Open government data and access to public sector information is commonplace, yet little attention has focused on the essential roles and responsibilities in practice of the information and records management professionals, who enable public authorities to deliver open data to citizens. The article considers the perspectives of open government and information practitioners in England on the procedural and policy implications of open data, across local public authorities. Design/methodology/approach Using four case studies from different parts of the public sector in England (local government, higher education, National Health Service (NHS) and hospital trust), the research involved Masters level students in the data collection and analysis, alongside academics, thus enhancing the learning experience of students. Findings There was little consistency in the location of responsibility for open government data policy, the range of job roles involved, or the organizational structures, policy and guidance in place to deliver this function. While this may reflect the organizational differences and professional concerns, it makes it difficult to share best practice. Central government policy encourages public bodies to make their data available for re-use. However, local practice is very variable, and perhaps understandably responds more to local organizational strategic and resource priorities. A lack of common metadata standards for open data, different choices about which data to open, problems of data redundancy, inconsistency and data integrity and a wide variety of views on the corporate and public benefits of open data. Research limitations/implications The research is limited to England and to non-national public bodies and only draws data from a small number of case studies. Originality/value The research contributes to the debate about emerging issues around the complexities of open government data and its public benefits, contributing to the discussions around technology-enabled approaches to citizen engagement and governance. It offers new insights into the interaction between open data and public policy objectives, drawing on the experience of local public sectors in England.
Purpose -From 2009 to 2011, the International Records Management Trust conducted a research project called Aligning Records Management with ICT/E-government and Freedom of Information in East Africa, with funding from the International Development Research Centre. The research was concerned with the integration of records management components into ICT/e-government and freedom of information initiatives, which are priorities for the governments in East Africa. This paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach -The research focused on the governments of the member states of the East African Community; Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi. In each of these countries, research teams examined the level of records management functionality in new or planned court case management systems, where possible. Findings -The findings demonstrated how the lack of a national regulatory framework for records management, at the highest level, could affect the design and implementation of systems, at the lowest, technical level. Originality/value -This paper draws together the case studies prepared by the author from data collected by the national research teams, to provide an overview of the issues encountered in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, which were the member states of the original East African Community, and demonstrate the correlation between ICT and records policy integration and court case management system functionality.
As the European powers appeared to withdraw from their colonies, they often took with them records that were subsequently claimed by the governments of the newly independent countries. These records are post-colonial examples of displaced archives. In recent history, the problem of displaced archives has been approached as a legal problem, and this has produced relatively few resolutions to archival claims. This article approaches displaced archives from a new perspective, applying theories and concepts recently introduced into archival theory by Michelle Caswell, Anne Gilliland and Marika Cifor: affect, imagined records and impossible archival imaginaries, and radical empathy. This article will show that these concepts, which have been deployed to decolonise diverse aspects of archival work, could also help resolve a persistent international problem, which is both technical and geopolitical/ diplomatic. This article will argue that archival theory, as recently influenced by Caswell, Gilliland and Cifor, demands a significantly changed approach to archival displacement, even as it sometimes arrives at established positions on repatriation and access. This change involves opening up dialogues about displaced archives to considerations beyond the juridical or geopolitical, to form richer understandings of archival displacement and its effects on individuals and communities. The article challenges individual archivists to apply the concepts of affect, imagined records and impossible archival imaginaries, and radical empathy in their work with colonial records as a component of decolonial archival praxis, and finally proposes a critical theorisation of displaced archives.
Freedom of Information (FOI) regimes can only be effective if government records are managed well. This article sets out the findings of research conducted in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania to establish the level of alignment between those governments' FOI aspirations and their records management readiness for FOI. The article sets out a high-level regulatory framework for the effective management of government records in the ICT/e-government and FOI environments to highlight areas that could be addressed, in order to prepare for FOI in the three countries.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.