IT training the global impact of open data khotailieu

The Global Impact of
Open Data

Key Findings from Detailed Case
Studies Around the World

Andrew Young and Stefaan Verhulst

Supported by:

Beijing

Boston Farnham Sebastopol

Tokyo


The Global Impact of Open Data
by Andrew Young and Stefaan Verhulst
Copyright © 2016 O’Reilly Media Inc. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Published by O’Reilly Media, Inc., 1005 Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol, CA
95472.
O’Reilly books may be purchased for educational, business, or sales promotional use.
Online editions are also available for most titles (). For
more information, contact our corporate/institutional sales department:
800-998-9938 or

Editor: Shannon Cutt

Production Editor: Nicholas Adams
Copyeditor: Octal Publishing, Inc.
September 2016:

Interior Designer: David Futato
Cover Designer: Randy Comer
Illustrator: Rebecca Demarest

First Edition

Revision History for the First Edition
2016-09-13:

First Release

The O’Reilly logo is a registered trademark of O’Reilly Media, Inc. The Global Impact
of Open Data, the cover image, and related trade dress are trademarks of O’Reilly
Media, Inc.
While the publisher and the authors have used good faith efforts to ensure that the
information and instructions contained in this work are accurate, the publisher and
the authors disclaim all responsibility for errors or omissions, including without
limitation responsibility for damages resulting from the use of or reliance on this
work. Use of the information and instructions contained in this work is at your own
risk. If any code samples or other technology this work contains or describes is sub‐
ject to open source licenses or the intellectual property rights of others, it is your
responsibility to ensure that your use thereof complies with such licenses and/or
rights.

978-1-491-96467-5
[LSI]

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

Part I.

Open Data’s Impact—Lessons Learned

1. Understanding the Impact of Open Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Introduction
I. What Is Open Data?
II. The Case Studies
III. What Is the Impact of Open Data on People’s Lives?
IV. What Are the Enabling Conditions that Significantly
Enhance the Impact of Open Data?
V. What Are the Challenges to Open Data Making an
Impact?
VI. Recommendations: Toward a Next Generation OpenData Roadmap
Key Remaining Questions

Part II.

3
5
6
14

17
20
25
37

Case Studies: Improving Government

2. Brazil’s Open Budget Transparency Portal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Making Public How Public Money Is Spent
Context and Background

42

iii


Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

46
50
54
57

3. Openaid in Sweden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Enhanced Transparency and Accountability
Context and Background
Product Description and Inception

Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

60
62
66
69
72

4. Open Contracting and Procurement in Slovakia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Establishing Trust in Government
Context and Background
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

77
83
90
94

5. Indonesia’s Kawal Pemilu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Elections: Free, Fair, and Open Data
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

98
102
105
108
110

6. Denmark’s Open Address Data Set. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Consolidating and Freeing-up Address Data
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

iv

| Table of Contents

114
116
121
129
132


7. Opening Canada’s T3010 Charity Information Return Data. . . . . 135
Accountability of Charities through Open Data
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact

Challenges
Looking Forward

Part III.

136
138
141
149
156

Case Studies: Empowering Citizens

8. Open Education Information in Tanzania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
A Tale of Two Dashboards
Context and Background
Product Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

162
165
168
172
174

9. Kenya’s Open Duka. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Open Data for Transactional Transparency
Context and Background

Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

178
182
187
188
190

10. Mexico’s Mejora Tu Escuela. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
Empowering Citizens to Make Data-Driven
Context and Background
Product Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

196
200
203
208
211

11. Uruguay’s A Tu Servicio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Empowering Citizens to Make Data-Driven
Context and Background

216

Table of Contents

|

v


Product Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

Part IV.

218
220
225
227

Case Studies: Creating Opportunity

12. Great Britain’s Ordnance Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
A Clash of Business Models
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

232

237
243
250
258

13. United States’ New York City Business Atlas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
Leveling the Playing Field
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

262
265
271
275
277

14. United States’ NOAA: Opening Up Global Weather Data in
Collaboration with Businesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Creating a New Industry Through Access to Weather Data
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

282
285

293
298
302

15. United States Opening GPS for Civilian Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
Creating a Global Public Utility
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
vi

|

Table of Contents

308
310
318
326


Looking Forward

Part V.

330

Case Studies: Solving Public Problems

16. Battling Ebola in Sierra Leone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337
Data Sharing to Improve Crisis Response
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

338
340
349
353
356

17. New Zealand’s Christchurch Earthquake Clusters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
Open Data for Improving Emergency Response
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

362
364
374
377
379

18. Singapore’s Dengue Cluster Map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Open Data for Public Health

Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

382
387
390
392
394

19. United States’ Eightmaps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
The Unintended Negative Consequences
Context and Background
Project Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

398
403
406
410
413

Table of Contents

|

vii


20. Kennedy v. City of Zanesville, United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
Open Data as Evidence
Context and Background
Case Description and Inception
Impact
Challenges
Looking Forward

418
421
425
428
431

A. Appendix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433

viii

|

Table of Contents


Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Omdiyar Network for supporting
this project. In particular, Laura Bacon, principal of policy invest‐

ments, has been instrumental in developing the case studies. This
work would not have been possible without the tireless efforts of our
colleagues at the GovLab, including the case studies research team:
Ali Clare, Auralice Graft, Juliet McMurren, Christina Rogawski,
David Sangokoya, and Rebecca Young; Akash Kapur who provided
crucial editorial support; and the GovLab developer team: Chris
Wong, Claudio Mendonca, Batu Sayici, and Mark Adkins-Hastings
who created odimpact.org where this research lives online. Thanks
also to the GovLab’s Beth Simone Noveck, Fred DeJohn, Lauren Yu,
Dinorah Cantú, Julia Root, Irene Tello-Arista, and María Hermosilla
for their input and support throughout the development of this
research.
The research contained in this volume was developed thanks to the
following experts and stakeholders who generously gave their time
and provided essential on-the-ground knowledge about their inspir‐
ing and transformative work: Neil Ackroyd, Kim Alexander, Robert
Andrews, Jay Bhalla, Uuf Brajawidagba, François Brouard, Iain
Campion, John Carpenter, Daniel Carranza, Julian Carver, Pablo
Clark, Izabela Corrèa, Jeff de la Beaujardiere, Leodelma de Marilac
Felix, Vivien Deparday, Patrick DuFour, Ee-Peng Lim, Carl Elm‐
stam, Peter Elson, Felipe Estefan, Aidan Eyakuze, Stephen Ferris,
Christian Fischer, Mike Flowers, Rafael García Aceves, Zachary
Goldstein, Hanna Helquist, Thorhildur Jetzek, Al Kags, Jason Kim,
Verena Luise Knippel, Daniel Kreiss, David Lasby, Michael Lencz‐
ner, Morten Lind, Andrew Loveless, Lindsay Marchessault, Arnold
Minde, Lindsay Mollineaux, Oscar Montiel, Otávio Moreira de Cas‐
ix


tro Neves, Ainun Najib, Bitange Ndemo, Bo Overgaard, Tim Owen,

Allan Parnell, Ed Parsons, Maria Patterson, Hilary Pearson, Karl
Peterson, Florent Peyre, Peter Rabley, Tara Ramchandani, Ira Rubin‐
stein, Fabrizio Scrollini, Diah Setiawaty, Rupert Simons, Singapore
National Environment Agency, Gabriel Sipos, Diego Soria, Allison
Soussi-Tanani, Javier Teran, Samhir Vasdev, Eva Vozárová, Neil
Weston, Alyssa Wright, and Alexandra Zapata Hojel.
Finally, our gratitude to the following dedicated individuals who
provided invaluable input during the open peer review process of
this research: Karin Ahlin, Antonio Almansa Morales, Andi Argast,
Jos Berens, Keitha Booth, J. Albert Bowden II, Mark Cardwell, Cor‐
inne Cath, Emmy Chirchir, Rafael García Aceves, Erik Holmlund,
Brendan Kenny, Alessia Lefebure, Ulrich Mans, Valerie Moye, Alina
Östling, Giuseppe Reale, Fathima Rifaa, Julian Singh, Rayna Stam‐
boliyska, Julian Tait, Jamie Van Ymeren, Mario Velasco, Niki Virani,
Johanna Walker, Andrew Weller, Ian White, Raymond Yee, and
Maria Zuffova.

x

|

Acknowledgements


Executive Summary

Recent years have witnessed considerable enthusiasm over open
data. Several studies have documented its potential to spur eco‐
nomic innovation and social transformation as well as to usher in
fresh forms of political and government accountability. Yet for all

the enthusiasm, we know little about how open data actually works
and what forms of impact it is really having.
This report seeks to remedy that informational shortcoming. Sup‐
ported by Omidyar Network, the GovLab has conducted 19 detailed
case studies of open-data projects around the world. The case stud‐
ies were selected for their sectoral and geographic representative‐
ness. They were built in part from secondary sources (“desk
research”), but also from a number of first-hand interviews with
important players and key stakeholders. In this report, we consider
some overarching lessons that we can learn from the case studies
and assemble them within an analytical framework that can help us
better understand what works—and what doesn’t—when it comes to
open data.
The report begins (“I. What Is Open Data?” on page 5) with an over‐
view of open data. Like many technical terms, open data is a contes‐
ted and dynamic concept. The GovLab has conducted a study of
nine widely used definitions to arrive at the following working defi‐
nition, which guides our discussion here:
Open data is publicly available data that can be universally and
readily accessed, used, and redistributed free of charge. It is struc‐
tured for usability and computability.

“II. The Case Studies” on page 6 includes a brief summary of our 19
case studies, each of which is detailed at considerably greater length,
xi


in Parts II through V. Sections III through V represent the core of
our analytical framework; they identify the key parameters and vari‐
ables that determine the impact of open data.

“III. What Is the Impact of Open Data on People’s Lives?” on page
14 discusses what we have identified as the four most important
dimensions of impact. Based on the case studies, GovLab has deter‐
mined that open data projects are improving government, primarily
by making government more accountable and efficient; empowering
citizens, by facilitating more informed decision-making and ena‐
bling new forms of social mobilization; creating new economic oppor‐
tunities; and helping policymakers and others find solutions to big,
previously intractable public problems (e.g., related to public health or
global warming).
These types of effects cannot be taken for granted. They are evident
to varying degrees across our case studies, and sometimes not at all.
Our research also identified four enabling conditions that allow the
potential of open data to manifest (“IV. What Are the Enabling Con‐
ditions that Significantly Enhance the Impact of Open Data?” on
page 17). Overall, we found that open data projects work best when
they are based on partnerships and collaborations among various
(often intersectoral) organizations; when they emerge within what
we call an “open data public infrastructure” that enables the regular
release of potentially impactful data; when they are accompanied by
clear open data policies, including performance metrics; and when
they address or attempt to solve a well-defined problem or issue that
is an obvious priority to citizens and likely beneficiaries.
“V. What Are the Challenges to Open Data Making an Impact?” on
page 20 identifies the key challenges that open data projects face.
These include a lack of readiness, especially evident in the form of
low technical and human capacity in societies or nations hosting
open data initiatives; projects that are unresponsive—and thus inflex‐
ible—to user or citizen needs; projects that result in inadequate pro‐
tections for privacy or security; and, finally, projects that suffer from

a shortage of resources, financial and otherwise. None of the 19 ini‐
tiatives we studied was immune to these obstacles; the most success‐
ful ones had found ways to surmount them and build applications
or platforms that were nonetheless able to tap into the potential of
open data.

xii

|

Executive Summary


“VI. Recommendations: Toward a Next Generation Open-Data
Roadmap” on page 25 features a set of 10 recommendations directed
at policymakers, entrepreneurs, activists, and others contemplating
open-data projects. Each of these broad recommendations is accom‐
panied by more specific and concrete steps for implementation.
Together, these recommendations and steps for implementation add
up to something of a toolkit for those working with open data.
Although preliminary, they are designed to guide the open-data
community in its ongoing efforts to launch new initiatives that ach‐
ieve maximum societal, economic, political, and cultural change.
The report ends with each of our 19 in-depth case studies, presented
in full and organized by their dimension of impact.

