scholarly journals From a culture of caution to a culture of confidence: facilitating the good governance of administrative data in the UK

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Stevens ◽  
Graeme Laurie
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Share Data ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Sector Data

ABSTRACT ObjectivesThis talk unpacks the culture of caution surrounding the use and sharing of administrative data in the UK and suggests the adoption of the authors’ novel decision-making tool and organisational strategy based on the public interest, to achieve good governance. Administrative data, which implicate all public sector data, are in constant demand –to be shared for ‘joined-up’ services, used as evidence in Government inquiries and for research purposes. These demands are often made on the basis that they serve ‘the public interest’ but public authorities are without the decision-making tools to make proportionate decisions outwith narrow and risk-averse interpretations of legal requirements. Public authorities are operating within a ‘culture of caution’, fuelled by misperceptions of what the law does or does not require for data to be used/shared ‘in the public interest’; uncertainties regarding incentives for data sharing; perceived controversies if something ‘goes wrong’; and imbalanced assessment of risks without robust assessment of potential public interests to be served or the potential ‘harm’ from not sharing data. ApproachThis discussion is substantiated by reference to major contributions to this field (e.g. Law Commission Report on data sharing in 2014; Thomas and Walport’s data sharing review in 2008 etc.) and to the authors’ engagement with the administrative data community as part of the legal work package to the Administrative Data Research Centre Scotland. ResultsThe research reveals that public authorities exhibit extreme hesitance to undertake data sharing initiatives for reasons including: misperceptions of the law (due to legal complexity, lack of legal precedent and authoritative guidance on data sharing) lack of resources and expertise to manage increasing demands to use/share data  individuals fear reprisal if something ‘goes wrong’ with data handling  senior-management fear public backlash for new uses of data and organisational reputational damage  no understanding of the incentives to share data if there is no ‘direct’ benefit to the public authority in question. ConclusionWe conclude by focussing on how to overcome the culture of caution, to one of confidence. We suggest the adoption of our decision-making matrix to help data custodians distinguish between real versus perceived barriers to data sharing (i.e. dispelling legal myths and identifying areas where changes can be made). We also introduce strategic solutions in our public interest mandate which entails overt commitment to use public sector data when it is in the public interest to do so.

scholarly journals Custodian Legal Culture - Enabling Multi-Stakeholder Research Collaborations Between Academia and Government in the UK

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stergios Aidinlis
Keyword(s):  
Data Sharing ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Public Bodies

BackgroundEmpirical studies suggest that some public bodies in England are very reluctant to grant access to administrative data for various purposes. This poster presents the conclusions drawn in my so-far research on the driving forces of administrative discretion in respect of data sharing for social research in the public interest in England. ObjectivesThis poster aims to work towards answering a fundamental question for methodological models for engagement and research co-production between academia and government. This question is: what are the driving forces behind the exercise of data custodian discretion when it comes to deciding whether they will disclose it or not for research purposes? Methods (including data)First, this poster presents the findings of a qualitative case-study involving semi-structured interviews with individuals working for three different public bodies in England, two data providers and a body facilitating administrative data sharing for research. Second, it integrates a pilot survey which will aim to elicit the perspectives of ADR conference attendees, both admin data researchers and other stakeholders, on the crucial questions that revolve around the disclosure of data for research by different providers across the UK. FindingsI propose a distinction between structural (e.g. the law/ infrastructural decision-making models) and cultural (e.g. perceptions of data ownership / trust-distrust in data sharing collaborators) influences, claiming that the latter are more salient in steering custodian discretion to share administrative data for research in practice than the former. I identify five main candidate cultural drivers and elaborate on them. ConclusionsWithout a sound socio-legal understanding of the driving forces of discretionary legal powers to share data on behalf of the providers, building bridges between them and the academic community in the interest of promoting social research in the public interest will remain a resilient challenge.

scholarly journals Good governance and transparency

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-353
Author(s):  
Laura Vilone ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Action ◽  
Special Place ◽  
The One

The notion of “good governance” implies the special place given to the State. Such a model is defined by the effectiveness of certain guarantees such as the independence of the judiciary, the correct and fair management of expenditure but also administrative transparency. Indeed, the latter depends on the sincerity of those involved in public action, on the one hand, and the constant dialogue between the public authorities and the public, on the other hand. The purpose of this intervention is to demonstrate that the realisation of the model of “good governance” is based, above all, on the existence of an administration that fully understands the requirements of administrative transparency. The two pillars of “good governance” would thus be the foundations of the principle of transparency: communication with citizens and their participation in the process of the decision-making process.

scholarly journals Opportunities and Principles of Using Digitalization in the Dialogue of Society and the Public Authorities in the UK on the Example of the Greater London Authority

2021 ◽  
pp. 109-113
Author(s):  
N. V. Eremina
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Digital Tools ◽  
British Society ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Internet Infrastructure ◽  
Government Institutions ◽  
The Uk

The UK is one of the leaders in the use of digital tools in the interaction of government institutions and citizens. Now we are witnessing an active dialogue between various British institutions precisely in the digital dimension, as the transfer of data on vaccinations and hospitalizations from hospitals to other structures is carried out thanks to blockchain technologies. Of course, the explosion of interest in the use of digital events was provided by the coronavirus. However, it provided not only an increase in the importance of «numbers» in British society, but also greatly contributed to the disunity of citizens, especially in the context of access to the Internet infrastructure. To this day, this very task remains the main one in the respective strategies. At the same time, individual cities and regions of the country are more actively solving the task. London and the activities of the mayor’s office should be pointed out as the most illustrative example. For the services of the mayor’s office, it was necessary to ensure the transparency of the decisions made, to form and strengthen the trust of citizens. As part of the analysis, the author comes to the conclusion that for the most part, these tasks can be considered completed. The purpose of this article is basing on an analysis of specific digital tools and examples of the implementation of digital strategies for 2017 and 2021 to identify how a particular metropolis has formed permanent channels of communication and interaction between decision-making institutions and citizens.

scholarly journals Advancing cross-centre research networks: learning from experience, looking to the future

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerina Jones ◽  
Sharon Heys ◽  
Helen Daniels
Keyword(s):  
Information Sharing ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Virtual Teams ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Research Networks ◽  
The Public ◽  
Information Governance ◽  
The Uk

IntroductionMany jurisdictions have programmes for the large-scale reuse of health and administrative data that would benefit from greater cross-centre working. The Advancing Cross centre Research Networks (ACoRN) project considered barriers and drivers for joint working and information sharing using the UK Farr Institute as a case study, and applicable widely. Objectives and ApproachACoRN collected information from researchers, analysts, academics and the public to gauge the acceptability of sharing data across institutions and jurisdictions. It considered international researcher experiences and evidence from a variety of cross centre projects to reveal barriers and potential solutions to joint working. It reviewed the legal and regulatory provisions that surround data sharing and cross-centre working, including issues of information governance to provide the context and backdrop. The emerging issues were grouped into five themes and used to propose a set of recommendations. ResultsThe five themes identified were: organisational structures and legal entities; people and culture; information governance; technology and infrastructure; and finance and strategic planning. Recommendations within these included: standardised terms and conditions including agreements and contractual templates; performance indicators for frequency of dataset sharing; communities of practice and virtual teams to develop cooperation; standardised policies and procedures to underpin data sharing; an accredited quality seal for organisations sharing data; a dashboard for data availability and sharing; and adequate resource to move towards greater uniformity and to drive data sharing initiatives. Conclusion/ImplicationsThe challenges posed by cross-centre information sharing are considerable but the public benefits associated with the greater use of health and administrative data are inestimable, particularly as novel and emerging data become increasingly available. The proposed recommendations will assist in achieving the benefits of cross-centre working.

scholarly journals Trust, security and public interest: Striking the balance

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Waind
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Data ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Minimum Standard ◽  
Privacy And Security ◽  
The Public ◽  
Core Conditions ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Very High

This literature review explores previous work in relation to the UK public’s attitudes towards the sharing, linking and use of administrative data for research. It finds the public is broadly supportive of administrative data research if three core conditions are met: public interest, privacy and security, and trust and transparency. None of these three conditions is sufficient in isolation; rather, the literature shows public support is underpinned by a minimum standard of all three. However, it also shows that in certain cases where the standard of one condition is very high – for example, public interest – this could mean that of another – for example, privacy and security – may, if necessary, be lower. An appropriate balance must be struck, and the proposed benefit must outweigh the potential risk. Broad, conditional support for the use of administrative data in research has not only been found consistently, but has also been held over time, with data collection for the 16 studies included spanning more than a decade from 2006-2018. It is therefore, at this time, appropriate to move beyond widescale, general consultation on the use of administrative data for research and build upon existing knowledge by delving into specific areas of research. The purpose of such an approach would not be to consult on whether research using administrative data should be done – as has been the focus of previous literature – but rather to guide how, why and when it is done. Nevertheless, it is important to continue to monitor and respond to any changes to public attitudes and adapt approaches if necessary.

Deliberative Democracy and Public Dispute Resolution

2018 ◽  
pp. 709-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Susskind ◽  
Jessica Gordon ◽  
Yasmin Zaerpoor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Fact Finding

Deliberative democracy and public dispute resolution (PDR) have the same goal—to inform and determine the public interest—but they involve different skills and practices. This article considers the ways in which deliberative democratic approaches to policy-related decision-making can be supplemented with tools used in public dispute resolution—specifically, the use of an independent mediator, the well-developed technique of stakeholder assessment, and a new strategy called joint fact-finding, where stakeholders with different interests work together with outside experts to identify common assumptions, gather information together, and formulate and clarify opinions. All are designed to achieve fairer, wiser, more stable and more efficient outcomes.

scholarly journals The Role of Public Participation in Governance towards Achieving Sustainable Development. Part 1

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 395-404
Author(s):  
Maurice S. Nyarangaa ◽  
Chen Hao ◽  
Duncan O. Hongo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Political Class ◽  
The Public ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Government

Public participation aimed at improving the effectiveness of governance by involving citizens in governance policy formulation and decision-making processes. It was designed to promote transparency, accountability and effectiveness of any modern government. Although Kenya has legally adopted public participation in day-to-day government activities, challenges still cripple its effectiveness as documented by several scholars. Instead of reducing conflicts between the government and the public, it has heightened witnessing so many petitions of government missing on priorities in terms of development and government policies. Results show that participation weakly relates with governance hence frictions sustainable development. Theoretically, public participation influences governance efficiency and development, directly and indirectly, thus sustainable development policy and implementation depends on Public participation and good governance. However, an effective public participation in governance is has been fractioned by the government. Instead of being a promoter/sponsor of public participation, the government of Kenya has failed to put structures that would spur participation of citizens in policy making and other days to activities. This has brought about wrong priority setting and misappropriation of public resources; The government officials and political class interference ultimately limit public opinion and input effects on decision-making and policy formulation, which might be an inner factor determining the failure of public participation in Kenya. The study suggests the need for strengthening public participation by establishing an independent institution to preside over public participation processes.

scholarly journals Atuação das organizações sociais na administração dos serviços de saúde: eficiência e seu instrumento de concretização do direito fundamental a saúde - Action of social organizations in the administration of health services

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Garbini Both ◽  
André Rodrigues Meneses
Keyword(s):  
Social Services ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Economic Sector ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Private Partnership ◽  
The Public ◽  
Social Organizations ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Percentage Data

<p>O presente trabalho objetiva analisar a atuação, legalidade e eficiência das organizações sociais. Uma vez que, esta tem sido motivo de intensos questionamentos, por parte daqueles que não enxergam benefícios na criação de um terceiro setor econômico. Há quem defenda que, é dever exclusivo do poder público, executar e fiscalizar os serviços sociais. A contrário senso há quem defenda uma publicização dos serviços que não são executados apenas pelo poder estatal, mas também pelo setor privado. Sendo assim, porque contrariar uma parceria publico-privada que só objetiva trazer benefícios para a população brasileira?</p><p>No decorrer deste estudo, será respondido tal questionamento, por meio de reflexões acerca das discussões e alegações de inconstitucionalidade da lei 9.637/98, de parte da lei de licitações ─ 8.666/93. Bem como, da suposta violação dos seguintes preceitos constitucionais: artigo 5ª, XVII e XVIII; artigo 22, XXVII; artigo 23; artigo 37, II, X e XXI; artigo 40, caput e § 4º; artigos 70, 71 e 74; artigo 129; artigo 169; artigo 175; artigo 196; artigo 197; artigo 199, § 1º; artigo 205; artigo 206; artigo 208; artigo 209; artigo 215; artigo 216, § 1º; artigo 218 e artigo 225. Onde será comprovado por meio de dados percentuais a eficiência e os benefícios advindos da sua criação.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This paper aims to analyze the performance, legality and efficiency of social organizations. Since this has been the subject of intense questions from those who do not see benefits in the creation of a third economic sector. There are those who argue that it is the exclusive responsibility of the public authorities to execute and supervise social services. On the contrary, there are those who advocate an advertisement of services that are not only carried out by state power, but also by the private sector. So, why oppose a public-private partnership that only aims to bring benefits to the Brazilian population?</p><p>In the course of this study, this question will be answered, through reflections on the discussions and allegations of unconstitutionality of Law 9.637 / 98, part of the law of bidding - 8.666 / 93. As well as the alleged violation of the following constitutional precepts: Article 5, XVII and XVIII; article 22, XXVII; Article 23; Article 37, II, X and XXI; article 40, caput and paragraph 4; Articles 70, 71 and 74; article 129; Article 169; article 175; Article 196; article 197; article 199, paragraph 1; Article 205; Article 206; article 208; Article 209; Article 215; article 216, paragraph 1; article 218 and article 225. Where will be proven by means of percentage data the efficiency and the benefits coming from its creation.mptions that justify the use of them with greater efficiency in the achievement of the public interest.</p>

Prison Crowding and the Evolution of Public Policy

1985 ◽  
Vol 478 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOAN MULLEN
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Budget Constraints ◽  
The Public ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
Eighth Amendment ◽  
The Future ◽  
American Prison

While crowding has been a persistent feature of the American prison since its invention in the nineteenth century, the last decade of crisis has brought more outspoken media investigations of prison conditions, higher levels of political and managerial turmoil, and a judiciary increasingly willing to bring the conditions of confinement under the scope of Eighth Amendment review. With the added incentive of severe budget constraints, liberals and conservatives alike now question whether this is any way to do business. Although crowding cannot be defined by quantitative measures alone, many institutions have far exceeded their limits of density according to minimum standards promulgated by the corrections profession. Some fall far below any reasonable standard of human decency. The results are costly, dangerous, and offensive to the public interest. Breaking the cycle of recurrent crisis requires considered efforts to address the decentralized, discretionary nature of sentence decision making and to link sentencing policies to the resources available to the corrections function. The demand to match policy with resources is simply a call for more rational policymaking. To ask for less is to allow the future of corrections to resemble its troubled past.

FORMATION OF THE BASIC KNOWLEDGE SYSTEM IN THE PUBLIC MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION SPHERE

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-216
Author(s):  
Valerii Bakumenko ◽  
Oleksiy Krasnorutskyy ◽  
Anatolii Hatsko
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Public Management ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Knowledge System ◽  
Basic Knowledge ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Administration Reform

The modernization of the management system and the knowledge management model is needed in the context of the public administration reform, taking into account the concept of decentralization and Good Governance. That is why the article focuses on the author’s approach to substantiating the formation of a modern knowledge system in public management and administration in Ukraine. It is proved that the approach to the knowledge system formation should be based on the identification of the needs of public administration objects. The need to comply with the necessary diversity law for a management subject of public entity regarding its knowledge of the entity has been identified. The content of the principle «from general to specific» for the objects of public administration is considered. The formation structure of the basic knowledge system in the public sphere is presented, which unites a number of blocks. The first block deals with the system of basic knowledge of public management and administration. The second block deals with the idea of a public authorities system at different levels. The third block concerns the formation of basic knowledge about public service. The fourth block concerns the formation of a basic knowledge system about current trends in the development of domestic public administration. The fifth block deals with the knowledge about the development and implementation of public policy and implementation of public administration. The sixth block deals with the consideration of public administration as a deliberate activity to establish internal procedures and processes in public administration to ensure their smooth functioning. The seventh block concerns the knowledge system for ensuring social stability. The eighth block is a glossary of basic terms and the ninth is a bibliography. The proposed approach is the scientific substantiation of the development of educational and professional programs of the basic textbook and standards for the specialty 281 – «Public Management and Administration». Keywords: knowledge, public administration, the necessary diversity law, public policy, public service, public authorities, public stability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document