Skip to main content

Governance, Transparency and the Collaborative Design of Open Data Collaboration Platforms: Understanding Barriers, Options, and Needs

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Government 3.0 – Next Generation Government Technology Infrastructure and Services

Abstract

Developments in open data have prompted a range of proposals and innovations in the domain of governance and public administration. Within the democratic tradition, transparency is seen as a fundamental element of democratic governance. While the use of open government data has the potential to enhance transparency and trust in government, realising any ideal of transparent democratic governance implies responding to a range of sociotechnical design challenges. In order to address these design challenges it is essential to adopt an interdisciplinary and stakeholder-engaged approach to research and innovation. In the current study, we describe a contextualist approach to the design of an open data collaboration platform in the context of an EU innovation project, focused on enhancing transparency and collaboration between citizens and public administrators through the use of open government data. We report on a collective intelligence scenario-based design process that has shaped the development of open data platform requirements and ongoing system engineering and evaluation work. Stakeholders across five pilot sites identified barriers to accessing, understanding, and using open data, and options to overcome these barriers across three broad categories: government and organisational issues; technical, data, and resource issues; and training and engagement issues. Stakeholders also expressed a broad variety of user needs across three domains: information needs; social-collaborative needs; and understandability, usability, and decision-making needs. Similarities and differences across sites are highlighted along with implications for open data platform design.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Open Data Barometer (January 2015) – http://barometer.opendataresearch.org/

References

  • Alexopoulos C, Zuiderwijk A, Charapabidis Y, Loukis E, Janssen M (2014) Designing a second generation of open data platforms: integrating open data and social media. In: International conference on electronic government, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 230–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberts, H. (1992). Acquisition: Past, present and future. Paper presented at the meeting of the Institute of Management Sciences and Operations Research Society, Orlando, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashby WR (1958) Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. Cybernetica 1(2):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Attard J, Orlandi F, Scerri S, Auer S (2015) A systematic review of open government data initiatives. Gov Inf Q (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannister F, Connolly R (2011) The trouble with transparency: a critical view of openness in e- government. Policy & Internet 3(1):158–187. doi:10.2202/1944-2866.1076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot JC, Jaeger PT, McClure CR (2008) Citizen-centered e-government services: benefits, costs, and research needs. In: Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on digital government research, Digital Government Society of North America, pp 137–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodin Ö, Crona BI (2009) The role of social networks in natural resource governance: what relational patterns make a difference? Glob Environ Chang 19(3):366–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome BJ, Cromer IL (1991) Strategic planning for tribal economic development: A culturally appropriate model for consensus building. International Journal of Conflict Management 2:217–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome BJ, Fulbright L (1995) A multi-stage influence model of barriers to group problem solving. Small Group Res 26:25–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broome BJ, Chen M (1992) Guidelines for computer-assisted group problem-solving: Meeting the challenges of complex issues. Small Group Res 23:216–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cappelli C, Engiel P, De Araujo RM, Cesar J, Leite P (2013) Managing transparency guided by a maturity model. In: 3rd global conference on transparency research, HEC, Paris, France, 24–26 October 2013, pp 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Caroll J (2000) Five reasons for scenario-based design. Interacting with Computers 13:43–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christakis AN (1987) Correspondence: Systems profiles. Systems Research 4(1):53–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coke JG, Moore CM (1981) Coping with a budgetary crisis: Helping a city council decide where expenditure cuts should be made. In: Burks SW, Wolf JF (eds) Building city council leadership skills: A casebook of models and methods. National League of Cities, Washington, DC, pp 72–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohn M (2004) User stories applied for Agile software development. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlander L, Fredriksen L, Rullani F (2009) Online Communities and Open Innovation. Ind Innov 15(2):115–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes S, Helbig N (2010) Information strategies for open government: challenges and prospects for deriving public value from government transparency. Electron Gov 6228:50–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte (2013) Market assessment for public sector information. Written for UK, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Google Scholar 

  • Denis J, Goëta S (2014) Exploration, Extraction and “ Rawification ” The Shaping of Transparency in the Back Rooms of Open Data. In: Neil Postman Graduate Conference. New York, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer C, Hogan M, Harney O, O'Reily J (2014) Using interactive management to facilitate a student-centered conceptualisation of critical thinking: a case study. Educ Technol Res Dev 62(6):687–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox J (2007) The uncertain relationship between transparency and accountability. Dev Pract 17(4–5):663–671. doi:10.1080/09614520701469955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeg R (1988) Forum of the future of pediatric nursing: Looking toward the 21st century. Pediatric Nursing 14:393–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghaus-Pasha A (2007) Governance for the millenium development: core issues and good practices. Building

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiner A, Isaac A, Iglesias C, Laufer C, Guéret C, Stephan EG, Kauz E, Atemezing GA, Bittencourt II, Almeida JP, Carrasco MT, Archer P, Albertoni R, Purohit S Córdova Y (2015) Data on the Web best practices – W3C working draft 25 June 2015. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20150625/

  • Grimmelikhuijsen SG, Welch EW (2012) Developing and testing a theoretical framework for computer-mediated transparency of local governments. Public Adm Rev 72(4):562–571. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02532.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groarke JM, Hogan MJ (2016) Enhancing wellbeing: An emerging model of the adaptive functions of music listening. Psychology of Music 44(4):769–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes SC, Hayes LJ, Reese HW (1988) Finding the philosophical core: a review of Stephen C. Pepper’s world hypotheses: a study in evidence. J Exp Anal Behav 1(1):97–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1962) The structural transformation of the public sphere (1962, trans: Cambridge Massachusetts, 1989, MIT Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Heald D (2006) Varieties of transparency. Proceedings-British Academy 25–43. doi:10.5871/bacad/9780197263839.003.0002

  • Hilgers D, Ihl C (2010) Citizensourcing: applying the concept of open innovation to the public sector. Int J Public Participation 4(1):67–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan MJ, Johnston H, Broome B, McMoreland C, Walsh J, Smale B et al (2015) Consulting with citizens in the design of wellbeing measures and policies: lessons from a systems science application. Social Indicators Research 123(3):857–877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger P, Bertot JC, Shilton K (2012) Information policy and social media: framing government-citizen Web 2.0 interactions. In: Reddick CG, Aikins S (eds) WEb 2.0 Technologies and Democratic Governance. Political, policy and management implications, Springer, New York, pp 11–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen K (2011) The influence of the PSI directive on open government data: an overview of. Gov Inf Q 28:446–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keever, D. B. (1989, April). Cultural complexities in the participative design of a computer-based organization information system. Paper presented at the International Conference on Support, Society and Culture: Mutual Uses of Cybernetics and Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee G, Kwak Y (2012) An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Gov Inf Q 29(4):492–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço RP (2013) Open government portals assessment: a transparency for accountability perspective. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 8074 LNCS, 62–74. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40358-3-6

  • Mei CS, Dewan SM (2014) Towards conceptualizing information transparency and its role in internet consumers’ concerns: a literature review

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer A (2009) Understanding modern transparency. Int Rev Adm Sci 75(2):255–269. doi:10.1177/0020852309104175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer A (2015a) E-governance innovation: barriers and strategies. Gov Inf Q 32:198/206

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer A (2015b) Government transparency in historical perspective: from the ancient regime to open data in The Netherlands. Int J Public Adm 38(3):189–199. doi:10.1080/01900692.2014.934837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojo A, Porwol L, Waqar M, Stasiewicz A, Osagie E, Hogan M, Harney O, Ahmadi-Zeleti F (2016) Realizing the innovation potentials from open data: Stakeholders’ perspectives on the desired affordances of open data environment, 17th IFIP working conference on virtual enterprises, Porto, Portugal, 3–5 October 2016, Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Ojo A, Mellouli S (2016) Deploying governance networks for societal challenges. Gov Inf Q. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2016.04.001

