Is more open data always a good thing?

Open data doesn’t always lead to more freedom and equality for all, writes Jathan Sadowski, a graduate student in ASU’s Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes, in a Future Tense article for Slate magazine. Despite a growing number of internet activists, and even the White House joining the push to make digital data easily available and machine-readable, simply making data more accessible is not enough to make the world a better place.

“Data isn’t like ore in the ground, waiting to be mined. Nor is it a neutral, objective reflection of reality,” argues Sadowski. Instead, data is constructed and interpreted by people at every step of the process from its initial collection to its final communication to policymakers and the public.

As an example of the complexities of open data efforts, Sadowski cites the Street Bump smartphone app that the city of Boston uses “to help record rough patches and potholes in the city’s infrastructure.” The app is designed to make road work in Boston more efficient and responsive, “but it also only represents data collected by those who own smartphones. Poorer neighborhoods will be left out and hence less able to signal that their infrastructure is in disarray.” This well-intentioned open data project, in attempting to streamline road work, actually exacerbates the already-wide gap in resource allocation between richer and poorer neighborhoods.

Sadowksi concludes that too much focus on the mere openness of data “can mask what’s really important: ensuring that the ways data is created and used align with values of justice.”

Future Tense is a collaboration among ASU, the New America Foundation and Slate magazine that explores how emerging technologies affect policy and society. The Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes is a research unit in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.