The past several months have included a lot of research –
reading, watching videos, talking to tons of people – to develop and explore
the ideas and potential of my new venture. Throughout this time I have
continually been frustrated by the language used within the Open Government
community around the differences between participation, collaboration, open
data, open information, open government, etc.
The following ideas are the clearest I have been able to understand this myself. I am currently using these definitions for understanding each of the stages of a broader “Open Government” progression.
The following ideas are the clearest I have been able to understand this myself. I am currently using these definitions for understanding each of the stages of a broader “Open Government” progression.
Stage 1: Open Data –
Open Information
This is simply the government sharing information and data with the rest of society. The data is usually released in a machine-readable format so that computers can process it quickly. The information included within this definition are reports, processes (ex. how are projects evaluated, how do we develop policy), access to information requests, etc.
This is simply the government sharing information and data with the rest of society. The data is usually released in a machine-readable format so that computers can process it quickly. The information included within this definition are reports, processes (ex. how are projects evaluated, how do we develop policy), access to information requests, etc.
Examples: IATI, data.gc.ca
Stage 2: Capitalizing
on the Public
This is what Beth Noveck (see this blog post) calls bringing “information to the centre.” This includes consultation processes, online discussion forums for citizens, etc. The ultimate goal here is to bring the public’s knowledge, expertise and perspective into government.
This is what Beth Noveck (see this blog post) calls bringing “information to the centre.” This includes consultation processes, online discussion forums for citizens, etc. The ultimate goal here is to bring the public’s knowledge, expertise and perspective into government.
Examples: The Foreign Policy Dialogue of 2002-03 by DFAIT is
a great example of this. As are initiatives like Ushahidi, paper and
e-petitions, the BC and Ontario citizens assemblies on electoral reform (this
kind of fits in stage 2 and 3), etc.
Stage 3:
Collaborative Policy / Law Making
This is when each of the actors – government, politicians, civil society organizations, citizens, and the private sector use collaborative tools and processes to work together to develop policy or legislation.
This is when each of the actors – government, politicians, civil society organizations, citizens, and the private sector use collaborative tools and processes to work together to develop policy or legislation.
Example: Participating Budget fits into this category. The
Open Ministry work in the Finland is another great example of this.
Stage 4:
Collaborative Action
This is when each of the actors all take action toward a common set of goals that they agreed on through a process of deliberation.
This is when each of the actors all take action toward a common set of goals that they agreed on through a process of deliberation.
The SSIR work on Collective Impact provides some guidance on
this, and the Public Policy Forum has done some really neat work across Canada
on this as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment