Governments generate a vast and important flow of information and content which is produced by their employees and contractors, or by other organisations that receive government funding, across a very broad range of scientific, social, cultural and economic activity. The term ‘public sector information’ (PSI) is used here in a broad sense to include information and data produced by the public sector as well as materials that result from publicly funded cultural, educational and scientific activities. It can include policy documents and reports of government departments, public registers, legislation and regulations, meteorological information, scientific research databases, statistical compilations and datasets, maps and geospatial information1 and numerous other data and information products produced by government for public purposes.

The importance of ensuring that such information flows to those who want access to it in order to use and re-use it is increasingly recognised. The value of PSI derives from its use. A great deal of the information and content generated by governments and publicly funded researchers is of value and relevance to the broader community. Properly used, as well as contributing to social and economic development, advancing education, research and innovation, it enhances public health and safety, creates opportunities for engagement between government and citizens, fosters transparency of governance and promotes democratic ideals. It is an essential foundation of an informed, participatory society and provides a foundation for evidence-based policy and decision-making, for example, in the planning and delivery of health and social welfare programs. The ability of the global community to address pressing challenges in the environmental, economic, health, cultural, and other fields is dependent on realising the full potential of this information and data, which demands improved levels of access and clearer re-use rights.

49The value of PSI increases when restrictions on access and re-use are removed and it is made available in common digital formats downloadable from internet websites.2 From the emergence of the World Wide Web in the early 1990s, the Australian government embraced the internet as a medium for communicating with citizens, civil society and business. Government agencies quickly grasped the advantages of email and the internet for disseminating information both within the public sector as well as from government to citizens and other stakeholders. Advances in information and communication technologies – greatly increased computing power and storage capacity, grid and cloud computing, high speed broadband networks, the collaborative web, simulation and virtual worlds – have brought about a revolution.3 These developments, which have fundamentally changed how information (especially information in digital form) is generated, shared, distributed and used, have immediate relevance for governments and public sector entities. For the public sector, the new technologies have brought about changes not only in the volume and kind of information that is generated and how it is produced, but also in how – and by whom – it is used.

While the importance of ensuring that government information flows to those who want or need to access and use it is increasingly acknowledged, it is also clear that policies to bring this about are unlikely to be achieved with simple ‘strokes of the pen’. If governments are to ensure that PSI can be accessed, used and re-used, they need to develop an integrated and comprehensive information policy framework that supports access and re-use among a distributed, online network of information suppliers and users. An extensive review of the materials published in Australia and key overseas jurisdictions4 clearly shows that the emerging international consensus on the social and economic benefits flowing from access to PSI and publicly funded research data is reflected in policies and practices developed at national, regional and international levels. In the United States and Europe, which have taken the lead in

50developing national information strategies, attention in recent years has been focused on the introduction of administrative procedures and technologies designed to ensure that access policies will be effectively implemented. In the United States and the United Kingdom, the role of coordinating agencies5 has been strengthened and web 2.0 technologies have been used to improve access to PSI and establish new channels of interactive communication between government and citizens.6 At the international level, the cause of promoting access to PSI and publicly funded research outputs has been advanced by inter-governmental and international organisations, bodies within the UN system (such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation [UNESCO]), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the International Science Union’s Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA).

AUSTRALIA

Australia does not yet have a national policy framework addressing access to and use of PSI, an important point of difference with the United States, the United Kingdom and European countries. The situation with respect to PSI access and use has been fragmented and lacking a coherent policy foundation, whether viewed in terms of interactions within or among the different levels of government at the local, state/territory and federal levels, or between the government, academic and private sectors. Some important practices and initiatives can be identified but they are only loosely connected, deal with different aspects of access and re-use and lack any formal coordination.

However, this situation is beginning to change, with the need for a comprehensive national information policy framework to be developed having been recognised in the Review of the National Innovation System (NIS) in 20087 and acknowledged in ministerial addresses in 2008 and 2009. The Venturous Australia – Building Strength in Innovation report produced by the NIS review panel8 recommended that a National Information Strategy should be established, to optimise the flow of information in the Australian economy.9 It further recommended that, ‘to

51the maximum extent practicable, information, research and content funded by Australian governments should be made freely available over the internet as part of the global public commons’,10 that ‘Australian governments should adopt international standards of open publishing as far as possible’11 and that PSI ‘should be released under a creative commons licence’.12 In another important development, the Digital Economy, Future Directions consultation paper released by the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy in December 2008 raised ‘Open Access to Public Sector Information’13 as a key issue for discussion, observing that there is increasing support for ‘the notion that the Australian Government should provide access to public sector information on terms that clearly permit the use and re-use of that information’.14 The final report, Australia’s Digital Economy: Future Directions expressly recognised ‘the digital economy and innovation benefits generated by open access to PSI, subject to issues such as privacy, national security and confidentiality’.15 Enabling open access to PSI is seen not only as a way of promoting public sector innovation but also as a means by which government can facilitate private sector innovation.16

The federal government’s response to the Venturous Australia recommendations, contained in the White Paper, Powering Ideas: An Innovation Agenda for the 21st Century,17 released as part of the May 2009 Budget process, is generally supportive of its recommendations on access to PSI. It

52accepted the need to build on initiatives already commenced by agencies including the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Bureau of Meteorology and Geoscience Australia and ‘to develop a more coordinated approach to Commonwealth information management, innovation and engagement’.18 A similar approach was taken by the Victorian Parliament’s Economic Development and Infrastructure Committee (EDIC) on the Inquiry into Improving Access to Victorian Public Sector Information and Data, tabled in parliament on 24 June 2009.19 The 46 recommendations of the Victorian Parliament’s EDIC include that the Victorian government should publicly endorse open access as the default position for the management of its PSI,20 develop a whole-of-government information management framework (IMF),21 adopt Creative Commons licensing as the default licensing system for the IMF22 and develop specific guidelines for the pricing of PSI, emphasising no or marginal cost provision wherever possible.23

Speeches by senior federal government ministers in early 2009 expressly supported the introduction of reforms aimed at providing greater access to government information, through improvements to freedom of information (‘FOI’) regimes and moving from the traditional ‘pull’ model inherent in FOI laws to a ‘push’ model in which government proactively releases information in accordance with an established information publication scheme, rather than reactively in response to specific requests. Important speeches signalling the shift in thinking at the federal level were delivered in early 2009 by Senator John Faulkner, (then) Special Minister of State, announcing the overhaul of the federal Freedom of Information Act and the creation of the Office of the Information Commissioner24 and Lindsay Tanner MP, Minister for Finance and Deregulation at the CeBIT Conference, discussing how web 2.0 technologies enable ‘the nature of the dialogue between Government and the wider community to be completely transformed’.25 To advance work in these areas, in June 2009, the federal government appointed

53the Government 2.0 Taskforce to work with it to identify policies and frameworks to make PSI more readily accessible and usable and to encourage online engagement between government and citizens.26 The federal government and several state governments have taken steps to reform the administrative arrangements for access to PSI, through the creation of Information Commissioner positions and the introduction of legal frameworks supporting a ‘right to information’.27

Whilst these steps by the federal and state governments are significant, they are very recent developments. For many years until recently, Australia was largely disengaged from the developments in theory and practice evident in the US, EU and international organisations from the mid-1990s. With some notable exceptions,28 until a few years ago there was little evidence of an awareness or appreciation of the steps being taken elsewhere. For reasons which have yet to be fully understood, Australia largely failed to engage with developments in the formulation of policies and principles for access to PSI that took place at the national (UK, US, NZ), regional (EU) and the international levels (UNESCO, OECD) up to around 2005. At the international level in particular, the Australian government appears not to have played a significant role (such as through participation in working groups) formed by a range of international organisations (notably UNESCO, OECD and ICSU/CODATA) to advance the policy framework for access to PSI. (Australia only rejoined CODATA – one of the leading international organisations concerned with science data – in 2008 after membership had lapsed some decades earlier.)

The issue of access to and re-use of government information and data has been considered by various government agencies and in reports commissioned by governments over the last 15 years. The National Library of Australia was one of the first federal government agencies to realise – by the mid-1990s – the potential of the emerging internet to provide enhanced citizen access to government information in digital format.29 The landmark 1994 report, Commerce in Content: Building Australia’s International Future in Interactive Multimedia Markets, commissioned from Cutler & Company by the federal government30 made several recommendations as to how governments, at both federal and state level, could leverage off the cultural and content materials they created, owned or used, so as to accelerate the development of the digital content sector.31 The recommendations included providing easy access to culturally significant data in

54digital form, as well as providing comprehensive access to nationally significant data, and promoting the development of standards for document and image digitalisation and archiving. Contemporaneously, the Australian Science and Technology Council’s (ASTC) 1994 report, The Networked Nation, proposed that government should stimulate public interest in, and facilitate access to, government information via electronic networks. ASTEC noted the need for a coordinated approach by government and recommended the establishment of a Commonwealth Government Information Services Task Force to provide this coordination, to develop pilot programs, to investigate options for extending community access to networked information, and to develop a directory of government information publicly available over networks. In 2006, the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC) in its report, From Data to Wisdom: Pathways to Successful Data Management for Australian Science,32 recommended that ‘Australia’s government, science, research and business communities establish a nationally supported long-term strategic framework for scientific data management, including guiding principles, policies, best practices and infrastructure’33 and the adoption of ‘mechanisms to enable the discovery of, and access to, data and information resources’.34

Opportunities arose on several occasions up to the mid-2000s to examine the question of access to PSI, but they were either not recognised as such or were not acted upon. The Copyright Law Review Committee’s review of Crown copyright in 2005–2006, which was established to address concerns about governments’ anti-competitive licensing of PSI, provided an opportunity to consider not only the subsistence and exercise of copyright in public sector materials but also to engage with the broader policy issues about access to and re-use of PSI. Unfortunately, the CLRC failed to contextualise its inquiry and recommendations within the framework of international developments and concepts about access to and re-use of government information and data.35 Developments that have occurred in overseas jurisdictions in establishing systems for access to environmental information36 have gone almost entirely

55unremarked upon in Australia and there is no current discussion of their relevance or significance domestically.

In the absence of a general national or inter-governmental policy, activities in Australia relating to information access and re-use have been largely focused on two key areas: spatial data and publicly funded research outputs (whether in the form of publications or data). Much of the impetus for access to PSI has come from the spatial information industry,37 which has for many years been a proponent of the view ‘that government held information, and in particular spatial information, will play an absolutely critical role in increasing the innovative capacity of this nation’.38 In fact, the most advanced data access and re-use policy developed in Australia to date – and only one ever intended to apply Australia-wide at the federal level – is the Spatial Data Access and Pricing Policy39 (known as the OSDM Policy) adopted by the Commonwealth government in 2001.

Various initiatives relating to publicly funded research results were developed within the Accessibility Framework for Publicly Funded Research established in 2004 as part of the Backing Australia’s Ability – Building Our Future through Science and Innovation package.40 The Accessibility Framework was designed to manage research information, outputs and infrastructure in order to enable them to be more readily discovered, accessed and shared. It aims to provide a regulatory environment that both enables and encourages the population of digital repositories in order to provide better access to information.41 The Open Access to Knowledge (OAK) Law and Legal Framework for e-Research projects established as part of the Research Information

56Infrastructure Framework for Australian Higher Education under Backing Australia’s Ability dealt extensively with the legal issues involved in managing open access publication of research papers and data so as to enable access and re-use.42 Several universities (including QUT)43 have introduced open access policies for academic publications and, in December 2006, the two major Australian public research funding bodies – the Australian Research Council (ARC) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) – announced the introduction of open access guidelines for published papers and data resulting from funded research projects, effective 2008.44 Both policies encourage researchers to:

At the state and territory level there is a lack of consistency in policies on access to and re-use of government information and data. States and territories have developed their own policies on information access and re-use and, in recent years some have also implemented policies on dealings with public sector intellectual property. There is a broadly held view that since public sector information has been produced through the expenditure of public funds, it should be made available to citizens and businesses.46 However, while access is generally supported, there

57are differences in how this is achieved in practice and in the pricing models applying in the various jurisdictions.

There has been an ongoing tension in Australian governments (federal, state and territory) between, on the one hand, adopting an open access approach and, on the other hand, focusing on cost recovery or generating commercial returns or rents. This dichotomy was remarked upon by KPMG Consulting after comparing geospatial data policies and practices in its 2001 Geospatial Data Policy Study Project Report for GeoConnections Canada:

Gradually, over the last few years, things have begun to change, led by Australian government agencies including Geoscience Australia, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Education and Innovation & Industry Departments, the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) and the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC). Acceptance of the importance of developing the policy framework for access to PSI has been growing, while key federal government agencies have made significant changes to their information licensing practices. In November 2005, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) abandoned the restrictive licensing practices it had previously applied in licensing its datasets, which had involved charging fees for access to data and the restriction or prohibition of commercial downstream use by the licensee and/or others. Since then the ABS has eliminated virtually all charges for data and restrictions on downstream use of their data (that is, both access and re-use), whether commercial or otherwise.48 Geoscience Australia offers free downloads of geospatial data from its website, based on the OSDM Policy.49 Whilst initiatives

58such as these are important and provide evidence of a growing awareness of the importance of ensuring access to and re-use of PSI, they remain fragmented and separate and involve relatively few government departments and agencies.50

One of the most influential projects in Australia in recent years has been the Government Information Licensing Framework Project (GILF Project).51 It grew out of a project commissioned by the Queensland Spatial Information Council (QSIC) in 2006 to develop a legal framework to support the sharing and re-use of spatial and other information within and across the various levels of government and between government and the private sector. The focus of the GILF project was the development of a licensing model to be applied to PSI, the objective being new standardised information licensing arrangements which could be recommended for use with all kinds of Queensland government information to enable enhanced, on-demand access to PSI.52 Importantly, the GILF project did not directly address information policy per se. However, by focusing attention on removing impediments to accessing PSI caused by inadequate or inappropriate licensing practices, its findings and recommendations about the use of Creative Commons licences on PSI directly influenced the reviews of information access policies by the federal government,53 other state governments54 and the New Zealand Government.55

At the federal government level, the GILF project also served as a catalyst for renewed effort on the development of a national information framework when it was adopted by the Ministerial Online and Communications Council (OCC) in 2007. The need for a coordinated national approach to information access and re-use was acknowledged in the proposal for a

59National Information Sharing Strategy (NISS) which was approved by Commonwealth, state and territory ministers at the June 2007 meeting of the OCC. The proposal (later renamed the National Government Information Sharing Strategy (NGISS)) and carried forward by the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO), envisaged the development of a standardised approach to information sharing to support the delivery of government services, for use by all portfolio areas at all levels of government.

NEW ZEALAND

By contrast with Australia, New Zealand has developed a comprehensive information strategy at the national level, which encompasses sector-specific strategies for digital content,56 e-government57 and geospatial information.58 Ongoing work has been done on the development of whole-of-government policies and practices for PSI since the NZ Cabinet approved the Policy Framework for New Zealand Government-held Information in 1997.59

The Policy Framework for New Zealand Government-held Information, developed by the New Zealand Public Service chief executives and State Services Commission,60 adopted the position that government-held information should be made as accessible as possible, with barriers to access removed. It balances the ease of access with security and the need to withhold certain types of information (notably personal information). It enunciated 11 principles which provide general guidance on matters including: availability, coverage, pricing, ownership, stewardship, collection, copyright, preservation, quality, integrity and privacy.

The Digital Strategy61 was first released in 2005 with the aim of creating a digital future for all New Zealanders, acknowledging that the information accessed through digital technologies can promote innovation, increase productivity and enrich the quality of the lives of New Zealanders. The strategy established the goal of unlocking the nation’s ‘stock of content and provide all New Zealanders with seamless, easy access to the information that is important to their lives, businesses and cultural identity’.62 It saw the unlocking of repositories of information (whether historical or new) as adding to the nation’s wealth of knowledge and creating a major new resource for education, cultural development and innovation. A revised version of the Digital Strategy, Digital Strategy 2.0,63 released in 2008, contains strong statements about re-use

60of public sector information, committing government to making public information accessible to everyone in a way that people want it, when they want it. Government is to provide secure personalised interaction between government and individuals, and open up authoritative data sources also while protecting privacy and the security of information.

The New Zealand Geospatial Strategy, launched in 2007, is designed to improve knowledge of, and access to, the geospatial assets owned, maintained or used by government.64 On 1 July 2009, the Ministry for the Environment (Manatū Mō Te Taiao) announced that it was making two important environmental databases – the Land Cover Database (LCD) and Land Environments New Zealand (LENZ) classification – available online, for free and licensed under an unrestricted Creative Commons licence.65 Both of these databases are widely used by government agencies in environmental and resource management planning. The new licence enables the public to freely share and distribute environmental data and information without having to seek permission to use and re-use the data.66 In the media statement the department stated that ‘improving access to the Government’s spatial information is a goal of the New Zealand Geospatial Strategy, one that the Ministry is committed to supporting’.

INTERNATIONAL

There have been significant international initiatives especially over the past decade which show how the drive to promote better access to PSI and the freer flow globally of information and knowledge produced through publicly funded research, has increased with the realisation of the full magnitude of the environmental, social and economic issues confronting humankind. It is in this challenging global context that there appears to be an increasing realisation by the international community that greater international cooperation, a significant part of which needs to be based on clearly articulated policies and principles on access to and re-use of PSI, is essential if these challenges are to be met effectively.

The United Nations (UN) and its specialised agencies have issued numerous official resolutions, declarations and reports addressing the development of policies on access to and re-use of government information.67 The importance of scientific research and open access to information relating to the environment is recognised in two of the key documents negotiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the Earth Summit) in 1992, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development68 and the United Nations Framework

61Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).69 Principle 9 of the Rio Declaration requires states to cooperate to strengthen their capacity for sustainable development ‘by improving scientific understanding through exchanges of scientific and technological knowledge’ while Principle 10 requires, at the national level, that ‘each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision making’. The UNFCCC commits parties to the Convention to promote and cooperate ‘in scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and other research, systematic observation and development of data archives related to the climate system’70 as well as to ‘the full, open and prompt exchange of relevant scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and legal information related to the climate system and climate change, and to the economic and social consequences of various response strategies’.71 These commitments were expanded upon by a decision at the Conference of the Parties in 1998 which recognised the importance of national contributions to global climate observing systems.72 It urges parties to ‘undertake free and unrestricted exchange of data to meet the needs of the Convention, recognising the various policies on data exchange of relevant international and intergovernmental organisations’.

During the 1990s, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) played an important role in further developing policies and guidelines on access to PSI. The growing awareness of the importance of access to information is particularly apparent in the recent work of intergovernmental bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Council for Science (ICSU). UNESCO’s work from the late 1990s on made an important contribution to the development of PSI access policies at the international level and fed into the more recent work of other bodies such as the OECD, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). One of the most useful guides to developing a national information policy is the report, Policy Guidelines for the Development and Promotion of Governmental Public Domain Information, which was commissioned by UNESCO from Paul Uhlir of the US National Academy of Sciences in 2004.73

During the last decade, the OECD74 (through its Directorate for Science, Technology and Policy75) has examined the social and economic implications of the development and use of information and communication technologies, the internet and e-business. At the Seoul Ministerial Meeting on the Future of the Internet Economy in 2008, the OECD Ministers

62endorsed the Seoul Declaration on the Future of the Internet Economy and supporting policy framework.76 The Seoul Declaration incorporates key principles from the OECD’s Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data from Public Funding and the Recommendation of the Council for Enhanced Access and More Effective Use of Public Sector Information and both of these documents form part of the supporting materials annexed to the Declaration.77 They provide guidelines on the availability of research data, including openness, transparency, legal conformity, interoperability, quality, efficiency, accountability and sustainability. OECD Recommendations have the status of OECD legal instruments that describe standards or objectives which OECD member countries (such as Australia) are expected to implement, although they are not legally binding. However, through long-standing practice of member countries, a Recommendation is considered to have great moral force.78 The relevance of the OECD guidelines to the Australian context was acknowledged by the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC) in its 2005 report From Data to Wisdom: Pathways to Successful Data Management for Australian Science, which recommended that they should be taken into account in the development of a strategic framework for management of research data in Australia.79

As well as the principles contained in declarations by UN agencies and inter-governmental organisations, statements of principle on open access to publicly funded research data and academic publications are found in numerous declarations made by non-government organisations and groups operating at the international level.

