This study, focusing on the case of the Government 3.0 Drive in Korea, analyzes the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of open government efforts for open data, freedom of information, enhanced governance with citizens, and interorganizational collaboration. Using the qualitative data from unstructured interviews with public managers and open government experts, the SWOT analysis found serious challenges around ongoing open government efforts. Open government does not come easy and cheap, but it is rather resourceful innovation that requires substantial investments in soliciting meaningful civic inputs and establishing systematic management of various efforts. This article suggests that contemporary governments should consider more realistic, practical, and tangible approaches to achieving ideals for open government.
AckermanJ. M.Sandoval-BallesterosI. E. (2006). The global explosion of freedom of information laws. ABA Administrative Law Review, 58, 85–130.
2.
AckoffR. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16, 3–9.
3.
BirkinshawP. J. (2010). Freedom of information and its impact in the United Kingdom. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 312–321.
4.
ChapmanR. A.HuntM. (Eds.). (2006). Open government in a theoretical and practical context. Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing.
5.
ChunS.ShulmanS.SandovalR.HovyE. (2010). Government 2.0: Making connections between citizens, data and government. Information Polity, 15, 1–9.
6.
ClarkD. (1996). Open government in Britain: Discourse and practice. Public Money & Management, 16, 23–30.
7.
CoglianeseC. (2009). The transparency president? The Obama administration and open government. Governance, 22, 529–544.
8.
DavisC. N. (2005). Expanding privacy rationales under the Federal Freedom of Information Act: Stigmatization as talisman. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 453–462.
DawesS. S. (2010). Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 377–383.
11.
DawesS. S.HelbigN. (2010). Information strategies for open government: Challenges and prospects for deriving public value from government transparency. In WimmerM. A.SchoollJ.JansennM.ChappeletJ. (Eds.), Electronic government: Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 50–60). Lausanne, Switzerland: EGOV.
12.
EvansA. M.CamposA. (2013). Open government initiatives: Challenges of citizen participation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 32(1), 172–203.
13.
FungA.WeilD. (2010). Open government and open society. In LathropD.RumaL. (Eds.), Open government: Collaboration, transparency, and participation in practice (pp. 105–113). Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
14.
Gil-GarciaJ. R. (2012). Towards a smart state? Inter-agency collaboration, information integration, and beyond. Information Polity, 17, 269–280.
15.
Gil-GarciaJ. R.ChunS.JanssenM. (2009). Government information sharing and integration: Combining the social and the technical. Information Polity, 14, 1–10.
16.
GinsbergW. R. (2011). The Obama administration’s open government initiative: Issues for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
17.
HammittH. (2005). Less safe—The dismantling of public information systems after 9/11. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 429–438.
18.
HaqueA. (2005). Information technology and surveillance: Implications for public administration in a new world order. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 480–485.
19.
HarrisonT. M.GuerreroS.BurkeG. B.CookM.CresswellA.HelbigN.PardoT. A. (2012). Open government and e-government: Democratic challenges from a public value perspective. Information Polity, 17, 83–97.
20.
HarrisonT. M.PardoT. A.CookM. (2012). Creating open government ecosystems: A research and development agenda. Future Internet, 4, 900–928.
21.
HeadB. W. (2008). Wicked problems in public policy. Public Policy, 3, 101–118.
22.
HoodH. D. (2006). Transparency: The key to better governance. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
23.
JanssenK. (2011). The influence of the PSI directive on open government data: An overview of recent developments. Government Information Quarterly, 28, 446–456.
24.
JanssenM.CharalabidisY.ZuiderwijkA. (2012). Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management, 29, 258–268.
25.
KadelS.RouthD. (1993). Implementing collaborative services: New challenges for practitioners and experts in reform. Journal of Education Policy, 8, 121–134.
26.
KalampokisE.TambourisE.TarabanisK. (2011). Open government data: A stage model. In MarijnJ.SchollH. J.WimmerM. A.TanYao-hua (Eds.), Electronic government (pp. 235–246). Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
27.
LathropD.RumaL. (Eds.) (2010). Open government: Collaboration, transparency, and participation in practice. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
28.
LeeG.KwakY. H. (2012). An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 492–503.
29.
LittleJ. W.TompkinsT. (1974). Open government laws: An insider’s view. North Caroline Law Review, 53, 451–475.
30.
LukensmeyerC. J.TorresL. H. (2008). Citizensourcing: Citizen participation in a networked nation. In YangK.BergrudE. (Eds.), Civic engagement in a network society (pp. 207–233). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
31.
MeijerA. J.CurtinD.HillebrandtM. (2012). Open government: Connecting vision and voice. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78, 10–29.
32.
McDermottP. (2010). Building open government. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 401–413.
33.
NamT. (2012a). Freedom of information legislation and its impact on press freedom: A cross-national study. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 521–531.
34.
NamT. (2012b). Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 12–20.
35.
NapoliP. M.KaraganisJ. (2010). On making public policy with publicly available data: The case of U.S. communications policymaking. Government Information Quarterly, 27, 384–391.
36.
PardoT. A.TayiG. (2007). Interorganizational information integration: A key enabler for digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 24, 691–715.
37.
ParksW. (1957). The open government principle: Applying the right to know under the constitution. George Washington Law Review, 26, 1–22.
38.
PatemanC. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. London, England: Cambridge University Press.
39.
PerrittH. HJr (1997). Open government. Government Information Quarterly, 14, 397–406.
40.
PiotrowskiS. J. (2007). Government transparency in the path of administrative reform. Albany: State University of New York Press.
41.
PiotrowskiS. J.RosenbloomD. H. (2002). Nonmission-based values in results-oriented public management: The case of freedom of information. Public Administration Review, 62, 643–657.
42.
PiotrowskiS. J.Van RyzinG. G. (2007). Citizen attitudes toward transparency in local government. American Review of Public Administration, 37, 306–323.
43.
RelyeaH. C. (2009). Federal freedom of information policy: Highlights of recent developments. Government Information Quarterly, 26, 314–320.
44.
RobertsN. (2000). Wicked problems and network approaches to resolution. InternationalPublic Management Review, 1, 1–19.
45.
RobertsonK. G. (1999). Secrecy and open government: Why governments want you to know. Basingstoke, England: Macmillan.
46.
RobinsonD.YuH.ZellerW. P.FeltenE. W. (2009). Government data and the invisible hand. Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 11, 160–175.
47.
RowleyJ. (2007). The wisdom hierarchy: Representations of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science, 33, 163–180.
48.
ShkabaturJ. (2011). Cities @ crossroads: Digital technology and local democracy in America. Brooklyn Law Review76(4), 1413–1486.
49.
SunsteinC. R. (2012). Simpler: The future of government. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
50.
SurowieckiJ. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations. New York, NY: Doubleday.
51.
ThalerR. H.SunsteinC. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
52.
Van BuerenE. M.KlijnE.KoppenjanJ. F. M. (2003). Dealing with wicked problems in networks: Analyzing an environmental debate from a network perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13, 193–212.
53.
WeberE. P.KhademianA. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68, 334–349.
54.
WorthyB. (2008). The future of freedom of information in the United Kingdom. The Political Quarterly, 79, 100–108.
55.
YuH.RobinsonD. G. (2012). The new ambiguity of “open government”. UCLA Law Review Discourse, 58, 178–208.
56.
ZelenyM. (1987). Management support systems: Towards integrated knowledge management. Human Systems Management, 7, 59–70.
