The GovLab Index

indexheaderbig

The GovLab Index brings you to the latest statistics related to open governance,  as inspired by  Harper’s indexClick here to contribute to the new GovLab Index by suggesting additional stats and numerical summaries. The GovLab Indexes to-date are as follows:

    The GovLab Index: Crime and Criminal Justice Data

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by Harper’s Index.

    Previous installments of the Index include Prizes and Challenges, Measuring Impact with Evidence, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions.

    “The GovLab Index: Crime and Criminal Data” provides information about the type of crime and criminal justice data collected, shared and used in the United States. Because it is well known that data related to the criminal justice system is often times unreliable, or just plain missing, this index also highlights some of the issues that stand in the way of accessing useful and in-demand statistics.

    Please share any additional statistics and research findings on the use of data within the criminal justice system with us by emailing Ryan at thegovlab.org.

    Data Collections: National Crime Statistics

    • Number of incident-based crime datasets created by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): 2
    • Number of years the National Incident Based Reporting System has been in use and has supposed to have replaced the UCR: 28
    • Number of U.S. Statistical Agencies: 13
    • How many of those are focused on criminal justice: 1, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
    • Number of data collections focused on criminal justice the BJS produces: 61
    • Number of federal-level APIs available for crime or criminal justice data: 1, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS).
    • Frequency of the NCVS: annually
    • Number of Statistical Analysis Centers (SACs), organizations that are essentially clearinghouses for crime and criminal justice data for each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands: 53

    Open data, data use and the impact of those efforts

    • Number of datasets that are returned when “criminal justice” is searched for on Data.gov: 417, including federal-, state- and city-level datasets
    • Number of datasets that are returned when “crime” is searched for on Data.gov: 281
    • The percentage that public complaints dropped after officers started wearing body cameras, according to a study done in Rialto, Calif.: 88
    • The percentage that reported incidents of officer use of force fell after officers started wearing body cameras, according to a study done in Rialto, Calif.: 5
    • The percent that crime decreased during an experiment in predictive policing in Shreveport, LA: 35  
    • Number of crime data sets made available by the Seattle Police Department – generally seen as a leader in police data innovation – on the Seattle.gov website: 4:
      • Major crime stats by category in aggregate
      • Crime trend reports
      • Precinct data by beat
      • State sex offender database
    • Number of datasets mapped by the Seattle Police Department: 2:
      • 911 incidents
      • Police reports
    • The year the Tiahart Amendment prevented a firearms trace database from being made public: 2003  
    • Number of states where risk assessment tools must be used in pretrial proceedings to help determine whether an offender is released from jail before a trial: at least 11.

    Police Data

    • Number of federally mandated databases that collect information about officer use of force or officer involved shootings, nationwide: 0
    • The year a crime bill was passed that called for data on excessive force to be collected for research and statistical purposes, but has never been funded: 1994
    • Number of police departments that committed to being a part of the White House’s Police Data Initiative: 21
    • Percentage of police departments surveyed in 2013 by the Office of Community Oriented Policing within the Department of Justice that are not using body cameras, therefore not collecting body camera data: 75
    • Number of state and local law enforcement agencies in the United States – each generating data separately – according to the most recent law enforcement agency census conducted by the BJS: 17,985

    The criminal justice system

    • Parts of the criminal justice system where data about an individual can be created or collected: at least 6
      • Entry into the system (arrest)
      • Prosecution and pretrial
      • Sentencing
      • Corrections
      • probation/parole
      • recidivism

    Sources

    The GovLab Index: Open Data (Updated)

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index: Open Data” provides an update on our previous Open Data installment, and highlights global trends in Open Data and the release of public sector information.

    Previous installments of the Index include Prizes and Challenges, Measuring Impact with Evidence, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions. Please share any additional statistics and research findings on the intersection of technology in governance with us by emailing shruti at thegovlab.org.

    Value and Impact

    Public Views on and Use of Open Government Data in the US

    • Percentage of Americans who have “used the internet to find data or information pertaining to government”: 65%
    • How many Americans think the federal government shares data very or somewhat effectively with the public: 44%
    • How many Americans “could think of an example where local government did not provide enough useful information about data and information to the public”: 19%
    • Percentage of Americans who have “used government sources to find information about student or teacher performance”: 20%
      • Those who have used government sources “to look for information on the performance of hospitals or health care providers”: 17%
      • To find out about contracts between governmental agencies and external firms: 7%

    Efforts and Involvement

    • Number of U.S. based companies identified by the GovLab that use government data in innovative ways: 500+
    • Number of Mexican companies and NGOs being identified by the GovLab and the Federal Government of Mexico that use open government data: 100
    • Number of open data initiatives worldwide in 2009: 2
      • Number of open data initiatives worldwide in 2013: over 300
    • Number of open government data portals worldwide in 2015: nearly 400
    • Number of cities globally that participated in 2015 International Open Data Hackathon Day: 222, up from 102 in 2013
    • Number of countries with Open Data sites in 2015 according to data.gov: 45
      • Number of U.S. cities with Open Data Sites in 2015: 46
      • U.S. states with open data initiatives in 2015: 39
    • Membership growth in the Open Government Partnership from launch in 2011 until 2015: from 8 to 65 countries
    • Number of time series indicators (GDP, foreign direct investment, life expectancy, internet users, etc.) in the World Bank Open Data Catalog: over 8,000
    • Number of countries surveyed by the Open Data Barometer in 2015: 86, up from 77 in 2013
    • How many of the 86 countries in the Barometer publish data on government spending in 2015: 8%
      • On government contracts: 6%
      • On ownership of companies: 3%
      • On performance of health services: 7%
      • On performance of education services: 12%
    • How many of the 1,290 datasets surveyed for the Barometer met the criteria of being truly open: 10%, up from 7% in 2013
    • How many of 77 countries surveyed by the Open Data Barometer have some form of Open Government Data Initiative in 2013: over 55%
      • How many Open Government Data initiatives have dedicated resources with senior level political backing: over 25%
    • How many countries are listed in the Global Open Data Index in 2015: 97, up from 60 in 2013
      • How many of the 970 key datasets in the Index are open in 2015: 106, up from 87 in 2013
      • Top three countries in the Global Open Data Index ranking in 2014: United Kingdom, Denmark, France
        • Ranking of the US in 2014: 8th, down from 2nd in 2013
    • The different levels of Open Data Certificates a data user or publisher can achieve “along the way to world-class open data”: 4 levels, Raw, Pilot, Standard and Expert
    • The number of data ecosystems categories identified by the OECD: 3, data producers, infomediaries, and users
    • Number of stories about the impact of open data crowdsourced by the Sunlight Foundation in May 2015: over 140

    Examining Datasets

    • How many datasets have been made open by governments worldwide: more than 1 million
    • Number of datasets on the U.S. site data.gov in May 2015: 132,088
    • How many released key datasets are truly open for re-use and can be used to hold government accountable, stimulate enterprise, and promote better social policy: fewer than 1 in 10
    • Percentage of datasets published in both machine-readable forms and under open licenses: less than 7%
    • Number of datasets on the Australian government’s open data website that were found to be unusable: one-third
    • Out of 23 countries surveyed by Capgemini, those who share comprehensive data that includes both breadth and granularity: 22%
      • Those who lacked enhanced search capabilities: over 60%
      • Countries who share data that is not regularly updated: 96%
      • Those who are not utilizing user participation capabilities: 87%
      • Average score of evidence of impact in 43 countries with some form of open data policy: 1.7 out of 10
      • Percentage of impact questions for which no evidence could be found: 45%

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: Prizes and Challenges

    Please find below the latest installment in the GovLab Index series, inspired by Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index: Prizes and Challenges” highlights recent findings about two key techniques in shifting innovation from institutions to the general public:

    • Prize-Induced Contests – using monetary rewards to incentivize individuals and other entities to develop solutions to public problems; and
    • Grand Challenges – posing large, audacious goals to the public to spur collaborative, non-governmental efforts to solve them.

    You can read more about Governing through Prizes and Challenges here. You can also watch Alph Bingham, co-founder of Innocentive, answer the GovLab’s questions about challenge authoring and defining the problem here.

    Previous installments of the Index include Measuring Impact with Evidence, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions. Please share any additional statistics and research findings on the intersection of technology in governance with us by emailing shruti at thegovlab.org.

    Prize-Induced Contests

    • Year the British Government introduced the Longitude Prize, one of the first instances of prizes by government to spur innovation: 1714
    • President Obama calls on “all agencies to increase their use of prizes to address some of our Nation’s most pressing challenges” in his Strategy for American Innovation: September 2009
    • The US Office of Management and Budget issues “a policy framework to guide agencies in using prizes to mobilize American ingenuity and advance their respective core missions”:  March 2010
    • Launch of Challenge.gov, “a one-stop shop where entrepreneurs and citizen solvers can find public-sector prize competitions”: September 2010
      • Number of competitions currently live on Challenge.gov in February 2015: 22 of 399 total
      • How many competitions on Challenge.gov are for $1 million or above: 23
    • The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act is introduced, which grants “all Federal agencies authority to conduct prize competitions to spur innovation, solve tough problems, and advance their core missions”: 2010
    • Value of prizes authorized by COMPETES: prizes up to $50 million
    • Fact Sheet and Frequently Asked Questions memorandum issued by the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Office of Management and Budget to aid agencies to take advantage of authorities in COMPETES: August 2011
    • Number of prize competitions run by the Federal government from 2010 to April 2012: 150
    • How many Federal agencies have run prize competitions by 2012: 40
    • Prior to 1991, the percentage of prize money that recognized prior achievements according to an analysis by McKinsey and Company: 97%
      • Since 1991, percentage of new prize money that “has been dedicated to inducement-style prizes that focus on achieving a specific, future goal”: 78%
    • Value of the prize sector as estimated by McKinsey in 2009: $1-2 billion
    • Growth rate of the total value of new prizes: 18% annually
    • Growth rate in charitable giving in the US: 2.5% annually
    • Value of the first Horizon Prize awarded in 2014 by the European Commission to German biopharmaceutical company CureVac GmbH “for progress towards a novel technology to bring life-saving vaccines to people across the planet in safe and affordable ways”: €2 million
    • Number of solvers registered on InnoCentive, a crowdsourcing company: 355,000+ from nearly 200 countries
      • Total Challenges Posted: 2,000+ External Challenges
      • Total Solution Submissions: 40,000+
      • Value of the awards: $5,000 to $1+ million
      • Success Rate for premium challenges: 85%

    Grand Challenges

    • Value of the Progressive Insurance Automotive X Prize, sponsored in part by DOE to develop production-capable super fuel-efficient vehicles: $10 million
      • Number of teams around the world who took part in the challenge “to develop a new generation of technologies” for production-capable super fuel-efficient vehicles: 111 teams
    • Time it took for the Air Force Research Laboratory to receive a workable solution on “a problem that had vexed military security forces and civilian police for years” by opening the challenge to the world: 60 days
    • Value of the HHS Investing in Innovation initiative to spur innovation in Health IT, launched under the new COMPETES act: $5 million program
    • Number of responses received by NASA for its Asteroid Grand Challenge RFI which seeks to identify and address all asteroid threats to the human population: over 400
    • The decreased cost of sequencing a single human genome as a result of the Human Genome Project Grand Challenge: $7000 from $100 million
    • Amount the Human Genome Project Grand Challenge has contributed to the US economy for every $1 invested by the US federal government: $141 for every $1 invested
    • The amount of funding for research available for the “Brain Initiative,” a collaboration between the National Institute of Health, DARPA and the National Science Foundation, which seeks to uncover new prevention and treatment methods for brain disorders like Alzheimer’s, autism and schizophrenia: $100 million
    • Total amount offered in cash awards by the Department of Energy’s “SunShot Grand Challenge,” which seeks to eliminate the cost disparity between solar energy and coal by the end of the decade: $10 million

    Sources

    The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Access (Infrastructure)

    Please find below the latest installment of the GovLab Index on Internet Governance, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “Internet Governance — Access (Infrastructure)” is part of a series of Indexes that focus on the five main areas within Internet Governance: access, content, code, trust, and trade. This edition focuses on infrastructural aspects of Internet access and connectivity. Previous installments in the series include Access (Net Neutrality), Code, Content, Trade, and Trust. Please share any additional statistics and research findings with us by emailing shruti at thegovlab.org.

    Internet Access

    Broadband in the United States

    • National average speed for Internet connections in the US: 31.85 Mbps
    • Most common household connection type in the United States in 2013: cable modem (42.8%)
      • Percentage of households with DSL connections: 21.2%
      • Households that reported using only a dial-up connection: 1%
    • Percentage of Americans who lack access to 25Mbps/3Mbps: 17% or 55 million
      • How many rural Americans lack access to 25Mbps/3Mbps: 53% or 22 million
      • How many urban Americans lack access to 25Mbps/3Mbps: 8%
    • Amount the broadband gap closed in 2014: 3%
    • Broadband as currently defined by the US Federal Communication Commission (FCC): 4 Mbps down, 1 Mbps up
    • Definition of broadband being proposed by Tom Wheeler, Chairman of the FCC, in January 2015: 25 Mbps down,  3 Mbps up

    Fiber Optics

    Sources

    The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Trust

    Please find below the latest installment of the GovLab Index on Internet Governance, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “Internet Governance — Trust” is part of a series of Indexes that focus on the five main areas within Internet Governance: access, content, code, trust, and trade. This edition on Trust examines cybercrime, cybersecurity and preparedness. Previous installments in the series include AccessCode, Content, and Trade

    Also see the GovLab’s Selected Readings on Mapping the Internet Governance Ecosystem for an overview of the actors, processes, and challenges relating to Internet governance.

    Economic Impact

    • Estimated cost of cybercrime to the global economy: $400 billion
    • Countries with the highest levels of cybercrime relative to gross domestic product (GDP): Germany (1.6%) and Netherlands (1.5%)
      • Level of cybercrime in the U.S. relative to GDP: 0.64%
      • In China: 0.63%
    • Cost of cybercrime in terms of percentage of global GDP: 0.8%
      • In comparison, cost of the global drug trade in terms of global GDP: 0.9%
    • Losses from cybercrime could cost as many as 200,000 American jobs, roughly a third of 1% decrease in employment for the US.
    • Amount reported as lost by a British company from a single attack in 2013: $1.3 billion
    • Amount lost by two banks in the Persian Gulf in an attack spanning a few hours in 2013: $45 million
    • How many US organizations lost $1 million or more due to cybercrime incidents in 2013: 7%
      • How many global organizations reported the same loss: 3%

    Number of Cyber Attacks

    • How many people in the U.S. had their personal information stolen in 2013: 40 million
    • Number of companies that were notified by the US government that they had been hacked in 2013: 3,000
    • Number of US households affected by a cybersecurity attack on JP Morgan bank in 2014: 76 million
    • Number of credit card numbers stolen by cybercriminals from Target in March 2014: 40 million, with an additional 70 million compromised
    • How many respondents to the US State of Cybercrime Survey reported detecting a security breach in the past 12 months: 3 in 4
      • Those who were more concerned about cybersecurity threats this year than in the past: 59%
    • Number of significant cyber attacks since 2006, understood as “successful attacks on government agencies, defense and high tech companies, or economic crimes with losses of more than a million dollars” according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies: 155

    Security and Preparedness

    • When the 28 countries in NATO made an agreement that a cyberattack on any NATO member could trigger a collective response from all its allies: September 2014
    • How many respondents from PriceWaterhouse Cooper’s Annual Global CEO survey reported that they were worried about the impact of cyber threats to their growth prospects: 49%
      • Percentage of CEOs in the US who reported the same concern: 69%
    • How many executives from financial institutions surveyed believe that cybersecurity is a strategic risk for their companies: 70%
    • Number of large companies across industries and geographies surveyed that stated having “nascent” or “developing” risk-management capabilities: 90%
    • How many companies were rated “mature” across practice areas studied: 5%
    • Percentage of companies where security concerns had delayed the adoption of public cloud computing by a year or more: 70%
    • How many global companies with high performing security practices “collaborate with others to deepen their knowledge of security and threat trends”: 82%
    • How many US organizations surveyed who had suffered a cybersecurity breach could not identify the source of the attack: 26%
      • Those that cite the culprit to be outside actors such as hackers: 72%
      • How many respondents point to “insiders” such as former or current employees, service providers and contractors as the source of breaches: 28%
      • How many organizations reported having a plan to respond to insider threats: 49%
      • Those that have a mobile security strategy: 31%
      • How many encrypt mobile devices: 38%
      • Median maximum amount that US banking and finance organizations invest in cybersecurity: $2,500 per employee
      • Median maximum amount that US retail and consumer products organizations invest in cybersecurity: $400 per employee
      • How many respondents have hired a Chief Security Officer or Chief Information Security Officer: 28%

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Trade

    Please find below the latest installment of the GovLab Index on Internet Governance, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “Internet Governance — Trade” is part of a series of Indexes that focus on the five main areas within Internet Governance: access, content, code, trust, and trade. This edition focuses on digital cross border trade and cryptocurrencies. Previous installments in the series include Internet Governance — Code, Internet Governance — Content and Internet Governance — Access.

    Digital Cross Border Trade

    Cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin

    Activity and Usage

    • The price, or value, of a Bitcoin as of Sept 17, 2014: $455 USD
    • Total number of Bitcoins: 13,266,474
    • How many Bitcoin transactions are made on average per hour: 3,219
    • Value of the average Bitcoin transaction: $2,635 USD

    Comparison with other payment systems

    Beliefs and Attitudes

    • Percentage of US adults surveyed who were not familiar with Bitcoin in January 2014: 76%
    • How many US adults have never and would never consider using an alternative form of currency like Bitcoin: 79%
      • How many would rather own gold than Bitcoin: 80%
      • Those who believe that Bitcoin hurts the US dollar: 38%

    Sources

    The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Code

    Please find below the latest installment of the GovLab Index on Internet Governance, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “Internet Governance — Code” is part of a series of Indexes that focus on the five main areas within Internet Governance: access, content, code, trust, and trade. This edition focuses on the IPv4 to IPv6 transition and the introduction of new generic top level domains (gTLDs). Previous installments include Internet Governance — Content and Internet Governance — Access.

    IPv4 to IPv6 Transition

    • How many bits are in an IPv4 address: 32 bits
    • Number of Internet addresses possible with IPv4: 4.3 billion
    • How many bits are in an IPv6 address: 128 bits
    • Number of Internet addresses possible with IPv6: 340 undecillion (3.4 × 1038) addresses
    • Year in which the Internet Society first organized World IPv6 Day, a coordinated 24-hour “test flight” that helped demonstrate major websites around the world are well positioned for the move to an IPv6 world: 2011
    • Percentage of users who access Google using IPv6 in September 2014: 4.5%
    • IPv6 deployment in the USA: 32%
    • Highest IPv6 deployment in Asia and Oceania: Japan, 30%
      • Deployment in China: 6.5%
      • Deployment in India: 21%
    • Highest IPv6 deployment in Europe: Belgium, 47%
    • Highest IPv6 deployment in South America: Peru, 25%
    • Highest IPv6 deployment in Africa: Tunisia, 23%
    • How many Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) exist to provide number resource allocation and registration services that support the global operation of the Internet: 5

    New gTLDs

    • How many generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) existed in 2012 (including .com, .org, etc.): 22
    • How many country-specific TLDs exist today (including .de, .nl, and .co.uk): 295
    • Number of applications for new gTLDs submitted to ICANN as of July 2014: 1930
      • Those in North America: 911
      • Europe: 675
      • Asia Pacific: 303
      • South America: 24
      • Africa: 17
    • Evaluation fee paid to ICANN to apply for a new gTLD: $185,000
    • How many new gTLD applications have been “delegated”, i.e., introduced into the Internet as of 29 Aug 2014: 378
      • How many applications have been withdrawn: 238
      • How many are pending string contention resolution: 479
    • Top five new gTLDs as of September 08, 2014:
      • .xyz (481,774 registrations, 22% of total)
      • .berlin (138,577 registrations, 6% of total)
      • .club (103,429 registrations, 4% of total)
      • .guru (70,351 registrations, 3% of total)
      • .wang (64,180 registrations, 2.9% of total)
    • Biggest selling Internationalized Domain Name (IDN): .在线 (.online) (35,849 registrations)

    Registrations

    • Number of marketers surveyed in the U.S. who said new gTLDs would make the Internet confusing: 75%
      • How many total U.S. respondents espoused this view: 50%
      • How many respondents globally espoused this view: 43%

    Sources

    The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Content

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Content” is part of a series of Indexes that focus on the five main areas within Internet Governance: access, content, code, trust, and trade. This edition highlights public sentiment and information on freedom of expression and censorship online. This Index examines various types of online censorship: technical blocking, search result removals, takedown, and self-censorship. Previous installments include Internet Governance — AccessMeasuring Impact with EvidenceOpen Data, The Data UniverseParticipation and Civic Engagement, and Trust in Institutions.

    Public Sentiment

    • Percentage of Internet users surveyed in 6 countries (USA, Mexico, Pakistan, Sweden, Egypt, and Thailand) who have felt hesitant expressing opinions on the Internet: 68%
      • How many of those concerned say it has a direct effect on their online behavior: 90%
      • Those who state freedom of speech online is not important: 8%
    • Percentage of Internet users surveyed who say it is acceptable to censor or block:
      • personal threats online: 80%
      • bullying: 79%
      • information that can compromise national security: 79%
      • pornographic content: 78%
      • slander: 76%
      • racist content: 70%
      • sexist content: 67%
      • religious criticism: 47%
      • criticism against government/state: 32%
    • How many of the 24 emerging and developing economies surveyed have a majority opinion that it is important that people have access to the internet without government censorship: 22 countries
    • Demographic that is most likely to call for Internet freedom without government censorship: 18-29 year olds
    • Correlation between support for Internet freedom and Internet usage: 0.76, higher usage correlates with higher support

    Censorship Country Overview

    • Of the 60 countries assessed, how many have experienced a negative trajectory in terms of Internet Freedom between 2012 and 2013: 34, including Vietnam and Venezuela
      • How many countries experienced a positive trajectory: 16, including Tunisia and Rwanda
    • Most commonly used types of Internet control in 60 countries according to Freedom on the Net 2013 Report:
      • blocking and filtering (29 countries including China and Iran)
      • cyberattacks against regime critics (examples: Bahrain and Belarus)
      • new laws and arrests (examples: Turkey and Bangladesh)
      • paid pro-government commentators (22 countries including Russia and Malaysia)
      • physical attacks and murder (26 countries including Egypt and Mexico)
      • surveillance
      • takedown requests and forced deletion (examples: Russia and Azerbaijan)
      • blanket blocking of social media and other ICT platforms (19 countries including Lebanon and Ethiopia)
      • holding intermediaries liable (22 countries including China and Brazil)
      • throttling or shutting down Internet and mobile services (examples: Egypt and Syria)

    Take Down

    • Number of content removal requests submitted to Twitter from government agencies, police and courts in the first half of 2013: 60
    • How many content removal requests submitted in the first half of 2014: 432
    • Number of information requests received by Twitter in the first half of 2014: 2,058
    • How many times the U.S. government submitted user information requests to Twitter in the first half of 2014: 1,257 user information requests, 61% of all requests received
    • When Facebook began publishing Transparency reports about data requests made by government and law enforcement agencies: June 2013, in the wake of the NSA leak
    • Number of US law enforcement requests received by Facebook in the second half of 2013: 12,598 requests for information about 18,715 users
      • Percentage of requests for which Facebook produced some data: 81%

    Self-Censorship

    • How many American adults surveyed who said they would be willing to discuss their views about government surveillance if it came up at various in-person scenarios, such as at a public meeting, at work or at a restaurant with friends: 86%
    • How many Facebook or Twitter users surveyed said they would be willing to post online about it: 42%
    • Percentage of Americans surveyed who are unwilling to discuss the Snowden case with others in person: 14%
    • How many of the remaining 14 percent of Americans who didn’t want to discuss Snowden in person were willing to discuss it on social media: 0.3%

    Search Result Removals

    • When the “Right to be Forgotten” was instituted in the European Union: May 2014
    • Number of Right to be Forgotten requests Google has received to remove links between May and July: over 91,000
      • Number of web pages involved: more than 328,000
      • Percentage of requests that are granted on the first application: 53%
    • Most popular types of right to be forgotten requests submitted to Google as of June 2014: Invasion of privacy (28%), Defamation and insult (19%)
    • Most common reason for right to be forgotten requests within the “invasion of privacy” category: disclosure of home address (22%)
    • How many people submitted right to be forgotten requests within the “defamation and insult” category with the reason that their names have “been mentioned in matters which I am completely extraneous to”: 43%, most common reason
    • Number of requests from governments to remove content received by Google globally in the first half of 2013: 3,846
      • Number of items requested to be removed: 24,737
      • Number of requests from Turkish authorities: 1,673
        • How many Turkish requests called for the removal of content related to alleged violations of law 5651, which regulates crimes committed via the Internet: two-thirds
    • Top reasons given for government requests for content removal to Google since July 2010: defamation (35%), privacy and security (14%), adult content (13%)

    Technical Blocking

    Sources

    The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Access

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by the Harpers Index. “The GovLab Index on Internet Governance — Access” is the first in a series of Indexes that focus on the five main areas within Internet Governance: access, code, content, trust, and trade. This edition highlights events and public sentiment on net neutrality. Previous installments of the Index include Measuring Impact with Evidence, Open Data, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions.

    Also see the GovLab’s Selected Readings on Mapping the Internet Governance Ecosystem for an overview of the actors, processes, and challenges relating to Internet governance. 

    • Percent of the U.S. population that has access to two or fewer cable broadband providers: 96%
    • Increase in average speed of streaming on the Comcast Network for Netflix after the streaming company paid for a direction connection to the ISP: 65%
    • Percent of U.S. Internet users who would switch to another service provider if their ISP violated network neutrality: 71%
      • Those who would complain to the ISP: 70%
      • How many would complain to Congress/FCC: 46%
    • Number of Americans surveyed who stated that government should not allow paid prioritization deals: 58%
    • How many times television news programs covered net neutrality between January 1 and May 12 of 2014: 25 times, less than 1% of all programs reviewed
    • When did Chile adopt the first ever network neutrality law: in 2010
    • When the “Marco Civil,” the first Internet Bill of Rights including net neutrality, was signed into law in Brazil: April 2014 (during the NETMundial Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance)
      • Number of participants at NETMundial including academia, government, the technical community, and civil society: 1480
      • Number of countries the participants came from: 97
      • Number of remote hubs for participation: 30
    • When did the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issue the Open Internet Order: December 2010
    • Date when the Open Internet rules were overturned by the D.C. Circuit: January 2014
    • Release of FCC’s new proposal allowing fast and slow lanes online and questions about Title II reclassification: May 2014
    • Date when the Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act is introduced to stop paid prioritization online: June 2014
    • Number of public comments received by the FCC on the issue of network neutrality: 1.1 million
      • Number of public comments available for bulk download by the public as of August 4, 2014: 475,280
      • Size of the data: over 1.4 GB
      • Most vocal neighborhood on the issue of net neutrality in the country based on public comments to the FCC: downtown Washington D.C., with 1 comment filed per 22 residents
      • Top three cities that filed the most comments based on self-reported zip codes: Washington D.C., San Francisco, Chicago
      • States with the most comments filed: California (76,857), New York (33, 158), Texas (26,687)

    Sources

    The GovLab Index: Privacy and Security

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index: Privacy and Security” examines the attitudes and concerns of American citizens regarding online privacy. Previous installments include Designing for Behavior ChangeThe Networked Public, Measuring Impact with Evidence, Open Data, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions.

    Globally

    • Percentage of people who feel the Internet is eroding their personal privacy: 56%
    • Internet users who feel comfortable sharing personal data with an app: 37%
    • Number of users who consider it important to know when an app is gathering information about them: 70%
    • How many people in the online world use privacy tools to disguise their identity or location: 28%, or 415 million people
    • Country with the highest penetration of general anonymity tools among Internet users: Indonesia, where 42% of users surveyed use proxy servers
    • Percentage of China’s online population that disguises their online location to bypass governmental filters: 34%

    In the United States

    Over the Years

    • In 1996, percentage of the American public who were categorized as having “high privacy concerns”: 25%
      • Those with “Medium privacy concerns”: 59%
      • Those who were unconcerned with privacy: 16%
    • In 1998, number of computer users concerned about threats to personal privacy: 87%
    • In 2001, those who reported “medium to high” privacy concerns: 88%
    • Individuals who are unconcerned about privacy: 18% in 1990, down to 10% in 2004
    • How many online American adults are more concerned about their privacy in 2014 than they were a year ago, indicating rising privacy concerns: 64%
    • Number of respondents in 2012 who believe they have control over their personal information: 35%, downward trend for 7 years
    • How many respondents in 2012 continue to perceive privacy and the protection of their personal information as very important or important to the overall trust equation: 78%, upward trend for seven years
    • How many consumers in 2013 trust that their bank is committed to ensuring the privacy of their personal information is protected: 35%, down from 48% in 2004

    Privacy Concerns and Beliefs

    • How many Internet users worry about their privacy online: 92%
      • Those who report that their level of concern has increased from 2013 to 2014: 7 in 10
      • How many are at least sometimes worried when shopping online: 93%, up from 89% in 2012
      • Those who have some concerns when banking online: 90%, up from 86% in 2012
    • Number of Internet users who are worried about the amount of personal information about them online: 50%, up from 33% in 2009
      • Those who report that their photograph is available online: 66%
        • Their birthdate: 50%
        • Home address: 30%
        • Cell number: 24%
        • A video: 21%
        • Political affiliation: 20%
    • Consumers who are concerned about companies tracking their activities: 58%
      • Those who are concerned about the government tracking their activities: 38%
    • How many users surveyed felt that the National Security Association (NSA) overstepped its bounds in light of recent NSA revelations: 44%
    • Respondents who are comfortable with advertisers using their web browsing history to tailor advertisements as long as it is not tied to any other personally identifiable information: 36%, up from 29% in 2012
    • Percentage of voters who do not want political campaigns to tailor their advertisements based on their interests: 86%
    • Percentage of respondents who do not want news tailored to their interests: 56%
    • Percentage of users who are worried about their information will be stolen by hackers: 75%
      • Those who are worried about companies tracking their browsing history for targeted advertising: 54%
    • How many consumers say they do not trust businesses with their personal information online: 54%
    • Top 3 most trusted companies for privacy identified by consumers from across 25 different industries in 2012: American Express, Hewlett Packard and Amazon
      • Most trusted industries for privacy: Healthcare, Consumer Products and Banking
      • Least trusted industries for privacy: Internet and Social Media, Non-Profits and Toys
    • Respondents who admit to sharing their personal information with companies they did not trust in 2012 for reasons such as convenience when making a purchase: 63%
    • Percentage of users who say they prefer free online services supported by targeted ads: 61%
      • Those who prefer paid online services without targeted ads: 33%
    • How many Internet users believe that it is not possible to be completely anonymous online: 59%
      • Those who believe complete online anonymity is still possible: 37%
      • Those who say people should have the ability to use the Internet anonymously: 59%
    • Percentage of Internet users who believe that current laws are not good enough in protecting people’s privacy online: 68%
      • Those who believe current laws provide reasonable protection: 24%

