Revolution Delayed: The Impact of Open Data on the Fight against Corruption

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by RiSSC – Research Centre on Security and Crime (Italy): “In the recent years, the demand for Open Data picked up stream among stakeholders to increasing transparency and accountability of the Public Sector. Governments are supporting Open Data supply, to achieve social and economic benefits, return on investments, and political consensus.

While it is self-evident that Open Data contributes to greater transparency – as it makes data more available and easy to use by the public and governments, its impact on fighting corruption largely depends on the ability to analyse it and develop initiatives that trigger both social accountability mechanisms, and government responsiveness against illicit or inappropriate behaviours.

To date, Open Data Revolution against corruption is delayed. The impact of Open Data on the prevention and repression of corruption, and on the development of anti- corruption tools, appears to be limited, and the return on investments not yet forthcoming. Evidence remains anecdotal, and a better understanding on the mechanisms and dynamics of using Open Data against corruption is needed.

The overall objective of this exploratory study is to provide evidence on the results achieved by Open Data, and recommendations for the European Commission and Member States’ authorities, for the implementation of effective anti-corruption strategies based on transparency and openness, to unlock the potential impact of “Open Data revolution” against Corruption.

The project has explored the legal framework and the status of implementation of Open Data policies in four EU Countries – Italy, United Kingdom, Spain, and Austria. TACOD project has searched for evidence on Open Data role on law enforcement cooperation, anti-corruption initiatives, public campaigns, and investigative journalism against corruption.

RiSSC – Research Centre on Security and Crime (Italy), the University of Oxford and the University of Nottingham (United Kingdom), Transparency International (Italy and United Kingdom), the Institute for Conflict Resolution (Austria), and Blomeyer&Sanz (Spain), have carried out the research between January 2014 and February 2015, under an agreement with the European Commission – DH Migration and Home Affairs. The project has been coordinated by RiSSC, with the support of a European Working Group of Experts, chaired by prof. Richard Rose, and an external evaluator, Mr. Andrea Menapace, and it has benefited from the contribution of many experts, activists, representatives of Institutions in the four Countries….(More)

Open governance systems: Doing more with more

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Jeremy Millard in Government Information Quarterly: “This paper tackles many of the important issues and discussions taking place in Europe and globally about the future of the public sector and how it can use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to respond innovatively and effectively to some of the acute societal challenges arising from the financial crisis as well as other deeper rooted global problems. These include inequality, poverty, corruption and migration, as well as climate change, loss of habitat and the ageing society. A conceptual framework for open governance systems enabled by ICT is proposed, drawing on evidence and examples from around the world as well as a critical appraisal of both academic and grey literature. The framework constructs a system of open assets, open services and open engagement, and this is used to move the e-government debate forward from a preoccupation with lean and small governments which ‘do more with less’ to examine the potential for open governance systems to also ‘do more with more’. This is achieved by enabling an open government and open public sector, as part of this open governance system, to ‘do more by leveraging more’ of the existing assets and resources across the whole of society, and not just within the public sector, many of which are unrealised and untapped, so in effect are ‘wasted’. The paper argues that efficiencies and productivity improvements are essential at all levels and across all actors, as is maximising both public and private value, but that they must also be seen at the societal level where trade-offs and interactions are required, and not only at the individual actor level….(More)”

Making Open Innovation Ecosystems Work: Case Studies in Healthcare

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

New paper by Donald E. Wynn, Jr., Renee M. E. Pratt and Randy V. Bradley for the Business of Government Center: “In the mist of tightening budgets, many government agencies are being asked to deliver innovative solutions to operational and strategic problems. One way to address this dilemma is to participate in open innovation. This report addresses two key components of open innovation:

  • Adopting external ideas from private firms, universities, and individuals into the agency’s innovation practices
  • Pushing innovations developed internally to the public by reaching out to external channels

To illustrate how open innovation can work, the authors employ the concept of the technological ecosystem to demonstrate that fostering innovations cannot be done alone.

Successful technological ecosystems create innovation through the combination of five key elements:

  1. Resources – the contribution made and exchanged among the participants of an ecosystem
  2. Participants – the characteristics of the participants
  3. Relationships – the relationships and interaction among the participants
  4. Organization –of the ecosystem as a whole
  5. External environment in which the ecosystem operates

This report examines both strategies by studying two cases of government-sponsored participation in technological ecosystems in the health care industry:

  • The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) built a new ecosystem around its VistA electronic health records software in order to better facilitate the flow of innovation practices and processes between the VA and external agencies and private firms.
  • The state of West Virginia selected a variant of the VistA software for deployment in its hospital system, saving a significant amount of money while introducing a number of new features and functionality for the seven medical facilities.

As a result of these studies, the authors have identified 10 best practices for agencies seeking to capi­talize on open innovation.  These best practices include encouraging openness and transparency, minimizing internal friction and bureaucracy, and continuously monitoring external conditions….(More)”

What should governments require for their open data portals?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Luke Fretwell at GovFresh: “Johns Hopkins University’s new Center for Government Excellence is developing a much-needed open data portal requirements resource to serve as a “set of sample requirements to help governments evaluate, develop (or procure), deploy, and launch an open data web site (portal).”

As many governments ramp up their open data initiatives, this is an important project in that we often see open data platform decisions being made without a holistic approach and awareness of what government should purchase (or have the flexibility to develop on its own).

“The idea here is that any interested city can use this as a baseline and make their own adjustments before proceeding,” said GovEx Director of Open Data Andrew Nicklin via email. “Perhaps with this we can create some common denominators amongst open data portals and eventually push the whole movement forwards.”

My fundamental suggestion is that government-run open data platforms be fully open source. There are a number of technical and financial reasons for this, which I will address in the future, but I believe strongly that if the platform you’re hosting data on doesn’t adhere to the same licensing standards you hold for your data, you’re only doing open data half right.

With both CKAN and DKAN continuing to grow in adoption, we’re seeing an emergence of reliable solutions that adequately meet the same technical and procurement requirements as propriety options (full disclosure: I work with NuCivic on DKAN and NuCivic Data).

Learn more about the GovEx open data portal standards project”

Who you are/where you live: do neighbourhood characteristics explain co-production?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Peter Thijssen and Wouter Van Dooren in the International Review of Administrative Sciences: “Co-production establishes an interactive relationship between citizens and public service providers. Successful co-production hence requires the engagement of citizens. Typically, individual characteristics such as age, gender, and income are used to explain why citizens co-produce. In contrast, neighbourhood-level variables receive less attention. Nevertheless, the co-production literature, as well as social capital and urban planning theory, provides good arguments why neighbourhood variables may be relevant. In this study, we examine the administrative records of citizen-initiated contacts in a reporting programme for problems in the public domain. This co-production programme is located in the district of Deurne in the city of Antwerp, Belgium. A multilevel analysis is used to simultaneously assess the impact of neighbourhood characteristics and individual variables. While the individual variables usually found to explain co-production are present in our case, we also find that neighbourhood characteristics significantly explain co-production. Thus, our findings suggest that participation in co-production activities is determined not only by who you are, but also by where you live.

Points for practitioners In order to facilitate co-production and participation, the neighbourhood should be the first place to look. Co-production benefits may disproportionaly accrue to strong citizens, but also to strong neighbourhoods. Social corrections should take both into account. More broadly, a good understanding of the neighbourhoods in the city is needed to grasp citizen behaviour. Place-based policies in the city should focus on the neighbourhood….(More)”

White House Announces New Steps to Improve Federal Programs by Leveraging Research Insights

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Factsheet: “Today the White House will announce new actions to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Federal programs by leveraging research insights about how people participate in, engage with, and respond to programs. Announcements include: an Executive Order, new guidance to Federal agencies to make government forms simpler and easier, and a report from the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team.

The report features the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team’s first year of projects, which have made government programs easier to access and more user-friendly, and have boosted program efficiency and integrity. As a result of these projects, more Servicemembers are saving for retirement, more students are going to college, more Veterans are accessing their benefits, more farmers are obtaining credit, and more families are gaining healthcare coverage.

The Federal Government administers a wide array of programs on behalf of the American people, such as financial aid to assist with college access and workplace savings plans to promote retirement security. Americans are best served when these programs are easy to access and when program choices and information are presented clearly. When programs are designed without these considerations in mind, Americans can incur real consequences. One behavioral science study found, for example, that a complex application process for college financial aid not only decreased applications for aid, but also led some students to delay or forgo going to college altogether.

Behavioral science insights—research insights about how people make decisions—not only identify aspects of programs that can act as barriers to engagement, but also provide policymakers with insight into how those barriers can be removed through commonsense steps, such as simplifying communications and making choices more clear. That same study on financial aid found that streamlining the process of applying—by providing families with assistance and enabling families to automatically fill parts of the application using information from their tax return—increased the rates of both aid applications and college enrollment.

When these insights are used to improve government, the returns can be significant. For instance, the Federal Government applied behavioral science insights to simplify the process of applying for Federal student aid and has made college more accessible to millions of American families. Similarly, the Pension Protection Act of 2006, which codified the practice of automatically enrolling workers into retirement savings plans, is based on behavioral economics research showing that switching from an opt-in to an opt-out enrollment system dramatically increases participation rates. Since the implementation of this policy, automatic enrollment and automatic escalation have led to billions of dollars in additional savings by Americans.

More Details on Today’s Announcements

Today, President Obama signed an Executive Order that directs Federal agencies to use behavioral science insights to better serve the American people. The Executive Order directs Federal agencies to identify programs in which applying behavioral science insights can yield substantial improvements; develop strategies for applying behavioral science insights to programs, and, where possible, for rigorously testing and evaluating the impact of these insights; recruit behavioral science experts to join the Federal Government; and strengthen agency relationships with the research community.

The Executive Order directs Federal agencies to take action in four areas in which prior research and practice indicate that behavioral science insights can play an especially strong role in program outcomes:

  • Streamlining access to programs: Agencies should look for opportunities to help qualifying individuals, families, and businesses access programs and benefits by streamlining processes that may otherwise limit participation.
  • Improving the presentation of information: Agencies should look for opportunities to improve how the government presents information to consumers, borrowers, and program beneficiaries by giving greater consideration to ways in which information format, timing, and medium can affect understanding.
  • Structuring choices carefully: Where programs and policies offer choices, agencies should carefully consider how the presentation and structure of those choices, including default settings and the number and arrangement of options, can empower participants to make the best choices for themselves and their families.
  • Considering a full range of incentives: Where policies create incentives to take specific actions, such as saving for retirement, agencies should consider how the frequency, presentation, and labeling of benefits, tax credits, and other incentives can more effectively and efficiently promote those actions, with a specific focus on opportunities to use nonfinancial incentives.

The Executive Order also formally establishes the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team (SBST), a group of experts in applied behavioral science that translates findings and methods from the social and behavioral sciences into improvements in Federal policies and programs for the benefit of the American people. The SBST is chaired by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and represents a dozen member agencies across the Federal Government, as well as offices within the Executive Office of the President. SBST also receives critical support from the General Services Administration. The Executive Order charges SBST with providing advice and policy guidance to Federal agencies in support of the order….(More)”

Video app provides underserved clients with immediate legal advice

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Springwise: “Pickle is a video call app that gives everyone access to a greater understanding of their constitutional rights, via on-demand legal advice.

Legal representation is expensive and we have already seen platforms in the US and the UK use crowdfunding to help underprivileged clients fund legal battles. Now, Pickle Legal is helping in a different way — it enables video calls between clients and attorneys, which will give everyone access to a greater understanding of their constitutional rights.

Pickle connects clients with legal representation via real-time video communication. Anyone in need of legal advice can download the app to their smartphone. When they launch the app, Pickle alerts their network of attorneys and connects the client with an available professional via a video call. The client can then gain immediate advice from the attorney — helping them to understand their position and rights in the moment.

Pickle Legal is currently in Beta and accepting applications from attorneys and clients alike. During the testing phase, the service is available for free, but eventually clients will pay an affordable rate — since the convenience of the platform is expected to reduce costs. Pickle will also be archiving videos — at the discretion of the parties involved — for use in any case that arises…(More)”

EveryPolitician

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

“The clue’s in the name. EveryPolitician aims to provide data about, well, every politician. In the world. It’s a simple but ambitious project to collect and share that data, in a consistent, open format that anyone can use.

Why? Because this resource doesn’t yet exist. And it would be incredibly useful, for a huge number of people and organisations all around the world.

When data is in a consistent, structured format, it can be reused by developers everywhere. You don’t have waste time scraping data and converting it into a format you can work with; instead, you can simply concentrate on making tools. And those tools can more easily be picked up, used and adapted to local needs anywhere in the world, saving everyone time and effort.

