Utility of Open Government Data for PhD students in India

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the utility of Open Government Data (OGD) from the perspective of the PhD students in India. Design/methodology/approach Semi-structured interviews are conducted with 68 PhD students in India to solicit their perspectives regarding the utility of OGD for them. Convenience and snowball sampling was used for contacting the PhD students and the study was conducted among students of North India who are from public and private universities. Findings While some PhD students tap OGD for their research work, others use OGD as informational tools for broadening their general knowledge. There are also some PhD students who do not use OGD at all. There are challenges associated with OGD usage by the PhD students. For instance, the outdated and incomplete data available on the government websites prevent their optimum use. Likewise, information available on the government websites needs to be revised on a regular basis for proper utilization in research. Research limitations/implications The study approached PhD students for seeking their perspectives about OGD utility and further research is required with a large number of respondents. Nevertheless, the study leaves social and practical implications because while the study leaves insights for more involvement of PhD students in tapping OGD for their research, it also leaves recommendations for the policy-makers to take a pro-active stance by providing data sets regularly and accurately for improving government efficiency in public service delivery. Originality/value Hitherto, conceptual and theory-driven research on OGD has been undertaken and case study-based research works have been conducted to assess the challenges and prospects of OGD implementation in Western settings. Furthermore, prior research has solicited perspectives from stakeholders like public officials, politicians or citizens to investigate the difficulties in OGD use and policy-implementation. Identifying the research gaps in extant literature with respect to the aforesaid dimensions, this is the first study where the perspectives of Indian PhD students have been recorded in terms of the utility of OGD in research and other purposes.

[1]  A. Tough.  Accountability, open government and record keeping: time to think again? , 2011 .

[2]  W. Halal.  Broadband takes off: finally cruising the information superhighway , 2004 .

[3]  Purcell,et al.  Finding and Managing Information: Generic information literacy and management skills for postgraduate researchers , 2010 .

[4]  John Krogstie,et al.  Mobile Student Information System , 2011 .

[5]  Olav Hagen Sataslaatten.  The Norwegian Noark Model requirements for EDRMS in the context of open government and access to governmental information , 2014 .

[6]  Efthimios Tambouris,et al.  A classification scheme for open government data: towards linking decentralised data , 2011, Int. J. Web Eng. Technol..

[7]  E. Thornton,et al.  Assessing state government financial transparency websites , 2013 .

[8]  K. Janssen.  Open Government Data and the Right to Information: Opportunities and Obstacles , 2012, J. Community Informatics.

[9]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  The potential of metadata for linked open data and its value for users and publishers , 2012 .

[10]  Johanna Gunnlaugsdottir.  Government secrecy: public attitudes toward information provided by the authorities , 2015 .

[11]  Bárbara Barbosa Neves,et al.  Too Old For Technology? How The Elderly Of Lisbon Use And Perceive ICT , 2012, J. Community Informatics.

[12]  M. Hillebrandt,et al.  Open government: connecting vision and voice , 2012 .

[13]  Lluís Esteve Casellas Serra,et al.  The mapping, selecting and opening of data , 2014 .

[14]  Sandy Q. Qu,et al.  The qualitative research interview , 2011 .

[15]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government , 2012, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[16]  Richard Heeks,et al.  The multiple meanings of open government data: Understanding different stakeholders and their perspectives , 2015, 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]  Katherine Browne,et al.  Snowball sampling: using social networks to research non‐heterosexual women , 2005 .

[19]  Alana Maurushat,et al.  Opening up government data for Big Data analysis and public benefit , 2017, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[20]  Stuti Saxena.  Significance of open government data in the GCC countries , 2017 .

[21]  Maxat Kassen,et al.  A promising phenomenon of open data: A case study of the Chicago open data project , 2013, Gov. Inf. Q..

[22]  Helen E. Chandler,et al.  Towards open government: official information on the Web , 1998 .

[23]  Patrice McDermott,et al.  Building open government , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[24]  H. Rubin,et al.  Qualitative Interviewing (2nd ed.): The Art of Hearing Data , 2005 .

[25]  Jo Bates,et al.  The strategic importance of information policy for the contemporary neoliberal state: The case of Open Government Data in the United Kingdom , 2014, Gov. Inf. Q..

[26]  M. Hanna.  Data mining in the e‐learning domain , 2004 .

[27]  B. Wirtz,et al.  Open Government: Origin, Development, and Conceptual Perspectives , 2015 .

[28]  S. Katuu,et al.  The Kenyan Judiciary’s Open Government Initiative: prospects and challenges , 2017 .

[29]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Acceptance and use predictors of open data technologies: Drawing upon the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology , 2015, Gov. Inf. Q..

[30]  Emmanuel Adjei,et al.  Digital preservation: The conduit through which open data, electronic government and the right to information are implemented , 2016, Libr. Hi Tech.

[31]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  A taxonomy of open government data research areas and topics , 2016, J. Organ. Comput. Electron. Commer..

[32]  Tom P. Abeles.  The Intelligent Use of Information , 2001 .

[33]  Erik Borglund,et al.  Open data?: Data, information, document or record? , 2014 .

[34]  H. Rubin,et al.  Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data , 1995 .