Utilization of open government data: A systematic literature review of types, conditions, effects and users

Abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the literature on the types, effects, conditions and user of Open Government Data (OGD). The review analyses 101 academic studies about OGD which discuss at least one of the four factors of OGD utilization: the different types of utilization, the effects of utilization, the key conditions, and the different users. Our analysis shows that the majority of studies focus on the OGD provisions while assuming, but not empirically testing, various forms of utilization. The paper synthesizes the hypothesized relations in a multi-dimensional framework of OGD utilization. Based on the framework we suggest four future directions for research: 1) investigate the link between type of utilization and type of users (e.g. journalists, citizens) 2) investigate the link between type of user and type of effect (e.g. societal, economic and good governance benefits) 3) investigate the conditions that moderate OGD effects (e.g. policy, data quality) and 4) establishing a causal link between utilization and OGD outcomes.

Full text

1
CITATION INFORMATION:
Safarov. I., S.G. Grimmelikhuijsen, and A.J. Meijer. 2017. Utilization of
open government data: A systematic literature review of types,
conditions, effects and users. Information Polity DOI: 10.3233/IP-160014
Utilization of Open Government Data
A Systematic Literature Review of types, conditions, effects and users
Igbal Safarov, Albert Meijer and Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen
Igbal Safarov (corresponding author) is a PhD researcher at the Utrecht School of
Governance in the Netherlands. His research focuses on open data, open government data
and data-driven social innovations.
Albert Meijer is a Professor of Public Innovation at the Utrecht School of Governance in the
Netherlands. His research focuses on smart cities, government transparency, coproduction in
the public sector and public innovation.
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen is assistant professor at the Utrecht School of Governance in the
Netherlands. His research interests include, public sector transparency, citizen attitudes,
experimental methods and behavioral public administration.
Utrecht University | Utrecht School of Governance
Bijlhouwerstraat 6, 3511 ZC Utrecht, The Netherlands

2
Utilization of Open Government Data
A Systematic Literature Review of types, conditions, effects and users
ABSTRACT: This paper presents a comprehensive overview of the literature on the types,
effects, conditions and user of Open Government Data (OGD). The review analyses 101
academic studies about OGD which discuss at least one of the four factors of OGD utilization:
the different types of utilization, the effects of utilization, the key conditions, and the
different users. Our analysis shows that the majority of studies focus on the OGD provisions
while assuming, but not empirically testing, various forms of utilization. The paper
synthesizes the hypothesized relations in a multi-dimensional framework of OGD utilization.
Based on the framework we suggest four future directions for research: 1) investigate the
link between type of utilization and type of users (e.g. journalists, citizens) 2) investigate the
link between type of user and type of effect (e.g. societal, economic and good governance
benefits) 3) investigate the conditions that moderate OGD effects (e.g. policy, data quality)
and 4) establishing a causal link between utilization and OGD outcomes.
Keywords: open data, open government data, utilization, effects, users, conditions
1. Introduction
Open government data has attracted much attention in recent years, becoming part of the
everyday lexicon of transparency activists, NGOs, and public officials. An increasing number
of academic studies focus on Open Government Data (OGD) initiatives and policy-making in
order to explain differences in OGD provisions among various government organizations [1]–
[3]. Indeed, there has been considerable scholarly attention devoted to OGD and its
provision by governments [4].
However, numerous OGD studies highlighted that a key problem of OGD lies not so much in
its disclosure, but in its usage, and – more precisely – the lack of OGD use [5]–[9]. In recent
years, many scholars have therefore sought to understand what determines OGD usage and
what conditions are necessary [3], [10], [11]. As a result of this surge in academic attention
on OGD usage, a systematic and comprehensive overview of what we know about OGD
utilization is lacking.
There have been two recent systematic literature reviews on OGD. Attard, Orlandi, Scerri, &
Auer [4] aim to assess OGD initiatives and describe the life-cycle of OGD. Attard et al. [4]
focus predominantly on the provision of public data, thus focusing on the supply side of
OGD. Hossain, Dwivedi, & Rana [12] conducted a comprehensive systematic review about
the insights from extant studies and provide a research agenda for future studies. This study
presents the classification of context, perspectives, research methods, benefits and barriers
of open data and information about publications.

3
Both literature reviews provide important insights about the current state-of-the-art in OGD
research. However, these studies have a broad aim and do not specifically focus on the
utilization of OGD. As we noted, the latter is particularly important because in practice OGD
is barely used and a better understanding is needed to improve this.
Another study, while it is not a pure systematic review, is targeted to provide a taxonomy of
OGD research areas [13]. This study provides 35 research areas of OGD including the
summary of research literature and research objectives. Charalabidis et al. [13] highlight the
importance and relevance of OGD usage and value as a research area which is very
supportive for our study. Comparing the mentioned reviews, our study focuses only the
papers about the public open data specifically utilization of OGD.
We will discuss the literature in four broad categories: the types of OGD utilization, the
subsequent effects, the contextual conditions moderating these effects, and the user groups
of OGD
1
. These four categories were chosen because it aligns with an often made distinction
in technology acceptance models, which have been widely used and tested (e.g. [14], [15]).
Although these categories are predetermined, the content of these categories is not and will
emerge from the literature itself. Thus the objective of this paper is to present a
comprehensive overview of what the academic literature has found on 1) the types of OGD
utilization 2) effects of OGD usage 3) condition that moderate these effects and 4) who are
identified as users.
The type of utilization covers the various ways in which practitioners employ OGD. For
instance, open data can be utilized as a research tool [16], in hackathons [17], [18], or in data
analytics [8], [19]. It is important to analyze these types according to how they influence the
effects of OGD. The effects constitute the second part of our review. OGD has the potential
to contribute to an array of (positive) outcomes, for example, transparency [20],
accountability [21], or as a source of innovation [22]–[24]. The third topic in the review is the
moderating conditions. For instance, research has indicated that the potential impact of OGD
usage may be moderated by various conditions, such as low data quality [25], [26] or legal
barriers [27], [28]. The fourth and final factor that we take into account is the users. Many
studies have highlighted users’ roles and participation in the OGD value-extraction process,
defining different user groups, such as developers [28], citizens [29]–[31], activists, and
NGOs [32], [33].
The contribution of this systematic literature review is twofold. First, it provides an overview
of the current OGD research focusing on the utilisation of OGD. Second, our objective is to
synthesize the current body of knowledge by developing a multi-dimensional framework of
OGD utilization and use this framework as basis to present suggestions for future research.
1
This also means the systematic literature review will not include all literature on OGD, only the literature that
discusses various factors of OGD utilization.

4
This article presents a systematic analysis of both tested and hypothesized relations in order to
develop a multi-dimensional framework of OGD utilization. This framework opens up the black box of
OGD utilization by identifying various patterns of usage, user groups, contextual conditions, and
effects. The article begins by outlining our review methodology, after which we present the
descriptive results of the review in the descriptive analysis section. Descriptive analysis presents year
of publications and its dynamics, the countries that the articles dedicated, diversity of methodologies
and other descriptive aspects of selected studies. Next, we discuss thematic analysis in which each
factor of OGD utilization is handled and elements of factors are discussed. The review continues by
synthesizing findings into an OGD utilization framework and discussing avenues for further OGD
utilization research in the “Synthesis and discussion” section. Finally, we discuss conclusion and
research limitations at the end of the review.”
2. Methodology
In order to analyze the existing knowledge, we conducted a systematic literature review
based on the established procedures [34]–[36]. The design of the literature review consisted
of a systematic collection of articles for the review, a systematic analysis of these articles
and a systematic synthesis of these findings (see Figure 1 below).
Figure 1 General research design
Data collection. To explore the heterogeneous literature in the field of OGD, the following
bibliographic databases were searched:
 www.scopus.com – Scopus database;
 apps.webofknowledge.com – Web of Science database maintained by Thomson
Reuters;
 dl.acm.org – Association for Computing Machinery database;

5
 www.sciencedirect.com – ScienceDirect database maintained by Elsevier
2
.
Figure 2 Selected primary studies
The searching of the studies was conducted from 1st December, 2015 to 21st January, 2016.
Since the same article can be reached through various scientific databases, the majority of
selected studies (n=65) was retrieved from the first used database (Scopus). The terms
“open government data” and “open data” were used as keywords to search each database
in the title, abstract and keywords of articles. However, “open data” has not been used as a
separate search keyword to keep the search results in the frame of public or government
based open data.
Selection criteria. We attempted to reduce the risk of bias because of data (study) collection
by implementing clear exclusion and inclusion criteria. the following inclusion criteria were
used in our review.
1. We only considered the peer-reviewed articles that were written in English language.
2. Only open government data studies were included in the review thus we excluded studies
regarding open science data, open data from NGOs and international organizations.
3. We included studies that regarded one or more dimensions of utilization: types, effects,
conditions and users. Studies that regarded open government data in general, without
mentioning these dimensions were excluded.
The types of utilization refer to the use and re-use of OGD for a particular purpose, typically
as a field of study or practice. Effects refer to the potential results and outcomes of OGD
utilization from social, economic or good governance perspectives. Conditions refer to the
environmental features or aspects of overall OGD utilization functioning as technical, social
or political paradigms of public data usability. The fourth factor of OGD utilization is users,
which describe individuals or groups that use public data for achieving the targeted effects
and gaining value mostly in the form of product, advantage or practice. Each selected study
was added a data extraction form in Excel to summarize information about publication,
2
We carried out an additional search on Google Scholar to search for articles containing the keywords “open
government data”. The search results on “Google Scholar” were very similar to our primary search results or
did not meet the requirements of inclusion.

6
research method, research question, abstract and results, utilization, effects, conditions,
users, research domain and research country.
Data synthesis. Based on the data extraction form, main trends and elements were
determined for each factor of OGD utilization. All elements were grouped and classified
regarding their most common characteristics to understand better the overall picture of
OGD utilization. In the final stage, the factors, elements and their classification were
depicted on the unified OGD utilization framework including connections between factors.
3. Descriptive analysis
This study analyzes 101 academic articles about Open Government Data (OGD) in order to
identify what is known about different types of utilization, the effects of utilization, the key
conditions, and the different user groups. For the purposes of a systematic literature review,
we categorized studies based on the country where the study was conducted. The collected
literature shows that OGD-related studies are primarily conducted in developed countries.
Only a couple of studies are devoted to developing countries, such as Brazil, India, Chile,
Mexico, Russia, and Romania, and regions, such as the Middle East and Latin America. The
most researched countries are the Netherlands (12), the United States (11), and the United
Kingdom (6), which indicates that scholars from these countries contribute significantly to
the field of study. Several studies investigate and compare two or more countries, such as
Sweden and the Netherlands [22]; the European Union [1], [37]–[39]; the Netherlands and
Brazil [40]; the Netherlands and Greece [41]; and, Australia, Canada, France, New Zealand,
Singapore, the UK, and the US [2].
Figure 3 shows that there is a predominant focus on the USA and the Netherlands. This
means that findings on OGD utilization are mainly found in two countries with strongly
developed economies and longstanding democratic tradition. More research from a more
diverse set of countries is needed to see if current insights about OGD hold in different
institutional contexts.
Figure 3. Number of articles by country
Next, we analyzed the publication trends of open data over time. Figure 4 illustrates the
rapid increase of academic publications about OGD in the last five years. Remarkably, more

7
than one-third of selected studies were published in 2015 (39 articles), whereas no articles
were found from before 2010. This finding is in line with OGD’s rising popularity in public
policy following the declaration of OGD principles by advocates in 2008 [42] and the
publication of the first Open Government National Action Plan of the United States in 2011.
As governments began investing increasingly in open data infrastructure, funds to study
those investments seem to have followed. This dramatic increase also indicates the need for
a more systematic overview and research agenda.
Figure 4. Number of selected studies by year
Further evidence for the growing popularity of OGD is the distribution of studies published in
journals and presented at conferences. A breakdown of the relevant studies is provided in
Table 1. This table shows that OGD research is mainly published in journals related with e-
government and information science in general. Interestingly, a great deal of papers was
published in official conference proceedings and not in journals. This may be due to the
youngness of the field; it takes a relatively long time to get article published in journals.
Furthermore, we also found many thematic journals that published articles about OGD, such
as Journal of Public Transportation and Journal of Public Health Management and Practice,
etc., that publish OGD-related studies (Table 1). This implies that OGD research is quite
dispersed over various disciplines, such as public administration and information science and
that it is a nascent field with many publications in conference proceedings.
Table 1. Sources of studies
Name of journal
Number
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS) - Springer
14
Government Information Quarterly
11
International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
7
Information Polity
7
Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research
5
Social Science Computer Review
5
Hawaii International Conference on System Science
4
International Conference on Digital Government Research
3
The variety of publication outlets also resonates with the diversity of methodologies used to
study the topic. The majority of the studies are qualitative (76), while only 25 out of 101 are

8
quantitative. Four studies combined both qualitative and quantitative methods. Taking into
account that the studies used a broad range of methodologies, those were coded and
generalized in order to clarify and group standard methods. Thus, we found that the
selected studies mostly adopted case studies (54), desk research, which was primarily used
to investigate OGD portals (14), literature reviews (13), document analysis (12), surveys (12),
and interviews (7) to investigate the targeted areas. The imbalance between qualitative and
quantitative studies indicates that there may be room for more quantitative studies on OGD.
4. Thematic analysis
4.1. The types of utilization
We found 70 articles that discussed one or more types of OGD utilization. The reviewed
literature revealed that there are many types of utilization. Some types of utilization were
very broad, such as innovation and decision-making, while others were very specific, such as
creating new stories from data, informal settlement analysis, or climate change research.
Figure 5 lists the types of utilization that were mentioned in at least three different studies.
Figure 5. Number of articles on the types of utilization
Innovation. Figure 5 highlights innovation as the most prominent type of OGD utilization in
the selected studies. The literature mentions various types of innovation, such as business-
driven innovation for the purposes of generating economic value [24] and innovation
spurred by citizens to co-produce public services [21]. In addition, according to the
literature, a lack of public data sharing significantly decreases innovativeness, hinders
entrepreneurial incentives, and prevents the execution of many new business and Internet
start-up plans [43]. In this paper, we included “innovation” as a type of utilization rather
than as an effect of utilization. We acknowledge that, in some cases, innovation can be an
outcome or effect of OGD utilization, in this paper, innovation is seen as an intermediary
variable that generates a broader effect, such as economic gain or societal value. Therefore,
we consider using OGD for innovation as a type of utilization itself (using it for innovative
purposes) and not an effect, as we conceptualize effects more broadly.

9
Data analytics. Data analytics allow users to utilize released public data more productively—
for instance, to create visualizations that are important for discovering and understanding
complex datasets [44]. According to the literature, the development of big data analytics in
the public sector may offer opportunities for predictions and forecasting by combining and
analyzing government data [19], [28]. Furthermore, several studies investigate data analytics
as a tool for different fields of study, including utilizing transportation data for public
transportation services [8], conducting environmental impact analysis [45], and studying
early childhood development [46].
Decision-making. Quality of decision-making partly depends on available data, which is
rapidly transforming with the implementation of digital tools, such as big data and machine
learning. Power, Robinson, Rudd, & Reeson [47] argue that decision-making possibilities
have been improved through the wide variety of OGD available to key decision makers,
experts, and non-experts, including members of local communities. OGD can contribute to
decision-making processes in very diverse ways. It can improve participatory decision-
making [48] real-time transparency of decision-making [9] and enable data-driven decision-
making in the planning process [49].
Anti-corruption. Promoting anti-corruption and the effective use of public resources are seen
as dominant reasons for releasing public data. A lack of information can lead to corruption,
and OGD can be a powerful tool to increase awareness while reducing the misuse and waste
of economic resources due to corruption [11], [50]. . However, most of the released public
datasets on the OGD portals seem less relevant in terms of utilizing them for anti-corruption
purposes, which decreases opportunities to achieve OGD’s anti-corruption possibilities [41],
[51].
Smart city. Smart use of technologies is key for enabling urban populations and stakeholders
to participate in and collaborate on urban management to become a ‘smart city’ [37]. Bakici,
Almirall, & Wareham [52] argue that OGD is a main component of smart cities, which also
include smart districts, living labs, initiatives, electronic services, and additional
infrastructure that enable the dynamic generation of new ideas through the utilization of
released public data. Spatial open data infrastructure, which is a core type of open data for
smart cities, may improve urban management [53]. Furthermore Chakraborty, Wilson,
Sarraf, & Jana [49] suggest that a lack of reliable open urban data can negatively impact
urban planning and implementation.
New services. Service creation over OGD is mostly associated with innovations and smart
city. However, some new services cannot be considered innovative while those services are
new as an approach or a location. OGD also can be utilized to extend existing services,
increase number of functionalities and quality of services. Geographic information and
postcode data can be a resource for improving existing classic services [43]. Service creation
based on OGD is in the early stages of its development which Chan [54] notes that

10
competitions and increasing awareness are the important factors to extend the participation
of users.
Research. Planning and predicting the potential directions of OGD utilization, particularly in
the research areas are very difficult. OGD allows a researcher to combine his/her internally
collected data and public data in order to test and confirm new hypotheses [25]. OGD can be
utilized for various academic studies such as unemployment research combining UK election
data and non-government open data [25] for ecological research combining data on the
number of trees (OGD) and open street maps (non-government open data) [55] and many
other fields of research. Martin et al. [16] consider the researchers as a part of the open data
ecosystem and argue that there is less awareness of open data among researchers.
Hackathons/competitions. Hackathons and competitions are considered a type of utilization
to create value from released public data. Hackathons are events which focus on developers
and mostly other information technology related stakeholders to work in partnership on a
specific domain or project. Matheus et al. [17] emphasize the importance of contests and
hackathons to develop applications for social control, transparency and improvement of
public policies in healthcare, transportation, education and etc. Hackathons are also
suggested as a significant component of open innovation strategy to spur citizen
engagement, to seek new ideas and improve awareness for utilization of OGD [54]. While
civic hackathons have a positive impact on citizen participation, limited adoption of the
results may decrease their effect, thus pursuing and maintaining the outcomes are
important [18].
4.2. Effects of OGD utilization
We found 83 articles that considered one or more effects of OGD. According to the
literature, OGD utilization has diverse effects, mostly related to generating social and
economic value and achieving good governance. Thematic analysis of selected studies
revealed six prominent effects, which were determined to be so due their occurrence in at
least three studies:
Figure 6. Number of articles on effects
Figure 6 highlights the important difference between ‘estimated’ and ‘established’ effects.
Not all studies that discuss effects employ empirically verified approaches. In addition, some
articles are not intended to confirm or cannot empirically confirm a solid connection

11
between OGD utilization and the discussed effects. In this regard, the effects can be
classified either as established effects or estimated effects. If the study empirically proved
the effect of OGD, it is considered an ‘established effect’, while hypothetical consideration
and assumed effects are considered ‘estimated effects’. Among 83 articles that discuss one
or more effects of OGD utilization, 19 studies’ approaches to the effects were classified as
established, while 64 out of 83 studies were classified as estimated.
According to this distinction, only one-fifth of the selected articles indicated one or more
established effects of OGD utilization. Nevertheless, the majority of studies either do not
discuss OGD utilization effects at all, or they estimate the potential effects of OGD
utilization. As is clear from the reviewed literature, while OGD has gained extensive
popularity with the recent establishment of many public data portals, Empirical studies have
yet to fully validate the potential effects of OGD utilization. A total of 40 studies considered
transparency and accountability as effects of the release and the utilization of OGD.
Economic development and citizen participation are the next most mentioned effects of
OGD utilization.
Transparency and accountability. Transparency and accountability are the core expected
effects of all OGD initiatives, regardless of the scope, government organization, and type of
data. OGD can be considered an important component of so-called computer-mediated
transparency [56]. Releasing public data decreases information asymmetry and thus
increases transparency and accountability [57]. Moreover, the creation of modern tools
based on OGD [58] promotes the utilization of public data by civil society, which increases
transparency, accountability, and government efficiency by enabling citizens to collaborate
with the government to tackle threats against public interests [59]. However, increasing
transparency and accountability is not an immediate result of releasing public data. These
outcomes require the fulfillment of many preconditions. For instance, the data that is
released must be relevant, and data analytics skills and awareness must be increased.
Murillo [51] argues that although a moderate number of datasets relevant to achieving
transparency have been released, thus their contribution to openness is limited regarding to
provide relevant data.
Economic development. Generally, economic development is perceived as quality and
prosperity improvements realized by innovation, diminishing transaction costs and the
utilization of proficiencies toward realization of new goods and services which positions the
economy on a rising growth trend [60, p. 12]. A main driver for national governments’ to
release datasets is economic development [61]. Availability of public data creates
opportunity for citizens to conduct social control, suggest developments of public services
thus achieve local economic development [33]. The contribution of OGD to the economic
development is mostly related to the establishment of new business, [23] and using OGD for
anti-corruption purposes to reduce the economic loss, hence lead to social and economic
development [50]. Moreover, OGD may contribute to information markets, which

12
consequently enhance economic growth and efficiency [43]. However, several studies
highlight that open data utilization by private sector is in the initial stage of its development
and does not necessarily effect on the creation of economic value, thus economic outcome
is uncertain [22], [61].
Citizen participation. According to the UN World Public Sector Report 2008, the notion of
citizen participation, which strongly correlates with good governance, is the participation of
citizens in policymaking, including levels of service, budget, and adjusting government
programs toward community needs and building public support [62]. Openness is considered
a strong determinant for participation by citizens and other stakeholders which is
fundamental subject in the studies of public administration [63]. OGD initiatives and
utilization of public data can decrease the citizen participation barrier and encourage
political participation by providing indirect channels into government activities [27]. M.
Janssen et al. [64] discuss citizen participation and self-empowerment as one of the political
and social benefits of open public data. Achieving better results with citizen participation will
essentially be determined by the prerequisites, like specific abilities and skills of the citizens
[37] which is discussed more broadly as an utilization condition in the next section.
Public service development. New public services based on OGD either appears as an
innovation building new services or functional improvement of existing services. The
important contribution of OGD to the public services as regulations, procedures and
standards is a common subject in the literature, emphasizing its capability to foster the
quality of services. By means of information openness, government bodies are expected to
deliver more cohesive, precise and innovative services to the citizens [65]. To improve the
public administration and the outcomes, OGD can be utilized for public service development
creating synergy with citizen participation on policy and service creation [66]. New public
services based on OGD created by citizens increase cooperation between government and
community with real social innovation [52]. Public service development is discussed as an
estimated effect of OGD utilization in the literature with strong expectations by scholars for
improving quality and effectiveness of public services. However, public bodies less willingly
support OGD initiatives with assumption that released data might be utilized to establish
better service applications than existing tools that the government provides [65].
Social value. Although the reviewed literature predominantly discusses social value as an
estimated effect of OGD utilization, there are enormous expectations on OGD for obtaining
more social value with effective utilization of public data. Consequently, social value is one
of the primary driving factors of OGD initiatives by governments and utilization by society
members [22]. Broad aspects of social value generation are discussed in the literature as an
effect of OGD utilization such as social control for efficiency of public services [17], social
innovation for innovative solutions of social problems in cities [52], increase citizen
interaction with government for solving local problems [28] or social value from better
transportation, health care, education and etc. However, getting better results are strongly

13
depended on the elimination of disabling conditions of OGD utilization regarding
institutional issues, user participation, legislation and technical issues [64].
Trust of citizens. Social and political trust of citizens in government is considered an
important potential effect of increased government openness [67]. While trust is widely
studied subject in political science and public administration, only three OGD related studies
discuss trust of citizens as a social and political benefits of OGD. There is insufficient
empirical verification for utilization - effect relationship between OGD and trust of citizens,
thus trust is an estimated effect of OGD utilization. The trust of citizens effect can only be
achieved under severe circumstances associated with quality of released data, including the
completeness of datasets, accuracy and reliability of OGD that has been collected in a
reliable record management conditions [68]. Depending on complexity and preconditions,
OGD might not create trust in government, even cause negative consequences and bad
experiences [64]. Consequently, transparency and data openness can be considered
supportive effect for improvement of citizen trust [69].
4.3. Conditions of OGD utilization
With respect to the types of utilization and the effects, conditions are a central phenomenon
of OGD utilization. They not only impact the enhancement of effects, but they also increase
the possibilities of utilization. Not surprisingly, the most discussed condition for the use and
re-use of OGD resources is the quality of data, which is followed by legislation/policy, skills,
and infrastructure.
Figure 7. Number of articles on conditions
The relationships between the utilization of OGD and the acquired effects are not a simply
“drag and drop”. Instead, they require many technological and social pre/post-conditions to
be accomplished that may either enable or disable the utilization process. According to our
observations, 77 studies discussed at least one or several conditions that impact the
utilization of released public data. Some conditions cover very broad aspects of OGD and are
discussed in only one study. These include open innovation strategies [54], information
policy [1], open data ecosystems [16], organizational culture and leadership [31], or
organizational support [45]. The conditions that directly influence OGD utilization and are
discussed in three or more studies are listed below.

14
Quality of data. Nearly 36 studies mention one or several parameters of data quality that
have impact on use and re-use of public data. In this regard, there are strong theoretical
arguments that quality of data is prerequisite for obtaining better effects from OGD
initiatives and utilization. Potential users and user groups cannot anticipate the expected
benefits that can be achieved, thus users may be unwilling to utilize OGD if data quality is
low [70]. Data quality is a complex and multidimensional concept. The literature generally
identifies timeliness [4], availability of metadata [71], accuracy [72] and usefulness [2] as key
components of data quality. In this regard, quality assurance might be a useful mechanism
to increase effects of utilization and hamper problems regarding OGD utilization [2].
Legislation/policy. Legislation and policy is the most often mentioned condition alongside
data quality [65]. Like all other conditions, legislation and policy can either spur or hamper
both the types of utilization and effects of OGD utilization. Freedom of Information (FOI)
legislation is an important legal backbone and fundamental to enable and enhance OGD
implementation and can reduce resistance of public bodies to opening up government data
[20], [39]. Development of a legal framework is considered one of the main requirements for
further development of OGD initiatives, along with political data publication, data standards
and targeting stakeholders’ interests [27]. However, legislation and policies are not always
supportive for opening up government data. Rather frequently, it is considered as a barrier
for building more resilient OGD initiatives. Particularly, legislative barriers and shortcomings
regarding data protection and funding models need to be solved for opening up more public
data and utilize them without any impediment [31]. Consequently, a clear and harmonized
legal framework is needed to regulate the relationship and eliminate ambiguities between
copyright, privacy, personal data and data openness to achieve the full potential of OGD
[39].
Skills. To be able to use OGD, technical skills and knowledge about data is needed, such as
knowledge about statistics or programming. ICT literacy is considered to be a more
significant conditions than financial and other resources in order to establish an innovation
by utilizing OGD [22]. Graves & Hendler [44] argue that whether important group of users,
such as journalists and activists – want to obtain benefits from public data, lack of
fundamental skills and expertise regarding data management, data visualization and data
operations hamper getting value and creating positive effects by utilizing OGD. Open data
focused research centers, think tanks and innovation incubators (e.g. Open Data Institute,
Open Knowledge Foundation) have a significant role in development of required skills and
expertise and supporting innovations creation processes and businesses using OGD [22].
Infrastructure. The increasing data generation requires infrastructure that facilitate data
exchange between government bodies and users, such as software for data analytics and
discovery and web-based platforms [24]. OGD infrastructure has specific requirements and
capabilities to address the challenges regarding public data sharing and utilization. For
instance, OGD infrastructures need to integrate various technologies, analysis techniques

15
and information architectures to support user requirements by using generic or specialized
open data platforms [72], [73]. Particularly, feedback mechanisms between supplier and
users [9], [74] and data processing capabilities [75] are the vital features of OGD
infrastructure which have strong impact on the utilization of OGD.
Availability. Availability of public data is essential element or pre-condition for the value
chain of data-driven innovation and OGD utilization [22]. A variety of available public data
helps users to combine and link diverse datasets for processing and answering questions
that were not possible with a single source and dataset [76]. Availability is considered one of
the strongest enabling factors for data-driven innovation which is believed to be the cause
the social and economic value generation [24]. Availability of OGD is considered to be a
necessary, yet not a sufficient condition for OGD utilization, because this requires the
fulfillment of many other conditions, like skills and technical knowledge, public awareness
and quality of data, to achieve or increase the expected effects of OGD utilization.
Privacy. Elimination of private-sensitive data and other attributes may cause privacy
breaches is the first phase of data preparation for publicly releasing [69]. Complying the data
protection legislation appears to be concerned over how public data be anonymized and
which parts of data be released [28]. Privacy and confidentiality, copyright and misuse of
data are considered foremost possible threats for government decision-makers to freely
release public data [10]. As a result, data policies regarding OGD should address privacy
issues upfront, including not publishing national security related data and to ensure the
compliance of confidentiality and privacy guidelines [72].
4.4. Users of OGD

16
A systematic approach to understanding the OGD utilization process by investigating users is
particularly important because of their purpose on data usage and because they are
consumers of utilization effects. Generally, 82 studies noted one or many user groups that
utilize OGD. Since the goal of this review is to investigate direct (directly utilizing OGD) and
indirect (consuming effects of OGD utilization) users, eight type of users and user groups
were extracted. Each of these was discussed in three or more studies. Generally, the users
can be divided into two broad groups: revenue-driven service developers and companies;
and public-value-oriented users encompassing journalists, researchers and citizens in
general [30].
Figure 8. Number of articles on users
Nearly half of the selected articles mention citizens as users of OGD. This is primarily
because citizens comprise a very broad user group and the studies are less empirically
focused on a particular user group. Moreover, the reviewed literature shows that users of
OGD are relatively less researched as subjects and authors. Instead, most literature merely
makes estimates about users. Several articles studied users and user groups as stakeholders
in an OGD ecosystem [74] or as part of the study domain [49], [77]. The next most discussed
user group after citizens is the business community. In general, 6 user categories or groups
were determined, with each user category having been discussed in at least 3 articles.
Citizens. Releasing government data is considered to be a key mechanism for reducing the
asymmetry of information among citizens and governments bodies [51], [58]. One study
identifies citizens as primary stakeholders (along with businesses, researchers, and
journalists) that are the major beneficiaries of utilization due to increased participation,
which enables citizens to obtain more insight into government activities [27]. OGD allows
citizens to evaluate the activities of government bodies and to take a more active part in
government decision-making [78]. The most effective way to deliver public value and
address a wide range of community challenges that still need to be improved is through the
creation of mobile applications developed by citizens and built to utilize public data (which
the author calls “citizen apps”) [79]. However, Mainka et al. [80] argues that although there
are limited examples of mobile applications developed by citizens, released government
data does not necessarily result in the rapid spread of application development. Data
analysis skills, the presentation of open data, and data exploration are critical factors for
determining citizens’ ability to achieve accountability, and these require affordable tools for

17
citizens to analyze and share public data [23]. Therefore intermediary tools that
demonstrate to citizens how they can use open data in familiar ways are necessary [81].
Business. As stated, users are perceived as revenue-driven and public-value driven regarding
their aims to utilize public data in order that businesses and entrepreneurs are forming an
important part of the first category. Susha et al. [22] emphasis that the drivers and motives
behind the establishment of social innovation projects that targeted to solve social problems
are different from those directing to marketable products using public data for commercial
profit. Despite the practical difficulty in observing OGD utilization by business bodies (either
because it is not one of the core activity of business or it is hidden under trade secrets), the
rapid development of data technologies, such as data mining and data analysis, has created
promising chances for research of business as a user of OGD. Very few studies focus purely
on businesses as a user of OGD, yet there are exceptions. For instance, some authors discuss
the development of commercial products over OGD [23], driving factors of OGD utilization
by business [22], diverse business models using open data [77], OGD as a foundation for
entrepreneurial innovations and start-ups [43], utilizing specific datasets for business
decisions [38]. It is believed that accurate and reliable data can support businesses to utilize
those public data for better decision-making [25], [82], although this effect is not yet
empirically validated.
Researchers. Researchers are mostly mentioned in combination of other users like
journalists, NGOs and citizens. Graves & Hendler [44] assume that researchers and
journalists may utilize OGD to investigate public policies, education system, healthcare and
etc. activities of governments. Taking into account the availability of advanced data analytics
tools and high professional competencies of researchers, awareness of data availability,
openness and limited engagement with OGD projects are primary obstacles for utilization of
data by researchers [16]. In addition, to interpret OGD, it is necessary to have precise
knowledge about the context of the data. Therefore, researchers need contextual qualitative
data along with OGD in order to utilize public data effectively for academic purposes [83].
Although the role of OGD in scientific studies have been less investigated, the increasing
number of studies that handle specific open dataset for research purposes, can be
considered decent foundation for exploring researchers as a user group of OGD utilization.
Developers. Open data developers perform significant role to encourage the adoption of
OGD policies and revealing more and more datasets [28]. OGD initiatives allow developers to
establish professional networks of developers to support development of universal tools and
encouraging the standardization of the utilization processes of OGD [84]. According to
Desouza & Bhagwatwar [79], the majority of the OGD based projects is established by
developers as start-ups. Accompanied by the availability of data resources, a complementary
additions, such as APIs (application program interface - containing protocols and tools for
application development) are considered an essential added value for developers to
establish services based on "live" public data [54]. Finally, taking into account the primary

18
role of developers in the utilization process, research on cultural and regional features is
needed to get a more comprehensive picture of the role of developers [80] and motivation
of developers [85] in OGD.
NGOs. Building resilient OGD ecosystem strongly requires the involvement of NGOs such as
Open Knowledge Foundation, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Transparency Hacker
Groups or Transparency International, which are very active on constructing guidelines,
promoting discussions, pressing national governments for releasing more data and
organizing events [17]. Although NGOs are estimated less primary user group comparing to
business, media and citizens (particularly for open spending data), they have a professional
interest and expertise for releasing and utilizing public data [86]. Additionally, collaboration
and partnership mechanisms between NGOs and governments by means of contests,
financial and technical supports and grants, offer more effective results [84]. Along with
active role of NGOs on OGD movement as defenders, utilization of specific public data may
add significant input towards realizing their activities which OGD's potential, in this regard,
essentially remains unexplored [87]. Consequently, the literature has mostly discussed the
promoter and campaigner role of NGOs in OGD utilization rather than as an end user of
OGD.
Journalists. Journalists are a user group that are highly involved in utilization of OGD for their
daily activities to conduct studies and write newspaper articles, including a visualization of
public data [44]. Journalists, for instance, may integrate several datasets for bringing new
insights that individuals may not be able or eager to conduct such research [7]. Moreover,
along with opening up relevant public data, government policy should effort to increase
motivation of data journalists and their community implementing grant programs, supports
of NGOs and targeted funds to solve social problems, particularly corruption and misusing
public resources [88]. The studies mostly handle the journalists as a user group along with
other potential user groups without specific attention thus, some studies discuss journalists
with NGOs and business [86] or journalists with other citizens [59], [81].
Finally, the summary of thematic analysis and classification are presented in the Table 2:
Table 2. Summary of thematic classification
Factors and brief
description
Num.
of
articles
Categories
References
TYPES
the use and re-use of
OGD for a particular
purpose, typically as a
field of study or
practice
30
innovation
[22]; [33]; [23]; [44]; [24]; [37]; [28]; [90]; [55];
[54]; [61]; [115]; [9]; [74]; [84]; [52]; [48]; [79];
[112]; [38]; [40]; [18]; [88]; [100]; [81]; [21]; [53];
[105]; [58]; [80].
7
data analytics
[44]; [28]; [25]; [19]; [8]; [48]; [46]
6
decision-making
[47]; [25]; [48]; [96]; [79]; [49]

19
6
anti-corruption
[51]; [50]; [88]; [11]; [106]; [103]
6
smart city
[37]; [52]; [40]; [53]; [49]; [80]
5
research
[6]; [25]; [55]; [16]; [83]
5
new services
[48]; [40]; [100]
3
hackathons/
competitions
[17]; [54]; [18]
EFFECTS
the potential results
and outcomes of OGD
utilization from social,
economic or good
governance
perspectives
40
transparency
and
accountability
[4]; [17]; [51]; [71]; [20]; [44]; [6]; [28]; [57];
[97]; [66]; [7]; [101]; [88]; [29]; [10]; [2]; [86];
[31]; [84]; [87]; [59]; [109]; [64]; [79]; [68]; [95];
[83]; [38]; [102]; [21]; [105]; [107]; [58]; [82];
[106]; [39]; [103]; [69]; [91]
28
economic
development
[22]; [17]; [32]; [33]; [23]; [27]; [24]; [28]; [90];
[55]; [54]; [61]; [115]; [50]; [8]; [29]; [77]; [30];
[52]; [48]; [64]; [112]; [45]; [18]; [100]; [46]; [41];
[49]
15
citizen
participation
[27]; [37]; [57]; [54]; [97]; [66]; [101]; [48]; [9];
[10]; [86]; [64]; [68]; [11]; [103];
7
public services
development
[47]; [17]; [33]; [8]; [52]; [79]; [85]
6
social value
[22]; [17]; [24]; [28]; [30]; [64]
3
trust of citizens
[64]; [68]; [69]
CONDITIONS
the environmental
features or aspects of
overall OGD utilization
functioning as
technical, social or
political paradigms of
public data usability
36
quality of data
[108]; [51]; [71]; [23]; [113]; [6]; [57]; [25]; [55];
[61]; [97]; [26]; [66]; [2]; [16]; [74]; [72]; [87];
[64]; [68]; [95]; [83]; [70]; [73]; [102]; [45]; [81];
[41]; [103]; [49]; [94]; [104]; [80]; [22]; [79]; [5]
26
legislation/policy
[114]; [65]; [51]; [20]; [27]; [78]; [28]; [61]; [115];
[110]; [1]; [74]; [31]; [64]; [39]; [103]; [91]; [22];
[71]; [97]; [68]; [90]; [10]; [99]; [96]; [9]
22
skills
[116]; [22]; [47]; [24]; [7]; [96]; [10]; [98]; [16];
[74]; [77]; [59]; [64]; [83]; [46]; [82]; [41]; [106];
[39]; [91]; [44]; [37]
13
infrastructure
[24]; [96]; [9]; [74]; [70]; [73]; [75]; [5]; [91];
[104]; [10]; [85]; [95]
10
availability
[22]; [71]; [24]; [25]; [97]; [66]; [16]; [40]; [45];
[41]
9
privacy
[71]; [28]; [50]; [29]; [10]; [72]; [109]; [39]; [69]
USERS
individuals or groups
that use public data
for achieving the
targeted effects and
gaining value mostly in
the form of product,
advantage or practice
49
citizens
[47]; [51]; [23]; [27]; [78]; [44]; [37]; [28]; [61];
[97]; [26]; [115]; [50]; [66]; [19]; [110]; [8]; [96];
[29]; [10]; [2]; [86]; [98]; [30]; [31]; [72]; [84];
[59]; [52]; [109]; [79]; [95]; [83]; [70]; [81]; [21];
[46]; [53]; [105]; [58]; [82]; [11]; [38]; [103]; [69];
[94]; [91]; [104]; [80]
24
business
[4]; [22]; [23]; [78]; [25]; [55]; [115]; [110]; [8];
[96]; [9]; [86]; [77]; [48]; [109]; [79]; [112]; [38];
[45]; [76]; [81]; [82]; [41]; [80]
20
researchers
[32]; [6]; [55]; [19]; [8]; [111]; [9]; [16]; [109];
[95]; [83]; [38]; [45]; [76]; [46]; [105]; [82]; [106];
[49]; [94]
19
developers
[37]; [28]; [54]; [61]; [110]; [101]; [29]; [9]; [84];
[48]; [79]; [112]; [70]; [40]; [18]; [85]; [100]; [46];
[80]

20
13
NGOs
[4]; [17]; [51]; [32]; [96]; [88]; [29]; [86]; [84];
[87]; [109]; [82]; [91]
8
journalists
[44]; [26]; [7]; [88]; [9]; [86]; [59]; [81];
5. Synthesis and discussion
5.1 Synthesizing our findings: the OGD utilization framework
The systematic literature review has resulted in a more comprehensive understanding of the
types of OGD utilization, effects, contextual conditions, users and the relations between
these factors. Most importantly we find that most relations between utilization factors are
assumed or hypothesized and not tested empirically. Based on the four categories we
introduced at the start of this article (types, effects, users, conditions), we can now ‘fill’
these categories with insights from the literature in a conceptual framework (Figure 9).
Figure 9. OGD utilization framework
In the proposed OGD utilization framework, two types of utilization can be distinguished
based on the literature: analytic utilization and synthetic utilization. Moodysson, Coenen, &
Asheim [89] distinguish between analytic and synthetic utilization according to types of
knowledge creation as follows: analytic denotes the understanding and explaining of
characteristics of the world and its features, while synthetic contributes to the design or
establishment of something to reach functional objectives. In this regard, analytic utilization
refers to OGD utilization that explains specific features or solves particular problems, such as
public, business, or government problems by implementing a specific set of algorithms to
analyze specific public data sets. On the other hand, synthetic utilization refers to the

21
utilization of OGD to develop tools and appliances that solve functional problems, such as
delivering better services.
The conditions of OGD utilization are also separated into two categories: technical and
social. Technical conditions are features such as the quality of data, their availability, and the
infrastructure for making them available. Social conditions are of an institutional nature
(legislation, policy, etc.), but they also refer to the skills of users. Both types of conditions are
well studied, since many scholars have recently attended to the availability of data [2], [26],
[27], [51], [55], [66], legal and regulatory issues [1], [61], [78], barriers to and enablers of
OGD [10], [28], and many other conditions that impact OGD utilization. However, each study
concentrated on different types of conditions and used a different methodology to measure
the impact, which makes it difficult to generalize their results.
The review found various hypothesized and established effects of OGD utilization: social
effects include social value generated by utilizing OGD and public services (e.g. [22], [24]),
economic effects include OGD utilization for economic development and increasing the
efficiency of various economic activities (e.g. [28], [90]), and good governance effects include
transparency and accountability, the trust of citizens, and citizen (e.g. [51], [91]).
We found a distinction between direct users – those who make use of the open government
data themselves – and indirect users – those who make use of data that has been processed
by intermediaries. According to the findings of this review, studies that investigate OGD
stakeholders [32] and commercial uses of OGD [77] discuss users more comprehensively.
The authors highlight the benefits of OGD for different users, including commercial
organizations [44], [55], [79], which have extensive expectations for OGD. In addition to
those who have professional skills and technical knowledge, users also include those who
can utilize simple datasets or who consume the effects of OGD utilization. The results show
that most studies globally describe users (like citizens) rather than focusing on specific types
or groups of users, and users’ motivations are less researched. Therefore,
5.2 Challenges and opportunities for future research
The review revealed some gaps in the literature on OGD utilization. First and foremost, we
found that many of the effects of OGD were not empirically tested but only proclaimed.
More rigorous empirical research is needed to assess if the estimated effects of OGD are
actually measurable. Our findings highlight that various relations are proposed but only the
relation between conditions and data utilization has been empirically tested. Below we will
highlight four potential future research directions.
1. Investigate the link between type of utilization and type of users

22
The relation between users and types of utilization could be studied. In other words, what
types of users are there and in what way does this shape the way OGD is used in practice.
For instance, we know very little which citizens use OGD but more importantly we do not
know the type of utilization that would be interested in. Our review made clear that there is
a wide range of potential utilization types, and some may be more closely aligned with
citizen preferences than other. To improve usage, we would need to better map the link
between who uses OGD and how this type of user will do so. A promising way to enhance
OGD utilization might be to investigate users and their motivation, which could improve the
efficiency and number of utilization types and their positive results.
2. Investigate the link between type of user and type of effects
Another link that warrants empirical attention is the link between types of users and effects.
How will different users social, economic and governance effects? For instance, data
journalist will produce newspaper articles and may influence public debates and possibly
resulting in better governance, whereas entrepreneurs will be likely to try to find a business
model that brings economic gain. So far, the literature has paid little empirical attention to
the conditionality of the type of use, users and potential effects and further research is
needed.
Furthermore, there is a strong focus on good governance effects, such as transparency and
accountability. As these are core good governance principles, , but there are other good
governance effects that are currently lacking serious attention. These include citizen
satisfaction [47], cost reduction [28], crowd-sourced monitoring and cooperative planning
[87], fostering competitiveness [52], and better urban planning [79], [80]. Overall, we need
more empirical evidence to prove the estimations made in the literature and to establish
mechanisms for measuring the mentioned effects.
3. Investigate the moderating conditions of OGD effects
The third link in our framework that requires investigation is between conditions and effects.
To result in positive outcomes on society, governance and economy with utilization of OGD,
we need to know more about what conditions moderate these effects. For instance, there
may be utilization for analytic or synthetic purposes, but this will only result in positive
outcomes (stronger economy, better governance) if certain conditions are met. Our review
showed that quality of data, skills, policy and legislation are all potential conditions that
effect the link between usage and outcome. We know very little, however, what conditions
moderate what type of use and which of these conditions are more or less important. We
encourage scholars to develop empirical studies that investigate these conditions as
potential moderating variables between OGD usage and one or more potential outcomes.
4. Establish causal link between utilization and potential OGD outcomes

23
The fourth and final direction is a more general concern and more difficult to solve research
issue. The causal link between utilization types and effects is another important connection
that requires rigorous research to reveal direct causality relation among a specific utilization
dimensions and its effects. To be able to draw causal inferences other research designs may
be needed. We found that the predominant research type in OGD studies is qualitative or
quantitative (mostly survey based). Although these methods have their merits, they may less
successful in drawing robust causal inferences about cause and effect, as reverse causality
may be an issue.
For instance, on the one hand, using OGD may result in greater wealth when successful
businesses are created. But the reverse possible as well, wealthier jurisdictions (states,
countries, cities) may also have more resources and more enterprises already. To investigate
truly causal effects carefully designed experiments are needed, a trend already witnessed in
some areas related to OGD, such as government transparency [92]. Experiments are useful
to establish cause and effect separately, by carefully manipulating one or two crucial
variables that are expected to cause an effect. For example, to investigate the effect various
types of utilization, in a field experiment a researcher could encourage various slightly
different datasets encouraging data analytics, research, or something else, and closely
monitor results in what type of effect.
5.3 Practical implications
We identified a growing attention on the OGD initiatives, and also an increasing need to
understand the nature of OGD utilization and its factors. In this regard, the systematic
review delivers a ground for practical decision-making regarding OGD utilizations.
Policymakers wishing to achieve better utilization outcomes are advised to evaluate possible
types of utilization in a specific context. Moreover, it is required to understand better the
conditions of OGD utilization process which consist social and technical components. This is
particularly important as the conditions moderate the effects of OGD utilization. Thus a
holistic picture on OGD utilization is needed, including the consideration of diverse user
groups, their requirements and potential effects. In respect of policy, there are strong
implications that the discussed four factors have a substantial role to play in the success of
OGD initiatives, nevertheless evidence is currently not systematic and strong enough to
inform policymakers on how they can consider, support and facilitate potential outcomes.
6. Conclusion
This paper presented the results of a systematic literature review on OGD by analyzing 101
studies which has several limitations. OGD is relatively new field of study so that, there are
limited number of empirical studies which researched OGD utilization. We used only 4 the

24
most recognized academic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, ACM and ScienceDirect. An
additional search in other databases (Emerald, Taylor & Francis, IEEE and InderScience) did
not result in any new entries in our corpus. The searching process may have also excluded
some relevant studies which cover OGD but named differently such as “open transportation
data”, “open healthcare data” etc. However, we believe that the selected wide-ranging
studies still afford to provide a comprehensive description of the current state of OGD
research.
The review of literature resulted in a OGD utilization framework, consisting of four generic
categories (users, effects, types and conditions) with a variety of subcategories. The
framework shows the multitude of relations between these four categories and also
highlights that we have little empirical knowledge on most of the relations that relate to the
effects of OGD. While most authors highlight positive effects, many studies focus on OGD
initiatives, facilitators, barriers and challenges. Overall, this paper offers an overview of the
current OGD research, and where we can go from here.
Investigating the effects of OGD on social, economic and governance outcomes is a
formidable task however. As we mentioned in the previous paragraph it is hard to try
determine cause and effect. Experimentation with OGD could be a possibility. However, we
also envision that qualitative studies using in-depth interviews may be able to trace causal
mechanism between the utilization of certain OGD initiatives and its effects.
It is important to keep improving our efforts to investigate who, how and why OGD leads to
positive outcomes for society. It is not enough to assume that these effects will occur, and
that they will occur automatically. The key contribution of this paper to the literature is the
framework unravelling the various implicit relationship in research on the use of OGD. The
framework we developed will help future research to systematically analyze the relations
between OGD utilization and various sorts of effects. This is important because while OGD is
proffered as a solution to many issues of public officials, NGOs and activists, yet this promise
is yet to be proven. It is our duty as scholars to show whether and how this promise can be
fulfilled.
References
References with asterisk (*) are not included in the systematic literature review.
[1] Janssen K. The influence of the PSI directive on open government data: An overview of recent
developments. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2011;28(4):446–56. Available
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.01.004
[2] Lourenço RP. An analysis of open government portals: A perspective of transparency for
accountability. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2015;32(3):323–32. Available
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.05.006

25
[3] Wang H, Lo J. Adoption of open government data among government agencies. Government
Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2015; Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.11.004
[4] Attard J, Orlandi F, Scerri S, Auer S. A systematic review of open government data initiatives.
Government Information Quarterly . Elsevier Inc.; 2015;32(4):399–418. Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.006
[5] Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M. “A Coordination Theory Perspective to Improve the Use of Open Data
in Policy-Making .” Chapter: Electronic Government // the series Lecture Notes in Computer
Science . 2013;8074:38–49. Available from: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-
642-40358-3_4
[6] Whitmore A. Using open government data to predict war: A case study of data and systems
challenges. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2014;31(4):622–30. Available
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.04.003
[7] Heise A, Naumann F. Integrating open government data with stratosphere for more
transparency. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web. Elsevier
B.V.; 2012;14:45–56. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2012.02.002
[8] Kuhn K. Open Government Data and Public Transportation. Journal of Public Transportation.
2011;14(1):83–97. Available from:
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1115&context=jpt
[9] Jaakola A, Kekkonen H, Lahti T, Manninen A. Open data, open cities: Experiences from the
Helsinki Metropolitan Area. Case Helsinki Region Infoshare www.hri.fi. Statistical Journal of the
IAOS. 2015;31(1):117–22. Available from:
http://content.iospress.com.proxy.library.uu.nl/articles/statistical-journal-of-the-iaos/sji00873
[10] Nam T. Challenges and Concerns of Open Government: A Case of Government 3.0 in Korea.
Social Science Computer Review. 2015;33(5):556–70. Available from:
http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/33/5.toc
[11] Brito K dos S, Costa MA da S, Garcia VC, Meira SR de L. Assessing the Benefits of Open
Government Data: The Case of Meu Congresso Nacional in Brazilian Elections 2014. 16th
Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research. 2015;89–96. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2757422
[12]* Hossain MA, Dwivedi YK, Rana NP. State-of-the-art in open data research: Insights from
existing literature and a research agenda. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic
Commerce. 2016;26(1–2):14–40. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10919392.2015.1124007?journalCode=hoce20
[13] Charalabidis Y, Alexopoulos C, Loukis E. A taxonomy of open government data research areas
and topics. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce. 2016;26(1–2):41–
63. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10919392.2015.1124720

26
[14]* Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four
Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science. 2000;46(2):186–204. Available from:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2634758?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
[15]* King WR, He J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information &
management. 2006;43:740–55. Available from:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378720606000528
[16] Martin EG, Helbig N, Birkhead GS. Opening Health Data: What Do Researchers Want? Early
Experiences With New York’s Open Health Data Platform. Journal of Public Health
Management and Practice. 2015;21(5):1–7. Available from:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25105279
[17] Matheus R, Ribeiro MM, Vaz JC. Brazil Towards Government 2.0: Strategies for Adopting Open
Government Data in National and Subnational Governments. Chapter Case Studies in e-
Government 20. 2015;121–38. Available from: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-
3-319-08081-9_8#page-1
[18] Johnson P, Robinson P. Civic Hackathons: Innovation, Procurement, or Civic Engagement?
Review of Policy Research. 2014;31(4):349–58. Available from:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ropr.12074/abstract
[19] Milic P, Veljkovic N, Stoimenov L. Framework for Open Data Mining in e-Government.
Proceedings of the Fifth Balkan Conference in Informatics. 2012;255–8. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2371369
[20] Palmirani M, Martoni M, Girardi D. Open Government Data Beyond Transparency. Electronic
Government and the Information Systems Perspective, Lecture notes in computer science.
Springer; 2014;8650:275–91. Available from: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-
319-10178-1_22
[21] Schillemans T, Twist M van, Vanhommerig I. innovations in accountability Learning Through
Interactive, Dynamic, and Citizen-Initiated Forms of Accountability. Public Performance &
Management Review. 2013;36(3):407–35. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/T_Schillemans/publication/260178390_Innovations_in_
Accountability/links/54ae90140cf21670b358423f.pdf
[22] Susha I, Grönlund A, Janssen M. Driving factors of service innovation using open government
data: An exploratory study of entrepreneurs in two countries. Information Polity. 2015;20:19–
34. Available from: http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-polity/ip353
[23] Magalhaes G, Roseira C, Manley L. Business Models for Open Government Data. 8th
International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. 2014;365–70.
Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2691195.2691273
[24] Jetzek T, Avital M, Bjørn-andersen N. Data-Driven Innovation through Open Government Data.
Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research. 2014;9(2):100–20. Available
from: 10.4067/S0718-18762014000200008

27
[25] Kalampokis E, Tambouris E, Tarabanis K. Linked Open Government Data Analytics. Chapter
Electronic Government Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2013;8074:99–110. Available from:
http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-40358-3_9
[26] Ceolin D, Moreau L, O’Hara K, Schreiber G, Fokkink W, Hage WR Van, et al. Reliability Analyses
of Open Government Data. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. 2013;1477:34–9. Available from:
http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1073/pospaper2.pdf
[27] Parycek P, Höchtl J, Ginner M. Open Government Data Implementation Evaluation. Journal of
theoretical and applied electronic commerce research. 2014;9(2):80–99. Available from:
http://www.scielo.cl/pdf/jtaer/v9n2/art07.pdf
[28] Jocelyn C, Oliver R, Gillian O. Value in the mash: exploring the benefits, barriers and enablers of
open data apps. Twenty Second European Conference on Information Systems. 2014;1–15.
Available from: http://ecis2014.eu/E-poster/files/0522-file1.pdf
[29] Sieber RE, Johnson PA. Civic open data at a crossroads: Dominant models and current
challenges. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2015;32(3):308–15. Available
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.05.003
[30] Lassinantti J, Bergvall-kåreborn B, Ståhlbröst A, Bergvall-kåreborn B. Shaping Local Open Data
Initiatives: Politics and Implications. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce
Research. 2014;9(2):17–33. Available from: http://www.scielo.cl/pdf/jtaer/v9n2/art03.pdf
[31] Barry E, Bannister F. Barriers to open data release; A view from the top. Information Polity.
2014;19(1/2):129–52. Available from: http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-
polity/ip000327
[32] Gonzalez-Zapata F, Heeks R. The multiple meanings of open government data; Understanding
different stakeholders and their perspectives. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.;
2015;32(4):441–52. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.09.001
[33] Matheus R, Vaz JC, Ribeiro MM. Open Government Data and the Data Usage for Improvement
of Public Services in the Rio de Janeiro City. 8th International Conference on Theory and
Practice of Electronic Governance. 2014;338–41. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2691240
[34]* Okoli C, Schabram K. A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature Review of Information
Systems Research. 2010; Available from:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1954824
[35]* Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences A PRACTICAL GUIDE.
BLACKWELL PUBLISHING; 2006. 57-70 p. Available from: http://www.cebma.org/wp-
content/uploads/Pettigrew-Roberts-SR-in-the-Soc-Sc.pdf
[36]* Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O, Peacock R. Storylines of research
in diffusion of innovation: a meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Social Science &
Medicine. 2005;61(2):417–30. Available from:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953604006471

28
[37] Veeckman C, Graaf S Van Der. The City as Living Laboratory: Empowering Citizens with the
Citadel Toolkit. Technology Innovation Management Review. 2015;5(3):6–17. Available from:
http://timreview.ca/article/877
[38] Iglesia JL. Alternative estimation of “‘ public procurement advertised in the Official Journal as
% of GDP ’” official indicator using open government data. Computers in Industry. Elsevier B.V.;
2014;65(5):905–12. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2014.03.004
[39] Rosnay MD De, Janssen K. Legal and Institutional Challenges for Opening Data across Public
Sectors: Towards Common Policy Solutions. "ournal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic
Commerce Research. 2014;9(3):1–14. Available from: 10.4067/S0718-18762014000300002
[40] Janssen M, Matheus R, Zuiderwijk A. Big and Open Linked Data ( BOLD ) to Create Smart Cities
and Citizens; Insights from Smart Energy and Mobility Cases. Chapter: Electronic Government /
Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2015;9248:79–90. Available from: 10.1007/978-3-319-
22479-4
[41] Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M, Poulis K, Kaa G V. Open Data for Competitive Advantage: Insights
from Open Data Use by Companies. 16th Annual International Conference on Digital
Government Research. 2015;79–88. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2757411
[42]* Ubaldi B. Open Government Data: Towards Emprical Analysis of Open Government Data
Initiatives. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance. 2013. Available from:
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/open-government-data_5k46bj4f03s7-
en;jsessionid=2a0q8ghrkd8s.x-oecd-live-02
[44] Graves A, Hendler J. A study on the use of visualizations for Open Government Data.
Information Polity. 2014;19:73–91. Available from:
http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-polity/ip000333
[45] Cowan D, Paulo A, McGarry F, Palmer RM. Adapting to Climate Change - An Open Data
Platform for Cumulative Environmental Analysis and Management. Chapter: Computational
Science and Its Applications the series Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2015;9155:3–15.
Available from: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-21404-7_1
[46] Kolyshkina I, Brownlow M, Taylor J. Improving every child’s chance in life. 3th International
Conference on Data Mining Workshops. 2013;180–4. Available from:
http://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/icdmw/2013/3142/00/3143a180.pdf
[47] Power R, Robinson B, Rudd L, Reeson A. Scenario Planning Case Studies Using Open
Government Data. Environmental Software Systems, 11th IFIP WG 511 International
Symposium, ISESS 2015. 2015;448:207–16. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-15994-2_20
[48] Kalampokis E, Hausenblas M, Tarabanis K. Combining Social and Government Open Data for
Participatory Decision-Making. Chapter: Electronic Participation the series Lecture Notes in

29
Computer Science. 2011;6847:36–47. Available from:
http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-23333-3_4
[48] Lakomaa E, Kallberg JAN. Open Data as a Foundation for Innovation: The Enabling Effect of
Free Public Sector Information for Entrepreneurs. Access, IEEE. 2013;1:558–63. Available from:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?reload=true&arnumber=6584732
[49] Chakraborty A, Wilson B, Sarraf S, Jana A. Open data for informal settlements: Toward a user’s
guide for urban managers and planners. Journal of Urban Management. Elsevier;
2015;4(2):74–91. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2015.12.001
[50] Rajshree N, Srivastava B. Open Government Data for Tackling Corruption – A Perspective. AAAI
Workshop - Technical Report. 2012;21–4. Available from:
https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/WS/AAAIW12/paper/viewFile/5326/5676
[51] Murillo MJ. Evaluating the role of online data availability: The case of economic and
institutional transparency in sixteen Latin American nations. International Political Science
Review. 2015;36(1):42–59. Available from:
http://ips.sagepub.com/content/36/1/42.full.pdf+html
[52] Bakici T, Almirall E, Wareham J. A Smart City Initiative; the Case of Barcelona. Journal of the
Knowledge Economy. 2013;4(2):135–48. Available from:
http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13132-012-0084-9
[53] Balena P, Bonifazi A, Mangialardi G. Smart Communities Meet Urban Management; Harnessing
the Potential of Open Data and Public / Private Partnerships through Innovative E-Governance
Applications. Chapter: Computational Science and Its Applications – the series Lecture Notes in
Computer Science. 2013;7974:528–40. Available from:
http://link.springer.com.proxy.library.uu.nl/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-39649-6_38
[54] Chan CML. From Open Data to Open Innovation Strategies: Creating e-Services Using Open
Government Data. 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 2013;1890–9.
Available from:
http://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/hicss/2013/4892/00/4892b890.pdf
[55] Radl W, Skopek J, Komendera A, Jager S, Modritscher F. And Data for All: On the Validity and
Usefulness of Open Government Data. 3th International Conference on Knowledge
Management and Knowledge Technologies. 2013;(article no.29):6–9. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2494228&dl=ACM&coll=DL
[56]* Meijer A. Understanding modern transparency. International Review of Administrative
Sciences. 2009;75(2):255–69. Available from:
http://ras.sagepub.com/content/75/2/255.abstract
[57] Jetzek T, Avital M, Bjørn-Andersen N. Generating value from open government data.
International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2013): Reshaping Society Through
Information Systems Design. 2013;2(July):1737–56. Available from:

30
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
84897679692&partnerID=40&md5=5cac1d6137ac8136bfa6657f99cb0c5a
[58] Fuentes-Enriquez R, Yaneileth R-R. Developing Accountability, Transparency and Government
Efficiency through Mobile Apps: The Case of Mexico. 7th International Conference on Theory
and Practice of Electronic Governance. 2013;313–6. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2591944&CFID=731841064&CFTOKEN=49246839
[59] Fung A. Infotopia: Unleashing the Democratic Power of Transparency. Politics & Society.
2013;41(2):183–212. Available from: 10.1177/0032329213483107
[60]* Feldman M, Hadjimichael T, Lanahan L, Kemeny T. The logic of economic development: A
definition and model for investment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy.
2015;1–17. Available from:
http://epc.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/11/08/0263774X15614653.abstract
[61] Neuroni AC, Riedl R, Brugger J. Swiss Executive Authorities on Open Government Data – Policy
Making beyond Transparency and Participation. 46th Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences. 2013;1911–20. Available from:
https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/hicss/2013/4892/00/4892b911.pdf
[62]* United Nations. People Matter Civic Engagement in Public Governance. World Public Sector
Report 2008. New York; 2008. Available from:
http://www.unpan.org/publications/content/PDFs/E-Library Archives/World Public Sector
Report series/World Public Sector Report.2008.pdf
[63]* Meijer A, Hillebrandt M, Curtin D, Brandsma GJ. Open Government: Connecting Discourses on
Transparency and Participation. NIG Conference 2010. 2010;1–23. Available from:
https://www.utwente.nl/nig/research/archive/2010/Papers/NIG_Conference_Meijer__Hillebr
andt__Curtin__Brandsma__15_November_2010__9.pdf
[64] Janssen M, Charalabidis Y, Zuiderwijk A, Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data
and Open Government. Information Systems Management. 2012; 530:258–68. Available from:
10.1080/10580530.2012.716740
[65] Yang T. To open or not to open? Determinants of open government data. Journal of
Information Science. 2015;41(5):596–612. Available from:
http://jis.sagepub.com/content/41/5/596
[66] Alanazi JM, Chatfield A. Sharing government-owned data with the public: a cross-country
analysis of open data practice in the Middle East. 18th Americas Conference on Information
Systems 2012 proceedings. 2012;1–10. Available from:
http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1296&context=eispapers
[67]* Grimmelikhuijsen SG, Meijer A. The effects of transparency on the perceived trustworthiness
of a government organization: evidence from an online experiment. Journal of Public
Administration Theory and Research. 2014;24(1):137–57. Available from:
http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/11/02/jopart.mus048

31
[68] Leveille V, Timms K. Through a Records Management Lens: Creating a Framework for Trust in
Open Government and Open Government Information. Canadian Journal of Information &
Library Sciences. 2015;39(2):154–90. Available from:
https://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/canadian_journal_of_infor
mation_and_library_science/v039/39.2.leveille.html
[69] Meijer R, Conradie P, Choenni S. Reconciling Contradictions of Open Data Regarding
Transparency, Privacy, Security and Trust. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic
Commerce Research. 2014;9(3):32–44. Available from: 10.4067/S0718-18762014000300004
[70] Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M. Participation and Data Quality in Open Data use: Open Data
Infrastructures Evaluated. 15th European Conference on e-Government. 2015; Available from:
http://repository.tudelft.nl/view/ir/uuid:c3e2530d-eaa2-409b-a700-b7107db7e159/
[71] Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M. Towards decision support for disclosing data: Closed or open data?
Information Polity. 2015;20:103–17. Available from:
http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-polity/ip358
[72] Bertot J. C., Gorham U., Jaeger P.T, Sarin L.C., Choi H., Big data, open government and e-
government: Issues, policies and recommendations. Information Polity. 2014;19(1/2):5–16.
Available from: http://content.iospress.com/journals/information-polity/19/1,2
[73] Alexopoulos C, Zuiderwijk A, Charapabidis Y, Loukis E, Janssen M. Designing a Second
Generation of Open Data Platforms: Integrating Open Data and Social Media. Chapter:
Electronic Government Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2014;Vol 8653:230–41. Available
from: http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-44426-9_19
[74] Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M, Davis C. Innovation with open data: Essential elements of open data
ecosystems. Information Polity. 2014;19:17–33. Available from:
http://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:288c0ce7-70cf-42b9-90a9-
05408edc33a8?collection=research
[75] Charalabidis Y, Loukis E, Alexopoulos C. Evaluating Second Generation Open Government Data
Infrastructures Using Value Models. 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System
Science. 2014;2114–26. Available from:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6758865
[76] Andersen A, Gür N, Hose K, Jakobsen K, Pedersen TB. Publishing Danish Agricultural
Government Data as Semantic Web Data. Chapter: Semantic Technology / the series Lecture
Notes in Computer Science. 2015;8943:178–86. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-15615-6_13
[77] Janssen M, Zuiderwijk A. Infomediary Business Models for Connecting Open Data Providers
and Users. Social Science Computer Review. 2014;32(5):694–711. Available from:
10.1177/0894439314525902

32
[78] Maramieri J. Open government data: a citizen’s right or a concession of public authorities?
Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society. 2014;10(2):11–22. Available from:
http://www.je-lks.org/ojs/index.php/Je-LKS_EN/article/view/928/874
[79] Desouza KC, Bhagwatwar A. Citizen Apps to Solve Complex Urban Problems. Journal of Urban
Technology. 2012;19(3):107–36. Available from:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10630732.2012.673056
[80] Mainka A, Hartmann S, Meschede C, Stock WG. Mobile Application Services Based Upon Open
Urban Government Data. iConference 2015 Proceedings. 2015; Available from:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/73635
[81] Volpi V, Ingrosso A, Pazzola M, Opromolla A, Medaglia CM, Design IR, et al. Roma Crash Map:
An Open Data Visualization Tool for the Municipalities of Rome. Chapter: Human Interface and
the Management of Information Information and Knowledge in Applications and Services the
series Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2014;8522:284–95. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-07863-2_28
[82] Canares MP. Opening the Local: Full Disclosure Policy and its Impact on Local Governments in
the Philippines. 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance.
2014;2007. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2691214&CFID=731841064&CFTOKEN=49246839
[83] Henriksen HZ. Scrutinizing Open Government Data to Understand Patterns in eGovernment
Uptake. Chapter: Electronic Government / Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2015;2:144–55.
Available from: http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-22479-4_11
[84] Kassen M. A promising phenomenon of open data: A case study of the Chicago open data
project. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2013;30(4):508–13. Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.05.012
[85] Juell-skielse G, Hjalmarsson A, Johannesson P, Rudmark D. Is the Public Motivated to Engage in
Open Data Innovation ? Chapter: Electronic Government / the series Lecture Notes in
Computer Science. 2014;8653:277–88. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-44426-9_23
[86] Worthy B. The impact of open data in the UK: Complex, unpredictable, and political. Public
Administration. 2015;93(3):788–805. Available from:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/padm.12166/abstract
[87] Linders D. Towards open development: Leveraging open data to improve the planning and
coordination of international aid. Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.;
2013;30(4):426–34. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.04.001
[88] Leontieva LS, Khalilova TV, Gaynullina LF, Khalilov AI. Social-Communicative Innovations in
Anti-Corruption Activities ( Regional Aspect ). Asian Social Science. 2015;11(7):387–93.
Available from: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ass/article/viewFile/46935/25326

33
[89]* Moodysson J, Coenen L, Asheim B. Explaining Spatial Patterns of Innovation: Analytical and
Synthetic Modes of Knowledge Creation in the Medicon Valley Life-Science Cluster.
Environment and planning. 2008;40:1040–57. Available from:
http://epn.sagepub.com/content/40/5/1040.abstract
[90] Albano CS. Open government data: a value chain model proposal. The Proceedings of the 14th
Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research. 2013;285–6. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2479775&CFID=740751372&CFTOKEN=42598657
[91] Ohemeng FLK, Ofosu-Adarkwa K. One way traffic: The open data initiative project and the
need for an effective demand side initiative in Ghana. Government Information Quarterly.
Elsevier Inc.; 2015;32(4):419–28. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.005
[92]* Bouwman R, Grimmelikhuijsen S. Experimental public administration from 1992 to 2014: A
systematic literature review and ways forward. International Journal of Public Sector
Management. 2016;29(2):110–31. Available from: dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-07-2015-0129
[93] Carrasco C, Sobrepere X. Open Government Data: An Assessment of the Spanish Municipal
Situation. Social Science Computer Review. 2015;33(5):631–44. Available from:
http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/33/5/631.full.pdf+html
[94] Galbrun E, Pelechrinis K, Terzi E. Urban navigation beyond shortest route: The case of safe
paths. Information Systems. Elsevier; 2015;1–12. Available from:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306437915001854
[95] Guarda GF, Oliveira EC, Junior RT de S. Analisys of it outsourcing contracts at the TCU (federal
court of accounts) and of the legislation that governs these contracts in the Brazilian federal
public administration. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management.
2015;12(1):81–106. Available from: http://www.scilit.net/article/10.4301/s1807-
17752015000100005
[96] Höcht J, Reichstädter P. Linked Open Data - A Means for Public Sector Information
Management. Chapter: Electronic Government and the Information Systems Perspective
Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 2011;6866:330–43. Available from:
http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-22961-9_26
[97] Jetzek T, Avital M. The Generative Mechanisms Of Open Government Data. Proceedings of the
21st European Conference on Information Systems. 2013;179–90. Available from:
http://openarchive.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/10398/8740/Avital_2.pdf?sequence=1
[98] Kool D De, Bekkers V. The Perceived Impact of Open Inspection Data on the Quality of
Education in Dutch Primary Schools: A Parent Perspective. Social Science Computer Review.
2015;33(5):645–59. Available from: 10.1177/0894439314560853
[99] Kucera J, Chlapek D, Klimek J, Necasky M. Methodologies and Best Practices for Open Data
Publication. Annual International Workshop on Databases, Texts, Specifications and Objects.
2015;1343:52–64. Available from: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1343/

34
[100] Lindman J, Kinnari T, Rossi M. Industrial open data: Case studies of early open data
entrepreneurs. System Sciences (HICSS), 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System
Science. 2014;739–48. Available from:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/abstractAuthors.jsp?arnumber=6758695
[101] Lofi C, Krestel R. iParticipate: Automatic Tweet Generation from Local Government Data.
Chapter: Database Systems for Advanced Applications: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
2012;(7239):295–8. Available from: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-
29035-0_24
[102] Lourenço RP, Piotrowski S, Ingrams A. Public Accountability ICT Support: A Detailed Account of
Public Accountability Process and Tasks. Chapter:Electronic Government / the series Lecture
Notes in Computer Science. 2015;9274(1):105–17. Available from:
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-22479-4_8
[103] Matheus R, Brazil PSP, Vaz JC, Souza CA De. Anti-Corruption Online Monitoring Systems in
Brazil. 6th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance.
2012;419–25. Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2463809
[104] Nahon K, Peled A, Shkabatur J. OGD Heartbeat: Cities’ Commitment to Open Data. eJournal of
eDemocracy and Open Government. 2015;7(2):116–36. Available from:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2575510
[105] O’Hara K. Transparency, Open Data and Trust in Government: Shaping the Infosphere. 4th
Annual ACM Web Science Conference. 2012;223–32. Available from:
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2380747
[106] Rajshree N. A Computational Model for Corruption Assessment. Workshop on AI Problems and
Approaches for Intelligent Environments and Workshop on Semantic Cities (conference).
2013;49–54. Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2516917
[107] Schalkwyk F Van. Supply-side Variants in the Supply of Open Data in University Governance.
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic
Governance. 2013;334–7. Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2591948
[108] Shepherd E. Freedom of Information, Right to Access Information, Open Data: Who is at the
Table? The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs. 2015;104(no 6):715–726. Available
from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00358533.2015.1112101
[109] Shum B, Aberer K, Schmidt A, Bishop S, Lukowicz P. Towards a global participatory platform
Democratising open data, complexity science and collective intelligence. The European
physical journal special topics. 2012;214(1):109–52. Available from:
http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjst/e2012-01690-3
[110] Solar M, Concha G, Meijueiro L. A Model to Assess Open Government Data in Public Agencies.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science: chapter Electronic government. 2012;7443:210–21.
Available from: http://rd.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-33489-4_18

35
[111] Susha I, Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M, Gronlund A. Benchmarks for Evaluating the Progress of Open
Data Adoption: Usage, Limitations, and Lessons Learned. Social Science Computer Review.
2015;33(5):613–30. Available from: 10.1177/0894439314560852
[112] Vert S, Vasiu R. Integrating linked open data in mobile augmented reality applications - a case
study. TEM Journal - Technology, Education, Management, Informatics. 2015;4(1):35–43.
Available from: http://www.tem-journal.com/archives/vol4no1.html
[113] Viscusi G, Spahiu B, Maurino A, Batini C. Compliance with open government data policies: An
empirical assessment of Italian local public administrations. Information Polity. 2014;19:263–
75. Available from: http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-polity/ip000338
[114] Wirtz BW, Piehler R, Thomas M, Daiser P, Wirtz BW, Piehler R, et al. Resistance of Public
Personnel to Open Government: A cognitive theory view of implementation barriers towards
open government data. Public Management Review. 2015;(December). Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.113889
[115] Yang T-M, Lo J, Wang H-J, Shiang J. Open Data Development and Value-Added Government
Information: Case Studies of Taiwan E-Government. ICEGOV ’13 Proceedings of the 7th
International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. 2013;238–41.
Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2591932
[116] Zuiderwijk A, Janssen M, Dwivedi YK. Acceptance and use predictors of open data
technologies: Drawing upon the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.
Government Information Quarterly. Elsevier Inc.; 2015;32(4):429–40. Available from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.09.005