Sébastien Martin et al.
benefits of Open Data, without the ambition of being exhaustive, we propose prevention measures and contingency actions which can be taken.
However, while Open Data is often considered at the level of general public policies, we note that not all types of data raise the same risks and opportunities. The sale of certain types of datasets is potentially very profitable, whereas others do not have existing markets. Rennes has to a large extent focused on geographic data, while Berlin has opened many economic datasets. The services developed based on the datasets can therefore be of very different nature, making all analyses on costs and benefits very difficult to apply across cases.
The analysis in terms of return on investment is very different according to the type of data. However, specific actions, such as the definition of complete and standardized metadata can enhance the potential for reuse of datasets and therefore increase the return on investment, whichever the type of data that is considered.
All the same, different types of actors may perceive risks in a different way, due in particular to their local context. Engaging in a risk management framework tailored to the specific context of data providers can help considering Open Data beyond the traditional barriers highlighted by opponents. Most importantly, it demonstrates the need to consider the deployment of an Open Data initiative as a long term process whose sustainability can be improved through the evolution of all stakeholders: users and re‐users through the enhancement of skills and the creation of efficient associations; data creators through the prediction and selection of formats necessary to enhance the reuse of data and the release of multiple data formats; finally intermediary platforms such as national aggregators which can help overcome risks related to the fragmentation of datasets, in technical, semantic, as well as legal terms.
Future work will be dedicated to the study of the different types of datasets and services developed and the way in which it is possible to optimize the return on investment of Open Data initiatives by selecting relevant datasets and understanding the process by which successful services can be built on top of those datasets.
References
Benjamin, S., Bhuvaneswari, R., Rajan, P.( 2007)“ Bhoomi:' E – governance ', or, an anti – politics machine necessary to globalize Bangalore?”, CASUM – m Working Paper. Both, W. & Schieferdecker, I.( 2012) Berliner Open Data‐Strategie, Fraunhofer Verlag. Chignard, S.( 2012) Open Data: comprendre l’ ouverture des données publiques. FYP. Davies, T.( 2010)“ Open Data, democracy and public sector reform”. Available at: http:// www. opendataimpacts. net / report / wp‐content / uploads / 2010 / 08 / How‐is‐open‐government‐data‐being‐usedin‐practice. pdf
Davies, T. & Bawa, Z.( 2012)“ The Promises and Perils of Open Government Data( OGD)”. The Journal of Community Informatics. Available at: http:// ci‐journal. net / index. php / ciej / article / view / 929 / 926
Deloitte.( 2 12) Open Data driving growth, ingenuity and innovation. Deloitte analytics paper. Available at: http:// www. deloitte. com / assets / Dcom‐ UnitedKingdom / Local % 20Assets / Documents / Market % 20insights / Deloitte % 20Analytics / uk‐insights‐deloitteanalytics‐open‐data‐june‐2012. pdf
Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P. & Littleboy, D., 2004.“ Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e‐Government”. International Journal of Public Sector Management Available at: http:// www. emeraldinsight. com / journals. htm? articleid = 868029 & show = abstract
Houghton, J., 2011. Costs and benefits of data provision. Melborne: Centre for Strategic Economic Studies( Victoria University) Available at: https:// www. oerknowledgecloud. com / sites / oerknowledgecloud. com / files / houghton‐costbenefit‐study. pdf
Janssen, M., 2012.“ Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government”. Information Systems Management.
Klessmann, J.; Denker, P.; Schieferdecker, I.; Schulz, S., 2012. Open Government data Deutschland. Eine Studie zu Open Government in Deutschland im Auftrag des Bundesministerium des Innern. Berlin: Bundesministerium des Innern( Germany).
Pasquier, M. & Villeneuve, J., 2007.“ Organizational barriers to transparency a typology and analysis of organizational behaviour tending to prevent or restrict access to information”. International Review of Administrative Science.
Uhlir, P. F., 2009. The Socioeconomic Effects of Public Sector Information on Digital Networks: Toward a Better Understanding of Different Access and Reuse Policies. OECD.
Yu, H. & Robinson, D., 2012.“ The New Ambiguity of Open Government”. Princeton CITP / Yale ISP Working Paper. Available at: http:// papers. ssrn. com / sol3 / papers. cfm? abstract _ id = 2012489 &
309