The digital transformation has led to fundamental changes in the way public administration operates, calling for a new paradigm in public sector governance. Furthermore, since the early 2000s, attention has been drawn to the appearance of a new form of governance, termed “collaborative governance”. In this context, the ecosystem metaphor has increasingly been put forward as a tool for leading change in the public sector and beyond, as it accounts for the interdependency of social, technological and information systems and stresses their self-organizing and co-evolutionary character. To systematize the use of the ecosystem metaphor in analysing and leading the establishment of data ecosystems and to take stock of the know-how in the field, the present paper proposes an analytical framework that draws on a synthesis of the current literature on data ecosystems. To demonstrate its practical value and its limitations, the framework has been applied to a concrete case: the Linked Open Data Ecosystem for the Performing Arts. The analytical framework rests on four key dimensions which represent the cornerstones of a data ecosystem: (i) data sharing; (ii) interoperability and shared infrastructures; (iii) stakeholder involvement; and (iv) economic sustainability. It is suggested that the ecosystem approach, along with the analytical framework provided in this paper, be used to lead the digital transformation in a variety of areas where data and information systems play an important role.
AnsellC.GashA. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
2.
BoninaC.EatonB. (2020). Cultivating open government data platform ecosystems through governance: Lessons from Buenos Aires, Mexico City and Montevideo. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101479
3.
BourneP. E.LorschJ. R.GreenE. D. (2015). Perspective: Sustaining the big-data ecosystem. Nature, 527(7576), S16–S17. https://doi.org/10.1038/527S16a
CarrollS. R.HerczogE.HudsonM.RussellK.StallS. (2021). Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR Principles for Indigenous data futures. Scientific Data, 8(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00892-0
6.
ChenJ.YanY.MinginsC. (2011, November). A three-dimensional model for egovernment development with cases in China's regional e-government practice and experience [Paper Presentation]. 2011 International Conference on Management of e-Commerce and e-Government (ICMeCG) (pp. 113–120), IEEE.
7.
CollisD. J. (1994). Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities?Strategic management journal, 15(S1), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250150910
8.
DaviesT. (2012). Open Data: infrastructures and ecosystems. In Paper presented at the ACM Web Science Conference, Evanston, Illinois, 2012.
9.
DavisonR. M.WagnerC.MaL. C. (2005). From government to e-government: A transition model. Information Technology and People, 18(3), 280–299. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840510615888
10.
DawesS. S.VidiasovaL.ParkhimovichO. (2016). Planning and designing open government data programs: An ecosystem approach. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.01.003
11.
Deloitte. (2012). Open Data driving growth, ingenuity and innovation. Deloitte analytics paper.
12.
DunleavyP.MargettsH. (2015). Design principles for essentially digital governance[Paper presentation]. Paper presented at the 111th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, 3–6 September 2015.
13.
DunleavyP.MargettsH.BastowS.TinklerJ. (2006). New public management is dead—long live digital-era governance. Journal of public administration research and theory, 16(3), 467–494. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057
14.
EmersonK.NabatchiT.BaloghS. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011
15.
EstermannB. (2018). Development Paths Towards Open Government – An Empirical Analysis Among Heritage Institutions. Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), 599–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.10.005
16.
EstermannB. (2020). Creating a Linked Open Data Ecosystem for the Performing Arts (LODEPA). Arti dello Spettacolo / Performing Arts, 6(Special Issue), 31–49. ISSN 2421-2679
17.
EstermannB.FraefelM.NeuroniA.VogelJ. (2018). Conceptualizing a National Data Infrastructure for Switzerland. Information Polity, 23(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-170033
18.
EstermannB.JulienF. (2019). A linked digital future for the performing arts: Leveraging synergies along the value chain. Canadian Arts Presenting Association (CAPACOA) in cooperation with the Bern University of Applied Sciences.
19.
European Union. (2017). Tallinn Declaration on eGovernment. Tallinn, 6 October 2017.
20.
GamaK.LóscioB. F. (2014). Towards ecosystems based on open data as a service. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2014) (659–664). https://doi.org/10.5220/0004974506590664
21.
GuptaA.PanagiotopoulosP.BowenF. (2020). An orchestration approach to smart city data ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153(April 2020), 119929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119929
22.
HallW.ShadboltN.TiropanisT.O'HaraK.DaviesT. (2012). Open data and charities. Nominet Trust.
23.
HarrisonT. M.PardoT. A.CookM. (2012). Creating open government ecosystems: A research and development agenda. Future Internet, 4(4), 900–928. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi4040900
24.
HeimstädtM.SaundersonF.HeathT. (2014). From Toddler to Teen: Growth of an Open Data Ecosystem. JeDEM - EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 6(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v6i2.330
25.
HsiehH. F.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
26.
HuvilaI. (2009). Ecological framework of information interactions and information infrastructures. Journal of Information Science, 35(6), 695–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551509336705
27.
HuxhamC.VangenS.HuxhamC.EdenC. (2000). The challenge of collaborative governance. Public Management an International Journal of Research and Theory, 2(3), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030000000021
InanG. G.BititciU. S. (2015). Understanding organizational capabilities and dynamic capabilities in the context of micro enterprises: a research agenda. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 210 (2 Dec. 2015), 310–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.371
30.
JanssenM.Van Der VoortH. (2016). Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.02.003
31.
JensenD.CampbellJ. (2019). The case for a digital ecosystem for the environment (Discussion Paper). UN Environment Programme.
32.
JetzekT. (2017). Innovation in the open data ecosystem: Exploring the role of real options thinking and multi-sided platforms for sustainable value generation through open data. In CarayannisE. G.SindakisS. (Eds.), Analytics, Innovation, and Excellence-Driven Enterprise Sustainability (pp. 137–168). Palgrave Macmillan, US.
33.
KhanM. H. (2019). Knowledge, skills and organizational capabilities for structural transformation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 48(March 2019), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2018.05.006
34.
KimD. Y.GrantG. (2010). E-government maturity model using the capability maturity model integration. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 12(3), 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1108/13287261011070858
35.
KitchenhamB. (2004). Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Joint Technical Report. Keele University, UK / National ICT Australia Ltd, ISSN:1353-7776.
36.
KitchenhamB.BreretonO. P.BudgenD.TurnerM.BaileyJ.LinkmanS. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering–a systematic literature review. Information and software technology, 51(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009
37.
KitsiosF.PapachristosN.KamariotouM. (2017, July). Business models for open data ecosystem: Challenges and motivations for entrepreneurship and innovation. In 2017 IEEE 19th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI) (Vol. 1, pp. 398–407). IEEE.
38.
KlievinkB.JanssenM. (2009). Realizing joined-up government—Dynamic capabilities and stage models for transformation. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.12.007
39.
KlievinkB.van der VoortH.VeenemaW. (2018). Creating value through data collaboratives. Information Polity, 23(4), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-180070
40.
KlijnE.-H. (2008). Governance and governance networks in Europe: An assessment of ten years of research on the theme. Public Management Review, 10(4), 505–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030802263954
41.
KontokostaC. E. (2013). Energy disclosure, market behavior, and the building data ecosystem. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1295(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12163
42.
KuipersB. S.HiggsM.KickertW.TummersL.GrandiaJ.Van der VoetJ. (2014). The management of change in public organizations: A literature review. Public administration, 92(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12040
43.
LindmanJ.KinnariT.RossiM. (2016). Business roles in the emerging open-data ecosystem. IEEE Software, 33(5), 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2015.25
44.
LnenickaM.KomarkovaJ. (2019). Big and open linked data analytics ecosystem: Theoretical background and essential elements. Government Information Quarterly, 36(1), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.11.004
45.
MargettsH.DunleavyP. (2013). The second wave of digital-era governance: A quasi-paradigm for government on the Web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 371(1987). http://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2012.0382
46.
