Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Dossiê Governo e Parlamento Digital

V. 15 N. 38 Maio/Ago. 2022

INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSIONS ASSOCIATED TO OPEN GOVERNMENT DATA: A CROSS-NATIONAL ANALYSIS

DOI
https://doi.org/10.51206/elegis.v15i38.752
Submitted
June 30, 2021
Published
2022-06-22

Abstract

Academia has been investigating the benefits and barriers of adopting open government data. However, there are theoretical gaps about the influence that institutional factors have on OGD initiatives. Thus, the purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between institutional dimensions and the level of openness of government data in different countries. For that, a quantitative approach, with secondary data and a linear regression model, were adopted. The results show that the performance of national OGD initiatives is associated with dimensions such as the degree of existence of a specific public policy for OGD, the existence of a freedom of information act, the development of e-government programs, participation in Open Government Partnership and government administrative quality. Therefore, beyond technical-managerial challenges, the institutional characteristics of each country make the implementation and performance patterns of OGD initiatives change case by case.

References

  1. ALBANO, Claudio Sonaglio; REINHARD, Nicolau. Desafios para governos e sociedade no ecossistema brasileiro de dados governamentais abertos (DGA). Cadernos Gestão Pública e Cidadania, v. 20, n. 67, 2015.
  2. ALLISON, Paul D. Multiple Regression: A Primer. Thousand Oaks. Pine Forge Press, 1999.
  3. ALTAYAR, Mohammed Saleh. Motivations for open data adoption: An institutional theory perspective. Government Information Quarterly, v. 35, n. 4, p.633-643, 2018.
  4. BROWN, D. Electronic government and public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, v. 71, n. 2, p. 241–254, 2005.
  5. CINGOLANI, Luciana; THOMSSON, Kaj; CROMBRUGGHE, Denis de. Minding Weber More Than Ever? The Impacts of State Capacity and Bureaucratic Autonomy on Development Goals. World Development, v. 72, p. 191-207, 2015.
  6. DAVIES, Tim; PERINI, Fernando; ALONSO, Jose. Researching the emerging impacts of open data. ODDC Working Papers. World Wide Web Foundation. 2013.
  7. DAVIES, Tim; PERINI, Fernando. Researching the emerging impacts of open data: revisiting the ODDC conceptual framework. The Journal of Community Informatics, v. 12, n. 2, p.148-178, 2016.
  8. DAVIES, Tim. Open data policies and practice: An international comparison. In: European Consortium for Political Research Conference, 8., 2014, Glasgow. 8th European Consortium for Political Research Conference. Glasgow, 2014. p. 1-26.
  9. DIMAGGIO, Paul J.; POWELL, Walter W.. The Iron Cage Revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, v. 48, n. 2, p. 147-160, 1983.
  10. EVANS, Peter. Embedded Autonomy. Princeton. Princeton University Press, 1995.
  11. FOUNTAIN, Jane E. Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press, 2001.
  12. FUKUYAMA, Francis. What is Governance? Governance, v. 26, n. 3, p.347-368, 2013.
  13. GONZÁLEZ-ZAPATA, Felipe; HEEKS, Richard. The Challenges of Institutionalising Open Government Data: a historical perspective of Chile’s OGD initiative and digital government institutions. In: VAN SCHALKWYK, François; VERHULST, Stefaan G.; MAGALHAES, Gustavo; PANE, Juan; WALKER, Johanna (ed.). The Social Dynamics of Open Data. Cape Town: African Minds, 2017. p. 13-34.
  14. GONZALEZ-ZAPATA, Felipe R. The Influence of Political Institutions and Power on Open Government Data (OGD): a case study of the chilean OGD initiative. 2017. 328 f. Tese (Doutorado) - Curso de Doutorado em Ciência Política. Global Development Institute School of Environment, Education nd Development, Universidade de Manchester, Manchester, 2017.
  15. GUJARATI, Damodar N.; PORTER, Dawn C. Econometria Básica. 5. ed. Porto Alegre: Amgh Editora Ltda., 2011.
  16. HAIR, J. F. et al. Multivariate Data Analysis. 6th. ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall International, 2005.
  17. HARRISON, Teresa M.; GUERRERO, Santiago; BURKE, G. Brian; COOK, Meghan; CRESSWELL, Anthony; HELBIG, Natalie; HRDINOVA, Jana; PARDO, Theresa. Open government and e-government: democratic challenges from a public value perspective. Information Polity, v. 17, n. 2, p. 83-97, 2012.
  18. HENNINGER, Maureen. Reforms to counter a culture of secrecy: open government in australia. Government Information Quarterly, v. 35, n. 3, p. 398-407, 2018.
  19. JANSSEN, Marijn; CHARALABIDIS, Yannis; ZUIDERWIJK, Anneke. Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government. Information Systems Management, v. 29, n. 4, p.258-268, 2012.
  20. KALAMPOKIS, Evangelos; TAMBOURIS, Efthimios; TARABANIS, Konstantinos. A classification scheme for open government data: towards linking decentralised data. International Journal of Web Engineering and Technology, v. 6, n. 3, p.1-20, 2011.
  21. KASSEN, Maxat. Open data and its institutional ecosystems: A comparative cross‐jurisdictional analysis of open data platforms. Canadian Public Administration, v. 61, n. 1, p. 109-129, 2018.
  22. KELLSTEDT, Paul; WHITTEN, Guy. The Fundamentals of Political Science Research. 2. ed. Nova York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
  23. LUNA-REYES, Luis F.; NAJAFABADI, Mahdi M. The US open data initiative: the road ahead. Information Polity, v. 24, n. 2, p. 163-182, 2019.
  24. MARCH, James G.; OLSEN, Johan P. Rediscovering institutions: the organizational basis of politics. New York: Free Press, 1989.
  25. MARTIN, Chris. Barriers to the open government data agenda: Taking a multi‐level perspective. Policy & Internet, v. 6, n. 3, p. 217-240, 2014.
  26. MATHEUS, Ricardo; RIBEIRO, Manuella Maia; VAZ, José Carlos. Strategies and instruments for the dissemination and promotion of open government data use in Brazil: case study of Rio de Janeiro city hall. Revista Tecnologia e Sociedade, Curitiba, v. 14, n. 33, p.172-189, 2018.
  27. NORTH, Douglass. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
  28. OPEN GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP. Open Government Partnership - Members. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.opengovpartnership.org/our-members/. Acesso em: 23 nov. 2019.
  29. OPEN GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP. Open Government Declaration. 2011. Disponível em: https://www.opengovpartnership.org/process/joining-ogp/open-government-declaration/ . Acesso em: 12 mar. 2021.
  30. PETERS, B. Guy. Institutional Theory in Political Science: The 'New Institutionalism'. Pinter, 1999.
  31. POSSAMAI, Ana Júlia. Dados Abertos no Governo Federal Brasileiro: desafios de transparência e interoperabilidade. 2016. 300 f. Tese (Doutorado) - Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência Política, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, 2016.
  32. PURON-CID, Gabriel. Factors for a successful adoption of budgetary transparency innovations: a questionnaire report of an open government initiative in Mexico. Government Information Quarterly, v. 31, p. 49-62, 2014.
  33. ROSNAY, Melanie Dulong de; JANSSEN, Katleen. Legal and Institutional Challenges for Opening Data across Public Sectors: towards common policy solutions. Journal of Theoretical And Applied Electronic Commerce Research, v. 9, n. 3, p. 1-14, 2014.
  34. ROTHSTEIN, Bo; TEORELL, Jan. What Is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions. Governance, v. 21, n. 2, p. 165-190, 2008.
  35. SAFAROV, Igbal; MEIJER, Albert; GRIMMELIKHUIJSEN, Stephan. Utilization of open government data: a systematic literature review of types, conditions, effects and users. Information Polity, v. 22, n. 1, p. 1-24, 2017.
  36. SAFAROV, Igbal. Institutional Dimensions of Open Government Data Implementation: Evidence from the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK. Public Performance & Management Review, v. 42, n. 2, p.305-328, 2019.
  37. SAYOGO, Djoko Sigit; PARDO, Theresa A.; COOK, Meghan. A Framework for Benchmarking Open Government Data Efforts. 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p.1896-1905, 2014.
  38. SEWADEH, Mirvat; SISSON, Jeffrey. Disseminating Government Data Effectively in the Age of Open Data. Federal Data Science, p.13-28, 2018.
  39. UNITED NATIONS. Sustainable Development Goals Indicators Database. 2016. Disponível em: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/database. Acesso em: 02 jan. 2020.
  40. UNITED NATIONS. UN E-Government Survey 2016. 2016. Disponível em: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2016. Acesso em: 10 abr. 2020.
  41. UNITED NATIONS. UN Data. 2021. Disponível em: http://data.un.org/. Acesso em: 04 mar. 2021.
  42. VAN SCHALKWYK, Francois; WILLMERS, Michelle A.; SCHONWETTER, Tobias. Institutionalizing Open Data in Government. SSRN Electronic Journal, p. 1-23, 2016.
  43. VARIETIES OF DEMOCRACY. V-Dem Dataset V6. 2016. Disponível em: https://www.v-dem.net/en/data/archive/previous-reference-materials/reference-material-v6/. Acesso em: 05 jun. 2020.
  44. VELJKOVIĆ, Nataša; BOGDANOVIĆ-DINIĆ, Sanja; STOIMENOV, Leonid. Benchmarking open government: An open data perspective. Government Information Quarterly, v. 31, n. 2, p.278-290, 2014.
  45. WEB FOUNDATION. Open Data Barometer, 4th Edition. 2016. Disponível em: <https://opendatabarometer.org/4thedition/?_year=2016&indicator=ODB>. Acesso em: 22 jul. 2019.
  46. WEB FOUNDATION. Open Data Barometer 4th edition - Research Handbook. 2016b. Disponível em: https://opendatabarometer.org/doc/4thEdition/ODB-4thEdition-ResearchHandbook.pdf. Acesso em: 07 mar. 2020.
  47. WEB FOUNDATION. Open Data Barometer 4th edition: Primary Data - Context and Impact. 2016. Disponível em: https://opendatabarometer.org/data/4thEdition/ODB-4thEdition-PrimaryData-Context-Impact.csv. Acesso em: 14 abr. 2020.
  48. YANG, Tung-mou; LO, Jin; SHIANG, Jing. To open or not to open? Determinants of open government data. Journal of Information Science, v. 41, n. 5, p.596-612, 2015.
  49. YANG, Tung-Mou; WU, Yi-Jung. Examining the socio-technical determinants influencing government agencies' open data publication: a study in taiwan. Government Information Quarterly, v. 33, n. 3, p. 378-392, 2016.
  50. YU, H.; ROBINSON, D. G. The new ambiguity of ―open government. UCLA Law Review Discourse, Los Angeles, v. 59, p.178-208, 2012.
  51. ZUIDERWIJK, Anneke; JANSSEN, Marijn. Open data policies, their implementation and impact: A framework for comparison. Government Information Quarterly, v. 31, n. 1, p.17-29, 2014.
  52. ZUIDERWIJK, Anneke; JANSSEN, Marijn; CHOENNI, Sunil; MEIJER, Ronald. Design principles for improving the process of publishing open data. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, v. 8, n. 2, p. 185-204, 2014.