Public Sector Transformation Through E-Government
Page 3
tion of e-government by building trust. Electronic Markets, 12(3), 157–162.
Weerakkody, V., & Choudrie, J. (2005). Exploring e-government in the UK: Chal-
lenges, issues and complexities. Journal of Information Science and Technol-
ogy, 2(2), 25–45.
Weerakkody, V., & Dhillon, G. (2008). Moving from e-government to t-govern-
ment: A study of process re-engineering challenges in a UK local authority
perspective. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 4(4), 1–16.
Weerakkody, V., Janssen, M., & Hjort-Madsen, K. (2007a). Realizing integrated
e-government services: A European perspective. Journal of Cases in Electronic
Commerce, 3(2), 14–38.
Weerakkody, V., Jones, S., & Olsen, E. (2007b). E-government: A comparison of
strategies in local authorities in the UK and Norway. International Journal of
Electronic Business, 5(2), 141–159.
Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction
with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 15(3), 371–391.
Part I
Transformational
E-Government
2 Open Government as a Vehicle
for Government Transformation
Dennis Linders, Susan Copeland Wilson,
and John Carlo Bertot
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
In 2009, the Obama administration launched a comprehensive open govern-
ment initiative—operationalized through agency open government plans,
transparency portals, open data, and Web 2.0 technologies—that sought to
realize greater transparency, accountability, and collaboration in the govern-
ment’s interactions with the public. This sparked a global movement around
innovative new ways to partner with citizens and deliver public services.
Inspired nations look to the early pioneers for guidance but no definitive
model or best practices yet exist. Yet while open government approaches have
evolved in diff eren
ff
t ways, all point to the goal of transforming the role of the
citizen from customer to collaborator. Building on this, the authors argue
that open government initiatives, when well designed and implemented, can
become vehicles for realizing genuine government transformation. To sup-
port this claim, the chapter draws from the United States (U.S.) experience
and other countries’ national action plans to identify the open government
enablers for specifi c
fi government transformations. Evaluating early lessons
learned, the chapter demonstrates the importance of a targeted strategic
vision; clear implementation guidance and metrics; and citizen-centricity. It
concludes that open government off er
ff s new forms of citizen participation and
collaboration that, when combined with the right strategic approach, promise
a profound transformation of the social contract.
1 ABOUT THIS CHAPTER
The Obama administration’s open government initiative (OGI) gave voice
to an emerging global open government movement that has redefi ne
fi
d gov-
ernment transparency around wholesale data publication; embraced Web
2.0 interactivity for improved citizen participation and collaboration; and
promoted government planning and management strategies for open gov-
ernment. These emerging eff
fforts, however, lack best-practice models from
which to draw lessons, aspiration, and guidance. It is essential, therefore, to
10 Dennis
Linders, Susan Copeland Wilson, and John Carlo Bertot
evaluate current initiatives to identify patterns for success, lessons learned,
and pitfalls to avoid (Lee & Kwak, 2011).
To frame this analysis, the chapter fi
first covers the characteristics of
open government and transformation, and discusses how open government
off
ffers the vehicle for government transformation. This is followed by an
evaluation of the U.S. OGI’s accomplishments and the rise of a global open
government movement. It then synthesizes the national action plans pro-
duced for the international Open Government Partnership (OGP) (2011) to
explore how governments intend to leverage openness to enable transfor-
mation. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the status of the OGI,
the challenges encountered, and lessons learned to date.
2 OPEN
GOVERNMENT AND TRANSFORMATION
When implemented, the open government and transformational government
models promise greater innovation, effi
c
ffi iency, and accountability in public ser-
vices by opening the government’s functions to greater public oversight and
participation. In so doing, they introduce new frameworks for collaboration
that could spark a reinterpretation of the roles and responsibilities of citizens
and governments.
2.1 Open Government
How open government is implemented—the legal and policy frameworks
used, the strategies articulated, and the processes adopted—varies with a
country’s culture, needs, inclinations, and technology maturity (OASIS,
2010; Bicking & Wimmer, 2011; OECD, 2011). The normative protocols
for implementing and assessing open government are still evolving: no com-
mon set of accepted practices or implementation strategies exists. Rather,
each implementation has its own interpretation of the problems to solve,
paths to sustainability, impacts sought, measurability, and good practices.
At a high-level, the OECD provides a characterization of open government
that is consistent with the literature, that is, government initiatives which:
1. “Strengthen the public debate to create ownership for objectives and
methods used” and
2. “Demonstrate results for the purpose of being accountable and build-
ing trust.” (p.6, 2011)
Many of the open government strategies commonly employed support
these characteristics, including making government data open for public
re-use and validation; collaboratively developing solutions with citizens;
and fostering a culture of presumed, proactive transparency (Lukensmeyer,
Goldman, & Stern, 2011; Kundra, 2010). While fl
flexible in language,
these strategies each embody the most common aims of open government:
accountability, trust, and collaboration.
Open Government as a Vehicle for Government Transformation 11
A decomposition of the U.S. Open Government Directive (OGD), policies,
speeches, and discussions within the U.S. open government community sug-
gests six discrete objectives for open government (Linders & Wilson, 2011):
• Improved accountability;
• Public reuse of data;
• Citizen engagement;
• Open innovation and crowd sourcing;
• Collaborative service delivery; and
• Interagency partnering.
These objectives are pushed by four clusters of advocates—transparency
and oversight watchdogs; technologists; e-democracy and citizen participa-
tion supporters; and bureaucratic reformers—that both complement and
compete in their interests. But thei
r collective voice presents no clear, over-
arching vision. As a result, “the idea of open government is still an abstract
one–to-many” (Montalbano, 2010b).
2.2 Transformational Government
Transformational government is often viewed as e-government’s next evo-
lutionary step, requiring technology for its implementation (Jansseen &
Shu, 2008). But it is similarly unscoped, leaving a number of unanswered
questions (OASIS, 2010; Bertot, Jaeger, & Grimes, 2010), such as:
• Which government structures should be transformed, to what extent,
and how?
• Should transformation depend on using technology?
• Does openness provide the venue for transformation?
• Who should participate?
• How should transformation be measured?
At a high level, consensus is developing regarding the characteristics of
government infrastructures that are transformational (Bannister & Con-
nolly, 2011):
• Transparency and open access to information: tools and data that
facilitate public engagement in decision making, expand situational
awareness, challenge the validity of information and practices, and
encourage innovative reuse.
• Participation and collaboration: citizen partnerships with govern-
ment entities, using government resources and information to identify
specifi
fic problems, and co-design/co-produce resolutions.
Importantly, these characteristics directly mirror the key principles of open
government. Whereas this is in part due to conceptual overlaps, it also suggests
12 Dennis
Linders, Susan Copeland Wilson, and John Carlo Bertot
opportunities for complementarity. For instance, transformation requires an
environment of mutually assumed trust and transparency that gives the agency
and stakeholders the confi denc
fi
e to accept the new norm change brings (Ban-
nister & Connolly, 2011). Open government can provide the mechanism for
building this public trust (Freed, 2010; Nye, Zelikow, & King, 1997). Indeed,
open government has tremendous potential to enable and give meaning to the
concept of government transformation.
2.3 Open Government and the Transformation of the Social Contract
If government is to transform through ICTs, it will likely be the interaction
between people and the technology that creates something new and valuable,
not the technology itself (Scholl, 2005). Likewise, open government is not so
much an end in itself as a means to fundamentally evolve the relationship
between governments and their citizens toward a collaborative partnership.
In particular, governments can today leverage the information revolution to
off er t
ff
heir citizens the means to genuinely “ask what you can do for your
country” (Cameron, 2010). This has come not a moment too soon, as bud-
get-crunched governments can no longer affor
ff d to act on their own. Rec-
ognizing this, politicians have begun to reshape their governing philosophy
around transferring power and decision-making to their citizens in exchange
for added public responsibility.
It is likely in these newly enabled forms of citizen participation and col-
laboration that government’s true transformational potential lies. With ICTs
enabling “many more people to work together,” it is possible that “we can
redesign our institutions” around collaborative problem-solving and thereby
deliver a “new kind of democratic legitimacy” (Noveck 2009, p. xiv). In this
new arrangement, “government becomes a platform for the creation of public
value and social innovation. It provides resources, sets rules, and mediates dis-
putes, but it allows citizens, nonprofi t
fi s, and the private sector to do most of the
heavy lifting” (Tapscott, 2010, p. xvii). Open data, for instance, enables the
public to “do things government employees might not think to do, to achieve
objectives far beyond those of government organizations” (Lakhani, Austin, &
Yi, 2010, p.1). Indeed, the tools of open government present an unprecedented
opportunity to transform the social contract by transitioning from a focus on
entitlements and a “citizen-as-customer” transactional relationship towards
shared responsibilities via government-citizen collaborations (Linders, 2011).
To examine this changing relationship in detail, it is important to explore the
evolution of open government.
3 EVOLUTION OF OPEN GOVERNMENT
3.1 Historical
Support
Open government is not a new concept. Dating back to Sweden’s
1766 Freedom of the Press Act, it is reflected in the U.S. Declaration of
Open Government as a Vehicle for Government Transformation 13
Independence and is integral to the Constitution (Article 1, Section 5).
This commitment is strengthened through legislation, executive orders,
and administrative policies that protect citizens’ right to understand the
government’s business, influences, and decisions. While their motives
varied, nearly every president since 1900 has contributed to these policies
and reforms (Peri, 1995). Institutions such as the Government Printing
Offi
ffice and Federal Depository Libraries further ensure that the public
has access to government information and data (Jaeger, Bertot, & Shuler,
2010). But these measures to ensure openness are often counterbalanced
by eff
fforts to restrict access to government information and operations,
usually in the name of national security (Gorham-Oscilowski & Jaeger,
2008). The OGI marks a signifi
ficant rebalancing of such policies in favor
of openness.
3.2. The U.S. Open Government Directive
Building on his campaign’s successful use of the Internet and social
media, President Obama based the OGI around the principles of trans-
parency of information; participation in decision-making; and col-
laboration in problem-solving (Orszag, 2009). Through agency Open
Government Plans, the OGD instilled these principles into the functions
of government by instructing agencies to:
• Identify key stakeholders;
• Make “high-value” datasets available;
• Design fl
flagship initiatives; and
• Explore new ways of engaging and collaborating with the public.
The process of developing the plans generated extensive discussions
and partnerships between agency open government representatives and
advocates, academia, and commercial vendors via open forums, work-
shops, seminars, and an emerging community of practice (Bertot, Smith,
& McDermott, 2012). An independent audit1 suggested that many agencies innovatively used the OGD as a tool to further their existing open
government activities, even if the Directive was often viewed as yet
another compliance mandate (Wilson & Linders, 2011).
3.3 Initiatives
and Accomplishments
To date, federal agencies have launched over 350 initiatives that have helped
to reshape the government’s interactions with the public while making vast
; stores of federal data available for public reuse and validation (Vein, 2011).
Table 2.1. identifi
fies some of the chief accomplishments.
14 Dennis Linders, Susan Copeland Wilson, and John Carlo Bertot
Table 2.1 Selected Accomplishments of the U.S. Open Government Initiative
Data Publication
Citizen Engagement
• Data.gov provides access to about
• Commercial entities are shaping new
380,000 government datasets in
businesses around open government
usable formats on subjects ranging
data; Data.gov cites over 230 citizen-
from budgets to demography
developed applications (Kundra, 2011).
to astronomy.
• The America COMPETES Act
• Recovery.gov provides transparent
promotes using prizes and challenges
access to Recovery Act spending for
to incentivize citizen and private
public oversight.
sector contributions such as through
• Mash-ups of many diff
fferent data
Challenge.gov.
streams (e.g ., On the Map for Emer-
• We the People (https://petitions.
gency Management) enable compre-
whitehouse.gov/) encourages the
hensive analysis by the public.
public to post online petitions for
• E-FOIA reading rooms post Freedom
White House review.
of Information Act (FOIA)-released
• Regulations.gov posts proposed
documents on agency websites.
regulations for citizen comment.
• The White House hosts virtual town
hall meetings, and most of the 24
major departments have a presence on
Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or other
platforms.
3.4 Towards a Global Movement
The OGI gave rise to a global open government movement. Close on Obama’s
heels, Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom’s (U.K.) began
a radical push for “the Big Society” that aims to leverage modern ICT infra-
structure to shift government functions back into the hands of the people.
Parallel eff or
ff ts elsewhere—from Singapore’s “Government-with-You” strat-
egy to Kenya’s ground-breaking open data portal—are more disjointed but
share many drivers, objectives, and policy arguments. More are likely to fol-
low, with the U.S. and Brazil launching a prominent Open Government Part-