MartiM.EstermannB.NeuroniA. (2022). “Die Tallinn-Prinzipien als Wegbereiter der digitalen Transformation des öffentlichen Sektors in der Schweiz”. In MertesA.PlegerL. E. (Eds.), Digitale Transformation der öffentlichen Verwaltung in der Schweiz (pp. 299–328). Springer Gabler.
47.
MartinS.TurkiS.RenaultS. (2017). Open data ecosystems. Introducing the stimulator function. In KőA.FrancesconiE. (Eds.), Electronic government and the information systems perspective. EGOVIS 2017. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 10441, pp. 49–63). Springer.
MaulanaR. Y.DečmanM. (2023). Collaborative governance in the digital transformation age: A systematic literature review with bibliometric mapping. Central European Public Administration Review, 21(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2023.1.02
50.
McCallumE.WeichtR.McMullanL.PriceA. (2018). EntreComp into action: Get inspired, make it happen. In BacigalupoM.O’KeeffeW. (Eds.), EUR 29105 EN. Publications Office of the European Union.
51.
NardiB.O’DayV. (1999). Information ecologies: Using technology with heart. MIT Press.
52.
NinckA.BurkiL.HungerbuehlerR.MuhlemannH. (2014). Systemics: Viable solutions for complex challenges. Heuris publishing.
53.
OECD. (2017). Government at a Glance 2017. OECD.
54.
OECD. (2019). Government at a Glance 2019. OECD.
55.
OECD. (2021). Government at a Glance 2021. OECD.
56.
PetticrewM.RobertsH. (2008). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. John Wiley & Sons.
57.
PoikolaA.KolaP.HintikkaK. A. (2011). Public data. An introduction to opening information sources. Ministry of Transport and Communications.
PonteD. (2015). Enabling an open data ecosystem. ECIS 2015 Research-in-Progress Papers. Paper 55. ISBN 978-3-00-050284-2. Retrieved February 21, 2022, from http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2015_rip/55
60.
StyrinE.Luna-ReyesL. F.HarrisonT. M. (2017). Open data ecosystems: An international comparison. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 11(1), 132–156. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-01-2017-0006
61.
UbaldiB. (2013). Open government data: Towards empirical analysis of open government data initiatives (OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, NO.22(22), 61).
62.
UN. (2016). United Nations e-government survey 2016. E-government in support of sustainable development. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ST/ESA/PAD/SER.E/205.
63.
UN. (2018). United Nations e-government survey 2018. Gearing e-government to support transformation towards sustainable and resilient societies. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ST/ESA/PAD/SER.E/212.
64.
UN. (2020). United Nations e-government survey 2020. Digital government in the decade of action for sustainable development. With addendum on COVID-19 response. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. ST/ESA/PAD/SER.E/214.
65.
van DongeW.BharosaN.JanssenM. F. W. H. A. (2022). Data-driven government: Cross-case comparison of data stewardship in data ecosystems. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), : 101642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101642
66.
Van SchalkwykF.WillmersM.McNaughtonM. (2016). Viscous open data: The roles of intermediaries in an open data ecosystem. Information Technology for Development, 22(sup1), 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2015.1081868
VogelR.MasalD. (2015). Public leadership: A review of the literature and framework for future research. Public Management Review, 17(8), 1165–1189. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.895031
70.
WangC.MedagliaR.ZhengL. (2018). Towards a typology of adaptive governance in the digital government context: The role of decision-making and accountability. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 306–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.08.003
71.
Welle DonkerF.van LoenenB. (2017). How to assess the success of the open data ecosystem?International Journal of Digital Earth, 10(3), 284–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2016.1224938
72.
WrightB. E.MoynihanD. P.PandeyS. K. (2012). Pulling the levers: Transformational leadership, public service motivation, and mission valence. Public administration review, 72(2), 206–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02496.x
73.
ZuiderwijkA.JanssenM.DavisC. (2014). Innovation with open data: Essential elements of open data ecosystems. Information Polity, 19(1–2), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-140329
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
