A critical narrative approach to openness: The impact of open development on structural transformation

Openness has become an important, all‐encompassing term denoting activities facilitated by sharing, using, producing, and redistributing information and communication resources within digital information systems. We compare theoretical advancements that emphasize processes and characteristics of openness with the limitations of extant approaches that have largely focused on improvements to productivity and efficiency. Based on Foucault and Bruner's ideas, this paper contributes a new critical narrative approach to understanding openness explicitly focused on structural transformation and power. The analysis focuses on the case of open development, examining 20 key studies based primarily on developing countries. The critical narrative approach unpacked the production of power/knowledge across actors, intentions, and outcomes of openness research and practice. We find that discursive formations are reliant on technocentric and normative ideals of researchers, leading to narratives of hypothetical outcomes that exclude marginalized perspectives. We propose hermeneutic composability and contesting normative narratives of openness as analytical techniques for an integrated, mutually constitutive conception of interactions between individuals, open artefacts, and open social praxis.

[1]  Kellyton dos Santos Brito,et al.  Brazilian government open data: implementation, challenges, and potential opportunities , 2014, dg.o '14.

[2]  Ineke Buskens The Importance of Intent: Reflecting on Open Development for Women’s Empowerment , 2011 .

[3]  M. Smith,et al.  Open ICT ecosystems transforming the developing world , 2010 .

[4]  Michael R. Wade,et al.  A Comprehensive Review and Synthesis of Open Source Research , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Frank Bannister,et al.  The great theory hunt: Does e-government really have a problem? , 2015, Gov. Inf. Q..

[6]  Dave Marcial,et al.  Enhancing Citizen Engagement with Open Government Data , 2016, J. Community Informatics.

[7]  I. Oosterlaken,et al.  Inserting Technology in the Relational Ontology of Sen's Capability Approach , 2011 .

[8]  Peng Huang,et al.  Participation in Open Knowledge Communities and Job-Hopping: Evidence from Enterprise Software , 2016, MIS Q..

[9]  Thomas Hess,et al.  Comparing the relative importance of evaluation criteria in proprietary and open‐source enterprise application software selection – a conjoint study of ERP and Office systems , 2011, Inf. Syst. J..

[10]  F. Shuaib,et al.  Innovative Technological Approach to Ebola Virus Disease Outbreak Response in Nigeria Using the Open Data Kit and Form Hub Technology , 2015, PloS one.

[11]  Michael Parmisano Canares Opening the local: full disclosure policy and its impact on local governments in the Philippines , 2014, ICEGOV.

[12]  Simeon Vidolov,et al.  Collaborative Re-orderings in Humanitarian Aid Networks , 2014, ISCRAM-med.

[13]  Michelle Willmers,et al.  Viscous Open Data: The Roles of Intermediaries in an Open Data Ecosystem , 2016, Inf. Technol. Dev..

[14]  Michael J. Gallivan,et al.  Striking a balance between trust and control in a virtual organization: a content analysis of open source software case studies , 2001, Inf. Syst. J..

[15]  Michael Gurstein Two Worlds of Open Government Data: Getting the Lowdown on Public Toilets in Chennai and Other Matters , 2012, J. Community Informatics.

[16]  Gal Oestreicher-Singer,et al.  Content or Community? A Digital Business Strategy for Content Providers in the Social Age , 2013, MIS Q..

[17]  E. Berdou Open Development in Poor Communities: Opportunities, Tensions, and Dilemmas , 2017 .

[18]  R. Scapens,et al.  Accounting systems and systems of accountability — understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts , 1985 .

[19]  R. König WIKIPEDIA: Between lay participation and elite knowledge representation , 2013 .

[20]  Roope Raisamo,et al.  Investigating perceived barriers to the use of open educational resources in higher education in Tanzania , 2014 .

[21]  Pierre Bourdieu,et al.  Bordieu: What Makes a Social Class?: On the Theoretical and Practical Existence of Groups , 1987 .

[22]  Md. Rakibul Hoque,et al.  ICT Based e‐Government Services for Rural Development: A Study of Union Information and Service Center (UISC) in Bangladesh , 2015, Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries..

[23]  James P. Grant,et al.  Adjustment with a human face , 1987 .

[24]  aul van der Boora,et al.  sers as innovators in developing countries : The global sources of nnovation and diffusion in mobile banking services , 2014 .

[25]  Farzaneh Aminpour,et al.  Utilization of open source electronic health record around the world: A systematic review , 2014, Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.

[26]  郭婷,et al.  Orientalism: An Overview , 2013 .

[27]  G. Gutting Foucault's Genealogical Method1 , 1990 .

[28]  Clay Shirky,et al.  Here comes everybody , 2009 .

[29]  D. Simon Development theory and the three worlds: Towards an international political economy of development , 1997 .

[30]  Vijay S. Mookerjee,et al.  Human Capital Development for Programmers Using Open Source Software , 2012, MIS Q..

[31]  Bhuvaneswari Raman The Rhetoric of Transparency and its Reality: Transparent Territories, Opaque Power and Empowerment , 2012, J. Community Informatics.

[32]  Sören Auer,et al.  A systematic review of open government data initiatives , 2015, Gov. Inf. Q..

[33]  Nihan Yildirim,et al.  Benefiting innovative capabilities of software developer/user communities in developing countries , 2010, PICMET 2010 TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT FOR GLOBAL ECONOMIC GROWTH.

[34]  Ilkka Kauranen,et al.  Crowdsourcing: a comprehensive literature review , 2015 .

[35]  Aaron D. Shaw,et al.  The Wikipedia Gender Gap Revisited: Characterizing Survey Response Bias with Propensity Score Estimation , 2013, PloS one.

[36]  M. Turshen Development as Freedom , 2001 .

[37]  Alnoor Ebrahim Global Accountabilities: Towards a reflective accountability in NGOs , 2007 .

[38]  K. D. Joshi,et al.  Why Individuals Participate in Micro-task Crowdsourcing Work Environment: Revealing Crowdworkers' Perceptions , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Dorothea Kleine,et al.  Technologies of Choice? ICTs, Development and the Capabilities Approach , 2014 .

[40]  Jenny Lagsten,et al.  The capability approach as a tool for development evaluation – analyzing students’ use of internet resources , 2012, Inf. Technol. Dev..

[41]  Christopher Zegras,et al.  Applying the General Transit Feed Specification to the Global South , 2014 .

[42]  H. Truman,et al.  Annual Report 2016 , 2016, Neuroradiology.

[43]  Mohammed Samaka,et al.  Open Education Resources and Mobile Technology to Narrow the Learning Divide , 2013 .

[44]  M. Foucault,et al.  Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 , 1980 .

[45]  Björn Sören Gigler Development as Freedom in a Digital Age: Experiences from the Rural Poor in Bolivia , 2015 .

[46]  Justine Johnstone,et al.  Technology as empowerment: a capability approach to computer ethics , 2007, Ethics and Information Technology.

[47]  Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic,et al.  Doing critical information systems research – arguments for a critical research methodology , 2011, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[48]  Niels Bjørn-Andersen,et al.  Organizational Learning with Crowdsourcing: The Revelatory Case of LEGO , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[49]  I. Robeyns Please Scroll down for Article Journal of Human Development the Capability Approach: a Theoretical Survey the Capability Approach: a Theoretical Survey , 2022 .

[50]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[51]  Satinder P. Singh,et al.  Introduction , 2002, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[52]  Björn Lundell,et al.  Open source in Swedish companies: where are we? , 2010, Inf. Syst. J..

[53]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting Critical Research in Information Systems , 2011, MIS Q..

[54]  Y. Benkler,et al.  The Wealth of Networks , 2008 .

[55]  Matthew Longshore Smith,et al.  Openness as social praxis , 2017, First Monday.

[56]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  The Transformation of Open Source Software , 2006, MIS Q..

[57]  Clayton R. Wright,et al.  Developing and Deploying OERs in Sub-Saharan Africa: Building on the Present. , 2012 .

[58]  Jeffrey Pomerantz,et al.  Fifty shades of open , 2016, First Monday.

[59]  J. Giles Internet encyclopaedias go head to head , 2005, Nature.

[60]  Savita Bailur,et al.  Closing the Feedback Loop: Can Technology Amplify Citizen Voices? , 2014 .

[61]  Larry Diamond,et al.  The Self Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies , 1999 .

[62]  P. Mcmichael,et al.  Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective , 1996 .

[63]  Tim G. Davies,et al.  The Promises and Perils of Open Government Data (OGD) , 2012, J. Community Informatics.

[64]  Michael Gurstein,et al.  Open data: Empowering the empowered or effective data use for everyone? , 2011, First Monday.

[65]  Satyarupa Shekhar,et al.  (Re)Prioritizing Citizens in Smart Cities Governance: Examples of Smart Citizenship from Urban India , 2014, J. Community Informatics.

[66]  Ji Eun Park,et al.  The Use of Technology for Large-scale Education Planning and Decision-making , 2016, Inf. Technol. Dev..

[67]  I. Robeyns The Capability Approach: An Interdisciplinary Introduction , 2003 .

[68]  Juan Carlos González,et al.  Government 2.0: a conceptual framework and a case study using Mexican data for assessing the evolution towards open governments , 2014, DG.O.

[69]  M. Nussbaum,et al.  Book reviews , 2002 .

[70]  Karl Reiner Lang,et al.  Consumer Co-creation of Digital Culture Products: Business Threat or New Opportunity? , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[71]  J. Bruner Actual minds, possible worlds , 1985 .

[72]  Martin J. Murillo Evaluating the role of online data availability: The case of economic and institutional transparency in sixteen Latin American nations , 2015 .

[73]  Y. Benkler Capital, Power, and the Next Step in Decentralization , 2010 .

[74]  J. Friedmann,et al.  Empowerment: The Politics of Alternative Development , 1994 .

[75]  Yingqin Zheng,et al.  Inequality of what? Social exclusion in the e-society as capability deprivation , 2008, Inf. Technol. People.

[76]  Dorothea Kleine,et al.  POLICY ARENA ICT4WHAT?— USING THE CHOICE FRAMEWORK TO OPERATIONALISE THE CAPABILITY APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT , 2010 .

[77]  J. Bruner The Narrative Construction of Reality , 1991, Critical Inquiry.

[78]  Andrés Martínez-Fernández,et al.  Improving public healthcare systems in developing countries using FOSS: The EHAS foundation case , 2012 .

[79]  Frank L. K. Ohemeng,et al.  One way traffic: The open data initiative project and the need for an effective demand side initiative in Ghana , 2015, Gov. Inf. Q..

[80]  H. Dreyfus,et al.  Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. , 1985 .

[81]  Other Human Development Report 2002: deepening democracy in a fragmented world , 2002 .

[82]  Kar Yan Tam,et al.  Factors Affecting the Adoption of Open Systems: An Exploratory Study , 1997, MIS Q..

[83]  F. V. Schalkwyk The Social Dynamics of Open Data , 2018 .

[84]  Eric Monteiro,et al.  Configurable Politics and Asymmetric Integration: Health e-Infrastructures in India , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[85]  Peter van der Windt,et al.  From Crowdsourcing to Crowdseeding: The Cutting Edge of Empowerment? , 2014 .

[86]  Eileen M. Trauth,et al.  The Choice of Critical Information Systems Research , 2004, Relevant Theory and Informed Practice.

[87]  Bartel Van de Walle,et al.  Increasing Efficiency of Humanitarian Organizations with Volunteer Driven Information Products , 2014, 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[88]  Gregory Michener,et al.  Policy Evaluation via Composite Indexes: Qualitative Lessons from International Transparency Policy Indexes , 2015 .

[89]  Sumandro Chattapadhyay Access and use of government data by research and advocacy organisations in India: a survey of (potential) open data ecosystem , 2014, ICEGOV.

[90]  Jonathan G. S. Koppell Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of “Multiple Accountabilities Disorder” , 2005 .

[91]  Liisa von Hellens,et al.  Illuminating the underground: the reality of unauthorised file sharing , 2015, Inf. Syst. J..

[92]  Gibson Burrell,et al.  Modernism, Post Modernism and Organizational Analysis 2: The Contribution of Michel Foucault , 1988 .

[93]  Mark Graham,et al.  Transparency and Development: Ethical Consumption through Web 2.0 and the Internet of Things , 2011 .

[94]  Jacqueline M. Klopp,et al.  Toward Open Source Kenya: Creating and Sharing a GIS Database of Nairobi , 2014 .

[95]  Bernd Carsten Stahl,et al.  Information Systems: Critical Perspectives , 2008 .

[96]  Amanda Sinclair,et al.  The chameleon of accountability: Forms and discourses , 1995 .

[97]  Nimmi Rangaswamy,et al.  The PC in an Indian urban slum: enterprise and entrepreneurship in ICT4D 2.0 , 2012, Inf. Technol. Dev..

[98]  Robin Teigland,et al.  Collective Action and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[99]  Un Desa Transforming our world : The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development , 2016 .

[100]  Arul Chib,et al.  The Impact of Open Development Initiatives in Lower‐ and Middle Income Countries: A Review of the Literature , 2016 .

[101]  Nithya V. Raman,et al.  Collecting data in Chennai City and the limits of openness , 2012, J. Community Informatics.

[102]  Accountability, autonomy, and authenticity: assessing the development waltz conducted to a ‘kwaito’ beat in Southern Africa , 2008 .

[103]  D. Kleine ICT4WHAT?—Using the choice framework to operationalise the capability approach to development , 2010 .

[104]  Maria Tamboukou Writing genealogies: an exploration of Foucault's strategies for doing research , 1999, Foucault and Education.