Civic open data at a crossroads: Dominant models and current challenges
Introduction
Many argue that citizen–government interactions are facilitated through, and indeed depend upon, the opening up of data generated by government and by governments' willingness to accept citizen feedback in the context of service provision (e.g., Goldstein et al., 2013, Nath, 2011). For example, through the provision of real-time transit and route schedules delivered through an open interface and with non-restrictive licenses, governments have enabled the production of consumer-oriented applications that seek to improve service to citizens. Open data provision also provides a conduit through which citizen feedback can be used to improve service delivery as well as constitute a form of citizen participation (Johnson & Robinson, 2014).
Understanding the ways that governments provide open data is a rapidly emerging area of research, with direct implications for the relationship between government and citizen. Governments have long collected information, including geospatial data, with which to support planning, decision-making, and service provision (Janssen et al., 2012, Tinati et al., 2012). Traditionally this data was kept internal to the organization and only made public in a distilled, generalized format, if at all. The widespread availability of public sector data on the Internet represents a shift towards opening and distributing datasets for general public and private sector use (Yu & Robinson, 2012). More fundamentally, it represents a transformation over time in the value of government data, from a means to an end in policy deliberations, to an end in itself (Onsrud, 1992), and even as an exercise in state power (Bates, 2014). Open data is argued to facilitate access to government data and improve service delivery but we argue that, through provision of data, increased participation in government functioning and decision-support can result.
Open data is fuelled by Internet technology that allows for easy sharing and use of data (Linders, 2012). A typical approach has been to release data for download or access via a web portal (Halonen, 2012, Tinati et al., 2012). Indeed, most open data provision focuses on “just getting the data out there,” that is, surmounting the technical, legal, and organizational barriers to placing data on a website. There also are more proactive and interactive approaches, such as government hosting or sponsoring of civic hackathons — user/developer events designed to drive use of open data with a focus on return benefit to government and citizens (Johnson and Robinson, 2014, Longo, 2011). These two forms of open data provision represent the current state of open data and narrow the view of open data to a commodity and provision of data as an end unto itself, as opposed to data provision as an end to improving citizen engagement, government transparency, and improving decision-making around government services. We argue that this customer-centric view of open data is unidirectional and transactional, missing much of the potential for data to act as a conduit for citizen engagement with government and direct input to decision-making.
Preliminary research with open data innovators in Canada suggests that open data stands at a crossroads (Johnson & Robinson, 2014), with the focus on the innovators—the original adopters of open data. Additional studies point to a continuum of adoption by government of open government, including capabilities to provide open data and to accept direct public feedback whether from social media or other conduits (Lee & Kwak, 2012). We follow Rogers (2003) here in our choice of the term ‘innovator’, the earliest adopting organizations that are willing to take risks and can tolerate the failure of initiatives. Open data now is positioned at the next phase—the early adopter stage. Even as open data moves to more widespread provision, early adopters must contend with continuing innovations in civic technology.
This paper outlines four conceptual models for open data that can occur at the early adopter stage. We describe what has become a traditional model of open data, which is the simple provision of data. Open data will likely move on from this first model, but how will it evolve? How will governments at various levels (municipal, state/provincial, federal) challenge, combine, extend, or dissolve aspects of each model? We propose conceptual models, such as government as open data advocate; civic issue tracker; and open data as a participatory realization of open government principles, present divergent models from the current open data publishing paradigm. We argue that the provision of open data requires a transformation from treating open data as an end in itself—openness for the sake of openness—towards open data as a means for accomplishing a broader open government agenda of citizen inclusion and participation in decision-making. These conceptual models are presented as a framework for the open data research community to consider, challenge with empirical results, and use as a way to continue tracking how open data provision unfolds in ‘real time’.
Section snippets
Origins of open data
Government collects data for program and service development, provision, evaluation, and justification (Gurstein, 2011, Meijer et al., 2012). Historically, this data was maintained by governments for internal use and only shared with citizens in heavily digested forms. The freedom of information (FOI) movement of the 1960s began to make a compelling case for public disclosure of government data, leading to the passage in the United States of several key FOI bills (Jaeger, 2005, Relly and
Models of open data provision
We argue that open data provision can be enacted in several ways, and that the nature of this delivery shapes the way the data is used, either as an end in itself (simple provision) or as a means to advance the goals of open government. We define four non-mutually exclusive, and non-sequential models of open data. These models consider how the level of government involvement with end users of open data can vary from: 1) a unidirectional provisioning of data (traditional data portal or
Open data at the crossroads
We have presented four different models that are driven by various government motivations for opening up data. Open data is at a crossroads because these motivations may conflict and also because open data potentially creates a corresponding shift in the role(s) of government. For example, business intelligence and economic development uses of open data are generally uni-directional and targeted towards linking government data with end users, rather than a deep consideration of citizen
Conclusion: The trajectory of open data
Government, citizens, private sector, and open data are in a rapidly evolving relationship, one where the type, degree, and directionality of data sharing will determine how data is used and exploited for private and/or public benefit. In the drive for efficiency in operations, government should not relinquish a focus on effectiveness or improvements to government–citizen relations. If the popular model of open data stagnates with the data over the wall model, government must ensure that value
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Dr. Renee E. Sieber is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and School of the Environment, McGill University. Dr. Sieber is the Canadian leader and among world leaders in the use of geospatial technologies for Public Participation. Dr. Sieber is currently the PI of the SSHRC Partnership Grant “How the Geospatial Web is re-shaping government–citizen interactions” (geothink.ca), which brings together researchers from geography, law, communications, and planning, leveraging
References (60)
The strategic importance of information policy for the contemporary neoliberal state: The case of Open Government Data in the United Kingdom
Government Information Quarterly
(2014)- et al.
Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies
Government Information Quarterly
(2010) - et al.
Open e-government in US state governments: Survey evidence from Chief Information Officers
Government Information Quarterly
(2012) Deliberative democracy and the conceptual foundations of electronic government
Government Information Quarterly
(2005)- et al.
An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement
Government Information Quarterly
(2012) From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media
Government Information Quarterly
(2012)Building open government
Government Information Quarterly
(2010)Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0
Government Information Quarterly
(2012)- et al.
The changing face of a city government: A case study of Philly311
Government Information Quarterly
(2014) - et al.
Perceptions of transparency of government policymaking: A cross-national study
Government Information Quarterly
(2009)
Open data policies, their implementation and impact: A framework for comparison
Government Information Quarterly
A platform for closing the open data feedback loop based on Web2. 0 functionality
eJournal of eDemocracy & Open Government
Open data movement in Greece: A case study on open government data sources
The enabling effects of open government data on collaborative governance in smart city contexts
eJournal of eDemocracy & Open Government
“This is what modern deregulation looks like”: Co-optation and contestation in the shaping of the UK's Open Government Data Initiative
The Journal of Community Informatics
Crowdsourcing the public participation process for planning projects
Planning Theory
Effectiveness of geographic information systems in local planning
Journal of the American Planning Association
Evaluating second generation open government data infrastructures using value models
IEEE
Potential contributions and challenges of VGI for conventional topographic base-mapping programs
The role of Canadian municipal open data initiatives: A multi-city evaluation (2013)
Information strategies for open government: Challenges and prospects for deriving public value from government transparency
Why government is not a platform
Making transparency work
Global Environmental Politics
Beyond transparency: Open data and the future of civic innovation
Citizens as voluntary sensors: Spatial data infrastructure in the world of Web 2.0
International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research
Open data: Empowering the empowered or effective data use for everyone?
First Monday
How good is volunteered geographical information? A comparative study of OpenStreetMap and Ordnance Survey datasets
Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design
Web Mapping 2.0: The Neogeography of the GeoWeb
Geography Compass
Being open about data. Analysis of the UK open data policies and applicability of data
Open government and e-government: Democratic challenges from a public value perspective
Information Polity
Cited by (206)
The governance of artificial intelligence in Canada: Findings and opportunities from a review of 84 AI governance initiatives
2024, Government Information QuarterlyBuilding open government data platform ecosystems: A dynamic development approach that engages users from the start
2023, Government Information QuarterlyDeterminants of open government data usage: Integrating trust theory and social cognitive theory
2023, Government Information QuarterlyOrchestrating distributed data governance in open social innovation
2023, Information and OrganizationConservation ethics in the time of the pandemic: Does increasing remote access advance social justice?
2022, Biological ConservationUnderstanding civil servants' intentions to open data: factors influencing behavior to disclose data
2024, Information Technology and People
Dr. Renee E. Sieber is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and School of the Environment, McGill University. Dr. Sieber is the Canadian leader and among world leaders in the use of geospatial technologies for Public Participation. Dr. Sieber is currently the PI of the SSHRC Partnership Grant “How the Geospatial Web is re-shaping government–citizen interactions” (geothink.ca), which brings together researchers from geography, law, communications, and planning, leveraging additional support from private, government, non-profit, and academic partners.
Dr. Peter A. Johnson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Geography and Environmental Management at the University of Waterloo. His research expertise is in the application and evaluation of geospatial technologies, including open data, the geospatial web, mobile devices, crowdsourcing, participatory geomatics, and volunteered geographic information. He is currently the Open Data node leader for the SSHRC-funded Partnership Grant ‘geothink.ca’.