آموزش وردپرس ساخت اپلیکیشن

The Open Government Data Policy as a Strategic Use of Information to Entrench Neoliberalism? The Case of Italy


Abstract


The philosophy of Open Government provides a new paradigm of innovation in public admin-istration built around three key words: transparency, participation and collaboration. Greater transparency of information about the PA and its way of working should help to regain public confidence in the institu-tions, motivating people to take a more active part in decision making processes. It should also encourage them to support the institutions by inputting their own knowledge and abilities, consequently engendering a widespread spirit of collaboration between different public authorities and between them and the pub-lic, businesses and non profit organisations, in order to relaunching the economic value of the Public Sec-tor Information (Huijboom, Van den Broek, 2011). The hypothesis behind this contribution, starting from an approach based on an interpretation of significant elements in public action (Moini 2013) and of their conceptual framework (Fischer 2003), is that through which open government, open data, social media, collective intelligence, and connectivity are key words in a new rhetoric of administrative innovation - summed up in the label ‘’government 2.0’’ - which refers to a form of public action easily seen to be drawn from the neoliberal paradigm (Jessop, 2002), even though subject to some variegated form at na-tional level

DOI Code: 10.1285/i20356609v9i2p517

Keywords: Administrative Innovation; Open Government Data; Neoliberalism; Public Action; Public Sec-tor Information

References


Bates J. (2014), “The Strategic Importance of Information Policy for the Contemporary Neoliberal State: the Case of Open Government Data in the United Kingdom.”, Government Information Quarterly, 31 (3): 388 – 395.

Bentivegna S. (2006), “Rethinking Politics in the World of ICTs”, European Journal of Communication, 21, 3: 331-343.

Bertot J. C., Jaeger P. T., and Grimes J. M. (2010), “Using ICTs to Create a Culture of Transparency: E-government and Social Media as Openness and Anti-corruption Tools for Societies”, Government Information Quarterly, 27(3): 264–271.

Bifulco L., de Leonardis O. (2006), “Integrazione tra le politiche come opportunità poli-tica”, in C. Donolo (ed.), Il futuro delle politiche pubbliche, Milano: Mondadori.

Borghi V., de Leonardis O., Procacci G. (2013), La ragione politica. Volume secondo: i discorsi delle politiche, Napoli: Editore Liguori.

Braman S. (2011), “Defining Information Policy”, Journal of Information Policy, 1: 1–5.

Calise M. and De Rosa R. (2003), “Il governo elettronico: visioni, primi risultati e un'a-genda di ricerca”, Rivista italiana di scienza politica, 2: 257-284.

Campbell J.L. (2004), Institutional Change and Globalization, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Castells M. (2004), La città delle Reti, Venezia: Marsilio.

Codagnone C., Osimo D. (2009), Future Technology Needs for Future eGovernment Services. Beyond i2010: eGovernment Current Challenger and Future Scenarios, report prepared for the European Commission, DG INFSO ICT for Government and Public Services.

Coleman S., Taylor J., Van Den Donk W. (eds.) (1999), Parliament in the Age of Internet, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Commaille J. (2004), “Sociologie de l’action publique”, in L. Boussaguet et al., Diction-naire des politiques publiques, Paris: Press de Sciences, 413-421.

d’Albergo E. (2002), “Modelli di governance e cambiamento culturale: le politiche pub-bliche fra mercato e comunità”, in F. Battistelli (ed.), La cultura delle amministrazioni tra retorica e innovazione, Milano: FrancoAngeli, pp. 71-90.

d’Albergo E. (2015), “Azione pubblica, imprese ed egemonia in una politica neoliberi-sta: l’Agenda urbana italiana e il paradigma Smart City”, in G. Moini (ed.) (2015) Neoliberismi e azione pubblica. Il caso italiano. Roma: Ediesse., 147-168.

Davies W. (2014), “Neoliberalism: A Bibliographic Review”, Theory, Culture & Society, 31 (7/8): 309-317.

Di Donato F. (2010), Lo Stato trasparente. Linked open data e cittadinanza attiva, Pisa: Edizioni ETS.

Ferro E. and Molinari F. (2010), “Framing Web 2.0 in the Process of Public Sector Innova-tion: Going Down the Participation Ladder”, European Journal of ePractice, 9(1): 20-35.

Flinders M., Wood M. (2014), “Depoliticisation, Governance and the State”, Poli-cy&Politics, 42 (2): 135-149.

Franceschetti L. (2011), L'amministrazione in rete: uno sguardo sociologico. La comunicazione online in sanità, Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Franceschetti L. (2012), “Etica pubblica e riforma della pubblica amministrazione in Italia”, in P. De Nardis (ed.), L'etica pubblica oggi in Italia: prospettive analitiche a confronto. Rapporto annuale

, Istituto di Studi Politici ‘S. Pio V’, Roma: Editrice Aspes, pp.63 - 118.

Gualmini E. (2003), L’amministrazione nelle democrazie contemporanee, Roma-Bari: Laterza.

Hay C. (2007), Why We Hate Politics, Cambridge: The Policy Press.

Hilgers M. (2012), “The Historicity of the Neoliberal State”, Social Anthropology, 20 (1): 80-94.

Himanen P. (2001), L’etica Hacker e lo spirito dell’età dell’informazione, Milano: Feltri-nelli.

Hood C. (1991), “A Public Management for All Seasons?”, Public Administration, 69, 1: 3-19.

Huijboom N., & Van den Broek, T. (2011), “Open Data: An International Comparison of Strategies”, European Journal of EPractice, 1–13 (April).

Ielo D. (2015), L'Agenda digitale: dalle parole ai fatti. Sanità, scuola, ricerca, start up, smart city, infrastrutture, appalti, anticorruzione, radiotelevisione, Torino: Giappi-chelli.

Jessop B. (2002), “Liberalism, Neo-Liberalism and Urban Governance: A State Theoretical Perspective”, Antipode, 34 (3), pp. 452-472.

Jessop B. (2013), “Putting Neoliberalism in its Time and Place: a Response to the De-bate”, Social Anthropology, 21 (1): 65-74.

Jessop B. (2014), “Repoliticising Depolitisation: Theoretical Preliminaries on some Re-sponses to the American Fiscal and Eurozone Debt Crises”, Policy&Politics, 42 (2): 207-223.

Kettel S. (2008), “Does Depoliticisation Work? Evidence from Britin’s Membership of the Exchange Rate Mechanism 1990-1992”, The British Journal of Poli-tics&International Relations, 10 (4): 630-648.

Knill C. (2001), The Europeanisation of National Administrations. Patterns of Institu-tional Change and Persistence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lascoumes P., Le Gales P. (2012), Sociologie de l’action publique, Paris: Armand Colin.

Le Grand J. (2007), The Other Invisible Hand: Delivering Public Services through Choice and Competition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Linders D. (2012), “From E-government to W-egovernment: Defining a Typology for Citizen Coproduction in the Age of Social Media”, Government Information Quarterly, 29 (4): 446–454.

Lippi A. (2003), “Le istituzioni ‘rendono’? Considerazioni teoriche per un’agenda di ri-cerca”, Teoria Politica, XIX, 1: 101-131.

Longo J. (2011), “#OpenData: Digital-era Governance Thoroughbred or New Public Management Trojan Horse?”, Public Policy and Governance Review, 2(2): 38–51.

Macartney H. (2011), Variegated Neoliberalism. EU Varieties of Capitalism and International Political Economy, Abingdon, New York: Routledge.

Mayntz R. (1999), “La teoria della governance, sfide e prospettive”, Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica, XXIX, 1: 3-22.

Mény Y., Wright V. (eds. 1994), La riforma amministrativa in Europa, Bologna: Il Mulino.

Moini G. (2011), “Le pratiche partecipative nel contesto delle politiche neoliberiste”, Rivista Italiana di Politiche Pubbliche, 1: 93-122.

Moini G. (2013), Interpretare l’azione pubblica. Teorie, strumenti e metodi, Roma: Ca-rocci.

Moini G. (ed. 2015), Neoliberismi e azione pubblica. Il caso italiano. Roma: Ediesse.

Mozzana C., Polizzi E. (2013) “Forme d’uso del sapere esperto nell’argomentazione delle scelte politiche”, in V. Borghi, O. de Leonardis, G. Procacci G. (eds.), La ragione politica. Volume secondo: i discorsi delle politiche, Napoli: Editore Liguori

Nam T. (2011), Toward the New Phase of E-government: An Empirical Study on Citizens Attitude about Open Government and Government 2.0, Paper presented at the 11th Public Management Research Conference, 2-4 June 2011, Maxwell School of Syracuse University.

OECD (2013), Towards Smarter and more Transparent Government. E-government Status Spring 2010, (GOV/PGC/EGOV(2010)3).

Osborne D., Gaebler T. (1995), Dirigere e governare, Milano: Garzanti (ed. or. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1992).

Parycek P., Sachs M. (2009), “Open Government: Information Flow in Web 2.0”, Euro-pean Journal of ePractice, 9(1): 59–70.

Peck J., Tickell A. (2002), “Neoliberalizing space”, in N. Brenner, N. Theodore (eds), Space of Neoliberalism. Urban restructuring in North America and Western Europe, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Peck J., Theodore N. and Brenner N. (2009), “Neoliberal Urbanism: Models, Moments, Mutations”, SAIS Review, 29 (1): 49-67.

Rhodes R. A. W. (1996), “The New Governance: Governing without Government”, Political Studies, 44: 652-667.

Rhodes R. A. W. (1997), Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity, and Accountability, Buckingham-Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Rifkin J. (2015), La società a costo marginale zero. L’internet delle cose, l’ascesa del commons collaborative e l’eclissi del capitalismo, Milano: Mondadori.

Sartori L. (2013), “Open Government: What Else?”, Le istituzioni del federalismo, 3-4: 753-776.

Sassen S. (2008), Una sociologia della globalizzazione, Torino: Einaudi Editore.

Saxby S. (2011). “Three Years in the Life of UK National Information Policy. The Politics and Process of Policy Development”, International Journal of Private Law, 4(1/2): 1–31.

Sum N. (2009), “The Production of Hegemonic Policy Discourses: ‘Competitiveness’ as a Knowledge Brand and Its (Re-)Contestualisations”, Critical Policy Studies, 3 (3-4):336-356.

Trechsel A.H., Kies R., and al. (2003), Evaluation of The Use of New Technologies in Or-der to Facilitate Democracy in Europe, European Parliament, STOA 116 EN 10-2003.

Vaccari C. (2009), “Nuovi media, strategie elettorali e partecipazione. La campagna presidenziale Usa 2008”, Comunicazione politica, 3: 399-420.


Full Text: PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.