This document discusses the tension between open government principles of making government data openly available to anyone in the world, and the principle of national sovereignty where governments prioritize serving their own citizens. It argues that existing principles support openness of government data within national boundaries for a state's own citizens, not globally for anyone interested. Initiatives like open data charters that promote openness to all users worldwide are contrary to national sovereignty. While e-governance initiatives aim to build information systems, declarations promoting openness to all lack theoretical foundations to justify changing this balance between openness and sovereignty.

1. Open Government and National
Sovereignty
Ivo Babaja
University of Zadar

2. Motive
• The motive for this reflection is declaration of principle that
open data should be available to "the widest range of
users", "by anyone, anywhere" and "without mandatory
registration"
• The source: International Open Data Charter developed by
G8, OGP, international organizations
• Included in some national legislations
• This principle is obviously in contrary to the principle of
national sovereignty; national administration works for and
is funded by the citizens of the national state.
So existing and agreed principle is that openness of gov
data is defined within state boundaries, not globally; for
citizens of the state, not for anyone interested on the earth.
2

3. Theoretical foundations are important
• Perspective: all e-governance initiatives,
including open government, e-democracy …
as attempts to build an information system.
• Where are theoretical foundations for these
initiatives? Hundreds of frameworks exist.
• Declarations like Open data charter are
important not only politically, but also
technically because they give those
foundations for further development.
3

4. E-gov as a disruptive business
• From our standpoint e-governance initiatives
can be regarded as disruptive innovations
Disruptive innovations are those that develop
new areas, provide new functionality and also
disrupt existing system and its linkages.
This is also true for e-gov initiatives, it is
just that it affect existing political system, not
existing market players.
4

5. Assessing e-gov initiatives
• From „disruptive business” approach, every
individual e-governance initiative can be
estimated using 2 factors:
- IMPACT - how much it changes the
system
- RATIONALITY – how much is this novelty
logically inevitable
5

6. Assessing global openness request
• RATIONALITY: non existent; no generally
accepted political principle obligates country
to be open to subjects that are not related to
its activities
• IMPACT: presumed to be low, but is not:
- digital (&financial) gap questions
- security concerns (DOS attack)
6

7. Importance of rationality
political principles
+
available technology
„competitive edge”
of e-governance
initiatives
7
• The rationality behind e-gov initiatives:
necessity of applying indisputable existing
political principles by the means of modern ICT

8. Competitive edge
8

9. Progress of disruptive innovations
• Starts by acquiring lower end of market
• Able to deliver more-suitable functionality at a
lower price
• Building on this success, it moves to mid- and
high- end of the market delivering
performance that incumbents cannot match
E-gov comparison: initial adoption of openness
can lead to implementation of more disruptive
mechanisms of direct democracy
9

10. BUT
• It is not possible to be devoted to apply
existing political principles and attempt to
change them in the same time
• Hence, global openness request stands in
opposition to our „competitive edge”
!
It may introduce suspicion and uncertainty
about ultimate goals of e-gov progress and ideas
10