Teresa M. Harrison
ABSTRACT
We consider open government (OG) within the context of e-government and its broader implications for the future of public administration. We argue that the current US Administration's Open Government Initiative blurs traditional distinctions between e-democracy and e-government by incorporating historically democratic practices, now enabled by emerging technology, within administrative agencies. We consider how transparency, participation, and collaboration function as democratic practices in administrative agencies, suggesting that these processes are instrumental attributes of administrative action and decision making, rather than the objective of administrative action, as they appear to be currently treated. We propose alternatively that planning and assessing OG be addressed within a "public value" framework. The creation of public value is the goal of public organizations; through public value, public organizations meet the needs and wishes of the public with respect to substantive benefits as well as the intrinsic value of better government. We extend this view to OG by using the framework as a way to describe the value produced when interaction between government and citizens becomes more transparent, participative, and collaborative, i.e., more democratic.
- Abramson, J. B., Arterton, F. C., and Orren, G. R. The electronic commonwealth: the impact of new media technologies on democratic politics. Basic Books, 1988. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Allison, B. My data can't tell you that. In D. Lathrop and L. Ruma, eds., Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2010, 257--265.Google Scholar
- Arnstein, S. R. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association 35, 4 (1969), 216--224.Google Scholar
- Barber, B. R. Strong democracy: participatory politics for a new age. University of California Press, 1984.Google Scholar
- Bertelsen, D. A. Media form and government: Democracy as an archetypal image in the electronic age. Communication Quarterly 40, 4 (1992), 325--337.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bowie, N. Equity and access to information technology. Annual Review of the Institute for Information Studies, (1990), 131--167.Google Scholar
- Chadwick, A. and May, C. Interaction between States and Citizens in the Age of the Internet: "e-Government" in the United States, Britain, and the European Union. Governance 16, 2 (2003), 271--300.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Clarke, M. and Stewart, J. Handling the wicked issues. The managing care reader, (2003), 273--280.Google Scholar
- Cramton, R. C. Why, Where, and How of Broadened Public Participation in the Administrative Process, The. Geo. LJ 60, (1971), 525.Google Scholar
- Creighton, J. L. The public participation handbook: Making better decisions through citizen involvement. Jossey-Bass Inc. Pub, 2005.Google Scholar
- Cresswell, A. M., Burke, G. B., Pardo, T. Advancing Return on Investment, Analysis for Government IT: A Public Value Framework. Center for Technology in Government, University at Albany, SUNY, 2006.Google Scholar
- Cresswell, A. M. Public Value and Government ICT Investment. (Antalya, Turkey, 2010).Google Scholar
- Cullen, R. Defining the transformation of government: E-government or e-governance paradigm. In H. J. Scholl, ed., E-Government: Information, Technology, and Transformation. M. E. Sharpe, 2010, 57--71.Google Scholar
- Curtin, D. and Meijer, A. J. Does transparency strengthen legitimacy? Information polity 11, 2 (2006), 109--122. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dawes, S. S. The Evolution and Continuing Challenges of E-Governance. Public Administration Review 68, (2008), S86--S102.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dawes, S. S. Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency. Government Information Quarterly, (2010).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dervin, B. Information↔ democracy: An examination of underlying assumptions. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45, 6 (1994), 369--385. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Development, O. F. E. C. A. Focus on citizens: public engagement for better policy and services. OECD Publishing, 2009.Google Scholar
- Doctor, R. D. Social Equity and Information Technologies: Moving toward Information Democracy. Annual review of information science and technology (ARIST) 27, (1992), 43--96.Google Scholar
- Ess, C. The political computer: Democracy, CMC, and Habermas. Philosophical perspectives on computer-mediated communication, (1996), 197--230.Google Scholar
- Ferranti, D. M. D. How to improve governance: a new framework for analysis and action. Brookings Institution Press, 2009.Google Scholar
- Florini, A. The right to know: transparency for an open world. Columbia University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
- Fountain, J. Central Issues in the Political Development of the Virtual State. In M. Castells and G. Cardoso, eds., The Network Society: From Knowledge to Policy. Center for Transatlantic Relations, Washington, DC, 2005, 149--181.Google Scholar
- Frederickson, H. G. Public administration and social equity. Public administration and law, (2005), 209.Google Scholar
- Fung, A. Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review 66, s1 (2006), 66--75.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fung, A. Open Government and Open Society. In D. Lathrop and L. Ruma, eds., Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2010, 105--113.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. The structural transformation of the public sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press, 1991.Google Scholar
- Hacker, K. L. Missing links in the evolution of electronic democratization. Media, Culture & Society 18, 2 (1996), 213.Google Scholar
- Harrison, T. and Falvey, L. Democracy and New Communication Technologies. In W. B. Gudykunst, ed., Communication yearbook 25. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001, 1--43.Google Scholar
- Heald, D. and Hood, C. Transparency: the key to better governance? Oxford University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
- Held, D. Models of democracy. Stanford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
- Hindman, M. S. The myth of digital democracy. Princeton University Press, 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kerwin, C. M. Rulemaking: how government agencies write law and make policy. CQ Press College, 1999.Google Scholar
- King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., and Susel, B. O. The Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration. Public Administration Review 58, 4 (1998).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kweit, M. G. and Kweit, R. W. Implementing citizen participation in a bureaucratic society: A contingency approach. Praeger New York, 1981.Google Scholar
- Lathrop, D. and Ruma, L. Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lee, G. and Kwak, Y. Open Government Implementation Model: Moving to Increased Public Engagement. 2010. http://www.businessofgovernment.org/report/open-government-implementation-model-moving-increased-public-engagement. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
- McGuire, M. Collaborative public management: Assessing what we know and how we know it. Public Administration Review 66, s1 (2006), 33--43.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moore, M. H. Creating public value: strategic management in government. Harvard University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
- Noveck, B. S. Wiki government: how technology can make government better, democracy stronger, and citizens more powerful. Brookings Inst Pr, 2009.Google Scholar
- Obama, B. Transparency and Open Government: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies. 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
- Oldenburg, R. The great good place: cafés, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. Paragon House, 1989.Google Scholar
- Orszag, P. Open Government Directive. 2009. http://www.whitehouse.gov/open/documents/open-government-directive. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
- Posner, P. L. Accountability Challenges of Third Party Governance. The Tools of Government, Oxford University Press, New York, United States, (2002).Google Scholar
- Provan, K. G. and Milward, H. B. Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks. Public Administration Review 61, 4 (2001), 414--423.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Riley, T. E-Governance vs. E-Government. 2003. http://www.i4donline.net/articles/current-article.asp? articleid=453&typ=Features. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
- Rowe, G. and Frewer, L. J. Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, and Human Values 25, 1 (2000), 3--29.Google Scholar
- Rucinski, D. The centrality of reciprocity to communication and democracy. Critical Studies in Media Communication 8, 2 (1991), 184--194.Google Scholar
- Salamon, L. M. and Elliott, O. V. The tools of government: A guide to the new governance. Oxford University Press, USA, 2002.Google Scholar
- Sifry, M. You can be the eyes and ears: Barack Obama and the wisdom of crowds. In D. Lathrop and L. Ruma, eds., Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2010, 115--122.Google Scholar
- Sirianni, C. Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance. Brookings Institution Press, 2009.Google Scholar
- Stirland, S. Obama's Secret Weapons: Internet, Databases and Psychology. 2008. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/10/obamas-secretw/. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
- Stone, D. and Lyons, D. President 2.0. 2008. http://www.newsweek.com/2008/11/21/president-2-0.print.html. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
- Van Dijk, J. A. Models of Democracy: Behind the Design and Use of New Media in Politics. Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronique de Communication 6, (1996), n2.Google Scholar
- Wagner, M. Obama Election Ushering In First Internet Presidency. 2008. http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=212000815. Accessed: 02-10-2011.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Open government and e-government: democratic challenges from a public value perspective
Recommendations
Open government and e-government: democratic challenges from a public value perspective
Special issue on Open Government and Public Participation: Issues and Challenges in Creating Public ValueWe argue that the Obama Administration's Open Government Initiative blurs distinctions between e-democracy and e-government by incorporating historically democratic practices. now enabled by emerging technology. within administrative agencies. We ...
Investing in open government: applying lessons from research and practice
dg.o '11: Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging TimesThe 2009 White House Open Government Directive set off a wave of planning and new initiative development among federal agencies designed to achieve the goals of this mandate, and has stimulated significant interest among state and local governments and ...
Contrasting perceptions about transparency, citizen participation, and open government between civil society organization and government
The concepts of Transparency, Citizen Participation and Open Government is increasingly being used by politicians, public officials and civil society. Open Government strategies are being assumed by public administration at different levels of ...
Comments