Skip to main content
Log in

A new model for effective and efficient open government data

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Disclosure and Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Open government data (OGD) is attracting stakeholders from different backgrounds. The call for OGD has been especially pronounced in the last 6 or 7 years. OGD demand accelerated after the launch of the US OGD initiative portal in 2009, followed by the UK in 2010. Before that, the availability and accessibility of government data were limited to certain executives and few government employees, whereas for others, it was either partially available or completely unavailable. Publishing government data, thereby making it available to the public, could be useful in many ways such as increasing transparency and accountability in governments, increasing overall efficiency and performance, encouraging publics’ engagement, and achieving trust and reputation. As an example of the role that OGD may provide, this paper compares the different financial reporting and auditing systems in the public sector between Brazil and Saudi Arabia. Also, the paper examines OGD initiatives among different countries with the focus of the Republic of Brazil and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s open data portals. Moreover, it assesses the level of data transparency based on the definition of the open data model, and more importantly, the paper suggests new dimensions to the open data concept when utilized by governments. In addition, it argues that the OGD in Saudi Arabia, which is an emerging initiative in a country that has centralized power, could be improved dramatically. We demonstrate by using a sample of procurement contracts data taken from the Council of Saudi Chambers Web site, which is publicly available and shows the potential of monitoring or auditing public spending.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: www.freeworldmaps.net)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Source: http://dados.gov.br/dataset/)

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. USASpending.gov (https://www.usaspending.gov) is the official source of spending data for the US Government. It shows how the federal government spends the money every year.

  2. Data.gov (https://www.data.gov/) is a US government Web site that aims to bring together datasets from hundreds of sources across the federal government and from 50 non-federal sources.

  3. The Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a multilateral initiative that aims to bring together governments to create action plans to promote openness, empower citizens, adopt new technologies, and fight misuse of government power (https://www.opengovpartnership.org/).

  4. Dados: Brazilian Open Data Portal (http://dados.gov.br/).

References

  • AlRushaid, M.W., and A.K.J. Saudagar. 2016. Measuring the data openness for the open data in Saudi Arabia e-Government: A case study. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 7 (12): 113–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, T.B. 2009. E-Government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information Economics and Policy 21 (3): 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J.C., P.T. Jaeger, and J.M. Grimes. 2010. Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly 27 (3): 264–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, D. 2010. PM’s podcast on transparency. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pms-podcast-on-transparency.

  • Cardoso, Ricardo L. 2017. Public sector financial reporting and auditing in Brazil.

  • Coglianese, C. 2009. The transparency president? The Obama administration and open government. Governance 22 (4): 529–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dados.gov.br. 2017. Retrieved September 24, 2017, from http://dados.gov.br/.

  • Dai, J., and Q. Li. 2016. Designing audit apps for armchair auditors to analyze government procurement contracts. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting 13 (2): 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dartdeloittecom. 2017. Available at: https://dart.deloitte.com/resource/1/dbbdf810-488c-11e6-8970-3bb2b71b01a5/. Accessed 27 Sept 2017.

  • Data.gov. 2019. Retrieved February 16, 2019, from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/21stcenturygov/tools/data-gov.

  • de Aquino, A.C.B., and R.A. Batley. 2015. Accounting and accountability: The political effects of technical reforms in Brazil.

  • DiMaio, A. 2009. Government 2.0: A gartner definition. Retrieved July, 1, 2011.

  • dos Santos Brito, K., M.A. da Silva Costa, V.C. Garcia, and S.R. de Lemos Meira. (2014). Brazilian government open data: implementation, challenges, and potential opportunities. In Proceedings of the 15th annual international conference on digital government research (pp. 11–16). ACM.

  • Esmaeili, H. 2009. On a slow boat towards the rule of law: The nature of law in the Saudi Arabia legal system. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law 26: 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florian. Bauer. (2012). Linked open data: The essentials. Edition Mono.

  • Gonzalez-Zapata, F., and R. Heeks. 2015. The multiple meanings of open government data: Understanding different stakeholders and their perspectives. Government Information Quarterly 32 (4): 441–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Group, O.K. (2017). The Open Definition. Retrieved September 24, 2017, from http://opendefinition.org/.

  • Huijboom, N., and T. Van den Broek. 2011. Open data: an international comparison of strategies. European Journal of ePractice 12 (1): 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M., Y. Charalabidis, and A. Zuiderwijk. 2012. Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management 29 (4): 258–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowledge, O. (2017). Datasets/procurement tenders. Retrieved September 05, 2017, from http://global.census.okfn.org/dataset/procurement.

  • Kozlowski, S. (2016). A vision of an ENHanced ANalytic constituent environment: ENHANCE (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University-Graduate School-Newark).

  • Kucera, J., and D. Chlapek. 2014. Benefits and risks of open government data. Journal of Systems Integration 5 (1): 30–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matheus, R., M.M. Ribeiro, and J.C. Vaz. 2012. New perspectives for electronic government in Brazil: The adoption of open government data in national and subnational governments of Brazil. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on theory and practice of electronic governance (pp. 22–29). ACM.

  • Maude, F. 2012. Open data white paper-unleashing the potential. London, UK: The Stationary Office Limited on behalf of HM Government, Cabinet Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J. (2014). Armchair auditing and the great town hall transparency swindle.

  • Obama White House, Data.gov. Retrieved February 16, 2019, from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/21stcenturygov/tools/data-gov.

  • Saudi General Auditing Bureau, Gab.gov.sa. Retrieved 27 September 2017, from http://www.gab.gov.sa.

  • Taylor, M.M., and V.C. Buranelli. 2007. Ending up in pizza: accountability as a problem of institutional arrangement in Brazil. Latin American Politics and Society 49 (1): 59–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The White House. 2009. Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Retrieved February 16, 2019, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2009/m09-12.pdf.

  • Verhulst, S., and A. Young. 2017. Open data in developing economies: Toward building an evidence base on what works and how.

  • White House. 2017. Open government initiative. Available at: http://whitehouse.gov/open/.

  • Yu, H., and D.G. Robinson. 2011. The new ambiguity of open government. UCLA Law Review Discourse 59: 178.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miklos A. Vasarhelyi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The authors are appreciative of the comments and suggestions from Deniz A. Appelbaum, Professor of Accounting and Finance, Montclair State University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alzamil, Z.S., Vasarhelyi, M.A. A new model for effective and efficient open government data. Int J Discl Gov 16, 174–187 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-019-00066-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-019-00066-w

Keywords

Navigation