Talkstandards » Blog Archive » Open Government and its Implications for Standards

Open Government and its Implications for Standards

posted by Ajit Jaokar on Wednesday, November 11th, 2009 at 9:50 am

Along with Open source and Open standards, we now have a new phrase; i.e. Open Government.

What does Open Government imply for standards?

Let’s take a step back. Prior to 1999, I used to work for an ERP vendor. ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) is a complex class of software that is typically intended to manage all the functions of a company (such as Accounts Payable, General Ledger, Billing and so on). Inspite of their complexity, there was a mad scramble to install ERP systems which was mainly motivated by the Y2K deadline.

However, did ERP really make a difference in terms of innovation?

Not really.

ERP was all about internal functions of an organization, the ‘plumbing’ so to speak. It made very little difference to the customers as to what billing system a company used or what General Ledger the company used.

Last week, the White House adopted Drupal, the Open source content management system which has a strap line of ‘community plumbing’. Whitehouse.gov is now running on Drupal. However, like ERP, if it is used only for internal functions (aka ‘plumbing’) – it should make no difference to anyone at all…

After all, Whitehouse.gov is a pretty structured website in terms of its content; photos of the President, videos, some blogs, information on legislation etc. And that content is mostly structured (apart from comments). One could argue that Drupal has many extensible libraries that third parties can build. But so do many other platforms.

Thus, the adoption of Drupal should be viewed more as a symbolic gesture for the use of Open Source; and in that role lies its greater significance and implications for standards.

Tim O’Reilly discusses the wider impact of the Drupal announcement under the concept of Gov 2.0.

The introduction of the terms Open Government/ Gov 2.0/ ‘Web 2.0 for Government’ adds to two already complex terms i.e. ‘Open Source’ and ‘Open Standards’. As viewed by Tim O’Reilly, Open Government is the concept of ‘Government as a platform’ which could also be seen as ‘Web 2.0 for Government’.

Web 2.0 itself is a philosophy i.e. a broad concept based on the foundation of Data, which many people wrongly equated to specific technologies (like the AJAX programming language).

Similarly, Open source (the technological foundation) is not necessarily needed for Open Government (which could be viewed as the concept/philosophical foundation of ‘Government as a platform’).

The question of whether Governments should mandate specific standards or technologies is more complex. Today, in the minds of most people we have a benevolent administration in the White House. But administrations can change every five years, and often they do. And consequently, enthusiasm for Government led ideas can wane.

The philosophy of Openness is correct, as is the idea of ‘Government as a platform’. However, just like Web 2.0, its technological implementation may be varied.

The standards for Open Government may be independent of the technology that is used to implement its internal systems as long as the philosophy of Openness and the idea of the ‘Government as a platform’ is maintained.

recent DISCUSSION

Ajit Jaokar says:

Martin
Re — more effective government means less resources spent, which will imply more services elsewhere (or lower taxes).
Yes, thats correct. So, technology will enable a more effecient government rgds Ajit
Ajit Jaokar says:

Stacy
Re — I think it is a fallacy to directly equate open government with open-source code and I appreciate your illuminating the greater challenge of achieving the former.

Yes .. very much so. I have pointed this in other blogs elsewhere ie there are many unknowns with the use of Open source(depending on the license and the govenance model) – ex – MySQL is open source – but then gets acquired by Sun and now by Oracle. So, its status is (rightly) debated. thus, there are many such issues which are not clear but in any case, equating the two is not correct as you say kind rgds Ajit
Ajit Jaokar says:

Mattias
Re How much should you expect? Good question .. short answer LOTS .. but the REAL question is how much of that would be USEFUL? But the philosophy of participation is accurate .. but it will need a change in process. So, this is still early stage rgds Ajit
Martin Sutinen says:

Ajit,
One aspect I read into Open Government would be an open mindset. The government has to start thinking outside the box in order to get the most out of the 2.0 concept. I agree that openness could in principle be technology neutral. I would however question that changes internally would not reflect externally. While the new technology might not enable new service, more effective government means less resources spent, which will imply more services elsewhere (or lower taxes). Through dynamic channels, the introduction of developments internally should result in customer improvements externally, although not necessarily in direct relation to the new technology.
Stacy Baird says:

Ajit: I think your point is well taken, the choice of technology always must meet the end use of that technology. But it’s clear where technology is today, open source and proprietary are living in far greater harmony than dissonance, and the situation is getting better practically daily. I think it is a fallacy to directly equate open government with open-source code and I appreciate your illuminating the greater challenge of achieving the former.
Ajit Jaokar says:

Niklas
Thanks for your comments. I did not mean to imply that Drupal implementation will not benefit anyone. What I mean is – any implementation of a system which is internal(with my analogy of ERP systems) has limited benefits to external parties(irrespective of the system/technology) rgds Ajit
Mattias Ganslandt says:

Ajit: Agree. ICT systems – particularly web 2.0 – for “open government”, whether based on open source or proprietary code, indeed has great potential. Question is how much to expect? There are several factors that one needs to consider. First, should we expect a substantial increase in private provision of public goods? Well, that will depend on the evolution of norms as well as the costs and benefits for individuals. Second, distributional conflicts at the heart of any political system will remain. Coordination problems are generally easier to solve than conflicts of interest. Third, any bureaucracy is reluctant to give up control. And since this is the very idea with open government one should expect internal resistance. For all of these reasons, political leadership and supporting policies and institutions may be needed to get beyond “declarations” and “ambitions”./Mattias
Niklas Lindblom says:

Ajit,
The distinction between philosophical concept and technological requirement is interesting and not something that is frequently discussed. And as with any kind of philosophy it is the matter of successfully implementing idea into practice that offers the greatest challenge. You mention that the implementation of Drupal will not benefit anyone, but would you say that there are any conflicts?
Further, the idea of Open Government seems to be strongly connected with open standards and has further spurred the push towards the public use thereof.
Further, the idea of Open Government is connected to increased efficiency as well as transparency, where Web 2.0 solutions might provide both. But is this a new venue for the open standards discussion?

Open Government and its Implications for Standards

recent DISCUSSION

Comment on this post

About the Author

Ajit Jaokar

Talkstandards.com

An active online community where developers, researchers, policymakers and other interested parties can share ideas and collaborate on the global standards system.