gobernanza

The year 2021 is undoubtedly a crucial period for the definitive progress in a regulatory and institutional framework that will enable the promotion of data strategies at both national and European level. As regards the latter, as has been advanced through various media, the main initiative refers to the foreseeable approval of a new data governance framework already announced with the draft Regulation made public in November 2020. As can be seen in this outline, this regulation is set to become one of the cornerstones of European policy on open data.

As a basis for the proposal for a Regulation on data governance, an impact assessment has been carried out beforehand, which has considered various analytical criteria, in addition to assessing the cost-benefit ratio of each of the measures envisaged. Specifically, the impact assessment identified several regulatory options of varying intensity in relation to the four main challenges identified:

• Identifying mechanisms to improve the re-use of public sector data
• Promoting trust in intermediaries
• Facilitating the transfer of data for altruistic purposes
• Fostering horizontal aspects of governance.

The evaluation found that there are barriers related to difficulties in accessing data, mostly related to technical aspects and data quality, but other barriers are also highlighted, such as those related to denial of access or the setting of unfair or prohibitive conditions, both financial and otherwise.

Throughout the process of preparing the impact assessment, evidence has been gathered through different and complementary methodologies, such as case studies and workshops on the possible existence of third-party rights hindering re-use and on governance structures; market studies on the role of intermediaries; and legal analysis, in particular on altruism in the release of data.

The different regulatory options considered ranged from no general measures at all (although they could be considered in relation to specific sectoral areas or, where appropriate, by Member States), to high/low intensity regulatory measures, without ruling out simple coordination based on guidelines and recommendations.

What were the different regulatory options envisaged in each of the above areas and why have some been prioritised over others?

Mechanisms to improve the re-use of public sector data

As a low-intensity measure - finally chosen - it was envisaged that Member States should establish a one-stop shop that would allow re-users to contact public sector bodies and even offer them advice, in particular to facilitate the re-use of publicly owned data subject to third party rights under certain conditions. The more demanding option, which was discarded in the final proposal, was instead to oblige them to set up a single body with decision-making powers, although this would entail significant legal and institutional challenges and more rigidity.

Promoting trust in intermediaries

In this respect, the approach is to seek to strengthen the role of intermediaries in fostering reliable data exchange systems both in business-to-business (B2B) and consumer-to-business (C2B) scenarios. In particular, while the less intensive alternative focused on an EU-wide voluntary labelling/certification scheme for such intermediaries, the more demanding option would have been to make such schemes mandatory. The major difficulties relating to the lack of an appropriate industry forum for the development of such a model and the difficulties in setting neutrality criteria, as well as the risk of fragmentation, led the draft Regulation to incorporate the first of the alternatives.

Facilitating the transfer of data for altruistic purposes

In relation to this objective, the aim was to ensure the availability of more data for the common good by increasing trust in systems inspired by altruism in the provision of data. Thus, a choice was made between requiring States to establish voluntary certification schemes for the implementation of data altruism mechanisms and/or for the entities that offer them or, on the contrary, opting for a model based on the need to have an authorisation to carry out such activities. This authorisation, granted by a public authority in advance and valid in the rest of the Member States, would aim at verifying whether the requirements laid down by law are actually met. The latter alternative was finally chosen in order to strengthen confidence in such entities and arrangements.

Fostering horizontal aspects of governance

The draft Regulation proposes the creation of a formal group of experts - the so-called European Data Innovation Board - in charge of promoting the exchange of national practices and policies based on the information provided by the States themselves, as well as exercising advisory functions, facilitating standardisation and the improvement of interoperability, providing coherence to the proposed governance model as explained in the following image:

However, the creation of a body with its own legal personality was envisaged which, in addition to the above-mentioned functions, would assume the task of supervising the process of granting labels and certifications, as well as the authorisations granted by the Member States. This last alternative was rejected, among other reasons, due to the results of the cost/benefit analysis carried out from the point of view of economic efficiency.

Finally, the document itself envisages a mid-term review mechanism through which to check whether, four years after the entry into force of the Regulation's provisions -three in the case of the objective of strengthening confidence in data sharing- the measures adopted really meet the expected results in terms of a series of specific indicators for each of the objectives and solutions finally proposed. In short, this is an approach that takes on a singular relevance if we consider the dynamism that characterises the data economy, since the regulation proposed with the draft Regulation is destined to be one of the main tools in meeting the objectives formulated in the European Data Strategy.

Content prepared by Julián Valero, professor at the University of Murcia and Coordinator of the Research Group "Innovation, Law and Technology" (iDerTec).

Contents and points of view expressed in this publication are the exclusive responsibility of its author.

The final impact that can be obtained through an open data initiative will ultimately depend on multiple interrelated factors that will be present (or absent) in these initiatives. That is why the GovLab of New York University has analyzed these factors thanks to the study of the several use cases collected by their project about the open data impact throughout the world, even ellaborating a periodic table of the enabling elements of the impact.

These elements  have been finally classified into five main categories, reviewing the different sections below.

Definition of the problem and the associated data demand

Obtaining a better anticipated knowledge of the problems we wish to solve and the data demand needed to be solved  is a logical first step to obtain the desired impact. The elements that go into action in this category are:

• In-depth analysis of future users and optimization regarding their needs from the beginning of the project.

• Definition of causes and context, clearly distinguishing among the causes of the origin of the problems we intend to address and the simple symptoms caused by these same problems.

• Refinement through the decomposition of the problem in each one of the factors that define it.

• Definition of the benefits and objectives expected to be carry out the subsequent measurement of their degree of achievement.

• Audit of the data necessary to carry out the proposed value proposition and inventory of the data actually existing in this regard.

Capacity and civil and institutional culture

The lack of knowledge or of the minimum technological and management capacities could give rise to a barrier difficult to overcome when obtaining the expected impact. The elements that are part of this category include:

• The minimum elements of hardware and software that constitute the data infrastructures necessary to to provide access and enable their use.
• Human capital, public services and elements of civil society that constitute the essential public infrastructure to guarantee the availability of data in a healthy ecosystem.
• The level of digital literacy and the degree of internet penetration necessary to take advantage of the available data.
• Cultural or institutional barriers as regards openness that could act as a brake on the publication or expansion of open data.
• The existence of the necessary technical knowledge and skills to take advantage of the data.
• The feedback channels enabled when collecting the experiences of the users and final beneficiaries of the data.
• Availability of the necessary resources to guarantee the sustainability and availability in the long term of the data already shared.

Data gobernance 

The diversity among the different governance models regarding the publication standards and policies is another clearly differentiating variable when talking about impact. The elements that are part of this category include:

• Development of performance metrics that inform the decisions to be taken in the opening projects through the different iterations.
• Control of risks that could affect the privacy of the data or sensitive information to prevent unwanted disclosure. 
• Open data by default as a guiding principle of the existing strategy and policies to guarantee political commitment at the highest level.
• Free access to information and other policies that work as necessary pillars on which to build open data projects.
• Measures to ensure a minimum quality of the published data so they are sufficiently precise and updated to be able to take advantage of them.
• Authentic ability to respond to the changing reactions and needs of data users.

Collaboration with other ecosysten agents 

Collaborations with all types of organizations and individuals that are part of the data ecosystem play a fundamental role to face a successful open data process. The elements that are part of this category include:

• Establish close connections with data managers, both public and private, is a good strategy to address the gaps in the data with their help.
• Domain experts that provide the specific knowledge required when working in specific and well-defined sectors.
• Collaborations with other individuals and related organizations regarding the opening philosophy.

Risk management

An open data will always be exposed to a certain level of risks that must be identified and adequately addressed. The elements that are part of this category include:

• Privacy problems for which it will be necessary to guarantee the data anonymization against the different techniques of individual identification.
• Non-intrusive data security techniques to protect sensitive information against unwanted exposure but without compromising the opening up of other data.
• Problems in decision making due to being based on incorrect or incomplete information.
• Deepening the power asymmetry in the face of the inability to access data by some marginalized groups for the benefit of a privileged minority.
• Use of open data as a simple image clearing instead of pursuing a true transformative change.

Although there are obviously other contextual variables that will affect our chances of success in each specific case, working on the elements previously seen will undoubtedly have a positive effect on the final impact of our open data initiatives.

Nowadays, there is a reflection that goes through the global open data community about whether the current open data model is already exhausted, making necessary to go further with a new generation of openness. According to David Eaves, one of the greatest achievements in this first era of data opening has been that governments realize not only the growing importance of open data, but also the shortcomings they have in terms of correct data management in general. As was also discussed in the conclusions of the last International Open Data Conference, it is time to address data problem in a more general way and face the debate and reform related to data governance processes within the administration in general, finally achieving that the opening was an integral part of these processes.

The last Open Data Barometer addresses precisely the issue of data as a government way, where data opening cannot be considered just another project within the administration, but must be an integral part of it. For this goal, it will be necessary to carry out changes not only in data management policies, but also in the internal structures of the administration and the decision mechanisms. In short, we are talking about going beyond the pure formulation of policies, changing everyday habits. It will also be very important to know how to take advantage of the appropriate relevant moments that can help us in this change, such as the digital transformation that many administrations are currently carrying out. To that effect, the last Barometer edition suggest to act in three key areas:

1) Opening by default - Although it must be taken as a long-term objective, it also requires a series of continuous and very concrete actions to achieve cultural and structural change, including: Resources; staff; leadership; budget; political support; implementation strategies and schedules; and policies and laws that provide the necessary legal framework to guarantee access to information and data in an appropriate manner and, at the same time, ensure privacy protection.

For example, Japan has been planning its government's default opening for a decade through its global government open data strategy, which has been designed to make data into a valuable asset for citizens. They also have a high level body for internal promotion of data opening promotion that regularly reports on progress at both national and local levels.

2) Data Infrastructures - It is necessary to carry out a technical and organizational transformation to modify the work habits in the administration and thus achieve a sustainable data opening. Nowadays, data quality is still low and there is a lot of data missing, and use licenses are still a problem, although, in general, they have been improved in the formats. The main barrier to improve in this area is that, in general, the open data management is still practically “handmade”, made by small informal groups (or open data champions) that feed ad-hoc platforms for data cataloguing, instead of driving a complete transformation of data management tools and training for all those public servants who work with them.

For example, the UK digital services standard is a set of 18 criteria that public administration should follow in order to create effective services. Among these principles, which are applicable to the entire administration, there are several principles that also encourage information opening and exchange through the use of open standards and common platforms.

3) Publish with a purpose - The final success of any open data initiative must be measured in terms of its contribution to improving the lives of people and the whole society. However, nowadays it is still very difficult to find examples of collaboration between the government and civil society when facing data opening. There are some working groups but normally only involve experts in the field and, over time, they usually disappeared too.

For example, through the alliance for open contracting, a series of working groups have been established with participants not only from the government, but also from all sectors of society. The purpose of this method is to facilitate the publication of data on public procurement. That way, data are more useful for companies and citizens, also improving procurement processes themselves, efficiency and transparency. The initiative is having great success because of its proven usefulness. More than 40 countries have already adopted (or formally committed to) the standard.

Therefore, after a decade of open data, it is time to end this first generation of initiatives and give way to new and renewed actions that address the opening of data as an integral part of daily activity in the whole administration, taking the necessary measures for its sustainability over time.

Content prepared by Carlos Iglesias, Open data Researcher and consultan, World Wide Web Foundation.

Contents and points of view expressed in this publication are the exclusive responsibility of its author.

Spain is one of the most prominent countries in the opening of public sector data, according to the Open Data Maturity in Europe 2017 report - remember that our country ranks second in the ranking that measures the maturity and availability of open data in Europe, just behind Ireland. Although this is very positive, fruit of hard work, we must not forget that there is still a lot of public information that can be made available to citizens and reusers. But many organizations do not know how to do it.

For this reason, the  Federation of Municipalities and Provinces of Spain (FEMP) has published "Open data: strategic guide for its implementation and minimum data sets to be published". This guide seeks to be "the work plan regarding data opening and its reuse for all local administrations". That is, it provides a series of recommendations and guidelines for entities to publish their data in a useful and efficient way, facilitating access to information and its reuse.

Specifically, the report includes information on the following fundamental aspects when addressing an open data initiative:

• The legal framework, both European and Spanish, and the different local ordinances.
• The model map of an open data portal. The report details the basic components that a portal must have - such as the catalog, a simple search engine or the conditions of use - and those that are recommended - such as the SPARQL Service or the visualization tools-.
• The model of governance and roles, based on the Open Government principle. The text defines the functions of the different parties involved in the initiative and gives advice to fight resistance to change.
• The data opening model, from the identification of the datasets to be opened, to the portal publication, its dissemination and maintenance.
• The technological plan, that analyzes the different tools, platforms, formats and standards to be used, based on factors such as interoperability and security.
• The measurement systems that allow to determine if the offered data respond to the needs of the users.
• The training and dissemination plan¸ to identify the main characteristics of the professionals who should manage the portal and the profiles of users who will use it.
• A series of basic concepts that we do not always know how to differentiate.

This guide has been prepared by the Open Data Group of the Network of Local Entities for Transparency and Citizen Participation of the Federation, made up of local entities, universities, the ASEDIE association, freelancers, entrepreneurs, companies and institutions such as Red.es. The work of this group did not end with the publication of this guide, but continues to promote open data, with activities such as the identification of new data sets that allow homogenizing the publication of open data and facilitate its management. These datasets are shown in the following figure.

Tus Datos, Mis Datos, Nuestros Datos meeting will be held next Wednesday, February 14, in the Auditorium of Medialab Prado, Madrid, from 9:30 am to 2:00 pm. Organized by Iniciativa Open Data, the event will cover the massive use of data in today's society, from different perspectives.

The event will begin with an open day session where attendees - prior registration - can visit three thematic spaces. In the first one, some national data catalog novelties (datos.gob.es) will be exposed, including information about which datasets are most used by citizens. Subsequently, Adolfo Antón, responsible for Datalab, will dedicate the second thematic space to address the key aspects for open data reuse. The third and last thematic space will be aimed at presenting the importance of data to move the city. This third space will be led by Ángeles Navarro of OpenDataSoft.

The second part of the meeting will be the Seminar Data, aimed at data managers of the Public Administration, open data professionals and digital rights and/or transparency experts. Given the target audience, access to this event will be invitation-only; although a score of places will be opened to the public the day before. The data seminar consists of a speech marathon where seven different profiles will present 7 miradas a los datos (7 looks at the data), a debate to discuss its importance, ownerhip, legal framework and opportunities for entrepreneurs and citizens, among others.

Then, there will be a round table discussion, focused on the socio-economic potential of open data, as well as the right to privacy and value generation at local level. This space will have the assistance of Juan Tomás García, from OpenSistemas, Borja Adsuara, digital strategy, public and regulatory affairs consultant, Helen Darbishire, from Access Info Europe and Elisa de la Nuez, from the Fundación ¿Hay derecho?, four experts to discuss open data as a wealth generator.

Finally, the day will end with a debate, with more than twenty renowned experts in data field. Participants will share their knowledge to develop a rights commandments based on institutional framework, in order to take advantage of data value in society.

This event´s aim is to promote open data knowledge, reuse and training among the citizens, while supporting entrepreneurial projects. An open space to reflect on governance, digital rights and data use in society to, in subsequent days, implement the conclusions to general public.

For more information, visit www.nuestrosdatos.es