Skip to main content

Approaches to Good Data Governance in Support of Public Sector Transformation Through Once-Only

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Electronic Government (EGOV 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 12219))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The Once Only Principle (OOP) drives current public sector modernization through the reduction of administrative burdens. It requires public authorities not to ask citizens and companies to repeatedly provide information to the public authorities. Instead, public authorities shall share and re-use data among themselves in due respect of data protection regulation. The sharing and re-use of sensitive and non-sensitive data among public administrations demands for broad acceptance by all stakeholders. Trust and transparency are key success criteria in such data-driven public sector transformation. Establishing proper governance mechanisms for the data infrastructures that enable the sharing and re-use in public service provisioning, and that provide the necessary transparency and trust levels is expected to effectively improve public service. This research investigates approaches for establishing a good data governance in OOP settings tackling the sharing and re-use of sensitive or personal data. Geographical focus is on the European Union and Switzerland.

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

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. European Commission: EU eGovernment Action Plan 2016–2020 - Accelerating the Digital Transformation of Government. COM/2016/0179 final, Brussels (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  2. OECD: Data-Driven Innovation: Big data for growth and well-being, Paris (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Agere, S.: Promoting good governance: principles, practices and perspectives. management and training services division, commonwealth secretariat, London (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  4. European Commission: European Governance - A white paper. COM/2001/428, Brussels (2001). https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/doc_01_10/DOC_01_10_EN.pdf

  5. Rosenbaum, S.: Data governance and stewardship: designing data stewardship entities and advancing data access. Health Serv. Res. 45(5), 1442–1455 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Schintler, L.A., Kulkarni, R.: Big data for policy analysis: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Rev. Policy Res. 31(4), 343–348 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O.P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., Linkman, S.: Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51(1), 7–15 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Webster, J., Watson, R.T.: Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Q. 26(2), iii–xiii (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Müller-Bloch, C., Kranz, J.: A framework for rigorously identifying research gaps in qualitative literature reviews. In: Proceedings of 36th International Conference on Information Systems (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Estermann, B., Fraefel, M., Neuroni, A.C., Vogel, J.: Conceptualizing a national data infrastructure for Switzerland. Inf. Polity 23, 1–23 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Klievink, B., Neuroni, A., Fraefel, M., Zuiderwijk, A.: Digital strategies in action - a comparative analysis of national data infrastructure development. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Roustaei, A., et al.: Gap analysis report of challenges, needs and benefits of the OOP4C analysis. In: SCOOP4C Consortium (2019). https://scoop4c.eu/sites/default/files/2019-06/SCOOP4C_D4.1_v1.1.pdf

  13. Wimmer, M.A., Scanlon, M., Boneva, R., Rigole, C.: Interoperability governance models. Deliverable for ISA2 Action. European Commission (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kalampokis, E., et al.: Identification and mapping of stakeholders. In: SCOOP4C Consortium (2017). https://scoop4c.eu/sites/default/files/2018-01/SCOOP4C_D2.1.pdf

  15. Panopoulou, E., et al.: Strategic stakeholder engagement plan. In: SCOOP4C Consortium (2019). https://scoop4c.eu/sites/default/files/2019-10/SCOOP4C_D22_v1.14_final_0.pdf

  16. Shin, D.H.: A critique of Korean national information strategy: case of national information infrastructures. Gov. Inf. Q. 24(3), 624–645 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2006.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Frischmann, B.M.: An economic theory of infrastructure and commons management. Minnesota Law Rev. 89(4), 917–1030 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Estermann, B., Riedl, R., Neuroni, A.C.: Integrated and transcendent e-government: keys for analyzing organizational structure and governance. In: Proceedings of DG.O, pp. 162–171 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Klievink, B., Neuroni, A.C., Fraefel, M., Zuiderwijk, A.: Digital strategies in action – a comparative analysis of national data infrastructure development. In: Proceedings of DG.O, pp. 129–138 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Janssen, M., Chun, S.A., Gil-Garcia, J.R.: Building the next generation of digital government infrastructures. Gov. Inf. Q. 26(2), 233–237 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zuiderwijk, A.: Open data infrastructures: The design of an infrastructure to enhance the coordination of open data use. Doctoral thesis, TU Delft, ‘s-Hertogenbosch (2015). https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:9b9e60bc-1edd-449a-84c6-7485d9bde012

