1. Open Government Data Ecosystems: Linking
Transparency for Innovation with Transparency
for Participation and Accountability
Luigi Reggi, Sharon Dawes
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy
IFIP EGOV 2016 Conference
September 5, 2016

2. Roadmap
• Background
• Research questions
• Theory
• Methods
• Results
• Implications for policy and practice
• Limitations and future research

3. Background
• Widespread diffusion of Open Government Data
(OGD) initiatives
• The rhetoric of OGD
– product and service innovation
– public participation in policy-making
– accountability
• But not much evidence that these benefits are
being produced
– publication by itself is not enough to stimulate
meaningful use of the data

4. Background
• Both research and practice have taken a
bifurcated path:
1. Transparency for innovation
• Apps development
• New business models
2. Transparency for accountability and participation
• Better decision making
• Increased democratic participation
• Greater accountability can lead to government
responsiveness and trust in government

5. Research questions
• What are the conceptual and empirical
connections between Transparency for
innovation and Transparency for
accountability and participation?
• How can OGD policies and strategies be
designed to improve both? What are the main
barriers and enablers to doing so?

6. Theory
Sociotechnical theory and ecosystems
• Sociotechnical systems
– Dynamic interplay of organizational, human,
material, and technological aspects
– Multi-actor physical and institutional environment
• Ecosystem models
– Trace the components of OGD Programs, their
dynamic relationships and their influence on
program performance

7. (Adapted from
Dawes et al.,
2016)
Advocacy & interaction
(for improved OGD)
OGD Policies &
Strategies
Data publication
Data use & apps
Socio-economic
benefits
Theory
Open Government Data Ecosystem

8. (Adapted from
Dawes et al.,
2016)
Advocacy & interaction
(for improved OGD)
OGD Policies &
Strategies
Data publication
Data use & apps
Socio-economic
benefits
Theory
Open Government Data Ecosystem

9. Research methods
Exploratory case study:
OGD on European Funding in Italy
Review of 3 complementary open government data initiatives
Data sources:
• Semi-structured interviews (Jan - Mar 2016)
– 4 interviews with practitioners with different roles at the OpenCoesione initiative (1 PM, 3
analysts)
– 2 interviews with 2 members of the Monithon national staff
– 1 representative of a local community in Southern Italy
– 2 researchers at two different Italian research institutions
• Participant observations (June-August 2015)
• 3 published program reviews
Data analysis:
Qualitative data were coded to highlight the relations among the actors in the
ecosystem and their main roles. This evidence was used to augment existing
conceptual models.

10. European Structural and Investment Funds
– EU co-financing: €454 billion for the 2014-2020
period (43% of EU budget)
– Problems of efficiency, effectiveness and
accountability
– As a way to address this problem, regulations
require EU States to publish OGD on projects
funded and recipients
Case study
Context

11. Case study
OpenCoesione: Italy’s OGD Portal
• Launched by the Ministry of
Economic Development in 2012
• Publishes data on 950k projects
(€51.2 billion investment)
• Launched proactive initiatives to
stimulate data use
– maps and interactive visualizations
– articles with data analysis
– data journalism schools
– participation in hackathons
organized by civic technology
communities

12. • Developed by civil society in 2013
• Promotes public engagement by
organizing citizen monitoring
activities of the projects found on
OpenCoesione
– field investigations
– Involves local communities and
national NGOs
• 98 “citizen monitoring reports”
uploaded after 2 years of activity
• Problems of economic
sustainability
Case study
Monithon - Monitoring Marathon

13. Case study
OpenCoesione School
• Launched by the OpenCoesione staff in
2013 as a public participation program,
based on open data availability
• 2,800 high-school students involved
(2015-16 edition)
• Develops new skills for data analysis and
field investigation
• Uses Monithon tools and methodology
for civic monitoring of public spending
• Students organize accountability forums
with political leaders and administrators
• In some limited cases, the feedback is
used to improve policy making

14. Results
Integrated OGD Ecosystem
Advocacy & interaction
(for improved OGD)
OGD Policies &
Strategies
Data publication
Data use & apps
Socio-economic
benefits
Collection of
citizen feedback
on policy results
Policy
making
Policy
benefits
Use of citizen
feedback by
intermediaries

15. Results
Integrated OGD Ecosystem
Advocacy & interaction
(for improved OGD)
OGD Policies &
Strategies
Data publication
Data use & apps
Socio-economic
benefits
Collection of
citizen feedback
on policy results
Policy
making
Policy
benefits
Use of citizen
feedback by
intermediaries

16. Implications for policy and practice
• Enablers
– Proactive strategies for stimulating data use improves
both data quality and public engagement
– Engagement is more feasible when data content and
characteristics match the interests of the user
community
• Barriers
– Tenuous sustainability of civic technology initiatives
and OGD intermediaries
– Absence of real public accountability mechanisms
between government and citizens

17. Limitations
• Single exploratory case study
• Interviews cover only the national staff of the
3 initiatives
• Other kinds of data (e.g., social media) may
show different patterns

18. Next steps
• Collect additional data about the Italian case
‒ from administrators, political leaders, NGOs, high-
school students and teachers, local communities
‒ Consider different types of data
• Test the integrated model in other cases
– Other EU countries sharing the same ESIF
regulations, but with different institutional and
socio-economic settings. e.g. Poland, Netherlands

19. Contact information
• Luigi Reggi (luigi.reggi@gmail.com)
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy, University at Albany-SUNY
• Sharon Dawes (sdawes@ctg.albany.edu)
Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy, University at Albany-SUNY
Center for Technology in Government, University at Albany-SUNY