector information, and have generated new classes of information re-user, including individuals,
enthusiasts, small companies and third sector bodies. These new users now have the tools to re-use
the information, but are often unable to access it due to cost barriers. This is especially common in
the field of geographic information, such as postcodes.
- While arguing for cost-recovery pricing for Trading Funds, the Cross Cutting Review argued more
widely that, in the short run, 'marginal cost pricing may bring considerable extra social benefits:
information is a good for which this marginal cost is in many cases near to zero (once information
is collected only the costs of reproduction, etc. are additional); there are also prospects that
demand would grow rapidly in response to lower prices (information being an experience good)
and as basic information is repackaged in innovative ways.' According to Derek Clarke, the South
African Mapping Agency 'did indeed find that the number of organisations consuming its data
increased by 500%' when it abandoned its previous charging policy.
- Some empirical evidence exists to suggest both that the total size of the US re-use market is much
larger than in European countries, and that certain types of markets for public sector information
re-use (e.g. weather derivatives) expanded much more quickly in the US than in Europe. However,
it is not possible from available research to determine whether this was related more to other
factors, such as the size of the US.
Box 14: Arguments for maintaining the status quo
- In the absence of economic analysis, the size of any economic gain from making some or all data
available at marginal cost is unknown. By contrast, the direct income saved by not making the
taxpayer fund trading funds can be calculated quite easily and is substantial (for example
approximately £60 million a year for Ordnance Survey).
- Data quality may suffer. The need for trading funds to make a return on capital gives them an
incentive to meet customer needs. Simultaneously, the cost-recovery model generates money
required to invest in improving data and keeping it up to date. Anecdotal evidence from the US
suggests that the quality of many types of US public data is lower than in the UK, although the
review was unable to identify specific studies showing this, or the costs to the US economy of
lower-quality data.
- Even if much more revenue is generated by companies re-using public sector information, it might
not be by companies paying tax in the UK.
- If trading funds do not receive direct compensation for the service they provide through cost
recovery, and if they are not obliged through statute or regulation to provide those services, their
natural incentive is to make those optional services inaccessible, thus reducing the total
information available for public use and re-use.
103. Government's existing charging policy in relation to trading funds is founded
on the assumption that the wider benefits of a marginal cost model for re-use are
small, compared to the data-collection costs and surpluses generated by trading
funds. Existing government policy also assumes the benefits that accrue will
primarily be private, and that the public should not have to pay for public sector
information through general taxation. However, there is enough evidence (see
below) to argue that these assumptions are now sufficiently out of date for them to
require a detailed re-examination:
- Ordnance Survey's OXERA study estimated that its data underpinned £100
billion of economic activity in the UK. If the current charging regime is
reducing the size of possible economic activity by even a single percentage
point of GDP, the tax income forfeited could dwarf the entire £50—60 million
that is currently saved by having Ordnance Survey sell information on a cost-
recovery basis. This clearly warrants closer examination.
- Making a return on capital does create positive incentives for good customer
service. However, the incidences of unproductive barriers to innovation
recorded by the Office of Fair Trading's report Commercial Use of Public
Information raise concerns. It is perhaps unsurprising that any charging model
creates non-cost barriers in terms of delay and bureaucracy, and narrows the
prospective market to clients capable of entering into contract negotiations.
The scale of these barriers under the current charging model is not known and
is of concern.
- The huge number of new data mash-ups that have grown up across the internet
in the last two years demonstrates new value being generated from
information re-used every day.
- HM Treasury's (HMT) decision to make mainstream public sector information
available at marginal cost has seen some striking successes. For example, the
free website uSwitch (based on public sector information) has created so
much value that it was recently purchased for £210 million.
- The historic division between personal use of public sector information
(traditionally free) and uses that benefit or affect a wider group of people
(traditionally licensed) is collapsing. Individuals increasingly expect that they
should be able to share valuable information with friends and family without
engaging in a licensing arrangement originally designed for businesses.
Possible alternative charging regimes
104. There is a major precedent that is often cited by those arguing for changes in
the trading fund cost recovery model. In the United States, public sector
information is collected by agencies funded from general taxation, and made
available to commercial and non-commercial users for free. Publicly-funded data
collectors do not re-sell value-added public sector information products.
Furthermore, recent changes in charging policies within the South African and
Canadian mapping agencies have moved both towards the US model, rather than
the cost-recovery model currently used in the UK.
105. International examples alone do not sufficiently justify changing the UK
model. The review was told several times in interviews that there were
disadvantages to the US approach. The most substantial, and often repeated, was
that the economic benefits might not offset the fall in government income
currently received from trading funds, resulting in a significant net revenue loss
for the government. There were also concerns about inferior data quality as a
result of this charging regime.
Recommended work
106. Acknowledging the indirect value of public sector information and the need to
ensure that charging arrangements are best serving the UK economy, the Cross
Cutting Review recommended that 'further work should be undertaken by the
Treasury and the DTI [Department of Trade and Industry] on the economics of
information pricing with a view to developing further the evidence base and to
inform future policy decisions.'
107. This recommendation has not yet been implemented. No reliable economic
analysis has been undertaken to estimate the costs and benefits of different
charging regimes. This has been of particular concern, since technological
changes have moved in a direction that challenges rather than supports the status
quo by increasing the value that can be generated from any one piece of
information.
108. Various options for reform of the cost-recovery trading funds are possible —
not simply a blanket change in the charging for all products and services from all
trading funds. Options include providing some or all information for free, pricing
at marginal cost or pricing at an intermediate level between cost recovery and
zero. The one thing that these various options have in common is that they are
likely to increase the market for public sector information re-use at the expense of
lower direct revenue to government from sales. The correct model will maximise
net benefits.
109. If economic analysis dictates that some reform of trading fund pricing models
is desirable, it will be necessary to re-examine the statutory functions of those
trading funds. This would prevent changed charging models from reducing the
amount of valuable public sector information produced.
Moving to an evidence-based UK charging regime
110. This review does not believe that there is a case for exempting trading funds
from the presumption of marginal cost pricing on a blanket basis, without
critically examining on a product-by-product basis whether the exemptions are in
the public interest. Current policy for non-trading funds is to assume that marginal
cost pricing generates the most economic and social value for the UK.
Deviations from the marginal cost presumption ought only to occur when there is
clear reason to believe that the public interest is best served by charging.
111. This review also agrees with the OFT that the Government should commission
a review of the economic case for moving to a marginal cost pricing model. This
should further develop the evidence base and inform future policy decisions. This
report recommends that such a review:
- be published by HM Treasury;
- pay particular attention to the different market situations of the biggest five
trading funds as separate pieces of analysis;
- be sufficiently resourced to examine the specific cases of the different re-use
markets for different products;
- include best estimates of the economic activity generated by changing the
pricing of raw public sector information, and the likely impact on tax revenues
in the UK;
- include best estimates of revenue lost to government and the economic impact
of any increase in taxation; and
- provide an international economic analysis of different public sector
information re-use markets in comparable countries. This should include an
analysis of comparative qualities of public sector information.
Publishing government's regulatory data online
Recommendation 11
. To improve the supply of government information for re-use, the
Better Regulation Executive should promote publication of regulatory information, and
should work with OPSI to encourage publication in open formats and under licences
permitting re-use.
<,h4>The internet can help people get better value for money
112. A significant body of literature describes the losses that citizens incur because
they lack information when making decisions, particularly purchasing ones.
These losses come about, for example, when citizens cannot obtain enough
information to evaluate the quality of a good or service before purchase.
113. Several studies have shown, for example, that using the internet increases
customer knowledge and collective consumer power, ultimately leading to lower
prices. Research in 2003 found that an average saving of 16% was achieved on
electronic goods when price comparison sites were used. Similarly, much of the
travel holiday industry has been transformed by the internet, driven by the effect
of information on consumer decisions.
114. In economic terms, what happens when someone buys a good or a service
without enough information to get a good deal is that they suffer 'consumer
detriment'. Consumer detriment occurs particularly where people make infrequent
purchases, of high value, and where the quality is hard to judge in advance. Box
15 below highlights the very real cost to citizens of a market in which the internet
has not yet helped reduce this problem.
Box 15: 'Consumer detriment' in the car industry
Car servicing is an example of the very high economic cost that the UK bears from markets in which
the sellers have considerably more information than buyers. Since 1985, there have been studies of the
market that have found consistent problems and complaints, with mystery shopping confirming
widespread evidence of poor standards, mis-selling and overcharging. Consumer detriment in the car
servicing industry is estimated at £4 billion a year.
The internet is only just starting to push the information balance in favour of the consumer. Academic
research from the US, published as long ago as 2001, examined 300,000 car purchases, and discovered
that customers who used an online service to inform themselves paid on average 2% ($450) less.
Better public sector information may enable reduced regulation
115. The economic policy of the UK is based on an assumption that well-
functioning markets in goods and services generate wealth and well-being.