  22. Bekkers, V.: Flexible information infrastructures in Dutch E-Government collaboration arrangements: experiences and policy implications. Gov. Inform. Q. 26(1), 60–68 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jetzek, T.: Managing complexity across multiple dimensions of liquid open data: the case of the danish basic data program. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(1), 89–104 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Neuroni, A.C., Fraefel, M., Riedl, R.: Inter-organizational cooperation in Swiss eGovernment. In: Janssen, M., Scholl, H.J., Wimmer, M.A., Tan, Y.-h. (eds.) EGOV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6846, pp. 259–272. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22878-0_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M.: Open data policies, their implementation and impact: a framework for comparison. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(1), 17–29 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wimmer, M.A., Marinov, B.: SCOOP4C: Reducing administrative burden for citizens through once-only - vision & challenges. Jusletter IT (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Stocksmeier, D., Wimmer, M.A., Führer, M., Essmeyer, K.: Once-only in Deutschland und Europa: Eine Roadmap grenzüberschreitender Vernetzung im Bereich Steuern. In: Digitalisierung von Staat und Verwaltung, pp. 87–98 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kalvet, T., Toots, M., van Veenstra, A.F., Krimmer, R.: Cross-border e-government services in Europe: expected benefits, barriers and drivers of the once-only principle. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV 2018), pp. 69–72 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Krimmer, R., Kalvet, T., Toots, M., Cepilovs, A., Tambouris, E.: Exploring and demonstrating the once-only principle: a european perspective. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, pp. 546–551 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  30. European Union: Regulation 2016/679 of the European parliament and the council of the European Union. Off. J. Eur. Commun. (2016). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj

  31. European Commission: A digital single market strategy for Europe. COM 192 final (2015). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52015DC0192

  32. Tallinn Declaration: Tallinn declaration on eGovernment at the ministerial meeting during Estonian Presidency of the council of the EU (2017). https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=47559

  33. European Union: Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services. Off. J. Eur. Commun. (2018). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_2018.295.01.0001.01.ENG

  34. Cave, J., Botterman, M., Cavallini, S., Volpe, M.: EU-wide digital once-only principle for citizens and businesses. Study for the European Commission (2017). https://ec.europa.eu/esf/transnationality/filedepot_download/1671/1692

  35. Vallner, U., et al.: State of play report of best practices. In: SCOOP4C Consortium (2017). https://scoop4c.eu/sites/default/files/2018-01/SCOOP4C_D1.2_0.pdf

  36. Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft: Strategie “Digitale Schweiz“. Bundesrat, Bern (2018). https://www.bakom.admin.ch/bakom/de/home/digital-und-internet/strategie-digitale-schweiz.html

  37. Neuroni, A., Kissling-Näf, I., Riedl, R.: E-Government und smarter Staat: Die Schweiz auf halbem Weg. In: Stember, J., Eixelsberger, W., Spichiger, A., Neuroni, A., Habbel, F.-R., Wundara, M. (eds.) Handbuch E-Government, pp. 163–180. Springer, Wiesbaden (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21402-9_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Wimmer, M.A., et al.: Roadmap for future areas of actions, and policy recommendations. In: SCOOP4C Consortium (2019). https://scoop4c.eu/sites/default/files/2019-11/SCOOP4C_D4.2_v1.2.pdf

  39. Wimmer, M.A. et.al.: Vision of the once-only principle for citizens, including key enablers and major barriers. In: SCOOP4C Consortium (2017). https://scoop4c.eu/sites/default/files/2018-01/SCOOP4C_D1.1.pdf

  40. Pavleska, T., Aranha, H., Masi, M., Grandry, E., Sellitto, G.P.: Cybersecurity evaluation of enterprise architectures: the e-SENS case. In: Gordijn, J., Guédria, W., Proper, H.A. (eds.) PoEM 2019. LNBIP, vol. 369, pp. 226–241. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35151-9_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Grandy, E., et al.: Generic federated OOP architecture. In: TOOP Consortium (2018). http://www.toop.eu/sites/default/files/D22_Generic_Federated_OOP_Architecture_Final.pdf

  42. Commission, E.: New European Interoperability Framework - Promoting Seamless Services and Data Flows for European Public Administrations. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxemburg (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Janowski, T.: Digital government evolution: from transformation to contextualization. Gov. Inf. Q. 32(3), 221–236 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Layne, K., Lee, J.: Developing fully functional E-government: a four stage model. Gov. Inf. Q. 18(2), 122–136 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Andersen, K.V., Henriksen, H.Z.: E-government maturity models: extension of the Layne and Lee model. Gov. Inf. Q. 23(2), 236–248 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Scholta, H., Mertens, W., Kowalkiewicz, M., Becker, J.: From one-stop shop to no-stop shop: an e-government stage model. Gov. Inf. Q. 36(1), 11–26 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., Haug, N.: Defining digital transformation: results from expert interviews. Gov. Inf. Q. 36(4), 101385 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. OECD: Embracing innovation in government - global trends 2017 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  49. OECD: Embracing innovation in government - global trends 2018 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  50. OECD: Embracing innovation in government. Global trends 2019 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Gil-Garcia, J.R., Guler, A., Pardo, T.A., Burke, G.B.: Characterizing the importance of clarity of roles and responsibilities in government inter-organizational collaboration and information sharing initiatives. Gov. Inf. Q. 36(4), 101393 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Karlsson, F., Frostenson, M., Prenkert, F., Kolkowska, E., Helin, S.: Inter-organisational information sharing in the public sector: a longitudinal case study on the reshaping of success factors. Gov. Inf. Q. 34(4), 567–577 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. McGuire, M.: Collaborative public management: assessing what we know and how we know it. Public Admin. Rev. 66(s1), 33–43 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Agranoff, R., McGuire, M.: Big questions in public network management research. J. Public Admin. Res. Theory 11(3), 295–326 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Gil-Garcia, R.J., Chengalur-Smith, I.S., Duchessi, P.: Collaborative e-Government: impediments and benefits of information-sharing projects in the public sector. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 16(2), 121–133 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Thomson, A.M., Perry, J.L.: Collaboration processes: inside the black box. Public Adm. Rev. 66(s1), 20–32 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Klievink, B., Janssen, M.: Developing multi-layer information infrastructures: advancing social innovation through public-private governance. Inf. Syst. Manag. 31(3), 240–249 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Wimmer, M.A., Boneva, R., di Giacomo, D.: Interoperability governance: a definition and insights from case studies in Europe. In: Proceedings of 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wimmer, M.A., Zamboni, A., Boneva, R.: Organisational interoperability guidelines. Deliverable for ISA2 action. European Commission (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Freeman, E.R.: Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, New York (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Bryson, J.M.: What to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Manag. Rev. 6(1), 21–53 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Kavanaugh, A.L., et al.: Social media use by government: from the routine to the critical. Gov. Inf. Q. 29(4), 480–491 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Wimmer, M.A., Scherer, S.: Supporting communities through social government in co-creation and co-production of public services: the SocialGov concept and platform architecture. Int. J. Public Adm. Digit. Age 5(1), 18–35 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  64. The Open Group: The TOGAF® Standard. Version 9.2, 11th edn. Van Haren Publishing, ‘s-Hertogenbosch (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wang, F.: Understanding the dynamic mechanism of interagency government data sharing. Gov. Inf. Q. 35(4), 536–546 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Cordella, A., Bonina, C.M.: A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: a theoretical reflection. Gov. Inf. Q. 29(4), 512–520 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Millard, J.: Open governance systems: doing more with more. Gov. Inf. Q. 35(4), 577–587 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  68. Klievink, B., Bharosa, N., Tan, Y.-H.: The collaborative realization of public values and business goals: governance and infrastructure of public–private information platforms. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(1), 67–79 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Weber, K., Otto, B., Österle, H.: One size does not fit all—a contingency approach to data governance. J. Data Inf. Qual. 1(1) (2009). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1515693.1515696. Article 4

  70. Cheong, L.K., Chang, V.: The need for data governance: a case study. In: Proceedings of 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, pp. 999–1008 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Khatri, V., Brown, C.: Designing data governance. Commun. ACM 53(1), 148–152 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Brous, P., Janssen, M., Vilminko-Heikkinen, R.: Coordinating decision-making in data management activities: a systematic review of data governance principles. In: Scholl, H.J., et al. (eds.) EGOVIS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9820, pp. 115–125. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44421-5_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  73. Thompson, N., Ravindran, R., Nicosia, S.: Government data does not mean data governance: lessons learned from a public sector application audit. Gov. Inf. Q. 32(3), 316–322 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Soma, K., Termeer, C., Opdam, P.: Informational governance – a systematic literature review of governance for sustainability in the information age. Environ. Sci. Policy 56, 89–99 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Spichiger, A., Rötzer, H.J., Neuroni, A.: Hoheitliches Handeln und Registerführung. In: Stember, J., Eixelsberger, W., Spichiger, A., Neuroni, A., Habbel, F.-R., Wundara, M. (eds.) Handbuch E-Government. LNCS, pp. 229–244. Springer, Wiesbaden (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-21402-9_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria A. Wimmer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Wimmer, M.A., Neuroni, A.C., Frecè, J.T. (2020). Approaches to Good Data Governance in Support of Public Sector Transformation Through Once-Only. In: Viale Pereira, G., et al. Electronic Government. EGOV 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12219. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57599-1_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57599-1_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57598-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57599-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics