This study aims to develop a comprehensive Government Openness Index (GOI) in developing countries, explore the relationship of the variables in the GOI, and examine the relationship of the GOI and income levels. Based on a linear scaling method, panel data from 101 countries was used to develop a GOI using four variables (e.g. accountability (ACC), information and communication technology (ICT), citizen participation and freedom (CPF), and transparency (TRA)). The results show that ICT performs highest in global means, coefficients of variation, and the contribution rate and contribution level to the change of GOI but CPT performs lowest in the contribution rate. The relationship between GOI and income is significantly positive. The results of this study suggest that developing countries should improve their capacity to utilize and sustain ICT and in particular human capacity for directing ICT toward improving citizen participation and freedom.
Beynon-DaviesPMartinS (2004) Electronic local government and the modernization agenda: progress and prospects for public service improvement. Local Government Studies30(2): 214–229.
DingLLeboTEricksonJSDiFranzoDWilliamsGTLiXFloresJ (2011) TWC LOGD: a portal for linked open government data ecosystems. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web9(3): 325–333.
EvansAMCamposA (2013) Open government initiatives: challenges of citizen participation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management32(1): 172–185. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pam.21651/full (accessed 30 March 2017).
International Telecommunication Union (2009) ITU e-government implementation toolkit: a framework for e-government readiness and action priorities. Available at: http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/cyb/app/docs (accessed 30 March 2017).
14.
IraniZLovePEJonesS (2008) Learning lessons from evaluating e-government: reflective case experiences that support transformational government. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems17(2): 155–164.
15.
JanssenMCharalabidisYZuiderwijkA (2012) Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management29(4): 258–268.
16.
LeeGKwakY (2012) An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly29 (4): 492–503.
17.
MaumbeBMOweiVAlexanderH (2008) Questioning the pace and pathway of e- government development in Africa: a case study of South Africa’s Cape Gateway project. Government Information Quarterly25(4): 757–777.
18.
Open Data Charter (2015) History Towards an International Open Data Charter. Available at: http://opendatacharter.net/history (accessed 30 March 2017).
Open Knowledge International (2017) The Global Open Data Index. Available at: http://2015.index.okfn.org/place/ (accessed May 30 2017).
27.
OsbergLSharpeA (2005) How should we measure the ‘economic’ aspects of well-being? Review of Income and Wealth51(2): 311–336.
28.
SushaIZuiderwijkAJanssenMGronlundA (2015) Benchmarks for evaluating the progress of open data adoption: usage, limitations, and lessons learned. Social Science Computer Review33(5): 613–630.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2014) E-Government Development Database. Available at: http://unpan3.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Data-Center(accessed 30 March 2017).
VeljkovićNBogdanović-DinićSStoimenovL (2014) Benchmarking open government: an open data perspective. Government Information Quarterly31(2): 278–290.
34.
WirtzBWBirkmeyerS (2015) Open government: origin, development, and conceptual perspectives. International Journal of Public Administration38(5): 381–396.
