Open data?. Data, information, document or record?

Pages163-180
Date15 July 2014
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-01-2014-0012
Published date15 July 2014
AuthorErik Borglund,Tove Engvall
Subject MatterInformation & knowledge management,Information management & governance
Open data?
Data, information, document or record?
Erik Borglund and Tove Engvall
Department of Archives and Computer Science, Mid Sweden University,
Härnösand, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of the article is to investigate what characterizes the information constructs that
the archival discourse and the open data discourse communicate in text, and what their similarities and
differences are. This article proposes that it is possible to see the open data initiative and modern
archival practice as two discourses that have used different terminology to express and communicate
their messages in the literature. In this article, we have applied a hypothesis-like assumption that the
information constructs used in open data are actually nothing other than records, as they are in the
archival discourse.
Design/methodology/approach – This article is based on a mixed method approach. A quantitative
text analysis (word count) was carried out in a large set of documents representing the open data
discourse and in the archival discourse. This was followed by a qualitative text analysis.
Findings – It was found that both discourses did focus on records. However, the opendata discourse
very seldom used the term record, but used information and data much more frequently. The archival
discourse used the term information almost as often as record. A possible adaption of communication
strategies can be identied, targeting a much wider audience through a user-centered approach. This
could be an indication of a change in the archival discourse, which seems to be moving from a discourse
that is very much regulated by law toward a discourse that is more focused on benet and usability.
Originality/value – This research indicates that it is possible to interpret both the open data and the
archival discourse as one united discourse, an effect derived from working with e-government. There is
an ongoing harmonization of the words used, and in the studied archival discourse, a more user- and
business-oriented focus can be seen.
Keywords Information, Open data, Discourse, Data, Document, Records
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
This article departs from focusing broadly on the current e-government development
and instead selects two related initiatives that we claim to be at least partially
overlapping. The rst of these initiatives is the work with open data; the second is
modern archival management.
The concept of open data can be argued to be derived from the European Inspire
Initiative (Blakemore and Craglia, 2006). As more and more information is produced
digitally, the possibility of reusing the information increases, and this is often
manifested under the umbrella of “open data”. In the open-data context, access to
information is discussed in terms of:
• innovation,
open government; and
better public nances.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
Open data
163
Received 21 January 2014
Accepted 3 June 2014
Records Management Journal
Vol. 24 No. 2, 2014
pp. 163-180
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/RMJ-01-2014-0012
The concept of open data is that public information should be available for others to use.
However, the term “open data” has not been fully scrutinized, and we argue that it is very
difcult to treat the three rather different contexts (a-c) similarly without carefully
dening what open data is. However, we do not aim to contribute a denition of open
data. Instead, we are interested in the “data”, i.e. the information that is dealt with by the
whole movement. Furthermore, we see open data as synonymous to the goal behind the
Public Sector Information (PSI) initiative (OECD, 2008), i.e. that it should be possible to
reuse public information.
Modern archival management has changed dramatically over the past 15 years,
mainly inuenced by e-government. The situation in Sweden is that modern archival
management and archival development cannot be separated from e-government
development. The Swedish “E-delegation” is responsible for developing Swedish
e-government (E-delegationen, 2009,2010a,2010b). The e-delegation has identied that
one of the most important conditions needed for efcient e-services is a working
e-archive solution. Therefore, the e-delegation has initiated a project to investigate how
a national model for a governmental e-archive can be structured and designed. This
project has been named e-ARD: the e-Archive and e-Diarium Project. Thanks to the
e-delegation, archives and records management issues are very hyped and many
government authorities are dependent on the results of the eARD project. The National
Archives in Sweden is responsible for the eARD project, and therefore the project also
has a regulatory role affecting all national government authorities.
Access to public information is part of the reason for the overlap between open data
and modern archival management. Sweden has a long history of openness of
government authorities dating back to 1766 when Sweden adopted the Constitution.
The Swedish Freedom of the Press Act (Tryckfrihetsförordning [1949, p. 105], chapter
2), which guarantees citizens the right to access public records, is one of four
fundamental Acts that form the Constitution. The Swedish Constitution together with
the Archives Act (Arkivlag (1990, p. 782, 3§) forms the legislation guaranteeing that
public records should be kept for administrative, legal and research purposes. Public
records are also important for the protection of cultural heritage and allow the general
public the right to access public records. In the Constitution (The Swedish Freedom of
the Press Act [Tryckfrihetsförordning]), a public record is dened and thus, regulation
about the management of public records is connected to the denition of a record. A
record, according to the Swedish Constitution, is very similar to the International
Council on Archives (ICA) denition: i.e. it is recorded information that is produced by
public business (International Council on Archives, 2000) and ISO 15489 (International
Standards Organization, 2001).
Nevertheless, the picture we aim to present is that both the open data and archival
management initiatives are derived from the work with e-government and both affect
public authorities as well as the general public. We are fully aware of the fact that the
boundary between open data and archival management is not absolutely clear and the
two initiatives tend to overlap each other. In this article, we focus on the Swedish
context, but similar initiatives can be found in many other countries. From an archival
theoretical perspective, both these initiatives deal with public records, but in practice,
the information construct used and articulated in open data and in archival management
differs. From our perspective, public information is public records, as opposed to the
denition of records from, e.g., ICA “Recorded information in any form or medium,
RMJ
24,2
164

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT