Current open data systems lag behind in their promised value creation and sustainability. The objective of the current study is twofold: 1) to investigate whether existing open data systems meet the requirements of open data ecosystems, and 2) to develop a research agenda that discusses the gaps between current open data systems on the one hand and participatory, value-creating, sustainable open data ecosystems on the other hand. The literature reveals that the main characteristics of value-creating, sustainable open data ecosystems are user-drivenness, inclusiveness, circularity, and skill-based. Our comparative case study of five open data systems in various application domains and countries highlighted that none of these systems are real open data ecosystems: they often do not balance open data supply and demand, exclude specific user groups and domains, are linear, and lack skill-training. We elaborate on a research agenda that discusses how research should address the challenge of making open data ecosystems more value-generating and sustainable.@en

In order to facilitate and coordinate the sharing of spatial data, governments worldwide have been developing Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs) for many years. Recently, technological, institutional and societal developments have caused these SDIs to shift towards more open infrastructures in which non- governmental actors are embraced as key stakeholders of the infrastructure. This move towards more open SDIs created additional challenges related to the governance of the infrastructure and required the implementation of new and additional governance approaches and instruments. This chapter analyses the governance of the UK open spatial data infrastructure, by examining the different governance instruments used in the past 10 years for governing the relationships and dependencies with non-government actors. The analysis demonstrates how governance of the open spatial data infrastructure in the UK is achieved by combining various traditional governance instruments such as strategic management, joint decision- making, allocation of tasks and competencies, market-based governance and interorganizational culture and knowledge sharing.@en

Onderzoek AMS E-GOS Local Governance modellen van open data bij gemeenten en de performatie van open data. In 2017 is het Kenniscentrum Open Data begonnen met het project ‘Effective Governance of Open Spatial data’ (E-GOS) Local. Het E-GOS Local onderzoeksproject was een uitbreiding op het E-GOS-project uitgevoerd door Dr. Glenn Vancauwenberghe. Waar het E-GOS project zich richtte op de ver-gelijking van governance modellen voor open data beleid tussen landen, richtte het E-GOS Local zich op de vergelijking van governance modellen voor open geodata beleid tussen gemeenten. In dit on-derzoek is de link tussen de ingezette governance instrumenten voor open data beleid bij gemeenten met de performantie van dat open data beleid in kaart gebracht. Het governance model van het open data beleid van de gemeente Amsterdam is geanalyseerd. Aspecten die hierbij in beschouwing zijn genomen, zijn of aan alle governance componenten voor open data beleid voldaan wordt, welke in-strumenten worden toegepast en wat de impact is van het beleid op de performantie van open (geo)data. Daarnaast is een vergelijkend onderzoek uitgevoerd in Den Haag, Eindhoven, Rotterdam en Utrecht om een beeld te krijgen welke governance modellen voor open data beleid in andere ge-meenten gehanteerd worden, en welke effecten die op de performantie van open data hebben.@en

The effective development and implementation of open data initiatives requires governance in order to avoid gaps, duplications, contradictions and missed opportunities. Appropriate governance instruments should be established to coordinate the activities and contributions of different stakeholders. This chapter reviews the governance of open data initiatives worldwide, using a governance instruments approach as introduced by public administration researchers to analyse coordination and governance in the public sector. Six sets of governance instruments in the governance of open data initiatives are identified: collective decision-making structures, strategic management, allocation of tasks and responsibilities, creation of markets, interorganizational culture and knowledgemanagement, and regulation and formalization of open data initiatives. The chapter shows how each of these six sets of instruments have been applied in various countries in the governance of nation-wide open data initiatives.@en

With the launch of a national data portal, the development of a national open data licence and the publication of various policy reports and action plans on open data, all in 2010, the United Kingdom took several major steps in implementing its open data agenda. In the following years, the UK further developed the various components of its open data initiative, providing access to a wide range of government data and promoting its re-use for a range of different purposes. The United Kingdom is now considered as one of the pioneers and leaders in open data worldwide. This chapter discusses the development and implementation of the open data agenda in the United Kingdom.@en

In the past 20 years, European public authorities have invested considerable resources in the development of spatial data infrastructures. With the European INSPIRE Directive as an important driver, national spatial data infrastructures were developed throughout Europe to facilitate and coordinate the exchange and sharing of geographic data. While the original focus of these spatial data infrastructure was mainly on data sharing among public authorities, it became more and more evident that these data could also be of great value to users outside the public sector. In recent years, several countries and public administrations started to make a shift towards the establishment of an ‘open’ spatial data infrastructure, in which also businesses, citizens and non- governmental actors were considered as key stakeholders of the infrastructure. This chapter provides an analysis of the measures and solutions implemented in four European countries (the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Denmark and Finland) to make their spatial data infrastructures open to businesses, citizens and other stakeholders. The analysis shows that in these four countries the move towards more open spatial data infrastructures can mainly be seen in the increased availability of geographic data and spatially enabled services to citizens, businesses and other stakeholders.@en

In the search for the ideal spatial data infrastructure a common ground has been established for the development of open spatial data infrastructures. Starting from confidential, highly restricted data with use limited to particular public sector users, SDIs across Europe have developed towards a wider focus, civil society oriented infrastructure enabling a multitude of users to access, share, use and re-use datasets and services from a wide variety of domains both nationally and internationally. Especially in recent years, several countries and public administrations started to make a shift towards the establishment of an open spatial data infrastructures (SDIs), in which also businesses, citizens and non-governmental actors were considered as key stake-holders of the infrastructure. In this workshop, the concept of Open SDI/INSPIRE was introduced to describe characterize the development and implementation of more open spatial data infrastructures. During the workshop a first prototype of the ‘Map of Open SDI in Europe’ was presented, showing the results of a first exploration of the openness of NSDI/INSPIRE implementation in Europe. The ‘Map of Open SDI in Europe’, a project of the Knowledge Centre Open Data of Delft University of Technology, is developed to provide SDI decision makers, practitioners and researchers with a more comprehensive understanding of the openness of spatial data infrastructures in Europe. The Map covers three key dimensions of Open SDIs: the readiness, the data availability and accessibility, the use of spatial data and the associated benefits. The map provides an overview of the actions and initiatives taken in different Member States to open their SDI to stakeholders outside the public sector. A workshop was organised at the INSPIRE Conference 2017 to demonstrate the map to the public and get input on how to further it improve it. During the workshop, several brainstorm sessions were organized on each of the key dimensions of Open SDIs. The main aim of these brainstorm sessions was to collect ideas on how to measure and assess each of the four dimensions and explore good practices that could be added to the Map. This report provides a summary of the workshop and the main results. @en

In the past 30 years, public administrations in Europe and worldwide have invested considerable resources in the development and implementation of Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs) for promoting, facilitating and coordinating the exchange and sharing of geographic data. SDI research has been an important driver and enabler for SDI development and implementation. Researchers across the world have been exploring various issues around the development and implementation of SDIs. While over the last decade SDIs significantly matured, new research challenges emerged and new researchers and research disciplines entered the domain of SDI research. There is, however, a risk of SDI research becoming more fragmented into separate – disciplinary, organizational and geographic – silos, due to a lack of initiatives enabling and facilitating collaboration and exchange of knowledge and experiences among SDI researchers. The ‘SDI Research and Strategies towards 2030’ workshop wanted to build further and continue the work done in past initiatives to promote knowledge sharing and collaboration among SDI researchers. In 2009 and 2010 two SDI research workshops were held at the GSDI Conferences in Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and Singapore, allowing especially early stage researchers in the domain of SDI to present their ongoing research and exchange views and ideas on new research challenges. One of the last attempts to develop an SDI research agenda already dates from 2005, when Bernard et al. drafted their proposal for an SDI research agenda, identifying several key research issues raised by the transition from GIS to SDIs. The ‘SDI Research and Strategies towards 2030’ workshop aimed to initiate the definition of a renewed Spatial Data Infrastructure Research Agenda. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions held during the workshop. @en

Open data assessment is about collecting, analysing and providing information on the performance of open data initiatives. Open data assessments are used to monitor the progress of open data initiatives, compare and benchmark the performance of different organizations or countries and hold governments and agencies to account for their decisions and investments. In the past ten years, many different open data assessment frameworks have been developed by researchers and practitioners around the world. Open data assessments can be divided into three main categories: open data readiness assessments, open data implementation assessments and open data impact assessments. Each of these three categories deal with the assessment of open data but focus on different aspects of open data initiatives and practices. In order to provide a better understanding of ongoing assessment initiatives and practices, this chapter reviews fifteen main open data assessment frameworks.@en

This book is about open data, i.e. data that does not have any barriers in the (re)use. Open data aims to optimize access, sharing and using data from a technical, legal, financial, and intellectual perspective. Data increasingly determines the way people live their lives today. Nowadays, we cannot imagine a life without real-time traffic information about our route to work, information of the daily news or information about the local weather. At the same time, citizens themselves now are constantly generating and sharing data and information via many different devices and social media systems. Especially for governments, collection, management, exchange, and use of data and information have always been key tasks, since data is both the primary input to and output of government activities. Also for businesses, non-profit organizations, researchers and various other actors, data and information are essential.@en

The effective development and implementation of spatial data infrastructures (SDIs) requires governance in order to avoid gaps, duplications, contradictions and missed opportunities in the implementation of different SDI components. Appropriate governance instruments should be established to coordinate the activities and contributions of different stakeholders. This article reviews the governance of national SDIs in Europe before, during and after the adoption of the European INSPIRE Directive, which aimed to establish an infrastructure for spatial information in the European community. The analysis is based on a governance instruments approach as introduced by public administration researchers to analyse coordination and governance in the public sector. The study shows that the instruments-based approach is a useful tool for analysing governance in the context of SDIs and contributes to a better understanding of SDI governance. Evidence was found for the adoption and use of each of six sets of governance instruments in the governance of national SDIs in Europe: collective decision-making structures, strategic management, allocation of tasks and responsibilities, creation of markets, inter-organizational culture and knowledge management, and regulation and formalization of the infrastructure.@en

This paper introduces the Open Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) Assessment Framework as a new approach for assessing the openness of SDIs. Open SDIs are SDIs in which non-government actors such as businesses, citizens, researchers and non-profit organizations can contribute to the development and implementation of the SDI, use spatial data with as few restrictions as possible and benefit from using these geographic data. A pilot application of the new framework resulted in the Map of Open SDI in Europe, which aims to show the level of openness of national SDIs in Europe. The map could become a relevant and practical tool that shows the status of Open SDIs in Europe and supports decision makers and practitioners in making their own SDI more open.@en

Many European countries are setting up initiatives and taking actions to make their data ‘open’, i.e. to make data freely available for use and re-use without restrictions. The presentation provides an analysis of how European member states are dealing with both the governance of their open spatial data policies and the monitoring and assessing the performance of these policies. Particular attention will be paid to the alignment of open data policies and spatial data policies in European countries. The presentation also aims to assess the performance of current open spatial data policies in Europe. While in certain member states monitoring the performance and impact of spatial data policies is only done in the context of the official INSPIRE monitoring and reporting process, some member states go further, and have developed and implemented a more detailed and systematic monitoring framework. The presentation critically evaluates current practices and experiences in monitoring the performance of spatial data policies, and explore how they fit into existing models and frameworks for measuring the performance of – open – data policies in general.@en

The European Union Location Framework (EULF), as part of the Interoperable Solutions for European Public Administrations (ISA) Programme of the EU (EC DG DIGIT), aims to enhance the interactions between governments, businesses and citizens by embedding location information into e-Government processes. The challenge remains to find scientific sound and at the same time practicable approaches to estimate or measure the impact of location enablement of e-Government processes on the performance of the processes. A method has been defined to estimate process performance in terms of variables describing the efficiency, effectiveness, as well as the quality of the output of the work processes. A series of use cases have been identified, corresponding to existing e-Government work processes in which location information could bring added value. In a first step, the processes are described by means of BPMN (Business Process Model and Notation) to better understand the process steps, the actors involved, the spatial data flows, as well as the required input and the generated output. In a second step the processes are assessed in terms of the (sub-optimal) use of location information and the potential enhancement of the process by better integrating location information and services. The process performance is measured ex ante (before using location enabled e-Government services) and ex-post (after the integration of such services) in order to estimate and measure the impact of location information. The paper describes the method for performance measurement and highlights how the method is applied to one use case, i.e. the process of traffic safety monitoring. The use case is analysed and assessed in terms of location enablement and its potential impact on process performance. The results of applying the methodology on the use case revealed that performance is highly impacted by factors such as the way location information is collected, managed and shared throughout the process, and the degree to which spatial data are harmonized. The work led also to the formulation of some recommendations to enrich the BPMN standard with additional methods for annotating processes, and to the proposal of the development of some tools for automatic process performance. In that context some planned future work is highlighted as well.@en

Many European countries are setting up initiatives and taking actions to make their data ‘open’, i.e. to make their data freely available for use and re-use without restrictions. The Digital Agenda for Europe, the first of seven flagships initiatives under Europe 2020, encourages governments to stimulate content markets by making public sector information available in a transparent and effective manner. It is hoped that the greater availability of interoperable public data will catalyse the secondary use of such data, leading to the growth of information industries and better government transparency. A large part of governmental data can be considered as spatial data, i.e. data that refer to a location on the earth. Typical examples of spatial data are topographical maps, address data, road data, and hydrographical data. Spatial data are becoming increasingly important in society, as most of the societal, environmental and economic challenges that governments, businesses and citizens are facing, require spatial understanding and insight.@en

This presentation reviews the ongoing governance efforts of the European Union and its National Member States to create a multinational infrastructure for spatial information in the European Community (INSPIRE)(Commission of the European Communities, 2007). In order to achieve this, it is necessary to establish a measure of governance between the users and providers of the information so that information and knowledge can be combined. The effective implementation of infrastructures for spatial information before 2021 requires governance by all those with an interest in the establishment of such infrastructures, whether as contributors or users. By governance we mean the structures, policies, actors and institutions by which INSPIRE is managed through decisions on accessing, sharing, exchanging and using the relevant available spatial information. Appropriate governance instruments (Verhoest and Bouckaert, 2005) which extend to the various levels of government and take account of the distribution of powers and responsibilities with the Member States should therefore be established (Masser and Crompvoets, 2015) This presentation systematically reviews the governance of INSPIRE at the European Commission as well as Member States levels based on the qualitative country reports. other implementation reports (Masser and Crompvoets, 2015), and the experiences of the INSPIRE Monitoring and Implementation groups and the Thematic Clusters. The review focuses on the different types of instruments used and how these instruments are used. The review outcomes could contribute to the creation of sustainable platforms that encourage different actors and institutions to participate, to discuss and argue various interests, and to strengthem the collaboration during policy making and implementation.@en

This presentation reviews the ongoing governance efforts of National Member States of the European Union to successfully implement INSPIRE. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to establish a measure of governance between the users and providers of the information so that information and knowledge can be combined. The effective implementation of infrastructures for spatial information before 2021 requires governance by all those with an interest in the establishment of such infrastructures, whether as contributors or users. By governance we mean the structures, policies, actors and institutions by which INSPIRE is managed through decisions on accessing, sharing, exchanging and using the relevant available spatial information. Appropriate governance instruments which extend to the various levels of government and take account of the distribution of powers and responsibilities within the Member States should therefore be established. This presentation systematically reviews the governance of INSPIRE at Member State level based on the qualitative country reports (2013 and 2016), and the experiences of the INSPIRE Monitoring and Implementation groups. The review includes the different types of instruments used and how these instruments are effectively used. The review outcomes could contribute to enhance the understanding of governing INSPIRE in the different EU member states.@en