Tong-Yi Huang
ABSTRACT
This article uses the drafting process of Taiwan's open government initiatives as the case to explore the connections among different stakeholders in the Taiwan Open Government National Action Plan and also this plan's effect on linking government agencies and civil society. Documentary analysis and social network analysis are conducted to assess the different effects of the plan. Through documentary analysis, this article identified characteristics of the enacting process of the national action plan, underlining the importance of integrating open government initiatives with administrative strategies. Moreover, the results of social network analysis show there are multiple networks embedded in the whole stakeholder's network, which reflects it is crucial to building a network not only between government departments and civil organizations but also within government agencies. With the analytical lens of multiple stakeholders, this study could contribute to open government research and the practice of Open Government Partnership initiatives in the future.
- Brandon Brockmyer and Jonathan A. Fox. 2015. Assessing the Evidence: The Effectiveness and Impact of Governance-Oriented Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. Retrieved March 15, 2022 from https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2693379Google Scholar
- Alan Fowler and Kees Biekart. 2017. Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives for Sustainable Development Goals: The Importance of Interlocutors. Public Adm. Dev. 37, 2 (May 2017), 81–93. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1795Google ScholarCross Ref
- Markus Fraundorfer. 2017. The Open Government Partnership: Mere Smokescreen or New Paradigm? Globalizations 14, 4 (June 2017), 611–626. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2016.1236463Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Ramon Gil-Garcia, Mila Gasco-Hernandez, and Theresa A. Pardo. 2020. Beyond Transparency, Participation, and Collaboration? A Reflection on the Dimensions of Open Government. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 43, 3 (May 2020), 483–502. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1734726Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert A Hanneman and Mark Riddle. 2005. Introduction to social network methods. University of California, Riverside, CA.Google Scholar
- Teresa M. Harrison, Theresa A. Pardo, and Meghan Cook. 2012. Creating Open Government Ecosystems: A Research and Development Agenda. Future Internet 4, 4 (December 2012), 900–928. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/fi4040900Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hsini Huang, Calvin Zhou-Peng Liao, Hsin-Chung Liao, and Don-Yun Chen. 2020. Resisting by workarounds: Unraveling the barriers of implementing open government data policy. Gov. Inf. Q. 37, 4 (October 2020), 101495. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101495Google ScholarCross Ref
- Alex Ingrams, Suzanne Piotrowski, and Daniel Berliner. 2020. Learning from Our Mistakes: Public Management Reform and the Hope of Open Government. Perspect. Public Manag. Gov. 3, 4 (December 2020), 257–272. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvaa001Google Scholar
- Kimberley R. Isett, Ines A. Mergel, Kelly LeRoux, Pamela A. Mischen, and R. Karl Rethemeyer. 2011. Networks in Public Administration Scholarship: Understanding Where We Are and Where We Need to Go. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 21, suppl_1 (January 2011), i157–i173. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muq061Google Scholar
- Daniel Lathrop and Laurel Ruma. 2010. Open government: Collaboration, transparency, and participation in practice. O'Reilly, Sebastopol (California).Google Scholar
- Ministry of Economic Affairs. 2022. Taiwan Presidential Hackathon. Retrieved April 15, 2022 from https://presidential-hackathon.taiwan.gov.tw/en/international-track/Google Scholar
- Richard G Mulgan. 2014. Making open government work. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York.Google Scholar
- National Development Council. 2021. Taiwan Open Government National Action Plan 2021-2024. Retrieved March 20, 2022 from https://reurl.cc/k1Z2K3Google Scholar
- National Development Council. 2021. Open Government National Action Plan. Retrieved April 15, 2022 from https://www.ndc.gov.tw/en/Content_List.aspx?n=0DA7FCB068C7ECF5Google Scholar
- Rosemary O'Leary and Nidhi Vij. 2012. Collaborative Public Management: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going? Am. Rev. Public Adm. 42, 5 (September 2012), 507–522. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012445780Google Scholar
- Open Government Partnership. 2021. OGP at Ten: Toward Democratic Renewal. Retrieved April 2, 2022 from https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/OGP-at-Ten-Toward-Democratic-Renewal_single-page-print.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Open Government Partnership. 2021. OGP Vital Signs: 10 Years of Data in Review.Google Scholar
- Open Knowledge International. Open Data Index. Retrieved April 3, 2022 from http://2015.index.okfn.org/place/Google Scholar
- T. O'Reilly. 2010. Government as a platform. In Open government: Collaboration, transparency, and participation in practice, Daniel Lathrop and Laurel Ruma (eds.). O'Reilly Media, Sebastopol (California), 11–39.Google Scholar
- Chul Hyun Park and Koomin Kim. 2022. Exploring the Effects of the Adoption of the Open Government Partnership: A Cross-Country Panel Data Analysis. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 45, 2 (March 2022), 229–253. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2022.2042703Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chul Hyun Park, Justin Longo, and Erik W. Johnston. 2020. Exploring Non-State Stakeholder and Community-Led Open Governance: Beyond the Three Pillars of Open Government. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 43, 3 (May 2020), 587–612. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2019.1677253Google ScholarCross Ref
- Suzanne J. Piotrowski. 2017. The “Open Government Reform” Movement: The Case of the Open Government Partnership and U.S. Transparency Policies. Am. Rev. Public Adm. 47, 2 (February 2017), 155–171. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016676575Google Scholar
- Christopher Wilson. 2021. Multi-stakeholder initiatives, policy learning and institutionalization: the surprising failure of open government in Norway. Policy Stud. 42, 2 (March 2021), 173–192. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2019.1618808Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bernd W. Wirtz and Steven Birkmeyer. 2015. Open Government: Origin, Development, and Conceptual Perspectives. Int. J. Public Adm. 38, 5 (April 2015), 381–396. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.942735Google ScholarCross Ref
Recommendations
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 ...
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 ...
Open government and e-government: democratic challenges from a public value perspective
dg.o '11: Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging TimesWe 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-...
Comments