Understanding smart data disclosure policy success: the case of Green Button

Open data policies are expected to promote innovations that stimulate social, political and economic change. In pursuit of innovation potential, open data has expanded to wider environment involving government, business and citizens. The US government recently launched such collaboration through a smart data policy supporting energy efficiency called Green Button. This paper explores the implementation of Green Button and identifies motivations and success factors facilitating successful collaboration between public and private organizations to support smart disclosure policy. Analyzing qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with experts involved in Green Button initiation and implementation, this paper presents some key findings. The success of Green Button can be attributed to the interaction between internal and external factors. The external factors consist of both market and non-market drivers: economic factors, technology related factors, regulatory contexts and policy incentives, and some factors that stimulate imitative behavior among the adopters. The external factors create the necessary institutional environment for the Green Button implementation. On the other hand, the acceptance and adoption of Green Button itself is influenced by the fit of Green Button capability to the strategic mission of energy and utility companies in providing energy efficiency programs. We also identify the different roles of government during the different stages of Green Button implementation.

[1]  Chris Arney Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness , 2015 .

[2]  Pamela S. Tolbert,et al.  Institutional Sources of Change in the Formal Structure of Organizations: The Diffusion of Civil Service Reform, 1880-1935 , 1983 .

[3]  S. Mezias An Institutional Model of Organizational Practice: Financial Reporting at the Fortune 200 , 1990 .

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

[5]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  Creating Open Government Ecosystems: A Research and Development Agenda , 2012, Future Internet.

[6]  Clifford Winston,et al.  The Efficacy of Information Policy: A Review of Archon Fung, Mary Graham, and David Weil's Full Disclosure : The Perils and Promise of Transparency , 2008 .

[7]  Peer C. Fiss,et al.  INSTITUTIONALIZATION, FRAMING, AND DIFFUSION: THE LOGIC OF TQM ADOPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION DECISIONS AMONG U.S. HOSPITALS , 2009 .

[8]  Steven L. Puller,et al.  Power to Choose? An Analysis of Choice Frictions in the Residential Electricity Market , 2012 .

[9]  Oren Bar-Gill,et al.  Informing Consumers About Themselves , 2007 .

[10]  Brian J. Cook,et al.  Full Disclosure: The Perils and Promise of Transparency , 2007, Perspectives on Politics.

[11]  J. Cochran,et al.  Energy Efficiency Policy in the United States: Overview of Trends at Different Levels of Government , 2009 .

[12]  Paul L. Joskow,et al.  Incentive Regulation For Electric Utilities , 1986 .

[13]  Jinook Jeong,et al.  An evaluation of incentive regulation for electric utilities , 1991 .

[14]  Richard A. Posner,et al.  Natural Monopoly and Its Regulation , 1999 .

[15]  Luis F. Luna-Reyes,et al.  Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research , 2012 .

[16]  R. Gray,et al.  Corporate social and environmental reporting , 1995 .

[17]  O. Bar‐Gill,et al.  Pricing Misperceptions: Explaining Pricing Structure in the Cell Phone Service Market , 2012 .