3. Risks related to governance issues
Sébastien Martin et al.
Opening data is the result of a political commitment. It raises risks related to the objectives and the sustainability of the initiative.
3.1 Open data vs. open government: A misunderstanding
Yu and Robinson( Yu, 2012) highlight a misunderstanding caused by the confusion between Open Government and Open Data, which are motivated by different objectives. This leads to consider Open Data as a technical issue, whereas it is not sufficient to engage in a process of Open Government. An Open Government process should seek transparency and a profound change in the way in which public bodies operate. They grounded mostly their analysis on the first project of the Obama administration in 2009. This risk concerns European initiatives to various extents. In Rennes, the concept of Open Government is not even mentioned; the initiative aims to create innovative services for citizens and to generate economic value from data, while strengthening the attractiveness of the city and the region. In Berlin however, Open Government is one of the stated objectives, of the Open Data initiative 5.
3.2 Reluctance of civil servants
In some cases, Open Data is perceived as a threat by civil servants. The increased control of citizens may lead to protests against public actions, based on an adequate or inadequate interpretation of data which is often de‐contextualized. This fear can generate hostile attitudes and finally a reluctance of civil servants to take an active part in the data opening process. In order to overcome this risk, certain actors have engaged in the early mobilization of internal and external stakeholders( e. g., Kéolis in Rennes) and of civil society organizations in order to prevent potential conflicts.
3.3 Inconsistency of public policies
A lack of perseverance in political behaviors can also put the initiative at risk: re‐users need to be confident that the Open Data policy will be sustainable and that data sources have a certain level of stability and are maintained over time. If Open Data remains the project of a specific team, then it can be questioned as soon as the political configuration changes. However re‐users can react heavily to any signal from the authorities. When it was discussed to include Etalab( in charge of the French Open Data platform 6) in a wider agency, many stakeholders expressed concerns about the willingness of the authorities to continue the Open Data policy. If Open Data is rooted enough in the administrative culture and operations, if it is supported by a cultural shift in public administrations( Davies, 2010), then it is possible to decrease the risks.
3.4 The relevant administrative level
Each local authority makes diverse choices regarding reuse conditions and formats for instance and opens datasets which are best suited to its context. They raise a risk of fragmentation of the initiative at the expense of the potential reuse of data released beyond the local territory.
A major challenge is to find a balance between state intervention that should ensure the consistency of the released datasets and local responsibilities. However, the coordination of efforts at European level( e. g., the European Thematic Network on Legal Aspects of Public Sector Information 7) and interoperability initiatives( e. g., SEMIC / JoinUp project) can help overcome the fragmentation of projects in Europe.
3.5 The lack of dialogue between data providers and re‐users
Another set of risks relates to the relationships between providers and end or intermediate users, including the lack of dialogue with the users, the lack of information about the updates of already opened datasets, and the lack of information about the future datasets to be opened.
5 « Open Data ist ein wichtiger Baustein des Open Government für eine transparente und bürgernahe Verwaltung. » http:// daten. berlin. de 6 http:// www. e talab. gouv. fr / accessed January 20 2012 7 The European Thematic Network on Legal Aspects of Public Sector Information
303