Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 1

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

European Public Sector Information Platform Topic Report No. 2012 / 08

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

Author: Antti Poikola and Frank Kresin Published: August 2012

Keywords PSI, Public Sector Information, Apps contest, Open Data, Hackathon Abstract By now we've seen many open data app contests, in many forms, all around world. In a way, this continuous sprawl is a success in itself. However, there are certain common themes emerging. There is a demand and a need to learn from each other and to design better and more sustainable models for boosting the innovation around open data.

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 2

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use This topic report will bring together insights from contest organisers from various countries. The insights are based on a meeting of over twenty-fve app contest organisers in Helsinki during the Open Knowledge Festival in September 2012 and on a questionnaire that was sent out to over sixty app contest developers. From this, we have compiled the most useful lessons learned. What can be expected from running a contest? What ingredients make a contest successful? What caveats should be avoided? What can be done to create sustainable impact? Who should be involved, at what stage, and to what end? We hope these insights will be benefcial to new contest organisers and will help create new editions of existing contests. Should you fnd anything missing or need further clarifcation, please do not hesitate to contact us.

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 3

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

Table of Contents
Abstract......................................................................................................................................... 5 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 5 2 Open data app contests.......................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Typical process for organising contests.......................................................................................... 7 2.2 Length and form of the contests......................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Side events................................................................................................................................................. 10 2.4 Judging the entries................................................................................................................................. 10 3 Goals and results................................................................................................................... 10 3.1 Goals and motivations behind the contests................................................................................ 11 3.2 Most important outcomes and impacts........................................................................................ 11 3.3 Drawbacks and possible problems................................................................................................. 12 4 Lessons learned..................................................................................................................... 13 5 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 15 List of annexes.......................................................................................................................... 16 I. List of open government data app contests.................................................................................. 16 II. App contests survey and summary of answers to the numeric questions ....................... 16

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 4

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

Abstract
By now we've seen many open data app contests, in many forms, all around world. In a way, this continuous sprawl is a success in itself. However, there are certain common themes emerging. There is a demand and a need to learn from each other and to design better and more sustainable models for boosting the innovation around open data. This topic report will bring together insights from contest organisers from various countries. The insights are based on a meeting of over twenty-fve app contest organisers in Helsinki during the Open Knowledge Festival in September 2012 and on a questionnaire that was sent out to over sixty app contest developers. From this, we have compiled the most useful lessons learned. What can be expected from running a contest? What ingredients make a contest successful? What caveats should be avoided? What can be done to create sustainable impact? Who should be involved, at what stage, and to what end? We hope these insights will be benefcial to new contest organisers and will help create new editions of existing contests. Should you fnd anything missing or need further clarifcation, please do not hesitate to contact us.

1 Introduction
Open data contests have become a common event in many countries, cities and towns. Following the original success of the Apps for Democracy 1 contest in Washington DC in 2008 and Show Us a Better Way 2 contest in UK in 2008, close to one hundred contests have been conducted all over the Western world, ofen in various editions. (See Annex I. List of open government data app contests.)

Image 1: Indicative number of open data contests by year. (See Annex I. for list of contests.)

These contests consist of the shared features of opening up data sets and of motivating 1 http://www.appsfordemocracy.org/ 2 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402134053/showusabetterway.com/

