LEVEL OF AGREEMENT

MOST DISCUSSED PARAGRAPHS

P2 As democracy remains under threat and many g
23 0
P9 To enable all these shifts, the OGP Support
17 13
P1 OGP’s vision is of healthier democracies whe
15 0
P8 A core design principle of OGP is a domestic
13 0
P7 OGP will retain its unique value-add – an ac
13 19
P12 Visible, genuine and continuous political le
13 0
P3 For much of our first decade, OGP focused on
13 0
P6 In the first decade, our collective emphasis
12 0
P20 The ultimate vision for OGP will only be rea
12 12
P19 The OGP Support Unit will work with the rest
12 10
P14 Where the above mentioned curated leadership
11 11
P18 Over time, OGP will ideally be in a position
10 12
P16 Consultations have shown strong appreciation
9 16
P13 To promote open government as a norm, invest
9 14
P4 OGP’s mission is to build, equip and inspire
9 0
P26 Mainstreaming Gender and Inclus
8 0
P15 For open government to truly be accepted as
8 13
P10 For the next five year period – 2023 to
8 0
P5 The OGP community has grown into a large and
8 0
P28 The OGP Support Unit will design an annual a
8 0
P22 While members and partners will continue to
7 9
P24 Participation is core to open government. Al
7 11
P25 A resounding concern facing the Partnership,
7 10
P29 The OGP Support Unit and IRM will work on
7 0
P30 Doubling Down On OGP Local in t
6 0
P27 Since the early days, OGP has invested in ca
6 0
P17 Action plans by OGP members have been at the
6 0
P11 It is very positive that the community of le
5 0
P21 OGP will continue to uphold one of its centr
3 0
P23 The OGP Steering Committee will launch a Par
2 11

LATEST COMMENTS

In germany journalism is currently discussed to get recognized as matter of common benefit in fiscal questions - hundreds of years after journalism is seen as 4th power in democracies 1848. So there is anything running wrong in awareness of the function of press in societies. and I'm afraid it is on the press/medias side. Like the continued ignorance of Open Gov and OGP by journalists/media, wich is really shocking. Especialy as OG outcomes supports their work and thei should be strong partner of civil societies in public obersight activities. But I'm afraid it has to do with journalism feeling to loose priviliges, like their own access to information rights. In Germany e.g. rarely Journalists disclose that they got their information by a FOI-request in their publications. If they would much more recipients would get aware of their FOI-rights.
It would be helpful to define 'youth' and seek to identify ways that *children* are also engaged in this work. Intergenerational partnerships shape better policy. Granted, engagement with children requires more support for the adults to be able to listen well to children, and have the skills and knowledge to do so fruitfully. Intersectional approach to this work is good to see and could be expanded slightly further.
One group that can be so easily overlooked in this work (despite being 30% of the world population) is children. Children are distinct from adults, and have specific needs, rights and capacities. As non-voters, they also have the least power in the work of OGP. Responding uniquely to children in the light of this distinctiveness, including engaging them as agents of change, will be important for the successful delivery of this vision, for people of all ages. Children as well as young people will be key allies in the work and future of the OGP mission, and a specific focus here will be important.
The move to increased ownership and striving to deliver change at all levels is excellent. It makes sense that we thus later also create a focus on 5 key areas. The balance to be struck here will be to ensure that by widening out the partnership, this collaborative approach doesn't --as it can do--become unfocused and lack impact. Accountability will be key to this and core to delivering this shift in strategy.
We can appreciate the need to identify common goals across the partnership. Those identified are sound. The issues related to (a) corruption, (b)& (d) accountability, and (c) governance would be strengthened by an explicit recognition of and reference to justice as a key mechanism to achieve these aims.
Excellent idea, important to expand on this thinking through what it would take to do it well.
In terms of "This will only be successfully done if the content is sourced and shared from, by and with the community." we feel it's important to expand on and acknowledge the broad range of specialist organization the Partnership draws on, which is a smart, efficient way of working but should be more of an explicit end goal to grow and mutually support these partners.
In terms of sustainability over time, we feel media and civil society are critical here to keeping up the reform and implementation pressure beyond one election cycle.
A really important point to consider carefully. Are OGP commitments leading or lagging. For open contracting, they can be both but - we think - tend to be better when the open gov action plan is the icing on the cake vs the original source, we tend to see "stickier" reforms when robust domestic legislation or regulation backed with local resources and staffing plans are in place.
A big opportunity would be channeling all those promises made at high-level summits into action plans with the support/expertise of OGP with the support and collaboration of civil society. Team OCP also thinks that OGP is already quite intentional, strategic and leveraging alliances, so important to clarify if the community should expect more of that approach, or something different? If it's "more" strategic or intentional than before, what does that look like?
Instead of aiming at being a "home", focus on being a, platform and a hub for a social network, intentionally nurturing communities of practice around the world to share open government stories, data, evidence, innovation, and events. OGP should be building out multistakeholder networks with explicit partnerships with state, local, national, and international media and tech companies that can connect the people making open government a reality around the world with journalists, independent news media outlets, artists, designers, and creators who have the skills to make this work come alive from everyone. There is immense value in OGP creating the internal capacity to tell stories itself, publish open access research as a platform, and build social networks across communities and borders that leverage mobile devices, social media, and emerging ideation tools. I look forward to seeing what vision OGP adopts and implements.
This is a really critical discussion point. If open government as a concept is not attractive, all the other strategy processes will fall short. I think this + point 1 should be combined into one goal, potentially with goal 4 as the evidence will make a key element for that.
It feels important to think through collaborative approaches and complement rather than compete with other organizations providing technical expertise and assistance, what does OGP need itself to do that isn't being done already vs what are the gaps OGP could fill and complement others?
Re: "Thirdly, it means using OGP regional events and summits to bring in more political actors and politically relevant discussions to these fora, and secure concrete commitments from leaders. This includes capitalizing on the political convening power of other platforms and partners." --> do you have specific platforms and partners in mind you could mention?
This comes across as very focused on government and political parties and less so on the civl society and other actors who shape the political space and help sustain reforms across administrations through on-going advocacy, pressure, investigations, etc.
This whole topic of education (and partnering in it) is elementary to get beyond the waves
interestingly this word appears in this context. but it nails an important target open government should adress (currently discussed in germany): Diffusion of responsibility
yes. both much more to be adressed. but political influence comes not only from those named but also from large CSOs, media and Academia. Esply broad media a lacking to recognize open government, although they are not only beneficiaries of open government for their work and business models but should also be strong partners of active civil society in oversight activities
Open Gov often comes with the idea (and promise) of co-creation at eye level between civil societies and governments. But sadly the resources for capabilties often aren't on eye level where civil societies are lacking resources. OGP partners should in future layout concepts for fixing this to get/hold eligibility
The quality of democracy not only implies being transparent, it also requires accountability and the promotion of a democratic, inclusive, responsible and purposeful Data Governance. One of the main reasons we want to continue promoting in Chile.
I would go quite a bit further here and add "foundations" to norm. Openness and open structures and information are the foundations for shared evidence, co-creation and above all: public oversight activities for all other monitoring frameworks and progress indicators in a regime of accountability mechanisms for reforms (by OECD etc, like Wellbeing-Index, SDGs, EITI, Human Rights Index, Public Sector Innovation Barometer etc). However, standards need general acceptance. That is why consortia are formed that are as broad and diverse as possible, that representatively stand behind a norm and give it relevance.
what I learned from network graphs: the degree of seperation value decreases with diversity of subnets faster than with the quantity of nodes. diversity trumps quantity.
wouldn't it be more a leveled playingfield if "reformers" would refer to all like: national and local reformers in government civil society, multilateral partners, parliamentarians, foundations
" information about government processes and decisions that impact their lives" > ..as well as generally information on matters of public and common interests
"better prepared to respond to the complex challenges" > Through the openness of state institutions, Open Gov helps civil society and individuals to better understand their significance and self-efficacy in the arts of being a state and society and thus makes them more responsive, flexible, self-determinated and resilient in crises. Moreover, through transparency, it helps to strengthen commitment among state actors in their duties for public interests and helps that way to keep this oaperating system in the best shape to cover crisis.
Is there any hunger for opensourced decentralized Canadian created blockchains to benefit citizens? We've just launched one and we are not affiliated to any big tech / big data tech companies. Power to the Canadian people :)
I would go one level below the specific form of government (democracy in this case) and promote Open Government as the culture and techniques of modern good governance (in general) with a benefit in a multilevel and multilateral dimension
Editors and reporters are open government leaders. If you want people to know about this work, engage and involve them.
There is a fourth pre-condition: vibrant independent media and freedom of information.
Imagine if OGP had invested in media partnerships over the last decade, ensuring that there wasn't a conveyor belt for "content" but engines for accountability and service journalism.
The absence of press freedom and freedom of information laws in these policy areas is brutal. OGP should be pushing for strengthening these laws and opposing Internet shutdowns.
When you write "the community," what do you mean? Once again, there is no mention of journalists or media.
Members are not held accountable through the IRM because OGP does not engage with media outlets to ensure that the findings of participatory theater get broad attention. OGP does not sanction governments that make a mockery of participation, either, for fear of lost access to officials, which enables openwashing and engenders widespread distrust in the integrity of the secretariat among the very actors in civil society that it wishes to cultivate. If OGP regularly highlighted countries failing to deliver on commitments or that engaged in participation theater in consultations in public fora that led to political or legal pressure on non-performing governments, perhaps the outcomes would lead to changes in culture or scale.
It is appalling that there is no mention of the role that journalists and free expression play in democracies. Press freedom and freedom to information laws crucial for publics to be able to access the information required for self-governance. OGP's continued failures to connect press freedom, media freedom, and democracy after over a decade are shocking.
Being transparent and responsive is not enough: to recover eroded trust, governments must deliver accountability. If corrupt elected leaders or powerful corporations that engage in criminal behavior are not held accountable after a public is aware of that behavior, then trust will fall, creating the conditions for authoritarianism. OGP should also include freedom of expression and access to information in this vision.
It is important to spread the word on positive stories and examples. Recognizing people and institutions should give the opportunity to the people at operational level - who really worked on successful stories.
test
Conducting citizens satisfaction/needs surveys represents one of the first steps to be taken here.
Cooperation between public institutions and NGO's can attract attention of the citizens in a way that they want to be involved too. That segment is very important for the reforms to take place.
This activity needs to include OGP members' work with the Multi-stakeholder Forums to ensure their participation is core to successful open government. This core activity needs to be given more priority in this strategy. On reflection, as I reach the end of the strategy, there is insufficient recognition of the MSF role in co-creating innovative NAPs.
This strategic shift is critical for embedding open government values into countries' business as usual philosophy
Endorse OGP's intention to work with other eligible or near-eligible countries. Some of these, such as Taiwan, have more innovative NAPs than OGP member countries.
Advice/guidance will be necessary to dissuade countries from choosing the more focused/narrow plan approach when their capacity is clearly at a higher level.
Agree. To achieve long-term open government change, leaders at critical global and regional initiatives need to be persuaded by its argument and to expect it to be relevant at this level.
This approach is an essential for achieving co-created NAPs, particularly in representative democracies which may see this as a threat.
It will be necessary to argue this case to university funders who, in the current very tight economic environment, are downsizing, rather than upsizing what are seen as nom-essential programmes.
Agree totally. Without visible, genuine and continuous political leadership which drives the co-creation of innovative NAPS and agendas, the change envisaged by this strategy will not occur.
This will require the OGP Support Unit and the IRM to persuade governments to fund and resource the creation and implementation of their NAPs. Without allocated funding and a recognition that OGP work is funded in a government's regular annual budget rounds, governments are unlikely to create inspirational open government content.
Requiring progress in these fundamental open government policy areas over the next five years should achieve a wider number of promising commitments on countries' NAPs. This emphasis is likely to also result in governments and civil society having a more common understanding and definition of open government.
This new approach is excellent; and a fundamental change for achieving long-term reform. It will require new IRM assessments of the relationship of NAP commitments to other reform currently outside the OGP programme.
Would the second sentence be clearer if the phrase "in developing" was changed to "to develop"? As it is written now, it is unclear whose capabilities etc need to be developed.
This paragraph would be be strengthened by the addition of "willingly" on line 4 between "governments" and "embed". This would emphasise the necessity for governments to actively drive this change. The word "actively" could also be added to this paragraph also.
I'm aware it's a contingent issue, but a brave step would be to include intersectional issues as part of the evaluation of OGP plans and IRM reports.
Looking forward to how this takes shape. Sounds promising.
This is not the right phrasing but a very powerful role OGP can play (and does, to an extent) is that of "matchmaker" between governments that want to do things and governments and civil society organizations that have dome similar things. This would be a nice add-on for the last two points.
This has inherent risks that I believe should be explicitly recognized and mitigation strategies prepared for them. We've seen many times politicians and governments using open government as a flag but not committing to it. A transition gone wrong could really impact OGP's image. To clarify, I agree with the strategy, but I feel this needs to be acknowledged and a way out for OGP in case of trouble designed into the strategy.
This is a valuable objective, but we also have to learn from past experiences that political support sometimes comes with significant resistance or outright rejection from civil society or other actors. A process to balance the involvement of more political leaders with the opinions of organizations about those leaders might be a healthy way to balance making OGP attractive to governments and to civil society. I'm not thinking of vetoing, but at least some sort of feedback mechanism where civil society and other actors can warn OGP of actors that might be attractive politically but generate rejections in local or international organizations.
We must also embed the open gov community in other areas and thematic groups. We' can't expect for everyone to "come to us", but need to proactively take the values and principles of open government at every level (OGP, countries, organizations) to other spaces.
Although everyone values inspiration and content, I believe the true value here lies in incubating innovation. A lot of resources have been spent on documenting and there's obviously value there, but I can't help feeling that return on investment in incubating innovation can be much higher. Aiming to collect experience and generate inspirational content goes so far, actually innovating and generating knowledge and content from those innovations can be so much richer.
Recognizing the limits of action plans and commitments is a great step for OGP. Not that they're not useful, but as stated, more is needed.
I think and I’m sure we’ve lost a very important direction - co-realization. We have only co-creation. Even our IRM evaluates only co-creation! It is important to talk about partnership implementation.
How we will work with the international/donors organizations/structures?
+ judicial authority
... and to become a global leader/champion/pioneer in implementing of the responsible good governance
... and to develop and improve of the new formats and standards of open responsible governance
Creo que algo natural sería pensar de esta manera cronológicamente: 1. Entra un nuevo miembro 2. Genera PAL a manera de pilotaje de esfuerzos de GA 3. El segundo PAL viene de manera híbrida, con compromisos puntuales pero también con una visión más amplia y compromisos ambiciosos y de largo plazo. 4. 3er PAL y en adelante, ya traen enfoques de visión estratégica combinado con acciones específicas. Otra idea es ver cómo poder integrar los PALs a los planes de desarrollo municipales, estatales y nacionales para hacerlos lo más vinculantes posibles.
Creo que es importante tratar de conectar a policy makers con académicos para generar artículos académicos para generar conocimiento. Sería interesante crear un fondo global con suficiente $$$ para poder concursar entre servidores y académicos y poder fondear papers y publicarlos libremente en la web.
Esto es crucial... creo que tenemos que empezar a generar espacios donde los miembros más comprometidos y que han tenido más éxito con sus compromisos empiecen a compartir su conocimiento de tal manera que sea replicable por otros miembros... para esto creo que es necesario que desde OGP conecten a los miembros que tienen aspiraciones con ciertos temas pero que no saben qué hacer ni qué accionar con los miembros que sí. Por otra parte, es importante empezar a generar espacios de "incubación" locales. Pueden ser Laboratorios pop-up, compromisos de PALs encaminados a incubación de ideas y demás.
Creo que es imperante que también se centren en la entrega y provisión de servicios públicos a la ciudadanía y cómo mejoramos la eficiencia y vigilancia de los mismos... ahí se encuentran muchos otros temas relacionados como el agua, saneamiento y la electricidad, que tienen que ver con temas de sostenibilidad medioambiental.
Esto para mi es lo más importante de todo. No podemos quedarnos solo en planes de acción. Creo que como pilotajes y primer acercamiento de gobiernos a este nuevo paradigma funciona perfectamente tener un PAL, pero creo que ese PAL debe de abrirse más a ser uno más estratégico y a largo plazo.
Civic participation is strongly felt at a territorial level by citizens add associations, but often politics and administrations in such contexts do not have sufficient support, vision, personnel, competencies, means, to develop enough and/ or adequate open government policies and practices. It is therefore essential that OGP provides local administrations with tools, supports, skills and guidelines in order to strengthen them and give life to more participatory initiatives.
Furthermore the OGP could also provide an annual contribution to finance studies, research, papers or publications, related to the principles and practices of open government, involving universities, foundations and other institutions.
In addition to this, OGP also aim to secure concrete commitments from national and sib-national governments that drive open government and innovation in an effort to push countries further in the areas of transparency, accountability and citizen engagement.
Very important and impressive points to look into
OGP Catalunya has guaranteed local level implications by having as co-signees of the 2021-2023 commitments all 947 territorial municipalities represented thru the two municipal platforms in Catalonia. We would like to vshare this experience and continue learnign from OGP Local partners in other continents. Sharing experiences is vital for the consolidation of solvent ethical political leadership interacting with the social strata in diverse & plural communities.
We suggest interaction with other international platforms that have some common goals with those we are setting up at OGP Local levels.
What about faciliting an exchange visit platform with OGP funding for the less economically solvent OGP Local members instrad of just awards ?
In the Slack forum, we requested a space for LGBTIQ+ as indispensible to honestly talk about the gender issue. For the period 2023-2028, this matter is even more relevant after living thru drawbacks in the treatment of Trans persons in open confrontations between feminists movements. It's particularly worrying to have lived discrimination to the point of exclusion of citizens due to their gender identity, not only in autocratic states but likewise in recognised democracies with ultra-conservative regimes in power. Furthermore, the risk of social exclusion due to economic issues is worrying including in supposed leading socio-economic territories such as the European Union. The current crisis provoke by the Russian invation of Ukraine and the world conflict on Russia has deepened the risk of exclusion of persons in their natural habitat or community, seriously affected by lack of transparency in governance in many European states. We wish to point out that in our work women's & LGBTIQ+ rights, we have been confronted with discriminatory treatment between persons from Ukraine & Russia, a situation that cannot be tolerated in a tru Open Government Partnership. We firmly demand a truly equitable stand that will erradicate any type of racial or cultural discrimination of any person due to political stand on any tyerritorial conflict, such as what is currently happening in the Ukraine-Russia war. Our policy must be - Persons First, without any type of discrimiantions due to diversity in the amplest sense of the word.
The use of civic space and respect fot the freedom of expression is a relevant issue to make OGP actions credibile before citizenry in open government democracies.
Let's ensure that "open government" is understood as "good governance with citizen participation" in the totality of the OGP signatory states. Otherwise, OGP Local units will remain as second fiddle in governance proposing & implementation.
Let's change "reforms" and discuss "transformation" instead.
It will be necessary to motivate OGP Local Units with innovative transformative proposals thay may not be supported by their national governments & OGP. This is a pending assignment for future interterritorial networking meets Let's give local OGPs the spotlight to share their assertive feasible proposals.
Implicating local governments at base levels is fundamental to succeed. The IRM monitoring must also count on citizen participation before it launches reports, to ensure "base truth" of implemented government policies.
We recommend you to fill in on our Catalonia experience in this new set-up of the Public Service School & the future law to ensure its effectivesness towards public integrity in governance. More information: https://eapc.gencat.cat/ca/lescola/que_fem/llei-de-lescola-dadministracio-publica-de-catalunya/index.html#googtrans(ca|en)
Are world leaders today aware of the relevance of "open government" in realtion to "good governance" ? It's a MUST to ensure a change in mindset of quite a few non-resilient leaders bent on building walls & fences towards national protectionism instead of global international action.
We fully agree. Strategic communications with a common-ground nerurolinguistics vocabulary respectful to cultural differences is a must. Our intercultural experience in Catalonia with over a hundred nationalities sharing community facilities in our municipalities could be a testing ground for such innovative communications strategy by Open Government Partnership-
This proposed concept of universal interaction, not only has been in our vision from headstart but also put into effect in 2022 in several transcontinental joint actions, unfortunately slowd down after a territorial government revamp. Nevertheless, thru our other international network channel on "time in use" & quality of living", we were able to reach out to Latin American counterparts to set up co-work schemes for 2023 and there onwards. We are open to establish same modus operandi with other OGP local units in such issues as equal rights in diversity, gender equality, intercultural citizen participation. Thus, we request this vision be reflected in the future strategy y its priorities.
May we suggest a truly new mindset in choosing the key words ? We recommend dropping the 20th century concept of "reform" and as of now centre on "TRANSFORMATION", whenever we speak of assertive change in government. Further, we offer our 3-T formula designed by an intergenerational & intercultural team of volunteers, engaged in creating a unique "equal rights & opportunities in diversity" strategy. Said strategy can de resumed in 3 words as its goal - Transversal Transparent Transformation - 3 Ts.
In Catalonia, we are currently discussing the future law for our Public Service School (Escola de Administració Pública de Catalunya) which is already involved in the implementation of transformation of public servervants' mindset on public integrity. As a matter of fact, all appointed high level public servants after the Feb. 14, 2021 elections had to undergo an aewareness training course & sign up commitment to the Gov't Code of Ethics. This is a political compromise of the actual government based on OGP Catalunya proposals at the Agora Meet that approved our 5 commitments to the Open Government Partnership for the period 2021-2023.
We refer you to Catalonia's open data experience this past decade, with a consortium for shared open data for public entities in compliance of the Transparency laws. In fact, our OGP Catalunya unit was born as a consequence of the global Transparency Pact of local governments and its commitment towards public integrity & fight against corruption.
Co-creation continues to be fundamental at local levels to reach global OGP goals Without implicating the local citizenry in the design of government policiy, elected policy-makers may neglect to resolve the true base problems due to ignorance of real day-to-day needs of its diverse communities. This is especially true in states with múltiple cultures living in isolated neigbourhood ghettos, subjected to global generalised laws not fit to their daily social & economic requirements.
True democracy is based on separation of powers with ethical actions both by elected & appointed public servants. Without a required Code of Ethics in the exercise of public functions, any democratic government is capable of serving vested interests, including political parties, instead of complying with their oath of office and/or appointment commitments as public servant. Such is the case in Spain today, with a judiciary system exercising functions with a lapsed mandate. Without Justice, there hardly can de true democracy guaranteed. Such situation affects all governance at local levels.
To attain effective democracy, it's indispensible to involve the citizenry at local levels in co-designing government actions & have citizens representing the communities in evaluating implementation of approved laws & policies by elected parliamentarians and appointed public servants.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 30 – P30 Rien à signaler. Nous prenons actes. Et attend de la part de OGP la concrétisation du Doubler sur OGP Local dans la nouvelle stratégie et des 29 autres P du dit projet sur le terrain. Merci beaucoup à toute l'équipe ayant contribué à cet outil si important pour la protection des vies des populations et citoyens du monde entier avec toutes ces ressources naturelles. RICE - Congo Brazzaville
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 29 – P29 Rien à signaler. Nous adhérons à l’initiative.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 28 – P28 Rien à signaler. Nous adhérons à cette initiative.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 27 – P27 Rien à signaler. Cette expérience de OGP mérite d'être expérimenter par les réformateurs des gouvernements ouverts pour l'intérêt de l'humanité.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 25 – P25 Rien à signaler. Nous tout à fait d'accord à l'idée, par ce que l'idée ne laisse personne au bord de la route.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 25 – P25 Rien à signaler. Nous adhérons cette idée
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 24 – P24 La stratégie 3.3. qui intègre un accent sur la participation et la responsabilité inclusives du public dans toutes les stratégies du PGO : fait référence à notre Commentaire 2 – P2 du dit projet.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 23 – P23 La stratégie de OGP : 3.1 du P22, traite déjà ces questions stratégiques de mettre le Partenariat au défi de faire progresser les principaux domaines politiques du gouvernement ouvert.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 22 – P22 Cette stratégie de OGP : 3.1. Fixer des priorités thématiques et cultiver des coalitions pour définir et conduire une ambition collective et des résultats durables est la stratégie centrale de toutes les stratégies quinquennales du présent projet. Nous adhérons à cette stratégie.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 21 – P21 Cet Objectif stratégique 3 de OGP est le souhait de tous les réformateurs des politiques des gouvernements ouverts pour la cause de l’humanité.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 20 – P20 Cette vision ultime de l'OGP renforcera et convergera à la mise en place effective des politiques gouvernementales nationales ouvertes et dynamiques. Par ailleurs nous tenons à souligner l’importance de cette vision ultime de l’OGP, par la notion du respect des droits humains et d’Etat de droit pour parvenir véritablement aux démocraties saines, dont le seul but ultime sera le bien-être social sans discrimination et violation des droits humains dans son ensemble dans tous les pays du monde entier.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l'Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 19 – P19 Les dispositifs du paragraphe : 2.2. Enregistrer, inciter et reconnaître les actions au-delà des plans d'action et des processus OGP, et au-delà des membres OGP est intéressant. Mais nous trouvons ce paragraphe trop chargé. Il faut aller à l’essentiel.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 18 – P18 Les diapositifs pris par OGP sur le point 2.1. Renforcer le cadre d'action avec des options attrayantes adaptées à l'objectif, pour permettre à tous les niveaux et branches du gouvernement dans différents contextes de faire progresser le gouvernement ouvert, rejoint notre commentaire 17 – P17
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 17 – P17 Pour rendre la stratégie 2 : Catalyser l'action transformatrice pour faire du gouvernement ouvert la norme à tous les niveaux et branches du gouvernement plus efficace, il serait préférable de donnée la possibilité à la population de participer pleinement à l’élaboration des politiques sociaux-économiques de leur pays, au lieu d’être représenté par les élus, du fait que ces élus nationaux et locaux ne servent que les intérêts de leur partie politique respectif. Cette approche permettra aux populations d’intervenir directement lors des abus de violation de leurs droits, et d’éviter des régimes qui confisquent le pouvoir, prenant en otage leur population au détriment de leurs intérêts.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 16 – P16 Nous félicitons OGP de son initiative du programme dit investir dans des alliances et des partenariats stratégiques en tant que renforçateurs et amplificateurs des principes de gouvernement ouvert. Ce programme intègre les principes essentiels des éléments clés déclencheurs des changements sociaux-économiques, culturels et démocratiques au sein des pays ayant accepté cette démarche comme modèle de gouvernance participative. Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE) attend de la part de OGP, de lui réserver une place à la table pour sa contribution à investir dans ces alliances et des partenariats stratégiques pour la réalisation de cette initiative du P16.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 15 – P15 Dans le cadre d’explorer comment nous pouvons renforcer le soutien public aux valeurs et aux réformes du gouvernement ouvert, nous trouvons ce paragraphe très intéressant et nous adhérons à cette démarche holistique. Il serait utile de classer des acteurs par secteur d’activité pour permettre à l’unité de soutien de OGP de coordonner, d’orienter et de contrôler toutes les actions et activités des membres de la communauté OGP, pour renforcer le soutien public aux valeurs et aux réformes du gouvernement ouvert pour les programmes des cours de leadership du gouvernement ouvert.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 14 – P14 Pour nous, l’établissement des partenariats avec des écoles gouvernementales, des académies de la fonction publique et d'autres établissements d'enseignement pour diffuser les compétences et les connaissances en matière de gouvernement ouvert, doit définir clairement : - Le rôle que chaque entité engagée jouera en tant que acteur dans la gouvernance des gouvernements ouverts dans un pays en ce qui concerne l’établissement des partenariats de si vaste programme de renommé mondial ; - La mission de chaque entité jouera en tant que acteur dans ces partenariats inscrits dans le P14.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 13 – P13 Cet investissement dans le développement du leadership et des compétences adaptatives ainsi que des compétences techniques clés et des compétences des principaux dirigeants communautaires, en partenariat avec d'autres, ne pourra se faire que dans la définition des missions et objectifs que la communauté OGP se fixe pour atteindre les résultats escomptés de ce dit mouvement mondial de développement du leadership et des compétences adaptatives ainsi que des compétences techniques clés et des compétences des principaux dirigeants communautaires, pour que chacun sache de quoi s’en tenir et afin de jouer pleinement son rôle dans l’ investissement de développement du leadership et des compétences adaptatives.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 12 – P12 Pour nous, construire une coalition politique plus forte pour un gouvernement ouvert, passe par le respect : des droits humains, de garantir les intérêts des parties, de la pratique démocratiques pluralistes et d’Etat de droit. A l’absence de ces principes, il ne pourrait y voir une véritable construction d’une coalition politique plus forte pour un gouvernement ouvert dans un Etat au service de leur population respective.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 11 – P11 L’objectif stratégique 1 : Renforcer l'engagement et les capacités d'une communauté diversifiée et croissante de dirigeants de gouvernement ouvert interconnectés conduisant des réformes, est une initiative louable dont laquelle nous adhérons entièrement à l’objectif stratégique 1. Pour sa mise en œuvre effective sur le terrain, nous devons tenir compte des contextes actuels et des enjeux sociaux-économiques majeurs, dont l’objectif stratégique principal est d’évaluer des politiques à travers les pratiques démocratiques saines et l’Etat de droit, dans le partenariat pour réaliser cette vision avec efficience et mesurable dans le temps dans ces pays d’interventions de OGP.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 10 – P10 Nous croyons aux objectifs stratégiques de OGP dans son ensemble, et adhérons à la prochaine période de cinq ans - 2023 à 2028 - OGP qui poursuivra quatre objectifs stratégiques qui se renforcent mutuellement, dans le seul souci est de faire passer les intérêts des populations au premier plan et faire valoir les droits humains dans les actions de terrain.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 9 – P9 Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE) s’est déjà engagé dans la promotion de valeurs universelles et interculturelles, il s’engage au côté de OGP à devenir le foyer d’inspiration, de l’innovation, des preuves et des histoires sur le gouvernement ouvert. Cet engagement ne peut se faire sans l’unité de soutien de OGP et l'IRM. De traduire cela par les actions du terrain.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 8 - P8 Merci d’avoir soumis cette approche à la communauté OGP pour recueillir de leur part des commentaires à ce sujet. Nous disons oui à ce principe de conception pour une société juste et efficace fondée sur les valeurs universelles et interculturelles et par-dessus celui de la protection sociale et de la prospérité pour tout être humain. Cela afin d’intégrer la notion d’une prospérité intergénérationnelle dans toutes les politiques gouvernementales nationales, comme modèle de démocraties participatives
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 7 – P7 Nous apprécions grandement les actions individuelles et des engagements de OGP inscrits dans ce paragraphe du P7. Des actions individuelles et des engagements du PGO à faire du gouvernement ouvert la norme à tous les niveaux et branches du gouvernement ne peut se faire que par le respect des droits humains, des régimes démocratiques et d’Etat de droit. Le contraire est inadmissible et inacceptable.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 6 - P6 Il est logique d’élargir la communauté du gouvernement ouvert pour devenir un mouvement beaucoup plus large et plus interconnecté de réformateurs du gouvernement ouvert. Il sied de rappeler à toutes les parties prenantes de la communauté OGP cité dans le P6, la notion des droits humains et le rôle que chaque partie prenante doit jouer en fonction de sa responsabilité, et dans le seul but de contribuer au bien-être social des peuples.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 5 – P5 Nous sommes tout à fait d’accord avec la communauté OGP sur les principaux changements stratégiques dans la nouvelle stratégie décrites dans le P5. Mais nous savons tous que les droits humains sont les fondements de toutes les sociétés justes ; cultures ; démocraties saines ; politiques et stratégies que lent peut mettre en œuvre. A l’absence de non-respect de ces droits humains, ils ne seraient pas des véritables réformateurs des gouvernements nationaux et locaux, de la société civile, de partenaires multilatéraux, de parlementaires, de fondations et bien plus encore efficaces et justes au service de tous, et non au service d’une classe donnée au sein de la société humaine.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 3 – P3 Tous ces dispositifs et propositions de l’OGP du P3 sont bons. Mais il serait très efficace de donner à la société civile du monde entier le pouvoir de contrôler les gouvernements dans leur exercice, en mettant en place cet organe indépendant de la société civile pour contrôler des politiques gouvernementales nationales. Ce dispositif justifie pour nous la non confiance des populations et citoyens de nos jours de leur gouvernements nationaux qui s’occupent que de leurs intérêts personnels au lieu de privilégier des intérêts généraux.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 2 – P2 Nous adhérons à la vision d’OGP. Il est question d’ajouter à ce point qui viendra renforcer les autres points du P2, celui de demander à tous les citoyens du monde entier de choisir entre la démocratie saine ou le régime dictatorial au sein des nations sous forme d’une pétition mondiale, qui sera déposée auprès des institutions internationales comme : l'ONU, Union Européenne, Asie, Océanie, Amérique latine et Union Africaine. - Créer un siège permanant dans chaque institution internationale de la société civile avec un droit de véto et de décisions et non à titre consultatif et représentatif, pour permettre à la société civile d’être représentée directement lorsque les droits des populations ou citoyens sont violés et bafoués par leurs gouvernements nationaux respectifs, au lieu d’attendre la fin d’un mandat constitutionnel, législatif, judiciaire, politique et administratif. - Mettre en place un organe indépendant de la société civile de contrôle des politiques gouvernementales pour les abus faits à l’endroit de leurs populations ou citoyens. C’est le seul moyen de protéger : - les démocraties et les peuples du monde face aux envahisseurs, aux anti-démocrates et aux violeurs des droits humains et des droits environnementaux, qui confisquent toutes les ressources naturelles d’un pays dans le seul but de les exploiter à leur fin personnelle en profitant de leur immunité constitutionnelle et juridique pendant l’exercice de leur mandat public ; - les populations contre les gouvernements nationaux qui prennent pour cible leur population lors des revendications de leur droit sociaux-économiques et environnementaux se voit violés par les gouvernements nationaux.
Le Réseau International des Citoyens pour l’Environnement (RICE), une organisation à but non lucratif (ONG) Commentaire 1- P1 Nous disons oui à la vision d’OGP (P1). Mais, les démocraties en elle-même ne posent pas problème au sein d’une société. Ce qui pose problème dans la démocratie, c’est le faite que les régimes politiques avec leurs alliés bilatéraux et multilatéraux et institutions publiques et privées, prennent en otages les vies des populations, en confisquant leurs droits à travers des institutions acquises à leurs causes, profitant de leur immunité constitutionnelle dans le seul but d’utiliser les pouvoirs : constitutionnel, législatif, public et judiciaire pour saper et violer les droits des populations et met en mal les démocraties dans le monde entier, afin de servir leurs intérêts personnels.
I'm with Tim on this. Let me take this one step further. The OGP 'policy' community will look to technologies and consider how they may be better used for the global public's good. The engineers who run their National research and education networks will do the same thing. And never the twain shall meet.
Sounds like the OGP Support Unit is still working on the old broadcast media paradigm. "conveyor belt", "go-to home". Arghh! There are enough govs now who are issuing advice on Community Building without providing any evidence that they follow their own advice. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/community-development-handbook/community-development-handbook#identifying-roles-within-a-community Thankfully, our Support Unit leads by example. This, I think, is more a case of community building & providing transparent analytics so we can ALL see which content inspires people to start talking about scoping joint projects, AND listing their priority.
Overview of Strategic Goals Goal 4 Strategies to pursue the goal Amend 2 to read: Support research to develop high quality and inspirational content to meet the diverse needs of the community.
Overview of Key Strategic Shifts Add a dot point: • Support CSOs in countries that are not OGP partners
Overview comments The strategy needs information that is much more specific in describing concrete actions that would be taken to achieve the rather vague aims to which it refers. The draft’s inspirational approach reflects previous strategic plans that uses bureaucratic language which uses many words to say little. The draft should explicitly acknowledge that the strategy is under-pinned by democratic power-sharing. Reference to power-sharing should also note that politicians and political parties are in competition with each other power for control over resources and that open government seeks decentralisation of that competition and control. There should be a sense of a staged approach to each of the strategic goals, avoiding the impression that execution of the strategy would occur as a Big Bang or concurrent revolutions! That brings us to budgetary implications, which should be acknowledged and canvassed. To avoid discussion of them is the leave open government vulnerable to being dismissed on unsubstantiated allegations of prohibitive costs. Research Priorities Anti-corruption needs justification as the first priority. It is treated as if that is a self- evident truth without acknowledging that its significance lies in its distortion of the exercise of public power & application of public finance. Background and Context The first paragraph reference to “… the contest between open and closed government …” falsely implies that there is a binary division whereas everyday observation reveals that there is a continuum between very high levels of disclosure and near complete secrecy surrounding data held by public entities. Furthermore, there can be constant tensions between pressures in favour of or resisting open government. These tensions require eternal vigilance to sustain progress towards open government. The final sentence of the second paragraph refers “ten years of evidence …” This is the type of research referred to above that should be published; the source(s) should be cited.
Considering that not all countries start from the same level or have different contexts, a special process and curatorship must be in place to choose innovative and inspiring stories that can help raise standards at different levels or situations.
I would like if we can highlight on Promoting Collaboration and Dialogue between the Public Sector and Civil Society
Digital technologies (sub c)) are enabling factors for everybody and instruments to realize all others principles.
I hope we all are able to design instruments and services comply with this Rights.
As the OG Italian Multistakeholder Forum we believe that OGP MISSION should be to realize and inspire a movement of reformers in public administration (elected lawmakers, decision makers, and civil servants) and civil society, working both inside and outside administrations to make open government the rule. We believe that an important strategy in this context could be the creation of cross-cutting multi-level civic and institutional networks.
As the OG Italian Multistakeholder Forum we share OGP mission and vision . We believe that an important strategy in this context could be the creation of cross-cutting multi-level civic and institutional networks. We also believe it is necessary to provide OGP with instruments, models and quality standards that can be tailored to different levels of government and countries, respecting communities and identities. Openness and inclusivity are of paramount importance in this specific moment where the Open Government movement is gaining ground but emergencies and organized interests are pushing the situation back, especially for countries with a high risk of democracy backsliding.
As the Italian OG Multistakeholder Forum we we share OGP’s VISION of healthier democracies where governments are open, transparent and responsive, and where civil society has the opportunity to co-create and monitor public policies and services.
I would recommend adopting an inter-sectional lens here. People who face multiple forms of discrimination, say due to race, socio-economic background AND gender are the most excluded from these spaces. Perhaps also more targeted language on women in particular. 'Women are underrepresented at all levels of decision-making worldwide. This negatively impacts our ability to achieve our goals. The SC, Support Unit and IRM will strive to ensure that women in all their diversity be included and represented throughout the work of the Partnership.'
Although not spelt out here, this is an appropriate response to the challenge of shrinking civic space. Where reformers and leaders in different places will need broader community support to achieve their goals.
Where lawmakers/elected representatives AND public officials (otherwise sounds like just civil servants, not politicians).
Great to see rights included here.
not sure what a gender voice is! this should probably read women, youth, indigenous people and representatives of other marginalised groups
and otrher marginalised groups - e.g. ethnic minorities, religious minorities, indigenour groups etc
What is the relationship between participation and accountability, and how with OGP drive not only partnership but also greater accountability arising from it?
these are all northern based or northern dominated institutions - is there not space for southern based organisations as well?
It would be useful to understand what some of the regional partners might be - is there, for example, any intention of trying to partner with organisations such as the AU, or SADC, ECOWAS etc? If not, what are the regional agendas that are referred to? It is important that the partnerships and alliances are with southern based organisations as well as northern based organisations
This is somewhat cryptic - a little more explanation of what this might entail would be useful
Who else is working in this space that OGP might want to partner with to increase outreach and impact?
focus should be on gender and inclusion of other marginalised groups. Perhaps use the concept of GESI, gender equality and social inclusion, rather than just gender. Also, it will be important to unpack OGP's approach to gender - is it gender transformative, feminist, or what?
I am interested to know how OGP will measure success in this regard? This is an important area of work, but notoriously difficult to measure impact
Include, in the bullet on 'everyone can see that public resources are used...' that people can see that public services are provided equitable, fairly, and in line with human rights
OGP is committed to the human rights framework - it would be good to refer to it in this section
include responsiveness as a value to be embedded in government actions
Taking "open government" out of its current niche is a fundamental strategy that will encourage and provide incentives for further reforms. Especially taking into account that on many occasions the area responsible does not have transversal jurisdiction and for this reason it is difficult to generate collaboration agreements.
In my opinion, strengthening the thematic working groups is essential, where the participants in them function as a kind of consultation team for the co-creation and implementation of commitments. They can also generate documentation that collaborates with those reformers interested in each subject.
Potrebbe essere una soluzione da implementare anche nell'ambito della milestone M1C1-56 del PNRR, secondo l'approccio proposto dal Consigli odi Stato con il parere 506.2022.
Proposta indirizzo strategico di visione da recepire nel ripensamento della visione politica delle misure. EN: Goal. Massive policies of involvement: invites all citizens to co-plan and co-design with an approach of equiproximity to the political parties. ITA: Obiettivo. Politiche massive di coinvolgimento: invito a tutti i cittadini a co-pianificare e co-progettare con un approccio di equiprossimità ai partiti politici.
Indirizzo strategico di sintesi. EN: Goal. Massive policies of involvement: invites all citizens to co-plan and co-design with an approach of equiproximity to the political parties. ITA: Obiettivo. Politiche massive di coinvolgimento: invito a tutti i cittadini a co-pianificare e co-progettare con un approccio di equiprossimità ai partiti politici.
Indirizzo di strategia e obiettivo. EN: Goal. Massive policies of involvement: invites all citizens to co-plan and co-design with an approach of equiproximity to the political parties. ITA: Obiettivo. Politiche massive di coinvolgimento: invito a tutti i cittadini a co-pianificare e co-progettare con un approccio di equiprossimità ai partiti politici.
EN: Goal. Massive policies of involvement: invites all citizens to co-plan and co-design with an approach of equiproximity to the political parties. ITA: Obiettivo. Politiche massive di coinvolgimento: invito a tutti i cittadini a co-pianificare e co-progettare con un approccio di equivicinanza ai partiti politici.
Agree with your suggestion!
Indeed. Agree that these points should be mentioned in the strategy.
Indeed!
It would be insteresting to have more clear and objetive goals. Using words such as “vibrant open government ecosystem” sounds like the speech of spread a wave of goodness. It is not propositional and generates more questions than clarify.
Perhaps we could include a Theory of Action diagram that lays out clearly how the vision, mission, goals and activities relate to each other?
This section feels a little light- there is a lot in the strategy as a whole about story-telling and narrative building- I'd suggest bringing it together in one place (here perhaps) and fleshing it out with a similar amount of detail as other actions listed above.
Supportive of this- this section right at the end seems slightly out of place- would move this up to the section when you discuss OGP local and as mentioned there, perhaps pull out as its own activity?
Love the focus on public participation and as you mention, this was a key theme of feedback from the community. Again, I wonder if this is a theme (to be added to the other 4 and to then be embedded across everything OGP does) rather than an activity?
Are these cross-cutting themes (ie are they less of an activity and more of a set of themes that will inform all of the activities?)
For consistency, I'd list the 4 themes in the same order as up above and with the same wording (eg I think climate is worded differently here).
I would rephrase again away from "norm" potentially and perhaps rename this as "Supporting open governance during transitional periods" or something a little more circumscribed. These moments are essential for OGP and there is a great deal of opportunity/work to do to ensure the partnership can respond effectively and quickly. I realise this will be matched with an operational plan but the implications of this might also be worth touching on here as they will be significant.
This piece is key- OGP is as much a process of inspiration as it is a mechanism for delivery and connecting these pieces is important to understand the impact but also to amplify it.
I am a big fan of local and would consider pulling that out and having it as its own stand-alone activity/action point, separate to adapting the action plan model.
This point to me doesn't seem to fit within strategic goal 1- I'd suggest moving it to Goal 2- it is more about shifting norms/understandings than building capability?
I would potentially agree with the point below that this could be merged with 1.2 into one point.
This is key- the partnerships with others will be important. It might be worth outlining here explicitly what we see as OGP's specific comparative advantage here vis-a-vis programs that already do this.
I'm all about positive story-telling :) I'd avoid the conveyor belt language as it sounds somewhat instrumentalized, which of course this is not- it is about telling meaningful stories because they are valuable in and of themselves.
These core issues make complete sense.
Agree- this has massive strategic communications implications which will need consideration.
A shift from community to embedded eco-system perhaps...?
I agree with the comments about "norm" and like Maharani's new phrasing below.
As a framing, and diagnosis of the challenge and new approach, this is excellent.
Reads well- I would ensure that the points listed to achieve the vision correspond directly to the activities that OGP suggests subsequently it will engage in, so this connects logically.
I'd try and shorten slightly- the "better outcomes" phrase might be superfluous.
It is an inappropriate approach, because it can disengage key members which have issues with neighbors. For instance, if OGP recognizes Taiwan as a full operating member it will violate the One China Policy standard, which can result in mainland China's disengagement. It would not be interesting, considering China's power and influence. The same could be said regarding autonomous regions as Catalonia, etc. The approach for non-universally recognized countries should be the same as is already made in multilateral institutions, such as the United Nations.
It is important to narrow the key institutions for open government agenda in multilateralism, regional integration, and relevant international civil society organizations, as has been done. It is also worth highlighting that the focus should be in uniting new efforts in pre-existing mechanisms on global governance, and avoid proposing new initiatives that already exist, but in a different format.
More appropriate indicators measuring the connection between the implementation of OGP national plans and the advancement of openness should be put in place. For instance, the culture of open government is more than data publishing. It is a "relational style" and it's visible and measurable in the decision-making processes.
"governments embed transparency, participation, inclusion and accountability"... to me it seems there is a further pillar, which is "integrity". It must be clear that threats to democracy mostly come from the capture of public sector put in place by private (sometimes illicit) interests (State capture).
Maybe the focus here should be more on research institutions and think tanks than on “learning institutions”.
Leadership institutes should not be the focus in this kind of cooperation. I agree that considering the current scenario, we should gather as much effort as possible towards the same initiative, but the concept of “leadership” is too shallow for the purpose of an open government agenda. The focus should be on making room in regional integration platforms – such as, OECD, Mercosur, OAS, EU, etc – and technical thematic institutions, for instance, Transparency International, Global Financial Integrity, and so on.
For the next 5 years, I don't think it's possible to focus both on attracting more areas to be members and retaining high performance across members. I think we should focus on retaining high performance and standardization first in the next 5 years before re-thinking about how we can attract more members. To our knowledge right now, there are many Local members but there are also many that have not submitted reports, conducted their action plans, et cetera; and what would be the point of having many members if they are inactive?
what does this mean?
Not so clear how strategic goal 2.2 relates to strengthening OGP Local membership track.
Agreed
does this point apply to this particular strategic goal?
this sentence needs to be rephrased, it's confusing to read
Agreed
redundant, point is similar with the one above
a counter-narrative of what?
"to bear to pursue"? That doesn't look right
Could we shorten this paragraph? It's too lengthy
If we are going to go in line with the Strategic Plan, and with consideration to our resources, perhaps it'd be best to prioritize doing this on key open government topics within OGP's thematic priorities Furthermore, the wording of these sentences probably should be revised—it sounds very volatile, and that's something that should be avoided in a strategic document.
consider rephrasing to "... on which the entire Partnership will be challenged and supported to advance ambitious action" -> because support would be needed for countries if they want to carry out the prioritized areas.
Content of this paragraph is redundant with points mentioned in other strategic goals, and doesn't tie in with the other contents of goal 2.3. Consider omitting this paragraph.
Concretely, what does this even mean? It's confusing to read, not sure how we'll materialize this...
what does "cross-fertilize" mean? Consider omitting.
It's essential to discuss the criteria on which reforms will be supported, how OGP can consistently keep track of these, and how OGP can support actions outside the OGP meaningfully with its limited resources. After all, the OGP still has a lot to do in terms of supporting existing members (national & local). It's also important that these criteria & standards are made transparent.
The points in this section are pretty similar to the ones in 1.2 so it feels redundant, consider merging the contents of the subheadings and make it under one subheading (And we could cut some of the paragraphs too to make the contents more concise)
Agreed
There needs to be more transparency on how OGP utilizes its resources and funds, as well as its criteria in selecting which reforms are supported/resourced by the OGP. Without this, it will be difficult to achieve the first pre-condition, as governments may question the need to commit to the platform.
consider omitting this part—too superfluous. The message of the sentence is already reflected without these words.
I agree with some of the comments below. There needs to be a standard on what counts as "inspirational" stories, and they need to be backed with evidence which are in line with OGP's standards of open governance.
To make it more concise, consider rephrasing to: Welcoming diverse policy priorities while setting Partnership-wide, collective policy goals for members
Suggest rephrasing to: Moving from individual actions and OGP commitments to mainstreaming open government values across all levels and branches of government.
Would recommend getting rid of words such as "much". Aside from it being immeasurable, it makes the sentences too flowery.
Agreed
Consider rephrasing to: OGP's mission is to inspire, build and equip a growing movement of reformers inside and outside government who learn and take action together to mainstream open government values.
As commented by a few users throughout different parts of the document, it's important to include why it's important for governance to be open and what concrete results can be achieved in doing so. It's important to address the commonly asked questions of "what comes next after openness?", "why is open governance so important?", and "why should we involve citizens to the extent demanded of OGP?" The vision statement mentions important elements of open governance, but is still lacking the "why" that many people ask.
this part could be rephrased to: everyone has the opportunity to participate in shaping and overseeing public policies and services
inclusive public participation should include opportunities for deliberation through citizens' assemblies and other forms of deliberative polling.
This could be the most powerful driver for change, since building capacity for democratic citizenship and governance can influence the system at all levels. Higher education in particular could make a significant contribution in educating professionals and citizens in skills and knowledge for open, democratic governance.
This means developing a network of allies across political parties, working through the Inter-Parliamentary Union, African Parliamentary Union, Council of Europe etc, or even encouraging All-Party Parliamentary Groups for Open Government at a national level, focusing on early career politicians in particular
To achieve this OPG needs to build a network among researchers in universities, centres, think tanks and civil society
An important part of the process is learning about what works & what doesn't, so monitoring, evaluation & reflection on which actions have contributed most to opening government AND improving outcomes, is essential.
These are laudable goals. They need to expressed more concisely, linked to indicators, goals & actions
on this subject matter: there needs to be more transparency on how OGP utilizes its resources and funds, as well as its criteria in selecting which reforms are supported/resourced by the OGP.
on this subject matter: there needs to be more transparency on how OGP utilizes its resources and funds, as well as its criteria in selecting which reforms are supported/resourced by the OGP.
Would suggest omitting the phrase "cutting edge", as the message is clearer without it.
How this can be concretely done needs to be elaborated, with consideration to the OGP's current resources and limitations as well. Furthermore, the OGP should have some criteria on which reforms will be supported (through incentives, etc.) by the OGP, and the criteria should be publicized transparently.
the use of "the norm" at the end of the sentence may be confusing/ambiguous to readers. Perhaps the end of the sentence could be rephrased to: ... "to mainstream open government values" instead of "to make open government the norm".
Agree with the second and third pre-conditions mentioned (“resourcing for open government reforms, and civic space for civil society and the public to be able to play their roles”), but the first one (“visible and genuine high-level political leadership”) is troublesome, because it can be used for political personalism. To be solid reforms, it needs to build over clear needs and the perception of a common problem that requires a common solution, as it was for example for establishing the environment protection international regime. Personalism may lead to fast paced results, but not solid and long term ones.
Agree with @timdavies argument. This “inspiration” and “innovation” discourse is risky because it can contribute to political cover. Regarding evidence based on stories it is a bad metric of achievements, which should be analyzed in quantitative terms
Anti-corruption policies, public participation, digital governance and transparency undoubtedly should be pillars when focusing on spreading and strengthening open government reforms. However, the understanding of transparency need to be wider and not only to “tackle the climate crisis”. We need to consider that different members around the globe of in different stages of implementing transparency policies. Some of them are in earlier stages, therefore, it makes more sense to establish a wider priority on transparency, including the financial aspect, public spending, etc. It does not prevent the emphasis on data related to climate change from being among the criteria of how these transparency policies should be implemented.
Besides meetings in international forums, as it already happens, for the effectiveness of “commitments to longer-term integrated reforms”, it would be interesting to promote agreements and common declarations of interest, for the purpose to establish clear criteria and standards which member jurisdictions would work toward, specially in terms of legislation adjustments.
It’s important to define how this “interconnected movement” would be organized. Considering efficiency, it should take advantage of pre-existing institutions established in the context of regional cooperation, and by thematic terms using tools such as working groups.
Safeguarding democratic regimes relies on a wide range of factors. There are also shades of democratic quality, being higher levels of democracy provided by legal restrictions to combat special interests, protect individual and minority group interests, and promote collective deliberation. Transparency and open government practices strengthen the three mentioned elements, therefore foster healthier democracies.
As a Key strategy, it will be great to see a clear strategic plan on how Open governance can translate to service delivery. How can the process deliver and answer the question, "It is now open, So what?"
من خلال منح المجتمعات المدنية المساحة والفرص للمشاركة ومساءلة الحكومة
Gender, is definitely a bias. However, the discriminant is SEXISM!
Global Wealth, slumps... Unless you are referring to The United States. We have no Wealth. The Modernization Acts, implement TOTAL- sanction. Due, to (multi- national) circumstances...
Unfortunately, demanding political participation is corruption. It falls along; the same ethic as, search & seizure.
Thickening the air between individuals increases government POWER. VOICES ARE Suppressed!
Broadening, interim relationships speculates greater class strategy. The masses, will involve total chaos. A State, that adopts, new transparency governances...will have to implement programmes, foreseeing; marginalization and genocides.
We are the locality. In observation, must make ourselves accountable by investing in the People of these spaces.
Those who can not stand corrected, will, suffer penalties. Life is FLOW.
In addition, to budget reform and other techniques... verbal /written- agreement is often, more so; utilized to express mutual agreement. This is great for Public Safety, Policing, and including; Public Health requirements.
In my experience those mechanism tend to select individuals who are particularly attracted to visibility opportunities, and do not necessarily select the best practices
I particularly agree on this point
I would add an activity of "coaching" on specific challenges in order to help pursue the expected results
Focussing on fewer policy area can help intensify the activities and visibility of their results
Yes, and it is also very important to give economic support to civil society leaders in order to help them make the time and space to follow this initiatives
I totally agree but in order to fulfill this goal it is important to make OGP more broadly known among political leaders. In Italy, for instance, most of political leaders ignore what OGP is and what benefits it could bring to their activities and programs
Regarding climate change it is foremost important that citizens' participation is addressed at consensus building on new energy production plants and and their siting, as conflict with local communities on new plants is one of the most frequent bottleneck in alternative energy production
Although such a shift is mostly important it seems very unlikely to happen, especially in some countries. I think the strategy should focus also on "how" to pursue this goal - e.g. by advocacy and lobbying in the political domain - and not only on what to do.
In order to fulfill those goals OGP could also play a role of advocacy to protect civic space in the cases in which it is endangered
Results should be reported in an open, standard, machine-readable format like StratML.
While the plan makes 13 references to accountability, it does not address the relevance of open, machine-readable data standards, like StratML for performance plans and reports. Here's what ChatGPT says about such standards: What is the relevance of machine-readable data standards to open government? Machine-readable data standards are important for open government because they allow government data to be easily accessed, analyzed, and used by a wide range of people and organizations. These standards help ensure that government data is published in a consistent and structured format, which makes it easier for people to understand and use the data. Additionally, machine-readable data standards can make it easier for government agencies to share data with one another and with the public, which can increase transparency and accountability. By using machine-readable data standards, governments can make their data more accessible and useful to a wider range of users, including journalists, researchers, and members of the general public.
Super important point. Healthy access to information where you live is what will mean most in practice for most citizens.
My final comment applies to the whole strategy. As mentioned above, the goal of culture change should be mentioned as a top priority early in the document. This should be followed up by what concrete tools/actions will be used/prioritised to affect this culture change. I've mentioned a few obvious ones in my comments above. Overall, this strategy renews my hope that the work and engagement between governments and civil society will finally grow into something meaningful that has the potential to achieve some of the OGP goals.
A good tool to use for this goal is to make sure that all Australian jurisdictions introduce FOI/RTI disclosure logs in their acts as has been done in Queensland, NSW, the Commonwealth and Tasmania. The exisiting disclosure logs also need better oversight to make sure agencies comply with the legislation. It would also be useful to assess the agency document diary system that exists in Sweden. In this system all government agencies have to disclose incoming and outgoing documents/information in an agency giving each document a heading and a number. This saves a lot of time in locating information as the public can do their own searches to see what information/documents an agency holds. They can then use the document number to request full access to the information.
Yes, it's very important to look at what works well internationally to avoid reinventing the wheel.
The most powerful reformers toward openness already exist in all Australian jurisdictions: the FOI/RTI officers and managers. Properly resource and back up the FOI/RTI teams and much will be achieved. The research data in passed and current projects that I'm leading, clearly shows that the vast majority of the FOI teams I've surveyed and interviewed have a strong pro information access facilitation values. However, they cannot deliver on their goals as they are severely under staffed, under resourced and at times not backed by agency management.
In my experience, based on my research - passed and current, visible and HIGH level political leadership is the principal tool for achieveing the culture change toward openness I mentioned above. Without such political will and engagement, little will change. Another concrete tool is to make the OGP values and processes mandatory in the induction packages for commencing public servants, parliamentarians and ministers on ALL levels.
This is super important: making openness the norm. This goes to the culture change I mentioned above. The challenge is how to achieve this crucial goal?
I suggest that the term culture change from secrecy to openness is used explicitly in the text to acknowledge the long-standing culture of secrecy that has existed in most Australian jurisdictions. I'll comment further on the tools how to achieve this culture shift below.
Maybe, based on action plans, it would be interesting to create work groups taking into account the great blocks of content like plain language, digital government, social participation, etc. For example, if there are jurisidictions, independent of populational, economic size and other macro aspects, that elaborated action plans aiming the plain language implementation, this jurisdictions could be part of plain language work group. And the goal of this group would be the experiences exchange by means of a online group and maybe meeting montly. Thus, the jurisdictions could share what each one is doing in this great area and tell the sucess cases about it.
Also, will be interesting to focus in local level through acceptance of more jurisdictions from this level, thus, I think would be easier to spread and internalize the open government principles and goals in a determined country because, in many times, the people from the middle and small cities are those with more difficulty to practice the oversee public policy and social participation due to the lack of knowledge.
This key strategic shift is vital for OGP's impact into the future. A compelling supportive case for it is made in this new open source book: https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-monograph/5506/The-Power-of-Partnership-in-Open The book's introduction is a good 34-page summary.
Of course, personalisation is needed.
Yes. High Functionality, is the derivative. This is the Future
I think this strategy allows chance for inequalities and misappropriation.
An OGP should have a global perspective, rather a consciousness; than knowledgeable reasoning.
Valuable, considering the Democratic Global expansion of humanitarian movements. Freedom and Liberty are a misconception. As Government Actors; ideas and choices are based upon relevancy about the socio-political determinants.
I agree completely! The Federal Government has a mandate affect: to influence the role we in-activate throughout citizens & neighbors (peers)...lives. As generation "Y" female/ Woman; 'I think, the priority is making sure that the conditional processing be brought to justice.'
This is a very important point that should be strengthened and encouraged
I agree with you @timdavies. It will be good to define what inspiration open government content is in order to avoid ambiguity
It will be helpful to know in concrete terms how much success has been achieved in the first decade of OGP.
This should link to a clearer strategy (and set of objectives / actions) around building and drawing on a robust academic evidence base on open government. Where is the focus on convening researchers, and bridging between research and practice? What does the new strategy say about OGPs own research role, as a producer of both research, and data for wider research?
This theme would benefit from more unpacking for the strategy, particularly because many of the issues with governance of technology: - involve grappling with the 'privatisation' of governance in digital platforms; - benefit from cross-border collaboration, and might support particular forms of commitment/action planning/intensive cross-country collaboration At the same time (and this is likely true also of the other focus areas with their own fora), there are a number of existing fora into which OGP may need to interface, such as Internet Governance Forum, or work on the UN Global Digital Compact. It would be great to see a little more in the strategy, or associated papers, on how OGP plans to work in these identified areas.
One of the challenges (evident also in the language of the strategy) is that we are still not good at using language that connects open government to local concerns. Consider whether there is work to be done here on the framing and narratives of open government.
Overall this is a positive direction - but care needs to be taken to avoid re-enforcing an idea of 'OGP insiders'. Consider applying clear principles of 'open learning' to any resources created for capacity building, and to robust transparency about any leadership development programmes (including recruitment). The open access / distributed model of https://www.teachingpublicservice.digital/ may be useful reference point.
Does there also need to be a focus on journalists and media? The role of journalism and media seems conspicuous by it's absence in the strategy refresh?
Inspirational content is good to have - but this needs to be handled quite carefully - and with some clear principles to avoid 'open washing'. Real-world open government examples are rarely simple stories, and often the pathway to sustainable change is rocky. A high-profile inspirational story told early in the journey of a project can be useful to inspire action in other countries or contexts, but can end up providing 'political cover', or adding complications, if implementation falters in the original case. It's important to think about how giving positive platform to stories of government action can affect domestic dynamics between government and civil society.
As a general point, could the final draft be reviewed for use of plain language? A plain language copy-edit could help the key messages of the strategy come out a lot more clearly (and would help a wider group to engage with consultation and implementation)
Re: "The goals will only be achieved by the entire open government community owning this strategy and collaborating together to achieve them." Consider how the final strategy can be presented to make this evident. For example, breaking down each sub-strategy into statements of: * OGP will: pursue goal X * The Support Unit will: take action Y * Reaching this goal requires community action to: take action(s) Z At the moment, this important idea of a co-owned strategy for open government as a movement gets rather lost when the sub-strategies are mostly about what OGP Sec or Support Unit will do alone.
(duplicate comment)
كيف يمكن المجتمع المدني مسألة ومحاسبة الحكومة واين هي السلطة المخولة لهم
جميل جدا ورش الحكومة المنفتحة لكن السؤال المطروح كيف يمكن المجتمع المدني مسألة المسؤولين يعني أي سلطة لديه لتنزيل استراتيجية الحكومة المنفتحة
There are numerous countries with authoritarian government at national level and democratic opposition at local/subnational level. Currently only those "local jurisdictions from countries that are participating in OGP" can join OGP Local. If the national government of a country is a repressive one and has no intention of joining OGP that blocks all local level initiatives too. It should be reformed.
This means that the local government level (I mean small cities with low structure, population and civil servants) will have the possibility to be part of the OGP through the action plan of a large jurisdiction (national or state level - in the case of Brazil) or will they be able to join the OGP with their own action plan and commitments? Because I think it's important to strengthen open government initiatives at the local level, and it's a good opportunity to do that through OGP's support and engagement with other jurisdictions around the world.

MOST ACTIVE USERS

	Molanda	29	2

maharani_opengovindo

29

2

Blair Glencorse

20

21

Fernando Fuster-Fabra Fernández

19

20

	José Paulo Silva Ferreira	14	28

Celeste Victoria RatcliffeB.S.

14

13

Keitha Booth

13

27

Barbara Schreiner

12

0

	Oliver Rack1676383912	11	3

Iolanda Romano Italy

9

19

timdavies

9

1

KRobinson OCP

9

0

	Digiphile	9	0

johan.lidberg@monash.edu

8

18

danielcarranza

8

13

Titus Alexander

6

15

	Olesia Arkhypska	5	30

Juan Alejandro García

5

13

andrieta_opengovindo

5

0

iverna

4

4

	alberto.dimulo	4	2

ANima

4

2

Jennifer Davidson

4

0

Thiago Barros

3

9

	Fwangmun Oscar Danladi	3	8

Italian FMS

3

8

kcoghill@swin.edu.au

3

0

Stefano Rollo

2

13

	mmcanaves	2	7

Tafida

2

2

mmragone

2

1

Aziz akhouad

2

1

	simonfj	2	0

Owen Ambur

2

0

m_dirienzo@hotmail.com

2

0

Caroline Gibu

1

29

	Francesco Pellecchia	1	28

aeyakuze@twaweza.org

1

3

RASHIDA SHEHU AMBURSA

1

3

Nadakhater

1

1

	Abriendo Datos Chile	1	1

Adam Foldes

1

0

alhassansesay00@gmail.com

1

0

MisterGladSteveCare

1

0

	Beatrice	0	29

Morocco_gov

0

13

AH

0

11

Ale García

0

11

	Digital Armenia	0	8

lmanconi@formez.it

0

7

Ben Worthy

0

7

u.bonelli@fastwebnet.it

0

5

	chrystold@gmail.com	0	4

ofabro

0

3

Ieva

0

3

Francesca Paron

0

2

	Sergio Agostinelli	0	2

maria.koomen@opengovpartnership.org

0

2

hiteshbhatt26@yahoo.com

0

2

KevinKeith

0

2

	Mekki Mouna	0	1

sesiliverdzadze@gmail.com

0

1

Ilenia De Finis

0

1

taher.alhatif@gmail.com

0

1

	Slobs	0	1