Sustainable Transparency

I attended TransparencyCamp here in DC on February 29th and March 1st. Much discussion about transparency got me thinking about a couple of things, specifically how to achieve sustainable transparency. My thinking breaks this down into two categories – first, what responsibilities fall to government actors and what fall to those outside of government and secondly, what does a realistic course of action towards sustainability actually look like?

What are the responsibilities of government and non-governmental actors?

The camp was devoted to the ways in which new technologies may be used to create more transparency in the United States government. However, little of the discussion that I witnessed considered the relative advantages that different actors have in bringing this to fruition. I propose the following:

1. There are responsibilities which are better tackled by actors working within government and still other responsibilities best accomplished by  actors outside of government. The goal is to strike a balance that leverages the skills and motivations of each while creating a system of checks and balances that ensures the longevity of the system.
2. The government’s responsibilities are to:
   1. maintain and improve the infrastructure that stores and disseminates government information, and
   2. remain aware of and be responsive to citizen’s needs as they evolve.
3. Non-governmental responsibilities are to:
   1. hold government accountable for meeting its obligations,
   2. provide innovation and ideas for improving government services, and
   3. support government in meeting its obligations.

Naturally, this leaves a lot of questions on the table:

• Given modern technologies, should government be parsing data or simply providing it? Can government provide its data in a basic human-readable format only and leave it to third parties to make it interesting?
• If government is not responsible for parsing data, then who pays for it and how? For-profits would of course utilize different business models than non-profits. Should non-profits be in the business of providing data that people come to rely on?
• Does the split in responsibilities change for different areas of government? Are the responsibilities the same for bills being debated in Congress, as they are for the EPA?
• And what about communication between governments and citizens? It seems to me that government should only be able to utilize a communication channel, not own it.

Obviously, this creates more questions than answers, but they’re all interesting things to keep in mind as we move forward.

A Realistic Path towards Sustainability

This is another big concern of mine, not just as it relates to transparency but also as it relates to government adoption of technology. There is so much changing so quickly these days – technology is driving changing expectations of consumers – including citizens, of course! One of the difficulties for government is staying abreast of these changes in a way that is not wasteful of their resources and still enables them to meet the complex array of demands that are already on their time.

From the outside, it is easy to demand more from government without understanding what slows their adoption internally. Frequently, this establishes a confrontational relationship between those inside and those outside that only serves to confuse the issue even further. Now this is not to say that the demands should not be made! Only that those interested in assisting the government to find its way to sustainable transparency should make every effort to build relationships with the government employees who are working towards the same goal. Each has unique responsibilities and capabilities in moving in the right direction, and together they are much more capable.

It also bears noting that a confrontational stance on governmental transparency may be a doomed proposition. If you are forced to share your diary with someone, how will you respond in the future? Even if you are mandated to keep a diary, will you really put down your concerns and fears there? Of course not, you would take every opportunity to protect yourself and keep your ‘sensitive data’ from prying eyes.

I would argue that a confrontational stance to acquiring government data will only make it more difficult to do so in the future and doesn’t actually contribute to sustainable transparency.

What do you think?

Blog Posts
Wayne Moses Burke
March 16th, 2009 3:23 pm
RSS feed for comments