Whenever the suppliers of a good or service have better information about it than
the citizens consuming it, markets work less efficiently than they should. As one
study notes, 'If citizens are to be given more choice in public policy and services,
they must be provided with information in forms they are aware of, can find easily
and are readily understandable when they are reached.' Government has several
options at its disposal to help achieve this.
116. The traditional approach has been to regulate — e.g. to force the suppliers
either to lower the price they offer or to provide evidence that they are supplying
at market rates. This has inefficiencies and costs because it requires government
itself to search for all the necessary information to make appropriate decisions. It
can also have unintended consequences (e.g. hindering one supplier and
inadvertently providing a competitive advantage to another).
117. Another approach is for government to supply citizens with all the information
they need to make their own decisions, which collectively influences the quality
and price of supply. In such cases, sharing information can empower citizens to
make better decisions. The UK Approach to Public Service Reform (2006) and
Building on Progress: Public Services (2007) both describe facilitating 'choice'
and 'voice' as practical, often more efficient, alternatives to top-down traditional
regulation. This approach still means costs for government in collecting and
sharing the information necessary to empower citizens; but it is lighter touch and
often (though not always ) more cost effective than regulation. Boxes 16 and 17
below show how this works in practice.
Box 16: Scores on the Doors
Scores on the Doors is a scheme whereby food safety information is made available at the point of sale,
supported by web-based information systems. Several local authorities have already introduced Scores
on the Doors schemes, and the Food Standards Agency (FSA) is now working with three groups of
local authorities in London, the Midlands and Scotland to evaluate different pilots. Key issues for this
evaluation will include the relationship between the ratings scheme and legal compliance, as well as the
level of consistency between different schemes. Over the next two years, the FSA will test different
models, and will seek to make a recommendation for one preferred scheme nationwide.
Schemes similar to Scores on the Doors operate in the United States, Australia, New Zealand and parts
of Europe. A studyof one scheme in Los Angeles found that both consumer and supplier behaviour
changed after the ratings became public. The proportion of restaurants receiving 'good' scores more
than doubled, sales at these establishments rose by 5.7% (while sales fell at restaurants with poor
ratings) and food-borne illness fell by 13%.
Box 17: Decreased mortality following publication of hospital mortality rates
Recent medical research suggests that mortality dropped following the publication of information
showing mortality rates for heart surgeries by hospital, and by individual surgeon.
Better citizen-generated information may enable reduced regulation
118. The rise of user-generated websites signals another and potentially more
efficient and cost-effective option for government. Government has long relied on
not-for-profit agencies from the third sector to supplement its own information
provision to citizens (e.g. the Citizens Advice Bureau service). However, the rise
of user-generated sites provides a vehicle whereby citizens can collect and share
information themselves, in a focused, low-cost way, reducing the information
asymmetry between them and suppliers of goods and services. One of the best
known of all such sites in the UK is MoneySavingExpert.
Box 18: MoneySavingExpert (www.Moneysavingexpert.com)
Moneysavingexpert is a journalistic consumer finance website set up by specialised
broadcaster/journalist Martin Lewis, to show people how to save money on financial services, retail
and other consumer products. The site reports over 2.5 million unique users each month, with 1.3
million people receiving the weekly email. The site has a very popular forum which has over a million
readers a month and 180,000 members. One of the site's many campaigns involves helping consumers
to campaign against bank overcharging. Since November 2006, over 3.3 million template letters have
been downloaded to this end, with thousands sharing tips and reporting successes.'
119. The changes in citizen information use do not just affect those who create and
use information on user-generated sites. For example, in the case of Scores on the
Doors, government can maximise the benefits of the already published food safety
information by making it more easily available for other sites to re-use.
120. In practice, this could mean government working in collaboration with those
that provide websites such as www.toptable.co.uk . Under such arrangements,
government would help provide information about the safety of pubs and
restaurants on the sites that citizens already use in great numbers to make their
decisions about where to go. These websites all use the power of user opinion and
user reviews to improve consumer experience.
The limitations of more information
121. While potentially useful, it is important to acknowledge that providing more
information or supporting peer-to-peer information sharing is not a panacea. Its
effectiveness will often depend on how customers interpret and use the
information provided. For example, on food safety, outlets at the worst end of the
scale may not be concerned about poor ratings if it ultimately does not influence
the decisions of their customers. Therefore, there remains a need for existing
enforcement in some instances. Nevertheless, supporting more user-generated
websites may provide government with a highly efficient and cost-effective way
of significantly improving the lives of citizens.
122. Information relating to regulation should not always be published in every
case. However, there should be a presumption in favour of publishing, unless
there is a strong case for claiming that it would do more harm than good.
Government should ensure that it is available in a form that makes it easy to bring
this information to the sites that normal users already visit every day.
123. Consequently, this review recommends that government should publish
regulatory information on the internet in a format that consumers find easy to
understand and that citizens and organisations can easily re-use and re-combine
with other information. More specifically, the review recommends that the Better
Regulation Executive promote publication of regulatory information, and should
work with OPSI to encourage publication in open formats and under licences
permitting re-use.
Box 19: Reputation systems - extract from a report by the Welsh Consumer Council
(forthcoming)
'Among the simplest means of online consumer self-expression is the indication of opinion through
ratings. Ratings allow numerical data from individual contributors to be crunched to provide aggregates
and patterns representative of a whole.
'Product scores given by Amazon users provide median ratings that people use to judge the quality of a
book or CD; review spaces give customers the opportunity to expand on their numerical expression
(their poor ratings and statements [about a product] provided a valuable counterpoint to the product
manufacturer's positive marketing campaign ).
'The simple technology of submitted averages lets consumers become self-informing communities.
The Tripadvisor website allows customers to make judgements about the appeal of hotels and resorts,
based on scores assigned by previous holidaymakers; mandatory feedback from eBay users assigns
karma scores, on which judgements are made as to the trustworthiness of buyers and sellers; users of
the Yahoo! Shopping retail gateway and price-searching service can likewise benefit from each other's
merchant ratings. Consumers are no longer reliant on individual reviews by magazines and critics,
but, when collected, have become a resource to inform themselves.'
Ensuring OPSI can regulate effectively
Recommendation 12
. To ensure that OPSI can regulate the public sector information market
effectively, government should review the fit between OPSI's functions and funding, and
recommend options that will ensure it is fit for purpose.
124. The main organisation responsible for ensuring access to government's
information is the Office of Public Sector Information. It regulates all
organisations that produce information licensed under Crown copyright. The sort
of regulatory work it carries out includes running the Information Fair Trader
Scheme, examining formal complaints from private sector data users made against
public sector information providers, and watching for anti-competitive behaviour.
This last task is extremely important, as many of the biggest providers of public
sector information are — at the very least — market dominant.
125. Evidence suggests that OPSI may be under-resourced and unable to perform
its regulatory duties properly. The recent OFT report on the Commercial Use of
Public Information argued:
'Comparing the size of OPSI and the size of the sector it regulates with the
established economic sector regulators and the size of the market sectors they
regulate, OPSI appears very small, with both fewer financial resources and
fewer staff.'
126. The Information Fair Trader Scheme (IFTS) has 16 members, including
Ordnance Survey, the Met Office and the Environment Agency, and has made
significant improvements to information-trading activities. The OFT has
recommended extending the scheme to all public sector bodies with a licensing
income of more than £100,000 — a change that would bring some 300 local
authorities within the scope of the IFTS and OPSI's remit. However, the benefits
of this change are only realisable if OPSI is given the necessary resources to run
the IFTS properly.
127. The OFT has also recommended that potential membership of the Information
Fair Trader Scheme have cost allocation and finance regimes assessed. OPSI is
currently not equipped to deliver this recommendation, despite there being no
routine audit of this vital aspect. OPSI is working with the audit bodies to
strengthen and coordinate approaches, but the limits to its capacity are of
considerable concern.
128. For OPSI to regulate effectively, government needs to be confident that it is fit
for purpose. Consequently, the review recommends that government examine the
fit between OPSI's functions and funding, and come up with options to make it fit
for purpose.
Chapter 7: Protecting the public interest
Government has a role to play in protecting the public interest.
Some specific actions it can take to do so include:
- promoting consistent, reliable information and enabling public servants to respond
to citizens seeking government advice and guidance online; and
- helping excluded groups take advantage of new internet developments.
Promoting consistent, reliable information
Recommendation 13
. To maximise the potential value of civil servants' input into online
fora, by autumn 2007 the Cabinet Office Propriety and Ethics and Government
Communications teams should together clarify how civil servants should respond to citizens
seeking government advice and guidance online.
129. It is currently unclear when and how government, and particularly public
servants, should engage with citizens in online spaces, whether run by the
government or by third parties. Public servants' reluctance to engage with citizens
online is understandable, given issues surrounding propriety, political neutrality
and the personal risk that information provided could be used against the
particular public servant.
130. However, there is a need to move beyond a position of pure risk aversion if
government is going to work with user-generated site users and operators. One
important step towards this will be to clarify the rules about the permissible
behaviour of civil servants in online spaces — not least whether such engagement
is permissible at all.
131. The review has found numerous positive examples of public servants entering
into online public spaces to leave information, give updates, point to services and
so on. Examples were also provided of where risk aversion went too far, possibly
as far as withholding information of importance to the safety of citizens.
Box 20: Institutional risk aversion exacerbating rather than mitigating risks to citizens.
'I was once on holiday in a foreign country where some very active political unrest started kicking
off. I won't tell you where for fear of identifying the person I'm going to talk about, but the
situation was serious enough for the Foreign Office to issue a travel advisory. I got chatting to this
guy in a bar who worked at the British Embassy, and he was saying he was very frustrated that his
bosses wouldn't let him go and post something on the Lonely Planet forum. He knew perfectly
well that was where all the travellers were looking for information and discussing the situation.
"We should be in there, part of that conversation, or what's the point?" he said. And he was
absolutely right.' (Stakeholder interviews)
132. Clear guidelines about acceptable forms of public servant engagement online
help mitigate situations such as that described in Box 20 above and create
confidence that benefits are realisable.
Tackling digital exclusion through user-generated websites
Recommendation 14
. The Digital Inclusion Team should explore the potential for promoting
digital and social inclusion through the partnerships proposed in recommendation 1 and
report to the Sub-Committee on Electronic Service Delivery (PSX(E)), in line with
recommendation 15.
133. There are significant benefits accruing from the new IT tools available.
However, these benefits may not reach all citizens. In particular, those unable to
access the internet (whether because of lack of internet access or inadequate ICT
skills) are unlikely to experience the benefits of the information shared online.
Furthermore, even if they can access it, the information available online may not
cater to the needs of certain disadvantaged groups.
134. Digital and social exclusion are not the same thing. Social exclusion happens
when people or places suffer from a series of problems, such as unemployment,
discrimination, poor skills, low income, poor housing, high crime, ill health and
family breakdown. Digital exclusion means lack of access to digital technology
or the inability to enjoy the benefits of the internet and other digital technologies
(e.g. through lack of ICT skills).
135. Many of those who are socially excluded are also digitally excluded. In
particular, many of those who suffer specific social disadvantages also lack the
skills to engage with technology. It is estimated that 79% of those on means-tested
benefits lack practical ICT skills. Furthermore, Ofcom has found that 15% of
people are 'involuntarily excluded' from communications services, largely on
account of cost.
136. There are initiatives already in place to ensure that everyone can have internet
access, along with the skills to make use of it. These include the Government's
commitment to give all school-age children access through internet-connected
computers in schools, and the UK Online network of centres providing free
access across the UK.
137. This review supports the current government efforts to ensure that all citizens
benefit from the recent advances in information technology. It may be that there
are certain steps that government can take to promote participation even further.
For example, it could encourage more government and user-generated content
online that is attractive to those who are currently digitally excluded.
138. Addressing social exclusion is a much bigger issue than addressing digital
exclusion; and it is one that cannot be solely — or even mainly — addressed by
improving access to information online. However, for socially excluded people
who do have internet access, there may be options to empower them and promote
social inclusion using the kinds of online ICT tools and online innovations
described in Chapter 1. Box 21 below, and the study of a Swedish commercial
parenting site (see paragraph 37 above) illustrate how this can be done.
Box 21: Homeless UK (www.homelessuk.org)
Launched in 2005, Homeless UK provides a website containing information about more than
8,000 services, including hostels, advice and support services. Registered local services are able to
access information about available vacancies in hostels and housing projects.
Some of the benefits (described by the Digital Challenge Team - a project management team set
up to implement the Inclusion through Innovation report ) include:
- improved access to supportive services;
- prevention of homelessness by providing information at an early
stage;
- increased knowledge of homelessness services; and
- homeless people (and those at risk) being able to get the help they
need, when they need it.
139. In line with these kinds of opportunities, the review recommends that the
Digital Inclusion Team explore the potential for promoting digital and social
inclusion in partnership with operators of user-generated websites. To achieve
this, the Digital Inclusion Team should be consulted when the partnerships
mentioned in recommendation 1 are established. The review recommends that the
Digital Exclusion Team explore the potential for promoting digital and social
inclusion through the partnerships proposed in recommendation 1 and report on
progress to the Sub-Committee on Electronic Service Delivery (PSX(E)) by
December 2007.
