These Rules and Regulations shall not apply to the following specified information, which shall not be released publicly or shared:
Intellectual Properties such as trade secrets, commercial information and proprietary information until it was made public, published, or protected under the law. [“IP”; see Open Data Policy 4.1 (a)]
Identifiable personal (natural or juridical) information that undermines privacy. [“Personal Information”; see Open Data Policy 4.1 (b)]
Names of persons, commercial establishments and entities whose collaborations in publicly-funded UP Diliman programs and projects warrants a protection of their rights to anonymity. [“Names”; see Open Data Policy 4.1 ©]
Results of testing, analytical work, and other related services provided by the University of the Philippines in Diliman to other entities. [“Results of services provided by UPD to other entities”; see Open Data Policy 4.1 (d)]
By default, the University of the Philippines in Diliman may not exercise discretion in the restriction of datasets not falling under the categories in [the above rules; numbers to be changed in the final Draft].
On the grounds of national security which shall be determined by law, jurisprudence, or appropriate governmental bodies like the Depart of National Defense and the Department of Justice, the University of the Philippines in Diliman may restrict the public release or sharing of datasets such as, but not limited to, hazard-related real time data and historical data. [“Restriction”; see Open Data Policy 4.1 (b)]]
This data sharing policy does not include (a) intellectual properties such as trade secrets, commercial information and proprietary information until it was made public, published, or protected under the law; (b) personnel, medical and other similar information that when disclosed constitutes unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; and © names of persons, commercial establishments and entities whose collaborations in publicly-funded UP Diliman programs and projects warrants a protection of their rights to anonymity; and (d) results of testing, analytical and other related services provided by the UP Diliman to other entities.
This policy shall allow UP Diliman to restrict the release of hazard-related real time and historical data that has bearing on national security.
Discussion
I am not agreeable to this sentence, “This policy shall allow UP Diliman to restrict the release of hazard-related real time and historical data that has bearing on national security.”. Hazard related data should be accessible to the public because it is only be getting people to know information on dangers in their that we are able to raise awareness and get people to take action. Releasing data also allows scientists to create new products and better science from “raw data”.
Here are some excerpts on my arguments on why NOAH and DREAM data are important in the country's disaster prevention and mitigation efforts:
Why are raw and system data important for disaster mitigation efforts?
Raw and system data generated by the NOAH and DREAM programs are not exclusively read and processed by UP researchers. There are other entities that have the capability to manipulate datasets. By restricting access, we prevent scientists, inventors, researchers, innovators and enthusiasts, both local and international, to explore the raw data and generate products that may even be better than what UP can produce. NOAH or DREAM researchers are not the only people capable of generating the best topographic and hazard maps and should never be claimed as such. The worst that can happen in disaster mitigation efforts is for scientific discovery by the community to be hindered. We want to be able to put at the forefront of battle against disasters the best scientific and technological products, without any delay.
A good example of system and raw data that are now made available are the .vol and .netcdf files of the Doppler radar system. These were previously inaccessible to academic researchers but because they were released in 2012 by PAGASA to NOAH, conversion of the raw data was made possible. They can now be viewed in the NOAH website and mobile apps as rainfall intensity for LGUs and everybody to view and use as a basis for disaster management and preparedness. Furthermore, research using the raw Doppler data was able to reveal 24-hour accumulated rainfall for the Habagat 2012, 2013 and 2014 events, showing heavy rain clouds emanating from mountain peaks. For the 2012 and 2013 Habagat flood events, these mountain peaks were found on the Natib and Mariveles volcanoes. In trying to understand the Habagat flood problem in Metro Manila and for science to significantly progress, we need to make raw data freely available to everybody because researchers need them.
The original concern of the NOAH program is to save lives. Saving lives in disaster work means readily accessible data before disaster strikes. Exercising control compromises opportunity and creates delays in data and product availability, which is critical in saving lives. All of us would agree that bureaucratic red tape (i.e. writing request letters and approval) causes delays. We need to get ahead of Yolanda- and Pablo-like disasters by delivering the best hazard maps at the soonest possible time. NOAH and DREAM are not the only entities that can deliver this kind of product. It can also be generated by other agencies such as NAMRIA, MGB and the agencies and organizations they work with. Even private innovators and researchers may deliver a good disaster map, perhaps even better than what NOAH and DREAM currently produce. What are the current trends in Open Access data for disaster mitigation and prevention?
1. The global trend in management of disasters encourages an open data policy. This was a key message in the 2014 World Risk Summit, which was held in London and attended by key players in disaster risk mitigation, including Mayors of major cities, Google, NASA, World Bank, Stanford and Bristol University, etc. 2. Open access to LiDAR data to the public is fast growing. The Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, UK and the United states are already providing government acquired LiDAR data for free. Even the UK Environmental Agency, the group that trained DREAM LiDAR researchers will have an Open Data policy by September 2015 (Matthew, 2015). 3. There is global effort to map in 3D the Earth’s surface with high-resolution instruments. NASA will deploy GEDI or the Global Ecosystems Dynamics Investigation LiDAR soon. GEDI is a laser-based instrument being developed for the International Space Station, which will provide a unique high-resolution 3-D view of Earth’s forests, helping to fill in missing information about their role in the carbon cycle. 4. The carbon cycle is now mapped with the use of high-resolution imagery. Since Climate Change is a global problem, everybody must cooperate, collaborate and share their data so that we get the best analysis of this global concern. 5. There is a concerted effort to fight floods on a worldwide scale. Big groups such as NASA, Cabot Institute, Bristol University, Google, Stanford University, World Bank, and others are collaborating to fight floods on a global scale by bringing together government, industry and humanitarian agencies to support the development of a high-resolution and higher accuracy global DEM. The advanced global DEM would use existing LiDAR data and stereo satellite images. New LiDAR elevation data would be acquired on board disaster-relief aircraft or on drones deployed over flood plains (Schumann, 2014).
The worldwide effort to map our environment in detail demonstrates that sharing high-resolution data like what NASA does to their imagery and 3D data is important in addressing Climate Change and disaster problems. DOST and UP are pioneers this side of the world with the use of high-resolution geospatial data for Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). The last thing that we want to happen is to lag behind the rest of the world in the near future in terms of promoting open access data for disaster prevention and mitigation only because we want to exert control due to plans of commercializing LiDAR and hazard map data. This type of control is not in sync with global trends in CCA and DRR, which needs to have positive action now. Delays brought about by exertion of control are not consistent with the lessons we learned from past disasters where the impacts of natural hazards got ahead of scientific knowledge (i.e. Yolanda and Pablo). Every minute counts!
Change ko lang iyong first paragraph:
I am not agreeable to this sentence, “This policy shall allow UP Diliman to restrict the release of hazard-related real time and historical data that has bearing on national security.”. Hazard related data should be accessible to the public because it is only by getting people to know information on dangers in their community that we are able to raise awareness and get people to take action. Releasing data also allows scientists to create new products and generate better science from “raw data”.
In support of Mahar's point, an IRR provision for the matter at issue could read: By default, hazard-related real time and historical data are shareable and actively made directly available to researchers and agencies working on disaster mitigation and prevention, unless an overriding national security concern is raised properly through the courts or other authorized bodies that in turn can order or request UP Diliman through the Vice Chancellor for Research and Development (OVCRD) to cease and desist the sharing of such vital data.
I agree with Mahar's points but I think we should discuss this when we meet. The DOST open data policy document has the same provision (in fact, that is where we got the UP provision). Last week I attended part of the IP workshop of the Phil-Lidar 2 project and a lot of what they want to do with their data is premised on the raw data they generate having a bearing on national security, and therefore not shareable publicly. I think operationalizing who gets to say when a data has bearing on national security will be important - of course it cannot just be the researchers who generated the data because of conflict of interest issues. Should it be the Department of National Defense?
I also agree with Mahar, and also, I wanted to say lang that with respect to national security, it should not be UP which defines that, but rather the national government defining such a restriction. Hence, my position is that by default the hazard related data should be accessible, and only if national government has specific directives on particular data, will UP restrict access to those specific data. Otherwise, if there are protocols that have to be satisfied, to obtain that data, it would be useless to provide the access na (given the nature of the emergencies in which hazard data could be applied to).
The exemptions clause on hazards-related data is already in the open data policy signed by Chancellor Tan. We really have to define well in the IRR what has bearing on national security and who decides. With the Philippine commitment to contribute to the Group on Earth Observation (GEO) https://www.earthobservations.org/documents/ministerial/geneva/statements/gms_philippines_statement.pdf, we should adhere to “full and open” access to and use of (geographic) data. I think that this has been decided upon already by the Philippine government.
Other important docs:
https://www.earthobservations.org/documents/dsp/201310_full_and_open_principle_interpretation_living_paper.pdf