“…The first problem that I feel plagues OSM is that the OpenStreetMap Foundation views the mission of the project to provide the world a geographic database, but not geographic services. OSM gives people the tools to create their own map rather than offering them a simple, out of the box solution. Providing the ability for individuals and organizations to make their own map may work well for some, but it discourages small and medium size organizations from using OSM and thus engaging with the project. And even if they do use our data, their engagement is through a third party, rather than directly with us….”
This document is the third report of five on the evaluation of offset agreements in Sweden and will focus on the agreement with Springer called Springer Compact and its outcome during 2017.
The evaluation is conducted to examine the effects of Springer Compact regarding economy, administration, researcher attitudes and research dissemination, and make recommendations for future negotiations with Springer Nature and other publishers. The previous reports were written in Swedish, but the remaining reports will be written in English. Therefore, some of the sections from the previous reports are repeated here to provide a background for the international reader. In addition to this, there is also a section comparing the Swedish Springer Compact agreement to that of three other countries (Netherlands, United Kingdom and Austria) and one society (Max Planck Society).
The report is structured in the following way: below is a short summary. Then the first section presents an introduction, describing open access, offset agreements and the background to why such agreements have emerged, the aim of the evaluation and a brief overview of existing recommendations for negotiating open access with publishers. The next section explains the specific offset model of Springer Compact. The third section makes the comparison between different Springer Compact agreements. The fourth and fifth sections contain the evaluation and recommendations for future negotiations.
“What happens to these social practices and imaginaries of quantification when readily available digital technologies facilitate the creation, analysis and reproduction of data by different publics? What kinds of shifts, dynamics, controversies, visions and programmes can be observed when data goes digital? One recent answer to these questions can be found in the phenomenon of open data, which can be understood as set of ideas and conventions aiming to turn information into a re-usable public resource.”
“Mariel Borowitz’s new book, Open Space: The Global Effort for Open Access to Environmental Satellite Data traces the history of environmental satellite data sharing policies, offering a model of data-sharing policy development, case studies and practical recommendations for increasing global data sharing. Below, she writes about why some countries have adopted an open data policy, while others have not.”
“Geospatial data capture and maintenance is in the process of being dramatically reshaped by ubiquitous sensing technologies, and the nature of geospatial data is radically changing also. Traditionally there have been barriers to accessing geospatial data, which have curbed the potential of innovation. However, in recent times open data movements and advances in managing large datasets such as satellite imagery and distribution have made it feasible for organizations to look for opportunities to leverage geospatial data and push the boundaries….”
“Within the next three years, England will use light detection and ranging (LIDAR) to survey the entirety of the country at one-meter resolution. LIDAR imaging has been an ongoing process for nearly 20 years in an effort to reduce flood risk. At present, about 75 percent of the country has been mapped, but the coverage is sparse in unpopulated areas and national parks.
All the data will also be available free to the public, as is the case with the current LIDAR data. In the past two years, users made more than a half-million LIDAR downloads from the Survey Open Data site….”
“AccuWeather has been trying to block open access to publicly-funded weather data for more than a decade. Its interest is to sell the same data to the public without “unfair competition” from the government. In the past it pursued this goal through Rick Santorum, the venal Senator from AccuWeather’s home state of Pennsylvania. Now it’s pursuing this goal through Donald Trump….”
“As a top executive at AccuWeather, Barry Myers has pushed for limits on the kinds of products that the National Weather Service offers to the public, saying they offered unfair competition to his industry.
Now, President Donald Trump’s nomination of Myers to lead the weather service’s parent agency could allow him to make those kinds of restrictions mandatory — to the benefit of his family-run forecasting company….”
As is well-known, these satellites, which are orbiting ESA since 2014, provide high-resolution radar and optical imagery on our planet:”