The New Ambiguity of 'Open Government'
The New Ambiguity of 'Open Government'
复制标题
“开放政府”的新模糊性
DOI：
10.2139/ssrn.2012489
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
9.8
通讯作者：
D. G. Robinson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Harlan Yu;Harlan Yu;Harlan Yu;D. G. Robinson
“开放政府”曾经带有很强的政治优势：它指的是政治敏感的政府信息披露。该短语首次使用于 20 世纪 50 年代，当时是在《信息自由法案》通过的辩论中。但在过去的几年里，这种传统含义已经模糊，并转向了技术。开放技术涉及通过互联网共享数据，各种政府都可以出于各种原因使用它们。最近的公共政策已经将“开放政府”的标签延伸到任何公共部门对这些技术的使用。因此，“开放政府数据”可能是指使政府整体更加开放（即对公众更加负责）的数据，但也可能同样指易于重复使用的政治中立的公共部门披露的数据，但这可能与公共问责制无关。今天，如果一个政权建立了正确类型的网站，它就可以称自己是“开放的”——即使它没有变得更加负责任。这种词汇的转变使得政策制定者和活动人士更难阐明明确的优先事项并提出令人信服的要求。本文为各方参与者提出了一种更有用的方式来构建辩论：我们将开放政府的政治与开放数据的技术分开。技术可以使公共信息更具适应性，使第三方能够在公民生活的许多方面以令人兴奋的新方式做出贡献。但技术的进步并不能解决关于公民生活的最佳优先事项的争论，政府服务的增强也不能取代公共责任。
“Open government” used to carry a hard political edge: it referred to politically sensitive disclosures of government information. The phrase was first used in the 1950s, in the debates leading up to passage of the Freedom of Information Act. But over the last few years, that traditional meaning has blurred, and has shifted toward technology. Open technologies involve sharing data over the Internet, and all kinds of governments can use them, for all kinds of reasons. Recent public policies have stretched the label “open government” to reach any public sector use of these technologies. Thus, “open government data” might refer to data that makes the government as a whole more open (that is, more accountable to the public), but might equally well refer to politically neutral public sector disclosures that are easy to reuse, but that may have nothing to do with public accountability. Today a regime can call itself “open” if it builds the right kind of web site — even if it does not become more accountable. This shift in vocabulary makes it harder for policymakers and activists to articulate clear priorities and make cogent demands.This essay proposes a more useful way for participants on all sides to frame the debate: We separate the politics of open government from the technologies of open data. Technology can make public information more adaptable, empowering third parties to contribute in exciting new ways across many aspects of civic life. But technological enhancements will not resolve debates about the best priorities for civic life, and enhancements to government services are no substitute for public accountability.