One of the open government movement’s main agenda items is more transparency supported by ICT. More transparency brings better governance, makes administrations more efficient and brings citizen support and legitimacy, they argue. There is not universal agreement however on the purpose and effects of transparency. Some say, that with politics it is just like with sausages – you do not want to see how they are made, and it could hinder daily business if politics and administrations are constantly under public scrutiny. A not alltogether different argument can be heard in diplomatic circles. The workings of diplomacy and intelligence are endangered by the radical openness of the WikiLeaks revelations. Transparency can be bad, the critics argue. Others consider the transparency advocacy as aimless open government demands and question a transparency for the sake of idealistic openness.

A recent academic paper by scientists at Oxford University discusses some of the problematic aspects of transparency. In „The Trouble with Transparency: A Critical View of Openness in e-Government“ (PDF) they approach the assumptions of the pro-transparency crowd and analyze the role of ICT in this context. The paper tries to illustrate weak points and disadvantages of the transparency demands. Some familiar problems are trends towards self-censorship or the establishment of informal structures, driven by increased transparency. The authors find phenomena in six dimensions that could reduce the benefits of ICT-driven transparency (e-transparency as they call it), which should be considered when drafting regulations and require further debate. These are cost issues, systemic risks suchs as blaming, conformity pressures, misinterpretation of information, the perceived blurring of lines between politicians and administrative officials from the citizens‘ vantage point, and the rights, dignity and privacy of public servants.

While the authors‘ approach is laudable and to discuss the topic in all its facets very important, their conclusion is ultimately apologetic. They conclude for example that many assumptions about the nature of transparency and technical rationality do not fit the day-to-day business of politics. Philipp Mueller, professor for Public Governance at the University of Salzburg, critizes that: „they ignore, that digitalization and virtualization changes the logic of government, intentional or not“. His new book „Open Statecraft“, which explores these new realities will be published this year (also see the recent Harvard International Review article „Machiavelli 2.0“). „What is required is an adjustment of the strategies and tactics we use to create public value. Politicians and organizations need to learn how to use transparency strategically, instead of harking back to the good old times. That is what Machiavelli would do today“ he explains. Whether there are certain risks we associate transparency with, or certain hopes about what it will bring, transparency is a reality on the daily agenda already. Politics and public administrations can use it strategically to realize their goals of serving the public, if they start treating it as a management tool.

Related posts:

1. The new face of Enterprise Content Management
2. 5 Cornerstones of Successful E-Government Projects
3. What Open Government Can Do For You