A new model for effective and efficient open government data

  • Zamil S. Alzamil
  • Miklos A. VasarhelyiEmail author
Original Article


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.


Financial reporting Auditing Open government data Data transparency Saudi Arabia Effective and efficient governments 



  1. 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
  2. Andersen, T.B. 2009. E-Government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information Economics and Policy 21 (3): 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cameron, D. 2010. PM’s podcast on transparency. Available at:
  5. Cardoso, Ricardo L. 2017. Public sector financial reporting and auditing in Brazil.Google Scholar
  6. Coglianese, C. 2009. The transparency president? The Obama administration and open government. Governance 22 (4): 529–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 2017. Retrieved September 24, 2017, from
  8. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dartdeloittecom. 2017. Available at: Accessed 27 Sept 2017.
  10. 2019. Retrieved February 16, 2019, from
  11. de Aquino, A.C.B., and R.A. Batley. 2015. Accounting and accountability: The political effects of technical reforms in Brazil.Google Scholar
  12. DiMaio, A. 2009. Government 2.0: A gartner definition. Retrieved July, 1, 2011.Google Scholar
  13. 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.Google Scholar
  14. 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
  15. Florian. Bauer. (2012). Linked open data: The essentials. Edition Mono.Google Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Group, O.K. (2017). The Open Definition. Retrieved September 24, 2017, from
  18. 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
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Knowledge, O. (2017). Datasets/procurement tenders. Retrieved September 05, 2017, from
  21. Kozlowski, S. (2016). A vision of an ENHanced ANalytic constituent environment: ENHANCE (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University-Graduate School-Newark).Google Scholar
  22. Kucera, J., and D. Chlapek. 2014. Benefits and risks of open government data. Journal of Systems Integration 5 (1): 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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.Google Scholar
  24. 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
  25. Morrison, J. (2014). Armchair auditing and the great town hall transparency swindle.Google Scholar
  26. Obama White House, Retrieved February 16, 2019, from
  27. Saudi General Auditing Bureau, Retrieved 27 September 2017, from
  28. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. The White House. 2009. Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Retrieved February 16, 2019, from
  30. Verhulst, S., and A. Young. 2017. Open data in developing economies: Toward building an evidence base on what works and how.Google Scholar
  31. White House. 2017. Open government initiative. Available at:
  32. Yu, H., and D.G. Robinson. 2011. The new ambiguity of open government. UCLA Law Review Discourse 59: 178.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rutgers, The State University of New JerseyNewarkUSA
  2. 2.Majmaah UniversityAl MajmaahSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations