Date post: | 14-Apr-2017 |
Category: |
Education |
Upload: | charalampos-alexopoulos |
View: | 64 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Doctoral DissertationOPEN GOVERNMENT DATA INFRASTRUCTURES:
Research Challenges, Artefacts Design and Evaluation
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOSSamos, December 2016
University of the AegeanDepartment of Information and Communication Systems Engineering
Outline of the Presentation
Samos, 6/12/2016 CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 2
Introduction
Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR
Conclusions & Further
Research
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 3
Open Government Data (OGD)Introduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Open Government Data (OGD) is a subset of Public Sector Information (PSI), relating to information produced and collected by public bodies which is openly offered for re-use by administrations, enterprises, researchers or citizens. OGD:covers all aspects of life (e.g. meteorological, geospatial, health,
education, legal, traffic, financial) can be a collection of different types (e.g. document, file, catalogue,
dataset)may be offered in different digital forms (e.g. pdf, xls, xml, csv, rdf, gml)
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 4
The policy context: Digital Agenda 2020 and PSI Directive
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
EUR 28 Billion direct annual turnover in the PSI Sector
8% annual growth
PSI Sector one of the faster growing sectors of the EU economy
“fifth freedom”: the free movement of knowledge
How Europe can Gain from the Rising Tide of Data
Samos, 6/12/2016
The supply-driven approach is insufficient
Strong barriers regarding data relevance and quality
The use of Open Data “intermediaries” is more effective
Technical complexity (multilinguality, kind, format, metadata) & Organizational barriers
Europe should build its innovative advantage in key areas through reinforced e-Infrastructures
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 5
Objectives: The Research Questions
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
1. Which are the main research challenges and opportunities for OGD and how we can map them?
2. What is the current state-of-play in the OGD infrastructures development?
3. What are the requirements and features for a new more advanced generation of OGD platform?
4. Which are the existing evaluation models and how to evaluate an OGD Initiative?
5. How to maximise value for Collaborative and Individual use of OGD and how to apply it to the Greek context?
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 6
Structure and Contribution
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 7
RQ1: Research AreasWHICH ARE THE MAIN RESEARCH CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OGD AND HOW WE CAN MAP THEM?
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 8
Method: Descriptive Theories
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Step 1: Analysis of government policy
documents
Step 2: Analysis of papers proposing OGD
research categorizations
Step 3: Construction of OGDRAT first version
Step 4: EGRL literature search and review
Step 5: Construction of OGDRAT second version
Step 6: Workshop organization – feedback
collection
Step 7: Construction of OGDRAT final version
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 9
OGDRAT: 1st LevelIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 10
OGDRAT: 2nd LevelIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 11
Ranking of OGD research topics based on EGRL
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 12
Answering RQ1: state-of-the-art in OGD research
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
The OGD research domain is still in its early stages, so it is important to identify the challenges and opportunities
Despite its significance and the political support at EU level, many challenges remain open for member states
Different disciplines have different uses for OGD
Current capacities to conduct research with OGD remain lacking
An infrastructure should integrate multiple and diverse tools and resources and will enhance thus the effectiveness and quality of e-government research
The study reveals the interesting thematic ‘richness’ of the OGD research domaino technological and non-technologicalo publishing of government datasets and also their usage
by various actorsLimitationso Projectso Librarieso Policy and legal Issues && Data Anonymisation Methods
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 13
RQ2: OGD Sources WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATE-OF-PLAY IN THE OGD INFRASTRUCTURES DEVELOPMENT?
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 14
OGD SourcesIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Stage 1: Identification of
OGD Sources
Stage 2: Formulation of
Analysis Framework
Stage 3: Data Collection
Stage 4: Data Processing
1 Borough of Trafford (UK) Open Data Catalog
2 Central Bureau of Statistics 11 Global Health Data Exchange
3 Data Gov UK 12 Hellenic Statistical Authority
4 Data.gov 13 INSPIRE Geo-portal
5 Deutschland API 14 Israel Government Sharing Site
6 Diavgeia Gov (Cl@rity) 15 Israel Land Administration
7 EUR-Lex 16 United Nations Data
8 European Environment Agency Data Service 17 Warwickshire Open Data
9 General Secretariat of Information Systems 18 World Bank's Open Data initiative
10 Geospatial Governmental Data
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 15
Analysis FrameworkIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Stage 1: Identification of
OGD Sources
Stage 2: Formulation of
Analysis Framework
Stage 3: Data Collection
Stage 4: Data Processing
Datasets Discovery
Data Provision
Language
Visualizations
Feedback
Web Server
CMS/Platform
User Interface (UI)
Data Format
API
Functional PerspectiveTechnological Perspective
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 16
Analysis FrameworkIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Stage 1: Identification of
OGD Sources
Stage 2: Formulation of
Analysis Framework
Stage 3: Data Collection
Stage 4: Data Processing
5-stars Berners Lee’s Rating Scheme
* make your stuff available on the web ** make it available as structured data *** using non-proprietary format **** use URLs to identify things, so that people can point at your stuff***** link your data to other people’s data to provide context
RDF-compliance
5-stars Maturity Scheme of Metadata Management
* Metadata Ignorance** Scattered or Closed Metadata*** Open Metadata for Humans**** Open Reusable Metadata***** Linked Open Metadata
Data License
Semantic Perspective
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 17
Analysis FrameworkIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Stage 1: Identification of
OGD Sources
Stage 2: Formulation of
Analysis Framework
Stage 3: Data Collection
Stage 4: Data Processing
2 primary investigators 2 additional researchers when
a conflict on a value occurs
Percentages of uses and new technologies
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 18
Answering RQ2: Consolidated view of utilities / functions of OGD infrastructures
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Type Function(s)
Data Provision
View data in HTMLExport data tables in embedded HTML codeView data in data tables with advanced filtering/pivoting capabilitiesMapChart
Visualization
View geospatial data on mapChoose underlying map layer (e.g.Google maps, Bing maps, ArcGIS)Spatial MashupsView google data mashups on mapDynamically create charts. Define columns, data sources, etcSupport for many chart types (pie, bar charts,etc)Save current viewData comparisons (time-line based comparisons, comparison on specific fields, etc.)
Feedback
Rate datasetsComment on DatasetsRequest Dataset forms
View popular demands / vote best data requests
Type Function(s)
Data acquisition
A “Submit Datasets” web form where users (authorized or not) can upload data to the portal
A Dataset Management System (DMS) to facilitate users to organize and maintain their dataset submissions via a web-based user interface
Datasets Catalog / Discover
Autocomplete free text search
Browse through CategoriesFaceted SearchSPARQL queryYahoo! Query Language (YQL) queriesAdvanced Query building (using all available data fields + conditional clauses)Browse through interactive mapBrowse data through chartsSimple Document listView popular / new searches
Data Provision
Download data as a file
Select Export file format (different from original format)
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 19
Answering RQ2: Consolidated view of technologies
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Specification / Utility Technologies
Metadata standards
Dublin Core, CKAN, INSPIREESRI ArcGIS Metadata – MXD
OECD metadata, UN comtrade metadataHealth Data Exchange (GHDx)
Euro-SDMX, SDMX, CSMD
Linked Data
RDF Support, N-Triple stores, SPARQL SupportCustom tools by Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute (RPI) to transform CSV to RDF, Linked Data Mashups
Supported Data formats
Html, pdf, xls, doc, csv, xml, RDF, ppt, rtf , JSON object, kml, kmz, mxd, tiff, png,ods,zip, tsv,txt
CMS / PlatformDrupal, Socrata, MediaWiki, Wordpress, Plone,
Joomla, PostGIS, CKAN engine
Specification / Utility Technologies
User Interface / Web Technologies
Html, Adobe Flash, JQuery, JavaExts, Struts MVC framework / Java, PHP (Joomla), Python, MooTools, SOBI 2, ExtJS, JSP,
Prototype, script.aculo.us, Microsoft ASP.NET, Nginx, Varnish
Piwik, Adobe Flex
Mashups / Visualizations
Google Maps, Bing Maps, ArcGISOpenLayers , GeoEx, OpenStreetMap
MapFIsh and MapServer, Google Charts
API
RESTful Web ServicesCKAN API
API query builder (code generation tool)
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 20
RQ3: Requirements WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS AND FEATURES FOR A NEW MORE ADVANCED GENERATION OF OGD PLATFORM?
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 21
ScopeOn a very abstract level: define logical system boundaries (Black-Box-View)
Detect relevant roles of the systems and their communications
Detect all types of usage, all types of operated infrastructures, incoming data etc. Every type of use became a use case
Identify the beginning events or actions that start the use case
Define the conditions and constraints that will stop or end a use case
Design the Use Cases will be designed in UML and describe them textually
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 22
Scenario-based designUse Case Description
Goal
Topic
Primary Actors and Roles
Secondary Actors and Roles
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Data sets
Data Services
Data owners
Data Access Rights
Data Formats
Metadata formats
Nationalities and Languages involved
Trigger
Pre-condition list
Post-conditions list
Primary Flow
Error Flow
Additional Requirements list
Notes & Outstanding Issues
Use Case/ Flow Chart Diagrams (UML)
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 23
Scenarios at a glance…Introduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Nr Scenario Public Servant Researcher Citizen
Initial scenarios
SC-01Storing or linking (making accessible), Annotating and Visualising a PS data
set x
SC-02Getting the ENGAGE metadata specifications (for applying them in my own
systems) x
SC-03 Getting useful information (through browsing datasets or visualisations) x x
SC-04 Getting data for my research work xSC-05 Linking my system with ENGAGE, for uploading data xSC-06 Linking my system with ENGAGE, for downloading data x xSC-07 Storing data in draft form (to be further curated) x x
SC-08 Put data and annotate them according to ENGAGE standard and my needs x x
IFIP-eGov
SC-09 Put my needs for Public Sector data x x
SC-10 Get information and training on metadata, open data, ENGAGE platform x x x
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 24
SC-04: Getting data for my research work
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 25
SC-04: Getting data for my research work
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 26
Open Data Workshop - DeliberationTwo questionnaires were distributed and answered by participants:
The first questionnaire targeted the rating of 8 (then) scenarios. From the results of the rating exercise, 2 more scenarios were added to the list (the training and insight scenario) and the 10 final scenarios were prioritized and extended
A second questionnaire discussed the important features of a service infrastructure for open data, indicating that the most important issues are:
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
1 for more important Rating
SC-03Getting useful information (through browsing datasets
or visualisations)1
SC-01Storing or linking (making accessible), Annotating and
Visualising a PS data set2
SC-04 Getting data for my research work 3
SC-02Getting the ENGAGE metadata specifications (for
applying them in my systems)4
SC-06 Linking my system with ENGAGE, for downloading data 5
Key Feature Planned coverage
Ensure quality and authenticity of data **Standardise Metadata ***
Convince Public Sector Officials **Provide Multi-country datasets / Language / Multiliguality ***
Provide linked data sets **
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 27
Final Requirements List: Classical Functionality
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Functionality Stakeholder Description
1 Data Publication/upload Provider Support for publication/upload of datasets to the providers
2 Data Modeling Provider Capabilities of flat metadata descriptions (based on a specific metadata models)
3 Data Search User Simple search via keywords, resource format, publisher, topic categories and countries
4 Data Visualisation User Simple visualisation techniques on specific datasets (maps, charts)
5 Data Download User Data and metadata downloading capabilities – also provision of API for this purpose
Final Requirements List: Advanced Functionality (1/4)
Samos, 6/12/2016 CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 28
Functionality Stakeholder Description1 Grouping and
InteractionProvider/ User Capabilities for
(a) searching for and finding other users/providers having similar interests with me in order to have information and knowledge exchange and cooperation, (b) forming groups with other users/providers having similar interests with me in order to have information and knowledge exchange and cooperation, (c) maintaining datasets/working on datasets within one group, (d) communicating with other users/ providers through messages in order to exchange information and knowledge and (e) getting immediately updated about the upload of new versions and enrichments of datasets maintained/worked on within the group, or new relevant items (e.g. publications, visualizations, etc.).
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Final Requirements List: Advanced Functionality (2/4)
Samos, 6/12/2016 CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 29
Functionality Stakeholder Description2 Data Processing Provider/ User Capabilities for
(a) data enrichment - i.e. adding new elements - fields, (b) for metadata enrichment - i.e. fill in missing fields, (c) for data cleansing - e.g. detecting and correcting ubiquities in a dataset, matching text names to database IDs (keys) etc., (d) converting datasets to another format, (e) submitting various types of items - e.g. visualisations, publications - related to a dataset and (f) datasets combination and Mash-ups.
3 Data Enhanced Modeling
Provider/ User Capabilities for description of flat, contextual and detailed metadata of any metadata/vocabulary model.
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Final Requirements List: Advanced Functionality (3/4)
Samos, 6/12/2016 CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 30
Functionality Stakeholder Description4 Feedback and
CollaborationProvider/ User Capabilities
(a) to communicate our own thoughts and ideas on the datasets to the other users and the providers of them through comments I enter on them, (b) to read interesting thoughts and ideas of other users on the datasets through comments they enter on them, (c) to express our own needs for additional datasets that would be interesting and useful to me, (d) to get informed about the needs of other users for additional datasets and (e) to get informed about datasets extensions and revisions.
5 Data Quality Rating User Capabilities to (a) communicate to the other users and the providers the level of quality of the datasets that I perceive, (b) get informed on the level of quality of the datasets perceived by other users through their ratings
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Final Requirements List: Advanced Functionality (4/4)
Samos, 6/12/2016 CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 31
Functionality Stakeholder Description6 Data Linking Provider/ User Capabilities of data and metadata linking to other ontologies in the Linked Open Data Cloud.
Capabilities of querying data and metadata through Sparql Endpoints7 Data Versions
Publication/uploadProvider/ User Support for publication/upload of new versions of the existing datasets, and connection
with previous ones and initial datasets8 Advanced Data
VisualisationUser Advanced visualisation techniques on specific datasets and/or datasets mash-ups (maps,
charts, plots and other)9 Advanced Data
SearchUser Multilingual search based on thesauri and advanced metadata schema
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 32
RQ4: Evaluation WHICH ARE THE EXISTING EVALUATION MODELS AND HOW TO EVALUATE AN OGD INITIATIVE?
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 33
IS Evaluation: Methodological Approach
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Evaluation Model for UsersEase of Use Experience
Performance
Data Search & Download Capabilities
Data Provision Capabilities
Accompl.Users’
Objectives
Use
FutureBehaviour
Users’ Data Analysis Capabilities
Samos, 6/12/2016 34CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Efficiency Level Effectiveness Level
Fut. Behavior Level
Evaluation Model for ProvidersEase of Use Experience
Performance
Providers’ Data Analysis Capabilities
Data Upload Capabilities
Accompl.Providers’Objectives
Use
FutureBehaviour
Samos, 6/12/2016 35CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Efficiency Level Effectiveness Level
Fut. Behavior Level
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 36
Evaluation ProcedureIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Achieving Sustainable
Interest
Accomplishing ENGAGE technical
Objectives
Overall Impact• Usability TestExternal• Qualitative discussionExternal• Experts QuestionnaireExternal• Experts QuestionnaireInternal
• Online MetricsExternal• Online User
QuestionnaireExternal• Internal Experts SWOT
AnalysisInternal
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 37
Overall ImpactIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Accomplishing Technical Objectives Score
ENGAGE USPs – Experts’ Questionnaire 78,54 %Usability of the ENGAGE platform – Usability Test 76,51 %Platform Capabilities – Online Users’ Questionnaire 60,5 %
Total 71,85 %
Achieving Sustainable Interest Score
Users’ Interest – Web Analytics 90 %Users’ General Satisfaction – Online Users’ Questionnaire 61,4 %
Users’ Perceived Usefulness – Usability Test 78,19 %
Total 76,53 %
Version 1.0
Version 2.0
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 38
Value Generation AlgorithmIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Value Dimension Alpha
Data Provision Capabilities (DPV) 0.834
Data Search and Download Capabilities (DSD) 0.805
User-level Feedback Capabilities (UFB) 0.770
Ease of Use (EOU) 0.716
Performance (PER) 0.719
Data Processing Capabilities (DPR) 0.811
Data Upload Capabilities (DUP) 0.858
Provider-level Feedback Capabilities (PFB) -
Support for Achieving User-level Objectives (SUO)
0.843
Support for Achieving Provider-level Objectives (SPO)
-
Future Behaviour (FBE) 0.876
Regression Models R2
SUO model (8 indep. variables) 0.776SPO model (8 indep. variables) 0.599FBE model (2 indep. variables) 0.412
FBE model (10 indep. variables) 0.647
Value Measures
Samos, 6/12/2016 39CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
41 value measures (all layers) 35 for the 1st layer• 14 common value measures• 15 value measures for users• 06 value measures for providers
These value measures was then converted to a question to be included in questionnaires to be distributed to stakeholders
A five point Likert scale is used to measure agreement or disagreement
132 participants from all target groups
Value Model for Prosumers: 2nd Generation Infra
Samos, 6/12/2016 40CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS
Data Provision Capabilities
3.03
Data Search & Download
Capabilities3.03
User-level Feedback Capabilities
2.97
Ease of Use3.35
Performance2.15
Data Processing Capabilities
3.27Data Upload Capabilities
2.93Provider-level
Feedback Capabilities
3.44
Support for Achieving
User Object.3.17
Support for Achieving
Provider Obj.3.12
Future Behaviour
3.19
0.624
0.489
0.639
0.760
0.651
0.307
0.680
0.730
0.479
0.379
0.135
0.632
0.735
Evaluation Results: Mapping for decision support
Samos, 6/12/2016 41CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Lower Ratings Group
Higher Ratings Group
data provision capabilities
data search-download cap.
data upload capabilities
performance
provider-level feedback cap.
ease of use
data processing capabilities
user-level feedback capabil.
Lower Impact Group Higher Impact Group
data provision capabilities
user-level feedback capab.
performance
provider-level feedback cap.
data processing capabilities
ease of use
data search-download cap.
data upload capabilities
Evaluation Results: the important features of OGD infrastructures
Samos, 6/12/2016 42CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
1. bring stakeholders together2. provide rich metadata3. enable data quality assessment4. ensure trust, security and critical mass5. have an appropriate revenue model6. provide use cases, training and support7. provide technical support: open data processing tools 8. provide a full API for machine-to-machine operation9. target multiple nationalities
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 43
RQ5: Marketplace HOW TO MAXIMISE VALUE FOR COLLABORATIVE AND INDIVIDUAL USE OF OGD AND HOW TO APPLY IT TO THE GREEK CONTEXT?
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 44
The Concept: 3rd Generation of OGD Infrastructures
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
University of the Aegean
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 45
Basic ModulesIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Vision, Mission, Communication,
Use Cases
Administration/ Index of Users
(citizens & businesses)
Application Registry
Web Service Registry Subscribe an App Subscribe a Web
Service
Instructions for Application
Development – Design Studio
Semantic Assets (Codelists for
sectors, types of apps, platforms
etc.)
Open Data Sources Registry
Declare your need for web
service
Relative sites (open data, gov,
communities)
Declare your need for app
Web and mobile operation: compatibility with all platforms
Mobile friendliness for all operating systems and devices
The basic language is Greek / English version is under development
Social media-like user interface
Maintenance without further development
Three user roles: visitors, registered users, moderators
Rating and comments capabilities for applications, data and web services from registered users and visitors
Integration with Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn social media platforms (users can use their own accounts for publishing their comments)
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 46
Re-usable Assets MilestonesRegistration of open government applications developed by citizens and businesses
Gathering of available open data and web services (public sector)
Voluntary development of open, free applicationsPromotion of new technologies in open government
mobile devices (mobile platforms)open web servicesopen governmental data
Provision of training in the use of open data and services for applications development
Support the cooperation between citizens, government and businesses
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Name, URL, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google+ reservation
Basic functionality for all modules
Basic codelists for metadata fields descriptions
50 registered apps following the developed metadata prototype
15 registered web services following the developed metadata prototype
22 registered open data sources following the developed metadata prototype
50 registered usersCooperation with other initiatives
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 47
Conclusions & Further Research
Samos, 6/12/2016
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 48
An extended OGD Life-CycleIntroduction Overall
MethodologyRQ1: Research
AreasRQ2: OGD
SourcesRQ3:
RequirementsRQ4:
EvaluationRQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Life Cycle Stage Tools Methods
Create / Gather Sensors, RFID, IS, Human, Connection with already gathered open data
Automated data creationManual data entryLinking with Open Data Portals
Pre-processDetailed Metadata Standards Evaluation Metrics and ModelsMaturity Matrices
Conceptualisation; StructuringAnonymisation; Evaluation
Curate LOD Refine External ToolIndividual / Native Tools
Metadata RefinementChange Data Format; Data Cleansing
Store / Obtain Repository and Data Centre Versioning, Data Linking
Publish Upload Capability LicensingIntellectual Property Rights
Retrieve / Acquire Multilingual Search techniques Download capabilities
Open Access3-layer Metadata Schema
Process External Data Processing toolLOD Refine External Tool
Data enrichment Create Linked Open DataDifferent Datasets combination
UseInternal & External Visualisation toolStatistical PackagesLinking with external artefacts
Statistical AnalysisMap, Chart, Plot Visualisation
CollaborateCollaboration Space and WorkflowWeb 2.0 Capabilities and ToolsDeclare Need
Exchange notes/emails/ideasData Quality Rating; Create Groups of common interests; Requests on Open Data
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 49
A maturity model for OGD e-Infrastructures
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Traditional OGD Infrastructures Advanced OGD InfrastructuresTime Point Zero 1st Generation 2nd Generation 3rd GenerationInternet presence OGD existence in silos
accessed by application OGD web presence OGD web presence OGD web presence
Functionality N/A Basic Web 1.0 Advanced Web 2.0 Supporting value creation
Type N/A OGD direct provision portals OGD direct provision & OGD aggregators
OGD aggregators, Collaboration Spaces
Stakeholders Distinction between Data Providers and Data Users
Distinction between Data Providers and Data Users
Data Procumers
Data Procumers
License Custom or N/A Custom or N/A CC share-alike CC share-alikeFormat .xls, .pdf html, .xls, .pdf + .csv + URLs + Linked data
Metadata Metadata Ignorance orClosed Metadata
Metadata Ignorance orClosed Metadata
Open Metadata for Humans or Open Reusable Metadata Linked Open Metadata
Open Government level
Initial: Information broadcasting
DataTransparency: processes and performance
Open participation: Data quality, Public feedback, conversation,voting, Interactive communications, Crowd-sourcing
Open Collaboration: Interagency and with the public, Co-creating value-added services
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 50
Multi-disciplinary Research Based on OGD
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
Samos, 6/12/2016
Societal Challenge ICT-enabled Governance Research Topic
OGD Research Topic Neighbouring Scientific Domain
Language divideand lack of cross-communitiescommunication
Language and Cultural Interoperability
Metadata for OGD Multilinguality Controlled Vocabularies
and Codelists Preservation
Information Intelligence Computer Science
(Translation tools) Behavioural sciences
Anticipatingunexpected crises
Social – Economic Simulation Models
Policy Modelling Process Optimization for
OGD (Accurate provision)
Semantic Annotation Organisational
Interoperability Sensor-generated open
data
Social and economic sciences
Enhanced collective cognitive intelligence (human / ICT-enabled) for better Governance
Modelling and Simulation Policy Analysis Identity Management
OGD Mining Citizen-generated open
data Visualization Information Management
Economics Mathematics Sociology Computer Science
Further Developments – OGD Co-creation
The Collaborative Service Design Studio◦ (a) design and create their own applications and ◦ (b) to create mashup applications, combining already existing applications and web
services
The Public Value Services Marketplace◦ offers the created personalized services under commercial terms. It implements the
vision where governments, citizens, and businesses in Europe mutually benefit from services of public value
Samos, 6/12/2016 CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 51
Introduction Overall Methodology
RQ1: Research Areas
RQ2: OGD Sources
RQ3: Requirements
RQ4: Evaluation
RQ5: Market Place for GR Conclusions
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 52
Author’s Publications: Journal papers
Samos, 6/12/2016
1. Alexopoulos, C., Loukis, E., & Charalabidis, Y. (2016). A methodology for determining the value generation mechanism and the improvement priorities of open government data systems. Journal of Computer Science and Information Systems, 13(1), 237-258.
2. Charalabidis, Y., Alexopoulos, C., & Loukis, E. (2016). A Taxonomy of Open Government Data Research Areas and Topics. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 26(1-2), 41-63.
3. Alexopoulos, C., Loukis, E., Mouzakitis, S., Petychakis, M., & Charalabidis, Y. (2015). Analysing the Characteristics of Open Government Data Sources in Greece. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-33.
4. Alexopoulos, C., Loukis, E., & Charalabidis, Y. (2014). A Platform for Closing the Open Data Feedback Loop based on Web2. 0 functionality. JeDEM-eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 6(1), 62-68.
Impact Factor Publisher
0.640 ComSIS
0.596 Taylor & Francis
0.423 Springer US
Open Access DU Krems
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 53
Author’s Publications: Conference papers
Samos, 6/12/2016
1. Charalabidis, Y., Alexopoulos, C., Diamantopoulou, V., & Androutsopoulou, A. (2016, January). An open data and open services repository for supporting citizen-driven application development for governance. In Proceedings of the 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 2596-2604)
2. Zuiderwijk, A., Loukis, E., Alexopoulos, C., Janssen, M., & Jeffery, K. (2014, May). Elements for the development of an open data marketplace. In Proceedings of the Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government (p. 309)
3. Charalabidis, Y., Loukis, E., & Alexopoulos, C. (2014, January). Evaluating second generation open government data infrastructures using value models. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 2114-2126)
4. Alexopoulos, C., Spiliotopoulou, L., & Charalabidis, Y. (2013, September). Open data movement in Greece: A case study on open government data sources. In Proceedings of the 17th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics (pp. 279-286).
5. Alexopoulos, C., Loukis, E., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2013, June). An Evaluation Framework for Traditional and Advanced Open Public Data e-Infrastructures. In Edited by W. Castelnovo and E. Ferrari. In Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Egovernment (pp. 102-111).
6. Alexopoulos, C., Loukis, E., Charalabidis, Y., & Tagkopoulos, I. (2012, October). A Methodology for Evaluating PSI E-infrastructures Based on Multiple Value Models. In Proceedings of the 16th Panhellenic Conference on Informatics (pp. 37-43).
HICSS IEEE SJR: 0,221
CeDEM IEEE Open Access
HICSS IEEE SJR: 0,221
PCI ACM SJR: 0,151
ECEG academic-conferences SJR: 0,113
PCI IEEE SJR: 0,151
CHARALAMPOS ALEXOPOULOS 54
Author’s Publications: other
Samos, 6/12/2016
Workshop papers
Alexopoulos, C., Zuiderwijk, A., Charalabidis, Y., & Loukis, E., (2014). Closing the open public data feedback loop: the ENGAGE platform. SHARE-PSI Workshop (Lisbon).
Alexopoulos, C., & Charalabidis, Y., (2015). Realising an Open Data Marketplace in Greece. SHARE-PSI Workshop (Timisoara).
Chapters in Books
Alexopoulos, C., Zuiderwijk, A., Charalabidis, Y., Loukis, E., & Janssen, M. (2014). Designing a second generation of open data platforms: integrating open data and social media. In Electronic Government (pp. 230-241). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Charalabidis, Y., Lampathaki, F., Alexopoulos, C., Kokkinakos, P., & Koussouris, S. (2012). A Classification of Future Internet Enterprise Systems Projects. In Enterprise Interoperability V (pp. 249-258). Springer London.
Book Authorships
Charalabidis Y., Zuiderwijk A., Alexopoulos C., Janssen M., (Aug. 2017). The world of Open Data. Palgrave Macmillan. (forthcoming)