Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives
A benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries
Martin Lnenicka (University of Pardubice)
Anastasija Nikiforova (University of Tartu)
Mariusz Luterek (University of Warsaw)
Petar Milic (University of Pristina)
Daniel Rudmark (University of Gothenburg, Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute)
Sebastian Neumaier (St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences)
Caterina Santoro (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, TU Delft - Information and Communication Technology)
Cesar Casiano Flores (University of Twente)
Marijn Janssen (TU Delft - Engineering, Systems and Services)
Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar (Universidad de Granada)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Open government and open (government) data are seen as tools to create new opportunities, eliminate or at least reduce information inequalities and improve public services. More than a decade of these efforts has provided much experience, practices, and perspectives to learn how to better deal with them. This paper focuses on benchmarking of open data initiatives over the years and attempts to identify patterns observed among European countries that could lead to disparities in the development, growth, and sustainability of open data ecosystems. To do this, we studied benchmarks and indices published over the last years (57 editions of 8 artifacts) and conducted a comparative case study of eight European countries, identifying patterns among them considering different potentially relevant contexts such as e-government, open government data, open data indices and rankings, and others relevant for the country under consideration. Using a Delphi method, we reached a consensus within a panel of experts and validated a final list of 94 patterns, including their frequency of occurrence among studied countries and their effects on the respective countries. Finally, we took a closer look at the developments in identified contexts over the years and defined 21 recommendations for more resilient and sustainable open government data initiatives and ecosystems and future steps in this area.