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 5

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use developers to work on these shared resources. They typically take the form of a challenge in which goals are set, rewards (e.g. prize money) are ofered and wider visibility is gained amongst the local community or beyond. Open data app contests help to persuade or facilitate data owners to open up their data either because the data is perceived to be public property anyway or because the data owners expect positive outcomes, usually in the areas of transparency, innovation and efciency. It involves motivating politicians to pass laws that make opening up of data possible and sustainable. Businesses are also involved in these contests as they scout for interesting results, and developers make these a part of their portfolios. Open data contests generally aim for one or more of the following results: enhanced transparency of (local) governments, enhanced efciency of (local) governments and service innovation, meaning new or better services for citizens and benefcial products for customers. As outcomes, we see that these contests have served as platforms for building communities and raising awareness on the theme of open data. Several good applications have ensued and developers have found their ways into government and commercial contracts. However, it turns out that it is difcult to establish lasting results. Some fear that the model is worn out and that developers, data owners and sponsors will soon lose interest, unless certain, albeit common, hurdles are overcome. This report brings together the insights of many contest organisers regarding what to do or what not to do to turn open data contests and their outcomes into lasting successes. It sets out to compile the lessons learned and to put forward recommendations for the future. Furthermore, this report seeks to promote debate and serve as a base for more discussion and knowledge building, enhancing the efectiveness of the model in respect of the goals of the relevant stakeholders. The report is based on the results of Apps Contest Organizers Meetup 3 held in Helsinki during the Open Knowledge Festival 2012 4 where over twenty-fve contest organisers met. Afer the meetup, follow-up discussion took place on the international contest organisers email list5, and we did a small-scale online survey 6, which was answered by organisers from fourteen diferent contests. This report is structured as follows. First, we elaborate on the nature of open data contests. Then, we study the motivations and goals behind the contests and compare these to the typical impacts and outcomes. We end with lessons learned and some general conclusions and an outlook for the future.

3 Apps Contests Organizers Meetup, 20 September 2012, Helsinki http://waag.org/en/blog/appcontests-towards-sustainable-results

4 Open Knowledge Festival 2012 in Helsinki http://okfestival.org/ 5 AppsForX -email list: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/appsforx 6 Blog post and survey by Antti Poikola http://poikola.f/apps-contests-everywhere/

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 6

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

2 Open data app contests

Open data app contests seem to have diferent ways in which they deliver value to the organisers and participants. They can be fun participants enjoy using their knowledge to resolve a communal problem or are happy to meet each other and be together during hackathons or award ceremonies. They can work towards transparency, catering to civilians and non-governmental organisations. They can facilitate innovation that gives rise to new businesses or other forms of economic activity. They can beneft governmental institutions and civilians who want better government services. They can provide developers with exposure amongst possible future employers or customers. They can beneft students by introducing apps development and open data in realworld settings. The following description on the typical form of contests is based on the survey and discussions with the contest organisers. For those who are planning to organise a similar contest we also recommend the Apps for Democracy guidebook 7 for practical guidance and the well-written report on the Australian GovCamp and CovHack contests8.

2.1 Typical process for organising contests

All contests typically follow a similar process (See Image 2 below). Once somebody, ofen a public body or some committed individuals, decides to hold a contest, they go afer funding and partners. Then the preparation phase starts. During this phase, decisions are taken regarding the rules and regulations that will govern the contest, the length of the contest, the jury, the prize money and, if applicable, the theme of the contest. Sometimes, new data sets are also opened up before the contest.

7 8

http://www.appsfordemocracy.org/guide-to-creating-your-own-apps-for-democracy/ http://www.govcampau.org/report/

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 7

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

Image 2: Typical process for an open data application contest.

The actual contest usually starts with a kick-of event during which details of available resources (data) and rules and regulations are announced. Sometimes this coincides with workshops that enable potential contestants to meet and discuss interesting themes and applications. Then, during the contests, one or more side events may be organised, typically hackathons, where groups are formed and people who want to participate can ask questions. Afer the closing date, a jury will judge the entries and rank the winners. Sometimes, the public is allowed to cast votes too. Then, an award ceremony is organised to declare the winners and put them in the spotlight, most ofen in the presence of some high-ranking government ofcials. And fnally, there is the administrative work: to evaluate the process and the results and, possibly, plan for the next edition.

2.2 Length and form of the contests

Over the years we have seen diferent models of open data app contests popping up. There are short contests or hackathons that last from one to a few days and aim for high energy levels and quick results. They typically yield preliminary applications, demos and prototypes that need a lot of development, afer the contest, to be turned into something useful. Then there are the longer running ones, from one to several months. They tend to look for more elaborate and polished results, and ofen require developers to think about the sustainability of their entries afer the contest. Some experts have noted that the short contests are not as likely to produce applications

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 8

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use that are viable in the long term, but they seem to be a good format for building a civicminded community of activists. 9 In order to get the best of both worlds, hackathons are ofen combined as pre- or side events with a longer running contest.

Image 3: According to the smallscale survey, the most common length for an app contest was three to four months. Peter Robinson from ChallengePost10 commented in interview that two to four months is enough time to produce a fully functional app, but not too long that people would forget the competition or disengage.

Another diference is between the open-ended contests, where developers are free to choose the type of application and intended audience, and the more thematically focused contests, where the desired outcomes are solutions to certain perceived problems or opportunities in a specifc feld. Open contests usually only have requirements for the data sources that should be used or ways that the applications can be licensed, whereas the thematically focused contests work with single themes or a set of predefned issues (e.g. transport, tourism, culture, environment). Typically, if themes are used then there are special prizes for diferent thematic categories. Other award categories are also used, such as ideas, implementation, students, and large organisations.
Table 1: According to the survey and the wider list of contests (Annex I) a litle more than half of the contests were open and the rest had one or more focused themes. The table below gives the most common app contest themes (the number in brackets indicates how many contests had the same theme).

Ofen contests that were started in an open form now have newer editions, with more structure to guide the contestants. This way, data that is specifcally relevant for these themes can be opened up and the results become more comparable, making it easier to select the really good applications.

9 http://blog.programmableweb.com/2011/05/20/the-pros-and-cons-of-government-app-contests/ 10 Online platform and company for open data- and other challenges http://challengepost.com

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 9

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

2.3 Side events

Most contests organise at least one pre- or side event during the contest. Amongst them are: hackathons and developer days during which developers get together to code, either individually or as a group barcamps and open spaces during which the agenda is set, based on the interests of the participants round table meetings, workshops and themed events, bringing together diferent stakeholders to discuss and share ideas bootcamps, consisting of presentations and workshops social events, such as breakfasts for diferent stakeholders (e.g. civil servants) sessions specifcally geared at pitching the idea to potential funders or customers (sometimes referred to as dragons dens)

These side events can be very elaborate, with external speakers, a high production value and lots of media coverage, or they can be small-scale and bottom-up. Many contest organisers also advertise themselves at existing events, to boost the attention and motivate participants and data owners to join the contest. The general opinion among contest organisers seems to be that any kind of side event is an important addition to the longer contest. These events help the participants and other stakeholders to engage and to stay engaged and, therefore, enable the contest to give better results.

2.4 Judging the entries

Typically the contests had three to fve diferent judging criteria for submissions. The criteria were very similar in most of the contests although the exact naming of the criteria varied. The most common category of judging criteria was aimed at evaluating the utility and usability of the applications. This category included criteria such as user benefts and app relevance, appeal, desirability, usefulness, usability and design. The second common category was aimed at evaluating the potential of the applications from a business and feasibility perspective, or asking how scalable the idea is. This category included criteria such as the applications business potential, business model, and business attraction, as well as its potential, scalability, technical feasibility and sustainability. Almost all contests also judged the submissions based on the originality and novelty of the idea.

3 Goals and results

In this chapter, based on the Helsinki meetup discussions and the survey, we compare the goals and motivations behind the contests to the actual impacts and outcomes.

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 10

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

3.1 Goals and motivations behind the contests

Open data contest organisers repeatedly state a few main reasons why a contest was organised. These are boosting the opening up of data and promoting data that are already open; getting applications and enhancing public services; supporting, promoting and activating the developer community; and building connections between diferent kinds of people. Organising an open data contest is supposed to stimulate and motivate data owners to open up their data. The topic is put on the agenda, especially when country or city ofcials act as spokespersons for, and supporters of, the contests, and the public media is involved. This enhanced visibility helps to overcome possible internal and external hurdles to opening up of data. Because of this, ofen, new data are opened up while the contests are running. At the same time, the spotlight is put on new and existing data sets and the repositories that hold them. The target audience typically involves individual coders, small businesses, and schools and universities that can engage students to work on them. This is ofen the case when already available data are generally underused or not used for interesting results. A further motivation for open data contests is the belief that the contests will lead to novel, useful, exciting or inspiring applications for the beneft of citizens. Metaphorically, open data is like crude oil that is waiting for somebody to take it and refne it into apps. The data owner is unable to foresee the turns this will take, and this is presented as a good thing afer all, he is not a developer. The contest can be either open for all kinds of ideas or thematically focused, in which case the desired outcomes are solutions to certain perceived problems or opportunities in a specifc feld. Another reason to set up app contests is to support, activate and promote local developer communities. Ofen developers are not organised very well and have a hard time fnding each other and potential clients. Contests, especially when they are combined with side events (see 2.3), will bring these like-minded people together to work on public issues or private opportunities. The associated prizes and award ceremonies bring them to together and into the limelight, enhancing the probability that later on they will be awarded contracts or be funded as start-up businesses. Lastly, open data app contests are organised to link and build bridges between coders, government ofcials and companies. Developers are ofen seen as far removed from the public good and unft to receive government contracts. The new bridges the contests help to build are seen as potentially fruitful because local talent can be brought in on local projects.

3.2 Most important outcomes and impacts

App contests seem to have a few recurring outcomes and impacts that are ofen mentioned. These are: boosting the opening up of data and promoting already open data; actually getting applications and enhanced public services; supporting, promoting and

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 11

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use activating the developer community; building connections between people with diferent backgrounds and roles; and receiving enhanced visibility. These outcomes are almost the same as the original goals that were aimed at when developing the contest. This indicates success, but also hints that it is hard to look for results beyond what is expected. Boosting the opening up of data is measured by the number of new data sets opened up and by the hard-to-quantify raised awareness of the relevant stakeholders that opening up of data is important. Promoting existing data sets and portals almost comes as a side efect of putting the new data in the spotlight. Another outcome is the actual applications that were developed and the new ideas for improved services that were generated. Most impact seemed to come from new public or city services, whereas commercially successful applications seemed to be rare or were deemed not to have a relevant impact by the contest organisers. This is rather surprising because of the commercial rhetoric that surrounds the open data theme11. The support, promotion and activation of the developer community, ofen alluded to as hackers, are also mentioned. The word hacker still has a negative connotation for many people. One of the outcomes of the contests is that hackers come to be seen as valuable members of society, instead of criminals or activists. The winners are put into the spotlight and sometimes receive even national coverage. Even winning small prizes is found to rightfully boost their egos and motivate them to go on. An of-stated outcome is the building of connections between developers, government ofcials, politicians and businesses. A regular outcome is that some developers make contact with local governments that then start to work with them to build better online city services. Another outcome is that developers start to work with companies towards a sustainable future for the applications. More common, however, is that they start to work at these companies. An interesting result is the formation of groups by individuals from diverse backgrounds around a shared theme, such as culture 12 or healthcare, that then work towards more open data and more active use. Most contests receive a lot of media attention. This can be targeted at the contest in general, highlighting the necessity of open data, at the data that is opened up or the data owners, or at the developers or companies that participate. Mostly, however, it is aimed at the winning applications. This can be due to the fact that the contests are still a relatively new phenomenon, so it is hard to say if this will be a lasting efect.

3.3 Drawbacks and possible problems

More and more app contests have been organised every year and according to the survey the trend seems to continue. The contest organisers we surveyed are either sure that there will be another edition or still in doubt about whether there will be a follow-up. There is just a single no that we know of (the Helsinki Region Mobile Competition, see table 2). This indicates that there is a certain value in the contests that merits the efort of
11 Look for example at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-891_en.htm

12 An example is open cultuurdata, to be found at http://www.opencultuurdata.nl/

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 12

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use continuing. Despite the growing popularity of the app contests, there are certain drawbacks and problems with the current forms of these contests. A problem that is encountered over and over is the sustainability of the resulting applications. The contests work well for the initial proof-of-concept phase, but the supporting structures for taking the ideas forward afer the app contest are currently not very well developed. Another possible problem is that, because there are so many contests and the number of possible participants is small, they might run dry of new ideas and applications. There needs to be collaboration among the contest organisers and capacity building amongst future developers. Furthermore, developers need to f nd sustainable models for themselves, as one cannot make a living by only participating in these contests.

4 Lessons learned
Contest organisers report many lessons learned from the contests that they were involved in. These lessons can be conveniently put into two categories: dos and donts. Although many of the lessons are general and applicable to all contests, there are things that depend on the situation at hand. One of the participants at the Helsinki meetup put it nicely: Diferent aims need diferent approaches. When the goal is to:
When the goal is to: help developers to learn from each other and have a good time enhance transparency of the (local) government stimulate innovation develop better government services profle developers towards potential clients or employers get students ready for an open data future You need to: have a place to meet, small sponsors and a strong community engage NGOs that have this as their core business facilitate incubation and acceleration, and connect to funders and innovative companies ensure committed and powerful problem owners in government involve big sponsors and companies work with schools and universities

Open data contests are said to beneft from clear communication regarding the rules, deadlines, resources (mostly data) and selection process. It is helpful to organise events during the contest where diferent stakeholders, like developers and data owners, meet and get to work together. By associating with existing events, you gain from additional attention, new attendants to the meetings and new participants in the contests. Regarding the incentives: money matters; but dont forget the small prizes that boost participant motivation. Also, think of rewards other than money giving high visibility to the prize-

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 13

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use wining apps or maybe even jobs to their developers. To get sustainable results, experiment with tying the payment of prize money to diferent delivery stages of the applications, that is, the idea, a demonstration, a prototype and the fnal product. Realise from the outset that you compete for the much in demand, but scarce time of the talented to turn your eforts into a success. Therefore, it is important to continuously and vigorously market the contest to all stakeholders, such as data owners, developers, small, medium and large companies, sponsors and politicians. Team up with local or national mass media since they can increase the visibility by a hundred- or thousand-fold. At the same time, use social media and experts in that feld to connect to developers. Market the contest to students in summer or winter schools and to all participants in previous editions of the contest. And never underestimate the power and joy of a T-shirt. Finally, when people show up, encourage participation, react on forums, treat them with respect and make them feel valued. Partner strategically with infuential parties as sponsors and co-organisers from widely diferent sectors, like businesses, local and national NGOs, formal networks, etc. This will not only help to attract funding, to engage participants and to organise the contest in the best possible way, but it will also turn the participants into ambassadors for open data in their respective circles, afer the contest. If present, connect to local developer groups and involve them early on; to make that mutually benefcial, listen well to their needs and desires and cater to these. Keep your strategic partners informed at all times and make good use of their communication channels. Absolutely key is the publication of as much data as possible. If needed, help the data owners to open up data efciently and in the right way. When new data gets released, publish data blogs on their structure and their potential. Try to connect data owners to developers during the contest. This has been very rewarding and has helped both in the opening up of more data and putting them to good use. Formation of groups of data owners and users around certain themes (e.g. culture or healthcare) is a good thing. In the frst edition, start with just a few broad categories to make it easy to participate and to get people used to the idea. Later on, this can be refned. Clear and comprehensive rules and guidelines are important for supporting developers, screening entries for eligibility, and running a fair contest. To stimulate innovation, accept only apps that were developed during the contest. Engagement can be stimulated further by opening up the voting process to the public, although this could give rise to undesired efects (cheating). Since the aim is sustainable results, insist that the entry is accompanied by information about the future of the application. Evaluate both thoroughly. To strengthen the open data community, consider the various ways by which people can help each other. Motivate them to meet, either live or virtually, and to share their capabilities and problems. On the other side, there are certain things to avoid. Avoid commercial presentations, because it is the community that we are building; we are not tendering or commercial marketing. Dont have too many contests running at the same time, as this will confuse

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 14

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use participants, dilute participation and possibly even stop participants from engaging altogether. Be careful about the management of expectations app contests give room for serendipity and cannot guarantee that a certain data set is used or that there will be great solutions to existing problems. Dont use data sets that will not be updated or available afer the contest. Avoid complicated rules and regulations or changing of categories and deadlines. Keep the rules simple and stick to them. Dont underestimate the time and efort it takes to set up and run a good contest that is rewarding to all stakeholders. Finally, dont wait until all is clear before you start it probably never will be. The efect of a wellorganised contest is that it pushes things in the right direction to achieve the desired result.

5 Conclusions
Innovation contests for open data re-use have taken of from 2009. In the context of this report we gathered details of more than 90 diferent contests that ofen have more than one edition. Only a few of them have ofcially stated that there will not be a follow-up, which indicates that the organisers actually found value in them. Although open data contests are quite new, in the past few years we have seen many, and taking into account what we have learned, it is possible to look ahead. Based on the questionnaire and interviews, we have come up with some predictions. Open data app contests will be valued in terms of getting people together and collecting initial ideas and prototypes; opening up data for citizens; developing start-ups and catering for growth and jobs. These contests might play a role in developing new services for citizens and enterprises; discovering great ideas, new talent, and new solutions to old problems; and promoting new opportunities for interacting with the data, and the government as a platform model13 for sharing resources and providing services. In order to overcome the sustainability problem of the resulting applications, the incentives that are provided for the developers need to be changed. We have to learn from successful incubating eforts how to streamline this process and how to go from a good idea to a sustainable business. Another way is for (local) governments and NGOs to become launching customers or clients, directing their IT eforts from large-scale contracts with multinationals to local developer talent. Lastly, the market for apps will have to grow by standardization, making it easier for the same applications to be used in other cities and countries. We will see a broad mix of diferent kinds of contests. Some of them will be tailored more towards commercially ready end-products. Sometimes they will take the form of a single hackathon; at other times, they will be challenges of a longer duration that are directed at providing solutions in certain problem areas or to specifc problems and needs. Some say the existing contests will fade away and give rise to more serious and enduring collaborations between data owners, developers and start-ups. Sustainability will be further enhanced by involving public institutions and big business. The growth of open data will continue to provide new resources for developers. The value 13 http://ofps.oreilly.com/titles/9780596804350/defning_government_2_0_lessons_learned_.html

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 15

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use open data brings will increase greatly when government and public organisations continue to move towards a platform model that invites third-party sofware developers to help in enhancing products and services. Finally, we will see new trends like big data, the internet of things and augmented reality enter the contest categories, ofering more opportunities to amaze the public on what is possible and needed. But whatever happens, open data contests have served a clear purpose. They have helped to set the topic of open data on the agenda of governments and companies, making it hard to dismiss as something marginal or optional. Many (semi) governmental organisations are now grappling with opening up of data and revising their business models as their former revenue models locking up data and charging for it become obsolete 14. We think this is a good thing and will in the end beneft all of us. These are positive outcomes that will beneft all.

List of annexes
I. List of open government data app contests II. App contests survey and summary of answers to the numeric questions

About the authors

Antti Poikola (1979) is an independent consultant at HILA Open Ltd and a team member of the ePSIplatform. Before becoming a full-time entrepreneur he worked as a researcher in media technology at Aalto University. Antti is active and widely connected in eParticipation and open data movements in Europe. He was the main author of the guidebook: Public data an introduction to opening the information resources, which was published by the Finnish Ministry of Transport and Communications 2010. Antti coordinated the frst Finnish open data contest, Apps for Finland 2009. Frank Kresin (1972) has been Programme Manager at Waag Society since 2006, and from 2009 holds the position of Research Director. He is responsible for programme and project development in the felds of creative healthcare, applications for society and e-culture, the public domain and education. Frank has a background in flm making and holds a masters degree in artifcial intelligence. His interests are in the application of technology for social innovation, knowledge management and empowerment by means of new media. Frank coinitiated Apps for Amsterdam, Apps for Holland and Apps for Europe and participates in the EU programs Commons for Europe, Code for Europe and COLLAGE. More information can be found at http://waag.org/en/person/frank

Copyright information
2012 European PSI Platform. This document and all material therein have been compiled with great care. However, the author, editor and/or publisher and/or any party within the European PSI Platform or its predecessor projects the ePSIplus Network project or ePSINet
14 http://policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/a%20right%20to%20data%20-%20mar %2012.pdf

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 16

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use consortium cannot be held liable in any way for the consequences of using the content of this document and/or any material referenced therein. This report has been published under the auspices of the European Public Sector Information Platform.

The report may be reproduced providing acknowledgement is made to the European Public Sector Information (PSI) Platform. The European Public Sector Information (PSI) Platform is funded under the European Commission eContentplus programme.

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 17

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use I. List of open government data app contests

Contest Name/Link

Years 2010, 2011, 2012 2012 2012 2012 2010 2011 2009 2012 2012 2012 2009, 2010 2012 2011, 2012 2010 2012 2011 2012 2010 2013, 2014 2011 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 2011 2012 2012 2012 2011, 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012

Country/ International region Africa Argentina Chile Uruguay Australia Australia Australia Australia Austria Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium Canada Canada Canada Canada & US Denmark Europe Europe Finland Finland France France France France France France France France France France

City/Region

Level

Organisation

Themes

Apps for Africa Buenos Aires Apps Codeando por Chile DateIdea App My State - Victoria Apps for New South Wales Mashup Australia GovHack Apps4Linz Apps for Antwerp Apps for Democracy Belgium Apps for Flanders Apps for Ghent Apps 4 Edmonton London Open Data Budget App Contest Ottawa Open Data App Contest The MintChip Challenge Digital Solutions based on Government Data Apps for Europe Open Data Challenge Apps for Finland HSL Mobiilikisa Bemyapp Concours Open Data 71 Concours Trophes Agenda 21 Dataconnexions Dfi Numrique Toulouse Mtropole Montpellier innovation Nantes, rendez-moi la ville plus facile Open App Les Hack Days Transilien Le Hackathon des cheminots

City of Buenos Aires Chile Uruguay Victoria New South Wales Linz Antwerp Flanders Ghent Edmonton London Ottawa Helsinki Dpartement de Sane et Loire Dpartement of Gironde Paris Toulouse Montpellier Nantes France France France

international local national national regional regional national national local local national local local local local local international national international international national local national regional regional national national regional local national national national

? Local government National government National government ? State Department of Finance and Services ? ? City of Linz OKFN Belgium/City of Antwerp/Digipolis ? OKFN Belgium OKFNbe/Ghent Living Lab/City of Ghent ? City of London & UnLondon ? Royal Canadian Mint ? Waag Society & 18 other parties ? Forum Virium Helsinki Helsinki Region Transport Authority Bemyapp Dpartement de Sane et Loire Dpartement de Gironde Etalab Toulouse Mtropole Montpellier Nantes Mtropole SNCF SNCF SNCF

tourism, education, transport, environment education, health, transport, budget, community budget digital currency, payments transport tourism tourism sustainable development transport, information transport transport transport

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 18

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

Country/ International region France France France France France France Germany Global Global Global Italy Italy Kosovo Netherlands Netherlands Netherlands

Contest Name/Link

Years

City/Region

Level

Organisation CCI Marseille Provence La Rochelle Rennes Mtropole Grand Toulouse Department LoireAtlantique Voxe.org Open Knowledge Foundation Deutschland World Bank World Bank NASA ? Regione Lombardia IPKO Foundation ? ? Kennisland Regional government, Waag Society & Hack de Overheid National government & Waag Society Kennisland, Netherlands Institute for Sound & Vision ? ? Informal alliance of local companies Mid Sweden University City of Stockholm Swedish National Heritage Board Viktoria Institute Martin Svalin ? rebro municipality West Sweden Royal Institute of Technology Hyper Island Psykologifabriken and Hoas Tool Shop Open Data Institute

Themes

Open Data awards Pulp Rennes Mtropole en Accs Libre Toulouse, Dfiez les donnes ouvertes Upload Hack the Elections Apps fr Deutschland Apps for Climate Apps for Development International Space Apps Challenge Apps for Italy OpenApp Lombardia App Camp Kosova Apps for Amsterdam Apps for the Planet Open Culture Data Competition Apps for Noord-Holland

2013 2013 2011 2012 2012 2012 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2011, 2012 2012 2011, 2012

Region PACA La Rochelle Rennes Toulouse Department LoireAtlantique Lombardia Amsterdam Amsterdam -

regional local local regional regional national national international international international national local national local regional national

culture, tourism transport politics

climate development space science news, culture, tourism, economy, entertainment environment culture

2011

Netherlands

Noord-Holland

regional

Apps for the Netherlands Open Cultuur Data competitie Nettskap 2.0 Apps for Russia Hack VT Appening Open Stockholm Award Hack4Europe Travelhack Codemocracy Fajk ppna rebro Ln Turisthack Green Hackathon Data Hack Fest Health Hack Days Open Data Institute

2011, 2012 2012 2010 2012 2012 2011 2012 2011 2011 2010 2012 2012 2012 2011 2012 2012 2012

Netherlands Netherlands Norway Russia US Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden UK

State of Vermont Stockholm rebro London

national national national national regional national local international national national national regional national national, international national international national

culture -

mobile apps mobility, environment, smart city, ideas culture transport transparency transparency, journalism transparency tourism environment general health health, midata

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 19

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use

Country/ International region UK

Contest Name/Link

Years

City/Region

Level

Organisation

Themes

Show Us a Better Way

2008 2010, 2011, 2012 2008, 2009 2010 2010 2010 2008, 2009 2010 2010 2010 2010 2009 2009 2009, 2010, 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011 2011

national

community, community, collaborative consumption army climate environment health inclusion transport education financial literacy employment education, public safety energy homelessness job creation, business health business preventing abuse and violence community health health open internet transport

Transformed by You

UK

Kent

regional

Kent County Council

Apps for America Apps for Army Apps for Californians Apps for Climate Action Apps for Democracy DC Apps for Environment Apps for Healthy Kids Apps for Inclusion Civic Apps for Greater Portland Area Data SF Challenge MassDOT Developers New York Big Apps AT&T San Diego Apps Challenge Equal Futures App Challenge MyMoneyAppUp Disability Employment App Challenge DOL Worker Safety and Health App Challenge Apps for Energy Project REACH Mobile App Challenge Commerce Business Apps Challenge US Surgeon General's Health Apps Challenge Apps for Entrepreneurs Apps Against Abuse Apps for Communities CDC Flu App Challenge SMART Apps for Health FCC Open Internet Apps Challenge MTA App Quest

US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US

California Washington DC Portland San Francisco Massachusetts New York San Diego New York State

national national local national local national national national local local local local local national national national national national national national national national national national national national national local

Sunlight Foundation ? ? ? ? US Environmental Protection Agency US Department of Agriculture; Let's Move! initiative ? ? ? ? City of New York City of San Diego White House Council on Women and Girls U.S. Department of the Treasury U.S. Department of Labor U.S. Department of Labor U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Small Business Administration U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Federal Communication Commission U.S. Center for Disease Control U.S. Department of Health and Human Services U.S. Federal Communication Commission NY State Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA)

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 20

Innovation Contests for Open Data Re-use II. App contests survey and summary of answers to the numeric questions
Table 1: Questions in the survey. *See Table 2 for the summary of answers to the closed/multiple choice questions. **Results to the open questions were interpreted and included in the report.

13 *

Rules and Organisation

What was the total prize money (if any) or other incentives used in the last edition of the contest?

19 **

Lessons learned and future plans

What are your plans for the next edition (if any)/things you want to resolve and maybe need help with?

Table 2: Summarized answers to the closed/multiple choice questions in the survey.

Name of the contest Years No. of entries Total prize money () Contest length (months) Next edition No. of side Themes events

Apps for Finland

2012, 2011, 2010, 2009

120

20000

5+

maybe

yes

Apps4nsw

2012, 2011, 2010, 2009

120

16200

1-2

yes

yes

ePSIplatform Topic Report No: 2012 / 08

August 2012

Page 21