More on Latent Communities for Government Websites
Further to my recent post on the potential of engaging latent communities around government websites to improve government responsiveness, consider the following exchange on Tom Watson MP’s website.
Tom Watson MP asked on his blog:
“I’m told that the licensing of the national postcode register is an ‘old chestnut’. I’m going to spend some time trying to understand just why [PAF](TW – essentially post code data) can’t be available for free or at marginal cost. Feel free to air your views in the comment section.”
He got only 14 responses, but excluding one or two, they were of an extremely high quality. Consider the interplay between the following commenters below the fold…
Greg comments that:
Thanks Tom. I’ve worked with postcodes for years, and it’s a real shame that the UK has one of the best systems for postal zoning, but the worst possible licensing regime.
The Post Office absolutely requires postal codes in order to make its sorting and delivery efficient. What’s more, as it is the originator, noone else can create them. ie. it’s a true natural monopoly with zero marginal cost.
The only reason we have to pay for them is that it suits the Post Office budget to exploit this monopoly - it would cost them nothing to simply upload the postcode file they use for their own purposes, and let businesses, charities and individuals use them to deliver innovative products and services, and better databases (from which, btw, the Post Office benefits).
In terms of your desires - may I plea for free. Free is magnitudes better than low cost for two reasons:
- it allows experimentation (I have an idea, but I need the data to test it. The cost of the data prevents me trying, so the idea never gets tested).
- it avoids transaction costs, legal costs, etc. The Post Office spends a fortune on sales people, administrators and lawyers to protect and exploit its data; and on the flip side potential users spend a fortune working out what they can and can’t do within license. Even low cost products incur these fixed costs; plus the infrastructure for users to monitor their customers’ usage and charge for it. These costs are totally eliminated when data is free.
The USPS allows you to download their ZIP code data in a whole bunch of formats - free - as well as providing it on CD Rom and via APIs. We should be embarrassed when we see how we hamper ourselves.
Mitch responds:
Greg,
Not sure what your involvement with postocdes has been. I worked for many years on the Royal Mail Postocde team and would make the following points:
1. The postcode system is designed solely for the collection, sorting and delivery of mail. Postcodes are also used for other purposes e.g. by insurance companies to categorise risk, but they are not designed to be so used and may not be suitable.
2. The maintenance of postocdes is not a small task and is definitely not done at marginal cost. By definition, address information changes regularly and each change has a significant impact to Royal Mail systems and processes. There is also a significant impact on local authorities and local businesses and residents. This an ongoing and expensive process.
3. The postal address file (PAF) is a significant asset to Royal Mail and it’s reasonable for them to exploit it (this government has encouraged Royal Mail to be more independent and commercial). There is a web site which allows anyone to interrogate for free the address file - http://postcode.royalmail.com/portal/rm/postcodefinder?catId=400145. Royal Mail feels this is more than enough for any domestic user. Business customers have to pay for greater access. So what?
4. Currently Royal Mail is ‘owned’ by the government; it’s still a nationalised industry. In that case, I’m not sure why Tom needs to investigate anything. If the government wants the postcode file to be available free or at marginal cost they only have to say the word. They won’t, of course, and Tom knows this.
There are some common misconceptions about postocdes, some of which I’ve tried to address here. The use (and mis-use) of this information is often blamed on Royal Mail but in my opinion they don’t explain themselves enough.
And Greg responds again with this zinging return:
The points you make, Mitch, are unfortunately so reminisecent of the innovation-stifling opinions of inward-facing bureaucrats which have been such a major contributor to Britain’s loss of economic advantage over the years. Examples which are now so clear include the fact that we invented public-key encryption long before the US, but kept it a government secret rather than using it to gain an edge in commerce; or that Frank Whittle invented the jet engine only to find that closed-minded bureaucrats couldn’t see it working. Bureaucrats are rarely the best people to judge whether something has a place in propelling innovation and competitiveness. The fact that there’s so much energy on my side of the postcodes debate [arguing to make it available for free] says it all.
Mitch; you should be proud that you worked on a world-leading data source. It’s just such a shame its wings are crippled by its owners.
Good form! There is a lot of specialised, local information in this exchange from a creator of the data in question on one hand and a potential user on the other. Enabling this latent community allowed Tom to listen into this exchange and learn from this specialised, local knowledge for next to no cost. There should be more of this – it’s might seem like a small example, but there’s a lot of potential at the margins for initiatives like this to improve government responsiveness.
HT: Free Our Data
Share This