  • Peled A (2011) When transparency and collaboration collide: the USA open data program. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 62(11):2085–2094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pepper SC (1942) World hypotheses: a study in evidence. University of California Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Piotrowski S, Conference G, Sasaki D (2011) Conceptualizing the Quality of Transparency Paper prepared for the 1, 0–27

    Google Scholar 

  • RezaeiZadeh M, Hogan M, O’Reilly J, Cunningham J, Murphy E (2017) Core entrepreneurial competencies and their interdependencies: insights from a study of Irish and Iranian entrepreneurs, university students and academics. Int Entrep Manag J 13(1):35–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosson MB, Carroll J (2002) Scenario-based design. In: Jacko J, Sears A (eds) The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 1032–1050

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval-Almazan R, Gil-Garcia JR (2012) Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities. Government Information Quarterly 29:72–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sato T (1979) Determination of hierarchical networks of instructional units using the ISM method. Educational Technology Research 3:67–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Velzen L, Van der Geest T, Ter Hedde MD (2009) Requirements engineering for e-Government services: a citizens-centric apporach and case study. Gov Inf Q 26:477–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warfield JN (1994) Science of generic design: managing complexity through systems design. Iowa State Press, Ames

    Google Scholar 

  • Warfield JN (2006) An introduction to systems science. World Scientific, Singapore

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M (2014) Open data policies, their implementation and impact: a framework for comparison. Gov Inf Q 31:17–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Hogan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Sample scenarios

Entrepreneur Annie is interested in starting a locally based café/food business and would like to connect with public administrators and potential customers to find out if there is a demand for this new business, what kind of premises or permissions she might need, what supports are available and to connect with other people who might partner/work with her in starting this business. She would like to use technology to build local social networks to connect with her business peer network and build a local customer base.

Civic Joe is part of the civic hacker community and a member of an active citizen group. He is a keen advocate for social equality and feels that citizens need a more participatory democracy to create a better society for all. He is interested in open data as a means of opening access to public information and promoting transparency. He wants to be able to interact with public data to understand how public decisions are made, to give his views in an easy and transparent way and receive feedback on them from public administrators who area leading local projects, so that he feels he has been part of the decision and policy making process. Joe also wants to be able to share ideas and data with other citizen groups, with a view to collaborating on projects and common goals.

Jane is a public administrator in a Dublin Local Authority. Jane is helping to prepare a new plan to promote local community and economic development in Dublin and wants to explore how technology might be used to engage a wider demographic and to facilitate bottom up community building. Jane is particularly interested in consulting with young people and people with a disability or other citizens who may not engage in more formal consultations. Jane wants an easy to use platform to gather and give feedback to citizens on issues that matter to them to inform policy and to build public trust. Jane also wants to be able to negotiate and plan activities with other public administrators in her community development group in her local authority public administration offices. She wants both citizens and her colleagues in the local community development group to have some flexibility in the way they draw upon data and information when working together to develop community projects. Jane is very passionate about promoting local community and economic development in Dublin and she wants a platform and set of services that will help her do good work.

Citizen Kay is interested in putting down more roots and getting involved in her local community. She initially got involved in community issues when a group of her neighbours got together to object to a big new development that would have caused a lot of disturbance in her quiet street. As a concerned citizen she wants an easy way to put her issues on a public platform, to share and find out about local news, to discuss with other local residents and have an input into what is happening in her community. She would like a meaningful exchange with public administrators and to build local social networks to highlight the good things that are happening in her community and perhaps to start up a skillshare/ local volunteering exchange. Kay wants to be able to access information on other similar local groups, so that she can get advice on starting her own.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hogan, M. et al. (2017). Governance, Transparency and the Collaborative Design of Open Data Collaboration Platforms: Understanding Barriers, Options, and Needs. In: Ojo, A., Millard, J. (eds) Government 3.0 – Next Generation Government Technology Infrastructure and Services. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 32. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63743-3_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics