Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Empowering Communities and Improving Public Services Through Open Data: South African Local Government Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Governance Models for Creating Public Value in Open Data Initiatives

Part of the book series: Public Administration and Information Technology ((PAIT,volume 31))

Abstract

The concept of open data has rapidly permeated the design and implementation of local government systems. Coupled with appropriate requisite and appropriate Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), public services are delivered on open platforms and domains further opening up transparency and accountability. Embedded on Open Government Data and e-government, South Africa is pushing to mitigate corruption and inefficiency in its public delivery platforms, especially at the local government levels. Using extensive literature review exploring both scholarly sources, policy and strategy documents from both the public and private sector, this chapter aims to provide a deeper understanding of the role of open data by local municipalities in South Africa. It will briefly discuss the importance of open data to local government in order to benefit its community especially in the realm of contemporary public governance models, discuss ways of promoting citizen participation, and, most importantly, offer necessary aspects for municipal officials to consider before formalising transparency policies. It is intended to help local government officials take first steps in creating municipal transparency and openness policies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexopoulos, C., Zuiderwijk, A., Charapabidis, Y., Loukis, E., & Janssen, M. (2014). Designing a second generation of open data platforms: Integrating open data and social media. In M. Janssen, H. J. Scholl, M. A. Wimmer, & F. Bannister (Eds.), 13th international conference on electronic government (EGOV), Sep 2014, Dublin, Ireland (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, LNCS-8653) (pp. 230–241). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. Electronic Government. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44426-9_19. hal-01401747.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, T. B. (2009). E-government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information Economics and Policy, 21(3), 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagui, L., Sigwejo, A., & Bytheway, A. (2011). Public participation in government: Assessing m-participation in South Africa and Tanzania. In A. Koch & P. A. van Brakel (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on world wide web applications (pp. 5–26). Johannesburg: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2012). Digitizing government interactions with constituents: An historical review of E-government research in information systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(5), 363–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benyon, S. Sam Qaqamba Beynon on Twitter. Twitter. Accessed 30 June 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 264–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 6(1), 78–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Gorham, U., Jaeger, P., Sarin, L., & Choi, H. (2014). Big data, open government and e-government: Issues, policies and recommendations. Information Polity, 19(1/2), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, P. (2006). Transparency as a human right. In C. Hood & D. Heald (Eds.), Transparency: The key to better governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradshaw, P. (2014). Transparency opportunity: Holding power to account – or making power accountable? In N. Bowles, J. T. Hamilton, & D. Levy (Eds.), Transparency in politics and the media: Accountability and open government. London: I.B. Tauris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braunschwei, K., Eberius, J., Thiele, M., & Lehner, W. (2012). The state of open data: Limits of current open data platforms. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f567/00355734c88ecb04005b84eb80362e35803f.pdf (Accessed 18 March 2019).

  • Chigona, W., Beukes, D., Vally, J., & Tanner, M. (2009). Can mobile internet help prevent social exclusion in developing countries? The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 36(7), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, S. A., & Luna Reyes, L. F. (2012). Editorial – social media in government. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 441–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, A., & Francoli, M. (2014). What’s in a name? A comparison of “open government” definitions across Seven Open Government Partnership members. eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 6(1), 248–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, A., Morris, Z., & Nolte, E. (2012). What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: Results of a systematic scoping review. Health Expectations, 18, 153–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Criado, J. I., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2013). Government innovation through social media. Government Information Quarterly, 30, 319–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, T. (2010). Open data, democracy and public sector reform. A look at open government data use from data.gov.uk, from http://www.opendataimpacts.net/report/. Accessed 30 June 2018.

  • Davis, T., & Mintz, M. (2009). Design features for the social web: The architecture of Deme. In Proceedings of 8th international workshop on web-oriented software technologies-IWWOST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, S., Vidiasova, L., & Parkhimovich, O. (2016). Planning and designing open government data programs: An ecosystem approach. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwivedi, Y. K., Weerakkody, V., & Janssen, M. (2012). Moving towards maturity: Challenges to successful e-government implementation and diffusion. ACM SIGMIS Database, 42(4), 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emery, F. (1993). The agenda for the next wave. In M. Emery (Ed.), Participative design for participative democracy (pp. 30–39). Canberra: Centre for Continuing Education, The Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florin, D., & Dixon, J. (2004). Public involvement in health care. British Medical Journal, 328, 159–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A., Graham, M., & Weil, D. (2007). Full disclosure: The perils and promise of transparency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, T., & Sayogo, D. (2014). Transparency, participation and accountability practices in open government: A comparative study. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 513–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huijboom, N., & Van den Broek, T. (2011). Open data: An international comparison of strategies. European Journal of ePractice, 12(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2012). Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management, 29(4), 258–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madumo, O. S. (2012). The promotion of developmental local government to facilitate a developmental state. Administratio Publica, 20(3), 40–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margo, M. J. (2012). A review of social media use in E-government. Administrative Sciences, Administrative Sciences, 2(2), 148–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A. J. (2012). The do it yourself state. The future of participatory democracy. Information Polity, 17(3–4), 303–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A., Curtin, D., & Hillebrandt, M. (2012). Open government: Connecting vision and voice. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 10–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Netswera, F. G., & Kgalane, T. S. (2014). The underlying factors behind violent municipal service delivery protests in South Africa. Journal of Public Administration, 49, 261–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noveck, B. S. (2009). Wiki Government: How technology can make government better, democracy stronger, and citizens more powerful. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD, ISOC and UNESCO. (2013). The relationship between local content, internet development and access prices (OECD digital economy papers, no. 217). Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Open Government Partnership. http://www.opengovpartnership.org. Accesses 24 June 2018.

  • Republic of South Africa. (1996). Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. As adopted on 8 May 1996 and amended on 11 October 1996 by the Constitutional Assembly. Pretoria: Parliament of South Africa Republic of South Africa. http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/constitution/SAConstitutionweb-eng.pdf. Accessed 12 July 2018.

  • Republic of South Africa. (2000). Promotion of access to information act 2 of 2000. Pretoria: Parliament of South Africa, Republic of South Africa. http://www.dfa.gov.za/department/accessinfo_act.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2018.

  • Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Ramon Gil-Garcia, J. (2016). Toward an integrative assessment of open government: Proposing conceptual lenses and practical components. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 26(1–2), 170–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2015.1125190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shkabatur, J. (2013). Transparency with (out) accountability: Open government in the United States. Yale Law and Policy Review, 31(1), 79–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • South Africa. (1998). The Local Government Municipal Systems Act 117 of 1998. Pretoria: Government Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  • South Africa. (2011). The South African National Development Plan (NDP), (2030). Cape Town: Planning Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • South Africa. Local Development Plan 2030. https://www.gov.za/issues/national-development-plan-2030. Accesed 18 March 2019.

  • Srivastava, S. C. (2011). Is e-government providing the promised returns?: A value framework for assessing e-government impact. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(2), 107–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, S. C., & Teo, T. S. H. (2007). What facilitates e-government development? A cross-country analysis. Electronic Government, 4(4), 365–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strömbäck, J. (2005). In search of a standard: Four models of democracy and their normative implications for journalism. Journalism Studies, 6(3), 331–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T. S. H., Srivastava, S. C., & Jiang, L. (2009). Trust and electronic government success: An empirical study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, C. (1995). Local government: Government closest to the people. Pretoria: HSRC Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurston, A. (2013). Transparency can “break cycle of poor governance” in developing world. Guardian Professional. Retrieved at 19 December. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2013/mar/12/transparency-break-cycle-poor-governance.

  • Ubaldi, B. (2013). Open government data: Towards empirical analysis of open government data initiatives. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hoven, J. (2005). E-democracy, e-contestation and the monitorial citizen. Ethics and Information Technology, 7, 51–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Waldt, G. (2015). Unpublished draft UJ internal handbook. Local governance: Leading sustainable communities. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veljković, N., Bogdanović-Dinić, S., & Stoimenov, L. (2014). Benchmarking open government: An open data perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhulst, S., & Young, A. (2016). Open data impact, when demand and supply meet. Key findings of the open data impact case studies. Available at: http://odimpact.org/static/files/open-data-impact-key-findings.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2018.

  • Wijnhoven, F., Ehrenhard, M., & Kuhn, J. (2015). Open government objectives and participation motivations. Government Information Quarterly, 32, 30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Accessed 2 July 2018.

  • Zuiderwijk, A., & Janssen, M. (2014). Open data policies, their implementation and impact: A framework for comparison. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Johannesburg, School of Consumer Intelligence and Information Systems, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Stella Bvuma & Bwalya Kelvin Joseph

Authors
  1. Stella Bvuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bwalya Kelvin Joseph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bwalya Kelvin Joseph .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar

  2. University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Kelvin Joseph Bwalya

  3. The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA

    Christopher G. Reddick

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bvuma, S., Joseph, B.K. (2019). Empowering Communities and Improving Public Services Through Open Data: South African Local Government Perspective. In: Rodríguez Bolívar, M., Bwalya, K., Reddick, C. (eds) Governance Models for Creating Public Value in Open Data Initiatives. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14446-3_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation