Silvana Fumega
@SilvanavF
Over the past two decades the way in which
individuals access government information has changed. The principles behind
Freedom of Information (FOI) legislation and Open Government Data (OGD)
initiatives are similar, however the tools and the formats in which that
information is published have varied. Open Government Data initiatives
introduce a new way to access and use the data produced and held by
governments.
In this context, several local
governments in Latin America, and around the world, have begun to implement OGD
policies. It is often argued that local governments are the closest level of
government to the people and, in that sense, they can produce greater changes
to people’s lives. They are also frequently at the forefront of openness and
participation experiments.
Following those ideas, together with a team of
researchers from Brazil (Ricardo Matheus
and Manuela Ribeiro) and Uruguay (Fabrizio Scrollini), we decided to embark on
a project on Open Government
Data policies in local governments in 3 important cities in the Southern Cone of Latin America: Buenos
Aires, Montevideo and Sao Paulo. This research, "Opening Cities: Open Data in Buenos Aires, Montevideo and Sao
Paulo”, is part
of a broader project on the impact of open data policies in developing
countries (ODDC) supported by the Web Foundation and IDRC.
In the case of Buenos Aires, the capital city of
Argentina, the OGD policy officially started in the first months of 2012. The
introduction of the topic in the policy agenda there can be awarded to a
combination of three elements: 1) "entrepreneurs" within the public
sector, 2) as well as outside it, along with 3) a stream of ideas, which was
emerging in some countries of the northern hemisphere. All came together in
late 2011 when the local elections produced a window of opportunity[1]
to introduce these new ideas.
One of the main features of Open
Government Data policy in the City of Buenos Aires is the decentralized nature
of the responsibilities towards the disclosure of government data. The
responsibilities and "ownership" of the data are under a
decentralized process: each agency is responsible for authorizing the release
of the data they produce. This type of measure took some pressure off from the
shoulders of the newly created agency (Office of Information and Open Government) and, therefore, left some room for this new unit to focus on
other aspect of the policy implementation. However, it is necessary to point
out, following John Wonderlich, that this type of initiatives could be simply
dismissed or ignored by agencies that decide not to release information[2].
The efforts of the Office of Information and
Open Government have been focused on two main areas: "Data
Generation" and "Open Government Culture" (content’s
management). Most of the resources of this agency are focused on the latest of
these areas, aimed at building capacity and creating a community of users. This
is so as greater demand
for government data also gives the Office Information and Open Government more
bargaining power with other agencies to demand greater amounts of data to be
published via the OGD portal.
Even before the establishment of the General
Direction of Information and Open Government, a community around OGD started to
be created. Around 2009 a small number of developers and members of civil
society organizations in Argentina were already working on these topics (at the
beginning with few available resources but investing many hours of work to
clean and to access data that were not yet released in reusable formats). Over
the past few years Open Government Data has gained popularity and became a
“mainstream” topic among developers and organizations working on government
transparency and access to public information. These actors play a crucial role
in OGD policies, as not every citizen is eager to engage with transparency
initiatives (due to a lack of interest, skills or resources). Thus, the
existence and capacity of technically skilled intermediaries is likely to be an
important determining factor for the success of open data interventions.
Some of the product
that civil society actors have created are published in the Buenos Aires Data
website <data.buenosaires.gob.ar>. This portal contains 49 applications[3], which
were built using the data provided in the portal (some of them are results of
the competitions and events organized by the Direction of Information and Open
Government). These applications are based on data from a variety of topics,
such as education, transit, culture, and security, among others. Despite this
variety and the actors that have been involved in creating these applications,
the use of OGD is still limited[4] (not
only in the case of the City of Buenos Aires but in most of these initiatives).
In more general terms, Open Government Data
policies, by relying on proactive publication of information tend not to
encourage confrontation between civil society actors and governments, as it
could be the case with some information requests under FOI laws when
governments are not willing to release the requested information. This
proactive disclosure of information, in the context of open data policies, might
partially explain why- unlike FOI laws- many of these policies were driven (or
at least not resisted) by actors within the public sector. In global terms, while the FOI diffusion took
several years, local and national governments in many countries quickly adopted
Open Data policies. This is the case of the City of Buenos Aires where the
Chief of Government provided an extensive support to this policy.
At the stage of implementation, information
disclosed in the framework of open data initiatives in cities is focused, often
very successfully, on providing information about city services such as
transport, cultural activities. Examples of this disclosure are the 70 datasets
provided by the City of Buenos Aires in their Open Data portal. Yet, in terms
of one of the main Open Data goals, “transparency towards accountability”, they
don't seem to be as successful. In that sense, the city of Buenos Aires is part
of the rule and not the exceptions.
In that same line, OGD portals are among the
most common commitments made by governments to get closer to the idea of Open
Government, as those portals can provide an appearance of government transparency.
However, in practice, Open Government Data initiatives in cities seem to be closer to the
idea proclaimed under the “smart cities” label than to the Open Government
principles. A city can offer new ways for people to access public services they
deliver but it doesn’t mean that they provide the information and institutional
channels for citizens and organizations to know how those services are funded,
implemented (among the vast amount of information a city- or any other
government- should disclose to get closer to the idea of an open government).
For a local (or any other government) a focus on
the effective and timely disclosure of politically important data is the only
way to really get closer to the idea of Open Government. However the focus on a
proactive approach and the potential offered by technology seduces cities
towards taking the option(s) that deliver minimal advantages in the terms of
transparency and accountability. Therefore whilst the potential and promise of
Open Government Data is enormous, its impact in terms of achieving Open
Government at this point in time, it is still limited.
As
a summary, if OGD portals are tools aimed to achieve greater government openness, there is still much work to be done by governments as well as civil society actors. In
that sense, it is left to be seen
if this policy (in the City of Buenos Aires as well as in other cities and
countries) will scale and what kind of real impact will produce in the long
run, or if only a few skilled actors will take advantage of these public
resources.
[1] Policy entrepreneurs,
according to Kingdon, are able to identify and use "windows of
opportunity" to promote changes in policy environments. (Kingdon 1984) In this context, as in other areas,
opportunities must be early recognized in order to achieve the desired
outcomes.
[2] Wonderlich, J. (2011) Obama's Open Government
Directive, Two Years On: http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2011/12/07/obamas-open-government-directive-two-years-on/
[3]
http://concursos.buenosaires.gob.ar/buenos-aires-apps/apps/
[4] Moreover, the agency in charge of implementing
the OGD initiative is not always aware of the actual use of the data by third
parties (the more datasets and users, the more difficult to track every
application or report) Sometimes, only when a problem occurs with one of the
datasets, the administrators of the OGP portal could become aware of the users
of such data.
