Trends in information technology and private sector activities

Trends in Information Technology and Private Sector Activities

Judith Coffey Russell*

As the largest single producer, consumer, and disseminator of information in the United States, the Federal government has enormous power to influence the development and diffusion of new information technologies. Through the use of electronic information systems, it also has the opportunity to make more government information readily available to more public users. Defining the appropriate uses of, and controls on, this power am of critical importance in determining whether the government will be a positive or a negative force, particularly with respect to the private sector. Although there has always been, and probably always will be, some competition between government and private sector information products and services, there is agreement that the laws and policies regulating government information practices do not, and should not, require or permit a Federal agency to provide information products and services in the same manner as a private company. Federal agencies must be careful not to exploit the power inherent in electronic data systems by providing nonessential services to the public simply because the capability to provide such services exists. Instead the government should assume an affirmative obligation to review each electronic information activity carefully in order to avoid unnecessary government interference in the marketplace for information products and services. Further, as the government becomes incmasiugly involved in the use of electronic collection and dissemination, it must also learn to differentiate among levels of service and requirements of various user communities. Positions of the Association of Research Libraries, the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science and the Information Industry Association are presented and am shown to be in surprising harmony with the policies of OMB Circular A-130 and the views of the House Committee on Government Operations. The Securities and Exchange Commission’s EDGAR system and recent development in distribution og government information on CD-ROM are reviewed as examples of the implementation of these policies. *Direct all correspondence

to: Judith Coffq Russell, Mead Data Centml, PO. Box 933, Dayton, OH 45401.

Government Information Quarterly, Volume 5, Number 3, pages 251-266. Copyright 0 I.988 by JAI Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 0740-624X.

252

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 3/l988

Because of the rapid development of computer and communications technologies during the second half of the twentieth century, information is acquired, generated, stored, and disseminated in ways and in volumes that were inconceivable at the beginning of the century. The Information Industry Association (IIA) has stated that: The information revolution has replaced the industrial revolution as the moving force in transforming our world and reshaping our lives. Important in themselves, these changes in information capability may be even more important to society through the multiplier effect they will have on progress in countless other fields of human endeavor.’

As “the largest single producer, consumer, and disseminator of information in the United States,“2 the Federal government has enormous power to influence the development and diffusion of new information techniques. Further, the use of electronic information systems. systems “permits government information to be used in ways that are not possible when the information is stored on paper records.“3 This includes “the opportunity to make more government information readily available to more public users! Defining the appropriate uses of, and controls on, this power are of critical importance in determining whether the government will be a positive or a negative force, particularly with respect to the private sector. Although many of the subjects addressed below can apply to more traditional forms of information collection and distribution, the focus here will be on electronic collection and dissemination of government information.

THE CHANGING

ROLE OF THE GOVERNMENT

The information industry is media independent, reflecting its recognition that the same information can often be packaged in many different ways to serve different user communities. The segmentation of data, publication in various media, and the provision of various levels of access to, and prices for, information create product differentiation and stimulate competition among private sector companies. As the government becomes increasingly involved in the use of electronic collection and dissemination, it must also learn to differentiate among levels of service and requirements of various user communities. In some instances this will mean maintaining traditional, nonelectronic information products in lieu of, or in addition to, the newer electronic products in order to meet user requirements. The Committee on Government Operations of the U.S. House of Representatives recommends that, “[t]o the greatest extent practicable, a Federal agency should support a diversity of information distribution mechanisms. Not all public users are willing or able to use computerized record systems.“5 Further, although there has always been, and probably always will be, some competition between the government and the private sector over information products and services, “laws and policies regulating government information practices do not require or permit a Federal agency to provide information products and information services in the same manner as a private company.“6 The difficulty continues to be in defining and maintaining the appropriate differences between a government information provider and a private sector provider. The House Committee on Government Operations summarizes the issue this way :

Trends in information

Technology

and Private Sector Activities

253

There are no simple principles that can be applied with certainty to every information product or service or to every electronic information system. The best that can be done is to identify thetots to consider in determining whether an information activity is appropriate for a government agency or should be left for the private sector.’

Acknowledging that there is “a risk that agencies may be able to exert greater control over information in electronic information systems than is possible with data maintained in traditional, hard-copy formats,“8 the House Committee on Government Operations states that “[a]n agency should take care not to exploit the power that is inherent in electronic data systems by providing non-essential services to the public simply because the capability to provide the services exists.“9 Instead the government should assume an affirmative obligation to review each electronic information activity carefully in order to avoid “unnecessary government interference in the marketplace for information products and services.“rO The IIA believes that both the government and the private sector can benefit from this avoidance of unnecessary interference, and states: Our vision for the future is that Federal agencies will add their demand to existing outside private demand for information of various hinds in a variety of formats. By doing so, Federal agencies will become a powerful propulsive force driving even greater development in highly refined information services.”

Through its Public Sector/Private Sector Task Force, the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS) has also recognized as an affirmative obligation of government the effective use of its power over information.

NATIONAL

COMMISSION INFORMATION

ON LIBRARIES SCIENCE

AND

The NCLIS Public Sector/Private Sector Task Force identified as its first principle for determining government policy on the distribution of information that: “The Federal govemment should take a leadership role in creating a framework which would facilitate the development and foster the use of information products and services.“r2 The significant word here is leadership, and the Task Force emphasized that the government cannot, and should not, manage the “entire information enterprise of the country. Rather, [it can set] policies that will guide Federal agencies in their information activities. . . so that a context is established within which non-governmental sectors can function.“13 In its effort to define the characteristics of appropriate government information activities, the Task Force identified two important related principles: The Federal government should establish and enforce policies and procedures that encourage, and do not discourage, investment by the private sector in the development and use of information products and servicesr4 The Federal government should not provide information products and services in commerce except when there are compelling reasons to do so, and then only when it protects the private see tor’s every opportunity to assume the function(s) commercially.rJ

The information industry supports these principles and expresses similar concerns about the role of government through its own trade association.

254

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION Whereas IIA acknowledges

INDUSTRY

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 311988

ASSOCIATION

that “since the early days, and generally

with useful purpose,

the government has been involved with the creation and distribution of information critical to our national interest, and [it] will continue to be[,]“i6 it cautions that “the underlying premise of the First Amendment surely means that government should not play the dominant role in providing information nor a domineering role in the control of information developed by others.“i7 Because government regulation interferes with ordinary marketplace forces, IIA recommends that the government impose a regulatory framework on the information industry (including the communications sector) that is minimal and recedes as the industry matures. It further recommends that the government avoid competition with the private sector, stating: Such competition vices, particularly

exists where the government creates or provides information products or serenhanced products or services, comparable to those which have been or could

be readily created or provided by private sector sources. This competition that is, where the private sector is meeting or can meet and information should not compekrs

should be minimized; need, the government

According to IIA, the government can avoid unnecessary competition with the private sector by determining in advance if there is a “genuine, demonstrable and critical need”19 for an information product or service that is not being met, or likely to be met, by the private sector. When there is such a need, the government should encourage the private sector to meet its needs through development or modification of a commercial information product or service. If that cannot be accomplished, the government should contract with the private sector for the development of the necessary product or service. Internal development by the government should be the last resort .20Additionally, IIA recommends a sunset policy under which government information products or services currently being offered should be carefully reviewed periodically to make sure that continued production and dissemination serve a need that still exists and that is not being met or cannot be readily met by private sector sources and are done in a manner that diminishes potential “competition” with the private sector?’

Since the issuance of the report of the NCLIS Public Sector/Private Sector Task Force in 1982 and the IL4 policy statement in 1983, the government has strengthened and clarified its own policies on information management through publication of OMB Circular A-130. OMB

CIRCULAR

A-130

The Circular, entitled “Management of Federal Information Resources,” provides a general policy framework for Federal information resource collection, management, and dissemination. It covers such diverse subjects as privacy, utilization of information technology, maintenance of Federal records, implementation of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the role of the private sector?2 The appropriate relationship between the government and the private sector is clearly articulated in the basic considerations and assumptions that introduce the Circular. The relevant assumption states:

Trends in Information

Technology

and Private Sector Activities

255

Although certain functions are inherently governmental in nature, being so intimately related to the public interest as to mandate performance by Federal employees, the government should look first to private sources, where available, to provide the commercial goods and services needed by the government to act on the public’s behalf, particularly when cost comparisons indicate that private performance will be the most economical?3

Through the Circular,

OMB limits agency data collection

and directs agencies to

create or collect only that information necessary for the proper performance of agency functions and that has practical utility, and only after planning for its processing, transmission, dissemination, use, storage, and dispositionr4

For information that meets the criteria established above, the Circular identifies the private sector as an alternative source, requiring Federal agencies to seek to satisfy new information needs through legally authorized interagency or inter- governmental sharing of information, or through commercial sources, where appropriate, before creating or collecting new information?5

OMB is even more specific about the role of the private sector when it discusses dissemination of government information in the Circular. Agencies are permitted to disseminate only those information products and services that are “specifically required by law; or necessary for the proper performance of agency functions:‘26 and only when “the latter do not duplicate similar products or services that are or would otherwise be provided by other government or private sector organizations.“27 The Circular directs agencies to disseminate government information products and services in a manner that is “most cost effective for the govemment while placing maximum feasible reliance on the private sector.“28 Additionally, OMB concurs with the IL4 assertion that a sunset policy is essential and the Circular requires Federal agencies to establish procedures for “reviewing periodically the continued need for and manner of dissemination of the agency’s information products or services.“2g Since the publication of the Circular, the House Committee on Government Operations has exercised its oversight responsibilities and published a report on implementation of these policies in the evolving electronic information activities of a number of Federal agencies.

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES The House Committee on Government Operations published its report on electronic collection and dissemination of information by Federal agencies in 1986. It recommended several important actions that agencies should take in developing and operating electronic information systems. With respect to competition with the private sector, the report stated: A Federal agency that unavoidably competes with the private sector in providing information products and services should compete fairly. Fair competition means that an agency should limit the services that it offers to the public and should leave the private sector to provide additional valueadded services. An agency should not offer an information service to the public simply because the capability to provide that service exists?0

256

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 3/l988

Because pricing is a significant factor in determining the competitive impact of information services that are offered by Federal agencies, the report advises that the extent to which any agency must provide free or low-cost access to electronic data bases depends on the agency’s statutory responsibilities, the type of data, and the community of users. Some agencies may be able to assure adequate public access to electronic data bases even if fees are required of all users. Other agencies may find it necessary to offer subsidies. In some instances, it may be appropriate for all costs of public access to be paid by the agency. Any decision about free or subsidized access should be evaluated independently of a determination of the appropriate fee for nonsubsidized information services?’

The Committee recognizes that these are not simple policies to implement and acknowledges that “it will be difficult to avoid reaching at least some inconsistent results,” stating: For example, newly proposed information services are likely to be scrutinized more than existing services. Terminating long standing government information products or services may be difficult to achieve?*

Additionally, agency conversion of a file that is already automated, either in whole or in substantial part, by a private company should be carefully reviewed because “in such a case, the existence and availability of the agency data base can have a substantial effect on the investment already made by the private company.“33 A delicate balance must be maintained between an agency’s internal information needs and its obligations under existing law or policy to disseminate that information to the public on the one hand and the requirement to utilize and avoid competition with the private sector on the other hand. The report provides several examples of agency automation programs that have successfully achieved this balance and can serve as effective models for electronic dissemination of agency information.94 The Committee also strongly reaffirms the principle that copyright protection “is not available for any work of the United States Govemment,“35 and states: “The possibility that Federal agencies can, through their own actions, acquire copyright-like controls over public data maintained in electronic information systems is very rea1.“36 The report cites the pricing and licensing arrangements used by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) for its Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System (MEDLARS) as an example of this inappropriate control, saying: There are three features of the Medlars system that suggest that NLM is exercising copyright-like controls: (1) the way in which fees are charged; (2) the imposition of restrictions on redisclosure of the data base; and (3) the way in which FOIA requests for Medlars information are treated?’

Warning that the model of information control established other government agencies, the Committee advises that

by the NLM could occur in

the real danger is the possibility that, in establishing electronic information systems, Federal agencies might also acquire copyright-like controls over public information. Since such controls are not a necessary function of these systems, there should be no difficulty in achieving the benefits of new information technology without any increase in government dissemination restrictions.‘*

Trends in information

Technology

and Private Sector Activities

257

In this context, the Committee states that “no Federal agency should be able to maintain a monopoly over the dissemination of public data, and no agency should permit an agency contractor to exercise monopoly power over agency data.39 The library community is a major user of government information. Recognizing this, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) established a Task Force on Government Information in Electronic Format in 1986 to address government responsibilities and private sector roles and to examine their impact on libraries.

ASSOCIATION

OF RESEARCH LIBRARIES

The ARL Task Force examined the role of the private sector and government responsibility for distribution of government information and sought to define a complementary partnership. While acknowledging that “the private sector has already contributed to the development of a diverse array of information systems that form critical supports for all aspects of our democratic society,“40 the ARL position is that the test is not whether a for-profit firm could sustain an information product if the government did not have a similar product, but rather whether there is a legitimate government role and public need in creating and distributing particular information products:”

ARL distinguishes between classes of information for which “full and effective government participation in the provision of information products is essential” and classes for which “government participation should be limited or the information collection activity eliminated.“42 Examples of the first class include instances where broad citizen access to information is essential to the operation of our democratic institutions, [such as t]he status of bills before Congress, information about tax collections, budgets, and expenditures, and description of government policies and programs . . [and the] Census of Population.43

In light of the Federal deficit and the related need to reassess Federal spending patterns, ARL recommends a regular review of government information programs in order to identify the purpose that the information serves and its relevance to the government responsibility for making information available. In some instances the government may find it appropriate to use tax support for data gathering, but allow the consumers of the information to support distribution through fees; examples of this type include “information sets that support a particular market [such as] crop reports.“44 Jn other cases, such as public health programs to combat infectious diseases, “the pursuit of a particular government policy militates subsidy of [the] distribution of appropriate information.“45 In still others, it may find no compelling reason for government involvement. “When the government has no particular advantage, or need, to gather a given set of information, market forces should lead to an array of private information products.“46 This concept is equally appropriate to decisions related to the distribution of government information. While it recognizes that “the environment for providing users with access to electronic information resources is significantly different from a traditional print-based library,“47 the ARL Task Force reaffirms the fact that libraries “have and will continue to play key

258

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 3/l988

roles in fulfilling Government information responsibilities by providing no-fee access for the general public to government documents.“4* ARL concludes that the private sector, in partnership with the government, can also make a significant contribution to fulfilling government responsibilities to make information available so long as: For that information where broad citizen access is essential to the operation of our democratic institutions, such partnerships must function so that the costs do not force the imposition of user fees by the Government or libraries.@

The ARL Task Force reaches the same conclusion as the House Committee on Government Operations when it identifies “delivery . . . . unencumbered by copyright or other use restrictions”50 as a key issue in the dissemination of government information. ARL believes that the prohibition on copyright on works of the Federal government should be extended to cover work produced under government grants and contracts and further states that “policies or practices that allow a Federal agency or a private organization to exert exclusive rights or other kinds of proprietary controls over government information in any format should be resisted.“51 In summary, the policies of OMB Circular A-130 and the views of the House Committee on Government Operations are compatible with and supported by the positions of ARL, NCLIS, and IIA. Although there has always been, and probably always will be, some competition between government and private sector information products and services, there is agreement that the laws and policies regulating government information practices do not, and should not, require or permit a Federal agency to provide information products and services in the same manner as a private company. Federal agencies must be careful not to exploit the power inherent in electronic data systems by providing nonessential services to the public simply because the capability to provide such services exists. Instead the government should assume an affirmative obligation to review each electronic information activity carefully in order to avoid unnecessary government interference in the marketplace for information products and services. Further, as the government becomes increasingly involved in the use of electronic collection and dissemination, it must also learn to differentiate among levels of service and requirements of various user communities. Clearly, it is easier to state these policies than it is to implement them, but it is useful to look at some specific government information collection and dissemination activities to see what happens when policy is put into practice.

THE

SECURITIES

POLICY IN PRACTICE: AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Advances in computer and communications technology, combined with increasing pressure on agencies to be more efficient and effective, has lead a number of agencies to examine the feasibility of electronic data collection. Perhaps the most visible among the early efforts to implement this new technology is the Electronic Data Gathering and Retrieval (EDGAR) system proposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC originally envisioned a system that would be operated at no cost to the agency, with a private sector contractor recovering its cost for developing and operating the system through an exclusive right to wholesale the electronic data and the option to compete in

Trends in information

Technology

and Private

Sector Activities

259

the retail market with value-added products and services. This scenario would have effectively shifted the burden of the costs for developing and operating the EDGAR system and for disseminating the resulting electronic information to public users of the data. “The essence of the original financing plan for EDGAR was that the SEC was exchanging an interest in the database for services. But an uncopyrighted database of public information does not have much market value.“52 After hearings by the House Committee on Energy and Commercti3 and the House Committee on Government OperationP4 were held in 1985, the SEC made significant changes in EDGAR. Under the present RFP for the operational system, EDGAR is divided into three subsystems. The receipt subsystem and the acceptance and review subsystem “shall be paid for in total by the SEC.“55 The contractor is to pay for the dissemination subsystem a critical objective of the operational EDGAR system is to achieve the widest possible distribution of SEC filings, as a fair and reasonable price that permits the SEC contractor to recover its costs [for the dissemination] and earn a reasonable rate of return on its investment. This is best accomplished by a structure that entails limited SEC involvement in product definition and price regulation and maximum reliance upon free market competition?6

These changes bring it into conformance on Government Operations that

with the conclusions

of the House Committee

in almost all cases, the basic cost of creating and operating an information system are expenses that would be incurred whether or not the system is shared with the public. In fact, . the primary reason for undertaking computerization was improving internal agency open&ions. Improving public access [was not] the sole or even the major motivation. Thus, the costs of computerization would have been paid by the agency in the absence of a public access requirement. As a result, it is appropriate that these basic costs should be borne entirely by the Federal agencies;”

It is interesting

to note that

at tbe same time that the SEC recognized that it would have to pay its own costs of using EDGAR, the agency also discovered that it could manage with a smaller system. The number of work stations needed for SEC processing decreased from 1,405 in the presolicitation document to 450?*

The private sector role in the EDGAR system has been preserved in several ways. The agency requirements for the electronic filing (receipt) subsystem and the acceptance and review subsystem are to be met by a private sector contractor identified through a competitive procurement and the agency will pay for the necessary equipment and services. The contractor will also play a role in the dissemination subsystem, but with protections that are “designed to ensure that any commercial vendor of information has adequate and timely access to SEC information at a fair and reasonable price[,] . . . resulting [in] direct and open competition among providers, including the EDGAR contractor.“59 The costs for the distribution subsystem will be borne by the contractor and passed on to the users of the electronic information. Because the SEC will eventually eliminate paper tilings, the RFP requires the EDGAR contractor “to provide free access by the public to the dissemination subsystem through workstations available in the SEC’s Public Reference Rooms.“60 The House Committee on Government Operations notes that

GOVERNMENT

260

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 3/‘l988

meeting the SEC’s public access responsibility through EDGAR may result in some competition with private sector information services. But the competition is unavoidable because the information service must be provided in order to fulfill the statutory role of the SEC!’

The Committee

elaborates

on this concept of justifiable

competition

by stating:

An agency’s obligation to allow the public reasonable use of an electronic data base will typically entail some upgrading of the public’s ability to access, copy, and manipulate data. It would be unreasonable, for example, for the SEC to allow the public to use EDGAR only as an electronic page-turner on the grounds that this service duplicated the type of access now provided to paper records. A value-added search service is integral to the operations of a computerized data baseP2

However, although EDGAR will also give the SEC the capability to analyze financial data, the SEC does not plan to provide this service to the public. The House Committee finds this commendable and states: The SEC’s job is to support public dissemination of financial information and not the analysis of that information. The private sector is capable of providing analytical services to the general public and any offering of such services would be unnecessary and unfair competitionb3

The present EDGAR RFP provides a framework for private sector distribution of enhanced or value-added information services that seems to meet the objectives of the IIA that testified: Only multiple, diverse, and specific information services can meet the information needs of different users, including Federal agencies. The only way for such a diversity to arise is for users to express their demands in market terms through willingness to pay, with entrepreneurs identifying and serving expressed needs and wantaP

Whereas EDGAR is a major electronic data collection and dissemination system and, therefore, has received considerable attention and oversight, the new information technologies also permit a proliferation of small, relatively low budget, information dissemination activities.

POLICY IN PRACTICE: CD-ROM Among the new technologies that are having a significant effect on the dissemination of government information, CD-ROM (Compact Disc-Read Only Memory) provides some interesting examples of the opportunity for partnership between the government and the private sector as well as the potential for competition. A parallel development to the compact audio disc, a CD-ROM is a sealed plastic disc, 4.7 inches in diameter, that can store up to 640 megabytes of electronic (digital) data on a single sideP5 It can be read (or played) on a drive (or player) that can be attached to a microcomputer as a peripheral device. The discs are mass produced by stamping and provide a relatively permanent means of distributing large amounts of electronic information, including ASCII text, images and audio dataP6 The data on a CD-ROM can be read, manipulated, and printed in much the same way as data stored on a floppy or hard disk, except that the user cannot erase the CD-ROM or write (save) new data on the disc. These characteristics make CD-ROM an excellent publishing media.

Trends in information

Technology

and Private Sector Activities

261

Although most of the discs pressed in the United States today are digital audio discs, there are more than sixteen plants that can handle CD-ROM discs?’ At least a few of these can handle discs containing classified information P* Since a plant with a capacity to press 50 million discs per year requires an investment on the order of $20 million69 and there is adequate capacity to accommodate both private sector and government pressing and duplicating requirements for the foreseeable future, there is little or no requirement for the Federal government to make an investment in a plant to press discs. Similarly, over two dozen companies offer data preparation and premastering services70 and several sell hardware and/or license software for performing these services to companies or agencies that wish to perform these tasks themselves. There are also over 40 companies providing search and retrieval software for use with CD-ROM;” while most of these are suitable primarily for text files, several are designed to manipulate statistical or numerical data files and others to handle graphic data such as maps, photographs, and satellite images. Clearly, the private sector offers a considerable diversity of software and services available “off-the-shelf’ for purchase or licensing by Federal agencies as well as an array of firms willing to do custom work under contract. The private sector has also become heavily involved in the dissemination of government information on CD-ROM. The December 1987 issue of CD-ROM Review identified approximately 160 CD-ROM information products that are, or soon will be, availableY2 Fully one-third of these could be readily identified as containing U.S. (Federal) government information. (Several others contained British, Canadian, or U.S. state government information.) These products vary considerably with respect to the type and quantity of government information included on the CD-ROM. Microsoft(R) Bookshelf is an example of a product that contains primarily proprietary information copyrighted by the private sector, including a business directory, thesaurus, style manual, almanac, dictionary/spell checker, and book of quotations; the only government information included on the disc is the five digit ZIP Code directory available under a nonexclusive license from the U.S. Postal Service. At the other extreme are a number of CD-ROM products where all of the information on the disc is obtained from the government. For these products the compilation or segmentation of the material, data preparation and mastering of the CD-ROM, and the software to access it are the value that is added by the publisher. Examples of this type include a number of popular government databases that have been distributed by online services for many years: AGRICOLA, ERIC, MEDLINE, NTIS and the Monthly Catalog of United States Government Publications. Each of these databases is available on CD-ROM from at least two commercial vendors. The products are differentiated by segmentation (years of coverage, comprehensive versus English language records, and so forth), software features, and price. This competition has been very healthy. Two ERIC products on CD-ROM already existedr4 when a third vendor75 introduced a comparable product at a substantially lower price. Within a matter of weeks all three products were comparably priced at the lower level. In addition, the search software offered by the competing vendors has continued to improve as new features are added to enhance and further differentiate their individual products. The software provided with a CD-ROM product can create substantially new information products even when there is no proprietary data involved. One example of this is the

262

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. S/No. 3/1988

first commercial CD-ROM product to offer MARC data with software that could be used to generate catalog cards or book order forms and, through a modem, to place orders for books through a jobberr6 Another example is a CD-ROM product that combines 1980 county level census data with digital maps to produce color maps summarizing data selected by the user?7 Other CD-ROM products that are entirely government information have obtained data from multiple government sources and blended it to create a “new” body of information that did not previously exist. Examples of this are products that have incorporated product descriptions, manufacturers’ part numbers, national stock numbers, national item identification numbers, pricing and related information into a procurement and logistical support information system.78 This blending has also been done with copies of vector and/or raster maps obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey, Defense Mapping Agency, and other sources, and integrated with place and landmark names, latitude/longitude locations, and other government data flles?g Special software allows the user to zoom in and out and to overlay icons or other user-generated data elements. As might be expected, a wide range of products exist in the mid-range and combine govemment information with proprietary information. A few examples of these include a product that incorporates full text of articles from medical journals with the related citations from the MEDLINE databasetO cataloging databases that incorporate MARC records from the Library of Congress with comparable records generated by participating libraries?’ and serials directories that incorporate MARC-S records with proprietary information gathered by the publisherBZ These examples are representative of the range of services that have been developed by the private sector since the introduction of this technology in late 1984. The government has also been actively evaluating CD-ROM and developing its own information products during this period. Although the list in CD-ROM Review identities only three government authored CD-ROM discs, there are, in fact, many more available and under development. The Cataloging and Distribution Service (CDS) of the Library of Congress (LC) has been distributing MARC records on computer tapes for 20 years. This year CDS will release at least two CD-ROM products; the first will be the LC subject authorities database and the second will be the name authorities file. CDS also plans to issue the MARC records for books, serials, maps, visual materials, and music on CD-ROM and is considering other products.83 It is unclear how these CDS products, particularly the MARC database, will effect existing private sector products based on or incorporating MARC records. Presentations by Library of Congress staff at several public meetings, in 1986 and 1987, indicated that CDS would produce a generic product, comparable to the existing magnetic tapes, with a minimal level of software to provide access to the records, *4 thus allowing private sector firms to enhance the CDS product by redistributing it with their own “value-added” software. More recent statements by LC staff contradict this earlier position: “We’re interested in what kind of products customers would like to see on CD-ROM, what equipment they already have, what sort of retrieval systems they prefer, and any other comments they have to guide us in developing products in this new format.“85 The initial CD-ROM containing MARC records will use software licensed from a commercial suppliers6 that provides many of the capabilities available from existing private sector suppliers of MARC data on CD-ROM.

Trends in hforrnation

Technology and Private Sector Activities

263

The final product configuration has not yet been determined. Like the Library of Congress, the U.S. Bureau of the Census has been distributing data in machine-readable form for over 20 years (beginning with the 1960 census of population). Some data has been distributed on floppy disk since 1984, but most of the files are too large for distribution on diskette. 87 The Census Bureau has already produced a test CD-ROM, which sells for $l25.8* The disc uses relatively simple retrieval and display software developed by Bureau personnel and, therefore, the software and the data are both in the public domain. Presentations by Census Bureau staff have expressed the intent to issue future products with a minimal level of public domain software that would allow standard tables to be accessed and displayed. Underlying data would be stored in a standard format that would encourage commercial software development to support users wishing to analyze or manipulate the data.8g Future plans for CD-ROM include publication of some data from the 1981 economic census and the 1987 census of agriculture as well as appropriate segments from the 1990 census of population. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (P’IO) supports 62 patent depository libraries as part of its effort to fulfill a statutory obligation to disseminate patent information to the public. For several years these libraries have been receiving free online access to the PTO CASSIS (Classification and Search Support Information System) database. PI0 has prepared a CD-ROM containing portions of the CASSIS databasePO and a pilot project is now underway to evaluate the effectiveness of the CD-ROM product in meeting the needs of the patent depository libraries. U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) has been a leader in Federal applications of CD-ROM and sponsors a special interest group (SIGCAT) that meets monthly to review developments in hardware, software, and publishing activities P’ A SIGCAT subcommittee is compiling a list of government and private sector CD-ROM projects incorporating Federal information. Another subcommittee is cooperating in an interagency project to produce a CD-ROM containing procurement regulations, telephone directories, and similar government information that would be of use to many agencies; the project is currently called FED-ROM. U.S.G.S. has already produced its own prototype CD-ROM containing geological informationg2 and is cooperating with the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on another.

CONCLUSIONS It is clear that new information technologies offer new opportunities for cooperation between the private sector and the government as well as new risks of government competition. There are in place appropriate policies and regulations to foster cooperation and protect against competition, but, as previously noted, implementation is not always easy. The eagerness of agencies to take advantage of CD-ROM and other technologies for electronic collection and dissemination of information, and their legitimate need to improve their own effectiveness and efficiency, must be managed carefully. This requires continued affirmation of existing policies and principles by OMB and the Congress, but it is not possible, or even desirable, given the size and complexity of government information activities for either OMB or the Congress to micromanage every agency activity. The system can work well only if there is a genuine commitment to implement these policies and principles on the part of senior management within each agency.

264

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 3/l988

The requirements for government to utilize the private sector to the maximum extent possible and to avoid competition with the private sector must be kept constantly in mind. Each new and existing agency information activity should be carefully reviewed to ensure that “an agency does not offer an information service to the public simply because the capability to provide that service exists.“93

NOTES AND REFERENCES 1. 2 3.

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. IO. 11.

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39.

Information Industry Association (HA), Meeting Informarion Needs in fhe New Information Age: A Policy Statement on the Roles of the Public and Private Sectors (Washington, D.C., 1983), p. I. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) , “Management of FederaJ information Resources; Final Publication of OMB Circular No. A-130,” Section 7a, Federal Register, 50 (December 24, 1985): 52736. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Operations, Electronic Collection and Dissemination of Information by Federal Agencies: A Policy Overview, House Report 99-560 (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1986). p. 10. Ibid. Ibid., p. 11. Ibid., p. 10. Ibid., p. 54. Ibid., p. 2. Ibid., p. 59. Ibid., p. 2. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Operations, Subcommittee on Government lnformation, Justice and Agriculture, Electronic Collection and Dissemination of Information by Federal Agencies; Hearings .__ 99th Congress, 1st Session (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1985), p. 65. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. Public Sector/Private Sector Task Force. Public Sector/Private Sector Interaction in Providing Information Services (Washington, D.C. : GPO, 1982), p. 39. Ibid., p. 41. Ibid., p. 42. Ibid., p. 43. IIA, Meeting Information Needs in the New Information Age, p. 3. Ibid., p. 3. Ibid., p. 4. Ibid., p. 6. Ibid. Ibid., p. 5. OMB, Circular No. A-130, Summary, p. 52730. Ibid., Section 7e, p. 52736. Ibid., Section 8a(l), p.52736. Ibid., Section 8a(2), p. 52736. lbid., Section 8a(9), p. 52736. Ibid., Section 8a(9), p. 52736. Ibid., Section 8a(ll)(b), p. 52736. Ibid., Section 8a(12)(b), P. 52736. House of Representatives, Report 99-560, p. 12. Ibid., p. 42. Ibid., p. 59. Ibid., p. 65. Ibid., p. 61 - 67. 17 L!S.C. Section 105 (1982). House of Representatives. Report 99-560, p. 27. Ibid., p. 28. Ibid., p. 36. Ibid., p. 13.

Trends in Information Technology and Private Sector Activities

40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 41. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53.

54. 55. 56. 51. 58.

59. 60. 61. 62 63. 64 65.

66. 67. 68.

69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74.

265

Association of Research Libraries, ‘l&k Force on Government Information in Electronic Format, Technology & US. Government Information Policies: Catalystsfor New Partnerships (Washington, DC., 1987), p. 7. Ibid., p. 4. Ibid., p. 5. Ibid. Ibid., p. 6. Ibid., p. 5. Ibid., p. 6. Ibid., p. 15. Ibid., p. 6. Ibid., p. 7. Ibid., p. 27. Ibid. House of Representatives, Report 99-560, p. 45. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, SEC: Oversight of the EDGAR System; Hearings . 99th Congress, 1st Session (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1985). House of Representatives, Electronic Collection and Dissemination of Information by Federal Agencies; Hearings. Securitie.sand Exchange Commission, SEC Requestfor PmposaLFfor an Operational EDGAR System, Solicitation Number SEC HQl-86-R-0637 (Amendment 10, October 23, 1987), p. B-l. Ibid., p. B-2A. House of Representatives, Report 99-560, p. 40. Ibid., p. 45. Note: The notice appearing at Federal Register, 50 (December 17, 1985): 51495-51496 stipulates 450 workstations, while Amendment 10 to the EDGAR RFP (October 23, 1987) lists 448 workstations to be phased in over a 21 month period in Exhibit F-l on page F-6; this includes 20 workstations in the SEC Public Reference Rooms. Securities and Exchange Commission, p. B-3. Ibid., p. B-3. House of Representatives, Report 99-560, p. 60. Ibid., p. 60. Ibid., p. 60. House of Representatives, Electronic Collection and Dissemination of Information by Federal Agencies; Hearings, p. 65. A standard microcomputer hard disk stores 10 or 20 million bytes (megabytes) of data and a 5.25 inch floppy disk holds approximately 320,000 bytes. With a capacity of 640 megabytes, a CD-ROM stores more data than 1500 floppy disks. Because the technology is new, the true archival life of CD-ROM discs is not yet known; however, it is definitely more durable and less destructible than magnetic media such as floppy disks, hard disks, and tape. Steven F. Smith, “The Final Steps: Look before You Reap,” CD-ROM Review, 2 (December 1987): 39. Companies that have confirmed their capability to provide secure facilities and appropriate procedures for mastering CD-ROM containing classified information include Discovery Systems in Dublin, Ohio; Nimbus Records, Inc. in Charlottesville, Virginia; Philips DuPont Optical in Wilmington, Delaware (their plant is in Rings Mountain, North Carolina); and 3M in St. Paul, Minnesota (their plant in Menominee, Wisconsin, is already a secure facility handling top secret material on other optical media). Roger Strukhoff, “Made in America,” CD-ROM Review, 3 (February 1988): 40. Raymond Bridge, “Casting Databases into Plastic,” CD-ROM Review, 2 (December 1987): 29. Janet M. Tiampo, “The Search Is On,” CD-ROM Review, 2 (June 1987): 26. Janet M. Tiampo, “CD-ROM Disc Titles,” CD-ROM Review, 2 (December 1987): 48-55. Published on CD-ROM by Microsoft Corp. (16Oll N.E. 36th Way, Box 97017, Redmond, Washington 98073, Telephone: (206) 882-8080). The first ERIC product on CD-ROM was published by SilverPlatter Information Services (37 Walnut Street, Wellesley, Massachusetts 02181, Telephone: 617 239-0306) and the second by DIALOG Information Services (3460 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304, Telephone: 800 3-DIALOG).

266

15.

16. II.

78.

79.

80. 81.

82.

83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88.

89.

90.

91. 92. 93.

GOVERNMENT

INFORMATION

QUARTERLY

Vol. ~/NO. 3/l988

OCLC (Online Computer Library Center, Inc., 6565 Frantz Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017, Telephone: 614 764~6ooo) introduced its ERIC product at the American Library Association Mid-Winter Meeting in January 1987. BiblioFile from Library Corp. (PO. Box 40035, Washington, D.C. 20016, Telephone: 800 624-0559 or 305 725-7220) was introduced at the American Library Association Mid-Winter Meeting in 1985. Supermap from Chadwyck-Healey Inc. (lJO1 King Street, Alexandria, Viinia 22314, Telephone: 800 752-0515 or 703 683-4890). Note: A comparable result can be obtained using data from a CD-ROM produced by Slater Hall Information Products (1522 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005, Telephone: 202 682-1350) in conjunction with other commercially available mapping software. Products of this type include TLRN (Technical Logistics Reference Network) from Innovative Technology Inc. (7927 Jones Branch Drive, McLean, Virginia 22101, Telephone: 703 734-3000), Parts-Master from National Standards (5161 River Road, Bethesda, Maryland 20816, Telephone: 301 951-1300 or 800 638-8094), CD-FICHE from USA Information Systems, Inc. (3303 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314, Telephone: 800 USA-8830 or Xl3 3X-7800), and Haystack distributed by Information Handling Services (l500 Inverness Way East, Englewood, Colorado 8Oll0, Telephone: 303 779-0600). Products of this type include World Atlas from DeLorme Publishing Company (P.O. Box 298, Freeport, Maine 04032, Telephone: 207 865-4171) and the U.S. Atlas GEOdiscrM from GEOVlSlON,rM Inc. (2X3 Scientific Drive, Norcross, Georgia 30092, Telephone: 404 448-8224). Published by Digital Diagnostics Inc. (601 University Avenue, Sacramento, California 95825, Telephone: 916 921-6629). This category includes products from General Research Corp. (5383 Hollister Avenue, Santa Barbara, California 93111, Telephone: 800 235-6788), Marcive Inc. (P.O. Box 47508, San Antonia, Texas 78265, Telephone: 800 531-7678), UTLAS International (2150 Shattuck Avenue,Berkeley, California 94704, Telephone: 415 841-9442), and Western Library Network (WLN) (AJ-BW, Olympia, Washington 98504, Telephone: 206 459-6518). Products of this type include Ulrich’s Plus from Bowker Electronic Publishing (245 West 17th Street, New York, New York lOOll, Telephone: 800 323-3288) and The Serials Directory from EBSCO Electronic lnformation (PO. Box 13787, Torrance, California 90503, Telephone: 213 530-7533). CDS Product News (January 1988), p. 1. For additional information, contact Customer Services Section, Cataloging and Distribution Service, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20541, Telephone: 202 287-6100). The present electronic distribution on magnetic tape does not include any software. “Staff Investigates Several Products,” CDS Connecrion, First Issue (1988). p. 2. Online Computer Systems, Inc. (20251 Century Blvd., Germantown, Maryland 20874, Telephone: 301 428-3700). It requires approximately 400 floppy disks to store the data from one magnetic tape, and many of the popular data files from the Census Bureau require multiple tapes. The CD-ROM Test Disc includes agriculture data for counties (from the 1982 census of agriculture), demographic data for zip codes (from the 1980 census of population), and 1984 population estimates for functioning governmental units. The disc can be ordered from Customer Services, (Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C. 20233, Telephone: 301 763-4100). Since this article was written, a second test disk has been produced and is available for sale by the Census Bureau. Free copies will be shipped to all Federal Depositories Libraries in August or September 1988. According to recent statements by Census Bureau personnel, raw data are likely to be formatted using a structure compatible with dBase lIJ since that format can also be translated by Lotus l-2-3 and many other popular off-the-shelf database and spreadsheet software packages. Test Disc A is available only to patent depository libraries and provides access to current patent classitication information, the Manual of Classification, and the assignee database. Additional information is available from the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (Crystal Mall 2, Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, D.C. 20231, Telephone: m3 557-9686). For additional information on SIGCAT, contact E. J. McFaul, U.S.G.S., 804 National Center, Reston, Virginia 22092, Telephone: ‘Fo3-648-7126). Available for $35 from E. J. McFaul, U.S.G.S., 804 National Center, Reston, Virginia 22092, Telephone: 703-648-7126). House of Representatives, Report 99-560, p. 12.