Uncovering the Enablers, Benefits, Opportunities and Risks for Digital Open Government (DOG): Enablers, Benefits, Opportunities and Risks for DOG

Uncovering the Enablers, Benefits, Opportunities and Risks for Digital Open Government (DOG): Enablers, Benefits, Opportunities and Risks for DOG

Muhammad Naeem (University of Worcester, Worcester, UK)
DOI: 10.4018/IJPADA.2019070103
Article PDF Download
Open access articles are freely available for download


The systematic review approach has been used to collect, examine, interpret, and synthesize research regarding enablers, challenges, opportunities, risks, and the usefulness of open government. The current review adopted the meta-synthesis approach to conduct the systematic review on 61 selected research papers. The study has covered the enablers for such initiatives and how governments of various countries can achieve open government benefits like lower level of corruption, higher level of public awareness and education, high level of transparency, more democratic control, improve efficiency and effectiveness of public services, and improve public services. The author has extracted various risks and challenges that obstruct open government efforts from getting their full potential. The study is helpful for policymakers of those countries who are planning to implement an open government system in their countries. However, a cooperation bias is one of the most considerable limitations in research studies that are included in this systematic literature review.
Article Preview


Transparency, accountability, collaboration, and citizen participations are the fundamental parameters of DOG (Arcelus, 2012; Saxena & Muhammad, 2018; Lourenço et al., 2017). Therefore, DOG or open source data are received attraction and has become a very recent phenomenon. DOG is known as data sets that are derived from economics, tourism, transportation, geographical, industry, education and quality levels, public organizations performance and budgeting levels, energy science, traffic, health, food, climate, social work, weather, and technology (Davies, 2012; Saxena, 2018; Janssen et al., 2012). Janssen et al. (2012) have stated that significant total of public sector organizations has implemented DOG system but many organizations especially in developing and emerging countries are still unenthusiastic for DOG. Nam (2015) has indicated that adoption and implementation of DOG is not cheap and easy, but it is considered as resourceful innovation to establish systematic management for public services. According to researchers, limited literature is available that has been explored the enablers, barriers, opportunities, and benefits of DOG data especially in the context of Arab and developing countries (Saxena, 2017; Saxena, 2018). Previous studies have indicated that enablers, drivers, and barriers are usually varied organization to organization, culture to culture, and developed to developing countries (Barry & Bannister, 2014; Grimmelikhuijsen et al., 2013; Hielkema & Hongisto, 2013; Saxena, 2018; Susha et al., 2015). These studies have described the enablers, barriers, and drivers into four groups: managerial and organizational, environmental and institutional, regulatory and legal, and information technology. The process, procedures, policies, and laws of opening up data are recognized as incomplete and awkward for people, government, and other stakeholders (Evans & Campos, 2013; Fuentes-Enriquez & Rojas-Romero, 2013; Janssen et al., 2017). It is cumbersome because many government agencies are opened their data too simplistically, but designing an open database often requires change in processes, employee skills, culture, behavior, system, and organizational structure.

With the advent and rise of internet and information systems, government public services data is online available in order to reduce the level of corruption (Aslam et al., 2015; Aslam et al., 2016; Aslam et al., 2018). According to the European Commission Anti-Corruption Report in 2014, the European Union countries are facing 120-billion-euro loss (economic costs of corruption) per year. The core objective of this paper is to highlight the challenges, risks and benefits of DOG through the lens of existing studies conducted in different countries, public sector organizations, cultures, contexts, and regions. Most of the studies on DOG are conceptual based papers (Bertot et al., 2010; McDermott, 2010), informational technologies and system for capturing the benefits and power of open data (Charalabidis et al., 2011; Kalampokis et al., 2011), and elaborations of the empirical utilization of DOG data (Hausenblas, 2009; Napoli & Karaganis, 2010). Furthermore, researchers argued that they were able to identify only one systematic literature and meta-analysis study in the context of DOG (Wirtz & Birkmeyer, 2015). There are only very few studies available that are conducted on systematic literature review on DOG (Attard et al., 2015; Criado, 2018; De-Oliveira & Silveira, 2018; Safarov et al., 2017; Wirtz & Birkmeyer, 2015), and these are limited to DOG definition, intatives, uses, issues specifically to few western countries. None of the research study provides a brief analysis regarding the challenges, enablers, benefits, and opportunities that go beyond conceptual ideas, applications, global sketches, and individuals’ projects. To date, authors of this study did not find single study that comprehensively discussed the challenges, enablers, opportunities, and benefits of DOG in the context of western and non-western countries.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2021): Forthcoming, Available for Pre-Order
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2020)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2014)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing