How to Be Open About Spending: Innovating in Public Sector Reporting in the Information Age

  • A. S. C. FaberEmail author
  • G. T. Budding
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 724)


The field of public sector reporting is moving from vertical to horizontal accountability: from hierarchical relationships that mediate between public organisations and citizens to directly disclosing available information. IT developments play an important role in innovative forms of reporting that respond to the growing importance of horizontal accountability. This paper provides an overview of some of the most important initiatives on the plane of reporting innovations, such as and OpenSpending, as well as recent examples in the Netherlands. The examples underline the importance of horizontal accountability forms, as well as the significance of ‘horizontal integration’: the idea that systems are fully integrated across different functions. However, issues of interoperability, security, and information architecture persist, often pared with the lack of authority to coerce (cross-sectoral) reporting changes. The paper concludes with a discussion of how these initiatives can aid further improvement in public accountability. We argue that the new forms of reporting do not only influence the question how reporting is composed, but that they also affect what is reported and for whom the reporting is compiled.


Public accountability Public sector reporting ICT E-government Interoperability 


  1. 1.
    Roberts, J., Scapens, R.: Accounting systems and systems of accountability: understanding accounting practices in their organisational context. Account. Organ. Soc. 10(4), 443–456 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pollitt, C.: Managerialism Redux? Keynote Address, EIASM Conference, Edinburgh (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castells, M.: The Rise of the Network Society. Wiley, New York (2011). Cordella, A., Bonina, C.M.: A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: a theoretical reflection. Govern. Inform. Q. 29, 512–520 (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bovens, M.: Public accountability. In: Ferlie, E., et al. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, pp. 182–208. Oxford University Press (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dees, M.: External reporting by public-sector organisations identifying new topics with a bearing on accountability. ECA J. 6, 11–14 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Magnette, P.: Between parliamentary control and the rule of law: the political role of the Ombudsman in the European Union. J. Eur. Public Policy 10(5), 677–694 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, G.: Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis New Public Management, and the Neo-Weberian state. University Press, Oxford (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Willems, T., Van Dooren, W.: Coming to terms with accountability. Combining multiple forums and functions. Public Manage. Rev. 14(7), 1011–1036 (2012). Klijn, E.H., Koppenjan, J.F.M.: Accountable networks. In: Bovens, M., Goodin, R.E., Schillemans, T. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability, pp. 242–257. Oxford University Press (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schoute, M., Budding, G.T.: Stakeholders’ information needs, cost system design, and cost system effectiveness in Dutch Local Government. Financ. Accountability Manage. 33(1), 77–101 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    IPSASB: The conceptual framework for general purpose financial reporting by public sector entities. IFAC Report, October (2014). US GASB: Why Governmental Accounting and Financial Reporting Is – and Should Be – Different. White Paper (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carvalho, J.B.D.C., Gomes, P.S., Fernandes, M.J.: The main determinants of the use of the cost accounting system in Portuguese Local Government. Financ. Accountability Manage. 28(3), 306–334 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Leary, D.E., Armchair Auditors: Crowdsourcing analysis of government expenditures. J. Emerg. Technol. Account. 12, 71–91 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    GDS: (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  14. 14.
    Shadbolt, N., et al.: Linked open government data: lessons from Datagovuk. IEEE Comput. Soc. 27(3), 16–24 (2012)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Government Digital Service: Git Hub – main page (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  16. 16.
    Wainwright, O.: Direct and well-mannered’ government website named design of the year. The Guardian, 16 April 2013. Accessed 20 Oct 2017. Author unknown: Writing for Design/Writing for Websites & Digital Design, D&AD (2013). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  17. 17.
    Sarantis, D., Askounis, D.: Knowledge exploitation via ontology development in e-government project management. Int. J.Digital Soc. 1(4), 246–255 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Development Initiatives: Implementing IATI: practical proposals (2010). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  19. 19.
    Linders, D.: Towards open development: Leveraging open data to improve the planning and coordination of international aid. Govern. Inform. Q. 30(4), 426–434 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Development Initiatives (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    International Aid Transparency Initiative: IATI Data (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  22. 22.
    OpenSpending Community: About OpenSpending (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  23. 23.
    OpenSpending Team: OpenSpending platform update, Open Knowledge Blog (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017. OpenSpending Team: OpenSpending Documentation (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  24. 24.
    OpenSpending Team: What is the Open Fiscal Data Package? Open Knowledge Blog (2016). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  25. 25.
    Magure, S.: Can data deliver better government? Polit. Q. 82(4), 522–525 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    OpenSpending Team: OS Explorer (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  27. 27.
    Open State Foundation, Open Spending (2015). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  28. 28.
    Baars, D., et al.: Open Spending. Een kwalitatief verkennende dieptestudie naar de beoordeling en het gebruik van Open Spending door journalisten, ambtenaren en politici. Commissioned by Gemeente Amsterdam and Stichting Open State (2014)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Author unknown: Wat Doet De Poet? Web application, launched at the Accountability Hack, organised by the Dutch Supreme Audit Institution on 9 June (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  30. 30.
    Dutch Quality Institute Dutch Municipalities: Waar Staat Je Gemeente? Website (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  31. 31.
    Alliander. Jaarverslag (2017). Accessed 20 Oct 2017
  32. 32.
    Layne, K., Lee, J.: Developing fully functional E-government: a four stage model. Govern. Inform. Q. 18(2), 122–136 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Steccolini, I.: Is the annual report an accountability medium? An empirical investigation into Italian Local Governments. Finan. Accountability Manage. 20(3), 327–350 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Linker, P.-J.: Kordes-Trofee: prijs voor de beste publieke verantwoording. In: Dees, M., et al. (eds.) Externe verslaggeving van publieke organisaties, pp. 229–236. SDU, Den Haag (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business and EconomicsVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations