Austrian Open Government Strategy

Editor's Notes

1. This presentation is about general political concepts and research questions are not defined yet.
2. At the Centre for E-Government of the Danube University Krems, we are working with an interdisciplinary team on a broad range of topics, with special focus on E-Democracy, Open Government, Open Data. Whilst Open Access and all kind of Open Movements have been discussed since 10 years, it is now that they are addressed at the top level of political governance in the Anglo-American countries. However, the starting position for an Open Government strategy in Austria is complex, as information cultures shape legal requirements and vice versa. We will primarily present our views on impacts on the development of Open Government strategies in Austria, focusing on both information cultures and the legal framework. The principles of Open Government will undoubtedly become more important on a global level.
3. To sum up the currying discussion and principles. Principles of open government as basis for an innovative participation culture. Transparency: All non-personalised data is published by the government, third parties interpret and reuse data e.g. iPhone apps or interpretation of environmental data. Collaboration: Crowd sourcing, collective intelligence based on different methods like jams  ideal environment for motivating citizens. Participation: 100 % is an illusion, but many want more of a say (EDEM 10 – Williamson), 4 % are actively engaged. But : Participation and collaborations transferred from a extreme small elite to a broader community/basis, even if we only reach 1% of society. Only the release of control in regards to information enables direct participation processes.
4. Publishing information and offering access to raw data leads to more trust from citizens and improves the collaboration between government and citizens. Governments can use the potential and knowledge of citizens. Open Government is thus more than access to data, it is also a strategy to control information flow and sources in a knowledge or information society. Central: The state publishes information, commits himself to: all agencies and organisations have to publish all data to citizens. “It’s your data!” Australian finance minister. Especially in this field, research has to be done and research questions will be defined for our centre.
5. “ Apps for Democracy”: This contest/competition created 47 iPhone, Facebook and web applications, with an estimated value in excess of $2,600,000 to the city. with cost for Washington, DC of only $50,000 This adds up to a return on investment of 5000 percent! These are impressive figures and potentials which our leading politicians and our heads of administration should realize. http://www.scribd.com/doc/17536602/Open-Government-Innovation-Apps-for-Democracy http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2009/08/24/apps-for-america-the-finalists/ http://www.appsfordemocracy.org/about /
6. Freedom of information is an important factor of re-democratization and closely tied to open government as citizens are more motivated to participate in a culture of transparency. In a paper of the Bertelsmann Stiftung freedom of information and the transparent state are linked. Especially in the developing economies and democracies free information access plays a crucial role. And in emerging countries we can see a big tendency for promoting citizen orientation. Open Government projects are based on the sharing of the state‘s information sovereignty with citizens. Mayer-Schönberger and Lazar have been coining the term „information government“ to describe these changes. Whilst E-Government is dealing with the electronic implementation of administrative processes, i-government is analysing the information flow within a state and society. Technological developments have an impact on the information flow. By sharing the information sovereignty and shifting information hierarchies, governments can use the intelligence of the crowd. In a knowledge and information society, the information flow is not solely controlled by companies and administration. It is individuals and groups (swarm intelligence) who put information on the real time web. A possible conflict in this theory could be – as has also been pointed out at our annual e-democracy conference by the way – the digital gap. How to access and interpret data sets is not yet well known and only an information elite knows how to access it. However, it is not necessary to overcome this gap completely to still make use of the advantages. (EDEM Harnard /Pene Lopez)
7. The MA2412 series was a sitcom aired in the Austrian Broadcasting Cooperation from 1998 to 2002. It is dealing with a culture of resistance and mistrust and the impression that giving information within an administrative context is not an obligation to provide. As comedy usually refers to reality, we got a historic document telling that a lack of trust and transparency in administrative and governmental authorities is definitely an issue in our country  Außer Dienst = off duty / off service Historical background Maria Theresia and Josef II build up the administration structure which is still existing in Austria and the former countries of the Austrian Empire.
8. Culture of mistrust: Some people would describe our information culture as a culture of mistrust on both sides. Social Networks: Generally we notice resentment against social networks in the working environment – the potential benefits for networking, innovation and working cultures have not been learned yet and many companies block Facebook & Co. for their employees (e. g. also the Federal Chancellery). People who use social networks excessively and openly might be perceived as excessive posers. „Having something to say“ is only allowed for prominent people. And as Jeff Jarvis pointed out in his notes on the German privacy paradox that can also be applied to Austria, some cultures seem to think that too much publicness is resulting in harm more than others. According to him, publicness should be set as the default instead of privacy, although ppl should always have control of and insights in what they share.
9. Cultures develop throughout the history of a country and are reflected in different legal frameworks but also coined by it. If societies and cultures change, they can also slow down a development. We will focus on problems in the context of open government in this part. Other countries have a historical advantage, like Sweden, where there is a legal basis for the information access of citizens since 1766 or the US with the Freedom of Information Act in 1960 and an addition in 1996 (concerning the active information politics of the government via new media). Finland, 1951, Austria 1974. Whereas in other countries free information access refers to a legal framework, the situation in Austria is more complex. As opposed to Germany, the right to information does not lead to the right of citizens to access records. Unique within the EU, the official secrecy is also covered within the constitution act. Whereas in many countries the electronic discovery of data is an obligation to deliver, in Austria we refer to the term „right to information/acces right“ (rhetorically significant). The ideal would be authorities that deliver information without reference to any particular occasion. The traditional burden of proof should be the other way round: Not the citizens should need to deliver a reason for their right to information, it‘s the public sector who needs to give a good reason for not opening up the information. In Australia, for instance, the obligation to publish is the default („it‘s your data“). An interesting and somewhat significan example of an enquiry to the authorities is the one of Georg Holzer, trying to create awareness for open government in Carinthia. He wanted to use his right to information and to access information about the expenses for marketing, advertisements etc. of the members of the government. In return, he was told that the „relevant legal requirements do not exist“.
10. Apart from activists and the mentioned initiatives, Austria seeks to established an Open Government strategy. The platform Digital Austria of the Federal Chancellery defined Visions for 2020, where transparency, raw data and mashups are included. After pressure from the economy in order to coordinate the ICT strategy, a competence center „internet society“ was created. At the moment further concepts are defined, while one of them could be Open Government an Open Data related. And in the context of the E-Government Strategy of the Federal Chancellery, interactive information systems, transparency and active data protection are defined as goals for 2011. (plus: defining which data sets should be used).
11. A short impression from a consortium discussion the future of ICT in economy, administration and science called ISPRAT and the thoughts on open government at the last ISPRAT meeting. Main points: we are moving towards openness and transparency and if governments don‘t drive the movement, they might well be driven by it. There is still a long way to go, and Popp, the Austrian head of the department in the ministry of science think‘s that e-participation is not accepted, but at the same time he said that they are discussing how to do an open data site like data.gov.at and that it‘s important and on their agenda.
12. The project www.offenedaten.de is another platform initiated by civil society. The platform is collecting open data that is not easy to access but open in principle. Users are also encouraged to use their right to information and send enquiries to authorities. The Open Data Movement in Austria is currently in the forming phase, mainly driven by Web enthusiasts advocating for publishing Open Gov Data based on Linked Open Data principles. „Linked Open Data“ (Tim Berners Lee): Linked Data as „a term used to describe a recommended best practice for exposing, sharing, and connecting pieces of data, information and knowledge on the Semantic Web“. (Wikipedia Definition) However, there are certain initiatives. Whereas in the UK, USA or New Zealand groups were started by governments, in Austria we try to convey the importance of open data via non-governmental initiatives so far. After the role model of the Comprehensive Knowledge Archive Network by the Open Knowledge Foundation (UK) the Open Government Data Initiative was formed.
13. For prospective or flagship projects, potential data sets need to be identified. In the Open Government Data Meeting in Mai 2010, the participants defined the following as potential data for a start: geo, public promotions and sponsorship, infrastructure, environment, security and health. Based on a community ranking, data on infrastructure and environment have the biggest potential. From an Austrian perspective, the publication of financial data does not have such a big potential. It was argued that this will take a lot more time  at the moment unimaginable (in Nordic Countries not too problematic; there are also different limits in the cultures: In US-America no financial data but crime records, which is for European countries „untouchable“.
14. A first step to enable citizens is the ability to form opinions on the basis of secure/authorised and broad information. This would require a radical change of roles within the Austrian government administration. Citizens should not need to argue why they have access to information. (burden of proof at the authorities, who have to argue why they can‘t give away information). At the moment, governments and administration are fighting against the loss of administrative sovereignty. And as services alone do not lead to democratisation, citizens‘ knowledge should be integrated (collaboration). Creating public awareness for the concept is another main issue in Austria as it is not widely known (apart from the mentioned enthusiasts). Marketing problem. But also defining limits – ethical discourse must be enhanced., e. g. Criminal records (more than ever with data flow). We suggest to implement Creative Commons licences that allow the non-commercial re-use for all data and information sponsored by the state. This would also apply to NGOs or the academic field (Open Access / Open Science initiatives). Only a top down approach can effectively change the situation with Open Access and Open Data being part of career and universities' requirements. EU council of ministers: »Member states should guarantee the right of everyone to have access, on request, to official documents held by public authorities. This principle should apply without discrimination on any ground, including that of national origin.«
15. In the context of research and science the principles of open information, open data etc. are applicable with open access or open science. We can find a close relationship between open access publishing and e-democracy and transparency. One could think of a complete open research process from the peer review to publications (more efficient scientific process). To be sustainably successful, the principles would have to be implemented in career models and university politics/policies (e. g. with an open access declaration – top down – from universities). We have to force a policy change where openness is the default, and closeness the option you might choose.
16. http://www.classcaster.org/resserver.php?blogId=175&resource=open.jpg Especially in Europe, universities are financed by public funds, but - as discussed before - they publish their high-value content in closed journals. In many member states, researches and their institutions are measured by impact factored through journals in which they publish. So traditional politics are motivating them to continue their tradition and make it even harder to establish open access journals; Currently we are using the wrong indicators, therefore politics has to change the framework. In Austria we have agreements between the ministry of science and research and the universities - development and financing of the universities are negotiated for a three years period – indicators for monitoring the development are defined; still until now we have no indicators for open access. In Austria we could and should change this culture very soon and I’m convinced that in the other member states, this would also be possible, because universities depend on public financing. So European governments could renew the framework very fast, maybe faster than in US-America, because they are more independent of administration and politics. In this field we could have a better position than USA. The framework should make OA mandatory for all universities this means: Build up central based repositories with bachelor’s, master’s & PhD theses Determine a percentage of papers which have to be published in OA journals, this percentage should be increased year for year until 90% are reached Open access to the raw data of surveys and research – especially in the area of social science there would be little risk Promote collaboration between universities and try to break up the silos Include society into science http:// www.taxpayeraccess.org / US-Society already demands access to the research results.