Via: uk.ac.durham; Thu, 19 Nov 1992 09:23:22 +0000
Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.gis
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 09:23:15 GMT
From:         Michael.Blakemore@DURHAM.AC.UK
Subject:      Pricing and Cost-Recovery Policies

Cost Recovery and Government Geographic Information
---------------------------------------------------

The recent postings continue a long, and often emotive debate
on the pricing of government digital data. Usually this means
that opposite polarities are given as examples, such as the
GB Ordnance Survey versus the USGS.

Within the UK the price and copyright of government geographic
information has become a major debating point. Last year the
Association for Geographic Information (AGI) was asked by the
Minister of State at Department of the Environment, to form
a 'Round-Table' discussion group into Ordnance Survey pricing
issues. Over the past year the AGI has taken evidence, and
heard the concerns of users of OS map data. There are genuine
concerns over price levels, price complexity, product volatility,
OS's commercial exploitation of its database under stringent
interpretations of copyright, and others. This report will be
published for discussion at the AGI's Conference next week, and
one it is in the public domain I should be able to post it on
GIS-L. It will be revised in December and formally submitted to
OS and the Minister in January.

Related to the issues of charging are those of copyright. Those
of you who have seen the Ordnance Survey Copyright leaflets will
understand the complexity of this area. If you have not, then
write to the Ordnance Survey and ask for 'Copyright 3'. The problem
with copyright is that legal opinion does not come cheap, and this in
itself may deter people from re-evaluating official interpretations of
copyright law. So, last year the AGI established a Copyright Committee,
chaired by Alan Gilchrist (an expert in intellectual property rights),
and advised by Taylor Joynson Garrett, a leading London law firm on
copyrights and intellectual property. TJG have given resources to this
committee, and the first report in Copyright and Geographic Information
will also be published at the AGI Conference next week. This is rather
too long to post, but you could contact the AGI Secretariat at
12 Great George Street, Parliament Square, London SW1P 3AP. Once I
know costs and pricing I will post those details.

Pip Forer asks specifically about cost recovery. I have just
finished a review of this, written with Gurmukh Singh (present Chair
of the AGI, and who was a member of the Chorley Commitee). This is the
result of a series of North American and European visits this year. I
must admit, however, that we did start out thinking 'residual cost good,
cost-recovery bad', and while we gathered much anecdotal and individual
evidence, we did not see any cohesive and integrated argument that would
convince a Treasury Minister. I'm happy to email details individually, but
fight shy of a publicity splash on GIS-L.

Lastly, colleagues could help me on one issue that has been highlighted
this past week. Darius, Peter Halls and others have identified the
costs of data as being a restrictive factor on research and teaching.
Furthermore, Pip Forer did argue that having to acquire individial bits
of data for research projects does not allow the browsing and experimentation
that underpins good research. It is important that a widespread body of
opinion responds on this, because the response I am receiving in the UK
is that there is no 'incontrovertible evidence' that low-cost copyright
free data are crucial to good research. I hope you see the way in which
officialdom thinks on these issues now! So, please will those that DO
feel there is a restriction please post something, and even more
importantly, those colleagues that (currently .. since there are those
in the USA who see cost-recovery as a means of reducing your budget
deficit) enjoy the USGS data policy please indicate whether the
ubiquity of information, and low cost, frees you to research more
effectively, and to carry out that research faster than you would
have done if you had to apply for little research subsets of data.

One of the recommendations of the AGI OS Pricing report is that in 1993
the AGI coordinates an econometric analysis of the impacts of cost-recovery.
This would seem the only convincing way of influencing policy, since
it is driven not by what many would see as rational argument, but by
the bottom-line balance. If you don't convice Treasury then it is
highly unlikely that policy will be influenced.





NOMIS, Unit 3P, Mountjoy Research Centre, University of Durham,
Durham DH1 3SW UK. Tel +44 (0)91-374-2468  Fax +44 (0)91,384-4971