Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to study a multi-institutional and multi-layer nature of open data-driven communication processes that provide a collaborative platform to meet the interests of various stakeholders in advancing public sector innovations, namely, government agents, citizens, independent developers, non-governmental organizations, mass media and businesses alike and understand an important role of mutually beneficial public–private partnerships in the area.
Design/methodology/approach
This is a case study research, which itself is based on a combinative approach, especially in applying, in a successive order, two methods of investigation, namely, stakeholder and policy analysis. In general, the combination of these two research techniques is useful in understanding the most important collaborative trends in the area and locating key institutional drivers and challenges that open data policymakers face today in implementing related digital collaborative and participatory platforms.
Findings
The open data concept could provide a promising collaborative platform to network various e-government stakeholders and accelerate related technology-driven public reforms. The successful implementation of the idea demands a fairly equal contribution from representatives of both public and private sectors of economy. The case has also clearly demonstrated the importance of cooperation with the local non-governmental sector, independent developers and journalists, whose active participation is a key factor for the overall progress of the open data phenomenon, to a greater degree, as a collaborative movement rather than an instrument of public sector innovations.
Research limitations/implications
One of the fundamental limitations of the investigation is that it is a single case study. It explores the development of open data phenomena in the context of such an advanced post-industrial society as Finland. In this regard, in order to support key arguments of the research, it is necessary to compare its findings with the results of similar case studies in other administrative, political and socioeconomic settings, which would open new promising dimensions for future research in this direction.
Practical implications
Policy recommendations are proposed by the author in the discussion section, which could help, for example, to boost information campaigns in popularizing open data technologies and its reuse among independent developers. A lot of unique visualizations and illustrations are presented in the paper to help readers grasp better key ideas of the research. In this respect, the paper is intended for a global professional community of open data experts, e-government specialists, political scientists, journalists, lawyers, students of public policy and public administration and all those who are interested in studying the phenomenon from the perspective of its key stakeholders.
Social implications
The author of the paper tried to develop a universal framework of case study research that could be used in investigating phenomena of open data not only in Finland but also in the context of other post-industrial societies, especially in analyzing roles of various stakeholders in adopting open data-driven collaborative and civic engagement platforms and startups.
Originality/value
This research presents a first case study that investigates a collaborative potential of open data phenomena from a stakeholder perspective in a more holistic manner, especially in analyzing professional networking platforms and related communication activities that meet the interests of stakeholders as diverse as government agents and journalists, independent developers and academia, charities and businesses in an attempt to better understand the fundamental factors of the open data movement as a collaborative socioeconomic trend.
[1]
Katleen Janssen,et al.
The influence of the PSI directive on open government data: An overview of recent developments
,
2011,
Gov. Inf. Q..
[2]
Michael Gurstein,et al.
Open data: Empowering the empowered or effective data use for everyone?
,
2011,
First Monday.
[3]
Michael Martin,et al.
The Open Government Data Stakeholder Survey
,
2011,
OKCon.
[4]
N. Huijboom,et al.
Open data: An International comparison of strategies
,
2011
.
[5]
Luis F. Luna-Reyes,et al.
IT-enabled policy analysis: new technologies, sophisticated analysis and open data for better government decisions
,
2012,
dg.o '12.
[6]
Yannis Charalabidis,et al.
Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government
,
2012,
Inf. Syst. Manag..
[7]
Hugh Glaser,et al.
Linked Open Government Data: Lessons from Data.gov.uk
,
2012,
IEEE Intelligent Systems.
[8]
Sylwia Męcfal.
Recenzja książki. Robert K. yin, Case Study Research. Design and Methods (fourth Edition), thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2009
,
2012
.
[9]
Calvin M. L. Chan,et al.
From Open Data to Open Innovation Strategies: Creating E-Services Using Open Government Data
,
2013,
2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[10]
Barbara Ubaldi,et al.
Open Government Data
,
2019,
Government at a Glance: Latin America and the Caribbean 2020.
[11]
Zhenbin Yang,et al.
Innovation in Government Services: The Case of Open Data
,
2013,
TDIT.
[12]
Encina Hall,et al.
Democratic Participation and Deliberation in Crowdsourced Legislative Processes: The Case of the Law on Off-Road Traffic in Finland
,
2013
.
[13]
Sharon Strover,et al.
Open government data intermediaries: a terminology framework
,
2013,
ICEGOV.
[14]
M. Janssen,et al.
Infomediary Business Models for Connecting Open Data Providers and Users
,
2014
.
[15]
Paul T. Jaeger,et al.
Big data, open government and e-government: Issues, policies and recommendations
,
2014,
Inf. Polity.
[16]
Marijn Janssen,et al.
Open data policies, their implementation and impact: A framework for comparison
,
2014,
Gov. Inf. Q..
[17]
Peter A. Johnson,et al.
Civic open data at a crossroads: Dominant models and current challenges
,
2015,
Gov. Inf. Q..
[18]
Niklas Johansson,et al.
Mind the Gap: Exploring Stakeholders' Value with Open Data Assessment
,
2015,
2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[19]
Richard Heeks,et al.
The multiple meanings of open government data: Understanding different stakeholders and their perspectives
,
2015,
Gov. Inf. Q..
[20]
Åke Grönlund,et al.
Organizational measures to stimulate user engagement with open data
,
2015
.
[21]
Marijn Janssen,et al.
Open data for competitive advantage: insights from open data use by companies
,
2015,
DG.O.
[22]
Jeffrey L. Privette,et al.
Scientific Stewardship in the Open Data and Big Data Era - Roles and Responsibilities of Stewards and Other Major Product Stakeholders
,
2016,
D Lib Mag..
[23]
Michael J. Hogan,et al.
Realizing the Innovation Potentials from Open Data: Stakeholders' Perspectives on the Desired Affordances of Open Data Environment
,
2016,
PRO-VE.
[24]
Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.
Open data and its usability: an empirical view from the Citizen’s perspective
,
2016,
Information Systems Frontiers.
[25]
Maxat Kassen,et al.
Open data and its intermediaries: a cross-country perspective on participatory movement among independent developers
,
2018
.
[26]
Esteve Almirall,et al.
Cocreating Value from Open Data: From Incentivizing Developers to Inducing Cocreation in Open Data Innovation Ecosystems
,
2018
.