Open data?

Erik A. M. Borglund · Tove Sofia Engvall

45 citations0/0 files storedRecords Management Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Digital and Traditional Archives Management E-Government and Public Services Information Science and Libraries

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of the article is to investigate what characterizes the information constructs that the archival discourse and the open data discourse communicate in text, and what their similarities and differences are. This article proposes that it is possible to see the open data initiative and modern archival practice as two discourses that have used different terminology to express and communicate their messages in the literature. In this article, we have applied a hypothesis-like assumption that the information constructs used in open data are actually nothing other than records, as they are in the archival discourse. Design/methodology/approach – This article is based on a mixed method approach. A quantitative text analysis (word count) was carried out in a large set of documents representing the open data discourse and in the archival discourse. This was followed by a qualitative text analysis. Findings – It was found that both discourses did focus on records. However, the opendata discourse very seldom used the term record, but used information and data much more frequently. The archival discourse used the term information almost as often as record. A possible adaption of communication strategies can be identified, targeting a much wider audience through a user-centered approach. This could be an indication of a change in the archival discourse, which seems to be moving from a discourse that is very much regulated by law toward a discourse that is more focused on benefit and usability. Originality/value – This research indicates that it is possible to interpret both the open data and the archival discourse as one united discourse, an effect derived from working with e-government. There is an ongoing harmonization of the words used, and in the studied archival discourse, a more user- and business-oriented focus can be seen.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 45 citations exist upstream.

Cited by

2017Open government data and the private sector: An empirical view on business models and value creation 2015State-of-the-art in open data research: Insights from existing literature and a research agenda 2017Examining open government data (OGD) usage in India through UTAUT framework 2021Empowering professional and ethical balance in digital record management 2017Rethinking Archives as Digital: The Consequences of "Paper Minds" in Illustrations and Definitions of E-archives 2020Open government data (OGD): challenging the concept of a “Designated Community”2016“The information has moved away from home” : Conceptions about how an outsourcing policy affects public records management 2021A reliable reflection? Challenges when documenting physical infrastructure

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.