There are numerous international policy statements that promote public availability and open exchange of data, including the Bermuda Principles (1996) and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003).80 The Bermuda Principles were developed by scientists involved in the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium and their funding agencies, and represented an agreement among researchers about the need to establish a basis for the rapid and open sharing of pre-publication data on gene sequences.81

63The Bermuda Principles required automatic release of sequence assemblies larger than 1kb and immediate publication of finished annotated sequences. They sought to make the entire gene sequence freely available to the public for research and development in order to maximise benefits to society. The Berlin Declaration had the goal of supporting the open access paradigm via the internet and promoting the internet as a fundamental instrument for a global scientific knowledge base.82 The Berlin Declaration defined ‘open access contribution’ to include scientific research results, raw data and metadata, and required open access contributions to be deposited in an online repository and made available under a ‘free, irrevocable, worldwide, right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship’.83

Acknowledgement of the need for data access and sharing is invariably found, in express statements, in the framework documents of large-scale observational projects generating vast amounts of data about the earth, water, marine environment and the atmosphere. For more than 50 years, the foundation documents of major science collaborative projects have typically included, as a key principle, a commitment to ensuring that research outputs will be openly and freely available. Data and information sharing provisions are found in numerous international environmental treaties, including the Antarctic Treaty (1959), the Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Ozone Protocol, the Convention on Biodiversity and the Aarhus Convention (1998).84 Article III of the Antarctic Treaty establishes the principle that scientific data will be ‘exchanged and made freely available’:

1. In order to promote international cooperation in scientific investigation in Antarctica, as provided for in Article II of the present Treaty, the Contracting Parties agree that, to the greatest extent feasible and practicable: … (c) scientific observations and results from Antarctica shall be exchanged and made freely available.85

The need for coherence between data sharing principles that are at the heart of international scientific collaborations and the policy and legal frameworks in place in the disparate jurisdictions where researchers operate is highlighted by the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) initiated in 2005 by the Group on Earth Observations (GEO).86 GEOSS seeks to connect the producers of environmental data and decision-support tools with the end users of these products, with the aim of enhancing the relevance of Earth observations to global issues. The end result is to be a global public infrastructure that generates comprehensive, near-real-time environmental data, information and analyses for a wide range of users. The vision for GEOSS is as a ‘system of systems’, built upon existing observational systems and incorporating new systems for Earth observation and modelling that are offered as GEOSS components. This emerging public infrastructure links a diverse and growing array of

64instruments and systems for monitoring and forecasting changes in the global environment. This ‘system of systems’ supports policymakers, resource managers, science researchers and many other experts and decision-makers.

One of GEO’s earliest actions was to explicitly acknowledge the importance of data sharing in achieving its vision and to agree on a strategic set of data sharing principles for GEOSS:

1. There will be full and open exchange of data, metadata and products shared within GEOSS, recognising relevant international instruments, and national policies and legislation.
2. All shared data, metadata and products will be made available with minimum time delay and at minimum cost.
3. All shared data, metadata and products being free of charge or at no more than the cost of reproduction will be encouraged for research and education.87

EUROPE

Some of the most important initiatives on access to information generated by public sector entities are those which have been developed by the European Union (EU), in the form of Conventions and Directives binding on EU Member States. An early example of cooperation at the European level is found in the Convention that established the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) in 1953.88 The Convention, which establishes CERN’s role in organising and sponsoring international cooperation in research, promoting contacts between scientists and interchange among laboratories and institutes89 requires research results to be ‘made generally available’:

Building on commitments in the Rio Declaration (1992)91 and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992), detailed obligations to provide access to environmental information were introduced in the Aarhus Convention (1998) which grants rights to members of the public to obtain access to environmental information and to participate in decision-making

65about environmental matters.92 In 2003 the European Parliament and Council adopted the Directive on Public Access to Environmental Information93 which requires public authorities to provide timely access to environmental information.

Central to any consideration of access to PSI in Europe are the Directive on the re-use of public sector information94 (‘the PSI Directive’), adopted in 2003, and the Directive establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information95 (‘the INSPIRE Directive’), adopted in 2007. In negotiating the PSI Directive, the European Parliament and Council of the European Union recognised that the public sector is the largest producer of information in Europe and that substantial social and economic benefits stood to be gained if this information were available for access and re-use. However, it was considered that European content firms engaging in the aggregation of information resources into value-added information products would be at a competitive disadvantage unless there were clear policies or uniform practices on how PSI could be accessed and re-used. The lack of harmonisation of policies and practices regarding PSI was regarded as a barrier to the development of digital products and services based on information obtained from different countries. In response, the PSI Directive establishes a framework of rules governing the re-use of existing documents held by the public sector bodies of EU member states. The INSPIRE Directive (which EU member states were due to implement by May 2009) establishes EU policy and principles on spatial information held by or on behalf of public authorities, such as information about mapping of the land and sea, the weather, geology, the environment, population, housing and public utility services. Its purpose is to ensure that private and public sector bodies and citizens can gain access to this information and re-use it where appropriate, to develop new services and information resources.

Further, communications of the European Commission in 2007 and 2008 address issues relevant to open access in relation to a broad range of information types including scientific and creative materials online. In the field of scientific information, the European Commission published a communication on scientific information in the digital age: access, dissemination and preservation in 2007.96 In January 2008, the European Commission published a

66communication on creative content online in the single market, launching further actions to support the development of innovative business models and the deployment of cross-border delivery of diverse online creative content services.97

Certain key and frequently encountered issues emerge from the various European initiatives and the varied informational contexts and subject matters which they address. The key issues include the benefits to be derived from technological (ICT) compatibility and interoperability (with the related need for readily accessible innovative ICT tools to facilitate these objectives e.g. open source software and open ICT systems), the need for clearly articulated information management policies and principles, the economics of open access to PSI, and the need for cross border legal compatibility such as widely accepted and clearly expressed standard open content licences which indicate clearly what uses may be made of the information being accessed online and on an open access basis.

UNITED KINGDOM

The United Kingdom has established itself at the forefront of European Union member states in implementing initiatives to enable access to public sector materials. It took the lead in 2005 by transposing the PSI Directive into UK law98 and establishing an effective administrative regime, central to which is the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI).99 From the mid-2000s, the UK government has demonstrated a broad commitment to the introduction of reforms to enable access to PSI, commissioning a series of important reports from which it has drawn guidance, including the Power of Information: an independent review (2007),100 the report on Models of Public Sector Information Provision via Trading Trusts (‘the Cambridge Report’)101 and the

67Power of Information Taskforce report (2009).102 Throughout these reports are findings and recommendations that support the introduction of fundamental reforms to longstanding policies and practices on access to and re-use of PSI, including those of the Ordnance Survey Office103 and other trading trusts.104

In the forum of public opinion, since 2006 the Guardian newspaper has run its influential Free our Data online campaign which serves to highlight perceived shortcomings in current access and pricing practices at the national and local government levels.105

The UK government’s embrace of the interactive functionality of web 2.0 technologies to foster engagement with citizens and provide greater access to PSI closely parallels developments in the United States from early 2009 under the Obama administration.106 An indication of the weight the UK government puts on the development of new models of public information delivery is found in the appointment in June 2009 of Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web, as its expert advisor. Sir Tim will lead a panel of experts to advise the Minister for the Cabinet Office on how the UK government can best use the internet to make public data as widely available as possible.107

UNITED STATES

The environment for access to government information in the United States is characterised by broad rights for citizens to obtain access to government information and re-use it for commercial purposes, a lack of restrictions on re-use, charges limited to the marginal costs of reproduction and dissemination, and the absence of copyright in materials produced by the federal government. The United States has a long history of support for public access to government information, with support for open access to government documents extending back to the era of the founding fathers. There has also been a long held commitment to the principle that scientific information and research results should, as far as possible, be shared

68broadly within the scientific community.108 This strong support of the open access philosophy is based on a variety of factors – historical, governmental and cultural.

Two documents are central to the US legislative and policy framework underpinning access to and re-use of PSI. These are the US Copyright Act 1976 and the OMB Circular A-130. Under the Copyright Act works of the federal government are excluded from copyright protection.109 While the absence of copyright to protect federal government agencies’ information is one clear contributing factor it certainly is not the only one. Circular A-130, issued by the OMB in 2000110 establishes the data access and re-use policy framework for executive branch departments and agencies of the US federal government, is the US federal government’s most significant policy statement on access to PSI. As well as acknowledging that government information is a valuable public resource and that the nation stands to benefit from the dissemination of government information, OMB Circular A-130 requires improperly restrictive practices to be avoided. Additionally, Circular A-16, entitled Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities, provides that US federal agencies have a responsibility to ‘[c]ollect, maintain, disseminate, and preserve spatial information such that the resulting data, information, or products can be readily shared with other federal agencies and non-federal users, and promote data integration between all sources’.111

Open access remains a key point of interest in current US political and administrative discourse. In 2008, the US National Institutes of Health112 (the largest funder of basic biomedical research in the world, spending US$27 billion in the 2005 financial year) and Harvard University faculties (the Law School113 and the Faculty of Arts and Sciences114) introduced mandatory open access

69publishing policies, requiring peer-reviewed journal publications to be made available in open access repository.115 President Obama came into office in January 2009 with a technology policy aimed at creating ‘a transparent and connected democracy’, including the use of technology ‘to reform government and improve the exchange of information between the federal government and citizens while ensuring the security of our networks’.116 On his first day in office President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government, encouraging transparency in government and instructing US government agencies to err on the side of making information public.117 As part of the Obama administration’s Open Government Initiative,118 the data.gov portal was launched in May 2009 providing access to large numbers of federal datasets, which are continually being added to.119 For example, machine-readable datasets may be accessed from the ‘raw’ data catalogue, in a variety of formats (including XML, CSV/TXT, KL/KMZ and Esri) with accompanying metadata and analysed using tools available on the portal.

CANADA

Canada, like Australia, continues to recognise the existence of copyright in (‘Crown copyright’) in materials produced by the government.120 While there have been initiatives designed to promote access to public sector materials in Canada in recent years (notably programs such as GeoBase and GeoGratis which provide free access to government spatial data), the Canadian situation is similar to that in Australia in that there is as yet no clearly established information policy or strategy operating at a national level. Unlike the United States, Canada has historically supported a higher level of private sector participation in the development, funding and maintenance of key spatial data infrastructure (SDI).121 This is reflected in initiatives led by

70GeoConnections Canada, a national program, commenced in 1999, headed by Natural Resources Canada which involves the federal, provincial (state), territory and municipal governments, and the private and academic sectors working in partnership with governments to develop the components of the Canadian Geospatial Data Infrastructure (CGDI).122

CONCLUSION

The federal government’s positive response to the Venturous Australia recommendations in the Powering Ideas White Paper, the prominence given to the issue of access to PSI in the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy’s Australia’s Digital Economy, Future Directions report, the formation of the Government 2.0 Taskforce, the enactment of Right to Information legislation and the creation of Information Commissioner positions by federal and state governments, when viewed together, provide a clear indication that Australian governments are now seized of the importance of proceeding to develop and implement a comprehensive national information strategy. As is apparent by reviewing developments in comparable jurisdictions, putting in place such a strategy is essential if Australia is to become a fully engaged participant in the global information economy.

As we begin to move along this path, much assistance can be obtained from the policies and practices developed in jurisdictions with the most advanced national information strategies (such as the United States and the United Kingdom), as well as declarations and recommendations of intergovernmental organisations such as the OECD and international bodies. To date, Australian activities aimed at enabling information access and re-use have been largely focused on two key areas: spatial data and publicly funded research outputs (whether in the form of publications or data). Policies and practices that have been developed in Australia for specific information domains will also provide guidance in developing a more broadly applicable strategy for access to PSI. However, in developing an Information Policy Framework, the importance of a comprehensive and integrated strategy should not be overlooked. It is important that the issues arising from specific data domains or economic sectors are not superimposed over the national Information Policy Framework. Rather, the focus should be on developing a comprehensive and integrated high level Information Policy Framework, within which consideration can be given to specific issues arising in particular sectors or information domains. As Uhlir emphasised in his 2004 report for UNESCO,123 in developing a national information policy, a broad approach must be taken. The Information Policy Framework for the management and active dissemination of PSI should be comprehensive and integrated, although individual consideration may be required for specific areas or sectors with special information objectives and implementation requirements (such as health, environment, energy, transportation, finance and defence).