Abstract
This research investigates whether, why, and how open government data (OGD) is used and reused by Brazilian state and district public administrations. A new online questionnaire was developed and collected data from 26 of the 27 federation units between June and July 2021. The resulting dataset was cleaned and anonymized. It contains an insight on 158 parameters for 26 federation units explored. This article describes the questionnaire metadata and the methods applied to collect and treat data. The data file was divided into four sections: respondent profile (identify the respondent and his workplace), OGD use/consumption, what OGD is used for by public administrations, and why OGD is used by public administrations (benefits, barriers, drivers, and barriers to OGD use/reuse). Results provide the state of the play of OGD use/reuse in the federation units administrations. Therefore, they could be used to inform open data policy and decision-making processes. Furthermore, they could be the starting point for discussing how OGD could better support the digital transformation in the public sector.
Dataset License: CC0.
Keywords:
open government data; benefits; barriers; enablers; drivers; public sector; use; reuse; open data; Brazil 1. Introduction
Public institutions produce, collect, and aggregate vast amounts of data and publish it as open (government) data [1]. According to Open Definition, open data can be freely used, reused, modified, and shared by anyone for any purpose. Given its potential, open data provides opportunities for governments worldwide to implement some of their digital transformation processes [2].
Furthermore, open government data (OGD) has the potential to improve operations efficiency, evidence-based and data-driven policymaking and increase transparency, accountability, civil participation, and trust in government. Despite its benefits, OGD has not been extensively adopted in public sector organizations, particularly in developing countries [3]. The literature provides insights into the barriers to OGD adoption, sharing, use, and reuse. Through a global survey, Zuiderwijk and Reuver [4] identified seven barriers to OGD initiatives: functionality and support; inclusiveness; economy, policy, and process; data interpretation; data quality and resources; legislation and access; and sustainability. In another study, Crusoe and Melin [5] conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the OGD barriers. Studies focused on technical, organizational, and legal barrier types, while studies on open data usage and systems were less frequent. Forty-six barriers were categorized to an expanded OGD process (suitability, release, publish, use, and evaluation). The literature also offers insights into determinants that influence the OGD adoption in public sector organizations [3].
However, the use of OGD for government is incipient [6], and studies addressing the use of OGD are scarce [3]. Therefore, this project investigates whether, how, and why open government data is used and reused by the Brazilian states and district public administrations. Thus, a survey was developed to collect information from digital government leaders of Brazilian federation units (FUs) public administrations. The term “use” means data use, reuse, or consumption in opposition to data adoption, release, or publication.
This research project was executed by the University of Minho (UM) and the University of the United Nations (UNU-EGOV), with the support of the Digital Transformation Group of States and Federal District (DF)—(GTD.GOV). The GTD.GOV is a national network that gathers specialists in digital transformation from state and district governments across the country. Its mission is to accelerate Brazilian states and district governments’ digital transformation [7]. The group was created by the Brazilian Association of State Entities of Information Technology and Communication (ABEP-TIC) and the National Council of State Secretaries of Administration (CONSAD).
ABEP-TIC brings together all state information technology and communication companies in Brazil. It seeks to influence public policies in all spheres of government to promote and strengthen cooperation among its associates. Furthermore, ABEP-TIC fosters administrative modernization to improve the quality and productivity of state government services [8]. In addition, CONSAD congregates the secretaries of state for administration of all 26 Brazilian States and the federal district to exchange experiences and seek creative solutions to improve public management in Brazil [9].
Brazil has been relatively successful in opening data. Given the increasing deployment of digital services, the Brazilian public administrations have produced an increasing set of government data in open format. According to the State Basic Information Survey (Estadic 2019) [10], all federation units have a transparency portal and publish general administration data in a reuse-friendly format and other formats. For example, 84.0% (21) of the 25 FUs published expenditure information in a more reuse-friendly format, while only 18.5% (5) of the 27 did so for accountability of the Fiscal Responsibility Act (LRF).
In addition, a recent survey on digital transformation trends in Brazilian state governments and the federal district [11] indicated that 19 of the 26 Brazilian states have open data portals. However, only eight have legislation which allow state public administration to share data among its agencies. Since OGD is already published and is an integral part of the digital transformation of public administrations, it is necessary to understand whether, for what, and why OGD is used. Moreover, if they are not used, understand the barriers and factors that could facilitate and drive data use and reuse.
Results provide an overview of OGD use and could inform open data policy and decision-making processes in the states and district public administrations. In addition, they provide the basis for further discussion about how OGD can be used and reused to support the digital transformation of the public sector.
2. Methods
This project (CEICSH 069/2021) was submitted to and approved by the Ethics Committee for Research in Social and Human Sciences (CEICSH) of the University of Minho (UM) on 22 June 2021. Personal data, such as IP address, emails, gender, and age, were collected. However, these data were anonymized to prevent individual respondent identification.
Our objective is to investigate whether, how, and why the public sector uses open government data. Therefore, given the exploratory, inductive nature of the work, we adopted the survey research method. It is used for collecting data from a representative sample of individuals to describe the behaviors, thoughts, and attitudes at a specific place and time. An instrument (questionnaire) composed of closed-ended and open-ended questions was developed as discussed in [12]. A systematic review of the literature, conducted according to [13,14] served to identify research gaps and support the creation of the survey.
From the literature review [15] we collected and systematized the categories of data used and what OGD is used for. We also gathered OGD use benefits, barriers, drivers, and enablers (BBDE) reported in these studies. Therefore, the following categories to classify BBDE were synthesized: political and social, legal and public policy, cultural, economic and financial, organizational and institutional, and technical and operational). Finally, questionnaire questions were developed based on the BBDE literature reported in [15], which adopted the abovementioned BBDE categorization. In summary, the review was the foundation of this survey and its online questionnaire.
Table 1 presents additional information on the questionnaire creation and application.
Table 1.
Additional information about the questionnaire.
Data Cleaning
After applying the questionnaire on the LimeSurvey platform, responses were exported and consolidated in an Excel spreadsheet in a tabular format. Data were collected in Portuguese. Data were cleaned and adjusted to fit in a row (regroup fields separated during the import to Excel process due to the use of commas in text input by respondents). Metadata in Portuguese and English were also imported and added to the spreadsheet. Then, answers to close-ended questions were translated to English and placed in a spreadsheet with English metadata. Open-ended questions which hold respondent inputted data were not translated to preserve originality and avoid introducing researchers’ biases. The dataset is available as a CSV file in an open format [18]. The dataset is composed of five CSV files and one Excel (XLST) file, as detailed in the Supplementary Material.
3. Data Description
This section describes the data collected according to the method presented in Section 3. Each column of the data table, what data are contained, their format, how to read and interpret data are defined.
The aim of this research is to investigate whether, for what, and why the public sector uses/consumes OGD. To collect information, a survey invited Brazilian State and District government leaders to respond to a new online questionnaire that is composed of four analytical sections, as shown in Table 2.
Table 2.
Questionnaire analytical structure.
The questionnaire was applied between 10 June and 9 July 2021. The resulting dataset comprises 26 rows, one for each federation unit excepting the State of São Paulo, which was the only State that declined to participate in the survey. Thus, this dataset represents the perspective of the 26-participating federation units. Responses were exported to Excel in a tabular format. The dataset contents are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3.
Dataset information.
Metadata was divided and is presented into seven tables. Data generated and collected by the system are in Table 4. The remaining tables correspond to data collected using the questionnaire. The respondent profile is listed in Table 5. Table 6 contains data about whether open government data (OGD) are used and for what data are used. Table 7, Table 8, Table 9 and Table 10 show respectively the questions related to OGD use benefits, barriers, enablers, and drivers. Columns are presented in the same order they appear in the dataset.
Table 4.
Data generated by the LimeSurvey software.
Table 5.
Respondent profile metadata.
Table 6.
Metadata of open government data use/reuse and what data used is for sections.
Table 7.
Metadata of the benefits of using open government data.
Table 8.
Metadata of the barriers to open government data use.
Table 9.
Metadata of the enablers of open government data use.
Table 10.
Metadata of the drivers of open government data use.
Table 4 presents information generated by the LimeSurvey software. All columns are mandatory. Note that the column ipaddr. IP address, which has the IP address of the respondent’s device, was anonymized.
Table 5 shows the questions of the respondent profile section. All columns are mandatory, except for the respondent’s name, email, and Q005[comment]. Due to the small size of this sample, it would be possible to identify respondents based on age and gender. Consequently, the following columns were anonymized Q00. Name, Q001. Email, Q002. Age, and Q003. Gender.
Table 6 describes three blocks of questions: if data are used, what data are used for, and why these data are not used. Each question corresponds to a column in the dataset. Q100 determines whether OGD is used. Then, if data are used, Q106, Q105, and Q104 explore what data are used for, the categories of data consumed, and the institutions that provide OGD. These questions were reversed to improve the questionnaire logic flow. Lastly, if OGD is not used, Q150 and Q151 investigate the reasons for not using OGD.
Q155 implements the snowball sampling strategy. It requests the respondent to inform the email of people who could collaborate with the study if the person could not. Q155. [Comment] was anonymized as it may have email addresses.
Table 7 presents the metadata of questions related to the benefits of using open government data (OGD) in the public sector. Benefits were grouped in three categories: political and social (BEPS), economic (BEE), and operational and technical (BEOT). Additionally, BEOTHER indicates the benefits suggested by the respondent. The last question in this table, Q160, investigates the negative impacts or effects of using OGD in the public sector.
Table 8 displays metadata of barriers to OGD use in the public sector questions. Barriers’ questions were categorized as cultural (BAC), economic and financial (BAEF), policy and legal (BAPL), organizational and institutional (BAOI), and operational and technical (BAOT). Additionally, BAOTHER indicates barriers suggested by the respondent.
The questions about enablers of OGD use in the public sector are presented in Table 9. They were grouped into in the same categories listed for OGD use barriers, i.e., cultural (EC), economic and financial (EEF), policy and legal (EPL), organizational and institutional (EOI), and operational and technical (EOT). Additionally, EOTHER holds enablers suggested by the respondent.
Drivers of OGD use in the public sector are listed in Table 10. As with the previous questions, they were categorized into organizational and institutional (DOI), political and social (DPS), and operational and technical (DOT). Additionally, DOTHER holds drivers suggested by the respondent. The final considerations section CF01 asks if the respondent wants to comment on the OGD use.
4. Results, Limitations, and Conclusions
This research aims to answer whether, how, and why OGD is used in the Brazilian states and District public administrations. Figure 1 shows that 26 out of the 27 Federation Units participated in the survey. Only the State of São Paulo did not respond to the questionnaire. Moreover, the map indicates that 16 States use/reuse OGD. The respondent of one State (Minas Gerais) reported not knowing whether OGD was used. The remaining nine federation units informed that OGD was not used. Therefore, 61% of the States’ administrations use OGD, 35% do not use it, and 4% do not know whether these data are used.
Figure 1.
Are open government data used/reused?
Regarding how OGD is used, we conclude that data are mainly used to support decision-making, create/improve public services, and analyze data (create analyses, forecasts, estimates, simulations, models). The most popular OGD categories mentioned by 63% of respondents are procurement and bids, expenses, and budget. The most cited data sources were the state secretariats and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).
The question of why OGD is used was addressed in terms of what OGD use benefits, barriers, facilitators, and drivers are. The most prominent benefits reported were increased transparency, more informed citizens, increased efficiency of the administration, and a more informed decision-making process. The most significant OGD use barriers were “the administration and public managers do not know what open data are” and “the absence of an organizational culture favorable to open data”. Regarding facilitating factors, the most relevant facilitators were “data were improved” and “the existence of a cooperative work culture”. Finally, the most important drivers were “data are available in easy-to-use formats” and “external stakeholders (international bodies, other agencies, journalists) pressure the administration to use the open data”.
It is worth noting that the reported results present a partial view of the use of OGD, as only one response per federation unit was considered. Thus, other secretaries and state agencies should be surveyed to acquire a broader view of OGD use and reuse in the Brazilian state and district administrations. However, public managers can use these results as a starting point to inform decision-making regarding open data policy and digital governance.
Furthermore, the usefulness of this dataset could be verified by developing indicators to measure its utilization rate using data collected by the data repository about downloads and reads.
Supplementary Materials
The following supporting information is available online at https://doi.org/10.34622/datarepositorium/UY7MFA, Table S1: Information about the dataset, Table S2: Dataset in Portuguese, Table S3: Metadata in Portuguese, Table S4: Dataset in English, Table S5: Metadata in English, and Table S6: Excel spreadsheet with all data and metadata.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: A.A.B., D.S. and I.K.; questionnaire development A.A.B. and I.K.; investigation, writing—original draft preparation, I.K.; writing—review and editing: A.A.B. and D.S.; supervision: A.A.B. and D.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
This research is approved by University of Minho Ethics Committee (CEICSH 069/2021).
Informed Consent Statement
The following statement was presented to respondents so to acquire their consent to participate in the survey: “Please read this consent form carefully before deciding to participate in the study. Time required: It takes around about 20 minutes to answer this questionnaire. Risks: The risks associated with participating in this study are minimal. Benefits: The benefits associated with this study are related to acquiring new knowledge and insights about the processes and procedures adopted by the Brazilian states and federal district public administrations in using open data to promote greater transparency and efficiency using these data. Confidentiality: The University of Minho (UM), based in R. 4710-057, Braga Portugal, under the General Data Protection Law of Brazil (LGPD), Law 13.709/2018, collects the personal data requested in this form to complement the analysis of how open government data are used by the public sector, and ensures that it will use this information exclusively for this purpose and after fulfilling the purposes the data will be erased. UM has adopted the best practices and organizational techniques to protect your personal data, as well as guarantee the exercise of your rights of access, rectification, and opposition, through the email: ikawashi@gmail.com. I authorize the use of the data provided herein in the context of the study of the use of public sector open government data that is being conducted by UM and UNU-EGOV in collaboration with the GTD.GOV. Voluntary Participation: Your participation in the study is entirely voluntary”.
Data Availability Statement
The resulting dataset is available at: https://doi.org/10.34622/datarepositorium/UY7MFA as per the CC0—“Public Domain Dedication” License, accessed on 5 October 2021.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Charalabidis, Y.; Zuiderwijk, A.; Alexopoulos, C.; Janssen, M.; Lampoltshammer, T.; Ferro, E. The World of Open Data: Concepts, Methods, Tools and Experiences; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrara, W.; Sander, F.; Oudkerk, F.; van Steenbergen, E.; Tinholt, D. Analytical Report 1: Digital Transformation and Open Data. Publications Office, LU. 2020. Available online: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2830/673557 (accessed on 1 October 2021).
- Khurshid, M.M.; Zakaria, N.H.; Rashid, A.; Ahmad, M.N.; Arfeen, M.I.; Faisal Shehzad, H.M. Modeling of Open Government Data for Public Sector Organizations Using the Potential Theories and Determinants—A Systematic Review. Informatics 2020, 7, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuiderwijk, A.; de Reuver, M. Why open government data initiatives fail to achieve their objectives: Categorizing and prioritizing barriers through a global survey. Transform. Gov. People Process Policy 2021, 15, 377–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crusoe, J.; Melin, U. Investigating Open Government Data Barriers: A Literature Review and Conceptualization; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), LNCS; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; Volume 11020, pp. 169–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mesquita, M.A.; Luciano, E.M.; Lübeck, R.; Wiedenhöft, G. Discussing the Twofold Role of Government-Provider and User—In the Open Government Data Ecosystem. In Proceedings of the EGov-CEDEM-EPart, Linköping, Sweden, August 2020. [Google Scholar]
- ABEP-TIC. GTD.gov: Grupo de Transformação Digital. 2020. Available online: https://gtdgov.org.br/quem-somos (accessed on 1 October 2021).
- ABEP-TIC. ABEP-Associação Brasileira de Entidades Estaduais de Tecnologia da Informação e Comunicação. 2017. Available online: https://www.abep-tic.org.br/sobre (accessed on 5 October 2021).
- CONSAD. Conselho Nacional de Secretários de Estado da Administração–CONSAD. 2021. Available online: https://www.consad.org.br/consad/ (accessed on 5 October 2021).
- Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatísticas. ESTADIC-Pesquisa de Informações Básicas Estaduais 2019; Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatísticas: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2020. Available online: https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv101769.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2021).
- Lafuente, M.; Leite, R.; Porrúa, M.; Valenti, P. Transformação Digital dos Governos Brasileiros: Tendências na Transformação Digital em Governos Estaduais e no Distrito Federal do Brasil; Banco Interamericano de Desenvolvimento: Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Kalaian, S.A. Research Design. In Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods; Lavrakas, P., Ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A.; PRISMA-P Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 2015, 4, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kitchenham, B.; Brereton, O.P.; Budgen, D.; Turner, M.; Bailey, J.; Linkman, S. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—A systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2009, 51, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kawashita, I.; Baptista, A.A.; Soares, D.S. Open Government Data Use by the Public Sector-an Overview of its Benefits, Barriers, Drivers, and Enablers. In Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Computer Science Conference, Kauai, HI, USA, 1 January 2022; p. 10. [Google Scholar]
- Kalton, G. Nonprobability Sampling. In Introduction to Survey Sampling; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chromy, J.R. Snowball Sampling. In Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods; Lavrakas, P., Ed.; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kawashita, I.; Baptista, A.A.; Soares, D.S. Use of Open Government Data in the Brazilian States and Federal District Public Administrations. Centro de Investigação Algoritmi. 2021. Available online: https://datarepositorium.uminho.pt/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.34622/datarepositorium/UY7MFA (accessed on 23 December 2021).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).