Chapter 8: Follow-through and next steps
Recommendation 15
The Minister for the Cabinet Office, in conjunction with OPSI, should
report to PSX(E) by December 2007 on departments' plans for implementing these
recommendations, and by December 2008 on progress and results.
Implementing the report's recommendations and intent
requires leadership and a clear time frame
140. This review has recommended a number of specific steps to ensure that
government maximises the benefits for citizens from new developments in the use
and generation of information on the internet.
141. The specific recommendations are intended to signal the need for government
to become more open. This includes openness to internet technologies that
empower citizens to co-produce information with government. It also means
openness in terms of sharing the information that government possesses, so that its
re-use can benefit citizens.
142. Such openness is not cost free. As mentioned above, sharing government's
information (particularly that held by trading funds) can mean sacrificing revenue
in the short term for longer-term benefits. However, the potential benefits from
sharing information often outweigh the costs, and, where this is the case, it should
be shared.
143. Clear leadership will be required to effect the proposed changes. This review
recommends that government mandate a specific policy lead to drive the
recommendations forward and report back to government on progress. Over the
longer term, this leadership needs to challenge government agencies to make the
cultural shift required.
144. Two agencies currently appear to be well placed to provide the kind of
leadership mentioned above. One organisation, the Office of Public Sector
Information, has already been asked to act as a centre of influence and excellence
with respect to the sharing of government's information. The Cabinet Office
appears particularly well placed as a natural coordinating entity to further
government's response to the opportunities arising around citizen publishing
online.
Appendices
1. List of the team
External Reviewers:
- Tom Steinberg, Director, mySociety
- Ed Mayo, Chief Executive, National Consumer Council
Steering Group
- Conrad Bird, Government Communications
- Alex Butler, Central Office of Information
- David Halpern, Prime Minister's Strategy Unit
- William Perrin, Delivery and Transformation Group
- Daniel Roulstone, Better Regulation Executive
- Michael Warren, Government Communications
Secretariat
- Steve Waldegrave, Deputy Director, Prime Minister's Strategy
Unit
- James Crabtree, Policy Adviser, Prime Minister's Strategy
Unit
- Amalie Kjaergaard, Delivery and Transformation Group, Cabinet
Office
- Francesca Sainsbury, Policy Adviser, Prime Minister's Strategy
Unit
- James Taylor, Prime Minister's Strategy Unit
2. Interview list
- Ministers and ministerial office staff (5)
- Departmental officials (30)
- Non-departmental civil servants (12)
- User-generated website operators (9)
- Private sector online entrepreneurs (10)
- Academics and other experts (6)
3. Case study: The power of information in healthcare
Introduction
Few policy areas illustrate the potential power of information more clearly than
healthcare. The internet is becoming a valuable source of information for patients
prior to visiting a doctor; by those in search of a second opinion; and by friends and
relatives trying to inform themselves about the condition of someone they know. The
wide availability of health information online also arguably has profound implications
for the relationship between patients and medical professionals. It also offers the
potential for users of health services to provide information to one another about both
their medical conditions and their experiences of using the NHS.
Information matters in health
There is strong evidence that better information results in improved health outcomes.
Better information in the hands of patients has a number of positive outcomes,
including an increase in patients' quality of life and feelings of psychological well-
being. Equally, information can help to drive up standards. In a recent example, a
report published in the medical journal Heart in 2007 found that information
provided in performance league tables about coronary bypass surgery led to lower
death rates after major heart operations.
Information is particularly important for chronic and long-term care. Some 45% of the
adult population in Britain have at least one long-standing medical condition. Many of
these conditions, including diabetes, can be dealt with by intelligent self-management.
However, it would be naive not to acknowledge the fact that significant risks do exist
in this area. Much of the health information produced online is of poor quality,
unverified and potentially unreliable. Certain online sources of information also
promote poor health outcomes contrary to government policy and good medical
practice (e.g. pro-anorexia sites — see Box 22 below). This has led to calls by some
(including the Picker report ) for accreditation of information providers.
Box 22: Pro-anorexia websites
'Pro-ana' refers to a concept or community that promotes or supports anorexia as a choice, rather than
an eating disorder. 'Pro-ana' groups are common on the internet, and share advice through message
boards and online communities. Doctors view the sites as supporting patients in their illnesses. A 2006
Stanford University study found that 61% of the visitors to these sites used them to obtain tips on
weight loss and purging techniques, as well as on how to hide their food-avoidance tactics from friends
and family members. Beat (formally called the Eating Disorder Association) states that the real danger
of 'pro-ana' sites comes when 'a visitor affected by an eating disorder has at last found someone who
really understands the way they feel about themselves'.
People increasingly seek information about their health, much of it online
Accessible, quality health information is a vital part of healthcare. It is also
increasingly being demanded by patients.
More and more British people are seeking information about their own health, and
many are doing so online. Health information is increasingly available online, from
both the NHS and other sources. Research carried out in 2005 suggests that the
internet is the second most popular source of health information (after doctors). In
2005, for example, 35% of British internet users sought health information online
during a 12-month period.
Patients no longer want information provided only by medical professionals. For
example, research demonstrates that many people find that exchange of experiences
with other patients and ex-patients is the most reassuring and efficient way of getting
information.
As a health information provider, the internet clearly benefits from several unique
characteristics: first, it can be accessed 24 hours a day; second, users can remain
anonymous; and third, with increased ICT availability and decreased cost, the internet
can reach a large section of the population.
Highlighting innovation
There is already significant evidence of innovation and information sharing in the area
of health, by the public, the private and the third sectors. Examples include:
- Mihealth is a web-based information system that supports breast cancer
sufferers, their families and carers through a combination of generic, local and
evidence-based information, as well as direct lived experiences and personalised
resources. These tools, which support patients' self-management and improved
self-care, include: Midiary, a personal diary that enables patients to keep track of
hospital and other appointments; and Mimoodstates, which helps patients to
record their mental and physical well-being on a daily basis.
- Patient Opinion seeks to enable patients to share their positive and negative
experiences of healthcare, ranging from the temperature of the food served, to the
professionalism of the nursing staff. This, in turn, provides independent feedback
to the NHS and helps patients identify the 'best' healthcare providers for their
specific needs, thereby empowering patient choice while (arguably) helping to
improve the NHS by highlighting areas in need of improvement.
- Jooly's Joint is an online support network of over 10,000 people with Multiple
Sclerosis. It provides a platform for people across the world to discuss and share
their thoughts on living with MS, and so provides personalised reassurance and
help in coping. This is reinforced by Julie Howell, who founded the website after
being diagnosed with MS at the age of 19. As she says, 'JJ has been incredible in
helping me develop as a person, in developing my understanding of life.'
- NHS Choices is a new website announced by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt
in April 2007. When launched, it will help patients choose the best place to go for
treatment, thereby intensifying competition between NHS hospitals in England.
This, it is hoped, will lead to improved service delivery.
4. Examples of harmful information on user-generated sites
Ratemyteacher
The appearance of user-generated sites such as www.ratemyteacher.co.uk provides
an example of how pupils can give feedback on education. However, media interest
has focused on the potential for negative feedback to spiral out of control. The charity
Teacher Support Network has produced a fact sheet for teachers, advising on how to
deal with online bullying. The NASUWT teachers' union has shown government
education officials evidence of online bullying on such message boards. The
Department for Education and Skills is currently updating its guidance on responses
to cyber-bullying, and is working with a range of websites to address the issue.
Is health information online accurate?
Nearly half of all women recently diagnosed as having breast cancer turned to the
internet for information on health. Although clinicians, researchers and healthcare
consumers are concerned about the accuracy of online health information a 2006
study in the British Medical Journal found that most posted information on breast
cancer was accurate. Perhaps more importantly, most false or misleading
statements were rapidly corrected by participants in subsequent postings. An
examination of 4,600 postings found only 10 (0.22%) to be false or misleading. Of
these, seven were identified as false or misleading by other participants and corrected
within an average of 4 hours and 33 minutes (maximum 9 hours and 9 minutes).
Consumers are satisfied with their online experience and are making choices based on
the information that they encounter.
5. Case study: opportunities to promote and improve online tax returns
through user fora
Introduction
Over 9 million British people file their personal tax returns annually, under the self-
assessment programme run by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC). In
2006—07, 9.5 million self-assessment forms were sent out and 2.9 million returns were
filed online. Online self-assessment is one of the most prominent and most successful
government programmes to put public services online. Filing income tax returns
online was identified by the European Union as one of 12 critical citizen services that
should be put online throughout the European Union.
Given the importance of the online tax returns programme, and the need to encourage
more citizens who currently file their taxes on paper to do so online, this seemed a
particularly useful case study area to explore whether government (particularly
HMRC) might employ user self-help fora to improve its services.
