Open government data: critical information management perspectives

IF 0.8 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
E. Shepherd, J. Bunn, A. Flinn, Elizabeth Lomas, Anna Sexton, Sara Brimble, Katherine Mary Chorley, Emma D. Harrison, J. Lowry, J. Page
{"title":"Open government data: critical information management perspectives","authors":"E. Shepherd, J. Bunn, A. Flinn, Elizabeth Lomas, Anna Sexton, Sara Brimble, Katherine Mary Chorley, Emma D. Harrison, J. Lowry, J. Page","doi":"10.1108/RMJ-08-2018-0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nOpen government data and access to public sector information is commonplace, yet little attention has focussed on the essential roles and responsibilities in practice of the information and records management professionals, who enable public authorities to deliver open data to citizens. This paper aims to consider the perspectives of open government and information practitioners in England on the procedural and policy implications of open data across local public authorities.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nUsing four case studies from different parts of the public sector in England (local government, higher education, National Health Service and hospital trust), the research involved master’s level students in the data collection and analysis, alongside academics, thus enhancing the learning experience of students.\n\n\nFindings\nThere was little consistency in the location of responsibility for open government data policy, the range of job roles involved or the organisational structures, policy and guidance in place to deliver this function. While this may reflect the organisational differences and professional concerns, it makes it difficult to share best practice. Central government policy encourages public bodies to make their data available for re-use. However, local practice is very variable and perhaps understandably responds more to local organisational strategic and resource priorities. The research found a lack of common metadata standards for open data, different choices about which data to open, problems of data redundancy, inconsistency and data integrity and a wide variety of views on the corporate and public benefits of open data.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe research is limited to England and to non-national public bodies and only draws data from a small number of case studies.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe research contributes to the debate about emerging issues around the complexities of open government data and its public benefits, contributing to the discussions around technology-enabled approaches to citizen engagement and governance. It offers new insights into the interaction between open data and public policy objectives, drawing on the experience of local public sectors in England.\n","PeriodicalId":20923,"journal":{"name":"Records Management Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/RMJ-08-2018-0023","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Records Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-08-2018-0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Purpose Open government data and access to public sector information is commonplace, yet little attention has focussed on the essential roles and responsibilities in practice of the information and records management professionals, who enable public authorities to deliver open data to citizens. This paper aims to consider the perspectives of open government and information practitioners in England on the procedural and policy implications of open data across local public authorities. Design/methodology/approach Using four case studies from different parts of the public sector in England (local government, higher education, National Health Service and hospital trust), the research involved master’s level students in the data collection and analysis, alongside academics, thus enhancing the learning experience of students. Findings There was little consistency in the location of responsibility for open government data policy, the range of job roles involved or the organisational structures, policy and guidance in place to deliver this function. While this may reflect the organisational differences and professional concerns, it makes it difficult to share best practice. Central government policy encourages public bodies to make their data available for re-use. However, local practice is very variable and perhaps understandably responds more to local organisational strategic and resource priorities. The research found a lack of common metadata standards for open data, different choices about which data to open, problems of data redundancy, inconsistency and data integrity and a wide variety of views on the corporate and public benefits of open data. Research limitations/implications The research is limited to England and to non-national public bodies and only draws data from a small number of case studies. Originality/value The research contributes to the debate about emerging issues around the complexities of open government data and its public benefits, contributing to the discussions around technology-enabled approaches to citizen engagement and governance. It offers new insights into the interaction between open data and public policy objectives, drawing on the experience of local public sectors in England.
开放政府数据:关键信息管理视角
目的公开政府数据和获取公共部门信息是司空见惯的事,但很少关注信息和记录管理专业人员在实践中的基本作用和责任,他们使公共当局能够向公民提供公开数据。本文旨在考虑英国开放政府和信息从业者对地方公共当局开放数据的程序和政策影响的看法。设计/方法/方法利用来自英格兰公共部门不同部门(地方政府、高等教育、国家卫生服务和医院信托)的四个案例研究,该研究让硕士级学生与学者一起参与数据收集和分析,从而提高学生的学习体验。发现开放政府数据政策的职责范围、所涉及的工作角色范围或履行这一职能的组织结构、政策和指导几乎没有一致性。虽然这可能反映了组织差异和专业问题,但很难分享最佳实践。中央政府的政策鼓励公共机构提供其数据以供重复使用。然而,当地的做法变化很大,可能可以理解的是,当地对组织战略和资源优先事项的反应更大。研究发现,开放数据缺乏通用的元数据标准,对开放哪些数据的选择不同,数据冗余、不一致和数据完整性问题,以及对开放数据的企业和公共利益的各种看法。研究局限性/含义该研究仅限于英格兰和非国家公共机构,仅从少数案例研究中获取数据。原创性/价值这项研究有助于围绕开放政府数据的复杂性及其公共利益展开新问题的辩论,有助于讨论公民参与和治理的技术方法。它借鉴了英国当地公共部门的经验,为开放数据与公共政策目标之间的互动提供了新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Records Management Journal
Records Management Journal INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: ■Electronic records management ■Effect of government policies on record management ■Strategic developments in both the public and private sectors ■Systems design and implementation ■Models for records management ■Best practice, standards and guidelines ■Risk management and business continuity ■Performance measurement ■Continuing professional development ■Consortia and co-operation ■Marketing ■Preservation ■Legal and ethical issues
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信