|
|
|
| Quality Evaluation of Forestry Open Government Data Based on Metadata |
| Wang Bo, Wen Jiwen |
| School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract A quality evaluation of forestry open government data helps data providers to manage data, providing a basis on which users can select datasets. Metadata, an important attribute to describe the origin and background of data resources, can be used as the basis to evaluate the quality of open government data. Based on the characteristics of forestry open government data resources, open government data life-cycle theory, and the principles of the data resources being scientific, comprehensive, pertinent, and easy to operate, this paper constructs a systematic and comprehensive forestry open government data quality evaluation model from the three aspects of data quality (form, content, and utility) and the three phases of the open government data life-cycle (generating, opening, and using), including evaluation frameworks and evaluation indicators, with quantitative methods. This paper also proposes future research directions that can provide references for general open government data quality evaluation, and it can help improve the quality and value of open government data.
|
|
Received: 01 January 2020
|
|
|
|
1 李晓彤, 翟军, 郑贵福. 我国地方政府开放数据的数据质量评价研究——以北京、广州和哈尔滨为例[J]. 情报杂志, 2018, 37(6): 141-145.
2 黄如花, 林焱. 国外开放政府数据描述规范的调查与分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017, 61(20): 37-52.
3 张晓娟, 谭婧. 我国省级政府数据开放平台元数据质量评估研究[J]. 电子政务, 2019(3): 58-71.
4 翟军, 陶晨阳, 李晓彤. 开放政府数据质量评估研究进展及启示[J]. 图书馆, 2018(12): 74-79.
5 [5] Vetrò A, Canova L, Torchiano M, et al. Open data quality measurement framework definition and application to Open Government Data[J]. Government Information Quarterly, 2016, 33(2): 325-337.
6 Moen W E, Stewart E L, McClure C R. Assessing metadata quality: findings and methodological considerations from an evaluation of the U.S. Government Information Locator Service (GILS)[C]// Proceedings of the IEEE International Forum on Research and Technology Advances in Digital Libraries. IEEE, 1998: 246-255.
7 Bruce T R, Hillmann D I. The continuum of metadata quality: defining, expressing, exploiting[OL]. 2004. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247818823_The_Continuum_of_Metadata_ Quality_Defining_Expressing_Exploiting.
8 李凡星. 基于数据质量的政府开放数据平台评估探究[D]. 南京: 南京大学, 2017.
9 Neumaier S, Umbrich J, Polleres A. Automated quality assessment of metadata across open data portals[J]. Journal of Data and Information Quality, 2016, 8(1): Article No.2.
10 Milic P, Veljkovic N, Stoimenov L. Comparative analysis of metadata models on e-government open data platforms[J/OL]. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, (2018-03-13). http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TETC.2018.2815591.
11 Stvilia B, Gasser L, Twidale M B, et al. A framework for information quality assessment[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007, 58(12): 1720-1733.
12 Ochoa X, Duval E. Automatic evaluation of metadata quality in digital repositories[J]. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 2009, 10(2/3): 67-91.
13 于梦月. 基于本体的开放政府数据的元数据方案及其应用研究[D]. 大连: 大连海事大学, 2018.
14 唐长乐, 张晓娟. 政府开放数据更新评估研究: 类型、性能与测度[J]. 情报资料工作, 2019, 40(1): 105-112.
15 数据质量评测方法与指标体系[EB/OL]. [2019-11-25]. https://max.book118.com/html/2017/0817/128456023.shtm.
16 政务信息资源目录体系[EB/OL]. [2019-09-22]. https://max.book118.com/html/2019/0202/5110120014002010.shtm.
17 def_formatLists.py.[EB/OL]. [2019-06-18]. https://github.com/opendatamonitor/odm.restapi/blob/master/odmapi/def_formatLists. py#L5-L39.
18 黄莺. 元数据质量的定量评估方法综述[J]. 图书情报工作, 2013, 57(4): 143-148. |
|
|
|