The history of online tax returns
HMRC, then called Inland Revenue, announced its decision to put self-assessment
online in 2000—01. The self-assessment programme includes small businesses,
individuals, and individuals filing through advisers, such as accountants and tax
specialists. Uptake of the service has been slow but steady. In 2002 only 76,000 filed
online, rising to more than a million in 2004. Last year around 3 million filed online.
(see Figure 3 below). However, take-up of HMRC's online filing has been relatively
low compared to other countries. In 2004, it was 17%, compared to 44% in the US
and 83% in Australia.
Objectives of online tax returns
The online self-assessment programme has three main benefits. First, it is more
convenient for taxpayers. Filing online is quicker and easier than filling in long,
cumbersome forms and reduces compliance costs. Second, the process of filing online
is significantly faster and more accurate than the traditional paper-based route. By
filing online, the most common mistakes can be avoided, as the system is designed to
check for errors, as well as to perform the tax calculation for the user.
Third, online filing saves the Government money. If 50% of self-assessment forms
were returned online, then, according to HMRC, savings of over £40 million a year
(from 2011—12) could be possible. HMRC estimates that the cost of processing a
tax return is reduced from £22 for a paper form to £13 if the return is filed
electronically, because the costs of data entry are eliminated and simple errors made
by taxpayers in completing the form are rectified.
Complexity
To maximise these three benefits, HMRC plans to increase the number of taxpayers
filing online. Increasing the number of those filing online, however, will be
challenging. It is reasonable to assume that those 'early adopters' who initially
decided to file online were those with the best IT skills. The remaining group, who
have not filed online, are therefore likely to need increased support and
encouragement. In order to realise these potential benefits, HMRC recognises the
need to ensure that taxpayers are supported through what can be a complicated and
confusing process.
In March 2006, HMRC published a review of its online services by Lord Carter of
Coles. The review identified difficulties with the 'human experience', in particular
problems with telephone helpdesks, including complaints over jammed lines and
advisers who were unable to answer questions, or who gave incorrect advice.
Equally, a report by the National Audit Office in June 2005 found that 'although the
HMRC website contained comprehensive information to help taxpayers file returns
accurately, taxpayers did not always find the information they were seeking' . It also
indicated concern over the knowledge of call centre staff and the accuracy of the
answers given to putative filers' queries. Taxpayers, often with technical and highly
specific queries, found that they had to make more than one call and then explain the
problem again and again as they were put through to different people.
Opportunity
With independent personal finance advice websites like MoneySavingExpert
becoming more popular, it is clear that people are becoming more comfortable finding
financial information online. Given the need for HMRC to increase the numbers of
people using its service, as well as the combined complexity of tax in general and
specific problems associated with online filing, this raises the question of whether
there are opportunities to find new ways of helping and supporting taxpayers.
Research of internet-use patterns has shown a significant and growing trend for users
to source information through a range of informal user-generated sources, ranging
from wikis through to moderated fora, chat rooms and blogs. The private sector has
embraced the potential for engaging customers in innovative ways, in order to provide
cost-effective and comprehensive customer support and advice. Notable examples
have been in computing, where companies have used the ability of a diverse customer
base to answer enquiries, which are often technically complex and highly specific, in
simple, accessible language. Good examples of this include Apple's support fora,
Dell's Ideastorm forum and Microsoft's Knowledge Base.
Following the private sector in developing user-support fora could provide a number
of benefits for government. A well-run, informative forum could provide users with
helpful information, while simultaneously helping to reduce demand for other, more
expensive forms of customer support. However, on the other side, HMRC and others
would need to think carefully about the potential problems associated with such an
approach. Steps would have to be taken to ensure that information was accurate, for
legal and other reasons. This, in turn, would involve some expenditure to moderate
fora and ensure the content is accurate. There is a risk that users would use the forum
to criticise the service itself, creating bad publicity.
Box 23: How a government online forum could help taxpayers with self-assessment
Imagine a user who, while trying to complete her online tax self-assessment, is confused over how to
register multiple sources of income. She searches the frequently asked questions section of the HMRC
site, but the advice available doesn't capture the specific nature of her question. Rather than turn to an
external source of information, she instead clicks on the link to the HMRC's new user-support forum.
This links to a searchable series of fora, categorised by different groups of users (e.g. partners or self-
employed). A simple word search reveals a series of users encountering similar problems, but none
quite captures her specific query. She posts a short description of the issue, and another user responds,
drawing attention to an answer he wrote to a similar query, which she can use to complete her form. An
HMRC moderator later checks the factual accuracy of the second users answer and edits the entry on
the common problems section of the relevant user-category forum.
Back to source document.