    Security Related Issues

    • How many have had an email or social networking account compromised or taken over without permission: 21%
    • Those who have been stalked or harassed online: 12%
    • Those who think the federal government should do more to act against identity theft: 74%
    • Consumers who agree that they will avoid doing business with companies who they do not believe protect their privacy online: 89%
      • Among 65+ year old consumers: 96%

    Privacy-Related Behavior

    • How many mobile phone users have decided not to install an app after discovering the amount of information it collects: 54%
    • Number of Internet users who have taken steps to remove or mask their digital footprint (including clearing cookies, encrypting emails, and using virtual networks to mask their IP addresses): 86%
    • Those who have set their browser to disable cookies: 65%
    • Number of users who have not allowed a service to remember their credit card information: 73%
    • Those who have chosen to block an app from accessing their location information: 53%
    • How many have signed up for a two-step sign-in process: 57%
    • Percentage of Gen-X (33-48 year olds) and Millennials (18-32 year olds) who say they never change their passwords or only change them when forced to: 41%
      • How many report using a unique password for each site and service: 4 in 10
      • Those who use the same password everywhere: 7%

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: Designing for Behavior Change

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index: Designing for Behavior Change” explores the recent application of psychology and behavioral economics towards solving social issues and shaping public policy and programs. Previous installments include The Networked Public, Measuring Impact with Evidence, Open Data, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions.

    • Year the Behavioural Insights or “Nudge” Team was established by David Cameron in the U.K.: 2010
    • Amount saved by the U.K. Courts Service a year by sending people owing fines personalized text messages to persuade them to pay promptly since the creation of the Nudge unit: £30m
      • Entire budget for the Behavioural Insights Team: less than £1 million
      • Estimated reduction in bailiff interventions through the use of personalized text reminders: 150,000 fewer interventions annually
    • Percentage increase among British residents who paid their taxes on time when they received a letter saying that most citizens in their neighborhood pay their taxes on time: 15%
    • Estimated increase in organ-donor registrations in the U.K. if people are asked “If you needed an organ transplant, would you take one?”: 96,000
    • Proportion of employees who now have a workplace pension since the U.K. government switched from opt-in to opt-out (illustrating the power of defaults): 83%, 63% before opt-out
    • Increase in 401(k) enrollment rates within the U.S. by changing the default from ‘opt in’ to ‘opt out’: from 13% to 80%
    • Behavioral studies have shown that consumers overestimate savings from credit cards with no annual fees. Reduction in overall borrowing costs to consumers by requiring card issuers to tell consumers how much it would cost them in fees and interest, under the 2009 CARD Act in the U.S.: 1.7% of average daily balances 
    • Many high school students and their families in the U.S. find financial aid forms for college complex and thus delay filling them out. Increase in college enrollment as a result of being helped to complete the FAFSA financial aid form by an H&R tax professional, who then provided immediate estimates of the amount of aid the student was eligible for, and the net tuition cost of four nearby public colleges: 26%
    • How much more likely people are to keep accounting records, calculate monthly revenues, and separate their home and business books if given “rules of thumb”-based training with regards to managing their finances, according to a randomized control trial conducted in a bank in the Dominican Republic: 10%
    • Elderly Americans are asked to choose from over 40 options when enrolling in Medicaid Part D private drug plans. How many switched plans to save money when they received a letter providing information about three plans that would be cheaper for them: almost double 
      • The amount saved on average per person by switching plans due to this intervention: $150 per year
    • Increase in prescriptions to manage cardiac disease when Medicaid enrollees are sent a suite of behavioral nudges such as more salient description of the consequences of remaining untreated and post-it note reminders during an experiment in the U.S.: 78%
    • Reduction in street-litter when a trail of green footprints leading to nearby garbage cans is stenciled on the ground during an experiment in Copenhagen, Denmark: 46%
    • Reduction in missed National Health Service appointments in the U.K. when patients are asked to fill out their own appointment cards: 18%
      • Reduction in missed appointments when patients are also made aware of the number of people who attend their appointments on time: 31%
      • The cost of non-attendance per year for the National Health Service: £700m 
    • How many people in a U.S. experiment chose to ‘downsize’ their meals when asked, regardless of whether they received a discount for the smaller portion: 14-33%
      • Average reduction in calories as a result of downsizing: 200
    • Number of households in the U.K. without properly insulated attics, leading to high energy consumption and bills: 40%
      • Result of offering group discounts to motivate households to insulate their attics: no effect
      • Increase in households that agreed to insulate their attics when offered loft-clearing services even though they had to pay for the service: 4.8 fold increase

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: The Networked Public, (Updated and Expanded)

    The GovLab Index: The Networked Public, (Updated and Expanded)

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by the Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index: The Networked Public — January 2014” provides an update on our previous The Networked Public installment, and highlights global trends in internet use, social media, and mobile networking. Previous installments include Measuring Impact with Evidence, Open Data, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions. 

    Global Overview

    • The proportion of global population who use the Internet in 2013: 38.8%, up 3 percentage points from 2012
    • Increase in average global broadband speeds from 2012 to 2013: 17%
    • Percent of internet users surveyed globally that access the internet at least once a day in 2012: 96
    • Hours spent online in 2012 each month across the globe: 35 billion
    • Country with the highest online population, as a percent of total population in 2012: United Kingdom (85%)
    • Country with the lowest online population, as a percent of total population in 2012: India (8%)
    • Trend with the highest growth rate in 2012: Location-based services (27%)
    • Years to reach 50 million users: telephone (75), radio (38), TV (13), internet (4)

    Social Media

    • How many online adults in the U.S. use a social networking site of some kind: 73%
    • Those who use multiple social networking sites: 42%
    • Dominant social networking platform: Facebook, with 71% of online adults
    • Number of Facebook users in 2004, its founding year: 1 million
    • Number of monthly active users on Facebook in September 2013: 1.19 billion, an 18% increase year-over-year
    • How many Facebook users log in to the site daily: 63%
    • Instagram users who log into the service daily: 57%
    • Twitter users who are daily visitors: 46%
    • Number of photos uploaded to Facebook every minute: over 243,000, up 16% from 2012
    • How much of the global internet population is actively using Twitter every month: 21%
    • Number of tweets per minute: 350,000, up 250% from 2012
    • Fastest growing demographic on Twitter: 55-64 year age bracket, up 79% from 2012
    • Fastest growing demographic on Facebook: 45-54 year age bracket, up 46% from 2012
    • How many LinkedIn accounts are created every minute: 120, up 20% from 2012
    • The number of Google searches in 2013: 3.5 million, up 75% from 2012
    • Percent of internet users surveyed globally that use social media in 2012: 90
    • Percent of internet users surveyed globally that use social media daily: 60
    • Time spent social networking, the most popular online activity: 22%, followed by searches (21%), reading content (20%), and emails/communication (19%)
    • The average age at which a child acquires an online presence through their parents in 10 mostly Western countries: six months
    • Number of children in those countries who have a digital footprint by age 2: 81%
    • How many new American marriages between 2005-2012 began by meeting online, according to a nationally representative study: more than one-third 
    • How many of the world’s 505 leaders are on Twitter: 3/4
    • Combined Twitter followers: of 505 world leaders: 106 million
    • Combined Twitter followers of Justin Bieber, Katy Perry, and Lady Gaga: 122 million
    • How many times all Wikipedias are viewed per month: nearly 22 billion times
    • How many hits per second: more than 8,000 
    • English Wikipedia’s share of total page views: 47%
    • Number of articles in the English Wikipedia in December 2013: over 4,395,320 
    • Platform that reaches more U.S. adults between ages 18-34 than any cable network: YouTube
    • Number of unique users who visit YouTube each month: more than 1 billion
    • How many hours of video are watched on YouTube each month: over 6 billion, 50% more than 2012
    • Proportion of YouTube traffic that comes from outside the U.S.: 80%
    • Most common activity online, based on an analysis of over 10 million web users: social media
    • People on Twitter who recommend products in their tweets: 53%
    • People who trust online recommendations from people they know: 90%

    Mobile and the Internet of Things

    • Number of global smartphone users in 2013: 1.5 billion
    • Number of global mobile phone users in 2013: over 5 billion
    • Percent of U.S. adults that have a cell phone in 2013: 91
    • Number of which are a smartphone: almost two thirds
    • Mobile Facebook users in March 2013: 751 million, 54% increase since 2012
    • Growth rate of global mobile traffic as a percentage of global internet traffic as of May 2013: 15%, up from .9% in 2009
    • How many smartphone owners ages 18–44 “keep their phone with them for all but two hours of their waking day”: 79%
    • Those who reach for their smartphone immediately upon waking up: 62%
    • Those who couldn’t recall a time their phone wasn’t within reach or in the same room: 1 in 4
    • Facebook users who access the service via a mobile device: 73.44%
    • Those who are “mobile only”: 189 million
    • Amount of YouTube’s global watch time that is on mobile devices: almost 40%
    • Number of objects connected globally in the “internet of things” in 2012: 8.7 billion
    • Number of connected objects so far in 2013: over 10 billion
    • Years from tablet introduction for tables to surpass desktop PC and notebook shipments: less than 3 (over 55 million global units shipped in 2013, vs. 45 million notebooks and 35 million desktop PCs)
    • Number of wearable devices estimated to have been shipped worldwide in 2011: 14 million
    • Projected number of wearable devices in 2016: between 39-171 million
    • How much of the wearable technology market is in the healthcare and medical sector in 2012: 35.1%
    • How many devices in the wearable tech market are fitness or activity trackers: 61%
    • The value of the global wearable technology market in 2012: $750 million
    • The forecasted value of the market in 2018: $5.8 billion
    • How many Americans are aware of wearable tech devices in 2013: 52%
    • Devices that have the highest level of awareness: wearable fitness trackers,
    • Level of awareness for wearable fitness trackers amongst American consumers: 1 in 3 consumers
    • Value of digital fitness category in 2013: $330 million
    • How many American consumers surveyed are aware of smart glasses: 29%
    • Smart watch awareness amongst those surveyed: 36%

    Access

    • How much of the developed world has mobile broadband subscriptions in 2013: 3/4
    • How much of the developing world has broadband subscription in 2013: 1/5
    • Percent of U.S. adults that had a laptop in 2012: 57
    • How many American adults did not use the internet at home, at work, or via mobile device in 2013: one in five
    • Amount President Obama initiated spending in 2009 in an effort to expand access: $7 billion
    • Number of Americans potentially shut off from jobs, government services, health care and education, among other opportunities due to digital inequality: 60 million
    • American adults with a high-speed broadband connection at home as of May 2013: 7 out of 10
    • Americans aged 18-29 vs. 65+ with a high-speed broadband connection at home as of May 2013: 80% vs. 43
    • American adults with college education (or more) vs. adults with no high school diploma that have a high-speed broadband connection at home as of May 2013: 89% vs. 37%
    • Percent of U.S. adults with college education (or more) that use the internet in 2011: 94
    • Those with no high school diploma that used the internet in 2011: 43
    • Percent of white American households that used the internet in 2013: 67
    • Black American households that used the internet in 2013: 57
    • States with lowest internet use rates in 2013: Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas
    • How many American households have only wireless telephones as of the second half of 2012: nearly two in five
    • States with the highest prevalence of wireless-only adults according to predictive modeling estimates: Idaho (52.3%), Mississippi (49.4%), Arkansas (49%)
    • Those with the lowest prevalence of wireless-only adults: New Jersey (19.4%), Connecticut (20.6%), Delaware (23.3%) and New York (23.5%)

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: Open Data, (Updated and Expanded)

    The GovLab Index: Open Data, (Updated and Expanded)

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by Harper’s Index. “The GovLab Index: Open Data — December 2013” provides an update on our previous Open Data installment, and highlights global trends in Open Data and the release of public sector information. Previous installments include Measuring Impact with Evidence, The Data Universe, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions.

    Value and Impact

    • Potential global value of open data estimated by McKinsey: $3 trillion annually
    • Potential yearly value for the United States: $1.1 trillion 
    • Europe: $900 billion
    • Rest of the world: $1.7 trillion
    • How much the value of open data is estimated to grow per year in the European Union: 7% annually
    • Value of releasing UK’s geospatial data as open data: 13 million pounds per year by 2016
    • Estimated worth of business reuse of public sector data in Denmark in 2010: more than €80 million a year
    • Estimated worth of business reuse of public sector data across the European Union in 2010: €27 billion a year
    • Total direct and indirect economic gains from easier public sector information re-use across the whole European Union economy, as of May 2013: €140 billion annually
    • Economic value of publishing data on adult cardiac surgery in the U.K., as of May 2013: £400 million
    • Economic value of time saved for users of live data from the Transport for London apps, as of May 2013: between £15 million and £58 million
    • Estimated increase in GDP in England and Wales in 2008-2009 due to the adoption of geospatial information by local public services providers: +£320m
    • Average decrease in borrowing costs in sovereign bond markets for emerging market economies when implementing transparent practices (measured by accuracy and frequency according to IMF policies, across 23 countries from 1999-2002): 11%
    • Open weather data supports an estimated $1.5 billion in applications in the secondary insurance market – but much greater value comes from accurate weather predictions, which save the U.S. annually more than $30 billion
    • Estimated value of GPS data: $90 billion

    Efforts and Involvement

    • Number of U.S. based companies identified by the GovLab that use government data in innovative ways: 500
    • Number of open data initiatives worldwide in 2009: 2
    • Number of open data initiatives worldwide in 2013: over 300
    • Number of countries with open data portals: more than 40
    • Countries who share more information online than the U.S.: 14
    • Number of cities globally that participated in 2013 International Open Data Hackathon Day: 102
    • Number of U.S. cities with Open Data Sites in 2013: 43
    • U.S. states with open data initiatives: 40
    • Membership growth in the Open Government Partnership in two years: from 8 to 59 countries
    • Number of time series indicators (GDP, foreign direct investment, life expectancy, internet users, etc.) in the World Bank Open Data Catalog: over 8,000
    • How many of 77 countries surveyed by the Open Data Barometer have some form of Open Government Data Initiative: over 55%
    • How many OGD initiatives have dedicated resources with senior level political backing: over 25%
    • How many countries are in the Open Data Index: 70
      • How many of the 700 key datasets in the Index are open: 84
    • Number of countries in the Open Data Census: 77
      • How many of the 727 key datasets in the Census are open: 95
    • How many countries surveyed have formal data policies in 2013: 55%
    • Those who have machine-readable data available: 25%
    • Top 5 countries in Open Data rankings: United Kingdom, United States, Sweden, New Zealand, Norway
    • The different levels of Open Data Certificates a data user or publisher can achieve “along the way to world-class open data”: 4 levels, Raw, Pilot, Standard and Expert
    • The number of data ecosystems categories identified by the OECD: 3, data producers, infomediaries, and users

    Examining Datasets

    • How many datasets have been made open by governments worldwide: more than 1 million
    • Number of datasets on the U.S. site data.gov: more than 90,000
    • How many released key datasets are truly open for re-use and can be used to hold government accountable, stimulate enterprise, and promote better social policy: fewer than 1 in 10
    • Percentage of datasets published in both machine-readable forms and under open licenses: less than 7%
    • Number of datasets on the Australian government’s open data website that were found to be unusable: one-third
    • Number of financial datasets in the World Bank Open Data Catalog: over 850
    • Out of 23 countries surveyed by Capgemini, those who share comprehensive data that includes both breadth and granularity: 22%
    • Those who lacked enhanced search capabilities: over 60%
    • Countries who share data that is not regularly updated: 96%
    • Those who are not utilizing user participation capabilities: 87%
    • Average score of evidence of impact in 43 countries with some form of open data policy: 1.7 out of 10
    • Percentage of impact questions for which no evidence could be found: 45%

    Sources:

    • Alonso, Jose. “Announcing the Global Open Data Initiative,” World Wide Web Foundation, June 11, 2013.
    • Carpenter, John and Phil Watts. “Assessing the Value of OS OpenData™ to the Economy of Great Britain – Synopsis,” Ordnance Survey, ConsultingWhere Limited and ACIL Tasman, 2013.
    • “Commission on the Weather and Climate Enterprise,” American Meteorological Society, http://www.ametsoc.org/boardpges/cwce/
    • Coyne, Allie. “Govt finds one third of open data was ‘junk’,” ITnews, Nov 12, 2013.
    • “Data,” The World Bank, accessed August 29, 2013.
    • Glennerster, Rachel and Yongseok Shin. “Does Transparency Pay?” International Monetary Fund, Vol. 55, No. 1, 2008.
    • “How to Kick-Start Innovation with Free Data,” Scientific American, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-to-kick-start-innovaton
    • Lippert, Catherine. “Topic Report No. 20 Public Sector Information Reuse in Denmark 2010,” European Public Sector Information Platform, 2010.
    • “Market Assessment of Public Sector Information,” Deloitte, U.K. Department for Business innovation & Skills, May 2013.
    • Open Data Barometer: 2013 Global Report,” ODI, OpenData Barometer, World Wide Web Foundation, 2013.
    • Open Data Census,” Open Knowledge Foundation, Accessed December 2013.
    • Open Data Certificate,” Open Data Institute, Accessed December 2013.
    • Open Data Index,” Open Knowledge Foundation, Accessed December 2013.
    • Open Data Sites,” data.gov, Accessed December 12, 2013.
    • Open data: Unlocking innovation and performance with liquid information,” McKinsey & Company, October 2013.
    • Shakespeare, Stephan. “Shakespeare Review: An Independent Review of Public Sector Information,” May 2013.
    • “Stimulus Funds, Transparency, and Public Trust,” United Nations e-Government Survey 2010,” 2010.
    • The Open Data Economy: Unlocking Economic Value  by Opening Government and Public Data,” Capgemini Consulting, 2013.
    • “The Value of Geospatial Information to Local Public Service Delivery in England and Wales,” Local Government Group, ConsultingWhere and ACIL Talisman, 2010.
    • Ubaldi, Barbara. “Open Government: Data Towards Empirical Analysis of Open Government Data Initiatives,” OECD Working Papers on Public Governance No. 22, OECD Publishing, 2013.
    • “Understanding the Impact of Releasing and Re-Using Open Government Data,” European Public Sector Information Platform, August 2013.
    • “Value of a Weather Ready Nation,” http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/PPI-Weather-Econ-Stats-10-13-11.pdf

    The GovLab Index: Measuring Impact with Evidence

    The GovLab Index: Measuring Impact with Evidence

    Please find below the latest installment in The GovLab Index series, inspired by the Harper’s Index. The GovLab Index: Measuring Impact with Evidence highlights the need for and current scarcity of evidence in decision-making practices. Previous installments include Open Data, The Data Universe, The Networked Public, Participation and Civic Engagement and Trust in Institutions.

    Click here to contribute to the next GovLab Index by suggesting additional statistics and numerical summaries! 

     United States

    • Amount per $100 of government spending that is backed by evidence that the money is being spent wisely: less than $1
    • Number of healthcare treatments delivered in the U.S. that lack evidence of effectiveness: more than half
    • How much of total U.S. healthcare expenditure is spent to determine what works: less than 0.1 percent
    • Number of major U.S. federal social programs evaluated since 1990 using randomized experiments and found to have “weak or no positive effects”: 9 out of 10
    • Year the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy was set up to work with federal policymakers to advance evidence-based reforms in major U.S. social programs: 2001
    • Year the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) was introduced by President Bush’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB): 2002
      • Out of about 1,000 programs assessed, number found to be effective in 2008: 19%
      • Percentage of programs that could not be assessed due to insufficient data: 17%
      • Amount spent on the Even Start Family Literacy Program, rated ineffective by PART, over the life of the Bush administration: more than $1 billion
    •  Year Washington State legislature began using Washington State Institute for Public Policy’s estimates on how “a portfolio of evidence-based and economically sound programs . . . could affect the state’s crime rate, the need to build more prisons, and total criminal-justice spending”: 2007
      • Amount invested by legislature in these programs: $48 million
      • Amount saved by the legislature: $250 million
    • Number of U.S. States in a pilot group working to adapt The Pew-MacArthur Results First Initiative, based on the Washington State model, to make performance-based policy decisions: 14
    • Net savings in health care expenditure by using the Transitional Care Model, which meets the Congressionally-based Top Tier Evidence Standard: $4,000 per patient
    • Number of states that conducted “at least some studies that evaluated multiple program or policy options for making smarter investments of public dollars” between 2008-2011: 29
    • Number of states that reported that their cost-benefit analysis influenced policy decisions or debate: 36
    • Date the Office of Management and Budget issued a memorandum proposing new evaluations and advising agencies to include details on determining effectiveness of their programs, link disbursement to evidence, and support evidence-based initiatives: 2007
    • Percentage increase in resources for innovation funds that use a tiered model for evidence, according to the President’s FY14 budget: 44% increase
    • Amount President Obama proposed in his FY 2013 budget to allocate in existing funding to Performance Partnerships “in which states and localities would be given the flexibility to propose better ways to combine federal resources in exchange for greater accountability for results”:  $200 million
    • Amount of U.S. federal program funding that Harvard economist Jeffrey Liebman suggests be directed towards evaluations of outcomes: 1%
    • Amount of funding the City of New York has committed for evidence-based research and development initiatives through its Center for Economic Opportunity: $100 million a year

    Internationally

    • How many of the 30 OECD countries in 2005-6 have a formal requirement by law that the benefits of regulation justify the costs: half
      • Number of 30 OECD member countries in 2008 that reported quantifying benefits to regulations: 16
      • Those who reported quantifying costs: 24
    • How many members make up the Alliance for Useful Evidence, a network that “champion[s]  evidence, the opening up of government data for interrogation and use, alongside the sophistication in research methods and their applications”: over 1,000
    • Date the UK government, the ESRC and the Big Lottery Fund announced plans to create a network of ‘What Works’ evidence centres: March 2013
    • Core funding for the What Works Centre for Local Economic Growth: £1m p.a. over an initial three year term
    • How many SOLACE Summit members in 2012 were “very satisfied” with how Research and Intelligence resources support evidence-based decision-making: 4%
      • Number of areas they identified for improving evidence-based decision-making: 5
      • Evaluation of the impact of past decisions: 46% of respondents
      • Benchmarking data with other areas: 39%
      • assessment of options available: 33% 
      • how evidence is presented: 29% 
      • Feedback on public engagement and consultation: 25%
    •  Number of areas for improvement for Research and Intelligence staff development identified at the SOLACE Summit: 6
      • Strengthening customer insight and data analysis: 49%
      • Impact evaluation: 48%
      • Strategic/corporate thinking/awareness: 48%
      • Political acumen: 46%
      • Raising profile/reputation of the council for evidence-based decisions: 37%
      • Guidance/mentoring on use of research for other officers: 25%

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: Trust in Institutions (Updated and Expanded)

    The GovLab Index: Trust in Institutions, (Updated)

    Please find below the next installment in The GovLab Index series inspired by the Harper’s Index. ‘The GovLab Index: Trust in Institutions — November 2013’ provides an update on our previous Trust in Institutions installment, in light of developments in the past few months including the U.S. government shutdown. This installment highlights attitudes and trends related to levels of trust in institutions including government, media and industry in the United States and across the world. Previous installments include Open Data, The Data Universe, The Networked Public and Participation and Civic Engagement

     Click here to contribute to the next GovLab Index by suggesting additional statistics and numerical summaries! 

    Trust in Government

    • How many of the global public feel that their governments listen to them: 17%
    • How much of the global population trusts in institutions: almost half 
    • The number of Americans who trust institutions: less than half
    • How many people globally believe that business leaders and government officials will tell the truth when confronted with a difficult issue: Less than one-fifth
    • The average level of confidence amongst citizens in 25 OECD countries:
      • In national government: 40%, down from 45% in 2007
      • In financial institutions: 43%
      • In public services such as local police and healthcare: 72% and 71% respectively

    Executive Government

    • How many Americans trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always or most of the time” in September 2013: 19%
    • Those who trust the “men and women … who either hold or are running for public office”: 46%
    • Number of Americans who express a great deal or fair amount of trust in:
      • Local government: 71%
      • State government: 62%
      • Federal government: 52%
    • How many Americans trust in the ability of “the American people” to make judgments about political issues facing the country:  61%, declining every year since 2009
    • Those who have trust and confidence in the federal government’s ability to handle international problems: 49%
    • Number of Americans who feel “angry” at the federal government: 3 in 10, all-time high since first surveyed in 1997

    Congress

    • Percentage of Americans who say “the political system can work fine, it’s the members of Congress that are the problem” in October 2013: 58%
    • Following the government shutdown, number of Americans who stated that Congress would work better if nearly every member was replaced next year: nearly half
    • Those who think that even an entire overhaul of Congress would not make much difference: 4 in 10 
    • Those who think that “most members of Congress have good intentions, it’s the political system that is broken” in October 2013: 32%

    Trust in Media

    • Global trust in media (traditional, social, hybrid, owned, online search): 57% and rising
    • The percentage of Americans who say they have “a great deal or fair amount of trust and confidence in the mass media”: 44% – the lowest level since first surveyed in 1997
    • How many Americans see the mass media as too liberal: 46%
      • As too conservative: 13%
      • As “just about right”: 37%
    • The number of Americans who see the press as fulfilling the role of political watchdog and believe press criticism of political leaders keeps them from doing things that should not be done: 68%
    • The proportion of Americans who have “only a little/not at all” level of trust in Facebook to protect privacy and personal information: three in four
      • In Google: 68%
      • In their cell phone provider: 63%

    Trust in Industry

    • Global trust in business: 58%
    • How much of the global public trusts financial institutions: 50%
    • Proportion of the global public who consider themselves informed about the banking scandals: more than half
    • Of those, how many Americans report they now trust banks less: almost half
    • Number of respondents globally who say they trust tech companies to do what’s right: 77%, most trusted industry
    • Number of consumers across eight markets who were “confident” or “somewhat confident” that the tech sector can provide long-term solutions to meet the world’s toughest challenges: 76%

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: The Data Universe

    The GovLab Index: The Data Universe

    Please find below the next installment in The GovLab Index series, brought to you by GovLab Research and inspired by Harper’s Index. The GovLab Index: The Data Universe, highlights global trends in Big Data and the creation of and sharing of digital information. Previous installments included The Networked PublicParticipation and Civic Engagement, and Trust in Institutions.

    Click here to contribute to the new GovLab Index by suggesting additional stats and numerical summaries!

    • How much data exists in the digital universe as of 2012: 2.7 zetabytes*
    • Increase in the quantity of Internet data from 2005 to 2012: +1,696%
    • Percent of the world’s data created in the last two years: 90
    • Number of exabytes (=1 billion gigabytes) created every day in 2012: 2.5; that number doubles every month
    • Percent of the digital universe in 2005 created by the U.S. and western Europe vs. emerging markets: 48 vs. 20
    • Percent of the digital universe in 2012 created by emerging markets: 36
    • Percent of the digital universe in 2020 predicted to be created by China alone: 21
    • How much information in the digital universe is created and consumed by consumers (video, social media, photos, etc.) in 2012: 68%
    • Percent of which enterprises have liability or responsibility for (copyright, privacy, compliance with regulations, etc.): 80
    • Amount included in the Obama Administration’s 2-12 Big Data initiative: over $200 million
    • Amount the Department of Defense is investing annually on Big Data projects as of 2012: over $250 million
    • Data created per day in 2012: 2.5 quintillion bytes
    • How many terabytes* of data collected by the U.S. Library of Congress as of April 2011: 235
    • How many terabytes of data collected by Walmart per hour as of 2012: 2,560, or 2.5 petabytes*
    • Projected growth in global data generated per year, as of 2011: 40%
    • Number of IT jobs created globally by 2015 to support big data: 4.4 million (1.9 million in the U.S.)
    • Potential shortage of data scientists in the U.S. alone predicted for 2018: 140,000-190,000, in addition to 1.5 million managers and analysts with the know-how to use the analysis of big data to make effective decisions
    • Time needed to sequence the complete human genome (analyzing 3 billion base pairs) in 2003: ten years
    • Time needed in 2013: one week
    • The world’s annual effective capacity to exchange information through telecommunication networks in 1986, 2007, and (predicted) 2013: 281 petabytes, 65 exabytes, 667 exabytes
    • Projected amount of digital information created annually that will either live in or pass through the cloud: 1/3
    • Increase in data collection volume year-over-year in 2012: 400%
    • Increase in number of individual data collectors from 2011 to 2012: nearly double (over 300 data collection parties in 2012)

    *1 zetabyte = 1 billion terabytes | 1 petabyte = 1,000 terabytes | 1 terabyte = 1,000 gigabytes | 1 gigabyte = 1 billion bytes

    Sources:

    The GovLab Index: Participation and Civic Engagement

    Following The GovLab Index: Trust in Institutions, GovLab Research brings you the next installment of statistics that reflect the trends, attitudes, behaviors, and environmental settings related to the Open Government and Government 3.0 movements, as inspired by  Harper’s index. Click here to contribute to the new GovLab Index by suggesting additional stats and numerical summaries!

    The GovLab Index: Participation and Civic Engagement

    • Percent turnout of voting age population in 2012 U.S. Presidential election: 57.5
    • Percent turnout in 2008, 2004, 2000 elections: 62.3, 60.4, 54.2
    • Change in voting rate in U.S. from 1980 to most recent election: –29
    • Change in voting rate in Slovak Republic from 1980 to most recent election: –42, the lowest rate among democratic countries surveyed
    • Change in voting rate in Russian Federation from 1980 to most recent election: +14, the highest rate among democratic countries surveyed
    • Percent turnout in Australia as of 2011: 95, the highest rate among democratic countries surveyed
    • Percentage point difference in voting rates between high and low educated people in Australia as of 2011: 1
    • Percentage point difference in voting rates between high and low educated people in the U.S. as of 2011:  33
    • Number of Black and Hispanic U.S. voters in comparison to 2008 election: 1.7 million and 1.4 million increase
    • Number of non-Hispanic White U.S. voters in comparison to 2008 election: 2 million decrease, the only example of a race group showing a decrease in net voting from one presidential election to the next
    • Percent of Americans that contact their elected officials between elections: 10
    • Margin of victory in May 2013 Los Angeles mayoral election: 54-46
    • Percent turnout among Los Angeles citizens in May 2013 Los Angeles mayoral election: 19
    • Percent of U.S. adults that used social networking sites in 2012: 60
    • How many of which participated in a political or civic activity online: 2/3
    • Percent of U.S. social media users in 2012 that used social tools to encourage other people to take action on an issue that is important to them: 31
    • Percent of U.S. adults that belonged to a group on a social networking site involved in advancing a political or social issue in 2012: 12
    • Increase in the number of adults who took part in these behaviors in 2008: four-fold
    • Number of U.S. adults that signed up to receive alerts about local issues via email or text messaging in 2010: 1 in 5
    • Percent of U.S. adults that used digital tools digital tools to talk to their neighbors and keep informed about community issues in 2010: 20
    • Number of Americans that talked face-to-face with neighbors about community issues in 2010: almost half
    • How many online adults that have used social tools as blogs, social networking sites, and online video as well as email and text alerts to keep informed about government activities: 1/3
    • Percent of U.S. adult internet users that have gone online for raw data about government spending and activities in 2010: 40
    • Of which how many look online to see how federal stimulus money is being spent: 1 in 5
    • Read or download the text of legislation: 22%
    • How many Americans volunteered through or for an organization at least once between September 2011 and September 2012: 64.5 million
    • Median hours spent on volunteer activities during this time: 50
    • Change in volunteer rate compared to the year before: 0.3 decline

     

    Sources:

 

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply