1   

Towards Greater Citizen Engagement and Transparency Through Open Budgeting in Jamaica1 Authors2: Indianna Minto-Coy, Senior Research Fellow3 Latoya Roberts, Research Assistant Brian Hall, Research Assistant and Maurice McNaughton, Director, Centre of Excellence

Submission to the Third International Open Data Conference Madrid, October 5, 2016

ABSTRACT While accountability mechanisms are often defined in terms of formal processes, and constitutionally appointed oversight structures, it is also acknowledged that civic participation is a necessary element of good governance and to realizing genuine accountability goals. As such, open and participatory budgeting have been offered as a means for increasing citizen engagement and participation via greater information and inclusion. The availability of complete budget information that is accessible, useful, and produced in a timely manner is held to be essential for civil society to participate effectively in the budget process. The goal of transparency goes well beyond data or information disclosure, and emphasizes the release of information about government actions, plans and processes, in such a way that makes them relevant, accessible, timely and accurate to the broadest set of constituents across civil society. This draws focus on not only what data is available but importantly the tools used to present such data towards increased utilisation and understanding. Furthermore, many of the emerging measures towards open budgeting are top down, with a focus on the need for governments to make information available. There remains a need to uncover citizen views and perceptions as it relates to open budgeting and the ways in which understanding and utilisation of open budget data can be                                                              1  

This is a working draft. Comments and queries are welcomed at: I.D.Minto‐[email protected]. 

2 The research team is based at the Mona School of Business & Management, University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, Kingston, Jamaica.   3  Corresponding Author: I.D.Minto‐[email protected]. 

 

2   

increased. This is important in uncovering the real demand for open data and the extent t which such measures will find success. To this end, the paper investigates the potential impact of open/participatory budgeting towards civic engagement and transparency from the point of view of citizens. It also assesses the role of visualisation tools in increasing understanding and utilisation of open budget data. Through desk research, focus groups and a quantitive mobile survey of citizens in Jamaica, the paper adds support to claims regarding the value of open and participatory budgeting in increasing transparency and civic engagement. Budget visualisation tools are also presented ad being important, particularly for young people in deepening their understanding and knowledge of open budgeting. However, the study goes beyond these findings to suggest that a real demand exists for open budgeting but that there remains a need in some settings to further translate transparency into accountability beyond voting. The implications of the research are important given the relationship between trust and other good governance indicators such as civic engagement (e.g. Marcel & Jacobzone, 2014). Anchored in the larger discourse on Open Data for Development, the findings suggest the need for the testing of assumptions around OD4D with implications for the extent to which OD4D will evolve into a truly transformative movement.

 

3   

Introduction Globally there is an emerging consensus that increased transparency and citizen engagement are important for addressing key government failures. Among the key government failures is corruption, with political engagement among citizens being noted as the main role of citizens in governance (Stuti et al, 2016 ). Citizen engagement as a measure of participatory governance,4 is held as being critical for the functioning of modern democracies. This is given the impact of engagement on how citizens view, trust and ultimately support the state, its institutions and the legitimacy of its leaders (Bertot et al, 2010; Shim & Eom, 2009). The specific type of engagement often envisioned here is political (e.g. Stuti, et al, 2016). Undoubtedly, however, the impact goes far beyond the political realm and decidedly so given the increasing intermingling of different spheres of society. As such, the implications for the very organisation of the economy and society are profound relating to the extent to which citizens are willing to pay taxes, to business support of and ability to partner with governments effectively for economic growth. However, there remains need for more studies which actually demonstrate the potential value and role of opening budget data and increased transparency on citizen or civic engagement.5 To this end, while accountability mechanisms are often defined in terms of formal processes, and constitutionally appointed oversight structures, it is also acknowledged that civic participation is a necessary element of good governance and essential to realizing genuine accountability goals. Beyond this gap is also the need for the application of open data and emergent open data for development principles and experiences in more diverse contexts. For example, with reference to ICT-Enabled transparency efforts, it has been observed that success depends on citizen acceptance of such efforts (Bertot, et al, 2010). Where open government and open budgeting are viewed as a conceptual and practical outflow from ICT-enabled efforts towards increased transparency then citizen acceptance and perceptions will also be important for success. Further, while ICTs have produced desired outcomes in many settings, it has been noted that results vary across cultures and settings (e,g, Heeks, 1998), suggesting the need for wider investigations of the potential impact of emergent principles such as open budgeting and open government in multiple settings. This will go some way in increasing the appeal and ultimately, relevance and impact of open data for development as a truly global movement/tool for enhancing the quality and impact of governance for development (including economic). As a first aim, therefore, we intend to demonstrate the value of open data principles for citizen engagement via open budgeting. Furthermore, while there is a view that opening government data will lead to greater transparency and civic engagement, the reality is that “building it” does not always mean that “they” will come. To this end, is the need for attention to how citizens can engage with opened                                                              4   



 See authors such as Gustafson and Hertting (2016) and Wampler and McNulty (2011) for a discussion on  participatory and collaborative governance.    5 See Adler and Goggins (2005: Abstract) definition of civic engagement as “the ways in which citizens participate in the life of a community in order to improve conditions for others or to help shape the community’s future”.  

 

4   

data and the tools that can extend and deepen their engagement and understanding of such data. The value of data visualisation tools have been considered in a number of settings (e.g. Dalby, 2011, Dawes, 2009; & Jug, 2014). For the present purpose, data visualisations have been suggested as a contributor towards more engaged and informed citizens (Foth et al, 2011). Bertot et al, (2010) also suggest the need for users to be able to understand and use the technology through which transparency tools are available. However, not many studies have investigated the impact of such tools in citizen engagement and information (Valkanova, et al, 2013). To this end, the second concern in this paper is in investigating the role of data visualisation tools in increasing civic engagement among citizens as it relates to open budgeting. The proposal is that such tools are important in ensuring that access and understanding of open budgeting and other data are not limited to (borrowing from Bertot, et al, 2010) civic-minded geeks. The paper addresses these questions through a review of the literature on citizen engagement and transparency and the place of open budgeting and visualisation tools in facilitating this engagement using the Caribbean island of Jamaica as a case study. As a test case, small islands/settings potentially offer an ideal site for assessing the impact of emerging ideas and principles (Minto-Coy, 2015 & McNaughton, 2015).6 The findings support the view that open data for development via open budgeting and through the use of visualisation tools can in fact impact participatory governance positively, offering a stimulus for knowledge dissemination, increased understanding, and helping citizens to become more engaged, more trusting and supportive of government, all indicators of civic engagement. Finally, the findings go beyond Jamaica and the Caribbean, given the preoccupation with the role of technology and ICTs in improving public sector performance towards improved citizen engagement and development (Minto-Coy, Bailey & Thakur, 2015). The paper therefore, rests within this wider discourse on ICT4D and its linkages with Open Data for development (OD4D) as part of the ongoing search for better government. The rest of the paper is organised as follows: Section 2 presents the conceptual arguments around some of the key themes in the discussion. The overarching framework within which this investigation takes place is that of the wider open data for development movement. Section 3 presents the methodology. Section 4 gives a guide to the study context, while Sections 5 and 6 details the findings and analyses. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implication of the findings and conclusion in Section 7. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Open Data for Development and Participatory Governance Open data as defined by Open Knowledge International is “….. data that can be freely used, reused and redistributed by anyone - subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute and share alike” (Open Knowledge International, n.d.). The term first appeared in 1995 in a                                                              6   

 

The study was undertaken as part of a wider study on Open/Participatory Budgeting for Improved Civic  Engagement and Transparency in Jamaica. As such, the authors would like to acknowledge the role of financial  support through the Fund for Digital Innovation in Latin America and The Caribbean (FRIDA) in producing the  work. 

5   

publication from an American Scientific Agency who suggested the open sharing of scientific data to aid in the solution of complex problems and in the building of knowledge (Chignard, 2013). It has since gained traction globally and is evident in fields such as software development and hence the term free/open source software was coined. The basis of this movement was the development of software through public platforms and to then share source codes (Chignard, 2013). When applied to government data it means data that is legally and technically open; this means that the data that is complete, accessible, timely, published as collected at source, machine processable/readable and free of control rights or license requirements. This ensures that the data can be used by anyone for any purpose (Tauberer, 2014). Since 2007 there has been a promulgation of other global initiatives aimed at tracking government data and funds and prompting governments across the world to provide avenues for civic participation. One of the most significant developments here is the emergence of the term open data for development (OD4D), largely through the coordinating activities of the IDRC, which has increasingly come to embody the ideals of opening data for improved decision making and governance. The idea of openness increasingly represents a new paradigm in the development literature which has great implications for societies. Budget transparency as a specific domain of interest has particular relevance within the wider sphere of Open for Development, given the emphasis on citizen engagement and transformation in how governments interact with different categories of citizens. Budgets, by their nature provide a tangible, quantifiable manifestation of how national policies and priorities are set (e.g. Fölscher, 2010). Transparency, in turn can be facilitated via the dissemination of information by government in a proactive way, requests for and release of government information, or through leaks (Piotrowski, 2007). In an OD4D world, however, proactive dissemination increases in relevance, given the increasing expectation that data (excepting sensitive data) be made available even without requests for same. As such, initiatives geared at facilitating open, participatory budget processes are seen as fundamental platforms for a wider culture of Government to citizen7 transparency, trust-building, accountability and engagement envisioned in the OD4D movement. However, while the OD4D movement goes beyond a focus on government to encompass groups such as businesses and entrepreneurs, the Open budgeting movement is more identifiably aimed at governments and citizens. To this end, Open Budgeting can be considered as conceptually aligned to and as a means for achieving participatory or collaborative governance. Collaborative governance here implies the intent to involve citizens in an ongoing way in complex decisionmaking (Wampler & McNulty, 2011) as implied in participatory budgeting with open budgeting being a means for encouraging and facilitating this form of engagement. Open Budgeting and Civic Engagement Increasing calls have been made for improving the institutional framework and methodology around public sector budgeting (see Browne, 2015). The reality, however, is that the availability of complete budget information that is accessible, useful, and produced in a timely manner is essential for civil society to participate effectively in the budget process (International Budget Partnership, 2012). Such information is also critical in achieving effective public financial                                                              7  See Linders (2012). 

 

6   

management, public participation, inclusion and accountability. Thus, according to the Transparency & Accountability Initiative, the goal of transparency goes well beyond data or information disclosure, and emphasizes the release of information about government actions; plans and processes, in a way as which makes it relevant, accessible, timely and accurate to the broadest set of constituents across civil society. On the other hand, while accountability mechanisms are often defined in terms of formal processes, and constitutionally appointed oversight structures, it is also acknowledged that civic participation is a necessary element of good governance and essential to realizing genuine accountability goals. According to the OECD national budgets are key administrative and policy instruments. They are the tool which governments use to deploy social and economic programmes and represent a contract between government and citizens which outlines how the government raises funds and allocates them to achieve the objectives of the society (OECD Senior Budget Officials, 2014). As a result budgets are expected to serve as an indicator of the fiscal health of a nation and are a major instrument of accountability. To that end they are often the cause of great tension between the state and civil society as there is a general belief that governments do not allocate resources equitably. However, Rueben & LevyBenitz (2003) state that social accountability is one such way in which this tension can be neutralized. Social accountability as defined by the World Bank “refers to the broad range of actions and mechanisms beyond voting that citizens can use to hold the state to account (World Bank, 2006). There are several categories of social accountability mechanisms. However fundamentally they all require the public to have access to government generated data and goods and services (Social Accountability: What does it mean for the World Bank). The World Bank has identified four major practices of social accountability. These are participatory policy making and planning, budget related social accountability work, monitoring and evaluation of delivery of government goods and services and public oversight. Each of these are said to have great implications for the society in which they are utilized (Rueben & Levy-Benitz, 2003). Though not explicitly stated, at the heart of this movement is the willingness of the public to become engaged by demanding information and having access to said information. In light of this several models such as e-governance and more recently, open government for development have been emerged as solutions. This is because some countries have adopted the notion that ICT can be used to both promote efficiency and transparency. However, Janssen, Charalabidis, & Zuiderwijk (2012) have noted that having access to information is only half the battle as data is only useful when used. Hence one may ask, how can budget data be used to improve governance? One answer put forward is that of open and participatory budgeting. Open/participatory budgeting is the combination of two ideas to form one initiative driven by the need to fight corruption and encourage transparency through the publishing of budget data to allow civil society to participate in the national budgeting process and thereby hold the government accountable. Open Budgeting: Context and Emergence The growing focus on open budgeting has been facilitated by some major developments within the

last three or so decades. Among these is the globalization of the open budgeting movement  

7   

which can be credited to the work of multi-lateral agencies/initiatives such as the World Bank (e.g. BOOST Initiative) and the International Budget Partnership (IBP). The IBP was established in 1997 out of recognition of the need for greater transparency and inclusiveness in national budgeting processes (IBP). Guided by these assumptions, the IBP has sought to pioneer ways in which open budgeting can be facilitated in countries across the world. Included here are the Open Budget Initiative and the Open Budget Survey. Action here was preempted by work started as early as 1985 in India where civil society organisations (CSO) lobbied for more access to information that would allow them to have a say in how public finances were allocated (IBP, n.d.). Additionally, the participatory budgeting movement is credited to Brazil where the first public forum to allow citizens to decide on budget issues was held in Porto Alegre in 1989 (Wampler, 2000). The promulgation of legislative changes such as the implementation of Access-to Information laws have also been important facilitators of the open budgeting, and the open data for development movement, as a whole. For the most part providing access to budget information was achieved through printing and in more recent times digitizing and publishing on websites maintained by government (Leon, Mora, & Ruiz, 2016). However, (Chignard, 2013) states that it was not until 2007 that the idea was introduced that open data could be applied to government data and by extension budgets. Open data has become synonymous with the term open government, to the effect where open data is defined as open government data in some spheres (World Bank). Since then IBP has recommended the establishment of budget information portals which conform to open data principles and practices (Leon, Mora, & Ruiz, 2016). This was in recognition of the need for raw data that could be manipulated to perform monitoring by experts and lay persons alike. While there is no global definition for open budgeting,the IBP considers budget which adhere to their core assumptions to be open. These core assumptions are:  Public engagement is necessary  Successful public engagement involves access to information and opportunities for participation  Government has a duty to ensure availability of timely and comprehensive information and to facilitate public participation  Governments’ have a duty to ensure adequate funds are allocated to poverty alleviation  Public funds should be spent on areas of public priority especially for the poor and marginalized. The study is concerned with the first three parts of this definition, with the understanding of the aim of participatory budgeting being the strengthening of democratic processes and the elimination of social exclusion (Wampler, 2000). The Promise of Open Budgeting A common agreement; that is that open government data especially open budgets and civic participation have far reaching implications and benefits for society (Fagan, 2015). In most cases it is seen as the engine for economic growth however the actual potential is yet to be quantified (Scott, 2014). Ling & Roberts, (2014) after examining the impact of institutional change as it  

8   

relates to transparency, accountability and participatory budgeting conclude that both transparency and accountability have led to improvements in human development indicators in societies in which they are present. They also found that participatory budgeting is linked to better public management and service delivery. One of the potential benefits of open/participatory budgeting is improved financial ratings, globally. This prospect is relevant for countries generally but importantly for developing and emerging economies reliant on attracting loans and Foreign Direct Investments for development funding. Carlitz, et al. (2008) e.g. have affirmed that countries with low Open Budget Survey scores are usually more dependent on international aid than those with higher scores. One cannot say for sure if there is a causal relationship between the two variables but there is certainly the suggestion that if countries work on improving their scores on the OBS they can reduce their dependence on foreign aid and improve their income level. Perhaps too being more open through participation in international indices will improve a country’s prospect of accessing foreign aid, as engaging one multi-lateral agency or another has been known to inspire confidence in countries (IDB, 2013). However, the benefit from participatory budgeting can only be realized under certain conditions. There is little evidence as to what these conditions are (see e.g. Linders, 2012). Furthermore, much of the focus has been on the need for the provision of data. However, it is increasingly recognized that while supply is important, particularly in those societies where secrecy has tended to shroud government, this is not sufficient for realizing the goals of open data for development. Rather, the demand for open budget data is also an important consideration, including developing contexts where there has been an absence of a culture of openness, and government sharing information with citizens. To this end it is important to investigate empirically, citizen views on open budgeting and its impact in fostering civic engagement and transparency. In addition to this,, there is the need to focus on the tools and ways in which the data is presented. Included here is the role of meaningful visualisation tools that may help to increase the visibility, understanding and use of open budget data. Such tools may be important in country contexts and among groups where experience with technology and levels of education may be low. Such tools may be important in avoiding what Kaplan (in Guerrini, 2015). In other words, opening data can lead to disadvantages for those who do not understand or know how to use the data provided. This is supported by Zhong (2013) cited in (Ling & Roberts, 2014) who observed that in Kenya participation only increased when citizens received information on how to use the data. These themes will be investigated through the perspective of the Caribbean Small Island Developing States with a special emphasis on Jamaica. Indeed, the Caribbean merits specific consideration here given the recognition that the region stands to benefit from and has been an active participant in the development of the OD4D (McNaughton, 2014; Minto-Coy, 2015). The following discussion lays out further relevance for the Jamaican context. The suggestion here too is that the context and conditions for unlocking the benefits of open budgeting may differ from one country to another, requiring further investigations into the impact of open data for development and related principles in different settings. Such studies

 

9   

have the potential of increasing the applicability and possibility for theorizing around open data for development and its role in civic engagement via the budgeting process.    OPEN/PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING IN THE CARIBBEAN

The Open Data discourse in the Caribbean has gained momentum. It is being spearheaded by the Caribbean Open Institute, under the leadership of the Caribbean Open Institute. While the Caribbean boasts several initiative and successes in the Open Data arena, very little has been said about Open/participatory Budgeting. In fact, only two countries in the region participate in the Open Budget Survey; namely Dominican Republic and Trinidad and Tobago (IBP, n.d.). The same two countries are also currently in the process of joining the Open Government Partnership. One might ask however, what of the other countries? Some of the remaining countries in the Caribbean have participated in the Open Data and Open Budget Readiness Assessment; these include St. Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, Jamaica and Haiti (Caribbean Open Data Institute, n.d.). Jamaica recently launched its open data portal which includes budget information but this is the bare minimal as the data is hardly comprehensive (Jamaica Open Data Portal, 2016). Outside of this the only other attempt at using budget data is a visualization constructed using the Open spending platform by the COI for the engagement of Journalists in 2015 (Caribbean Open Data Institute, n.d.). McNaughton (2014), estimates that the economic contribution of Open Data to the economy of Jamaica alone by using data from education, tourism and agriculture is somewhere to the tune of $30billion. There is also need for research on whether this potential economic benefit from Open Data can be transferred to Open Budgeting in the Caribbean in terms of improving transparency, accountability and increasing civic engagement. Jamaica is a good case for such an exploration, given the particular relevance of these themes for that country which is sometimes perceived as suffering the effects of high public debt, crime and corruption. This is evidenced by low ratings on the Corruption Perception Index (Munroe, 2016). Inadequate accountability, transparency and perceptions of corruption have been noted by the Jamaican government as critical challenges to obtaining national development goals (Planning Institute of Jamaica, 2009). The suggestion has been made that corruption is not a recent phenomenon or a condition of independent Jamaica (i.e. post 1962) (e.g. Mills). Indeed, it has been shown that corruption existed under the period of colonial governance (Minto-Coy, 2016). Where consensus lies is in the view that corruption has increased since independence. A 2013 documentary produced by the National Integrity Commission chronicles a number of cases of corruption since the early years of independence. At the heart of the matter, public funds that were misallocated, misused, received from/connected to perpetrators of illicit activities or simply vanished without explanation. These events have led to national outcry from citizens, civil society groups and the media who have demanded more transparency and accountability from governments on the use of public funds. Open budgeting also has far-reaching implications in terms of the potential for increased engagement with the state, tax compliance, increased formality and trust in developing societies. Jamaica also suffers from low levels of citizen trust, engagement with the state, low levels of tax compliance and informality (Minto-Coy, 2011). For example, informality has been estimated to  

10   

be as low as 35% and high as 43% (Vuletin, 2008; IADB, 2006). The relationship between trust, civic engagement and support for leaders and state institutions has also been noted (e.g. Marcel & Jacobzone, 2014; Stuti, 2016). The significance of the research resides in the reality of Jamaica's debt-servicing obligations (roughly 60% of the national budget), which have partly been blamed on poor financial management over the years (Browne, 2015). Indeed, the benefits of Open Budgeting in terms of enhanced accountability, transparency, increased tax compliance and a more active citizenry are already emerging in a number of countries (see Schouten and Monamoto, 2012).    

METHODOLOGY The project is an exploratory research aimed at assessing the potential for the use of open data and international best practices for open budgeting in Jamaica; this towards improving civic engagement and government transparency. As such a mixed methods research design was utilized. That is, both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were utilized in order to arrive at the outputs. According to Moss (n.d.), “Mixed-method design expands the research in a way that single approach can’t...[and] makes the research more comprehensive”. The qualitative aspect included a desk review, two focus groups, interviews and social media engagement, while the quantitative aspect involved the use of a structured questionnaire administered via the mobile phone. In particular the value of the mobile phone in gathering large data is increasingly being recognised (Jug, 2014).   

The focus groups were particularly useful for demonstrating the visualization tool with the outcomes being used to inform the design and implementation of the mobile questionnaire. Participants were chosen at random and given invitation letters and asked to indicate their interest in participating. The groups chosen were University of the West Indies UWI), Mona students both at the Masters and Undergraduate levels and Ancilliary Staff. These groups were targetted given ease of access, represented a wide cross section of the population and offered the means to access core groups related to the study. For the structured survey, a number of carriers and platforms were investigated and detailed meetings held wit representatives from two such companies – TextItin and Trend Media8. . A pilot was first undertaken, which drew attention to the need for the most efficient and costeffective means for respondents to participate in the study. Final selection was informed by ease of use to the respondents, ease of administering the survey, incentive delivery and ease of analysis for survey administrators. As such, the mobile survey was administered to smartphone users on the Digicel mobile network on August 5, 2016. The targeted number of participants was 250 persons from different socioeconomic backgrounds and age ranges across the island. However, the actual number of respondents rose to 1749 within 2 hours; while 1409 persons completed the survey. The sample was taken from a population of 1.2 million Digicel smart phone subscribers, allowing for more efficient, cost-effective and expansive reach across the total estimated population of 2.8 million.The final qualitative method employed was social media. The team created a Facebook page 9which was used to provide information on the project                                                              8 Trend Media is the digital advertising arm of Digicel, the largest mobile carrier in Jamaica and the Caribbean (See. http://trend.media/shorthand/).  9   https://www.facebook.com/openbudgetingja/ 

 

11   

and get feedback persons who liked the page and/or left comments. This project engagement and dissemination tool also provides some amount of qualitative data which can be used to assess interest in the budgeting process and the use of open data to improve transparency. The quantitative data was collected using a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire allowed for a representative sample of the population to be analyzed as well as the possibility of getting feedback from a large number of respondents (University of Portsmouth, 2012). The instrument consisted of approximately twenty (20) structured (open-ended and close-ended) questions designed to answer the research questions The data collected from the questionnaires was coded and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).A key component of the project was to find creative ways to make the Jamaican Budget more understandable, appealing and more interactive. An open source solution called Open Spending was used to achieve this goal. Open Spending is an open source tool allowing the tools created to in turn be made openly available and as such, facilitating the utilisation of open data principles as both the subject and methodology of the study. The desk research was carried out to gain insights on examples of visualized budget data and the relevant literature. This was in an effort to understand other ways in which the data can be presented to improve its appearance, usefulness and usability. The data visualization was presented primarily in the focus groups to ascertain feedback and its use and effectiveness. It is acknowledged that there are some limitations which impacted the quality of the data collected. For example, the focus group had limited scope in terms of the sample used. Although the population chosen represents a wide cross-section of individuals, they failed to capture some segments of the country as most persons attending or working at the University live within the corporate areas of Kingston & St. Andrew and St. Catherine However, this challenge was reduced by the structured survey which captured the views of a wider group of citizens.    

Another limitation is the fact that the mobile survey was only administered to smartphone users on a particular network. While this accounts for close to half of the Jamaican population, it is acknowledged that it may skew the results obtained due to the exclusion of non-smartphone users. A final limitation is the comprehensiveness of the budget data available to be visualized while a fair amount of data is available in PDF format on the finance ministry’s website the government recently launched its open data portal and the available data to be visualized is very limited. As such this affects the level of visual aids which can be delivered. The larger suggestion is for the need more government data to be made open, a point recognized by the recent World Bank Open (Open Data and Open Government Readiness Assessment). FINDINGS Findings from Focus Groups Demographic An integral part of the Open/Participatory Budgeting process is the provision of opportunities for the public participation throughout the budget lifecycle. As was outlined by the OBS Report 2015, public participation is a major problem across the world and results for the Caribbean                                                                                                                                                                                                   

 

12   

(Jamaica included) show that there also is need for improvement in this area. Hence this research would not be complete without some form of citizen engagement. For the purposes of this project the engagement was in the form of two focus groups. The sizes of the groups varied but overall a total of 30 persons participated in the focus groups. More than half of the participants (across the groups) were males (74 %). Additionally, most of the participants had at least a secondary education. Further analysis shows that the most frequent age group 41-50 age, a majority of which had attained a secondary level education at least. Responses to Questions The focus groups aimed at gaining an insight into views on the current budget process, the presentation and level of engagement in and understanding of that process. They also allowed for the demonstration of the open budget data visualisation tool. Feedback was also elicited on the tool and its potential impact on engagement. The responses to the questions were not dissimilar. The overriding sentiment was that the presentation of the budget was boring, jargon-filled and difficult to decode without the requisite technical competence. In fact, a participant said that it appeared that the government knew people were going to watch and so they made the information harder to understand. Only one participant admitted to regularly watching the presentation. A majority only saw clippings of the actual presentation or the highlights and on television Respondents were asked about the presentation of the budget with one person noting the need to be motivated to take an interest in watching given that the presentation was too long and boring. It was also noted that the language was too technical, while the presentation seemed not to allow for persons to understand what was being presented. The sessions also aimed to get an understanding of wether citizens knew where to get budget information. In the first of our two focus groups individuals said that the media and conversations with others (veranda talk) were their main sources of information about the budget. Interestingly, no one in the second group knew where to find information about the budget. They concurred that they needed somewhere where they could easily access the information without going to the Ministry of Finance. It was clear that no one knew that the information was available online. A similar situation existed in the first focus group where most of the individuals did not know that the information was online. Two persons knew before hand and another found it just before the session. One expressed that they thought they could get a summary online and was quite surprised when they could not. All participants expressed an interest in getting more information about the budget. The participants in the second focus group thought that lack of access to information was a problem which was restricted to those without higher education. However, the discussion in the first focus group which contained tertiary level students saw where they expressed the need for the information to be presented in a more simplified and concise manner. When asked what would help you understand the budget more, the response was for a more engaging and simplified format. The second group expressed that they would like to have someone (similar to the person signing for the deaf) to breakdown the information for them while the budget is being presented. On the other hand, the first focus group said that a skit or some type of video would be useful. They stated that social media should be the main vehicle through which the government launches a public education campaign. In the words of one  

13   

participant in the second group there is need “for greater transparency and more engagement”. Participants were not specific about the type of additional information that they think should be in the budget. They, however, asked for more details about the information that is presented. Would you want to be more involved in the budget process and how (e.g formulation? Monitoring? The responses from the previous question often led to these questions as respondents would outline how they wanted the information to be passed on to them. The second group outlined that they wanted to monitor the budgetary expenditure. They also expressed a desire to be a part of the formulation and evaluation process as they believed that they would be the best persons to advise the government on issues in society. The first group, also wanted to be more involved in the whole process; that is formulation through to evaluation. However, they believed that there was a barrier of the Jamaican culture which prevented the utilization of some proposed participatory budgeting mechanisms. A set of questions were also posed to ascertain the potential impact of open and participatory budgeting on citizens. Among these, were: If you had more information on the budget and you were able to monitor spending how would this make you feel? All participants when asked this question said that this would help them feel better about the future of the country. They said that it would motivate them to become more interested in the activities of the country; such as voting and volunteering. At least one person in the Focus Group 1 noted that this would not have an impact on their desire to vote. However, the participants expressed that participation would need to go further than just receiving information, as they would also like to give their feedback and have it responded to in a timely manner. This they said would help with transparency and accountability. Other observations There was also a point made in the first focus group which spoke to a need for a change of culture in how information is viewed as even if the information is made available there would be no interest without engagement. This underscored the need for public engagement by the government.   

Post Demonstration Feedback Using the open spending platform two visualization methods were presented: a bubble tree and block format. In general, the participants were very receptive to the tools presented, noting that it made the information more easier to understand than the documents that were previously available. This was due to the variation in colour and size of images presented, which gave a quicker more user-friendly view of the budget. It was identified, however, that the tools could be more user-friendly and could still become tedious to navigate due to the immensity of the information. They, however, made certain suggestions on how to improve the visualisation tool itself. These included: 1. Adding information for both revenue and expenditure to allow for comparison 2. Adding a key or view which shows the ministries in alphabetical order to enable easier navigation.  

14   

3. Make tools more interactive, showing changes in the budget from year to year. Social Media Engagement As part of the team’s objective to determine the potential of impact of open budgeting principles in Jamaica, a Facebook page was created and was used to provide information on the project in order to ascertain feedback from persons who liked the page and left comments. Based on research done by the Pew Centre, 39% of adults do political or civic activities on social networking sites (Smith, 2013). On our Facebook page, we provided the links to our visualization of the budget as well as additional images concerning money and budgeting. We realized that initially when the page was launched there was not as much traction as we liked. However, when a link to the page itself was included in the mobile survey, there was an increase in the number of likes and comments on the page itself. At the peak week, approximately 1160 persons visited the Facebook page while 258 persons liked the page. Comments on the page included “thanks for the opportunity” and “it’s pretty good”. This referred to the survey tool and the open visualization tool export respectively with some wanting more information.

Mobile Survey The purpose of the survey was to: 1) Assess how knowledgeable persons were about the current budgeting process; 2) Determine ways in which persons would want the budget presented; 3) Determine the key sections persons would want to see in the budget; 4) Assess how persons would want to be engaged in the budgeting process. Through these questions, we aimed to determine how effective participatory budgeting would assist in the improvement of budget transparency and civic engagement in Jamaica. As an incentive for doing the survey, Jamaican $200 Digicel credit was given to the first 250 participants who completed the survey. Nonetheless, over 1749 responses were received. Results Sample Overview: The sample was heavily female throughout all age groups. 80% of the sample was between the ages of 19-30. In addition, majority of respondents were from Kingston and St Andrew and St. Catherine. In fact 42% of the sample came from these regions. Budget Knowledge/Current Process: Based on the survey, most respondents showed “very little knowledge” of the budget (48%). While on the other hand, only 8% showed a “lot of knowledge”. Interestingly enough, respondents between the ages of 19 to 40 had “very little knowledge” of the budget as the dominating response when asked. However, persons aged 50 and over had “enough” as their largest response. When the respondents were asked if they knew where to find information on the national budget, a majority (59%) did not know where to find it. When analyzing the responses by age, it was found that although 59% of the respondents did not know where to find information on the national budget, 62%, aged 50 and above did actually know where to find information on the  

15   

budget. For the persons that knew where to find information about the budget, 33% mentioned the internet, 14% mentioned the Ministry of Finance Website, while 10% mentioned the JIS. Other respondents mentioned the media, bank, news, the University (of the West Indies Mona) and the Parliament. With regards to a question asking respondents if they watched the budget presentation, the positive responses increased by age. Meaning, for the persons between ages 19 -30, 48% of them watched the budget presentation. However 68% of the respondents aged 50+ actually watched the budget presentation. When the respondents were asked about the way the budget was presented, a majority were indifferent (56%); while 20% indicated that it was “easy to understand” and the remainder (24%) indicated that it was “hard to understand”. Interestingly enough, when analyzed by gender, the level of indifferences reduces by age and in fact, the respondents 50+ had the highest percentage in terms of stating that the budget was “easy to understand”. A high percentage of the respondents (93%) show a general interest in understanding the budget. These results are also consistent among all the age groups as well. In addition, 92% of the respondents are interested in getting more information on the budget. Budget Presentation: When questioned about possible tools that could help them understand the budget more, 60% of the respondents cited video, 39% cited simpler language, 38% cited pictures and 25% cited web visualization. Other helpful methods mentioned by the respondents included, “Graphs/Charts/Statistics”, text message, PowerPoint, social media, AV combination with interactive panel and booklets. Key Sections of the Budget: At 75%, education is the area of the budget that most respondents are interested in. Healthcare is second with 53%. Taxation at 50% is the third area that most respondents are interested in. Interestingly enough, among the gender, female respondents are greatly interested in education and healthcare while males are mainly interested in education and taxation. In addition, among the age group 41-50, more interest is in healthcare. When asked “what additional information would you want to be in the budget” the largest response was “anything and everything” at 13%, followed by “education and health” at 10%, then “tax” at 9%. Other responses included employment, salary increase, information, youth development and security and crime. Citizen Involvement in Budget Process: When asked the question “would you want to be involved in the budget formulation process” 49% of the respondents said no, while the remainder (51%) said yes. For the persons that mentioned that they would want to be a part of the budgeting process, 12% would want to give opinions/ideas, 7% would want to receive a survey and 6% mentioned “anyway possible”. Additional responses included voting, open forum/meetings and others mentioned that they would want to be involved in the budgeting process by becoming a constituency member. 83% of the respondents are interested in monitoring the income and expenditure throughout the fiscal year. Interestingly enough, the persons in the 50+ category had the highest percentage in being interested in monitoring actual spending and income throughout the financial year with 73%. For the question, “how do you now feel about Jamaica’s budgeting process”, need more accountability was the highest answer with 62%. 23% do not trust the process, 20% feel that the process is not transparent while 18% do not know how they feel about the budgeting process. Based on the age groups, the highest percentage of those who do not trust the process are in the

 

16   

age group 19-30 (24%) while the lowest percentage of those who do not trust the process are in the 50+ age group. When asked the question “if you had more information and could monitor government spending, how would it make you feel?”, the majority answered that this would make them feel better as a Jamaican citizen, trust and support the government more. Additional responses included that they would be more active in their community, as well as be more willing to pay taxes. Other Observations It may appear that the data was skewed to only Kingston, St Andrew and St. Catherine, Trend media performed its sampling evenly based on the percentage of phones in the area. Based on this, it can be assumed that Kingston, St. Andrew and St. Catherine, has the highest density of smart phones in the area. The related concern is the extent to which these views will represent those in more rural locations across the island. The data suggests that persons above 50+ are to be more knowledgeable about the budgeting process due to the fact that they know where to find the budget and also that they had the largest percentage of responses who understood the budget. It is possible that the way the budget is currently presented is effective for that age group to understand. However, issues exists with persons below the 50+ age group, who seem not to be as knowledgeable about the budgeting process with the current presentation of the budget a definite factor in this. In spite of this disparity and overall persons are still very much interested in getting more information on the budget. Although a relatively even split existed with the question “would you want to be involved in the budgeting process”. It is possible that the factor that is causing this is that persons feel that trust and accountability is lacking in the current budgeting process.    

DISCUSSION Drawing on the foregoing discussion, the remainder of the paper pulls together a number of points in relation to the two areas of focus of the study. Namely, the role of open and participatory budgeting in increasing transparency and civic engagement, and the role of visualisation tools in enabling greater engagement and understanding of open budget data. These are important considerations in the emerging discourse and research on OD4D irrespective of the national or regional setting. There also remains a need to garner more research which focuses on the demand side of OD4D, namely in assessing the views of citizens on such emerging principles. This is important in as far as issues of citizen-ownership and -support are deemed important considerations in democratic governance. The present study has sought to address some of these gaps through a focus on uncovering citizen views as it relates to these themes. Such studies are important in helping to widen the appeal of OD4D in so doing, helping to ensure the movement does not become a top-down initiative, void of citizen engagement. Importantly too, the act of engaging citizens through research on themes such as open budgeting, open government and OD4D is important not only as an academic exercise or for the information uncovered. That is studies such as the present, play a potentially important role in raising knowledge and awareness among citizens on new and  

17   

emerging ideas and practices, while encouraging interaction and contemplation that otherwise may not have emerged. The Role of Open Budgeting in Civic Engagement and Transparency An important point highlighted in the literature and which was also substantiated in the study related to the potential and value of open budgeting and participatory governance principles in helping to raise levels of transparency and citizen's support of government. Indeed, the findings would support a proposition that OD4D can lead to more empowered and engaged citizens by increasing transparency and openness around the budgeting process. This is seen in the acknowledgement by the majority of survey respondents and participants in the focus groups that they would feel better as citizens, that they would be encouraged to vote and engage in other activities demonstrative of increased civic engagement. Nonetheless, it is important to note that the provision of open (budget) data and allowing citizens to see what was happening in government was only one side of the equation, with attention to demand also being important. In so doing, the findings support much of the emerging discussion in the wider literature but also goes beyond this. That is, the call to ensure citizen engagement via participation and feedback, while essential, have to be supported by effective mechanisms which link transparency to accountability. This is particularly so in settings where accountability and transparency have traditionally not been the norm. For many countries now experimenting with open data the transparency/accountability link may be the last step towards realizing the true vision of empowered citizenry and improved democracies which greater transparency and civic engagement via open (budget) data is meant to foster. While the focus of OD4D admittedly goes beyond the public and political engagement, and notwithstanding the relevance of business and economy, it could be suggested that real transformation towards empowered and active citizens is where OD4D will truly have its most transformative effect. The study also highlights the role of ICTs and new media as tools for citizen engagement and information around open budget data. This observation is similar to that of other researchers such as Foth, et al (2011) who noted that social media, mobile technology and ubiquitous computing are important in encouraging more engaged citizens. These tools have an interactive and knock on effect as well. For instance, the findings from the Facebook page suggest that the uptake in the number of page visit and likes was as a result of the mobile survey instrument having a link to the Facebook page. Although more creative means and content could have been added to the page, the data suggests that there exists a group of persons willing to view and possibly engage in open budgeting through social media. In fact, the application of the survey, via mobile phone itself allowed the dissemination of information and prompted engagement on open budget principles which may otherwise not exist. In so doing, the act of participating in the research incited persons to begin thinking about their role in the budgeting and wider governance process and how open budget data and participation could affect how they engage with the state. Where international development agencies (e.g. the IDRC and World Bank) among others are actively encouraging countries to adopt open-data principles and practices from a supply side, the present study suggests that there is also a demand for opening budgetary data, among other forms of government data. What this study suggests is that for Jamaica, there is also an indication that citizens, particularly young people feel divorced from government but would nonetheless, be more involved were they are engaged around with attention to the form of engagement also being an issue. Relatedly, while the provision of more information via open data can be an  

18   

important step towards engagement, the underlying point is that this has to be matched by attention to raising awareness of the existence of the data. This also means changing the culture towards information in some settings. What is clear is the need for culture change around how citizens perceive information, to then actively seek out and engage with such information once provided. As noted in one definition of civic engagement, “developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference” in a community are important towards civic engagement (Ehrlich, 2000: vi). Ultimately then, Open budgeting and by extension, open government and OD4D are not panaceas. Infusing the discussion on the likely impact of opening budget data and OD4D with realism means an acceptance that some citizens may still not wish to be engaged or to seek out information. For instance, 49% of respondents in the mobile survey noted that they had no desire to be engaged in the budgeting process. Some of these views may be informed by the perception of the process as being corrupt or exclusive. In such contexts however, the emphasis must be on ensuring that information and opportunities for engagement are there for those who wish to do so, as well as active attempts to engage with the uninterested. Relatedly, there is much at stake here, given that the majority of the uninterested are young people. That is, while all groups expressed a desire to be involved and to get more information, there is need to focus specifically on sub-sections of the population, including young people. For instance young people appear to be more disengaged than adults over 40 years. This appears to be the case even among the more educated. This pattern is not necessarily unique to Jamaica and the Caribbean, demonstrating the need for more efforts at opening up governance through the provision of data as a means of stymying the culture of youth apathy. The very future of the democratic process can be affected by success or failure here. The Role of Data Visualisations Tools in Increasing Understanding and to Access Open Budget Data The very tools by which citizens interact with open (budget) data also impacts use, understanding and ultimately, the extent to which open data can have a transformative effect in society. As such, another aim of this paper was to examine the role of visualisation tools in increasing understanding and accessibility of open budget data. Data visualisation here was shown to help in increasing the awareness and understanding of open budget data, towards increased engagement, collaboration and civic engagement. In fact, the use of colour and different sized bubbles (in the bubble map) to represent individual expenses under the budget were highlighted as being particularly useful than the many pages of figures and tables presented by government. This allowed those who wished for more information to then go the government's website. In so doing, such tools have the capacity to address some of the traditional divides in ICTs, including technological literacy, usability and functionality (See Bertot, et al 2011). These divides are also relevant considerations in an emerging OD4D world, given the role of ICTs in facilitating OD4D. Perhaps more than any other period, there appears to be a strong conglomeration of actors, interests and institutions towards the logic of ICT-Enabled transparency implicit in open budgeting and ultimately in OD4D. This scenario is not unique with Bertot already noting the alignment of policies, technology and citizen demand towards technology-enabled government for enhanced trust among citizens. ICT-enabled initiatives such as e-government have in the past seen the proliferation of websites that lack interactivity, are rarely updated and are not  

19   

customised to enhance user experience without much impact on the actual performance of governments (Minto-Coy, et al, 2015; Bertot et al, 2011). To this end attention to opening government data should be viewed not as an end but as one step towards increasing use, transparency and information provision. For the full benefits of opening government data to be activated countries and organisations active in this field need to pay specific attention to the design and development of tools that will help citizens beyond those who are tech-savvy to understand and engage with such data. For instance, while an open government data portal was launched in Jamaica, the presentation of the data remains an issue for usage, underscoring the need for the data to then be made more presentable for users. Such tools offer practical means by which Bertot et al's warning (against open data and government and such movements becoming the purview of civic-minded geeks) be addressed. Indeed, the implications for the wider OD4D movement are important, given the existing views that ICTs have more generally led to the empowering of the empowered. Visualisations therefore, can assist in broadening the relevance, application and impact of OD4D towards ensuring a similar assessment does not meet this movement in the future. Important too will be the need to focus attention on the design and testing of such tools to increase access among a wide audience with attention to different age groups and socioeconomic status. While citizens were not directly included in the design of the data visualisation used in this study, participants did provide extensive feedback on the ways in which the tool could be improved for greater utility. The larger point here is the need for user engagement not only in assessment but also in design. Indeed, another factor to be considered in such design, which was not considered here is gender and specifically, how women access and use such tools vis-a-vis men.

CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS AND NEXT STEPS The research was an exploratory one aimed at assessing the potential for open data and data visualisation tools; this towards improving civic engagement and government transparency. As such a mixed methods research design was utilized. That is, both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were utilized in order to arrive at the outputs, with the Caribbean island of Jamaica as the site for the study. While the focus was on one setting, there is admittedly need for the testing of emerging open data principles in varying national settings. This is important for advancing the global impact of OD4D. Nevertheless, while the study focused on one country, the suggestion is that participatory budgeting has the potential to help countries globally especially those with minimal fiscal resources, or where there is need to break practices of corruption and the misuse/appropriation of public funds and their pervasive effects in terms of slow growth and development. The paper underscores that there are potentially positive implications for transparency and improved governance through the adoption of participatory governance tools in the budgeting process. Visualisation tools using open data are also presented as being important in raising understanding, use and access to budget data. The marrying of mobile innovations and the still emerging field of open data and open budgeting is an important aspect of this study. The integration is also natural given the implications of the  

20   

developments in ICTs and mobile telephony that have paved the way for the evolution of the open data movement from which open government has also sprung. The study and its findings have a place within this emergence and these ongoing developments. The study has a number of limitations which while important do not reduce the significance and application of the findings. For instance, the validity of the findings could be enhanced by the inclusion of more country cases, while the remaining aspects of the OD4D movement (e.g. impact on entrepreneurship and growth) could be examined for a more comprehensive assessment of the prospects of the movement. In fact, these possible limitations constitute a tentative research agenda for building the salience of OD4D as a research field. Further investigations could also look at design features for open data visualisation tools for different users, including young people and women. Finally, the challenge that this research suggests is that the “so what” question remains largely unanswered and must be addressed for governance innovations such as open budgeting and OD4D to translate into genuine change, empowerment and action. Suggested here is the need for further studies on how tangible links can be made between accountability and transparency. This is important in societies and cultures where politicians and leaders are rarely held to account for misdeeds. The indication then is that transparency is but one plank toward the development of an accountability culture. That is, citizens need to see that their engagement and increased information and participation visibly impact how government's operate and where this is not done then there is recourse. Otherwise there is the risk that interest in participation (voice) and OD4D will dissipate in much the same way that the promise of e-government and other initiatives at transforming government2citizen relationships have done. These are local challenges with a global impact relating to the future of OD4D and open government data.

 

21   

References Adler, R.P. & Goggin, J. (2005). “What do we Mean by 'Civic Engagement'?”, Journal of Transformative Education, 3 (3): 236-253. Auditor General's Department, 2015, Report of the Auditor on the financial transactions and financial statements of the Government for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2015. Bates, J., 2014, Strategic importance of information policy for the contemporary neoliberal state: The case of open governemtn data in the United Kingdom. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), pp. 388-395, viewed 20 August 2016, from http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/80765/1/Bates%20%20GIQ%20-%20final%20submitted%20version.pdf Bates, J.,2014, The progressive ideals of Open Data are being used to further interests of the Neoliberal State. The Impact Blog. London School of Economics and Political Science, viewed 21 August 2016, from http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/10/02/open-government-data-andthe-neoliberal-state/ Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P.T. & Grimes, J.M. 2010, “Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: Egovernment and Social Media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies”, Government Information Quarterly, 27 (2010): 264-271 Caribbean Open Data Institute, n.d., viewed 9 August 2016, from http://caribbeanopeninstitute.org/ Caribbean Policy Research Institute, 2011, Towards Public Sector Reform in Jamaica: What international and local experience tells us about successful public sector reform, viewed 19 August 2016, from http://www.capricaribbean.com/sites/default/files/public/documents/report/towards_public_sector _reform_in_jamaica.pdf Carlitz, R., Renzio, P. d., Krafchik, W., & Ramkumar, V., 2008, Budget Transparency around the World:Results from the 2008 Open Budget Survey. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 2009(2), viewed 10 August 2016, from https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/45362830.pdf Chignard, S. ,2013, A brief history of Open Data. ParisTech Review, viewed 5 August 2016, from http://www.paristechreview.com/2013/03/29/brief-history-open-data/  Dawes, S. S., 2009. “Governance in the digital age: A research and action framework for an uncertain future”. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 257–264. Dudis, D.,2015, Know Your Contractors: Transparent Ownership Reduces Corruption. Space for Transparency. Transparency International, viewed 21 July 2016, from http://blog.transparency.org/2016/03/24/why-open-data-can-stop-corruption/ Eggers, W. D., Hamail, R., & Ali, A.,2012, Data as the New Currency: Government’s Role in Facilitating the Exchange. Deloitte Review 13, viewed 25 July 2016, from http://deloitte.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/files/2013/11/DataCurrency_report.pdf Fagan, C.,2015, Following the Money: Why Transparent Development Finance Matters. Space for Transparency. Transparency International, viewed 19 August 2016, from http://blog.transparency.org/2016/03/24/why-open-data-can-stop-corruption/ Fagan, C.,2016, Why Open Data Can Stop Corruption. Space for Transparency. Transparency International, viewed 29 August 2016, from http://blog.transparency.org/2016/03/24/why-opendata-can-stop-corruption/

 

22    Foth, M., Forlano, L., Satchell, C., and Gibbs, M., (Eds.), 2011. From Social Butterfly to Engaged Citizen: Urban Informatics, Social Media, Ubiquitous Computing, and Mobile Technology to Support Citizen Engagement. MIT Press. Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency, n.d., viewed 1 September 2016, from http://www.fiscaltransparency.net/about/ Government of Jamaica, 1959, Financial Administration and Audit (FAA) Act. Ministry of Justice, viewed 10 August 2016, from http://moj.gov.jm/sites/default/files/laws/Financial%20Administration%20and%20Audit%20Act_ 0.pdf Government of Jamaica, 2002, Access to Information Act. Kingston: Ministry of Justice, viewed 29 August 2016, from http://moj.gov.jm/sites/default/files/laws/The%20Access%20%20to%20Information%20Act.pdf Guerrini, F.,2015, The dark side of Open Data: It's not how much you publish but how and why. Forbes/Tech, viewed 10 August 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/2015/01/27/the-dark-side-of-open-data-its-not-onlyhow-much-you-open-but-how-and-why/#1ec0722a79c5 Gunn, T.,2016, Open Data Portal to improve transparency-Dr. Wheatley. Kingston, Jamaica: Jamaica Information Service, viewed 11 June 2016, from http://jis.gov.jm/open-data-portal-improvetransparency-dr-wheatley/ Houses of Parliament, n.d. , viewed August 27, 2016, from http://www.japarliament.gov.jm/ Jamaica Observer,2016, Houses of Parliament to debate Supplementary Estimates this afternoon, viewed 30 June 2016, from http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/News/House-debates-SupplementaryEstimates-this-afternoon IBP,n.d., viewed 28 August 2016, from http://www.internationalbudget.org/ IDB, 2013, Inter-American Development Bank/World Bank Joint Statement on Extended Fund Facility in Jamaica, viewed 21 August 2016, from: http://www.iadb.org/en/news/announcements/2013-0408/joint-idb-and-world-bank-statement-for-jamaica,10415.html International Budget Partnership, 2015, Open Budget Survey 2015, viewed 10 August 2016, from http://www.internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/OBS2015-Report-English.pdf International Budget Partnership, 2015, Open Budget Survey 2015: Dominican Republic. IBP. International Budget Partnership,2015, Open Budget Survey 2015:Trinidad and Tobago. IBP. Jalbert. K., 2011. “Culturally Situated Sensing: Peer Innovation and Citizen Sensing in Native American Communities”, viewed 16 September, 2016 from http://kirkjalbert.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/01/Jalbert_Culturally_Situated_Sensing_20111.pdf Jamaica Constitution Order In Council,1962, Government of Jamaica. Jamaica Gleaner, 2013, A Look At Jamaica's IMF Report. Kingston, Jamaica, viewed 26 August 2016, from http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20130731/news/news1.html

 

23    Jamaica Observer ,2014, World Bank to Assist Jamaica with Open Data Development. Kingston, Jamaica, viewed 29 June 2016, from http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/latestnews/World-Bank-to-assistJamaica-with-open-data-development Jamaica Open Data Portal. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.data.gov.jm/ Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A.,2012, Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Governance. Information Systems Mangement, 29(4), 258-268. JIS. (n.d.). Budget watch:Glossary. Retrieved from Jamaica Information Service: http://jis.gov.jm/government/budget-watch/ Jug. M., 2014. “Information Revolution: From Data to Policy Action in Low-Income Countries: How Can Innovation Help?”, PARIS21 (Partnership in Statistics for Development in the 21st Century), Discussion Paper No. 3 April 2014, viewed September 16, 2016. Retrieved from http://www.paris21.org/sites/default/files/PARIS21-DiscussionPaper3-Innovation.pdf Kaplan, D. (2012, May 25). Towards Corporate and User Generated Open Data: Benefits and Issues Around the Extension of Open Data-Keynote Speech. Nantes: European Open Data Week. Retrieved from http://www.opendataweek.org/2012/wpcontent/uploads/2012/04/DK_ODW_Keynote-2505.pdf Kendal, R. (2011, September). Making Governments Walk the Talk: Budget Monitoring and Litigation for Early Childhood in Buenos Aires. Retrieved from http://www.internationalbudget.org/2011/09/making-government-walk-the-talk-budgetmonitoring-and-litigation-for-early-education-in-buenos-aires/ Kuunifaa, C. D. (2011). Access-to-Information legislation as to achieve transparency in Ghanian governance: lessons from the Jamaican experience. Puerto Rico: World Library and Information Congress 77th IFLA: General Conferee and Assembly. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/pastwlic/2011/141-kuunifaa-en.pdf Leon, J. R., Mora, D. d., & Ruiz, L. (2016, February). Digital Budgets: How are Governments Disclosing Fiscal Information Online. (I. B. (IBP), Ed.) Retrieved from http://www.internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/ibp-paper-digital-budgets-howgovernments-disclose-fiscal-info-online-2016.pdf Linders, D. (2012, October). From E-Government to We-Government: Defining a Typology for Citizen Coproduction in the Age of Social Media. Government Information Quarterly, 29, pp. 446-454. Ling, C., & Roberts, D. (2014, July). Evidence of Developmental Impact from Institutional Change: A Review of the Evidence on Open Budgeting. Capacity Development and Results. World Bank Institute. Retrieved from http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=701020068111101101094122092067116106018051 026007034010028016061055015098014022033046072099011027005028010046007119071103 120008016097024067111094067113027029007097078071083094072079072113078&EXT=pdf McNaughton, M. (2014). Open Government Data: A Catalyst for Jamaica's Growth and Innovation Agenda. Estimating the Potential Value of Open Data to the Jamaican Economy. Caribbean Policy Research Institute. Retrieved from http://www.capricaribbean.com/sites/default/files/public/documents/report/open_government_dat a_a_catalyst_for_jamaica039s_growth_and_innovation_agenda.pdf

 

24    McNaughton, M. (2015, May). Making Sense of US$3 Trillion-Estimating the Value of Open Data for Small Developing Economies. Ottawa: International Open Data Conference (IODC). Retrieved from http://opendatacon.org/making-sense-of-us3-trillion-estimating-the-value-of-open-data-forsmall-developing-economies/ Ministry of Finance and Planning. (2016). Fiscal Policy Paper FY2016/17. Kingston: Government of Jamaica. Moss, M. (n.d.). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Mixed Methodology Research. Retrieved from http://classroom.synonym.com/advantages-disadvantages-mixed-methodology-research4263.html Munroe, T. (2016, January). The Findings from 2015 Corruption Perceptions Report. Retrieved from https://www.niajamaica.org/publications/The%20Findings%20of%20the%20Corruption%20Perc eption%20Index.pdf Nam,T. 2011. “Toward the New Phase of E-Government: An Empirical Study on Citizens' Attitude About Open Government & Government 2.0”, Paper Presented at The 11th Public Management Research Conference June 2–4, 2011 Maxwell School of Syracuse University. Retrieved from https://www.maxwell.syr.edu/uploadedFiles/conferences/pmrc/Files/Nam_Toward%20the%20Ne w%20Phase%20of%20E-government.pdf National Integrity Action . (2016). Retrieved from https://www.niajamaica.org/ National Integrity Action (NIA) Jamaica. (2013, February 05). The Cost of Corruption........Jamaica's Barrier to prosperity. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEZnDCMvjO8 News from the OPM:Inaugural Address-Portia Simpson Miller. (2012, January 6). Retrieved from Office of the Prime Minister: http://opm.gov.jm/inaugural-address-prime-minister-simpson-miller/ Northern Illinois University. (n.d.). Responsible Conduct in Data Management. Retrieved from http://www.niu.edu/rcrportal/datamanagement/dctopic.html OECD. (2002). OECD Best Practices for Budget Transparency. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/Best%20Practices%20Budget%20Transparency%20%20complete%20with%20cover%20page.pdf OECD Senior Budget Officials. (2014). Draft Recommendations of the OECD Council on The Principles of Budgetary Governance. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/Draft-Principles-Budgetary-Governance.pdf Office of the Prime Minister. (2012, January 6). Inaugural Address-PrimE Minister Portia SimpsonMiller. Retrieved from http://opm.gov.jm/inaugural-address-prime-minister-simpson-miller/ OGP. (n.d.). Retrieved from Open Government Partnership: http://www.opengovpartnership.org/ Open Data and Open Budget Readiness Assessment. (2012). Retrieved from Jamaica Open Data Portal: http://www.data.gov.jm/story/open-data-readiness-assessment Open Data Charter. (n.d.). Towards an International Open Data Charter. Retrieved from http://opendatacharter.net/history/ Open Data for Development. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://od4d.net/

 

25    Open Knowledge Institute. (n.d.). About Open Spending. Retrieved from Open Spending Community: http://community.openspending.org/about/ Open Knowledge International. (n.d.). What is Open Data? Retrieved from Open Data Handbook: http://opendatahandbook.org/guide/en/what-is-open-data/ OPM Communications,2015, PM Says Government Committed to Accountability and Transparency. Kingston, Jamaica: Office of the Prime Minister, viewed 29 June 2016, from http://opm.gov.jm/pm-says-government-committed-to-accountability-and-transparency/ Organization of American States (OAS), n.d., How does the Government of Jamaica decide on an allocation in the Estimates of Expenditure for the activity, Natural Disasters, and in the event of the occurrence, how is the budget allocation executed? How are accountability and Transparency ensured?, viewed 30 July 2016, from http://www.oas.org/dsd/EnvironmentLaw/CaribbeanLegislationProject/Documents/GOJ'sNatural Disasters.pdf Patterson, C.,2016, Open Data Offers Prospect for Wealth Creation. Kingston, Jamaica: Jamaica Information Service, viewed 2 September 2016, from http://jis.gov.jm/open-data-offers-prospectswealth-creation/ Jamaica Gleaner, 2016, Phillips says lack of government transparency crippling public confidence, viewed 10 July 2016, from http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/lead-stories/20160404/phillipssays-lack-govt-transparency-crippling-public-confidence Promoting effective auditing through a quality assurance management framework: Supreme Audit Institution of Jamaica (SAI of Ja) Country Paper, viewed August 12, 2016 from http://www.auditorgeneral.gov.jm/files/u5/Country_Paper.pdf Ramkumar, V., & Shapiro, I. (eds.), n.d., Guide to transparency in Government Budget Reports: Why are Budget Reports important, and what should they Include? ,viewed 10 June 2016, from http://www.internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/Guide-to-Transparency-in-GovernmentBudget-Reports-Why-are-Budget-Reports-Important-and-What-Should-They-Include-English.pdf Renzio, P. d.,2015, Why are open budgets important? Publish What You Fund, viewed 13 August 2016, from http://www.publishwhatyoufund.org/updates/by-topic/iati/why-are-open-budgets-important/ Renzio, P. d., & Wehner, J.,2015, Impacts of Fiscal Openess: A Review of the Evidence, viewed 14 August 2016, from https://ebape.fgv.br/sites/ebape.fgv.br/files/SSRN-id2602439.pdf Rueben, W., & Levy-Benitz, M.,2003, The role of civic engagement and social accountability in the Governance equation. Social Development Notes. Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Network, viewed 15 August 2016, from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPCENG/214574-1118058447732/20526739/sdn75.pdf Scott, A.,2014, Open Data for Economic Growth. World Bank, viewed 20 August 2016, from http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/Brief/TAI/OpenDataforEconomicGrowth.pdf Skillachi,2009, Transparency in Government, viewed 21 August 2016, from http://www.data.gov.jm/ Smith, A., 2013, Civic Engagement in the Digital Age, viewed 3 September 2016, from Pew Research Center: http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/04/25/civic-engagement-in-the-digital-age/

 

26    World Bank.,n.d., Social Accountability: What does it mean for the World Bank. SocialAccountability Source Book, viewed 21 June 2016, from http://www.worldbank.org/socialaccountability_sourcebook/PrintVersions/Conceptual%2006.22. 07.pdf Tauberer, J.,2014, Open Government Data Definition: The 8 Principles of Open Government Data, viewed 10 July 2016, from Open Government Data: Te Book: https://opengovdata.io/2014/8principles/ Textit.in.,n.d., textit.in, viewed 5 September 2016, from textit.in: https://textit.in/ The Legal Framework for Budgeting. An International Comparison,2004, OECD Journal on Budgeting, 4(3), viewed 10 July 2016, https://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/43487903.pdf The World Bank.,2014, Open Data Initiatives in the Caribbean, viewed 10 May 2016, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/ict/brief/open-data-initiatives-in-the-caribbean Transparency International.,2015, Corruption Perceptions Index Report 2015, viewed 15 May 2016, from https://www.niajamaica.org/publications/Corruption%20Perceptions%20Index%202015%20repor t.pdf Transparency International., 2016., viewed 15 May 2015 from https://www.transparency.org/ Trend Media.,n.d., Trend Media, viewed 6 September 2016, from http://www.trend.media/trend-media/ University of Portsmouth.,2012, Primary Data Collection: Questionnaires, viewed 4 September from http://compass.port.ac.uk/UoP/file/fa9fbb2f-06fb-4fef-9ce1c5e06b26a831/1/Questionnaires_IMSLRN.zip/page_07.htm Valkanova, Jorda, S., Tomitsch, M., Vande Moere, A. 2013. “Reveal-it!: The Impact of a Social Visualization Projection on Public Awareness and Discourse”, CHI 2013: Changing Perspectives, Paris, France. Retrieved September 16, 2016 from http://infoscape.org/publications/chi13.pdf Wampler, A.,2000, A Guide To Participatory Budgeting, viewed 21 July 2016, from https://www.commdev.org/userfiles/files/1613_file_GPB.pdf World Bank, 2012, BOOST Initiative, viewed 10 June 2016, from http://wbi.worldbank.org/boost/boostinitiative World Bank.,n.d, Data: Open Data in 60 Seconds, viewed 10 July 2016, from http://opendatatoolkit.worldbank.org/en/open-data-in-60-seconds.html World Bank.,n.d., Open Data and Open Government Readiness Assessment, viewed August 10 2016, from http://data.gov.jm/sites/default/files/Jamaica-Open-Data-Open-Budget-ReadinessAssessment.pdf