Effectively the world's biggest government hackathon, GovHack includes some amazing ideas on how to solve public challenges, using open data from agencies in innovative ways.
Whether you've previously heard of the GovHack event or not, visiting the Hackerspace (2016.hackerspace.govhack.org/projects), where all the registered projects are listed, is an inspiring way to start the morning and get some innovative ideas on how to address some of the pressing challenges facing your agency or organisation.
I wasn't actively involved in GovHack this year, due to family commitments, so don't have any insights from the ground on how the event went.
However from the social correspondence and general mood online, the event maintained the heights it attained in past years, while maturing further with better systems and challenge structures.
With GovHack managed by a second generation team (with the founder and key past organisers moving on or otherwise engaged), this year marked a major transition for the event.
The success of this year proves that GovHack isn't just a passion-play, but is a solid, sustainable, professional event that can become an important ongoing part of the open data movement, and tool for governments to foster citizen engagement, for a long time into the future.
Congrats to all of the organisers this year, who have made this possible.
Here's some stats from the event, based on the current information in the Hackerspace.
Total projects registered: 439
Total projects submitted: 351 (80%)
(Projects must be submitted to be eligible for judging)
The tables below show the number and percentage of submissions (Sub.) by territory, as well as submissions by 2015 population estimates.
As I measure it, the smaller the population per submission, the greater the level of engagement with GovHack within that territory - leaving ACT the most engaged, followed by South Australia, Tasmania, Queensland, New Zealand and then Western Australia, with Victoria and NSW at the end.
Projects by Country
Country | Reg. | Sub. | % Sub. |
Population
| Sub./Pop. |
Australia
|
373
|
291
|
78.0%
|
23,781,200
|
81,722
|
New Zealand
|
66
|
60
|
90.9%
|
4,596,700
|
76,612
|
Projects by Australian State/Territory
State/Territory |
Reg.
|
Sub.
|
% Sub.
|
Population
|
Sub./Pop.
|
Australian Capital Territory
|
51
|
44
|
86.3%
|
390,800
|
8,882
|
New South Wales
|
70
|
45
|
64.3%
|
7,618,200
|
169,293
|
Queensland
|
84
|
70
|
83.3%
|
4,779,400
|
68,277
|
South Australia
|
60
|
49
|
81.7%
|
1,698,600
|
34,665
|
Tasmania
|
13
|
11
|
84.6%
|
516,600
|
46,964
|
Victoria
|
69
|
48
|
69.6%
|
5,938,100
|
123,710
|
West Australia
|
26
|
24
|
92.3%
|
2,591,600
|
107,983
|
Projects by Region and Local event - Australia
Region | Local Site | Reg. | Sub. | % Sub. | |
ACT | Canberra |
45
|
39
|
86.7%
| |
ACT | Canberra Heritage Hack |
6
|
5
|
83.3%
| |
NSW |
Camperdown Games for Learning
|
4
|
4
|
100.0%
| |
NSW | Parramatta |
6
|
5
|
83.3%
| |
NSW | Sydney Official |
55
|
32
|
58.2%
| |
NSW | Tyro Fintech Hub |
5
|
4
|
80.0%
| |
QLD | Brisbane Maker Node |
11
|
7
|
63.6%
| |
QLD | Brisbane Official |
42
|
35
|
83.3%
| |
QLD | Brisbane Youth Node |
1
|
1
|
100.0%
| |
QLD | Far North Queensland |
1
|
1
|
100.0%
| |
QLD | Gold Coast |
6
|
4
|
66.7%
| |
QLD |
Ipswich
|
4
|
4
|
100.0%
| |
QLD | Logan |
6
|
6
|
100.0%
| |
QLD | Rockhampton |
3
|
3
|
100.0%
| |
QLD | Sunshine Coast |
6
|
5
|
83.3%
| |
QLD | Toowoomba |
4
|
4
|
100.0%
| |
SA | Adelaide |
36
|
31
|
86.1%
| |
SA |
Adelaide Maker
|
2
|
1
|
50.0%
| |
SA |
Mount Gambier
|
9
|
9
|
100.0%
| |
SA | Onkaparinga |
5
|
2
|
40.0%
| |
SA | Playford |
7
|
5
|
71.4%
| |
SA |
Port Adelaide Enfield
|
1
|
1
|
100.0%
| |
Tas | Hobart |
7
|
5
|
71.4%
| |
Tas | Launceston |
6
|
6
|
100.0%
| |
Vic | Ballarat |
9
|
8
|
88.9%
| |
Vic | Geelong |
5
|
4
|
80.0%
| |
Vic | Hack for Wyndham |
5
|
5
|
100.0%
| |
Vic | Melbourne |
36
|
20
|
55.6%
| |
Vic | Melbourne Mapspace |
14
|
11
|
78.6%
| |
WA | Geraldton |
3
|
2
|
66.7%
| |
WA | Perth |
23
|
22
|
95.7%
|
Projects by Region and Local event - New Zealand
Region | Local Site | Reg. | Sub. | % Sub. | |
NZ | Auckland |
16
|
15
|
93.8%
| |
NZ | Christchurch |
15
|
12
|
80%
| |
NZ | Dunedin |
1
|
1
|
100%
| |
NZ | Hamilton |
10
|
9
|
90%
| |
NZ | Napier, Hawkes Bay |
2
|
2
|
100%
| |
NZ | Northland |
1
|
1
|
100%
| |
NZ | Queenstown |
3
|
3
|
100%
| |
NZ | Wellington |
14
|
13
|
92.9%
| |
NZ | Whanganui |
4
|
4
|
100%
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.