The data

The long term aim is to include every elected official in the world, but let’s start simple. Our first goal is to have data for all present-day national-level legislators.

To see how far we’ve got, pick a country.

There’s more to this data than you’ll see there, though. For most datasets there is richer information available, including contact details, photos, gender, and more.

If you want to use that data, you can download it in two useful formats:

  • CSV format (great for spreadsheets)
  • JSON in Popolo format (ideal for developers)

A note about the Popolo standard: it’s a rich, expressive format that, like a language, is used in many different ways by different authors. However, when we add data to EveryPolitician we always use Popolo according to the same, defined principles. It’s because of this consistency that the tools you build will work with EveryPolitician data from any country, for any country.

Want more detail? Interested in using this data in a web application or tool you’re building? See the technical overview of EveryPolitician.”

Who May Use the King’s Forest? The Meaning of Magna Carta, Commons and Law in Our Time

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

David Bollier: “The relationship between law and the commons is very much on my mind these days.  I recently posted a four-part serialization of my strategy memo, “Reinventing Law for the Commons.”  The following public talk, which I gave at the Heinrich Boell Foundation in Berlin on September 8, is a kind of companion piece.  The theme: this year’s celebration of the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta and its significance for commoners today.

Thank you for inviting me to speak tonight about the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta and the significance of law for the commons.  It’s pretty amazing that anyone is still celebrating something that happened eight centuries ago!   Besides our memory of this event, I think it is so interesting what we have chosen to remember about this history, and what we have forgotten.

This anniversary is essentially about the signing of peace treaty on the fields of Runnymede, England, in 1215.  The treaty settled a bloody civil war between the much-despised King John and his rebellious barons eight centuries ago.  What was intended as an armistice was soon regarded as a larger canonical statement about the proper structure of governance.  Amidst a lot of archaic language about medieval ways of life, Magna Carta is now seen as a landmark statement about the limited powers of the sovereign, and the rights and liberties of ordinary people.

The King’s acceptance of Magna Carta after a long civil war seems unbelievably distant and almost forgettable.  How could it have anything to do with us moderns?  I think its durability and resonance have to do with our wariness about concentrated power, especially of the sovereign.  We like to remind ourselves that the authority of the sovereign is restrained by the rule of law, and that this represents a new and civilizing moment in human history.  We love to identify with the underdog and declare that even kings must respect something transcendent and universal called “law,” which is said to protect individual rights and liberties.

In this spirit, the American Bar Association celebrated Magna Carta in 1957 by erecting a granite memorial at Runnymede bearing the words “Freedom Under Law.”  On grand public occasions – especially this year – judges, politicians, law scholars and distinguished gray eminences like to congregate and declare how constitutional government and representative democracy are continuing to uphold the principles of Magna Carta.  More about that in a minute.

This evening I’d like to explore a richer, more complex story about Magna Carta and its meanings for us today.  There are in fact two distinct but related stories to be told.  Story No. 1 – call it “The Triumph of the Modern Market/State” – is the one that I just told.  It is usually invoked by distinguished elites to celebrate constitutional democracy, its close alliance with so-called free markets, and the idea of “freedom under law.”  Story No. 1 assures us that constitutional government and representative legislatures actually serve as the brave bulwarks of liberty and law, defending the rights enshrined in Magna Carta.  And to be sure, the Great Chart represents a significant advance over the monarchy, tribalism, and a Hobbesean war of each against all that once prevailed in many regions of the world.

Myself, I’m more interested in the neglected side of the history of Magna Carta, a story that doesn’t get told very often.  Call it Story No. 2, or what I call Law for the Commons. ...(More)”

The tools of social change: A critique of techno-centric development and activism

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Jan Servaes and Rolien Hoyng in New Media and Society: “Generally, the literatures on Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) and on networked resistance are evolving isolated from one another. This article aims to integrate these literatures in order to critically review differences and similarities in the techno-centric conceptions of agency and social change by political adversaries that are rooted in their socio-technical practices. We repurpose the critique of technological determinism to develop a multi-layered conception of agency that contains three interrelated dimensions: (1) “access” versus “skill” and the normative concept of inclusion; (2) fixed “system” versus “open-ended network” and savoir vivre; and (3) “institution” versus “extra-institutional network” and political efficacy. Building on our critique, we end by exploring the political possibilities at the intersections of conventional institutions or communities and emerging, extra-institutional networked formations…(More)”