Impact of Open Data Policy on Accountability and Transparency in

Governance

1. Introduction:

Data that is accessible, machine-readable, and openly licensed is formally referred to as

"open data." In actuality, that entails data that can be obtained via the internet, edited using
common software, and where the user is not in any way restricted from further sharing the
material. Open data and governance have a variety of relationships. More accountability and
openness may result from the use of open data. It may result in more citizens being involved in
decision-making. Additionally, it can encourage innovation in governance procedures and public
service delivery (Azhar & Desouza, 2014).

As a number of recent studies have demonstrated, the term "open data" itself raises at
least two fundamental issues, including the following: (1) What are "data" (Borgman, 2015;
Leonelli, 2015)? Also, according to Levin et al. (2016), Pasquetto et al. (2016), Pomerantz and
Peek (2016), what is "open"? Because these terms are so ambiguous, people, research initiatives,
communities, and organisations define "data" and "openness" in a variety of ways, frequently
using unwritten rules rather than official regulations. Understanding how open data obligations
and expectations are met under various conditions is made possible by the notions of
"accountability" and "transparency." A person or organisation is responsible for "open data"
when they are held accountable for the act(s) that make data accessible, whatever those activities
may be. Being accountable is having to defend actions and choices before a person or group. On
the other hand, transparency is the idea that information regarding the acts of a person or an
organisation can be observed by others. According to Leshner, Lessig, and McNutt et al. (2009)
as well as Leshner and Lessig (2009) and McNutt et al. (2016), both notions are frequently
brought up in research and policy discussions about the relationships that organisations,
organisations, and other social bodies have with their constituents or communities.

Finding patterns and combining information from numerous sources is made possible by
open data. With access to accessible data, accountability campaigners or watchdog groups might
find it easier to learn where money is being spent, how well the government is operating in
certain locations, or which businesses are the biggest pollutants in a given area. Anyone with an
internet connection in the UK can now see where money is being spent and which organisations
are receiving public monies thanks to the government's requirement that all local councils
provide open data on all spending transactions exceeding £500.

The most frequent consumers of this data have been journalists, but it has also been used
by ordinary residents and neighbourhood advocacy groups. Platforms like OpenSpending.org
take data accessibility and encouraging citizen participation in important matters like national
budget decisions a step further. Government budget and spending information is displayed
through interactive graphs and a searchable database in Open Spending. A network of volunteers
working with data and papers from their governments have added budget data for Nigeria, India,
Kenya, South Africa, and the UK to the Open Spending website (Macintosh, 2013).

Projects like the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI), which has developed a
uniform data standard for reporting on aid activities, demonstrate the growing value of open data.
In the past, citizens searching across the websites of numerous donors to learn about projects in
their country frequently discovered that there was little information publicly available.
Governments receiving aid had to rely on routinely requesting data from the donors operating in
their countries to learn what projects are funded where. Now that more than 50% of official
ODA is released in the IATI standard format, governments and individuals have access to the
most recent data on who is funding whom (Bannister & Connolly, 2014).

Even though the data is far from perfect (IATI is still in its infancy), because it has been
made available as open data, others are free to build upon it by adding details like the locations
of projects' projects and "mashing up" the data to create visualizations and other products that
make it accessible to a variety of groups. IATI shows how open data has the ability to enhance
effective governance across borders and to increase the openness of multinational institutions,
which frequently appear opaque and remote to residents in any given country.

2. Literature Review:

In high-level visions of open data, researchers’ data, and

metadata practices are expected to be robust and structured. The integration of the internet into
scientific institutions amplifies these expectations, as it provides a seemingly ubiquitous data
distribution mechanism (Agre, 2002). When examined critically, however, the data and metadata
practices of scholarly researchers often appear incomplete or deficient (Van Tuyl and Whitmire,
2016; Vines et al., 2014). The concept of accountability helps to guide explanations for data
practices that seem, on the surface, to be insufficient. ‘‘Accountability’’ is a concept drawn from
multiple social science traditions, including studies of governance in organizations and nations
(Bovens, 1998), and studies of mundane activities in everyday life (Garfinkel, 1967; Woolgar
and Neyland, 2013). It is important to remember that for most researchers, working with data is a
very mundane activity. As Pink et al. (2017) note, data are intertwined with everyday routines,
and often entail significant improvisation, both in data generation and use. For field based
scientists, such as ecologists and archaeologists, data may literally emerge from the dirt. For
laboratory and computational scientists, data generation and management are less obviously
subject to worldly interference, but are nevertheless imperfect human activities (Gitelman, 2013).
To be accountable for data, researchers must be able to describe in a way sufficient for the social
situation at hand how any perceived data problems are anomalous, correctable, or in fact not
problematic at all—they must be ‘‘answerable’’ for their data. Simply being answerable for data
can be called soft accountability. When soft accountability is coupled with the possibility of
sanctions for non-compliance, such as loss of research funding or journal article rejections for a
lack of data archiving, researchers face hard accountability (Fox, 2007).

Turning now to transparency, being transparent is often

described as a public value and norm of behavior that counters corruption, and enables easy
access and use of information (Ball, 2009). Diverse political drivers are increasing the attention
on transparency as it relates to open data (Levy and Johns, 2016). As a result, researchers are
increasingly being asked or required to enable their data to be transparent by sharing with
colleagues or making data available on the web. Transparency in research is almost always
selective, however (Jasonoff, 2006). Researchers may have numerous incentives to keep
particular aspects of the work out of the eye of the public or their research competitors, including
the fear of being scooped, or a lack of time to fully clean, process, and package data. This
selective character of research openness suggests a distinction between different kinds of
transparency, specifically, opaque and clear transparency (Fox, 2007). Opaque transparency
refers to the dissemination of information that does not reveal how people actually behave in
practice, while clear transparency involves using information-access policies and programs that
do, in fact, reveal reliable information about human or organizational actions.
 Good governance is an approach that is committed to creating a system founded in justice
and peace that protects an individual’s human rights and civil liberties. It is the process of
measuring how public institutions conduct public affairs and manage public resources while
allowing for monitoring, and guarantees respect for human rights with due regard to the rule of
law. When it comes to good governance, quality open data is critical and can lead to more
effective and efficient governments. It is also critical for credible institutional and political
processes and the delivery of outcomes necessary to achieve sustainable development. Good
governance has eight characteristics - participatory, consensus-oriented, accountable, transparent,
responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law
(UNESCAP). These characteristics have guided governments and organisations good governance
practices. Quality open data underpins each of these. For instance, integrity in government
transactions can only be achieved through transparency and accountability, and the latter will
only be realised if citizens and organisations have access to quality government data and
information.

Open data brings wide-ranging benefits to governments and many different groups of
people, organisations and individuals. It keeps duty bearers or governments alert and responsive
to society and responsible for their actions. Similarly, it empowers rights holders or citizens to
know what their government is doing and hold them to account. It further empowers citizens to
be directly informed and involved in decision-making processes of governance, both in public
and political spaces. It allows opportunities for collaboration and helps establish trust and
credible relationships between government, organisations, private sector and citizens during
emergency situations and the development process.

There is a strong intersection between open data and transparency as concepts. As fields
of study and practice in international development, however, open data and transparency have
remained somewhat separate. In international development, open data work is often associated
with building statistical capacity, developing ICT infrastructure, enabling civic technology
activities, and supporting public and private sector innovation and other digital economy
benefits. Transparency, on the other hand, is typically associated with governance reform, anti-
corruption and citizen empowerment. The literature and evidence base of each has largely
emerged separately. The open data field has developed both technical and, increasingly, political
insights into the practicalities of getting data released and used. However, as open data is a
relatively new field, evidence about its effectiveness is underdeveloped.

Notable examples of more robust sources of evidence include the Open Data Research
Network’s evaluations of open data projects, and a case study mapping project at Gov Lab
(Young & Verhulst, 2016). The open data literature can also often overlook or underestimate the
broader political, social and governance considerations of what it means to be open and
transparent, and importantly, what it takes for this to lead to accountability. Its integration of
gender issues is also underdeveloped, and some have argued that it lacks conceptual clarity (see
Fox, 2014; Carter, 2014; McGee & Edwards, 2016). The evidence base and literature emerging
from work on transparency provides a deeper contextualization of information transparency and
its connection to accountability in international development. As a field of practice that has
existed for longer, it has a broader pool of examples and empirically evaluated experiments than
the open data field.

3. Problem Statement:

By allowing access to information maintained by the

government, open data rules seek to improve accountability and openness in governance. In
order to hold governments responsible for their actions and decisions, these rules mandate that
they share statistics, papers, and information about public services, budgets, and contracts.
However, elements including accessibility, comprehensiveness, capacity, and willingness of
governmental institutions and civil society organisations to engage with open data determine
how effective open data regulations will be. Governments must spend money on data
management systems, hire qualified staff, and set up channels for handling citizen complaints
and suggestions. To properly comprehend and use open data, civil society organisations and
individuals must be equipped with the required skills. This will enable them to take an active part
in governance processes (Saxena, 2018). The influence of broader socio-political settings on the
effect of open data regulations on accountability and transparency cannot be analysed in
isolation. Supportive institutions, such impartial monitoring committees and efficient forums for
citizen participation, can strengthen the effects of open data legislation on openness and
accountability. With a focus on the accessibility, comprehensiveness, and use of open data as
well as the socio-political context, this study attempts to provide a thorough examination of the
effects of open data regulations on accountability and transparency in governance. The results
will advance our understanding of how open data may be used to advance democratic
government, accountability, and transparency (Park &Garcia, 2022).

4. Research Objectives:
 To examine the impact of open data policy on transparency and citizen participation in
decision-making within government institutions.
 To assess how open data commitments are fulfilled in terms of accountability and
transparency in governance practices.
 To investigate the role of open data in fostering innovation in governance procedures and
public service delivery despite its imperfections.
5. Research Questions:
 How does the implementation of open data policy affect transparency and citizen
participation in decision-making processes within government institutions?
 What are the key factors that contribute to the fulfillment of open data commitments in
terms of accountability and transparency in governance practices?
 In what ways does open data enable accountability activists and watchdog organizations
to monitor public expenditure and performance in government institutions?
6. Methodology:

This descriptive essay is supported by secondary information gathered from sources such
books, newspapers, and newspapers, periodicals, and the internet.

7. Significance of Study:

Because it examines how open data policies affect transparency and accountability in
government, the study is very significant. The potential to increase transparency and citizen
involvement in decision-making processes, which are essential components for developing good
governance, is increased with the availability of open data. Policymakers and scholars can obtain
insights into the mechanisms through which open data can lead to good changes in governance
practises by comprehending how open data commitments are met and its function in fostering
openness and accountability. The study also emphasises actual cases of websites like
OpenSpending.org and initiatives like the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI),
which show the practical application and growing significance of open data in enhancing global
governance and enabling citizens to hold governments and international institutions accountable.
The study's focus on the necessity of precise definitions of data and openness also highlights the
significance of creating clear and standardized frameworks for implementing open data policies
globally, ultimately aiding in the advancement of more transparent and accountable governance
practises on a global level.

8. Organization of Study:

Chapter no. 01: Introduction

Chapter no. 02: Literature review

Chapter no. 03: Methodology

Chapter no. 04: Data Analysis and Results

Chapter no. 05: Conclusion