NEWS & ANALYSIS

The uneven ‘open data' revolution

William Attwell on what cities need to consider when embarking projects in support of transparent governance

The drive to make increasing amounts of government-generated data available to citizens has gathered pace in recent years. The movement marks a shift from mere 'access to information' - usually involving an application, which can be turned down - to actually making raw information openly available for people to download, process and use.

Studies suggest this makes governments more transparent and accountable while also holding significant economic value (for example, by providing more detailed market insights). Advocates of open data argue that making officially-held information freely available has the potential to transform government-citizen relations.

In an era when many national institutions - and, in the case of the European Union or world football body FIFA, supra-national institutions - face a crises of legitimacy, a more open exchange of information has the potential to re-charge engagement with a public familiar with the free exchange provided by Twitter and Instagram.

The response from governments has been uneven. President Barack Obama, on his first day in office, signed an executive order stating that all government information that did not need to be kept secret for security reasons, should be made available to the public. An Open Data Initiative has since been established, featuring over 90 000 datasets, from federal, state and city-level governments across the Unites States. Similar initiatives have been launched in the United Kingdom, Singapore, India, New Zealand and Mexico.

However, this should not be enthusiastically over-interpreted as a world-wide trend towards greater transparency. The South African Parliament has recently passed new legislation - the Protection of State information Act - that increases restrictions on a wide range of state-generated information, with harsh penalties for offenders.

A recent survey study by the International Budget Partnership on the relative availability of state budget information found that most countries do not freely disclose even the most basic information about how public funds are spent. It stated that 'only a minority of government's publish significant budget information. Fewer still provide appropriate mechanisms for public participation, and independent oversight mechanisms frequently lack appropriate resources and leverage'. Out of the 100 countries surveyed, 26 provide 'minimal' or no budget information and 77 do not meet basic standards for budget transparency.

Awareness of the need for greater budget transparency globally has spurred an international movement advocating the sharing of public finance data through 'open budgets' that are readily available on the internet in accessible formats. The World Bank, for example, in collaboration with non-governmental organisations - including the Open Knowledge Foundation and the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency - has established an open budget ‘portal' where governments can chose to make openly available their budgetary data, subject to verification by the Bank. Though the initiative will no doubt generate momentum for the open data movement, what is less clear are the practical ‘next steps' governments need to take to coordinate and publish complex data flows.

The prospect of opening up budgetary and other large datasets poses peculiar issues for cities. First, it is important to recognize that city governments are generators, and users, of particularly rich flows of information: Traffic congestion, public transport movements, electricity supply and distribution, water and sanitation, education, social services (such as housing), land use management, and local taxation are the responsibility of municipal authorities in many countries, presenting a daunting data management challenge.

Second, the institutional set-ups of city governments do not necessarily lend themselves to creating a single portal where accurate, verifiable information is openly available in consistent, readable formats. Both in developed and developing country contexts, these large institutions frequently suffer from 'silo' problems, with the result that responsibility for coordinating data updates - an inherently cross-departmental or 'transversal' activity - can be obscured by managerial divisions. The situation is further complicated when municipalities are divided into separate council or borough authorities.

Third, many datasets held by city governments are, by their very nature, private and confidential, making them unsuitable for open consumption. Whether the financial details of homeowners in arrears for their municipal service payments, the personal details of children in foster care, the financial particulars of people applying for welfare relief, or confidential inter-governmental correspondence, much of the information generated by cities is protected by privacy laws - and rightly so. Pursuing the 'right to information' in these instances can infringe on people's privacy and dignity.

Before embarking on an open data project, therefore, cities need to provide clear policy guidelines explaining which types of data are appropriate to publish, including explicit ‘exclusion material' for private information. This needs to be accompanied by clear interdepartmental protocols for coordinating data updates and formatting and a publication mechanism, such as an online portal. Finally, an oversight authority needs to be identified that can vet sensitive information, iron out management challenges and identify potential risks.

William Attwell is Africa Analyst at Oxford Analytica Ltd. and is a former Principal Analyst responsible for economic policy in the Office of the Executive Mayor of Cape Town. He writes in his personal capacity.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter