Impact assessment of making OS ‘mid-scale’ data free puts cost at 47m-58m pounds
What interesting reading the impact assessment of the DCLG consultation on making OS data free is. Clearly some arms have been twisted in the Treasury to make it happen – Liam Byrne, chief secretary to the Treasury, almost surely in the driving seat there.
On the option being chosen (which is explicitly not the one that was examined in the “Cambridge study”, which looked at the benefits of releasing large-scale data, not the “mid-scale” data being proposed) the cost seems to be that government costs rise somewhat, while costs to the commercial sector fall.
From the document (on the impact assessment page):
ANNUAL COSTS
Lost OS revenue from OS Free data being made free: £19-24m (govt would fund this on a cost plus basis, amounting to £6-9m).
Increased government charges for large-scale data: £28-34m (price rebalancing based on number of datasets used by public and private sector).
One-off (Transition) Yrs: £ tbc
Average Annual Cost (excluding one-off): £47-58m
Total Cost (PV) £391-482m
Other key non-monetised costs by ‘main affected groups’ Transition costs to Ordnance Survey, government departments and businesses of moving to new model. There would be impacts on third party providers (see Competition Assessment, Annex 1).
ANNUAL BENEFITS
Description and scale of key monetised benefits by ‘main affected groups’: gain to business and consumers from OS large-scale data being made cheaper: £28-34m if assume price rebalancing is revenue neutral.
Gain from OS Free data being made available: £19-24m.
Average Annual Benefit (excluding one-off) £47-58m
Total Benefit (PV) £391-482m
Other key non-monetised benefits by ‘main affected groups’: The lower charges to businesses and consumers for large-scale data, and the free data should increase demand and hence welfare. Entry and innovation should occur in the market for geographical information. These welfare benefits have not been quantified (Pollock report focuses on releasing large-scale data).
And finally:
Key Assumptions/Sensitivities/Risk: Modelling assumptions: some substitution from paid-for to free data; lost revenue by OS due to competition from new derived products. Not yet determined how the revenue shortfall will be covered from government (i.e. who will pay and how). So for now assume no change in demand, but will estimate this for the final IA.
Price Base Year 2009
Time Period Years 10
Net Benefit Range (NPV) -
NET BENEFIT (NPV Best estimate) £0
- The following posts may be related...(the database guesses):
- Fun facts from the DCLG / OS consultation (29 December 2009; score: 53.83%)
- Hurrah! Ordnance Survey consultation is live! (23 December 2009; score: 47.91%)
- How does Ordnance Survey justify its licensing costs when its accounts are disputed? (22 June 2006; score: 39.56%)
- How much does it cost to display a map online? The correct(ed) answer (29 June 2006; score: 30.51%)
- Today in the Guardian: 'free data' ministers still in place, but face uphill challenge (9 October 2008; score: 28.08%)
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Figure 8 in the consultation document puts the price for freeing *all* OS data at only £60m/year. This could be entirely funded by an average £150 surcharge per successful planning application. Obviously it would make sense to charge large developments more than smaller ones, but this doesn’t seem like an unreasonable charge. Alternatively, the government seems to have no problem conjuring up billions for other data projects, e.g. the NHS system or national ID cards.
Also, why are they only planning on making raster data available. Seems like they are just being obstreperous.