The Centre for Internet and Society
http://editors.cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 41 to 55.
On World Water Day - Open Data for Water Resources
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/on-world-water-day-open-data-for-water-resources
<b>Lack of open data for researchers and activists is a key barrier against ensuring access to water and planning for sustainable management of water resources. In a collaboration between DataMeet and CIS, supported by Arghyam, we are exploring the early steps for making open data and tools to plan for water resources accessible to all. To celebrate the World Water Day 2018, we are sharing what we have been working on in the past few months - a paper on open data for water studies in India, and a web app to make open water data easily explorable and usable. Craig Dsouza led this collaboration, and authored this post.</b>
<p> </p>
<h4>Project Blog: <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/" target="_blank">Open Water Data
for Integrated Water Science</a> (External)</h4>
<h4>Open Water Data Paper - Datasets for Water Studies in India Blog - Summary: <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/precipitation/2017/12/31/OWD-Paper/" target="_blank">Read</a> (External)</h4>
<h4>Open Water Data Paper - Datasets for Water Studies in India Blog - Full Paper: <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/docs/open-water-data-paper.pdf" target="_blank">Read</a> (PDF)</h4>
<h4>Open Water Data Web App: <a href="https://water-data-web-app.appspot.com/" target="_blank">View</a> (External)</h4>
<h4>Open Water Data Web App - Tech Stack: <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/tech/2017/12/08/OWD-Web-App-Tech-Stack/" target="_blank">Read</a> (External)</h4>
<h4>Open Water Data Web App - Precipitation Data: <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/precipitation/2018/01/05/OWD-Web-App-Precipitation-Data/" target="_blank">Read</a> (External)</h4>
<hr />
<p>The 22nd of March is celebrated internationally as World Water Day. Water is so tightly intertwined in every aspect of our lives that one can only scratch the surface in understanding this resource. Besides directly giving us life, it is a key non-renewable shared resource that dictates whether and how societies can grow and prosper. It has shaped the way civilization arose - on riverbanks and coastal lands. Adequate water of good quality can make or break a child’s early growth. Water available at the right time in the monsoon could shape a family’s fortunes for an entire year.</p>
<p>Unfortunately given the development trajectory of the last century, we have struggled to strike a balance and use water in a sustainable manner. Far too many face the ill effects of this misuse. The challenge with water lies in its nature as a common pool resource, which means that it belongs to everyone. Water is for everyone to benefit from and conversely it is no individual’s responsibility to manage and to ensure its sustainability. While some laws and policies exist to ensure sustainable use of water its fluid (pun intended) and ephemeral nature make those laws very hard to enforce. No one knows for sure how much water lies under the ground and above the surface, we only have estimates. Moreover even these estimates lie in the hands of a few. The Government of India is by far the largest entity that collects data on water across the country. Management of this resource however requires that these data points and the capacity to monitor should be decentralized. The 73rd amendment recognises this by placing the authority to plan and implement local works such as watershed management and drinking water provision under the purview of Panchayats.</p>
<p>To address this shortcoming Datameet and CIS in collaboration have taken first steps with a project to ensure that data and tools to plan for water resources are accessible to all. The strategy within this project has been to seek alternative data sources for water, other than government data much of which still isn’t open data. Two alternatives that have emerged are remote sensing open data and crowdsourced community data. A <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/precipitation/2017/12/31/OWD-Paper/" target="_blank">paper</a> put together by the team highlights the numerous sources available for datasets such as rainfall, soil moisture, groundwater levels, reservoir storages, river flows, and water demand including domestic and agricultural water. Besides the paper the team has also put together a first iteration of a <a href="https://datameet-pune.github.io/open-water-data/precipitation/2018/01/05/OWD-Web-App-Precipitation-Data/" target="_blank">web app</a> which seeks to provide these datasets in an easy to use intuitive and interactive format to users in the area of water planning and management. The first dataset available here is <a href="http://chg.geog.ucsb.edu/data/chirps/" target="_blank">CHIRPS</a>: a high resolution daily rainfall dataset for the whole of India.</p>
<p>The plans for this project in the future include making available more datasets (crop maps and Evapotranspiration) and features to access them. In addition to this the goal is also to improve our understanding of the usability of remote sensing water data with efforts to calibrate it with ground observations. A key element of these plans is to develop these resources in collaboration with end users of the data so that the tools are developed with their concerns in mind. <strong>We welcome ideas, queries, feedback, and partnerships - do contact us at <a href="mailto:pune@datameet.org">pune@datameet.org</a></strong>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/on-world-water-day-open-data-for-water-resources'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/on-world-water-day-open-data-for-water-resources</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroOpen Water DataOpen DataOpen ScienceOpen Government DataEnvironmentFeaturedOpennessHomepage2019-01-28T14:41:51ZBlog EntryNASA International Open Data Challenge 2015
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/events/nasa-international-open-data-challenge-2015
<b>As part of the initial NASA Open Government 2.0 plan, the NASA International Open Data challenge brings together the FOSS community, citizen scientists, open data practitioners , open hardware enthusiasts and students for collaborative problem solving with the goal of producing relevant open-source solutions to address global needs applicable to both life on Earth and life in Space.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On April 11 and 12, 2015 2015, the event will be organized by the Centre for Internet and Society in collaboration with mentors from Team Indus, one of India's leading Space Technology Start-Ups. The event will start off with the following keynote and workshops at 9am on Saturday, April 11th, 2015:</p>
<div style="text-align: justify; "><b>Pre-Hackathon Workshop: 9 a.m., Saturday, April 11, 2015</b></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">IBM Blue Mix Team + OpenCube Labs</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">(Big Data Analytics using Cloud Services like Bluemix/Heroku, with node.js implementation and Android APIs)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; "></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">
<div><b>Keynote: Amar Sharma, 12 p.m., April 11, 2015</b></div>
<div>Amar is credited as being the youngest and first Indian amateur astronomer to have an Asteroid named after him in 2014 at the age of 29. <b>(380607 Sharma)</b> He will talk about CCD Astro Imaging and his travails and journey as a self-made astronomer and comet hunter.</div>
<div></div>
<div>We will then break off into teams to commence the hackathon that will end on Sunday,April 12, 2015 at 6pm, after which teams will upload and present their solutions for Local and Global Nominations.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Registration is free and you are required to confirm participation at the below link:</div>
<div><a href="https://2015.spaceappschallenge.org/location/bangalore/">https://2015.spaceappschallenge.org/location/bangalore/</a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; "></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">Participants are requested to bring their own laptop/computing devices.</div>
<hr />
<p> </p>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">Please see last year's event's focus on Open Science and Big data, and the various Open Data solutions developed at CIS, to get an idea of what the event is about:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; "><a href="https://2014.spaceappschallenge.org/location/bangalore/">https://2014.spaceappschallenge.org/location/bangalore/</a> This year, we will have a workshop on Big Data Analytics conducted by IBM BlueMix Labs followed by Heroku implementation and Android Programming by friends of CIS from OpenCubeLabs, that will follow a very special Keynote speaker who is first amateur astronomer to have an asteroid named after him, to join the likes of Ramanujan and Vikram Sarabhai.</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/events/nasa-international-open-data-challenge-2015'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/events/nasa-international-open-data-challenge-2015</a>
</p>
No publishersharathOpen DataEventBig DataOpenness2015-04-27T01:08:27ZEventMonitoring Sustainable Development Goals in India: Availability and Openness of Data (Part II)
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02
<b>The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an internationally agreed upon set of developmental targets to be achieved by 2030. There are 17 SDGs with 169 targets, and each target is mapped to one or more indicators as a measure of evaluation. In this and the next blog post, Kiran AB is documenting the availability and openness of data sets in India that are relevant for monitoring the targets under the SDGs. This post offers the findings for the last 10 Goals. The first 7 has already been discussed in the earlier post.</b>
<p> </p>
<p><em>The first part of the post can be accessed <a href="http://cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-01/">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr />
<h3>Goal #08: <em>Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all</em></h3>
<p>There are fourteen indicators to monitor the goal 8 and the data is available for all the indicators mapped to their respective targets. For most of the indicators, the data availability is not what the indicator demands, but has to be derived from the available dataset.</p>
<p>The data can be accessed freely in the public domain for all the indicators. However, for the subparts in some of the indicators, the data is not accessible freely. There is a cross agency dependency over the data, to arrive at the required indicator.</p>
<p>Data is collected annually for most of the indicators, while the indicators, viz., Indicator 8.3.1.: Share of informal employment in non-agriculture employment by sex; Indicator 8.5.2: Unemployment rate by sex, age-group and persons with disabilities, which are measured by the Census or the planning commission the frequency of data collection becomes decennial or quinquennial. And the Indicator 8.8.2 : Number of ILO conventions ratified by type of convention, which lists the number of conventions the frequency cannot be determined as it's just a list updated whenever there is a ratification of any ILO conventions. Some of the available data are restricted to particular years and most of them are not till date.</p>
<p>Two indicators, i.e., Indicator 8.5.2 and Indicator 8.10.1: Number of commercial bank branches and ATMs per 100,000 adults, which are measured at the level of districts, whereas Indicator 8.7.1: Percentage and number of children aged 5-17 years engaged in child labour, per sex and age group; Indicator 8.8.1: Frequency rates of fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries by sex and migrant status, are measured at the state level. The remaining are measured only at the national level.</p>
<p>Most of the data are collected from the international organisations like ILO, UNEP, UNWTO, etc., from whose source the data are not updated regularly. There is also a need to disaggregate according to the indicator.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #09: <em>Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation</em></h3>
<p>When development is through industrialization, sustainable and inclusiveness should be the necessary conditions to attain it. Having said this, the data is available for all the indicators, i.e., twelve indicators, corresponding to the targets as defined for the goal 9. For most of the indicators, the data have to be derived for the required measure to monitor the goal.</p>
<p>From among these indicators, the data is collected annually for most of the indicators, while for the two indicators, Indicator 9.3.1: Percentage share of small scale industries in total industry value added; Indicator 9.3.2: Percentage of small scale industries with a loan or line of credit, the frequency of data collection is once in five years.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Excluding two indicators, i.e., Indicator 9.2.2: Manufacturing employment as a percentage of total employment; Indicator 9.1.1: Share of the rural population who live within 2km of an all season road, for which the data is available at the state level and district level respectively, for the remaining indicators the data is available only at the national level.</p>
<p>The data pertaining to eleven indicators are freely accessible in the public domain, however, for the Indicator 9.b.1: Percentage share of medium and high-tech (MHT) industry value added in total value added, the data is not freely accessible. Most of the freely available data are obtained from the international organisations, along with the official data from the government in India.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #10: <em>Reduce inequality within and among countries</em></h3>
<p>Bridging the gap between the global north-south divide through co-operation – social, economical, political, etc., would promote equality. There are twelve indicators for measuring this goal, of which the data is not available for one of the indicators and are available for the remaining indicators.</p>
<p>From the data available, for six of the indicators the data is accessible freely in the public domain, whereas for the five of the indicators – Indicator 10.2.1; Indicator 10.3.1; Indicator 10.4.1; Indicator 10.7.3; Indicator 10.a.1, the data is closed.</p>
<p>Most of the data available are of the national level and for the Indicator 10.7.3: Number of detected and non-detected victims of human trafficking per 100,000, the data includes from the states as well. However, since the goal refers to inequalities within the country as well, the granularity of the data should have been from the state/district level as well.</p>
<p>And, the frequency of data collected are annually for some of the indicators and for some the details cannot be determined or not valid. For most of the indicators the data has to be derived from the available dataset and disaggregated as needed. Also, for some indicators the data is partially available.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 10.7.1: Recruitment cost borne by employee as percentage of yearly income earned in country of destination</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #11: <em>Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable</em></h3>
<p>Housing and the type of settlements determines the human development and the progress of development of a nation. Therefore for monitoring the goal 11 is implicit to human development. There are thirteen indicators to monitor this goal and out of which the data is available for ten indicators and for the three indicators the data is not available.</p>
<p>For three of the indicators the available data is not freely accessible, while for the remaining ones the data is accessible. And for most of the indicators the data has to be derived as needed.</p>
<p>The data is collected annually for most of the indicators and quinquennially for the Indicator 11.5.1, and for some data the data pertains to particular year and there lacks a sequence of data availability.</p>
<p>For four of the indicators – Indicator 11.2.1; Indicator 11.3.1; Indicator 11.6.1; Indicator 11.a.1, the data is available at the state/city level along with national level. And for the remaining indicators the data is available at the national level alone. Also, some of the data are not up-to-date and refers to data more than 3 or years old.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 11.3.2: Percentage of cities with direct participation structure of civil society in urban planning and management, which operate regularly and democratically</li>
<li>Indicator 11.7.1: The average share of the built-up areas of cities that is open space in public use for all, disaggregated by age, sex, and persons with disabilities</li>
<li>Indicator 11.b.1: Percentage of cities implementing risk reduction and resilience strategies aligned with accepted international frameworks (such as the successor to the Hyogo Framework for Action on Disaster Risk Reduction) that include vulnerable and marginalised groups in their design, implementation and monitoring</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #12: <em>Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns</em></h3>
<p>Production and consumption should go hand in hand, but over consumption or over production would only lead to destruction of the environment. Therefore goal 12 seeks to ensure a sustainability in both. The data is available for ten indicators out of twelve indicators, and for the two indicators the data is not available, so as to monitor the respective goals. Some of the data are partially available and using the available data the indicators can be derived.</p>
<p>Moreover, the data for six of the indicators which are available are freely accessible in the public domain whereas for the remaining four indicators – Indicator 12.4.1; Indicator 12.4.2; Indicator 12.5.1; Indicator 12.b.1, the data is not open.</p>
<p>While for most of the indicators say, Indicator 12.2.1; Indicator 12.3.1; Indicator 12.5.1; Indicator 12.a.1; Indicator 12.c.1, the data is collected annually, whereas for the others, the data which are available are for particular years or cannot be determined. Except for the Indicator 12.5.1, for which the data is available at the city level, the data for the remaining are of the national order. The data is collected from both the national institutions, ministries and also from the international organisations.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 12.1.1: Number of countries with SCP National Actions Plans or SCP mainstreamed as a priority or target into national policies.</li>
<li>Indicator 12.8.1: Percentage of educational institutions with formal and informal education curricula on sustainable development and lifestyle topics</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #13: <em>Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts</em></h3>
<p>The impact of climate change is severe, therefore taking an urgent action ensures could reduce the impact. The data is available for four of the indicators out of five, and for one of indicators the data is not available.</p>
<p>The data for three indicators are freely accessible in the public domain, whereas for the Indicator 13.3.1: Number of countries that have integrated mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning into primary, secondary and tertiary curricula, the data is not open and also not specific to the indicator. The data for some of the indicators are partially available and have to be derived.</p>
<p>The frequency of the data is not uniform and cannot be determined, by the virtue of the indicator itself. For example, the occurrence of a disaster event is random. However, for some of the indicators the reporting is either annual or quadrennial.</p>
<p>The data availability is at the national level and in case of the Indicator 13.3.1., the data is available for two states – Orissa and Tamil Nadu. Data for almost all the indicators are obtained from international organizations and very less data availability from the national databases.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 13.2.1.: Number of countries that have formally communicated the establishment of integrated low-carbon, climate-resilient, disaster risk reduction development strategies</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #14: <em>Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>Oceans are the torchbearers for all the countries. Therefore everything related to oceans, seas and marine resources have an impact on the human life. There are ten indicators corresponding to the targets, of which the data is available for nine indicators and for one indicator the data is not available. The data for some of the indicators are not direct, but need to be derived, while for some indicators the data is partially available. To derive some indicators we need to rely on cross agency data.</p>
<p>For the Indicator 14.a.1: Budget allocation to research in the field of marine technology as a percentage of total budget to research, the data on budgetary allocation doesn't specify to marine technology.</p>
<p>The frequency of data collected for most of the indicators are not available or cannot be determined or not applicable, whereas for some the data is collected annually. And for most of the indicators the data is available at the national level and for the Indicator 14.5.1: Coverage of protected areas in relation to marine areas, the data is available for the states also.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 14.6.1: Dollar value of negative fishery subsidies against 2015 baseline</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #15: <em>Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>This goal on restoring, promoting ecosystem and stopping biodiversity loss, etc., has fifteen indicators mapped to twelve corresponding targets. Of which, the data is available for fourteen of the indicators and the data is not available for the one of the indicators. Data for some of the indicators exist partially and for some the data has to be derived to match the indicators. To arrive at the indicators, the data has to be derived from different datasets available.</p>
<p>Most of the data which are available are closed and only five are accessible in the public platform – Indicator 15.1.1 : Forest area as a percentage of total land area; Indicator 15.4.2: Mountain Green Cover Index; Indicator 15.8.1: Adoption of national legislation relevant to the prevention or control of invasive alien species; Indicator 15.9.1: Number of national development plans and processes integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services values; Indicator 15.a.1: Official development assistance and public expenditure on conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystems.</p>
<p>The frequency of data collected is not available or cannot be determined for majority of the indicators, while the data is annually collected for the ones which can be determined. Furthermore, the data is available at the national level for all the indicators, except the Indicator 15.b.1: Forestry official development assistance and forestry FDI, for which the data is available at the level of states as well.</p>
<p>The data available are collected by international organisations like OECD, FAO, Convention on Biological Diversity, etc., as well as by the national institutions and ministries like Planning Commission, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, etc.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 15.2.2: Net permanent forest loss</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #16: <em>Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>A society which is inclusive, peaceful, provides justice and accountable in all its forms would ensure sustainable development, therefore to promote the aforementioned parameters one has to monitor them through an established measure. There are twenty-one indicators for this goal mapped to the respective targets and out of which the data is not available for five indicators to monitor the goal. From the available dataset, the values need to be derived for some of the indicators and for some indicators the data is directly/partially available.</p>
<p>From among the data which are available, for nine indicators the data is not freely accessible in the public platform, while the remaining six data set are open to access. They are available both from national and international agencies and most of the data are not up to the date.</p>
<p>The data which are available are collected/reported annually. And, excluding four indicators. i.e.; Indicator 16.1.3, Indicator 16.3.1, Indicator 16.4.2, Indicator 16.b.1, the data is available at the state level, while for the remaining indicators the data is available only at the national level. Most of the indicators require data from past 12 months, but the available dataset does not cater the needs, as they are not updated regularly. Finally, the indicators seeks disaggregated data for monitoring the goal.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 16.1.4: Proportion of people that feel safe walking alone around the area they live</li>
<li>Indicator 16.2.3. Percentage of young women and men aged 18-24 years who experienced sexual violence by age 18</li>
<li>Indicator 16.6.2: Percentage of population satisfied with their last experience of public services</li>
<li>Indicator 16.7.2: Proportion of countries that address young people's multisectoral needs with their national development plans and poverty reduction strategies</li>
<li>Indicator 16.a.1: Percentage of victims who report physical and/or sexual crime to law enforcement agencies during past 12 months disaggregated by age, sex, region and population group</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #17: <em>Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development</em></h3>
<p> </p>
<p>Moving towards achieving SDGs in the global scenario requires support – financial, technological, etc. This support can be strengthened the relationship between the developing and the developed countries. There are twenty-four indicators to monitor the goal 17, out of which the data is available for twenty-three of the indicators and for one of the indicators the data does not exist.</p>
<p>The data which are available are direct as per the indicators, whereas for most of the indicators the data need to be derived. Data is partially available for the Indicator 17.16.1: Indicator 7 from Global Partnership Monitoring Exercise: Mutual accountability among development co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews.</p>
<p>From the data available for twenty-three indicators, fourteen of the data set are freely accessible and the nine are not open. Also, some of the data which are open are not up to date or the latest data is not open.</p>
<p>The data is collected annually for most of the indicators and for some the data is available for particular year. Also for some of the indicators like Indicator 17.5.1: Number of national & investment policy reforms adopted that incorporate sustainable development objectives or safeguards x country; Indicator 17.6.1: Access to patent information and use of the international intellectual property (IP) system; Indicator 17.18.2: Number of countries that have national statistical legislation that complies with the Fundamental Principles of Official statistics, the frequency cannot be determined or not valid.</p>
<p>Since this indicator speaks at the national level, the granularity of the data pertains to the nation. Most of the data are obtained from the international organisations say UN, World Bank, IMF, OECD, etc., and some are from the national institutions/ministries like Planning Commission, Finance Ministry, etc.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 17.17.1: Amount of US$ committed to public-private partnerships and civil society partnerships</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>Decision making depends on data, a data should be representative, with high quality and has to be timely collected, which ensures precise assessment of the decision being made. From the analysis it was found that, most of the data which are available are either not freely accessible, outdated and not precise to the need. Most of the SDG indicators are based on disaggregation. The disaggregation is a key to measure to the precision, especially incidences like poverty, food security, health, etc. Therefore, to monitor different parameters we need to identify the different levels prevailing in the parameter to ensure inclusivity.</p>
<p>Said above, the frequency of data collection is either annual, quinquennial and decennial. To enable real time evaluation, the data should be up-to-date. Moreover, for most of the indicators the data availability is at the national level or at the state level and sometimes at the district level. The granularity of data ensures geographic inclusiveness.</p>
<p>In a country like India for close monitoring of progress/development of any sort the data availability should be;</p>
<ul><li>at a granular level of district/block,</li>
<li>collected and updated regularly,</li>
<li>disaggregated by age, sex, and also by social group, and</li>
<li>the data should be open to be able to access in the public domain freely.</li></ul>
<p>Open data will be a crucial tool for governments to meet the transparency and efficiency challenges. For this reason, government data should be open – freely accessible, presented in a format that is comparable and reusable and, ideally, released in a timely manner.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Author</h3>
<p>Kiran A B, is a student of Master of Public Policy (MPP) at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru. Kiran has an undergraduate degree in electronics and communications engineering, and he has three years full-time work experience as a software engineer, working in different technological platforms. His research interest includes interdisciplinary linkages between policy, law and technology.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroDevelopmentOpen DataOpen Government DataData RevolutionOpennessSustainable Development Goals2016-04-12T04:14:27ZBlog EntryMonitoring Sustainable Development Goals in India: Availability and Openness of Data (Part I)
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-01
<b>The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an internationally agreed upon set of developmental targets to be achieved by 2030. There are 17 SDGs with 169 targets, and each target is mapped to one or more indicators as a measure of evaluation. In this and the next blog post, Kiran AB is documenting the availability and openness of data sets in India that are relevant for monitoring the targets under the SDGs. This post offers the findings for the first 7 Goals, while the next post will cover the last 10.</b>
<p> </p>
<p><em>The second part of the post can be accessed <a href="http://cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-02/">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr />
<h3>Monitoring Sustainable Development Goals</h3>
<p>The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an internationally agreed upon set of developmental targets to be achieved by 2030. These are universal goals and targets which involve the entire world, developed and developing countries alike. They aim at integrating and balancing the three dimensions of the sustainable development – economic development, social inclusion, and environmental sustainability. There are <a href="http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/">17 SDGs with 169 targets</a>, and each target is mapped to one or more indicators as a measure of evaluation, covering a broad range of sustainable development issues <strong>[1]</strong>.</p>
<p>To initiate the visioning process for the SDGs, the United Nations established a High Level Panel in the year 2012, comprising of 27 members. The notion of "data revolution for sustainable development" has been one of the most remarkable categories of imagination and operational requirement to emerge from the final report of this High Level Panel. It identified a significant need for massive restructuring of infrastructures for generating global,
reliable, comparable, and timely data. The Independent Expert Advisory Group (IEAG) on "data revolution for sustainable development" has also raised the need for opening up development data. It proposes that open data must be considered as an instrument of ensuring transparency and accountability of the government <strong>[2]</strong>. Further, in a recent post from the World Economic Forum meeting, Stephen Walker and Jose Alonso have noted that "Not only will governments that embrace open data improve their public accountability and efficiency, they will also reap the social and economic benefits of opening up data for citizens" <strong>[3]</strong>. Opening up of government data is expected to transform the relationship between the government and the various stakeholders.</p>
<p>Currently the data is used by the governmental institutions for self-monitoring and making only a limited data available for public access and usage. But SDGs are not only for the government to monitor and realise, the
responsibility lies with various other actors as well.</p>
<p>Open data has a major role to play in transforming the vision of the SDGs into reality, by enabling the informed participation of multiple actors – private companies, non-government organisations, academic and research institutes, civic activists, etc. To plan, monitor, and actualise the path being traversed by a country, open data becomes essential. Also to facilitate public participation in the governance.</p>
<p>In this and the next blog post, I am documenting the availability and openness of data sets in India, which are relevant for the indicators identified for monitoring of targets under the 17 SDGs. This post offers the findings for the first 7 Goals, while the next post will cover the last 10. Along with questions of availability and openness, I have also documented the technical format of the available data, the level of granularity, and also the frequency of its collection, when applicable. The chart below describe the overall situation of availability and openness of data for monitoring SDGs in India.</p>
<p> </p>
<iframe src="https://cis-india.github.io/charts/2016.02.21_monitoring-SDGs-India_01/index.html" frameborder="0" height="580" width="600"></iframe>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #01: <em>End poverty in all its forms everywhere</em></h3>
<p>The data is available for most of the indicators either directly or need to be derived, however, data doesn't exist for one of the indicators.</p>
<p>The data exists at the national level and at the state level or both, but data availability at the district/city level would give a better picture. Though NSSO sample survey data includes representative data at the state/UT level, such data is often not made freely accessible. Not all data which have been collected, i.e., from agencies like NSSO, National Family Health Survey, etc., are open in the public domain.</p>
<p>Also, the frequency of data collected for most of the indicators are either decennial or quinquennial, rather an annual survey would facilitate better/close monitoring. Health is an important measure associated with poverty, but the data is decennially collected. There is a need for regular data updation, while considering those data which are supposed to be collected annually.</p>
<p>In this context, to derive certain indicators, say Indicator 1.3.1., there is a cross agency dependency on data, and lacks disaggregation of data. The disaggregation is a key to measure inequality, especially incidences like poverty. So to monitor poverty we need to identify the different strata of poverty and policy can be formulated accordingly.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 1.3.1. Percentage of population covered by social protection floors /systems disaggregated by sex, and distinguishing children, unemployed, old age, people with disabilities, pregnant women/new-borns, work injury victims, poor and vulnerable</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #02: <em>End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture</em></h3>
<p>Indicators and the data corresponding to them reflects two things, what has been done and what has to be done. The data for fifteen indicators mapped to the targets in goal 2 are available for thirteen of the indicators. The data which are available are likely to match the indicator directly or the data has to be derived for most of the indicators. And for the remaining two indicators the data is not available.</p>
<p>For most of the indicators that have to be derived, there is a strong dependency on the dataset from NSSO sample survey for arriving at the requirement. This dependency comes at a cost, as NSSO sample data are not freely available in the public domain, thus making the overall monitoring dependent on closed data. There is a cross agency reliance on data, for arriving at the indicator, and the data on public platform are not up to date.</p>
<p>Also, the data for majority of the indicators are measured at the national as well as state level, but a goal like ending hunger – providing food security, would definitely require data in the order of district/village level. Though data is available for the Indicator 2.2.1: Prevalence of stunting (height for age <-2 SD from the median of the WHO Child Growth Standards) among children under five years of age, but, the data is from eight states only and the national data is derived from it, too small sample size to extrapolate as the nation's data.</p>
<p>On the frequency of data collection, Indicator 2.c.1: Indicator of (food) Price Anomalies (IPA), are collected monthly and some of the data are quinquennial or decennial. However, most of them are annually collected, enabling better accountability and close monitoring of the goals and to frame actionable policy steps.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 2.5.1: Ex Situ Crop Collections Enrichment index</li>
<li>b. Indicator 2.5.2: Percentage of local crops and breeds and their wild relatives, classified as being at risk, not-at-risk or unknown level of risk of extinction</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #03: <em>Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages</em></h3>
<p>Data is available for all the twenty-five indicators corresponding to the thirteen targets set to measure goal 3 on health and well-being. Some of the data are direct to the indicator, while some have to be derived from various data set to arrive at the indicator.</p>
<p>Data is open and accessible freely in the public domain for all the indicators, most of the data are from World Health Organisation (WHO) database. However, for finer tunings and up to date data there is dependency on National Family Health Survey (NFHS) which is collected decennially.</p>
<p>The WHO data lacks updation and ones which are available are pertaining to an year, thus making the analysis of the annual trend difficult. While the frequency of data collected for most of the data are annual.</p>
<p>The dataset available are at the national and state level, and two of the data set is measured in the order of cities. Most of the WHO dataset provides data at the national level, whereas NFHS, District Family Health Surveys and other agencies provide data at the lowest order, but such dataset are not freely accessible on the public domain. The updated data on health are not made available freely accessible in the public domain which are derived through health surveys.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #04: <em>Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all</em></h3>
<p>Education in India is a fundamental right of every citizen, therefore achieving inclusive, equitable and quality education for all becomes necessary. Said this, to monitor goal 4, data is available for nine indicators out of eleven indicators, and for the remaining two indicators, the data is not accessible or in public domain for free access, and for the sub-part of the indicator on proficiency level. Though data exists for all the indicators, however, for most of the indicators we need to derive from multiple sources. Data does not exist for subparts like psychosocial wellbeing, in the Indicator 4.2.1 and proficiency in functional literacy and numeracy skills as in the Indicator 4.6.1.</p>
<p>The data are collected annually for seven indicators and for the two indicators Indicator 4.3.1 and Indicator 4.6.1, which relies on NFHS and Census data respectively, the data is collected decennially. Also, for some of the indicators the data availability is restricted to particular years or are not up to date.</p>
<p>The data which exists are collected at the national and state level for some of them and for some data set the data exists at the national level only, whereas for the Indicator 4.6.1, the data set is of the order of city. And the disaggregation issue prevails here as well, so to sort data based on the given parameter one has to consult NSSO sample survey or derive from the existing data.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 4.7.1: Percentage of 15-year old students enrolled in secondary school demonstrating at least a fixed level of knowledge across a selection of topics in environmental science and geo science. The exact choice/range of topics will depend on the survey or assessment in which the indicator is collected. Disaggregation: sex and location</li>
<li>Indicator 4.a.1: Percentage of schools with access to (i) electricity; (ii) Internet for pedagogical purposes; (iii) computers for pedagogical purposes; (iv) adapted infrastructure and materials for students with disabilities; (v) single-sex basic sanitation facilities; (vi) basic hand washing facilities</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #05: <em>Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls</em></h3>
<p>Gender as a social construct has been deprived of equality and equity, therefore, achieving equality and empowering women and girls lays down the path for an inclusive development. In this direction, to monitor the goal 5, data is available for eleven indicators and do not exist for three indicators out of fourteen indicators. However, the Indicator 5.3.2, is not relevant as India does not acknowledge FGM/C. Also, for most of the indicators, the data need to be derived from the given dataset.</p>
<p>For most of the data, the data is collected at the National or state level. Whereas for the Indicator 5.a.1, the data is available at the district/tehasil level and it is based on Agricultural census of India, carried out once in five years.</p>
<p>The collection of data is annual in most cases, decennial in the cases of NFHS data, quinquennial with regard to data on land ownership and rights based on gender. Also, in cases of proportion of women in parliament or number of legal framework – domestic/international, the frequency cannot be determined as its subject to change.</p>
<p>Regarding openness, though data exists, the data is not available to access freely. These data are either from NSSO sample survey and NFHS. For most of the indicators the data exists in general without disaggregation, but, as the goal demands sex based disaggregation, we need to derive from the existing data.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 5.3.2: Percentage of girls and women aged 15-49 who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C), by age group (for relevant countries only)</li>
<li>Indicator 5.6.2. Number of countries with laws and regulations that guarantee women aged 15-49 access to sexual and reproductive health care, information and education</li>
<li>Indicator 5.c.1: Percentage of countries with systems to track and make public allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #06: <em>Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all</em></h3>
<p>Water is a life giving source, but ensuring water and sanitation in a sustainable way is a challenge indeed. Data is available for all the ten indicators to monitor the goal 6. While for most of the indicators the data has to be derived from the given data set or from other data set. The data set available are in absolute numbers, need to modify as per the indicators.</p>
<p>The data is collected annually for most of the indicators, however, for the indicators, Indicator 6.3.2: Percentage of water bodies with good ambient water quality; Indicator 6.4.1: Percentage change in water use efficiency over time, the data pertains to the specific year, without a time series.</p>
<p>Three of the data are measured at the state level, one at the district level – Indicator 6.2.1, and another at the level of cities – Indicator 6.3.1. For most of the indicators, the data are from international agencies like WHO, UNEP, FAO, etc.</p>
<p>The data for four of the indicators are not freely accessible on the public domain, though data exists. Also, for the Indicator 6.a.1, the available data is not specific to it, but gives an overview. Overall, for the close monitoring of the goal 6, the granularity of the data should be at the district/block level, and must be freely accessible.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Goal #07: <em>Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all</em></h3>
<p>Energy is considered one of the basic needs of human life, therefore, providing energy which is reliable and affordable has to ensure sustainability and the kind of energy being produced. The data exists for five of the indicators out of six indicators, however, the data does not exist for one of the indicators. The data for two of the indicators – Indicator 7.2.1, Indicator 7.3.1, have to be derived from the given data set.</p>
<p>For most of the data, the data is collected annually and the data is collected at the national level. However, as to the data availability for the Indicator 7.2.1, the data is available at the state level.</p>
<p>To arrive at the required indicator, there is a dependency over other dataset. Though most of the data are available, for three of the indicators – Indicator 7.2.1: Renewable energy share in the total final energy consumption (%); Indicator 7.3.1. Energy intensity (%) measured in terms of primary energy and GDP; Indicator 7.a.1: Mobilized amount of USD per year starting in 2020 accountable towards the US 100 billion commitment, the data is not freely accessible.</p>
<p><strong>Data Not Available:</strong></p>
<ul><li>Indicator 7.b.1. Ratio of value added to net domestic energy use, by industry</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>References</h3>
<p><strong>[1]</strong> "Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals." Sustainable Development Solutions Network. March 20, 2015. Accessed February 16, 2016. <a href="http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/150320-SDSN-Indicator-Report.pdf">http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/150320-SDSN-Indicator-Report.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[2]</strong> "A World That Counts - Mobilising the Data Revolution for Sustainable Development." Report. Independent Expert Advisory Group Secretariat, 2014. Accessed February 19, 2016.
<a href="http://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/A-World-That-Counts.pdf">http://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/A-World-That-Counts.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[3]</strong> Walker, Stephen, and Jose M. Alonso. "Data Will Only Get Us so Far. We Need It to Be Open." World Economic Forum. January 29, 2016. Accessed February 16, 2016. <a href="http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/data-will-only-get-us-so-far-we-need-it-to-be-open">http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/data-will-only-get-us-so-far-we-need-it-to-be-open</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Author</h3>
<p>Kiran A B, is a student of Master of Public Policy (MPP) at the National Law School of India University, Bengaluru. Kiran has an undergraduate degree in electronics and communications engineering, and he has three years full-time work experience as a software engineer, working in different technological platforms. His research interest includes interdisciplinary linkages between policy, law and technology.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-01'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/monitoring-sustainable-development-goals-in-india-availability-and-openness-01</a>
</p>
No publisherKiran ABOpen DataOpen Government DataData RevolutionOpennessSustainable Development Goals2017-01-02T14:12:58ZBlog EntryMeeting on Proactive Disclosure and Personal Data (Delhi, May 13, 5:30 pm)
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/meeting-on-proactive-disclosure-and-personal-data-delhi-may-13
<b>CIS is organising an informal discussion on topics related to proactive disclosure and personal data thrown up by the recently published report by Amber Sinha and Srinivas Kodali titled "Information Security Practices of Aadhaar (or lack thereof)". Please join us at 5:30 pm today, May 13, at the CIS office.</b>
<p> </p>
<h4>Read the report: <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/information-security-practices-of-aadhaar-or-lack-thereof-a-documentation-of-public-availability-of-aadhaar-numbers-with-sensitive-personal-financial-information-1">PDF</a></h4>
<p> </p>
<h3><strong>Location</strong></h3>
<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m18!1m12!1m3!1d876.157470894426!2d77.20553462919722!3d28.550842498903158!2m3!1f0!2f0!3f0!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!3m3!1m2!1s0x0%3A0x834072df81ffcb39!2sCentre+for+Internet+and+Society!5e0!3m2!1sen!2sin!4v1493818109951" frameborder="0" height="450" width="600"></iframe>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/meeting-on-proactive-disclosure-and-personal-data-delhi-may-13'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/events/meeting-on-proactive-disclosure-and-personal-data-delhi-may-13</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroPrivacyOpen DataOpen Government DataInternet GovernancePublic Accountability2017-05-13T04:32:41ZEventLegal Challenges to Mapping in India #1 - Laws, Policies, and Cases
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/legal-challenges-to-mapping-in-india-1-laws-policies-cases
<b>Responding to the draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill and the draft National Geospatial Policy made public recently, this post provides an overview of the present configuration of laws, policies, and guidelines that provides the legal framework in India for governance of creation and sharing of geospatial data in India. The post also studies these policies in action by describing the key legal cases around the creation and use of geospatial data. The next post of this series will document the reflections and opinions of the key geospatial industry actors in India, as well as the free and open source mapping community.</b>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>1.</strong> <a href="#1">Introduction</a></p>
<p><strong>2.</strong> <a href="#2">Mapping the Legal Journey of Geospatial Data: Past to Present</a></p>
<p><strong>2.1.</strong> <a href="#2-1">National Map Policy, 2005</a></p>
<p><strong>2.2.</strong> <a href="#2-2">Guidelines issued by Survey of India</a></p>
<p><strong>2.3.</strong> <a href="#2-3">Remote Sensing Data Policy (RSDP)</a></p>
<p><strong>2.4.</strong> <a href="#2-4">Civil Aviation Rules</a></p>
<p><strong>3.</strong> <a href="#3">Incidents of Legal Actions Faced by Agencies</a></p>
<p><strong>3.1.</strong> <a href="#3-1">Google's Mapathon in Legal Trouble</a></p>
<p><strong>3.2.</strong> <a href="#3-2">One Country - Two Boundaries</a></p>
<p><strong>3.3.</strong> <a href="#3-3">J. Mohanraj v Google and Others</a></p>
<p><strong>4.</strong> <a href="#4">Conclusion</a></p>
<p><strong>5.</strong> <a href="#5">References</a></p>
<p><strong>6.</strong> <a href="#6">Author Profile</a></p>
<hr />
<h2 id="1">1. Introduction</h2>
<blockquote>“Maps, like faces, are the signature of history.” – Will Durant <strong>[1]</strong></blockquote>
<p>Throughout the course of history geospatial information has played an important role in technological, economic, political and cultural dimensions of the human society. With technological developments taking place, the field of mapping – that is collection, analysis, and representation of geospatial data – is continuously evolving. On the face of it, creation of geospatial data seems to be an exclusive scientific and technological matter. However, the political and economic facets of geospatial data are often as predominant and complex as its scientific practice. Continuing from the colonial era, the political facet of mapping emerged significantly in the public discourse from the 1990s onwards as digital technologies amplified the ability of non-governmental actors to collect, generate, and share geospatial data, in the form of maps or otherwise <strong>[2]</strong>. This 'democratisation' of the ability to map and share private/user-generated maps structurally undermined the government's ability to have an authoritative and universal voice when it comes to geospatial depiction of the nation and its various components. Similar to the other upsurges in the digitized world, which is often followed by an introduction of legal provisions in order to keep access to and use of digital data under mechanisms of monitoring and permission, mapping in India has also has subsequently been governed under policies addressing both terrestrial mapping and remote sensing. Concerns of national security, naturally, have driven much of these policies.</p>
<p>This post focuses on providing an overview of the present configuration of laws, policies, and guidelines that provides the legal framework in India for governance of creation and sharing of geospatial data in India. The post also studies these policies in action by describing the key legal cases around the creation and use of geospatial data. The next post of this series will document the reflections and opinions of the key geospatial industry actors in India, as well as the free and open source mapping community.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="2">2. Mapping the Legal Journey of Geospatial Data: Past to Present</h2>
<blockquote>“We know every inch of the nation, because we map every inch of it!” – Survey of India <strong>[3]</strong></blockquote>
<p>Aforementioned slogan adopted by the primary organization responsible for mapping all geospatial data in India indicates the importance of the geospatial data and mapping the same. While it indicates the importance of having access to mapping data in order to be aware of the geospatial features of one’s country, it also cleverly reveals the vulnerability that having access to mapped data brings. The phrase can be said to imply that mapping every inch of the country leads to information about every inch of the nation which is useful if in the hands of government agency but repugnant to security if in the hands of external agencies. This conflict between access to information about the country and the security concerns arising from such an open access has led to a rich evolution of legal policies governing the same.</p>
<p>Set up in 1767, Survey of India (hereinafter “SOI”) was required to map the terrains of India to fulfill the commercial and political convenience of the East India Company <strong>[4]</strong>. During these colonial times, maps were considered to be essential for governmental purposes and thus their dissemination to unauthorized persons was barred by Clause 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 <strong>[5]</strong>. Thus, till 1950s mapping was being governed by the colonial provisions which maps restricted to official use only <strong>[6]</strong>. With independence, the functions of the SOI shifted mainly towards providing information for the defense forces <strong>[7]</strong>.</p>
<p>An important change came in the form of orders and notifications by Ministry of Defence (hereinafter “MOD”) during 1960s, the major one being the 1965 order that permitted distribution of maps of scale 1:4 M <strong>[8]</strong>. The Map Restriction Policy of the MOD, however, imposed categorical restrictions on sharing of maps, aerial photos, and all geophysical data for various parts of India - with a focus on international border areas in the North-Eastern state, and the coastal zone that included several large cities like Chennai, Kochi, Kolkata, and Mumbai <strong>[9]</strong>. Dr. Manosi Lahiri notes that "[t]his had a far reaching effect on the mapping culture of independent India and perpetuated the perception among many that maps were a security threat" <strong>[10]</strong>." By 1971, however, the functions of SOI extended to catering to inter alia all development activities and was hence brought under the ambit of Department of Science and Technology <strong>[11]</strong>.</p>
<p>However, the catalytic transformation came in the form of National Map Policy, 2005 which made SOI the nodal governmental agency for dealing with all processes involving geospatial data. While harping for open access to geospatial data, the policy accompanied by corresponding guidelines have largely restricted the power to map geospatial data to SOI. The Policy and the guidelines have been discussed in detail as under.</p>
<h3 id="2-1">2.1. National Map Policy, 2005</h3>
<p>The National Map Policy, 2005 (hereinafter, “NMP”) was announced by the Central Government on May 19, 2005 <strong>[12]</strong>. The preamble of the policy identifies the importance of high quality spatial data in various facets such as socio-economic development, conservation of natural resources, infrastructure development etc <strong>[13]</strong>. Topographic map database constitutes the foundation of all spatial data and its production, maintenance, and dissemination has been assigned as a responsibility to SOI, which is to "liberalize access" to spatial data without compromising upon security concerns. Thus, the conflict between national security and right to have access to information regarding one’s country is clearly highlighted in the policy as a need for enactment of the same. Thus, the policy objectives include access to National Topographic Database (NTDB) <strong>[14]</strong> and promotion of geospatial based intelligence, subject to confirmation to national standards of SOI.</p>
<p>In order to realize the security concerns, inter alia, a dual-classification was created amongst the maps, namely - i) <strong>Defence Series Maps (“DSM”)</strong> and ii) <strong>Open Series Maps (“OSM”)</strong>. While the former constitutes of topographical maps that mainly cater to defence and security requirements of the country, the latter supports developmental activities. Hence, DSMs whether in analogue or digital form, fall under the classified category and the power to issue guidelines pertaining to their use vests digit mainly for developmental purposes, they are not openly accessible by ipso facto and need to gain the ‘unrestricted’ tag after clearance from MOD. A table specifying the distinction between DSMs and OSMs in detail has been provided below:</p>
<hr />
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<th>Sub-Topic</th>
<th>Defence Series Maps (“DSM”)</th>
<th>Open Series Maps (“OSM”)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Why are these maps used?</td>
<td>The maps under this series cater to defence and security requirements of the country.</td>
<td>The maps under this series are useful in supporting various developmental activities in the country.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>What are the technical classifications?</td>
<td>Everest/WGS-84 Datum and Polyconic/UTM Projection) on various scales (with heights, contours and full content without dilution of accuracy).</td>
<td>In UTM Projection on WGS-84 datum, bearing different map sheet numbers. (And as provided in Annexure B of the NMP)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Who can use these maps?</td>
<td>Maps (in analogue or digital forms) for the entire country will be classified.</td>
<td>Both hard copy and digital form will become “Unrestricted” after obtaining a one-time clearance of the Ministry of Defence.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>How can the maps be used?</td>
<td>Guidelines regarding the use of DSMs will be formulated by the Ministry of Defence.</td>
<td>Guidelines regarding the use of OSMs will be formulated by SOI regarding aspects like procedure for access, further dissemination /sharing, ways and means of protecting business and commercial interests of SOI etc.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<hr />
<p>While the DSMs are completely classified, restrictive provisions regarding usage and dissemination of OSMs have also been incorporated in the policy. OSMs are not allowed to show any civil and military Vulnerable Areas and Vulnerable Points (VA’s/VP’s). OSMs on a scale larger than 1:1 needs to be disseminated either by sale or an agreement, which will allow the agency to add its own value to the maps obtained, and to share these maps with others.</p>
<p>The primary transaction between SOI and the agency as well as all the subsequent transactions between the agency and other users have to be registered in the Map Transaction Registry for records. While the Map Transaction Registry forms an important part of the NMP, no such registry information has been made available on the official website of SOI as indicated by the screenshot below.</p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/SurveyOfIndia_MapTransactionRegistry.png" alt="Map Transaction Registry, Survey of India" />
<h6>Map Transaction Registry, Survey of India, URL: <a href="http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/view/48">http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/view/48</a></h6>
<p> </p>
<p>The policy allows users to publish maps on hard copy or web (with or without GIS interface) subject to a certification from SOI in case of depiction of international boundaries. The policy also upholds the validity of the previous MOD notifications pertaining to mapping subject to the modifications introduced by the policy and authorises SOI to issue further guidelines corresponding to the policy.</p>
<h3 id="2-2">2.2. Guidelines issued by Survey of India</h3>
<p>Under the powers vested by the NMP, SOI has issued detailed clarificatory guidelines in furtherance of the policy <strong>[15]</strong>. The restrictions arising on mapping of geospatial data can be attributed to two major factors namely, Security concerns and Copyright provisions <strong>[16]</strong>. Under the guidelines, copyright of both digital and analogue maps has been vested with the SOI. Penal consequences have been mentioned as a result of violation of SOI’s copyrights. In furtherance of security concerns, the guidelines uphold the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Notification No. 118-Cus./F.No.21/ 5/62-Cus. I/VIII dated 4th May 1963 which prohibits the export of all maps/digital data in 1: 250K and larger scales through any means. Digital Topographical data has been an exclusive licensing domain of only Indian individuals, organisations, firms or companies.</p>
<p>While paper maps can be accessed from SOI offices against payment of price, digitisation of maps has been strictly made forbidden by the guidelines. Ownership of digital data has been vested completely with the SOI and can only be gained against payment after application through a specified proforma.</p>
<h3 id="2-3">2.3 Remote Sensing Data Policy (RSDP)</h3>
<p>In 2011, the confusion pertaining to applicability of NMP to both territorial and satellite mapping was resolved with the release of the Remote Sensing Data Policy (RSDP). The policy recognized the importance of remote sensing data and noted that it was largely used by government and non-government users from Indian and foreign remote sensing satellites. However, again banking upon the need for security considerations, the policy was released with the purpose of “…managing and/ or permitting the acquisition/dissemination of remote sensing data in support of developmental activities" <strong>[17]</strong>. Department of Science (DOS) was made the nodal government agency for all actions pertaining to remote sensing data under the policy.</p>
<p>A basic perusal of the policy indicates a parallelism between the RSDP and the NMP. Thus, similar to NMP, RSDP assures of a government managed Indian Remote Sensing Satellites (IRS) Programme, the data produced by which will be solely owned by the government and other users could only be provided with licences if need be. Any attempt at acquiring and/or dissemination of remote sensing data within India requires permission through the nodal government agency. National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC) of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO)/ DOS is vested with the authority to acquire and disseminate all satellite remote sensing data in India, both from Indian and foreign satellites. NRSC is also supposed to maintain a systematic National Remote Sensing Data Archive, and a log of all acquisitions/ sales of data for all satellites. Thus, nodal government agencies were created for both terrestrial mapping and satellite imagery, former being SOI and latter NRSC.</p>
<h3 id="2-4">2.4 Civil Aviation Rules</h3>
<p>Aerial instruments and aircrafts act as important instruments for geophysical surveys and mapping. Thus, this area does not go ungoverned. While, till date, India doesn’t impose an explicit bar on foreign registered aircraft overflying its territory for aerial photography and geo-physical survey, the same is subject to prior clearance under rule 158 and 158A of the Aircraft Rules, 1937 on account of safety and security concerns, the procedure for which has been given under Civil Aviation Rules (CAR) <strong>[18]</strong>. CAR is applicable to inter alia agencies undertaking aerial photography, geophysical surveys etc. An application is required to be made as per Annexure E which inter alia requires confinement of photography/sensing to the exact area as applied and cleared by the Ministry of Defence. The application is forwarded by DGCA to the Ministry of Defence and other agencies responsible for issuing NOC.</p>
<p>DGCA’s restrictions extends to voluntary geographic information with prohibition of civilian drones in India. Unmanned drones are an important equipment used for the purpose of collecting geo-spatial data. The ban on flying drones in India exist from October, 2014 but is not in common knowledge <strong>[19]</strong>. While it is argued that drones could harm people and lead to chances of crashing, the major argument has always been the use of drones by anti-national elements to peruse sensitive places for plotting terror attacks <strong>[20]</strong>. While there is an ambiguity regarding using drones in India, flying drones over defence establishments and historical places is completely banned <strong>[21]</strong>. Thus, civilians using drones for clicking pictures of monuments etc. have often been confronted by the police <strong>[22]</strong>.</p>
<p>Thus, there is no single policy that acts as a deterrent for mapping in India but an accumulation of multiple policies, guidelines and legal provisions that are used by departments of government to restrict mapping in the name of security. These restrictions have also witnessed incidents in their furtherance as detailed below.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="3">3. Incidents of Legal Actions Faced by Agencies</h2>
<p>Since the advent of restrictive mapping policies, numerous incidents have come forth when agencies have found themselves faced by legal actions for violating such policies. In recent times, these incidents were publicly highlighted in 1998 when the sale of the CD-Roms of Delhi Guide Maps created by Eicher were prohibited <strong>[23]</strong>. Eicher has been one of the oldest players of the private mapping market, creating city and road maps for India in the private sector for public distribution. While having faced a ban in earlier times, it is also one of the few companies been able to access the SOI data for value addition. It works in collaboration with SOI now, often launching products in ‘strategic alliance’ with them. After the implementation of NMP, we have witnessed two major legal controversies, both involving SOI on one hand and Google on the other.</p>
<h3 id="3-1">3.1. Google's Mapathon in Legal Trouble</h3>
<p>In furtherance of Google’s constant endeavour to have every nook and corner mapped, Google holds a competition called ‘Mapathon’ each year <strong>[2]</strong>. The competition invites people to map their local surroundings incentivised by lucrative prizes to winners. However, an initiative launched for purely mapping purposes had to face a large legal hurdle in the year of 2013. Google-Mapathon, 2013, held in February-March, had declared Vishal Saini as the 1st winner who had mapped the military-prone city of Pathankot. According to legal provisions governing mapping practices in India, civil and military Vital Areas (VAs) /Vital Points (VPs) cannot be shown on maps in public domain <strong>[25]</strong>. Thus, the tech-giant found itself amidst legal controversy for having held the competition without permission from Survey of India after a concern raised by BJP’s Tarun Vijay. A case was filed by SOI at the R.K. Puram Police Station. The primary contention was that the “Mapathon 2013 activity is likely to jeopardise national security interest and violates the National Map Policy. Citizens of the country, who are ignorant of the legal consequences, are likely to violate the law of the land” <strong>[26]</strong>.</p>
<p>Considering the involvement of a U.S. based company, the investigation was handed over to CBI During the probe, it was alleged by then Surveyor General of India Swarna Subba Rao that Google did not refrain from “polluting” <strong>[27]</strong> the internet with classified material despite having been asked so. Further, then Additional Surveyor-General of India R.C. Padhi wrote claimed that “The Survey of India is only mandated to undertake ‘Restricted’ category surveying and mapping, and no other government/private organisations or any individual are authorised to do so” <strong>[28]</strong>. He told Reuters that some of the information provided by locals to Google could be ‘sensitive’ and the security of the nation could not be compromised at any cost <strong>[29]</strong>.</p>
<p>Google on the other hand said that its primary motive was to map local information of daily needs such as hospitals, restaurants, markets etc. and the competition was in tandem with national laws. Further, it was heard that Google had been approached regarding Mapathon by SOI and it had replied with intimation of willingness to talk to SOI. However, SOI had not reverted back and Google was always ready and willing to talk out the matter. However, the much hyped case did not have a substantial result and CBI had to close the probe on account of lack of evidence <strong>[30]</strong>.</p>
<p>Considered a thing of past, the controversy resurfaced in the recent times of January, 2016 post the Pathankot Air Base strike <strong>[31]</strong>. Google was dragged to the court for having displayed sensitive geospatial data regarding Pathankot that made possible an airstrike at the location. An injunction was sought to refrain Google from showing sensitive military areas and defence establishments on the maps made available by it. While the injunction was refused, Delhi High Court had asked the centre and the additional solicitor to look into the same and keep the court apprised. Thus, this can be termed as an open and unfinished matter ongoing legal contemplation.</p>
<p>While it is understandable that some areas are considered as vulnerable due to security concern. The lost keeps changing often leading to transgression into security places. But the major point being the list of vulnerable areas is classified and not released to public. In absence of such a list, how is it possible for google to vet its data to comply with security concerns.</p>
<h3 id="3-2">3.2. One Country - Two Boundaries</h3>
<p>Another major legal controversies in the field of geospatial mapping has been with regards to wrong depiction of international boundaries of India by Google. A basic perusal of the official website of SOI provides a list of only three documents under the tab of ‘Public Awareness’, all dealing with the crime of depicting wrong Indian boundaries <strong>[32]</strong>. While one of them includes the certified map with correct boundaries, to be complied with, other is a gazette notification bringing the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1961 which criminalized the act of showing wrong depiction of boundaries. Section 69A of the IT Act has also been used earlier to restrict access to links depicting incorrect maps of India <strong>[33]</strong> though it only speaks about restricting public access to data, necessary in the interest of Sovereignty and Integrity inter alia, the section per se does not deal with dissemination of geos-spatial data.</p>
<p>It was in the year of 2014, that on the directions of Department of Science and Technology, SOI filed a complaint against Google at the Dehradun Police Station for depiction of international boundaries not in a “wrong manner” i.e. not in compliance with Government of India authentication <strong>[34]</strong>. The result was that today Google shows different boundaries on Indian domain, in compliance with SOI and different on International domain.</p>
<p>Google was also involved in a controversy when in 2009, Google maps for India marked areas of Arunachal Pradesh, including its capital Itanagar and Tawang, in China <strong>[35]</strong>. It was followed by an apology from Google and an immediate rectification for Indian users. However, Google uses a different version for China and the world creating disparity in the boundary depiction <strong>[36]</strong>.</p>
<p>Google has not been the only platform having faced the anger of Indian community for wrong depiction. In 2011, copies of the Economist Magazine were seized for having depicted the map of Kashmir divided between India, Pakistan and China <strong>[37]</strong>. For similar reasons, Al-Jazeera was taken off air by the Indian government after a 5-day ban imposed under Section 69A of the IT Act <strong>[38]</strong>. Modi’s visit to Queensland University of Technology was accompanied by an “unqualified apology” from the authorities for having depicting Indian map without portions of Kashmir <strong>[39]</strong>. Urban Development Department of Bihar also ended up show-causing one of its employees for putting up wrong map on its website and substituting the same with SOI’s version after media attention <strong>[40]</strong>. India seems to be the country often having been angered due to wrong depictions of maps.</p>
<p>While India seems to be actively involved in Geo-politics, it isn’t the only country Google has fallen in legal trouble with, for wrongly depicting International Boundaries. In 2010, Google gained a lot of media attention for allegedly starting the ‘First Google Maps War’ <strong>[41]</strong>. It occurred when a Nicaraguan official led his forces to the Costa Rican territory on other side of the customary border and used Google Maps as a proof to deny trespassing. Nicaragua and Costa Rica have a long territorial dispute and Google seem to have fuelled it by depicting the Nicaraguan version of border according to which that area of Cost Rican territory came within the boundaries of Nicaragua <strong>[42]</strong>. Despite Nicaragua’s petition to Google to not accept Costa Rica’s petition to shift borders, Google voluntarily changed its borders to comply with the Costa Rican stance <strong>[43]</strong>.</p>
<p>Another such incident followed in the case of Google’s depiction of Dutch-German border with respect to Dollart Bay <strong>[44]</strong>. Germany claimed the border to be closer to Dutch land while Dutch claimed it to be more towards centre. Google, however, chose to depict a self-version that transferred the German city of Emden to the territorial control of Netherlands. This infuriated the city which resorted to expressing its displeasure and asking Google to change the depiction. Google, this time, however remained dormant and no amendment in the depiction of Dutch-German border could be witnessed.</p>
<p>At the time of Crimean referendum supporting independence, U.N. had passed a resolution condemning the same and supporting territorial integrity of Ukraine. Google, however, believed in the contrary and was quick to bring changes into its maps to depict formation of independent Crimea <strong>[45]</strong>. Rather than a mistake, this time, Google had adopted a stance against the UN resolution and used its maps to vocalize the same.</p>
<p>Similarly during the inclusion of South Sudan in the U.N.G.A., while members voted, they were unaware of the exact territorial division between North and South Sudan. It was then that Google initiated the process of collecting geo-spatial information regarding South Sudan from locals in order to better the territorial integrity <strong>[46]</strong>.</p>
<p>Thus, Google has times and again fallen into criticism for wrong depiction of international boundaries and even varied depictions of boundaries as per the perspective of the political entity. However, “Popularity does not bestow authority” <strong>[47]</strong> and Google’s maps cannot be accurately relied upon for proving sovereign territorial holds. Thus, most of the international incidents have witnessed countries resorting to peaceful petitions to Google informing it regarding the inaccuracy of the border and requesting a shift in the same. Hardly has the world witnessed penal provisions being invoked against Google for depicting versions other than the perceived ones.</p>
<h3 id="3-3">3.3. J. Mohanraj v Google and Others</h3>
<p>Apart from the above two incidents, another pertinent case is the 2008 judgment by the Madras High Court in J. Mohanraj v (1) Secretary To Government, Delhi; (2) Indian Space Research Organisation, Bangalore; (3) Google India Private Limited, Bangalore . A writ petition was filed by Mohanraj seeking a complete ban on Google Earth and ‘Bhuvan’; mapping initiatives by Google and ISRO respectively <strong>[48]</strong>.</p>
<p>The petition was allegedly filed in public interest considering the security apparatus of Indian Government along with the threat posed by the terrorists. The petitioner claimed that the initiatives such as Google Earth used high quality satellite imagery to display bird’s eye view of various establishments including minute details and were bound to cover defense establishments and sensitive areas, posing a threat to Indian security. Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam’s speech was referred to indicate his views against such open creation of geospatial data. The provisions of the NMP was highlighted and it was alleged that such mapping practices violated the individual rights of a person under Article 21 of the Constitution. Further, it was claimed that such practices could only be taken up by SOI and were outside the purview of private organizations.</p>
<p>However, the Court held that the petitioner was unable to produce any specific “Guidelines/Rules/Law laid down by the Central/State Governments, prohibiting the private organisations or any other individuals to Interactive Mapping Program, covering vast majority of the Planet”. Since the court could only interpret existing provisions and not lay down guidelines, passed the judgment against the petitioners.</p>
<p>From the above explained incident it seems that the NMP per se does not refrain creation of mapping data by agencies other than SOI. The centre of the conflict seems to lie with the interpretation of the policy by SOI claiming itself to be the exclusive agency entitled to map data. Hence, often though complaints and cases are filed against such activities, no concrete consequence emerges from the same. Further, the courts have also neglected the grievance of the issue and given ambiguous judgments in most cases. Thus no judicial sanction or opposition to the SOI’s guidelines exist till date often allowing SOI to continue with following its own version. While these cannot be termed as a solution, they definitely indicate towards the root of the problem.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="4">4. Conclusion</h2>
<p>It can be concluded from above compilation of legal provisions and incidents that it is perhaps SOI’s interpretation to NMP that gives rise to exclusive authority to map geospatial data and not the policy per se. The objective of the policy clearly advocates for promotion of the use of geospatial knowledge and intelligence. More than one provision under the SOI guidelines indicate towards the arbitrary abuse of power. First, a provision regarding ‘Settlement of disputes’ has been included in the guidelines. Secretary, Department of Science & Technology has been vested with binding decision making powers in case of a dispute on the applicability or interpretation of the guidelines between the SOI and any other person. Thus, instead of a judicial forum, an executive authority has been vested with quasi-judicial powers. Such a dispute resolution mechanism cannot be considered as devoid of bias towards the governmental agency, hampering fair and equal justice. Second, SOI assumed the power of mapping data but under the guidelines considers itself devoid of complete responsibility for the loss caused to any person on account of failure of proper dissemination of data. Third, the SOI has reserved the right to add, delete, modify or amend every provision of the guidelines at any time without assigning any reason or notice.</p>
<p>While depiction of wrong boundaries has been specifically been criminalized and can be accepted as symbolic of sovereign hold over contentious territorial areas, it hardly fulfills a security purpose other than acting as a proof to the international community. The incident regarding Mapathon, on the other hand, though did not result in penal consequences towards Google, seem counterproductive in the first place for asking for a ban on increase of geospatial resource data. Considering the same, prudency demands that India also adopt policies and measures that are more peaceful and accommodating in nature such as resolving territorial matters by talking out with Google and other agencies. The current and proposed stringent penal provisions only act as dis-incentivising measures for geo-spatial agencies to map India, which is not the motive sought to be achieved by the bill.</p>
<p>However, the interpretation of the policy cannot be blamed alone for restrictions such as depiction of VAs and VPs have been specifically mentioned in the policy. Above mentioned policies and guidelines have often been criticized for being overly restrictive in nature and a consequence of colonial hangover. In times of crowdsourcing of mapping data, the need of the hour exist in critically analysing the existent policies and their interpretation. The same is especially so in the absence of a high quality digital version of the correct boundary of India. While a map in PDF form has been put up by Survey of India, the same cannot be converted to digital form to be complied with or used to resolve territorial disputes of detailed nature. This makes it absolutely impossible to completely comply with the Indian version of the boundaries without a proper resource acting as a comparison check. The need of the hour is for the Government to release less ambiguous and specific details as to what it considers to be outside the scope of private mapping and the correct boundaries along with a less stringent policy framework so that India can protect its security, sovereignty and integrity while promoting creation and dissemination of geo-spatial data.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="5">5. References</h2>
<p><strong>[1]</strong> SV Srikantia, 'Restriction on maps: A denial of valid geographic information,' [2000] 79(4), Current Science 484.</p>
<p><strong>[2]</strong> Fatima Alam, 'Mapping the politics of cartography,' Infosys Science Foundation, 31 March 2015, <a href="http://www.infosysblogs.com/infosysprize/2015/03/mapping_the_politics_of_cartog_2.html">http://www.infosysblogs.com/infosysprize/2015/03/mapping_the_politics_of_cartog_2.html</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[3]</strong> 'About Us,' Survey of India, <a href="http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/view/10-about-us">http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/view/10-about-us</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[4]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[5]</strong> R Ramachandran, 'Public Access to Indian Geographical Data,' [2000] 79(4) Current Science 450.</p>
<p><strong>[6]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[7]</strong> Supra, 4.</p>
<p><strong>[8]</strong> “Scale represents the relationship of the distance on the map/data to the actual distance on the ground. Map detail is determined by the source scale of the data: the finer the scale, the more detail.” Seen at <a href="http://gif.berkeley.edu/documents/Scale_in_GIS.pdf">http://gif.berkeley.edu/documents/Scale_in_GIS.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[9]</strong> Dr. Manosi Lahiri, 'Survey & Mapping in India: The Regulatory Framework,' Directions Magazine India, <a href="https://www.mlinfomap.com/Pdf/Survey&Mapping-Lahiri%202.1.pdf">https://www.mlinfomap.com/Pdf/Survey&Mapping-Lahiri%202.1.pdf</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[10]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[11]</strong> Supra, 2.</p>
<p><strong>[12]</strong> ‘Guidelines for implementing National Map Policy,’ Survey of India, <a href="http://surveyofindia.gov.in/files/nmp/Guidlines%20for%20Implementing%20National%20Map%20policy.pdf">http://surveyofindia.gov.in/files/nmp/Guidlines%20for%20Implementing%20National%20Map%20policy.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[13]</strong> 'National Map Policy, 2005, Preamble,' Survey of India, <a href="http://surveyofindia.gov.in/files/nmp/National%20Map%20Policy.pdf">http://surveyofindia.gov.in/files/nmp/National%20Map%20Policy.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[14]</strong> Ibid, Objectives.</p>
<p><strong>[15]</strong> Supra, 11.</p>
<p><strong>[16]</strong> Supra, 5.</p>
<p><strong>[17]</strong> 'Remote Sensing Data Policy, 2011,' National Remote Sensing Centre, Indian Space Research Organisation, <a href="http://www.nrsc.gov.in/Remote_Sensing_Data_Policy">http://www.nrsc.gov.in/Remote_Sensing_Data_Policy</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[18]</strong> Civil Aviation Requirement Section 3 Air Transport Series ‘F’ Part I Issue I, 12th October 2010.</p>
<p><strong>[19]</strong> Nandagopal Rajan, 'Why India needs rules for flying drones, soon' (The Indian Express, 9 July, 2015) <a href="http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/gadgets/why-india-needs-rules-for-flying-drones-soon/">http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/gadgets/why-india-needs-rules-for-flying-drones-soon/</a> accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[20]</strong> TNN, 'Now, flying a drone can land you in prison' (The Times of India, 15 February, 2016) <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/Now-flying-a-drone-can-land-you-in-prison/articleshow/50990613.cms">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/Now-flying-a-drone-can-land-you-in-prison/articleshow/50990613.cms</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[21]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[22]</strong> Supra, 19; 20.</p>
<p><strong>[23]</strong> Supra, 5.</p>
<p><strong>[24]</strong> tech2 news staff, 'Why is Google’s Mapathon in hot waters in India? All you need to know' (Tech-2, 12 Aug, 2015) <a href="http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/why-is-googles-mapathon-in-hot-waters-in-india-all-you-need-to-know-228810.html">http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/why-is-googles-mapathon-in-hot-waters-in-india-all-you-need-to-know-228810.html</a>, accessed 6 May 2016</p>
<p><strong>[25]</strong> Supra, 12.</p>
<p><strong>[26]</strong> Supra, 24.</p>
<p><strong>[27]</strong> ‘PTI, 'Google ‘polluted Internet’ with classified material: Survey of India' (The Hindu, 10 August, 2014) <a href="http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/internet/mapathon-2013-row-google-polluted-internet-with-classified-material-says-survey-of-india/article6300853.ece">http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/internet/mapathon-2013-row-google-polluted-internet-with-classified-material-says-survey-of-india/article6300853.ece</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[28]</strong> Sandeep Joshi, ‘Google didn’t take permission for Mapathon’ (The Hindu, 24 April, 2013) <a href="http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/google-didnt-take-permission-for-mapathon/article4648589.ece">http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/google-didnt-take-permission-for-mapathon/article4648589.ece</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[29]</strong> Supra, 24.</p>
<p><strong>[30]</strong> Abhishek Sharan, 'CBI may close probe against Google in Mapathon case' (Hindustan Times, 12 February, 2015) <a href="http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/cbi-may-close-probe-against-google-in-mapathon-case/story-CgZYWoP9NgYA3xVepjr5bN.html">http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/cbi-may-close-probe-against-google-in-mapathon-case/story-CgZYWoP9NgYA3xVepjr5bN.html</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[31]</strong> PTI, 'Pathankot attack: Sensitive sites on Google Maps under Delhi HC scanner' (Times of India, 15 January, 2016) <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/Pathankot-attack-Sensitive-sites-on-Google-Maps-under-Delhi-HC-scanner/articleshow/50596143.cms">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/Pathankot-attack-Sensitive-sites-on-Google-Maps-under-Delhi-HC-scanner/articleshow/50596143.cms</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[32]</strong> ‘Public Awareness,' Survey of India, <a href="http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/display/190-public-awareness">http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/pages/display/190-public-awareness</a>), accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[33]</strong> Aman Sharma, '7-year jail, Rs 100 crore fine soon for showing PoK, Arunachal as disputed' (The Economic Times, 05 May 2016) <a href="http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/7-year-jail-rs-100-crore-fine-soon-for-showing-pok-arunachal-as-disputed/articleshow/52117889.cms">http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/7-year-jail-rs-100-crore-fine-soon-for-showing-pok-arunachal-as-disputed/articleshow/52117889.cms</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[34]</strong> Jaspreet Sahni 'Survey of India files complaint against Google maps for wrong depiction of India's boundaries' (News18, 13 December 2014) <a href="http://www.news18.com/news/india/survey-of-india-files-complaint-against-google-maps-for-wrong-depiction-of-indias-boundaries-731101.html">http://www.news18.com/news/india/survey-of-india-files-complaint-against-google-maps-for-wrong-depiction-of-indias-boundaries-731101.html</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[35]</strong> Itanagar agencies, 'Arunachal fumes over wrong map on iPhone4' (Deccan Herald, 04 October, 2010) <a href="http://www.deccanherald.com/content/101784/F">http://www.deccanherald.com/content/101784/F</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[36]</strong> CC, 'How Google represents disputed borders between countries' (The Economist, 04 September, 2014) <a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/09/economist-explains-1">http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/09/economist-explains-1</a>, accessed 6 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[37]</strong> The Kashmir Walla, 'Ten Maps of Kashmir That Angered India' (The Kashmir Walla, 14 May, 2015) <a href="http://thekashmirwalla.com/2015/05/ten-maps-of-kashmir-that-angered-india/">http://thekashmirwalla.com/2015/05/ten-maps-of-kashmir-that-angered-india/</a>accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[38]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[39]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[40]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[41]</strong> Frank Jacobs, 'The First Google Maps War' (The New York Times, 28 February, 2012) <a href="http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/the-first-google-maps-war/">http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/the-first-google-maps-war/</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[42]</strong> Ethan Merel, 'Google’s World: The Impact of "Agnostic Cartographers" on the State-Dominated International Legal System' [2016] <em>Columbia Journal of Transnational Law</em> 442-444.</p>
<p><strong>[43]</strong> Ibid.</p>
<p><strong>[44]</strong> Europe, 'Google map gives German harbour to Netherlands' (BBC, 23 February, 2011) <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-12558741">http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-12558741</a>, accessed 11 May 2016.</p>
<p><strong>[45]</strong> Supra, 42, 448.</p>
<p><strong>[46]</strong> Ibid, 449.</p>
<p><strong>[47]</strong> Supra, 47.</p>
<p><strong>[48]</strong> <em>J. Mohanraj v (1) Secretary To Government, Delhi; (2) Indian Space Research Organisation, Bangalore; (3) Google India Private Limited, Bangalore, 2008 Indlaw MAD 3562</em>.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2 id="6">6. Author Profile</h2>
<p><strong>Adya Garg</strong> is a law student at West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata and has completed her second year. An ardent *SRK fan*, and a dancer at heart, she loves reading books in her free time. Always excited about exploring new fields, she never misses an opportunity to work on areas outside her legal curriculum.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/legal-challenges-to-mapping-in-india-1-laws-policies-cases'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/legal-challenges-to-mapping-in-india-1-laws-policies-cases</a>
</p>
No publisherAdya GargGeospatial Information Regulation BillOpen DataOpen Government DataGeospatial DataOpenness2016-05-11T13:43:11ZBlog Entry International Open Data Charter: First Public Draft
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/international-open-data-charter-first-public-draft
<b>The first public draft of the International Open Data Charter was released at the International Open Data Conference in Ottawa, Canada, May 28-29, 2015. It is being developed by a range of organisations led by the Open Government Partnership (OGP) Open Data Working Group (co-chaired by Government of Canada and the Web Foundation), the Government of Mexico, the Open Data for Development (OD4D) Network, and Omidyar Network. CIS has contributed comments to a previous version of the draft, and also took part in the pre-release meeting of potential stewards of the Charter on May 26 in Ottawa. Here is the text of the draft Charter. Please visit opendatacharter.net/charter/ to submit your comments.</b>
<p> </p>
<h2>Consultation Draft, May 2015</h2>
<p> </p>
<h3>Preamble</h3>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>1)</strong> The world is witnessing the growth of a global movement facilitated by technology and digital media and fuelled by information – one that contains enormous potential to create more accountable, efficient, responsive, and effective governments and businesses, and to spur economic growth.</p>
<p>Open data sit at the heart of this global movement.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>2)</strong> Building a more democratic, just, and prosperous society requires transparent, accountable governments that engage regularly and meaningfully with citizens. Accordingly, there is an ongoing effort to enable collaboration around key social challenges, to provide effective oversight of government activities, to support economic development through innovation, and to develop effective, efficient public policies and programmes.</p>
<p>Open data is essential to meeting these challenges.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>3)</strong> Effective access to data allows individuals and organisations to develop new insights and innovations that can generate social and economic benefits to improve the lives of people around the world, and help to improve the flow of information within and between countries. While governments collect a wide range of data, they do not always share these data in ways that are easily discoverable, useable, or understandable by the public.</p>
<p>This is a missed opportunity.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>4)</strong> Today, many people expect to be able to access high quality information and services, including government data, when and how they want. Others see the opportunity presented by government data as one which can provide innovative policy solutions and support economic and social benefits for all members of society. We have arrived at a point at which people can use open data to generate value, insights, ideas, and services to create a better world for all.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>5)</strong> Open data can increase transparency around what government is doing. Open data can also increase awareness about how countries’ natural resources are used, how extractives revenues are spent, and how land is transacted and managed – all of which promotes accountability and good governance, enhances public debate, and helps to combat corruption.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>6)</strong> Providing access to government data can drive sustainable and inclusive growth by empowering citizens, the media, civil society, and the private sector to identify gaps, and work toward better outcomes for public services in areas such as health, education, public safety, environmental protection, and governance. Open data can do this by:</p>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">showing how and where public money is spent, which provides strong incentives for governments to demonstrate that they are using public money effectively;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">supporting citizens, civil society organisations, governments and the private sector to collaborate on the design of policies and the delivery of better public services;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">supporting assessments of the impact of public programs, which in turn allows governments, civil society organisations, and the private sector to respond more effectively to the particular needs of local communities; and</li>
<li>enabling citizens to make better informed choices about the services they receive and the service standards they should expect.</li></ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>7)</strong> Open government data can be used in innovative ways to create useful tools and products that help to navigate modern life more easily. Used in this way, open data are a catalyst for innovation in the private sector, supporting the creation of new markets, businesses, and jobs. These benefits can multiply as more private sector and civil society organisations adopt open data practices modelled by government and share their own data with the public.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>8)</strong> We, the adherents to the International Open Data Charter, agree that open data are an under-used resource with huge potential to encourage the building of stronger, more interconnected societies that better meet the needs of our citizens and allow innovation and prosperity to flourish.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>9)</strong> We therefore agree to follow a set of principles that will be the foundation for access to, and the release and use of, open government data. These principles are:</p>
<ul>
<li>Open Data by Default;</li>
<li>Quality and Quantity;</li>
<li>Accessible and Useable by All;</li>
<li>Engagement and Empowerment of Citizens;</li>
<li>Collaboration for Development and Innovation;</li></ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>10)</strong> We will develop an action plan in support of the implementation of the Charter and its Technical Annexes, and will update and renew the action plan at a minimum of every two years. We agree to commit the necessary resources to work within our political and legal frameworks to implement these principles in accordance with the technical best practices and timeframes set out in our action plan.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Principle 1: Open Data by Default</h3>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>11)</strong> We recognise that free access to, and the subsequent use of, government data are of significant value to society and the economy, and that government data should, therefore, be open by default.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>12)</strong> We acknowledge the need to promote the global development and adoption of tools and policies for the creation, use, and exchange of open data and information.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>13)</strong> We recognise that the term ‘government data’ is meant in the widest sense possible. This could apply to data held by national, federal, and local governments, international government bodies, and other types of institutions in the wider public sector. This could also apply to data created for governments by external organisations, and data of significant benefit to the public which is held by external organisations and related to government programmes and services (e.g. data on extractives entities, data on transportation infrastructure, etc).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>14)</strong> We recognise that there is domestic and international legislation, in particular pertaining to security, privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, and personally-identifiable and other sensitive information, which must be observed and/or updated where necessary.</p>
<p><strong>15)</strong> We will:</p>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">develop and adopt policies and practices to ensure that all government data is made open by default, as outlined in this Charter, while recognising that there are legitimate reasons why some data cannot be released;</li>
<li>provide clear justifications as to why certain data cannot be released;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">establish a culture of openness, not only through legislative or policy measures, but also with the help of training and awareness programs, tools, and guidelines designed to make government, civil society, and private sector representatives aware of the benefits of open data; and</li>
<li>develop the leadership, management, oversight, and internal communication policies necessary to enable this transition to a culture of openness.</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Principle 2: Quality and Quantity</h3>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>16)</strong> We recognise that governments and other public sector organisations hold vast amounts of information that may be of interest to citizens, and that it may take time to identify data for release or publication.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>17)</strong> We also recognise the importance of consulting with citizens, other governments, non-governmental organisations, and other open data users, to identify which data to prioritise for release and/or improvement.</p>
<p><strong>18)</strong> We agree, however, that governments’ primary responsibility should be to release data in a timely manner, without undue delay.</p>
<p><strong>19)</strong> We will:</p>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">create, maintain, and share public, comprehensive lists of data holdings to set the stage for meaningful public discussions around data prioritisation and release;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">release high-quality open data that are timely, comprehensive, and accurate in accordance with prioritisation that is informed by public requests. To the extent possible, data will be released in their original, unmodified form and at the finest level of granularity available, and will also be linked to any visualisations or analyses created based on the data, as well as any relevant guidance or documentation;</li>
<li>ensure that accompanying documentation is written in clear, plain language, so that it can be easily understood by all;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">make sure that data are fully described, and that data users have sufficient information to understand their source, strengths, weaknesses, and any analytical limitations;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">ensure that open datasets include consistent core metadata, and are made available in human- and machine-readable formats under an open and unrestrictive licence;</li>
<li>allow users to provide feedback, and continue to make revisions to ensure the quality of the data is improved as needed; and</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">apply consistent information lifecycle management practices, and ensure historical copies of datasets are preserved, archived, and kept accessible as long as they retain value.</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Principle 3: Accessible and Usable by All</h3>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>20)</strong> We recognise that opening up data enables citizens, governments, civil society organisations, and the private sector to make better informed decisions.</p>
<p><strong>21)</strong> We recognise that open data should be made available free of charge in order to encourage their widest possible use.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>22)</strong> We recognise that when open data are released, they should be made available without bureaucratic or administrative barriers, such as mandatory user registration, which can deter people from accessing the data.</p>
<p><strong>23)</strong> We will:</p>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">release data in open formats and free of charge to ensure that the data are available to the widest range of users to find, access, and use them. In many cases, this will include providing data in multiple formats, so that they can be processed by computers and used by people; and</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">ensure data can be accessed and used effectively by the widest range of users. This may require the creation of initiatives to raise awareness of open data, promote data literacy, and build capacity for effective use of open data.</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Principle 4: Engagement and Empowerment of Citizens</h3>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>24)</strong> We recognise that the release of open data strengthens our public and democratic institutions, encourages better development, implementation, and assessment of policies to meet the needs of our citizens, and enables more meaningful, better informed engagement between governments and citizens.</p>
<p><strong>25)</strong> We will:</p>
<ul>
<li>implement oversight and review processes to report regularly on the progress and impact of our open data initiatives;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">engage with community and civil society representatives working in the domain of transparency and accountability to determine what data they need to effectively hold governments to account;encourage the use of open data to develop innovative, evidence-based policy solutions that benefit all members of society, as well as empower marginalised groups; and</li>
<li>be transparent about our own data collection, standards, and publishing processes, by documenting all of these related processes online.</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h3>Principle 5: Collaboration for Development and Innovation</h3>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>26)</strong> We recognise the importance of diversity in stimulating creativity and innovation. The more citizens, governments, civil society, and the private sector use open data, the greater the social and economic benefits that will be generated. This is true for government, commercial, and non-commercial uses.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>27)</strong> We recognise that the potential value of our open data is greatly increased when it can be used in combination with open data from other governments, the private sector, academic, media, civil society, and other non-governmental organisations.</p>
<p><strong>28)</strong> We will:</p>
<ul>
<li style="text-align: justify;">create or explore potential partnerships to support the release of open data and maximise their impact through effective use. This may include local, regional, and global partnerships between governments, civil society, and the private sector;</li>
<li>engage with civil society, the private sector, and academic representatives to determine what data they need to generate social and economic value;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">provide training programs, tools, and guidelines designed to ensure government employees are capable of using open data effectively in policy development processes;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">encourage non-governmental organisations to open up data created and collected by them in order to move toward a richer open data ecosystem with multiple sources of open data;</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">share technical expertise and experience with other governments and international organisations around the world, so that everyone can reap the benefits of open data; and</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">empower a future generation of data innovators inside and outside of government by supporting an environment optimised for increasing open data literacy and encouraging developers, civil society organisations, academics, media representatives, government employees, and other open data users, to unlock the value of open data.</li></ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>Crossposted from <a href="http://opendatacharter.net/charter/" target="_blank">http://opendatacharter.net/charter/</a>.</em></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/international-open-data-charter-first-public-draft'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/international-open-data-charter-first-public-draft</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroOpen DataHomepageOpenness2015-06-02T15:51:12ZBlog EntryInternational Open Data Charter: Comments by CIS
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-comments-by-cis
<b>The second meeting of Stewards of the International Open Data Charter is in progress in Santiago, Chile, where the revisions made to the Charter based on the comments received during the public consultation period that ended on July 31, 2015, are being re-discussed and finalised by the Stewards. Here we are sharing the comments submitted by us on the first public draft of the Charter published during the International Open Data Conference in Ottawa, Canada, in May 2015. The comments include those submitted by Sumandro and Sharath Chandra Ram.</b>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>The draft International Open Data Charter and all the submitted comments can be accessed here: <a href="http://opendatacharter.net/charter/" target="_blank">http://opendatacharter.net/charter/</a></strong></p>
<p> </p>
<h2>Comments on the Public Draft</h2>
<p><em>Note: The text below contains excerpts from the public draft of the Charter, followed by submitted comments in <strong>bold</strong>.</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p>1) The world is witnessing the growth of a global movement facilitated by technology and digital media and fuelled by information – one that contains enormous potential to create more accountable, efficient, responsive, and effective governments and businesses, and to spur economic growth.</p>
<p><strong>The word ‘movement’ can perhaps be replaced by ‘transformation.’ ‘Movement’ tends to suggest some kind of unity of purpose or objective, which is not perhaps what is meant here. Also, is it possible to add ‘transparent’ to ‘accountable, efficient, responsive, and effective’?</strong></p>
<p>Open data sit at the heart of this global movement.</p>
<p><strong>Perhaps ‘transformation’ and not ‘movement’.</strong></p>
<p>2) Building a more democratic, just, and prosperous society requires transparent, accountable governments that engage regularly and meaningfully with citizens. Accordingly, there is an ongoing effort to enable collaboration around key social challenges, to provide effective oversight of government activities, to support economic development through innovation, and to develop effective, efficient public policies and programmes.</p>
<p><strong>Perhaps insert ‘sustainable’ before ‘economic development’. In the second sentence, none of the action phrases (‘enable collaboration’ and ‘effective oversight’ and ‘innovation’ and ‘develop effective, efficient’) are speaking about either democracy or justice. The focus seems to be completely on effectiveness. Phrases like ‘transparent’, ‘accountable’, and ‘participatory’ should be introduced here.</strong></p>
<p>Open data is essential to meeting these challenges.</p>
<p><strong>The above point clarifies why ‘data is essential’ but not why ‘open data is essential’. The connection between democracy and justice on one hand, and open data on the other is not yet articulated clearly.</strong></p>
<p>3) Effective access to data allows individuals and organisations to develop new insights and innovations that can generate social and economic benefits to improve the lives of people around the world, and help to improve the flow of information within and between countries. While governments collect a wide range of data, they do not always share these data in ways that are easily discoverable, useable, or understandable by the public.</p>
<p><strong>Along with allowing ‘insights’ and ‘innovations’ to develop, can it also be highlighted that open data make decisions and processes transparent?</strong></p>
<p>This is a missed opportunity.</p>
<p><strong>I agree with above comments that it is perhaps better to articulate this not as ‘missed opportunity’ but to highlight this as the very ‘opportunity’ that the open data agenda is interested in capturing.</strong></p>
<p>4) Today, many people expect to be able to access high quality information and services, including government data, when and how they want. Others see the opportunity presented by government data as one which can provide innovative policy solutions and support economic and social benefits for all members of society. We have arrived at a point at which people can use open data to generate value, insights, ideas, and services to create a better world for all.</p>
<p><strong>This point may also mention that some people are interested in using government data to open up government decisions and processes and make them transparent, which is a necessary condition for making the government accountable.</strong></p>
<p>6) Providing access to government data can drive sustainable and inclusive growth by empowering citizens, the media, civil society, and the private sector to identify gaps, and work toward better outcomes for public services in areas such as health, education, public safety, environmental protection, and governance. Open data can do this by:</p>
<p><strong>Perhaps ‘democratic participation’ can be added after ‘sustainable and inclusive growth’. That is: ‘Providing access to government data can drive sustainable and inclusive growth, and democratic participation, by empowering citizens…’</strong></p>
<p>7) Open government data can be used in innovative ways to create useful tools and products that help to navigate modern life more easily. Used in this way, open data are a catalyst for innovation in the private sector, supporting the creation of new markets, businesses, and jobs. These benefits can multiply as more private sector and civil society organisations adopt open data practices modelled by government and share their own data with the public.</p>
<p><strong>The incentive for private sector and CSOs to open up data is not clear. Overall benefit may rise with them opening up data, but how does a private company / CSO benefit by opening up its data?</strong></p>
<p>8) We, the adherents to the International Open Data Charter, agree that open data are an under-used resource with huge potential to encourage the building of stronger, more interconnected societies that better meet the needs of our citizens and allow innovation and prosperity to flourish.</p>
<p><strong>Along with ‘stronger’ and ‘more interconnected’, please mention ‘more transparent’ and ‘more democratic’. Also it is not clear what is meant by ‘stronger’. ‘[B]etter meet the needs of our citizens’ does not necessarily suggest a more democratic or just society, but a more effective welfare distribution system. Please add ‘… and empower the citizens to ensure accountability of the government.’</strong></p>
<p>9) We therefore agree to follow a set of principles that will be the foundation for access to, and the release and use of, open government data. These principles are:</p>
<ol><li>Open Data by Default;</li>
<li>Quality and Quantity;</li>
<li>Accessible and Useable by All;</li>
<li>Engagement and Empowerment of Citizens;</li>
<li>Collaboration for Development and Innovation</li></ol>
<p><strong>Does it makes sense to remove the ‘Quantity and Quality’ point and merging it with ‘Accessible and Usable by All’? Data quantity and quality issues, along with those related to publication of data, can all logically follow under the topic of data access and use. For example, highly aggregated data published once a year without documentation is not really usable data.</strong></p>
<p>10) We will develop an action plan in support of the implementation of the Charter and its Technical Annexes, and will update and renew the action plan at a minimum of every two years. We agree to commit the necessary resources to work within our political and legal frameworks to implement these principles in accordance with the technical best practices and timeframes set out in our action plan.</p>
<p><strong>We (at CIS) strongly feel that the Charter should also prescribe that along with the national Action Plan, Open Data Citizen’s Charters are created for various levels and verticals of the government. This will clarify data publication responsibilities and targets at ministerial and sub-national (including city) governmental levels, and will allow for much more effective monitoring (national and international) of the Action Plan implementation process.</strong></p>
<p><strong>‘[A]t a minimum of every two years’ reads a bit unclear. Does it mean that the Action Plan should be renewed only after two years and not before, or that the Action Plan should be renewed every two years or before that?</strong></p>
<p>11) We recognise that free access to, and the subsequent use of, government data are of significant value to society and the economy, and that government data should, therefore, be open by default.</p>
<p><strong>Along with clarifying the scope of ‘government data,’ the idea of ‘open’ in the context of data needs a clear definition as an independent point. The document is getting into ‘open by default’ without clarifying what is ‘open’, including both necessary and sufficient conditions.</strong></p>
<p>12) We acknowledge the need to promote the global development and adoption of tools and policies for the creation, use, and exchange of open data and information.</p>
<p><strong>I agree with Mike Linksvayer. This is a great opportunity for the Charter to connect the open data agenda with the wider open agendas, especially that of free and open source softwares. It is very important that this point promotes ‘global development of free and open source tools’.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Extending the comment by Jose Subero, along with ‘tools’ and ‘policies’, it will be great to have a mention of ‘standards’ here, which is critical for ensuring ‘interoperability’ and thus ‘harmonisation’.</strong></p>
<p>13) We recognise that the term ‘government data’ is meant in the widest sense possible. This could apply to data held by national, federal, and local governments, international government bodies, and other types of institutions in the wider public sector. This could also apply to data created for governments by external organisations, and data of significant benefit to the public which is held by external organisations and related to government programmes and services (e.g. data on extractives entities, data on transportation infrastructure, etc).</p>
<p><strong>It is wonderful that the point promotes a wide understanding of ‘government data’ but at the same time it should also define a necessary core understanding of data, just to ensure that governments do not interpret this point too narrowly.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Further, a focus only on data created by public agencies can perhaps be too narrow (for the necessary/core understanding of ‘government data’). With public services delivered increasingly by private agencies and public-private-partnerships, it is crucial that ‘government data’ should explicitly include any data coming out of a process funded by public money (the process may be carried out by a public agency or not). This is an extremely important point from a developing country perspective.</strong></p>
<p>14) We recognise that there is domestic and international legislation, in particular pertaining to security, privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, and personally-identifiable and other sensitive information, which must be observed and/or updated where necessary.</p>
<p><strong>From a developing country perspective, it is very important that the Charter does not keep this critical point dependent on domestic and international legislations. International legislation may not be very developed for all of the mentioned topics, and many countries may not have existing domestic legislations on these topics either. The Charter should mention an internationally acceptable list of concerns / criteria for not opening up data. The list may include the topics mentioned here, like privacy and national security. This need not be a list of sufficient criteria, but of necessary ones.</strong></p>
<p>15) We will:</p>
<ul><li>develop and adopt policies and practices to ensure that all government data is made open by default, as outlined in this Charter, while recognising that there are legitimate reasons why some data cannot be released;</li></ul>
<p><strong>'Administrative reforms’ are most often crucial to make government data ‘open by default, and the same should be mentioned along with ‘policies’ and ‘practices’.</strong></p>
<ul><li>provide clear justifications as to why certain data cannot be released;</li></ul>
<p><strong>This is a great point. Perhaps it can be added that all government agencies should produce a list of all data assets maintained by them, point out the ones that cannot be made open, and provide clear justification as to why those cannot be released. This comment pre-empts 19.1. Perhaps this point about providing justification for not releasing data can be merged with 19.1.</strong></p>
<ul><li>develop the leadership, management, oversight, and internal communication policies necessary to enable this transition to a culture of openness.</li></ul>
<p><strong>Along with ‘leadership, management, oversight, and internal communication’, is it possible to add ‘incentives’? This is often overlooked in implementing open data policies.</strong></p>
<p>16) We recognise that governments and other public sector organisations hold vast amounts of information that may be of interest to citizens, and that it may take time to identify data for release or publication.</p>
<p>17) We also recognise the importance of consulting with citizens, other governments, non-governmental organisations, and other open data users, to identify which data to prioritise for release and/or improvement.</p>
<p>18) We agree, however, that governments’ primary responsibility should be to release data in a timely manner, without undue delay.</p>
<p><strong>Points 16-18 seem to suggest that the ‘quantity and quality’ issue is mostly one of prioritisation. This can be misleading. This is perhaps the ‘quantity’ issue, but not at all the ‘quality’ issue.</strong></p>
<p>19) We will:</p>
<ul><li>...</li>
<li>release high-quality open data that are timely, comprehensive, and accurate in accordance with prioritisation that is informed by public requests. To the extent possible, data will be released in their original, unmodified form and at the finest level of granularity available, and will also be linked to any visualisations or analyses created based on the data, as well as any relevant guidance or documentation;</li></ul>
<p><strong>Please add ‘human- and machine-readable’ along with ‘timely, comprehensive, and accurate’.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Put ‘, and’ between ‘, and accurate’ and ‘in accordance’.</strong></p>
<p><strong>‘Relevant guidance or documentation’ should be mentioned before, and not after, ‘visualisations or analyses’.</strong></p>
<ul><li>ensure that accompanying documentation is written in clear, plain language, so that it can be easily understood by all;</li></ul>
<p><strong>Add that the documentation should be ‘comprehensive’, along with being written in plain language.</strong></p>
<ul><li>make sure that data are fully described, and that data users have sufficient information to understand their source, strengths, weaknesses, and any analytical limitations;</li></ul>
<p><strong>Regarding ‘Full description of data’ — Aggregate data must be accompanied by low level raw data along with details of analytical methods used to arrive at figures. This allows for verification as well as alternate views and detection of statistical anomalies.</strong></p>
<ul><li>ensure that open datasets include consistent core metadata, and are made available in human- and machine-readable formats under an open and unrestrictive licence;</li></ul>
<p><strong>Is this the necessary definition of ‘open data’? If so, it should be much higher up.</strong></p>
<ul><li>allow users to provide feedback, and continue to make revisions to ensure the quality of the data is improved as needed; and</li></ul>
<p><strong>This point should clarify if it is talking about making revisions of the data itself (its content), or how it is being published (its form), or both?</strong></p>
<ul><li>apply consistent information lifecycle management practices, and ensure historical copies of datasets are preserved, archived, and kept accessible as long as they retain value.</li></ul>
<p><strong>The ‘as long as they retain value’ part seems vague. Who is going to take this decision about value? Is it possible to rephrase this as ‘as long as they are demanded by data users’?</strong></p>
<p>21) We recognise that open data should be made available free of charge in order to encourage their widest possible use.</p>
<p><strong>Maybe ‘government data’ and not ‘open data’ (open data already means it is available gratis). Also, along with ‘free of charge’ maybe add ‘under open license’, as that is a critical requirement for ‘widest possible use.’</strong></p>
<p>22) We recognise that when open data are released, they should be made available without bureaucratic or administrative barriers, such as mandatory user registration, which can deter people from accessing the data.</p>
<p><strong>I strongly believe that this point should be removed. Registration of the data user can also be very useful for the government agencies to track demand and actual usage of their datasets. Instead of the government agencies doing such kind of tracking as a background process, it is much better if the data usage monitoring of all users is done transparently. Along with perhaps a public dashboard of data usages of the users of an open data portal. As long as the registration barrier does not involve an approval process by the government agency, it can be allowed.</strong></p>
<p><strong>A more general point should be added as part of this principle, regarding no-discrimination (or approval process) among data users interested in accessing and using of open government data.</strong></p>
<p>23) We will:</p>
<ul><li>release data in open formats and free of charge to ensure that the data are available to the widest range of users to find, access, and use them. In many cases, this will include providing data in multiple formats, so that they can be processed by computers and used by people; and</li></ul>
<p><strong>Please add ‘open license’ along with ‘open formats’ and ‘free of charge’.</strong></p>
<p>24) We recognise that the release of open data strengthens our public and democratic institutions, encourages better development, implementation, and assessment of policies to meet the needs of our citizens, and enables more meaningful, better informed engagement between governments and citizens.</p>
<p><strong>Perhaps add ‘, and makes them transparent’ after ‘strengthens our public and democratic institutions’. Please also add ‘monitoring’ along with ‘development, implementation, and assessment’.</strong></p>
<p>25) We will:</p>
<ul><li>implement oversight and review processes to report regularly on the progress and impact of our open data initiatives;</li></ul>
<p><strong>The functioning of these ‘oversight and review processes’ must be open and transparent themselves. The reporting should be public.</strong></p>
<ul><li>engage with community and civil society representatives working in the domain of transparency and accountability to determine what data they need to effectively hold governments to account; encourage the use of open data to develop innovative, evidence-based policy solutions that benefit all members of society, as well as empower marginalised groups; and</li></ul>
<p><strong>This must also include a point regarding the government proactively seeking data demands from citizens, CSOs, academics, and the private sector.</strong></p>
<p><strong>‘as well as empower marginalised groups’ is too vague. Perhaps it can be made into a separate point, and qualified with what kinds of empowerment is needed – from demanding data, to accessing and using data, to be aware of the data collected from such groups by the government agencies.</strong></p>
<ul><li>be transparent about our own data collection, standards, and publishing processes, by documenting all of these related processes online.</li></ul>
<p><strong>This should be part of point 19.</strong></p>
<p>26) We recognise the importance of diversity in stimulating creativity and innovation. The more citizens, governments, civil society, and the private sector use open data, the greater the social and economic benefits that will be generated. This is true for government, commercial, and non-commercial uses.</p>
<p><strong>The diversity point is almost already made with points 20-21 – widest possible users lead to widest possible use.</strong></p>
<p>28) We will:</p>
<ul><li>...</li>
<li>engage with civil society, the private sector, and academic representatives to determine what data they need to generate social and economic value;</li></ul>
<p><strong>This is also covered under the Principle 3.</strong></p>
<ul><li>provide training programs, tools, and guidelines designed to ensure government employees are capable of using open data effectively in policy development processes;</li></ul>
<p><strong>This should be part of Principle 1.</strong></p>
<ul><li>encourage non-governmental organisations to open up data created and collected by them in order to move toward a richer open data ecosystem with multiple sources of open data;</li></ul>
<p><strong>I agree with ABS. Why not ‘non-governmental organisations and the private sector’?</strong></p>
<p><strong>Also the document shifts back and forth between ‘civil society organisations’ and ‘non-governmental organisations’. If both mean the same in this document, then it should use only one.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<h2>General Comments on the Charter</h2>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>1. Why not merge the Principle 4 and 5 so as to describe an overall situation of engagement and collaboration. The ends can be commercial acts or towards democratic practices, but the existing principles do not make much a difference between the two types of acts.</strong></p>
<p><strong>2. Further, can a new principle be added at the end that would address the implementation process of the Action Plan? Specifically, it should clarify how the implementation itself be an open process, with not only the Action Plan but annual reports regarding the status of implementation. This principle may connect to the work being done by the Implementation WG.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-comments-by-cis'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-comments-by-cis</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroOpen DataOpen Government DataFeaturedPoliciesOpennessInternational Open Data Charter2015-09-08T11:01:01ZBlog EntryInternational Open Data Charter, Consultation Meeting, Delhi, July 09, 5:30 pm
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-consultation-delhi-09072015
<b></b>
<p> </p>
<p>This is to invite you to a consultation meeting on the first public draft of the International Open Data Charter, at the CIS office in Delhi, on Thursday, July 09, 2015, at 5:30 pm.</p>
<p>The Charter is being developed by the Open Data Working Group of the Open Government Partnership in consultation with a number of international organisations. Meant for approval and implementation by national governments, the Charter has five key principles:</p>
<ul>
<li>Open by Default;</li>
<li>Quality and Quantity;</li>
<li>Useable by All;</li>
<li>Engagement and Empowerment of Citizens; and</li>
<li>Collaboration for Development and Innovation.</li></ul>
<p>The first public draft of the International Open Data Charter was published in end of May 2015 at the International Open Data Conference in
Ottawa, and can be accessed here: <a href="http://opendatacharter.net/charter/" target="_blank">http://opendatacharter.net/charter/</a>.</p>
<p>Organisations and individuals are invited to submit comments directly on the Charter page, before July 31.</p>
<p>CIS, acting as a general steward of the Charter and a consultation lead, is organising this meeting to discuss the context, the drafting process, and the objectives of this document, and to encourage the participants to comment on the existing text of the Charter.</p>
<p>We keenly look forward to your participation in the consultation meeting on Thursday.</p>
<p>The CIS office address is G 15, Top floor, behind Hauz Khas G Block Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016.</p>
<p>If you are coming down Aurobindo Marg from AIIMS and towards IIT, then take the left turn into Chaudhary Dalip Singh Marg and come towards the Hauz Khas Police Station, stop when you see a Southy outlet on your right, and enter through the gate on your left (opposite Southy). The CIS office is on the top floor of the first house on your left. <a href="https://goo.gl/maps/kcJoq" target="_blank">Location on Google Map</a>.</p>
<p>Please share this invitation with all relevant individuals, organisations, and networks.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-consultation-delhi-09072015'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-consultation-delhi-09072015</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroOpen DataOpen Government DataInternational Open Data CharterOpenness2015-07-07T12:12:50ZEventInternational Open Data Charter, Consultation Meeting, Bengaluru, July 28, 5:30 pm
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-consultation-bengaluru-28072015
<b></b>
<p> </p>
<p>This is to invite you to a consultation meeting on the first public draft of the International Open Data Charter organised by CIS with <a href="http://www.datakind.org/howitworks/datachapters/datakind-blr/" target="_blank">DataKind</a> and <a href="http://datameet.org/" target="_blank">DataMeet</a> at the CIS office in Bengaluru, on Tuesday, July 28, 2015, at 5:30 pm.</p>
<p>The Charter is being developed by the Open Data Working Group of the Open Government Partnership in consultation with a number of international organisations. Meant for approval and implementation by national governments, the Charter has five key principles:</p>
<ul>
<li>Open by Default;</li>
<li>Quality and Quantity;</li>
<li>Useable by All;</li>
<li>Engagement and Empowerment of Citizens; and</li>
<li>Collaboration for Development and Innovation.</li></ul>
<p>The first public draft of the International Open Data Charter was published in end of May 2015 at the International Open Data Conference in
Ottawa, and can be accessed here: <a href="http://opendatacharter.net/charter/" target="_blank">http://opendatacharter.net/charter/</a>.</p>
<p>Organisations and individuals are invited to submit comments directly on the Charter page, before July 31.</p>
<p>We are organising this meeting to discuss the context, the drafting process, and the objectives of this document, and to encourage the participants to comment on the existing text of the Charter.</p>
<p>We keenly look forward to your participation in the consultation meeting on Tuesday.</p>
<p>The CIS office address is Number 194, 2nd 'C' Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bangalore 560071 (opposite Domlur Club and near the TERI building).</p>
<p>Please share this invitation with all relevant individuals, organisations, and networks.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-consultation-bengaluru-28072015'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/international-open-data-charter-consultation-bengaluru-28072015</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroOpen DataInternational Open Data CharterOpenness2015-08-21T05:45:53ZEventICANN Begins its Sojourn into Open Data
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/icann-begins-its-sojourn-into-open-data
<b>The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) recently announced that it will now set up a pilot project in order to introduce an Open Data initiative for all data that it generates. We would like to extend our congratulations to ICANN on the development of this commendable new initiative, and would be honoured to support the creation of this living document to be prepared before ICANN 58.</b>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">To quote the ICANN blog directly, the aim of this project is to “<em>bring selected data sets into the open, available through web pages and programming APIs, for the purposes of external party review and analysis</em>” <a href="#ftn1">[1]</a>. This will play out through the setting up of three components:</p>
<ol><li>Development of a catalogue of existing data sets which will be appropriate for publication</li>
<li>Selection of the technology necessary for managing the publication of these data sets.</li>
<li>Creation of a process to prioritise the order in which the data sets are made available <a href="#ftn2">[2]</a>.</li></ol>
<h3><strong>Principles in Question</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The Centre for Internet and Society firmly believes in the value of accessible, inclusive open data standards as a tool for enhancing transparency in any system. Greater transparency goes a long way towards bringing a regulatory authority closer to those who are governed under it – be it a state or a body such as ICANN. It is, in fact, an indispensable component of a multistakeholder model of governance to facilitate informed participation by all parties concerned in the decision making process.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The right to information that a regulatory authority owes those it regulates has two kinds of components. The first may be described as reactive disclosure – “<em>when individual members of the public file requests for and receive information</em>” <a href="#ftn#3">[3]</a>. The second is disclosure that is more proactive in nature – “<em>when information is made public at the initiative of the public body, without a request being filed</em>” <a href="#ftn4">[4]</a>. The former is epitomized by initiatives such as the Freedom of
Information Act <a href="#ftn5">[5]</a> in the United States, the Right to Information Act in India <a href="#ftn6">[6]</a>, or ICANN’s very own Documentary Information Disclosure Policy <a href="#ftn7">[7]</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Proactive disclosure policies, on the other hand, operate out of the principle that the provision of information by those in positions of regulatory authority will ensure free and timely flow of information to the public, and the information so provided will be equally accessible to everyone, without the need for individual requests being filed <a href="#ftn8">[8]</a>. Proactive disclosure also goes a long way towards preventing officials from denying or manipulating information subsequent to publication <a href="#ftn9">[9]</a>. Scholars have touted proactive disclosure as the “<em>future of the right to know</em>” <a href="#ftn10">[10]</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">At the Centre for Internet and Society, much of our research has pointed towards the direction of creating better open data standards for governments (Please see “<a href="http://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/open-government-data-study">Open Data Government Study: India</a>”). We are one of the Lead Stewards of the International Open Data Charter <a href="#ftn11">[11]</a> and have maintained that it is crucial for governments to maintain open data standards in the interest of transparency and accountability. We firmly believe that the same principles extend also to ICANN – a body which, as per its own by-laws commits towards operating “…<em>to the maximum extent feasible in an open and transparent manner and consistent with procedures designed to ensure fairness</em>”<a href="#ftn12">[12]</a>.</p>
<h3><strong>Suggestions</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">While this policy is in its nascent stage, we would like to put forward certain principles which we believe ought to be kept in mind before it gets chalked out, in the best interest of the ICANN community:</p>
<ol><li>To determine what data sets should be made publicly accessible, it would be useful to carry out an analysis of existing DIDP requests to understand trends in the kind of information that the ICANN community is interested in accessing, which can then be proactively disclosed. It would be redundant on ICANN’s part to disclose, under this Open Data Policy, data which is already publicly available.</li>
<li>ICANN should first develop a catalog of all existing data sets with ICANN, apply the principles for deciding appropriateness for publication, then make publicly available both the full catalog, and the actual data sets identified for publication. ICANN should make clear the kind of information it is not going to make accessible
under this open data standards, and justify the principles on the basis of which it is choosing to do so (analogous to the exceptions clauses under the DIDP).</li>
<li>With respect to technology to be selected for managing the publication of data sets, free and open source software (such as CKAN) ought to be used, and open standards should be adopted for the use and licensing of such data.</li>
<li>Such data ought to be downloadable in bulk in CSV/JSON/XML formats.</li>
<li>DIDP responses and the open data work flows ought to be integrated so that all the responses to DIDP requests are automatically published in a machine-readable format as open data.</li>
<li>Qualitative (text of speeches, slides from presentations, recordings of sessions, etc.) and quantitative data should both be included under this new policy.</li></ol>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In conclusion, we would like to extend our congratulations to ICANN on the development of this commendable new initiative, and would be honoured to support the creation of this living document before ICANN 58.</p>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<h3><strong>Endnotes</strong></h3>
<div id="ftn1">
<p>[1] Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, <em>ICANN Kicks off Open Data Initiative Pilot</em>, (November 6, 2016), available at <a href="https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-kicks-off-open-data-initiative-pilot">https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-kicks-off-open-data-initiative-pilot</a> (Last visited on November 9, 2016).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<p>[2] Id.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<p>[3] Naniette Coleman, <em>Proactive vs. Reactive Transparency</em>, (February 8, 2010), available at: <a href="http://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/proactive-vs-reactive-transparency">http://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/proactive-vs-reactive-transparency</a> (Last visited on November 9, 2016).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn4">
<p>[4] Id.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn5">
<p>[5] Freedom of Information Act, 1966, 5 U.S.C. § 552.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn6">
<p>[6] Right to Information Act, 2005 <em>available at</em> http://righttoinformation.gov.in/rti-act.pdf</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn7">
<p>[7] ICANN, <em>Documentary Information Disclosure Policy</em>, available at <a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en">https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/didp-2012-02-25-en</a> (Last visited on November 9, 2016).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn8">
<p>[8] Helen Darbishire, <em>Proactive Transparency: The future of the right to information?</em> Working paper. N.p.: World Bank, (2009).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn9">
<p>[9] Id.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn10">
<p>[10] Darbishire, <em>supra</em> note 8.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn11">
<p>[11] Open Data Charter, <em>Who We Are</em>, available at <a href="http://opendatacharter.net/who-we-are/">http://opendatacharter.net/who-we-are/</a> (Last visited on November 10, 2016).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn12">
<p>[12] Article III(1), Bylaws For Internet Corporation For Assigned Names And Numbers</p>
</div>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/icann-begins-its-sojourn-into-open-data'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/icann-begins-its-sojourn-into-open-data</a>
</p>
No publisherPadmini Baruah and Sumandro ChattapadhyayOpen DataICANNinternet governance2016-11-12T01:17:24ZBlog EntryGoogle, Apple and Microsoft may need licence for satellite mapping in India
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/news/economic-times-aman-sharma-neha-alawadhi-may-9-2016-google-apple-and-microsoft-may-need-licence-for-satellite-mapping-in-india
<b>Cold response from MNCs like Google to India's security concerns is seen as a prime reason for the proposed legislation to regulate mapping of the country, a move that critics call "return of the Licence Raj" and "digital nationalism".</b>
<p>The article by Aman Sharma and Neha Alawadhi was published in <a class="external-link" href="http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/google-apple-and-microsoft-may-need-licence-for-satellite-mapping-in-india/articleshow/52180349.cms">Economic Times</a> on May 9, 2016. Sumandro Chattapadhyay was quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>A draft of Geospatial Information Regulation Bill, released last week seeking public comments, says anyone mapping India by a satellite or aerial platform will need a licence from a government "security vetting authority". "India as a responsible power must have established guidelines," Kiren Rijiju, MoS for Home, told ET, reacting to the criticism to the move.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>"We won't create hurdles for business and technological development, but national security considerations must not be compromised either," said Rijiju. Non-compliance could land you in jail for seven years. On the top of that would be a fine of up to Rs 100 crore. BJP MP Tarun Vijay, who has long been campaigning for such a law, said "patriotic Indians" should use the country's own 'Bhuvan' software application for maps.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>"Why do we need Google? We should stop becoming Google's instruments," he told ET. "The patriotic government of Narendra Modi has taken a right step in a big relief to the security establishment. UPA did not take any action despite my pleas to the then Defence Minister AK Antony. I congratulate the Modi government for showing spine in face of arrogance of these IT giants," he said, adding: Google has been "behaving as if it were above Indian law".</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>A top government official involved in the move said maps of India's sensitive installations were available on Google Maps, increasing the security risk of those sites. Demand to mask those were never complied to. "Pathankot air base, which was recently attacked, can be seen on Google Maps. Terrorists plot strikes on sensitive targets studying Google Maps," he told ET.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>"Our plea to black out sensitive installations do not yield results. This Bill is now sending a strong message that US companies cannot be running roughshod over Indian security interests." Companies such as Google, Microsoft and Apple, which have millions of Indians using their maps, would be hit directly by the legislation if it is pushed through. Firms that depend on these maps to provide their services, such as Uber, Zomato and Ola, too would be affected. Google, Apple and Microsoft didn't respond to emails seeking comment.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Mishi Choudhary, legal director at Software Freedom Law Centre, said almost all online businesses today depend on geo-location and provide maps for the use of their services, and that all of them will be forced to seek a licence under the proposed law. "This kind of digital nationalism is a way to create a government-controlled monopoly on all geographical information about the country, conveniently transforming Digital India to Licence India, digitally this time," said Choudhary, who was part<span> </span>of the successful legal fight to scrap Section 66A of the IT Act to ensure freedom of expression on the Internet. An executive at one of the big tech companies said the draft Bill raised far too many questions.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>"On the face of it, the Bill will kill any and every use of the maps. It is also unclear if you get a licence for maps, only you can use it or others can use it, too," he said. "Also, whether every time you update a map, does one have to get a security clearance? Maps have to be live and dynamic, so getting it approved from government each time may not be feasible."</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Those working on mapping and geospatial technology said services such as Google Maps are popular because they are faster and easier to use compared to government-prescribed process.<span> </span>"According to Indian law...if I have to buy certain data, I will have to go to the concerned department, like ISRO's National Remote Sensing Agency, or the Survey of India. In the case of NRSC (for satellite data), they will purchase the data for me, and then I will have to pay. That's a long process and hence people went to services like Google Maps, which are easier," said Devdatta Tengshe, a freelance geospatial information systems consultant.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The agency removes sensitive zones from the data and takes about two-three months or even more to respond, which is an unrealistic timeline for people working with digital data, he said. There is also apprehension that the Bill will undermine rescue and humanitarian efforts, such as during disasters like the Nepal earthquake.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>"It was user-generated geospatial data that was used by the humanitarian response teams. This situation of lack of openly usable geospatial data holds true for large parts of India, and especially Himalayan India," said Sumandro Chattapadhyay, research director at Centre for Internet and Society. Also of concern is the lack of court's jurisdiction in matters related to the proposed legislation, said SFLC's Choudhary.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>A senior government official, however, said companies should not have a problem to come under regulations on security considerations and that the Bill was up for public comments where the companies can lodge their apprehensions. "We are not banning anyone from mapping India — only that the mapping has to be in line with Indian security considerations regarding sensitive installations and correct boundaries being depicted like not showing PoK and Arunachal Pradesh as out of India," this official said.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>A group of techies have, meanwhile, got together to create a website called savethemap.in, which aims to educate people and make them send out responses to the draft Bill. It will likely come up with a template response, along the lines as the savetheinternet. in campaign that was instrumental in taking the net neutrality debate to the people.</span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/news/economic-times-aman-sharma-neha-alawadhi-may-9-2016-google-apple-and-microsoft-may-need-licence-for-satellite-mapping-in-india'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/news/economic-times-aman-sharma-neha-alawadhi-may-9-2016-google-apple-and-microsoft-may-need-licence-for-satellite-mapping-in-india</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaOpen StandardsOpen DataOpen Government DataOpenness2016-05-10T15:20:39ZNews ItemGeekup on Open Data in Bangalore
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/geekup-bangalore
<b>HasGeek in partnership with the Centre for Internet and Society invite you to a talk by Hapee de Groot on 25 January 2012 at CIS office in Bangalore.</b>
<h2>Hapee de Groot</h2>
<p>Hapee de Groot has worked on a wide range of issues around Open Source Data, ICT and Media Development, Access, Security, ICT for Development (ICT4D) and Localisation of Content, for a global stage towards greater transparency and accountability with the Dutch NGO Hivos since 2001. Before that, in the nineties, he was an advocate for free public internet access, working with xs4all and the <a class="external-link" href="http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0101/msg00085.html">digital city Amsterdam</a> (DDS). He has also served as an editor for OneWorld International and ran the Digital Divide Campaign which turned into a still ongoing digital channel at <a class="external-link" href="http://www.digitalopportunity.org/">DigitalOpportunity.org</a>.</p>
<p>Hapee is one of the earliest generations of hackers and is highly influential on the subjects of ICT and Technology, Open Source, Social Media, and Technology in Africa, according to the influence measures on Klout. This is his 5th visit to India where he has worked previously on Mission 2009 and setting up access for remote areas in India, in collaboration with Toxic Links and Sarai, Delhi. He was a participant at the InfoActivism Camp in Bangalore, 2008.</p>
<p>His current interest is in the field of Open Government Data and he partners with six international donor agencies to run the Transparency and Accountability Initiative. He brings together his technical skills, policy experience and development research to train people in understanding the politics, responsibilities and risks associated with open data platforms and helps NGOs and governments in producing secure and citizen friendly platforms of data collection, distribution and dissemination.</p>
<h2>Open Data</h2>
<p>From his background working for a development organisation (HIVOS) Hapee will talk about Open Data and its use for citizen engagement. This is a twofold process. On the one side there is the history of the traditional NGO and their limited impact on the system. On the other side there are the Open Government Data initiatives pushed from within administrations, including by the Obama administration. The question is of how both can benefit from each other.</p>
<p>Hapee has some examples of citizen driven projects in Africa that HIVOS supports. He will present on these projects, including on data visualization and technical platforms. He would like to hear from the audience (that's you!) on similar projects in India.</p>
<p>The other side of the coin is privacy which is a bigger issue in India than in Africa. How can we be open while still protecting privacy? Hapee will lead a discussion on this.</p>
<p><strong>Registrations are closed<br /></strong></p>
<p>Wednesday, 25 January 2012, Bangalore</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Welcome with tea, coffee and snacks</td>
<td>6.00 p.m. - 6.15 p.m.<br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Lightning Talks</td>
<td>6.15 p.m - 7.00 p.m.<br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Open Data<br /></td>
<td>7.00 p.m. - 8.00 p.m.<br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/geekup-bangalore'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/geekup-bangalore</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaOpen DataOpenness2012-01-31T03:38:25ZEventEthical Issues in Open Data
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ethical-issues-in-open-data
<b>On August 1, 2013, I took part in a web meeting, organized and hosted by Tim Davies of the World Wide Web foundation. The meeting, titled “Ethical issues in Open Data,” had an agenda focused around privacy considerations in the context of the open data movement.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The main panelists, Carly Nyst and Sam Smith from <a class="external-link" href="http://https//www.privacyinternational.org/">Privacy International</a>, as well as Steve Song from the <a class="external-link" href="http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Pages/default.aspx">International Development Research Centre</a>, were joined by roughly a dozen other privacy and development researchers from around the globe in the hour long session.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The primary issue of the meeting was the concern over modern capabilities of cross-analytics for de-anonymizing data sets and revealing personally identifiable information (PII) in open data. Open data can constitute publicly available information such as budgets, infrastructures, and population statistics, as long as the data meets the three open data characteristics: accessibility, machine readability, and availability for re-use. “Historically,” said Tim Davies, “public registers have been protected through obscurity.” However, both the capabilities of data analysts and the definition of personal data have continued to expand in recent years. This concern thus presents a conflict between researchers who advocate governments releasing open data reports, and researchers who emphasize privacy in the developing world.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Steve Song, advisor to IDRC Information & Networks program, spoke of the potential collateral damage that comes with publishing more and more types of information. Song addressed the imperative of the meeting in saying, “privacy needs to be a core part of open data conversation.” In his presentation, he gave a particularly interesting example of the tensions between public and private information implications. Following the infamous <a class="external-link" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting">2012 school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut</a>, the information on Newtown’s gun permit owning citizens (made publicly available through America’s <a class="external-link" href="http://foia.state.gov/">Freedom of Information Act</a>) was aggregated into an interactive map which revealed the citizens’ addresses. This obviously became problematic for the Newtown community, as the map not only singled out homes which exercised their right to bear arms but also indirectly revealed which homes were without firearm protection and thereby more vulnerable to theft and crime. The Newtown example clearly demonstrates the relationship (and conflict) between open data and privacy; it resolves to the conflict between the right to information and the right to privacy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">An apparent issue surrounding open data is its perceived binary nature. Many advocates either view data as being open, or not; any intermediary boundaries are only forms of governments limiting data accessibility. Therefore, a point raised by meeting attendee Raed Sharif aptly presented an open data counter-argument. Sarif noted how, inversely, privacy conceptions may form a threat to open data. He mentioned how governments could take advantage of privacy arguments to justify their refusal to publish open reports. <br /><br />However, Carly Nyst summarized the privacy concern and argument in her remarks near the end of the meeting. Namely, she reasoned that the open data mission is viable, if only limited to generic data, i.e., data about infrastructure, or other information that is in no way personal. Doing so will avoid obstructions of individual privacy. Until more advanced anonymization techniques can be achieved, which can overcome modern re-identification methods, publicly publishing PII may prove too risky. It was generally agreed upon during the meeting that open data is not inherently bad, and in fact its analysis and availability can be beneficial, but the threat of its misuse makes it dangerous. For the future of open data, researchers and advocates should perhaps consider more nuanced approaches to the concept in order to respect considerations for other ethical issues, such as privacy.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ethical-issues-in-open-data'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ethical-issues-in-open-data</a>
</p>
No publisherkoveyOpen DataInternet GovernancePrivacy2013-08-07T09:19:54ZBlog EntryDraft Report on Open Government Data in India (v2)
http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/publications/ogd-draft-v2
<b></b>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/publications/ogd-draft-v2'>http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/publications/ogd-draft-v2</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshOpen DataPublicationsOpenness2011-08-23T02:47:22ZFile