IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2312.00551.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives: a benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Lnenicka
  • Anastasija Nikiforova
  • Mariusz Luterek
  • Petar Milic
  • Daniel Rudmark
  • Sebastian Neumaier
  • Caterina Santoro
  • Cesar Casiano Flores
  • Marijn Janssen
  • Manuel Pedro Rodr'iguez Bol'ivar

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Lnenicka & Anastasija Nikiforova & Mariusz Luterek & Petar Milic & Daniel Rudmark & Sebastian Neumaier & Caterina Santoro & Cesar Casiano Flores & Marijn Janssen & Manuel Pedro Rodr'iguez Bol'i, 2023. "Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives: a benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries," Papers 2312.00551, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2312.00551
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.00551
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Rose & W. J. M. Mackenzie, 1991. "Comparing Forms of Comparative Analysis," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 39(3), pages 446-462, September.
    2. Lijphart, Arend, 1971. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 682-693, September.
    3. Anastasija Nikiforova & Nina Rizun & Magdalena Ciesielska & Charalampos Alexopoulos & Andrea Miletiv{c}, 2023. "Towards High-Value Datasets determination for data-driven development: a systematic literature review," Papers 2305.10234, arXiv.org.
    4. Michener, Gregory, 2015. "Policy Evaluation via Composite Indexes: Qualitative Lessons from International Transparency Policy Indexes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 184-196.
    5. Namhoon Ki, 2021. "Public service motivation and government officials’ willingness to learn in public sector benchmarking process," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 610-632, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lnenicka, Martin & Nikiforova, Anastasija & Luterek, Mariusz & Milic, Petar & Rudmark, Daniel & Neumaier, Sebastian & Santoro, Caterina & Flores, Cesar Casiano & Janssen, Marijn & Rodríguez Bolívar, M, 2023. "Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives: a benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries," SocArXiv v7msn, Center for Open Science.
    2. Petteri Repo & Kaisa Matschoss, 2019. "Social Innovation for Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Jennifer Robinson, 2011. "Cities in a World of Cities: The Comparative Gesture," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, January.
    4. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    5. Gisselquist, Rachel M., 2020. "How the cases you choose affect the answers you get, revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Dishil Shrimankar, 2023. "Comparative Assessments of Indian Democracy," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 134-139, June.
    7. Relly, Jeannine E. & Rabbi, Md. Fazle & Sabharwal, Meghna & Pakanati, Rajdeep & Schwalbe, Ethan H., 2020. "More than a decade in the making: A study of the implementation of India's Right to Information Act," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    8. Rachel M. Gisselquist, 2018. "Legal empowerment and group-based inequality," WIDER Working Paper Series 039, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Vik, Jostein, 2020. "The agricultural policy trilemma: On the wicked nature of agricultural policy making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    10. Andrew Murray Faure, 1994. "Some Methodological Problems in Comparative Politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(3), pages 307-322, July.
    11. Jaap Woldendorp & Hans Keman, 2010. "Dynamic institutional analysis: measuring corporatist intermediation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 259-275, February.
    12. Kristin Bergtora Sandvik & Ingunn Bjørhaug & Astrid Espegren & Adèle Garnier, 2023. "Protecting skilled Afghan women: Brain save and the politics of vulnerability," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(1), pages 5-15, February.
    13. Bryan K. Ritchie, 2010. "Systemic Vulnerability and Sustainable Economic Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13731.
    14. Virginie Boutueil & Thomas Quillerier & Anna Voskoboynikova, 2019. "Benefits and Pitfalls of Deregulating Taxi Markets: Can Contrasted Case Studies Help Inform the Debate?," Post-Print hal-02422160, HAL.
    15. Cacace, Mirella & Ettelt, Stefanie & Mays, Nicholas & Nolte, Ellen, 2013. "Assessing quality in cross-country comparisons of health systems and policies: Towards a set of generic quality criteria," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 156-162.
    16. Klára Báliková & Natacha Jesus-Silva & Noémia Bessa Vilela & Michaela Korená Hillayová & Jaroslav Šálka, 2023. "The forest land tax systems in Slovakia and Portugal," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(10), pages 427-437.
    17. Arts, Bas & Brockhaus, Maria & Giessen, Lukas & McDermott, Constance L., 2024. "The performance of global forest governance: Three contrasting perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    18. Hervé Dumez & Alain Jeunemaître, 2005. "La démarche narrative en économie," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 56(4), pages 983-1005.
    19. Huiqi Yan & Jeroen van der Heijden & Benjamin van Rooij, 2017. "Symmetric and asymmetric motivations for compliance and violation: A crisp set qualitative comparative analysis of Chinese farmers," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 64-80, March.
    20. Pointvogl, Andreas, 2009. "Perceptions, realities, concession--What is driving the integration of European energy policies?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5704-5716, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2312.00551. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.