Advertisement

Open Government Initiatives in Spanish Local Governments: An Examination of the State of the Art

  • Laura Alcaide MuñozEmail author
  • Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar
  • Cinthia Lorena Villamayor Arellano
Chapter
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 31)

Abstract

The implementation of OG initiatives is favoring reforms moving public administrations to more collaborative and participative spaces with stakeholders. In Spain, fostered by the issuance of legislation, governments have formulated numerous action plans with the intention of achieving the objectives included in European Digital Agenda. This paper seeks to analyze the efforts made by the Spanish municipalities regarding the implementation of the OG initiatives with the aim at getting an overview of how these initiatives have been put into practice to increase the level of openness in these governments. Findings indicate that Spanish municipalities seem to be at the beginning of the process of OG implementation into their management processes, which is not being homogeneous in all municipalities. Also, these OG initiatives have not been addressed to promote more democratic governance models in sample municipalities.

Keywords

Open Government Spanish municipalities Citizen participation 

References

  1. Alcaide Muñoz, L., Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P., & Alcaraz Quilez, F. J. (2016). Policies and strategies for digital inclusion: Regional governments in Spain. In J. Prescott (Ed.), Handbook of research on race, gender, and the fight for equality (pp. 1–29). IGI Global.Google Scholar
  2. Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Pachón, J. R. C., & Cegarra, J. L. M. (2012). E-government and citizen's engagement with local affairs through e-websites: The case of Spanish municipalities. International Journal of Information Management, 32(5), 469–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De la Fuente, A. (2015). ESTUDIOS SOBRE LA ECONOMÍA ESPAÑOLA - 2015/10 Las finanzas autonómicas en 2014 y entre 2003 y 2014. Fundación de Estudios Económicos Aplicados. Instituto de Análisis Económico.Google Scholar
  5. European Commission. (2010). A Digital Agenda for Europe. European Union Commission, Brussels, 2010. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0245R(01)&from=EN
  6. Gascó-Hernández, M., Martin, E. G., Reggi, L., Pyo, S., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2018). Promoting the use of open government data: Cases of training and engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 35, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Girish, J. G., Williams, C. R., & Yates, D. J. (2014). Predictors of on-line services and e-participation: A cross-national comparison. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 526–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Government of Catalonia. (2015). Plan de Gobierno Abierto 2017–2018. Available at: http://governobert.gencat.cat/web/.content/01_Que_es/06_Pla_de_Govern_Obert/Plan-de-Gobierno-Abierto_es.pdf
  9. Government of Murcia. (2017). Plan de Gobierno Abierto de la Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia. Available at: https://transparencia.carm.es/documents/184026/7322308/PlanGobiernoAbierto_def.
  10. Government of Spain. (2017a). Plan Nacional de Territorios Inteligentes. Available at: http://www.agendadigital.gob.es/agenda-digital/noticias/Documents/PNTI/plan-nacional-territorios-inteligentes.pdf
  11. Government of Spain. (2017b). III Plan de Acción de España 2017–2019 de la alianza para el Gobierno Abierto. Available at: http://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/dam/jcr:74d66aee-760c-4962-983e-0b250fb583b8/2017_Junio_Spain_III_Plan_GA_OGP_vf.pdf
  12. Grant, C. (2016). Supporting a passion for new ideas through open APIs. Information Services & Use, 36(1/2), 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harrison, T. M., & Sayogo, D. S. (2014). Transparency, participation and accountability practices in open government: A comparative study. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 513–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holgersson, J., & Karlsson, F. (2014). Public e-service development: Understanding citizens’ conditions for participation. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 396–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2012). E-Participation, transparency, and trust in local government. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 819–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leen, G., & Kwak, Y. H. (2012). An Open Government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 492–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lindgren, I., & Jansson, G. (2013). Electronic services in the public sector: A conceptual framework. Government Information Quarterly, 30(2), 163–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nam, T. (2012). Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. National Institute of Statistics (2017). Available at: https://www.ine.es/Google Scholar
  20. Open Government Partnership (OGP). (2017). Manual para puntos de contacto de Gobierno, Disponible en. https://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/OGP_POC-Manual_2017_ES.pdf
  21. Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P. (2017a). Governance model for the delivery of public services through the Web 2.0 Technologies: A political view in large Spanish Municipalities. Social Science Computer Review, 35(2), 203–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P. (2017b). Governance models and outcomes to foster public value creation in smart cities. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 521–530). ACM.Google Scholar
  23. Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P. (2018). Governance models and outcomes to foster public value creation in smart cities. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age (pp. 24–37). ACM.Google Scholar
  24. Ruijer, E., Grimmelikhuijsen, S., & Meijer, A. (2017). Open data for democracy: Developing a theoretical framework for open data use. Government Information Quarterly, 34(1), 45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sandoval-Almaza, R., & Gil-García, J. R. (2012). Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-Government among municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(1), S72–S81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith, D. A., & Fridkin, D. (2008). Delegating direct democracy: Interparty legislative competition and the adoption of the initiative in the American States. American Political Science Review, 102(3), 333–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Torres, L., Pina, V., & Acerete, B. (2005). Gauging e-government evolution in EU municipalities. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 3(6), 43–54.Google Scholar
  28. United Nations. (2013). Guideline on Open Government Data for Citizen Engagement. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. División for Public Administration and Development Management. New York. Available at: http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/Guidenlines%20on%20OGDCE%20May17%202013.pdf
  29. Veljkovic, N., Bogdanovic-Dinic, S., & Stoimenov, L. (2014). Benchmarking open government: An open data perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 31(2), 278–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Alcaide Muñoz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar
    • 1
  • Cinthia Lorena Villamayor Arellano
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations