When transparency and collaboration collide: The USA Open Data program

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 62, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 2085-2094

  Peled, Alon ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA PERFORMANCE; DATA PROGRAM; DATA SHARING; FEDERAL AGENCY; INFORMATION MARKETPLACE;

DATA REDUCTION; USER INTERFACES; WORLD WIDE WEB;

TRANSPARENCY;

EID: 80054682146     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.21622     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Balla, S.J., &, Wright, J.R., (2001). Interest groups, advisory committees, and congressional control of the bureaucracy. American Journal of Political Science, 45 (4), 799-812.
2. Bawn, K., (1995). Political control versus expertise: Congressional choices about administrative procedures. American Political Science Review, 89 (1), 62-73.
3. Coglianese, C., (2009). The transparency president? The Obama administration and open government. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 22 (4), 529-544.
4. Danziger, J.N., Dutton, W.H., Kling, R., &, Kraemer, K.L., (1982). Computers and politics: High technology in American local governments. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
5. Danziger, J.N., &, Kraemer, K.L., (1986). People and computers. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
6. Data.gov. (2010). Open government directive agency datasets. Retrieved from
7. Dunlop, C., &, Kling, R., (1991). Computerization and controversy: Value conflicts and social choices. Boston, MA: Academic Press.
8. Dutton, W.H., &, Kraemer, K.L., (1977). Technology and urban management: The power payoffs of computing. Administration and Society, 9, 304-340.
9. The Economist. (2010a, February 25). The data deluge. 1-15. Retrieved from.
10. The Economist. (2010b, February 4). Of governments and geeks. Retrieved from.
11. Epstein, D., &, O'Halloran, S., (1999). Delegating powers: A transaction cost politics approach to policy making under separate powers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
12. European Climate Exchange. (2010). Emissions. Retrieved from.
13. European Union Emission Trading System. (2010). The European Union's Emissions Trading System in perspective. Retrieved from.
14. Hamilton, A., Madison, J., &, Jay, J., (1961). The Federalist Papers. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
15. Harper, J., (2010). Grading agencies' high-value data sets. Retrieved from
16. Hendler, C., (2009). FOIA after the Open Government Directive. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from.
17. Hendler, C., (2010). Report card: Obama's marks at Transparency U. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from.
18. Hilgartner, S., (2000). Science on stage: Expert advice as public drama. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19. Holder, E., (2009). Memorandum for heads of executive departments and agencies: The Freedom of Information Act. Retrieved from.
20. Huber, J.D., &, Shipan, C.R., (2002). Deliberate discretion: The institutional foundations of bureaucratic autonomy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
21. King, J.L., (1983). Centralized vs. decentralized computing: Organizational considerations and management options. ACM Computing Services, 14 (4), 319-345.
22. Kling, R., (1980). Social analyses of computing: Theoretical orientations in recent empirical research. Computing Surveys, 2 (4), 61-110.
23. Kling, R., (1983). Value conflicts in the deployment of computing applications: Cases in developed and developing countries. Telecommunications Policy, 7 (1), 12-34. (Pubitemid 13503383)
24. Kling, R., &, Iacono, S., (1984). The control of information systems development after implementation. Communications of the ACM, 27 (12), 1218-1226. (Pubitemid 15437376)
25. Kling, R., &, Iacono, S., (1989). The institutional character of computerized information systems. Office, Technology and People, 5 (1), 7-28.
26. Kling, R., &, Scacchi, W., (1982). The web of computing: Computer technology as social organization. Advances in Computers, 21, 1-90.
27. Kraemer, K.L., (1980). Computers, information, and power in local governments. In, A. Mowshowitz, (Ed.), Human choice and computers. Amsterdam, The Netherlnads: North Holland.
28. Kraemer, K.L., Dickhoven, S., Tierney, S.F., &, King, J.L., (1987). DataWars: The politics of modeling in federal policymaking. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
29. Kraemer, K.L., &, Dutton, W.H., (1979). The interests served by technological reform. Administration and Society, 11, 80-106.
30. Kraemer, K.L., Dutton, W.H., &, Northrop, A., (1982). The management of computer applications in local governments. Public Administration Review, 42, 234-243.
31. Kraemer, K.L., &, King, J.L., (1977). Computers and local governments: A review of research (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Praeger.
32. Kraemer, K.L., &, King, J.L., (1985). The dynamics of computing. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
33. Kraemer, K.L., &, King, J.L., (1986). Computing in public organizations. Public Administration Review, 46, 488-496.
34. Kraemer, K.L., &, King, J.L., (1987). Computers and constitutions: A helpful, harmful or harmless relationship ? Public Administration Review, 47 (1), 93-105.
35. Kraemer, K.L., &, Kling, R., (1985). The political character of computerization in service organizations: Citizens' interests or bureaucratic control. Computers and the Social Sciences, 1 (2), 77-89.
36. Krause, G.A., &, Douglas, J.W., (2005). Institutional design versus reputational effects on bureaucratic performance: Evidence from US government macroeconomic and fiscal projections. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15 (2).
37. Kundra, V., (2011). From data to apps: Putting government information to work for you. Retrieved from
38. Lakhani, K.R., Austin, R.D., &, Yi, Y., (2010). Data.gov (No. 9-610-075). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School.
39. Laudon, K.C., (1974). Computers and bureaucratic reform. New York, NY: Wiley.
40. Magnuson, S., (2009). Defense Department under pressure to share biometric data. National Defense.
41. Mahoney, J.D., (2000). The market for human tissue. Virginia Law Review, 86 (2), 163-223.
42. Mayer-Schönberger, V., &, Lazer, D., (2007). The governing of government information. In, V. Mayer-Schönberger, &, D. Lazer, (Eds.), Governance and information technology: From electronic government to information government (pp. 292-281). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. McCubbins, M.D., Noll, R.G., &, Weingast, B.R., (1987). Administrative procedures as instruments of political control. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 3 (2), 243-277.
44. McCubbins, M.D., Noll, R.G., &, Weingast, B.R., (1989). Structure and process, politics and policy: Administrative arrangements and the political control of agencies. Virginia Law Review, 75, 431-482.
45. McCubbins, M.D., &, Schwartz, T., (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28 (1), 165-179.
46. McDermott, P., (2010). Building open government. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 401-413.
47. Meier, K.J., &, Bohte, J., (2007). Politics and the bureaucracy: Policymaking in the fourth branch of government. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
48. Millar, L., (2011). Beth Noveck, Former U.S. Deputy CTO [Interview]. Asia Pacific FutureGov. Retrieved from
49. Moffitt, S.L., (2010). Promoting agency reputation through public advice: Advisory committee use in the FDA. Journal of Politics, 72 (3), 880-893.
50. Northrop, A., Kraemer, K.L., Dunkle, D., &, King, J.L., (1990). Payoffs from computerization: Lessons over time. Public Administration Review, 50 (5), 505-514.
51. Noveck, B.S., (2009). Wiki government: How technology can make government better, democracy stronger, and citizens more powerful. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
52. Noveck, B.S., (2011). Testimony of Dr. Beth S. Noveck before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics of the Canadian Parliament. Retrieved from
53. Office of Management and Budget. (2009). Open Government Directive. Retrieved from
54. Roberts, A., (2006). Blacked out: Government secrecy in the information age. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
55. Rourke, F.E., &, Edward, F., (1961). Secrecy and publicity: Dilemmas of democracy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
56. Schneider, A., &, Ingram, H., (1990). Behavioral assumptions of policy tools. Journal of Politics, 52 (2), 510-529.
57. Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina. (2006). A failure of initiative. Washington, DC: Author.
58. Snellen, I., (1994). ICT: A revolutionizing force in public administration ? Informatization and the Public Sector, 3, 283-304.
59. Stone, D.A., (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York, NY: Norton.
60. National Archives and Records Administration. (2006). Implications of recent Web technologies for NARA web guidance. Retrieved from
61. U.S. Department of Justice (1974). The Privacy Act of 1974. Retrieved from.
62. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (1991). Many federal agencies collect and disseminate information. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
63. U. S. Government Accountability Office. (2008). Demand for the Social Security Administration's electronic data exchanges is growing and presents future challenges. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
64. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2010a). Challenges in federal agencies' use of Web 2.0 technologies. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
65. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2010b). OMB's Dashboard has increased transparency and oversight, but improvements needed. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
66. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2011a). DOD Can Better conform to standards and share biometric information with federal agencies. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
67. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2011b). GRANTS.GOV additional action needed to address persistnt governance and funding challenges. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
68. U.S. Secretary of State, Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security, & Director of Central Intelligence. (2011). Memorandum of Understanding on the integration and use of screening information to protect against terrorism. Washington, DC. Retrieved from.
69. Wadhwa, V., (2011, June 22). The death of open government. The Washington Post. Retrieved from.
70. Weiss, J.A., &, Gruber, J.E., (1984). Using knowledge for control in fragmented policy arenas. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 3 (2), 225-247.
71. White, J.D., (2007). Managing information in the public sector. London, England: Sharp.
72. The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2009). President signs two executive orders and three memorandums [Press Release]. Retrieved from
73. Yackee, J.W., &, Yackee, S.W., (2006). A bias towards business? Assessing interest group influence on the US bureaucracy. Journal of Politics, 68 (01), 128-139. (Pubitemid 43448402)
74. Zegart, A.B., (2004). Blue ribbons, black boxes: Toward a better understanding of presidential commissions. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 34 (2), 366-393.