Open Government

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Open democracy diagram

Open government is a synonym for the opening of government and administration to the population and the economy. This can contribute to more transparency , more participation , more intensive cooperation , more innovation and a strengthening of community interests. In the Anglo-Saxon-speaking area , the term "open government" has become established for this development, which is particularly characterized by Web 2.0 technologies.

Open Government

Open government is mainly used as a collective term for a whole series of different concepts and visions that deal with certain facets of an opening up of the state and administration. These include considerations such as:

Such an opening in the age of Web 2.0 with several communication channels and direct contact between administration and citizens, according to the Spanish EU Council Presidency in its Granada Strategy 2010, could accelerate their transformation. A goal to be striven for is therefore the establishment of an ongoing dialogue with the citizens in order to understand their needs and requirements and to take these into account in decision-making. This requires open, cooperative cooperation between the administration and the population, and demands transparency and openness in all of its decisions and actions. This requires a cultural change in people's minds so that the public sector becomes an open organization that citizens can understand - an organizational change in order to be oriented towards the new requirements and a vertical multi-channel management in order not to exclude anyone.

In science, there is still no generally accepted definition of the term open government. Johann Herzberg, for example, assumes a “two-stage” model with regard to the development of the term. Accordingly, since the 1940s, open government has initially been understood in the sense of the transparency of state action. This understanding is still important today, but since Barack Obama's election victory as US president in 2008, open government has increasingly been understood in terms of interaction. Openness means the ability to interact and the ability to interact ultimately means the ability to learn. An open state is therefore actually understood today as a state that is capable of interacting and learning. The state must cooperate more closely with civil society and business in order to defuse specific control and acceptance problems of today's political and administrative systems. The joint problem-solving of politics, business and civil society can be described with the sub-term "Open Innovation", which thus becomes the central implementation concept of the current Open Government discourse. It is always about questions of the renewal of democracy - in the sense of a concurrent, but clearly definable discourse.

In terms of this second - normative - discourse level, it can be assumed that open government is a "political program to redefine state theory and practice under the conditions of a digitally networked society". The approach can be understood as the “first serious attempt to adjust the political-administrative systems of the nation states to the social transformation that has been going on for some time in the course of the conversion of all social systems to internet-based communication”.

Use

Historical development

In times of increasing systemic distrust, decreasing capacity to act due to public debt, steadily falling voter turnout and a lack of trust in public processes, it seems time to think about opening up processes and new forms of division of labor. It is therefore becoming more and more difficult, according to the prognosis, to continue developing politics in the much-cited “quiet little room” and without enforcing the integration of the citizens. In the Anglo-Saxon-speaking area, the term “open government” has become established for this opening up of the state and administration. US President Barack Obama is pioneering this change in administrative culture . On the day of his inauguration in January 2009, he announced the new strategic administrative pillars of his presidency in the memorandum "Transparency and Open Government":

  • Government and administration should be transparent.
    • Transparency builds a sense of duty and provides citizens with information about what their government and administration is currently doing.
  • Government and administration should be participatory.
    • Political participation increases the effectiveness of government and administration and improves the quality of their decisions by integrating the widely dispersed knowledge of society into the decision-making process.
  • Government and administration should be collaborative.
    • Open Government Collaboration | Collaboration offers innovative tools, methods and systems to promote cooperation across all administrative levels and with the private sector.

Through these strategic guidelines for more openness, which should strengthen democracy and increase efficiency and effectiveness in government and administration, transparency, participation and cooperation are given high priority. These specifications did not arise spontaneously, but are the result of a development that lasted several decades, which Barack Obama took up on the basis of his own conviction. When he was elected US president, he benefited in particular from the Web 2.0 technologies that enabled him to mobilize supporters and get voters to vote. However, these new types of social interaction only work if they are transparent (if the users are sure that they are obviously not being exploited and meaningful purposes are being pursued), if they are participatory (if the users feel that they can help shape it ) and if they are collaborative (if tasks can be divided up so that individual users can drive the joint project forward with a small contribution).

In the USA , Great Britain , Australia and New Zealand , the national governments have recognized the potential of a networked active civil society and in 2009 made Open Government an important pillar of their administrative and domestic policy. Openness, transparency, participation, collaboration, innovation, the opening of freely available data, open standards and interfaces as well as open source software shape this cultural change, which is characterized by a new partnership with the citizen and with which new trust can be built.

Open Government and Germany

An opening of the state and administration in the sense of open government would be technically possible in Germany . E-government and in particular Web 2.0 technologies are already helping to further develop tried and tested concepts for the state and administration with “Transparency 2.0”, “Participation 2.0” and “Collaboration 2.0”. Free information, participation, accountability and open communication have shaped the Federal Republic of Germany for decades. Administrative information can now be published in real time via the Internet and accessed worldwide. Portals enable the bundling and processing of distributed databases in tables, reports, charts and maps. Through this targeted use of information technologies, new types of information and processes can be generated that contribute significantly to transparency in the state and administration. Web 2.0 technologies open up increased participatory involvement of the population and new types of collaborative forms of cooperation. The economic value of public sector data is also increasingly recognized as a national good.

Politically, an opening in the sense of open government would change governance and administration. The previous understanding of and handling of transparency, participation and cooperation in politics and administration will continue to develop through the provision of easy-to-use applications and services. After all, many of these Web 2.0 technologies are already available to anyone who is interested. They are also being continuously improved. Through the more intensive involvement of the population and an open information policy, the trust of the citizens in state institutions and in the elected representatives can be increased and the innovative strength increased. An opening must be politically wanted by the executives and the politicians. Otherwise there is a risk that after the first conflicts, after verbal or real aggression, an engagement will be ended by a power word. For politicians in particular, opening up could result in a loss of representation. You will therefore demand careful consideration, paying particular attention to your own future role, a conceivable populism and the privileges of individuals who are particularly familiar with the use of Web 2.0 technologies. In essence, it is about the politically discussed question of the extent to which the state and administration want to open up to citizens, companies and associations. An opening does not only mean more interoperability in the technical sense through open data, standards, interfaces and open source software. Rather, it is about the administrative policy line in the sense of citizen and addressee orientation, a new division of responsibility between politics , the state , economy and civil society in times of empty coffers as well as the design of new, cross-organizational process and value chains based on open electronic communication systems.

For example, analyzes have shown that more than 30 cities and municipalities in Germany are already using interactive collaboration platforms to actively involve citizens in the policy development process through innovative participation mechanisms. In particular, online participatory budgeting , dialogues and consultations are very popular with the responsible administrations.

Since autumn 2011, a civil society working group Open Government Partnership Germany has been involved in a campaign in Berlin to get the federal government to join the Open Government Partnership , an international agreement for the implementation of open government strategies worldwide.

As part of the steering project "Promotion of Open Government", an online consultation on the draft of the key issues paper was carried out in June 2012. All contributions to the online consultation and the IFK's position paper were evaluated following the consultation. The evaluation report including documentation of all comments was made available on the platform after the consultation in September 2012.

In October 2012, the administrative informatics specialist group and the informatics department in law and public administration of the Gesellschaft für Informatik published a memorandum on the opening of the state and administration (open government), in which the subject area is to be developed on a broader basis.

On February 19, 2013 the data portal for Germany went online, which refers to open administrative data from the federal, state and local governments. GovData is an application of the IT planning council and is based on an administrative agreement that not all federal states have yet joined.

At the end of 2013, participation in the international Open Government Partnership (OGP) initiative was included as a goal in the coalition agreement between the CDU, CSU and SPD. However, the federal government did not officially announce its intended accession until April 7, 2016. On December 7, 2016, Germany's participation in the OGP was officially initiated with the presentation of the declaration of intent.

The eGovernment MONITOR study by the D21 initiative and the Institute for Public Information Management , which has been carried out annually since 2010, provides information on the use and expectations of Open Government offers from a citizen's perspective in the DA-CH region and other comparison countries . According to the study, 17% of German online users over the age of 18 are portals for participation in political decisions via the Internet, e.g. B. online participatory budgeting or petitions. 8% have already used these portals. In comparison, in Austria there are 31% experts and 19% users.

See also

literature

Web links

References and comments

  1. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 3.
  2. ^ Based on Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comercio: Spanish Proposal for a Digital Europe: The Granada Strategy, Granada 2010, p. 26 f.
  3. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 2.
  4. ↑ Herzberg, Johann (2013): “Open Government” - An attempt at a definition of the term, in: Verwaltung & Management 19 (1), pp. 40–44.
  5. ↑ Herzberg, Johann (2012): State modernization through open innovation: problem situation, theory formation, recommendations for action. TICC series of publications (vol. 4), Berlin: epubli / Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck, p. 51.
  6. ↑ Ibid., P. 52.
  7. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 19.
  8. ↑ Giordano Koch, Maximilian Rapp, Dennis Hilgers and Johann Füller: Functional Mechanisms of an Open Government Platform: Findings from Science & Practice, In: eGovernment Review No. 9
  9. ↑ Maximilian Rapp and Giordano Koch: Bürgerbeteiligung 2.0, In: Das Rathaus Heft 4 2012, p. 103
  10. ↑ Barack Obama: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies - SUBJECT: Transparency and Open Government, in: General Services Administration: Transparency and Open Government, Intergovernmental Solutions Division, GSA Office of Citizens Services and Communications, Washington DC 2009, p. 4th
  11. ↑ Philipp Müller: Learning from Facebook - Transparency, Participation, Collaboration: Citizens make their administration, in: Wiener Zeitung - Verwaltung Innovativ, June 23, 2009, p. 9
  12. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Transparency 2.0 - Transparency through E-Government, in: Verwaltung & Management, Volume 15, Issue 6, Nomos Verlag, Baden-Baden 2009, p. 329
  13. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 2 f .
  14. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 1.
  15. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 18 f .
  16. ↑ Jörn von Lucke: Open Government - opening of state and administration - expert opinion for Deutsche Telekom AG on T-City Friedrichshafen (PDF; 419 kB), Deutsche Telekom Institute for Connected Cities, Zeppelin University gGmbH, Friedrichshafen 2010, p. 19.
  17. ↑ Giordano Koch and Maximilian Rapp: Open Government Platforms in Municipality Areas: Identifying elemental design principles, In: Public Management im Paradigmenwechsel, Trauner Verlag, 2012.
  18. ↑ https://opengovpartnership.de/
  19. ↑ Promotion of Open Government (open government and administrative action) ( Memento from June 8, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  20. ↑ Open Government Consultation - Procedure ( Memento from April 1, 2013 in the Internet Archive )
  21. ↑ GovData.de - data portal for Germany (also daten-deutschland.de )
  22. ↑ https://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2013/2013-12-17-koalitionsvertrag.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2
  23. ^ Joint declaration on the Franco-German Council of Ministers on April 7, 2016 ( Memento of July 9, 2016 in the Internet Archive )
  24. ↑ eGovernment MONITOR
  25. ^ Institute for Public Information Management ( Memento from August 4, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
  26. ^ Initiative D21; ipima (Ed.): eGovernment MONITOR 2015. Use and acceptance of electronic citizen services in international comparison ( Memento of September 21, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 1.97MB), 2015, p. 33.