Open Government Data Ecosystems: Linking Transparency for Innovation with Transparency

for Participation and Accountability

Luigi Reggi, Sharon DawesRockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy

IFIP EGOV 2016 ConferenceSeptember 5, 2016

Roadmap

• Background• Research questions• Theory• Methods• Results• Implications for policy and practice• Limitations and future research

Background

• Widespread diffusion of Open Government Data (OGD) initiatives

• The rhetoric of OGD– product and service innovation– public participation in policy-making – accountability

• But not much evidence that these benefits are being produced– publication by itself is not enough to stimulate

meaningful use of the data

Background

• Both research and practice have taken a bifurcated path:

1. Transparency for innovation • Apps development• New business models

2. Transparency for accountability and participation• Better decision making• Increased democratic participation• Greater accountability can lead to government

responsiveness and trust in government

Research questions

• What are the conceptual and empirical connections between Transparency for innovation and Transparency for accountability and participation?

• How can OGD policies and strategies be designed to improve both? What are the main barriers and enablers to doing so?

TheorySociotechnical theory and ecosystems

• Sociotechnical systems– Dynamic interplay of organizational, human,

material, and technological aspects– Multi-actor physical and institutional environment

• Ecosystem models– Trace the components of OGD Programs, their

dynamic relationships and their influence on program performance

(Adapted from Dawes et al., 2016)

Advocacy & interaction(for improved OGD)

OGD Policies &Strategies

Data publication

Data use & apps

Socio-economicbenefits

TheoryOpen Government Data Ecosystem

(Adapted from Dawes et al., 2016)

Advocacy & interaction(for improved OGD)

OGD Policies &Strategies

Data publication

Data use & apps

Socio-economicbenefits

TheoryOpen Government Data Ecosystem

Research methodsExploratory case study:

OGD on European Funding in Italy

Review of 3 complementary open government data initiatives Data sources:• Semi-structured interviews (Jan - Mar 2016)

– 4 interviews with practitioners with different roles at the OpenCoesione initiative (1 PM, 3 analysts)

– 2 interviews with 2 members of the Monithon national staff– 1 representative of a local community in Southern Italy– 2 researchers at two different Italian research institutions

• Participant observations (June-August 2015)• 3 published program reviews

Data analysis:Qualitative data were coded to highlight the relations among the actors in the ecosystem and their main roles. This evidence was used to augment existing conceptual models.

European Structural and Investment Funds– EU co-financing: €454 billion for the 2014-2020

period (43% of EU budget) – Problems of efficiency, effectiveness and

accountability– As a way to address this problem, regulations

require EU States to publish OGD on projects funded and recipients

Case studyContext

Case studyOpenCoesione: Italy’s OGD Portal

• Launched by the Ministry of Economic Development in 2012• Publishes data on 950k projects

(€51.2 billion investment)• Launched proactive initiatives to

stimulate data use– maps and interactive visualizations– articles with data analysis– data journalism schools– participation in hackathons organized

by civic technology communities

• Developed by civil society in 2013• Promotes public engagement by

organizing citizen monitoring activities of the projects found on OpenCoesione– field investigations– Involves local communities and

national NGOs• 98 “citizen monitoring reports”

uploaded after 2 years of activity• Problems of economic sustainability

Case studyMonithon - Monitoring Marathon

Case studyOpenCoesione School

• Launched by the OpenCoesione staff in 2013 as a public participation program, based on open data availability

• 2,800 high-school students involved (2015-16 edition)

• Develops new skills for data analysis and field investigation

• Uses Monithon tools and methodology for civic monitoring of public spending

• Students organize accountability forums with political leaders and administrators

• In some limited cases, the feedback is used to improve policy making

ResultsIntegrated OGD Ecosystem

Advocacy & interaction(for improved OGD)

OGD Policies &Strategies

Data publication

Data use & apps

Socio-economicbenefits

Collection of citizen

feedback on policy results

Policy making

Policy benefits

Use of citizen feedback by

intermediaries

ResultsIntegrated OGD Ecosystem

Advocacy & interaction(for improved OGD)

OGD Policies &Strategies

Data publication

Data use & apps

Socio-economicbenefits

Collection of citizen

feedback on policy results

Policy making

Policy benefits

Use of citizen feedback by

intermediaries

Implications for policy and practice

• Enablers– Proactive strategies for stimulating data use improves

both data quality and public engagement– Engagement is more feasible when data content and

characteristics match the interests of the user community• Barriers– Tenuous sustainability of civic technology initiatives and

OGD intermediaries – Absence of real public accountability mechanisms

between government and citizens

Limitations

• Single exploratory case study• Interviews cover only the national staff of the

3 initiatives• Other kinds of data (e.g., social media) may

show different patterns

Next steps

• Collect additional data about the Italian case‒ from administrators, political leaders, NGOs, high-

school students and teachers, local communities‒ Consider different types of data

• Test the integrated model in other cases– Other EU countries sharing the same ESIF

regulations, but with different institutional and socio-economic settings. e.g. Poland, Netherlands

Contact information

• Luigi Reggi (luigi.reggi@gmail.com) Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy, University at Albany-SUNY

• Sharon Dawes (sdawes@ctg.albany.edu)Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy, University at Albany-SUNYCenter for Technology in Government, University at Albany-SUNY