A Comparative Study of Methods for Deciding to Open Data

Abstract

Governments may have their own business processes to decide to open data, which might be supported by decision-making tools. At the same time, analyzing potential benefits, costs, risks, and other effects-adverse of disclosing data are challenging. In the literature, there are various methods to analyze the potential advantages and disadvantages of opening data. Nevertheless, none of them provides discussion into the comparative studies in terms of strengths and weaknesses. In this study, we compare three methods for disclosing data, namely Bayesian-belief networks, Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making, and Decision tree analysis. The comparative study is a mechanism for further studying the development of a knowledge domain by performing a feature-by-feature at the same level of functionalities. The result of this research shows that the methods have different strengths and weaknesses. The Bayesian-belief Networks has higher accuracy in comparison, and able to construct the causal relationships of the selected variable under uncertainties. Yet, this method is more resource intensive. This study can contribute to the decision-makers and respected researchers to a better comprehend and provide recommendation related to the three methods comparison.