Participatory information governance. Transforming recordkeeping for childhood out-of-home Care
| Date | 11 March 2019 |
| Pages | 178-193 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-09-2018-0041 |
| Published date | 11 March 2019 |
| Author | Joanne Evans,Sue McKemmish,Gregory Rolan |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance |
Participatory information
governance
Transforming recordkeeping for childhood
out-of-home Care
Joanne Evans,Sue McKemmish and Gregory Rolan
Centre for Organisational and Social Informatics, Monash University,
Melbourne, Australia
Abstract
Purpose –This paper examines the recordkeepinggovernance requirements of the childhood out-of-home
Care sector, with critical interlaced identity, memory, culturaland accountability needs. They argue that as
we enter a new era of participation, new models for governance are required to recognise and dynamically
negotiate a range of rights in and to records, across space and through time. Instead of recordkeeping
configured to support closed organisations and closely bounded information silos, there is a need for
recordkeeping to reflect, facilitate and be part of governance frameworks for organisations as nodes in
complex informationnetworks.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper reports on a key outcome of the Setting the Record
Straight for the Rights of the Child NationalSummit held in Melbourne Australia in May 2017, the National
Framework for Recordkeepingin Out-of-Home Care, and the research and advocacy agenda that will support
its development.
Findings –The authors argue that as we enter an algorithmic age, designing for shared ownership,
stewardship, interoperability and participation is an increasing imperative to address the information
asymmetries that foster social disadvantage and discrimination. The authors introduce the concept of
participatoryinformation governance in response to social, politicaland cultural mandates for recordkeeping.
Given the challenges associatedwith progressing new participatory models of recordkeeping governance in
the inhospitable environment of existing recordkeeping law, standards and governance frameworks, the
authors outlinehow these frameworks will need to be re-figured forparticipatory recordkeeping.
Practical implications –The National Framework for Recordkeepingfor Childhood Out-of-Home Care
seeks to address the systemicrecordkeeping problems that have been most recently highlightedin the 2013-
2017 RoyalCommission into Institutional Responsesto Child Sexual Abuse.
Social implications –The National Framework for Recordkeepingfor Childhood Out-of-Home Care will
also address how a suite of recordkeepingrights can be embedded into networked socio-technical systems.
This represents an example ofa framework for participatory information governance whichcan help guide
the design of new systemsin an algorithmicage.
Originality/value –The proposed National Framework represents a new model for recordkeeping
governance to recognise and enact multiple rights in records. Designed to support the lifelong identity,
memory and accountabilityneeds for those who experience childhood out-of-home Care, it aims to foster the
The Rights in Records by Design Project is funded through an Australian Research Council (ARC)
Discovery Grant DP170100198. The Chief Investigators are Associate Professor Joanne Evans
(Monash University), Associate Professor Jacqueline Wilson (Federation University Australia),
Professor Sue McKemmish (Monash), Associate Professor Philip Mendes (Monash), Professor Keir
Reeves (Federation), and Dr Jane Bone (Monash). Associate Professor Joanne Evans is the recipient of
ARC Future Fellowship FT140100073 Connecting the Disconnected: Co-Designing Inclusive Archival
and Recordkeeping Systems. The authors would also like to acknowledge the contributions of all
those involved in the Setting the Record Straight for the Rights on the Child Initiative, and at the May
2017 Summit, to the development of the National Framework for Childhood Out-of-Home Care.
RMJ
29,1/2
178
Received30 September 2018
Revised24 November 2018
Accepted6 December 2018
RecordsManagement Journal
Vol.29 No. 1/2, 2019
pp. 178-193
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/RMJ-09-2018-0041
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
transformation of recordkeeping and archival infrastructure to a participatory model that can address the
current inequitiesand better enable the design and oversightof equitable algorithmic systems.
Keywords Social justice, Social care, Information governance, Participatory recordkeeping
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Emerging discourses on governance respond to a number of political, societal and
technological changes. As faith in monolithic hierarchical bureaucracies has broken down,
network forms of delivering public services have emerged in which governments co-
ordinate public, private, commercial and not-for-profit actors. While not necessarily new,
growing concerns with how these networks operate in a transparent, inclusive, responsive
and participatory manner is reflected in increasedinterest in governance, not just as a buzz
word, but as it applies across all kinds and layers of societal organisations and systems
(Bevir, 2012). For example, the following UNESCO definition highlights the role of
governance frameworks in distributing power for fairness, equity and justice and the need
for accountabilityand transparency in and across management and operational systems.
Governance has been defined to refer to structures and processes that are designed to ensure
accountability, transparency, responsiveness, rule of law, stability, equity and inclusiveness,
empowerment, and broad-based participation [...]Governance systems set the parameters under
which management and administrative systems will operate. Governance is about how power is
distributed and shared, how policies are formulated, priorities set and stakeholders made
accountable (UNESCO, 2015).
In Australia, a major focus of recommendations of the recent Royal Commission on
Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse(RCIRCSA) is the development of a National
Framework for Child Safety (RCIRCSA, 2017a, p. 317) to co-ordinate cross-sectoral and
interdisciplinary action. The RCIRCSA (2017a, p. 316) was critical of the domination of
existing governance frameworks by government child protection agencies and outsourced
service providers, finding that child safety requires national leadership and “a coordinated
interdisciplinary response across multiple sectors and all jurisdictions”–justice,
child protection, health, education, disability services, out-of-home care, the faith-based
sector and community services[1]. It recommended mandatory implementation of ten Child
Safe Standards to ensure institutions fulfilled their responsibility to uphold the United
act in the best interests of the child (Article 3). The Australian Human Rights Commission
has subsequently developed theStandards into a suite of National Principles for Child Safe
Organisations, currently with COAG(Council of Australian Governments) for endorsement
(Australian Human Rights Commission, 2018). The Royal Commission also recommended
five high level principles for recordkeeping (RCIRCSA, 2017b, pp. 22-23) to supplement the
Child Safe Standards,as illustrated in Figure 1.
The Commission viewed recordkeepingprinciples as particularly relevant to Standard 1
and embedding child safety in institutional leadership, governance and culture. Quality
recordkeeping is equallycritical to decision-making, engaging other stakeholders, providing
authoritative sources of information and supporting complaints processes. Specifying the
elemental role of comprehensive high-quality recordkeeping in good governance,
particularly in the out-of-homeCare sector, the Commissioners stated:
They help promote consistency of practice, retention of organisational memory and institutional
accountability. They also help institutions to maintain descriptions of their processes, decisions,
Childhood out-
of-home Care
179
To continue reading
Request your trial