Open Data Platforms and Their Usability: Proposing a Framework for Evaluating Citizen Intentions

  • Kawaljeet KapoorEmail author
  • Vishanth Weerakkody
  • Uthayasankar SivarajahEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9373)


Governments across the world are releasing public data in an effort to increase transparency of how public services are managed whilst also enticing citizens to participate in the policy decision-making processes. The channel for making open data available to citizens in the UK is the platform, which brings together data relating to various public services in one searchable website. The platform currently offers access to 25,500 datasets that are organized across key public service themes including health, transport, education, environment, and public spending in towns and cities. While the website reports 5,438,159 site visits as of June 2015, the average time spent on the site has been recorded at just 02:12 min per visitor. This raises questions regarding the actual use and usability of open data platforms and the extent to which they fulfill the stated outcomes of open data. In this paper, the authors examine usability issues surrounding open data platforms and propose a framework that can be used to evaluate their usability.


Open data Citizen Usability Evaluation Public services 


  1. 1.
    Borzacchiello, M.T., Craglia, M.: The impact on innovation of open access to spatial environmental information: a research strategy. Int. J. Technol. Manage. 60(1–2), 114–129 (2012). doi: 10.1504/ijtm.2012.049109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Braunschweig, K., Eberius, J., Thiele, M., Lehner, W.: The State of Open Data Limits of Current Open Data Platforms (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    BBC News. Ordnance Survey offers free data access. (2009). Accessed 10 Jun 2015
  4. 4.
    Ajzen, I.: From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour. In: Kuhl, J., Beckman, J. (eds.) Action-Control: from Cognition to Behavior, pp. 11–39. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M.: Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1980)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bandura, A.: Social Foundations of Thoughts and Action: a Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1986)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arzberger, P., Schroeder, P., Beaulieu, A., Bowker, G., Casey, K., Laaksonen, L., Wouters, P.: An international framework to promote access to data. Science 303, 1777–1778 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chiu, R.K.: Ethical judgment and whistleblowing intention: examining the moderating role of locus of control. J. Bus. Ethics 43(1–2), 65–74 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Choenni, S., van Dijk, J., Leeuw, F.: Preserving privacy whilst integrating data: applied to criminal justice. Inf. Polity 15, 125–138 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Conradie, P., Choenni, S.: On the barriers for local government releasing open data. Gov. Inf. Q. 31, S10–S17 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cranefield, J., Robertson, O., Oliver, G.: Value in the mash: exploring the benefits, barriers and enablers of open data apps. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) 2014, Tel Aviv, Israel, 9–11 June 2014. ISBN 978-0-9915567-0-0Google Scholar
  12. 12. About (2015)
  13. 13.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13, 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fang, Z.: e-government in digital era: concept, practice, and development. Int. J. Comput. Internet Manage. 10(2), 1–22 (2002)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fang, X., Holsapple, C.W.: An empirical study of web site navigation structures’ impacts on web site usability. Decis. Support Syst. 43(2), 476–491 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I.: Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1975)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Glidden, J.: The Citadel Reveals Open Data Findings. (2015)
  18. 18.
    Janssen, K.: Open government data and the right to information: opportunities and obstacles. J. Community Inform. 8(2) (2012).
  19. 19.
    Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., Zuiderwijk, A.: Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Inf. Syst. Manage. 29(4), 258–268 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kapoor, K., Dwivedi, Y.K., Williams, M.D.: Role of innovation attributes in explaining the adoption intention for the interbank mobile payment service in an indian context. In: Dwivedi, Y.K., Henriksen, H.Z., Wastell, D., De’, R. (eds.) TDIT 2013. IFIP AICT, vol. 402, pp. 203–220. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Labay, D.G., Kinnear, T.C.: Exploring the consumer decision process in the adoption of solar energy systems. J. Consum. Res. 8(3), 271–278 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Martín, A.S., de Rosario, A.H., Pérez, C.C.: Open government data: a european perspective. In: Information and Communication Technologies in Public Administration: Innovations from Developed Countries, vol. 195 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ozaki, R.: Adopting sustainable innovation: what makes consumers sign up to green electricity? Bus. Strategy Environ. 20(1), 1–17 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pannell, D.J., Marshall, G.R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., Wilkinson, R.: Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 46(11), 1407–1424 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. The Free Press, Glencoe (1962)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rogers, E.M., Shoemaker, F.F.: Communication of Innovations. Free Press, New York (1971)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., Weerakkody, V.: Evaluating the use and impact of Web 2.0 technologies in local government. Gov. Inf. Q. (2015). ISSN 0740-624X,
  29. 29.
    Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., Jones, S.: Application of Web 2.0 technologies in e-government: a United Kingdom case study. In: 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 2221–2230. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Surowiecki, J.: The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business Economies, Societies and Nations. Doubleday, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tornatzky, L.G., Klein, K.J.: Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: a meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 29(1), 28–43 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ubaldi, B.: Open Government Data: Towards Empirical Analysis of Open Government Data Initiatives, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 22, OECD Publishing, Paris (2013). doi:
  33. 33.
    Veljković, N., Bogdanović-Dinić, S., Stoimenov, L.: Benchmarking open government: an open data perspective. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(2), 278–290 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27, 425–478 (2003)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Venkatesh, V., Thong, J., Xu, X.: Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 36, 157–178 (2012)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang, J., Senecal, S.: Measuring perceived website usability. J. Internet Commerce 6(4), 97–112 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wangpipatwong, S., Chutimaskul, W., Papasratorn, B.: Understanding citizen’s continuance intention to use e-government website: a composite view of technology acceptance model and computer self-efficacy. Electron. J. e-Gov. 6(1), 55–64 (2008)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wilcox, J.: Government drops first set of COINS. (2010).
  39. 39.
    Zhang, J., Dawes, S.S., Sarkis, J.: Exploring stakeholders’ expectations of the benefits and barriers of e-government knowledge sharing. J. Enterp. Inf. Manage. 18, 548–567 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M.: Open data policies, their implementation and impact: a framework for comparison. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(1), 17–29 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., Choenni, S., Meijer, R., Alibaks, R.S.: Socio-technical impediments of open data. Electron. J. e-Gov. 10(2), 156–172 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brunel Business School, College of Business, Arts and Social SciencesBrunel University LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations