Open Data: European Ambitions and Local Efforts. Experiences from Austria

The member states of the European Union are faced with the challenges of handling “big data” as well as with a growing impact of the supranational level. Given that the success of efforts at European level strongly depends on corresponding national and local activities, i.e., the quality of implementation and the degree of consistency, this chapter centers upon the coherence of European strategies and national implementations concerning the reuse of public sector information. Taking the City of Vienna’s open data activities as an illustrative example, we seek an answer to the question whether and to what extent developments at European level and other factors have an effect on local efforts towards open data. We find that the European Commission’s ambitions are driven by a strong economic argumentation, while the efforts of the City of Vienna have only very little to do with the European orientation and are rather dominated by lifestyle and administrative reform arguments. Hence, we observe a decoupling of supranational strategies and national implementation activities. The very reluctant attitude at Austrian federal level might be one reason for this, nationally induced barriers—such as the administrative culture—might be another. In order to enhance the correspondence between the strategies of the supranational level and those of the implementers at national and regional levels, the strengthening of soft law measures could be promising.

[1]  Renate E. Meyer,et al.  Meaning Structures in a Contested Issue Field: A Topographic Map of Shareholder Value in Austria , 2010 .

[2]  Sabine Kuhlmann NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR THE ‘CLASSICAL CONTINENTAL EUROPEAN ADMINISTRATION’: MODERNIZATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL IN GERMANY, FRANCE AND ITALY , 2010 .

[3]  Irvine Lapsley,et al.  1new Public Management: The Cruellest Invention of the Human Spirit? , 2009 .

[4]  Tom Christensen,et al.  The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management , 2010 .

[5]  Renate E. Meyer,et al.  Public management dynamics in a federal legalistic Rechtsstaat system , 2005 .

[6]  S. Osborne The new public governance? : emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance , 2010 .

[7]  Renate E. Meyer,et al.  OF BUREAUCRATS AND PASSIONATE PUBLIC MANAGERS: INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS, EXECUTIVE IDENTITIES, AND PUBLIC SERVICE MOTIVATION , 2014 .

[8]  C. Pollitt,et al.  Public management reform : a comparative analysis - new public management, governance, and the Neo-Weberian State , 2011 .

[9]  Christopher Pollitt,et al.  Public Management Reform , 2000 .

[10]  C. Hood A PUBLIC MANAGEMENT FOR ALL SEASONS , 1991 .

[11]  Krishna K. Tummala Comparative bureaucratic systems , 2003 .

[12]  Renate E. Meyer,et al.  Public Management Reform: An Identity Project , 2006 .

[13]  H. Thomas,et al.  Government for the people , 2009 .

[14]  Renate E. Meyer,et al.  Chapter 6 Public Administration Modernization: Common Reform Trends or Different Paths and National Understandings in the EU Countries , 2007 .

[15]  V. Nissen,et al.  Donau-Universität Krems , 2012 .

[16]  J. Manyika Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity , 2011 .

[17]  K. Schedler,et al.  Cultural aspects of public management reform , 2007 .

[18]  Katleen Janssen,et al.  The influence of the PSI directive on open government data: An overview of recent developments , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[19]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  New public management is dead. Long live digital-era governance , 2005 .

[20]  Geert Bouckaert,et al.  Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis , 2004 .

[21]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[22]  S. Sassen The global city: introducing a concept , 2005 .

[23]  Stephen P. Osborne,et al.  Introduction The (New) Public Governance: a suitable case for treatment? , 2010 .

[24]  Tom Christensen,et al.  Beyond NPM? Some Development Features , 2010 .