Open data work: understanding open data usage from a practice lens
| Author | Jochem van den Berg,Erna Ruijer,Albert Meijer,Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852317753068 |
| Published date | 01 March 2020 |
| Date | 01 March 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Review of
Administrative
Article
Sciences
International Review of Administrative
Open data work:
Sciences
2020, Vol. 86(1) 3–19
!
understanding open
The Author(s) 2018
data usage from
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
a practice lens
DOI: 10.1177/0020852317753068
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
Erna Ruijer ,
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen,
Jochem van den Berg and Albert Meijer
Utrecht University School of Governance
Abstract
During recent years, the amount of data released on platforms by public administra-
tions around the world have exploded. Open government data platforms are aimed at
enhancing transparency and participation. Even though the promises of these platforms
are high, their full potential has not yet been reached. Scholars have identified technical
and quality barriers of open data usage. Although useful, these issues fail to acknowl-
edge that the meaning of open data also depends on the context and people involved.
In this study we analyze open data usage from a practice lens – as a social construction
that emerges over time in interaction with governments and users in a specific context
– to enhance our understanding of the role of context and agency in the development
of open data platforms. This study is based on innovative action-based research in
which civil servants’ and citizens’ initiatives collaborate to find solutions for public
problems using an open data platform. It provides an insider perspective of
Open Data Work. The findings show that an absence of a shared cognitive framework
for understanding open data and a lack of high-quality datasets can prevent processes
of collaborative learning. Our contextual approach stresses the need for open data
practices that work on the basis of rich interactions with users rather than
government-centric implementations.
Corresponding author:
Erna Ruijer, Utrecht University, School of Governance, Bijlhouwerstraat 6, 3511 ZC The Netherlands.
Email: h.j.m.ruijer@uu.nl
4
International Review of Administrative Sciences 86(1)
Points for practitioners
This study provides an insider perspective of Open Data Work by demonstrating what
people actually do with open data, what impact it has and what we can learn from this
about the skills, knowledge and technologies that open data usage requires. It shows
how a collaborative learning process around open data is crucial to develop practices
that are supported by citizens’ initiatives. Lastly, it demonstrates how ongoing (digital)
interactions over open data can result in shared understandings and meaning-
ful practices.
Keywords
citizen participation, e-government, open government, open government data,
transparency
Introduction
Openness is considered a good governance principle. In this light open government
data initiatives have exploded around the world (Vetro` et al., 2016). Open govern-
ment data (OGD) are non-privacy-restricted and non-confidential data, produced
with public money and made available without any restrictions on their usage or
distribution (Janssen et al., 2012: 258). The release of OGD is stimulated by
initiatives such as the international Open Government Partnership, in which
more than 75 countries are participating (Open Government Partnership, 2017).
OGD are said to be the goldmine in public administration (Kroes, 2011) and are
expected to strengthen democratic and governance processes (Safarov et al., 2017).
However, up until now the use of these data has been lagging behind and the actual
impact is limited (Attard et al., 2015; Ruijer and Martinius, 2017). Part of the
problem has been identified in the current data management and publication
practices of governments, raising practical barriers for users of OGD (Dawes
and Helbig, 2010). Consequently, attention has been paid in OGD literature to
uniform user barriers in the form of technical and quality issues, for example
(Dawes et al., 2016; Zuiderwijk and Janssen, 2014).
This rapidly growing new field has attracted scholars and practioners with dif-
fering understandings and views of OGD (Gonzalez-Zapata and Heeks, 2015).
These perspectives have produced important understandings but generally fail to
produce an in-depth understanding of what actually occurs in the interaction
between government organizations and citizens’ initiatives when using OGD.
Usage patterns of technology are often regarded as rational and generic rather
than subjective and contextual (Fulk et al., 1990). Meijer et al. (2014) stress that
OGD and their uses should also be studied as social constructions that emerge over
time in a specific context, leading to a richer insight into the dynamics and com-
plexity of OGD usage. To enhance our understanding of the underlying patterns of
Ruijer et al.
5
the social construction of OGD, we need to study how government organizations
generate – or do not generate – access to OGD, how they interact with
citizens’ initiatives and how a practice of OGD usage is socially constructed in a
specific situation.
The aim of this study is to obtain insight into actual OGD usage and to enhance
our understanding of the role of context and agency for OGD usage. This research
builds upon fundamental insights from studies of organizational usage of
information systems such as the social construction of technology (Bijker, 2012),
technology structuration (Orlikowski, 1992) and technology enactment (Fountain,
2001). Orlikowski (2000) summarizes these insights with the term ‘practice lens’.
This lens enables us to examine how people interact with technology and is better
able to explain emergence and change in both technologies and their use in context
(Orlikowski, 2000: 404). This theoretical perspective helps us to understand OGD
usage not as it should be but as it is.
The article presents results from innovative action-based research on concrete
OGD usage. In our study civil servants collaborate with representatives of grass-
roots organizations in order to find insights and solutions for public problems
based on OGD. This research contributes to the literature in three ways. First, it
contributes to the literature on transparency and OGD by enhancing our under-
standing of how OGD practices are socially constructed by a variety of actors in a
specific contextual situation. This study goes beyond the uniform dos and don’ts as
many of the analyses of barriers and drivers do (Zuiderwijk and Janssen, 2014).
Rather it emphasizes the need for OGD practices that work on the basis of rich
interactions and collaborative work with citizens’ initiatives rather than
government-centric implementations. Second, it contributes to the literature on
collaborative learning processes (Dillenbourg, 1999; Fung, 2004; Johnson and
Johnson, 1996) by providing further insight into the construction of joint knowl-
edge based on OGD in collaboration with others. Third, our study contributes to
the literature by connecting instrumental debates about OGD to perspectives
on technological practices developed in the organization science, sociology and
information systems (Kling, 1991; Orlikowski, 2000, 2010). It enhances our
understanding of the role of context and agency in the development of technology
or more specifically in the development of OGD platforms.
Open data use from a practice lens
The expectations of OGD are high, but the full potential of OGD has not yet been
reached (Safarov et al., 2017; Worthy, 2015). The OGD process is complex
(Zuiderwijk and Janssen, 2014). The process of implementation, also called the
OGD life cycle (Attard et al., 2015), consists of data creation, data publishing,
findability, usage and discussion around data (Zuiderwijk and Janssen, 2014).
This process is in line with the goals of open government: transparency and par-
ticipation (Meijer et al., 2012). In order to advance the goals of open government,
an OGD platform should enable data discusssion as well as facilitate collaboration
6
International Review of Administrative Sciences 86(1)
between government and citizens (Ruijer et al., 2017; Sieber and Johnson, 2015;
Zuiderwijk and Janssen, 2014). After all, the construction of knowledge depends
upon relations with others (Fung, 2004; Johnson and Johnson, 1996). It requires
collaborative learning, a process which occurs when a group works together
to acccomplish shared goals (Johnson and Johnson, 1996). Currently, however,
governments mainly focus on what Sieber and Johnson (2015) call ‘data over the
wall’, where governments publish OGD via a portal and where interaction and
participation with citizens is limited. However, in order to advance the goals of
open government it is important to further reflect on the possibilities of OGD
usage and not simply view publishing OGD as an end point (Sieber and
Johnson, 2015).
In the current literature, the possibilities of OGD usage are presented from
differing perspectives (Gonzalez-Zapata and Heeks, 2015). Based on a literature
review, Gonzalez-Zapata and Heeks (2015) distinguish four differing perspectives:
the bureaucratic perspective is associated with OGD policy; the political perspec-
tive views OGD as a fundamental right; the economic perspective conceives
OGD as a way of economic growth and the technological perspective focuses on
technology design. These perspectives have generated various insights into oppor-
tunities, barriers, differing stakeholders of OGD usage and in the roles and
relationships between government and stakeholders (Dawes et al., 2016; Sieber
and Johnson, 2015). A dominant idea in the studies of OGD is that barriers
need to be identified and...
To continue reading
Request your trial