Executive Summary

|

xiii



PART I

Open Data’s Impact—Lessons
Learned



CHAPTER 1

Understanding the Impact
of Open Data

Introduction
Recent years have witnessed considerable enthusiasm over the
opportunities offered by open data. Across sectors, it is widely
believed today that we are entering a new era of information open‐
ness and transparency, and that this has the potential to spur eco‐
nomic innovation, social transformation, and fresh forms of
political and government accountability. Focusing just on economic
impacts, in 2013, for example, the consulting firm McKinsey estima‐
ted the possible global value of open data to be more than $3 trillion
per year.1 A study commissioned by Omidyar Network has likewise
calculated that open data could result in an extra $13 trillion over
five years in the output of G20 nations.2
Yet despite the evident potential of open data, and despite the grow‐
ing amounts of information being released by governments and cor‐

porations, little is actually known about its use and impact. What
kind of social and economic transformations has open data brought
about, and what transformations might it effect in the future? How
1 Manyika, James, Michael Chui, Diana Farrell, Steve Van Kuiken, Peter Groves, and

Elizabeth Almasi Doshi. “Open Data: Unlocking Innovation and Performance with Liq‐
uid Innovation.” McKinsey Global Institute. November 12, 2013.

2 Gruen, Nicholas, John Houghton, and Richard Tooth. “Open for Business: How Open

Data Can Help Achieve the G20 Growth Target.” Omidyar Network. June 2014.

3


—and under what circumstances—has it been most effective? How
have open-data practitioners mitigated risks (e.g., to privacy) while
maximizing social good?
As long as such questions remain unanswered, the field risks suffer‐
ing from something of a mismatch between the supply (or availabil‐
ity) of data and its actual demand (and subsequent use). This
mismatch limits the impact of open data and inhibits its ability to
produce social, economic, political, cultural, and environmental
change. This report begins from the premise that in order to fully
grasp the opportunities offered by open data, a more full and
nuanced understanding of its workings is necessary.
Our knowledge of how and when open data actually works in prac‐
tice is lacking because there have been so few systematic studies of
its actual effect and workings. The field is dominated by conjectural
estimates of open data’s hypothetical influence; those attempts that

have been made to study concrete, real-world examples are often
anecdotal or suffer from a paucity of information. In this report, we
seek to build a more systematic study of open data and its effect by
rigorously examining 19 case studies from around the world. These
case studies are chosen for their geographic and sectoral representa‐
tiveness. They are built not simply from secondary sources (e.g., by
rehashing news reports) but from extensive interviews with key
actors and protagonists who possess valuable and thus far untapped
on-the-ground knowledge. They go beyond the descriptive (what
happened) to the explanatory (why it happened, and what is the
wider relevance or impact).
To provide these explanations, we have assembled an analytical
framework that applies across the 19 case studies and lets us present
some more widely applicable principles for the use and impact of
open data. Impact—a better understanding of how and when open
data really works—is at the center of our research. Our framework
seeks to establish a taxonomy of impact for open-data initiatives,
outlining various dimensions (from improving government to creat‐
ing economic opportunities) in which open data has been effective.
In addition, the framework lays out some key conditions that enable
impact, as well as some challenges faced by open-data projects.

4

| Chapter 1: Understanding the Impact of Open Data


I. What Is Open Data?
It is useful to begin with an understanding of what we mean by open
data. Like many technical terms, open data is a contested concept.

There exists no single, universally accepted definition. The GovLab
recently undertook an analysis of competing meanings, with a view
to reaching a working definition. The Appendix contains nine
widely used definitions and our matrix of analysis.
Based on this matrix, we reached the following working definition,
which guides our research and discussion throughout this report:
Open data is publicly available data that can be universally and
readily accessed, used, and redistributed free of charge. It is struc‐
tured for usability and computability.

It is important to recognize that this is a somewhat idealized version
of open data. In truth, few forms of data possess all the attributes
included in this definition. The openness of data exists on a contin‐
uum, and although many forms of information we discuss here
might not be strictly open in the sense just described, they can none‐
theless be shareable, usable by third parties, and capable of effecting
wide-scale transformation. The 19 case studies included here there‐
fore include a variety of different kinds of data, each of which is
open in a different way, and to a different degree. Here are some
examples:
• Brazil’s Open Budget Transparency Portal is an example of the
most “traditional” type of open-data project: a downloadable set
of open government data accessible to the public.
• Mexico’s Mejora Tu Escuela is the result of a nongovernmental
organization compiling and presenting data (including open
government data) in easily digestible forms.
• The Global Positioning System (GPS) is arguably not an “open
data” system at all, but rather a means for providing access to a
government-operated signal.
• The United Kingdom Ordnance Survey offers a combination of

free and paid spatial data, suggesting the possibilities (and limi‐
tations) of a mixed model of open and closed data.
In each of these cases, “open” has different meanings and connota‐
tions. Many—but not all—of the cases, however, demonstrate the
importance of shared and disseminated information, and highlight
I. What Is Open Data?

|

5


open data’s potential to enhance the social, economic, cultural, and
political dimensions of our lives.

II. The Case Studies
Methodology
To select our case studies, we undertook a multistep process that
involved several variables and considerations. To begin with, we
examined existing repositories of open-data cases and examples in
order to develop an initial universe of known open-data projects
(see This initial scan of existing
examples allowed us to identify gaps in representation—those sec‐
tors or geographies that often remain underrepresented in existing
descriptions of open data and its effect (or lack thereof). To fill in
some of these gaps (and more generally widen our list of case study
candidates), we also reached out to a number of experts in relevant
subject areas; for example, open data, open governance, civic tech‐
nology, and other related fields. We also attended and conducted
outreach at a number of open-data-related events, notably the 2015

International Open Data Conference in Ottawa, Canada and Con‐
Datos in Santiago, Chile.
Based on this process, we identified a long list of approximately 50
case studies from around the world. These included examples from
the private sector, civil society, and government, and spanned the
spectrum of openness just mentioned. The next step was to conduct
a certain amount of preliminary research to arrive at our final list of
19 case studies. To do this, we took into account several factors: the
availability and type of evidence in existence; the need for sectoral
and geographic representativeness; and the type of impact demon‐
strated by the case study in question (if any). We also considered
whether previous, detailed case studies existed; as much as possible,
our goal was to develop case studies for previously unexplored and
undocumented examples.
Having selected our 19 cases, we then began a process of more indepth researching. This involved a combination of desk research
(e.g., using existing media and other reports) and interviews (usu‐
ally by telephone). For many of our examples, there existed very lit‐
tle existing research; the bulk—and certainly the most useful—of
our evidence came from a series of in-depth interviews we conduc‐

6

|

Chapter 1: Understanding the Impact of Open Data


ted with key participants and observers who had been involved in
our various cases.
Upon completing drafts of each case study, and in the spirit of open‐

ness that defines the field under examination, we open-sourced the
peer review process for each case and this paper. Rather than shar‐
ing drafts only with a select group of experts, we made our report
and each of the case studies openly accessible for review in the inter‐
est of gaining broad input on our findings and collaboratively pro‐
ducing a common resource on open data’s effects for the field.
Through broad outreach at events like the 2015 Open Government
Partnership Summit in Mexico City, Mexico, and through social
media, more than 50 individuals from around the world signed up
to peer review at least one piece.
During the month-long open-peer-review process, more than two
dozen of those who signed up shared their input as Recognized Peer
Reviewers through in-line comments and in-depth responses to the
ideas and evidence presented in this report. Additionally, each ele‐
ment of the report was made openly accessible to the public, allow‐
ing anyone to share suggestions, clarifications, notes on potential
inaccuracies and any other useful input prior to publishing. Much of
this input was integrated into the final version of this report.

The 19 Cases
The standalone impact case studies (see Parts II through V) include
detailed descriptions and analyses of the initiatives listed later in the
report. In addition, the following table summarizes their main fea‐
tures and key findings. Here, we include a brief summary of each
example:

Outcome: Improving Government
Brazil: Open Budget Transparency Portal
Sector: Public
Impact: Tackling corruption and transparency

Description: A tool that aims to increase fiscal transparency of the
Brazilian Federal Government through open government budget
data. As the quality and quantity of data on the portal have
improved over the past decade, the Transparency Portal is now one
of the country’s primary anti-corruption tools, registering an aver‐
II. The Case Studies

|

7


age of 900,000 unique visitors each month. Local governments
throughout Brazil and three other Latin American countries have
modeled similar financial transparency initiatives after Brazil’s
Transparency Portal.
Sweden: openaid.se
Sector: Philanthropy and aid
Impact: Tackling corruption and transparency
Description: A data hub created by the Swedish Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency (Sida) built on open government data. The website visual‐
izes when, to whom, and why aid funding was paid out and what the
results were. The reforms are seen to be an important force for
enhanced transparency and accountability in development coopera‐
tion at an international level and increased cooperation and involve‐
ment of more actors in Swedish development policy.
Slovakia: Open contracting projects
Sector: Public sector
Impact: Tackling corruption and transparency

Description: In January 2011, Slovakia introduced a regime of
unprecedented openness, requiring that all documents related to
public procurement (including receipts and contracts) be published
online, and making the validity of public contracts contingent on
their publication. More than two million contracts have now been
posted online, and these reforms appear to have had a dramatic
effect on both corruption and, equally important for the business
climate, perceptions of corruption.
Indonesia: Kawal Pemilu
Sector: Politics and elections
Impact: Tackling corruption and transparency
Description: A platform launched in the immediate aftermath of
the contentious 2014 Indonesian presidential elections. Kawal Pemi‐
lu’s organizers assembled a team of more than 700 volunteers to
compare official vote tallies with the original tabulations from poll‐
ing stations and to digitize the often handwritten forms, making the
data more legible and accessible. Assembled in a mere two days,

8

|

Chapter 1: Understanding the Impact of Open Data


with a total budget of just $54, the platform enabled citizen partici‐
pation in monitoring the election results, increased public trust in
official tallies, and helped ease an important democratic transition.
Denmark: consolidation and sharing of address data
Sector: Geospatial services

Impact: Improving services
Description: In 2005, the Building and Dwelling Register of Den‐
mark started to release its address data to the public free of charge.
Prior to that date, each municipality charged a separate fee for
access, rendering the data practically inaccessible. There were also
significant discrepancies between the content held across different
databases. A follow-up study commissioned by the Danish govern‐
ment estimated the direct financial benefits alone for the period
2005–2009 at €62 million, at a cost of only €2 million.
Canada: T3010 charity information return data
Sector: Philanthropy and aid
Impact: Improving services
Description: In 2013, the Charities Directorate of the Canada Reve‐
nue Agency (CRA) opened all T3010 Registered Charity Informa‐
tion Return data since 2000 via the government’s data portal under a
commercial open-data license. The resulting data set has been used
to explore the state of the nonprofit sector, improve advocacy by
creating a common understanding between regulators and charities,
and create intelligence products for donors, fundraisers and grantmakers.

Outcome: Empowering Citizens
Tanzania: Shule and Education Open Data Dashboard
Sector: Education
Impact: Social mobilization
Description: Two recently established portals providing the public
with more data on examination pass rates and other information
related to school performance in Tanzania. Education Open Data
Dashboard is a project established by the Tanzania Open Data Ini‐
tiative; Shule was spearheaded by Arnold Minde, a programmer,
entrepreneur, and open-data enthusiast. Despite the challenges

II. The Case Studies

|

9