Open government data use: The Brazilian states and federal district cases

5Citations
Citations of this article
56Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose This paper presents the results of an online survey and subsequent interviews investigating whether, how, and why public administrations of Brazilian states and the federal district (Federation Units) use open government data. According to the literature reviewed, the questions were categorized into four big groups: benefits, barriers, enablers, and drivers. Design/Methodology/Approach The Survey method, based on a questionnaire followed by interviews, was used to collect and analyze data from the open data officers of 26 Brazilian Federation Units. Findings The use of open government data is controversial as responses from the questionnaires and interviews do not match and raise questions about how well-represented each Federation Unit was. Evidence of open government data use was found. Among others, findings showed that political leadership committed to using open data facilitates and motivates public agents to use these data. Additionally, interviews indicated that the lack of human resources with the knowledge, skills, and capabilities to use open data is a relevant barrier to data use. Findings also revealed that open government data mainly support policy and decision-making processes. Practical implications This research contributed to the open data and public administration fields. It portrays diverse realities of open government data use and institutionalization in Brazilian state and district public administrations. In addition, it provides lists of open government data use benefits, barriers, drivers, and enablers from the perspective of these administrations so that they can benchmark against each other and improve their OGD use.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kawashita, I., Baptista, A. A., Soares, D., & Andrade, M. (2024). Open government data use: The Brazilian states and federal district cases. PLoS ONE, 19(3 March). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0298157

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free