2. How to successfully design and implement an Open Government Strategy in Canada?
This Chapter takes stock of Canada’s governance frameworks and mechanisms for open government and provides recommendations for their consolidation in line with the country’s ambition to design its first holistic and integrated Open Government Strategy. In particular, the Chapter discusses the need to enlarge the focus of Canada’s open government agenda and move beyond the traditional emphasis on open data / open information. It also reviews institutional mandates and roles and provides recommendations to upgrade monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, including through the design of Canada’s first Open Government Maturity Models.
Based on the premise that the Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada intends to develop an Open Government Strategy, the following sections provide tailored recommendations on the process to design and implement an eventual Federal Open Government Strategy. It should be noted that the recommendations provided here are based on the assumption that Canada aims to design an Open Government Strategy aimed at fostering transparency, accountability and citizen and stakeholder participation across all federal institutions.
Designing and implementing an Open Government Strategy is an ambitious undertaking that has to be planned well. This section provides contextual recommendations that could be considered prior to starting the development of the Strategy.
The design and implementation of an OGS requires political commitment.
As stipulated by provision 1 of the OG Recommendation (Box 2.1), political commitment is a prerequisite for the successful implementation of an Open Government Strategy. In addition to the support that is needed to initiate the design process of an Open Government Strategy, there needs to be long-term commitment in order to sustain the momentum for reform during the implementation phase. Ensuring this kind of long-term commitment requires, for example, creating buy-in and identifying political champions. The most senior government leaders need to be personally invested in the process to design and implement the OGS.
“Take measures, in all branches and at all levels of the government, to develop and implement open government strategies and initiatives in collaboration with stakeholders and to foster commitment from politicians, members of parliaments, senior public managers and public officials, to ensure successful implementation and prevent or overcome obstacles related to resistance to change”
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris,
https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
The process to design and implement the OGS needs to fully involve the senior leadership of the Canadian government
Under the previous government, oversight responsibilities for the open government file were split between the President of the Treasury Board and the Minister of Digital Government. Until the abolishment of the position in 2021, the Minister of Digital Government was for example in charge of policies and practices on open data, digital services, inclusive and open digital governance, ethical use of data, artificial intelligence, and open source products (Government of Canada, 2021[2]). This Minister also played a key role in the OGP-process, endorsing and approving the action plans before their submission to the OGP and acting as the ministerial representative to the OGP. In turn, the President of the Treasury Board was responsible for policies relating to transparency (e.g. proactive disclosure of information), accountability, and inclusion and diversity and for approving TBS policy instruments, such as the Policy on Service and Digital. Following the 2021 election, the government decided to reorganise parts of the executive branch and the oversight responsibility for the open government file will be newly defined.
In order to raise awareness and create buy-in, once responsibilities have been defined, the Open Government Office should aim to involve all relevant Ministers and Deputy-Ministers at TBS (and the federal government in general) from the preparatory phase of the Open Government Strategy. This may include the organisation of specific briefing meetings, facilitating their participation in international events on open government topics, among others.
The OGS should be built on a broader understanding of the concept of open government.
Guided by the 2014 Directive on Open Government (Government of Canada, 2014[3]), which defines open government as “a governing culture that holds that the public has the right to access the documents and proceedings of government to allow for greater openness, accountability, and engagement”, Canada’s open government agenda has historically had a focus on elements relating to open data and open information. This focus is also reflected in the understanding that most public officials and civil society stakeholders have of the concept. Interviews conducted for this Scan confirmed that they mainly associate open government with the provision of open government data.
While open information and open data are definitely important building blocks of an open government agenda and while the provision of high quality data and information should continue to be an important axis of the open government agenda of Canada, the government of Canada could ensure that its eventual Open Government Strategy fosters all dimensions of openness (in addition to further pushing the open information / open data agenda to maintain Canada’s leadership role in the field).
In this regard, the OGS represents a unique opportunity to redefine the concept of open government and ensure that public officials and non-public stakeholders understand that open government represents a holistic understanding of the way citizens and the state interact. Figure 2.1 highlights key terms that are included in OECD Member countries’ definitions of open government.
Once updated, the definition could be included in the OGS itself. The definition would further have to be disseminated widely in order to ensure that the whole-of-society understands that open government refers to a wider agenda that focuses on fostering the government-citizen nexus. Alternatively, instead of re-refining open government, Canada could consider starting to refer to “open, responsive and participatory government”.
The new definition of open government and the OGS could integrate a civic space perspective
Civic space is defined by the OECD as the set of legal, policy, institutional and practical conditions necessary for non-governmental actors to access information and data, express themselves, associate, organise and participate in public life. A healthy civic space is a precondition for and facilitator of open government initiatives. In order to maximise the benefits of open government initiatives, and ensure that they achieve their full potential, governments need to guarantee that their civic space is open, protected and promoted through clear policies and legal frameworks that set out the rules of engagement between citizens and the state, framing boundaries, and defending individual freedoms and rights (OECD, 2016[5]).
For example, when open government data (OGD) are shared by public entities, it is crucial for citizens, journalists and civil society organisations (CSOs) to be able to safely and securely access the data on an equal basis to achieve real transparency and democratise its use and re-use. Similarly, it is critical to have strong legal protections for individual rights, functioning and funded complaints mechanisms, and rule of law to achieve real accountability. Effective participation is only possible when all members of society have an opportunity to be consulted, informed, and listened to and to express their opinions. Lastly, the increasing use of digital technologies by public authorities, to communicate with citizens or to deliver essential public services, require that individual rights and freedoms are also protected in the digital sphere.
Canada could lead the way for the global open government community by integrating civic space considerations into an eventual update of its definition of open government. According to data collected by the OECD through a Perception Survey (OECD, 2021[6]), civic space considerations are not yet an integral part of most Member and Partner countries’ open government agendas. In fact, more than 70% of responding WPOG-Delegates noted that civic space was not yet fully integrated into their countries’ open government agendas. Data collected by the OECD shows that in Canada, as in many other OECD Member and Partner countries, the protection of the civic space is a cross-cutting responsibility, with different public institutions involved (i.e. the Prosecutors’ Office, the Human Rights Commission, etc.). Acknowledging that TBS is not the main entity responsible, Canada could include the promotion and protection of the civic space as part of the enabling environment for open government, meaning as a precondition for the success of open government reforms. This could resonate with values and objectives of Canada’s open government agenda such as inclusion, accessibility and diversity.
In addition, TBS could include initiatives / activities in its Open Government Strategy that support a protected civic space. For example, an objective could include ensuring an inclusive and equal participation by reaching out to traditionally underrepresented groups of society such as indigenous people, LGBTI persons, migrants, etc. Other concrete initiatives could include fostering a healthy information ecosystem, empowering citizens to fight against mis- and disinformation and improving the environment for civil society organisations to operate and collaborate with public authorities. In particular, Canada could take an international leadership position1 in the protection of the digital civic space, by protecting an open Internet, empowering citizens with digital rights, fighting against the digital divide and promoting an ethical use of technology across the Government.
The process to design the Strategy should be based on a clear roadmap.
Forward planning can allow governments to improve transparency, predictability and co-ordination of policy processes. As a first step, prior to launching the development of the OGS, the Treasury Board Secretariat should therefore establish a clear roadmap. This roadmap could involve elements such as:
An overview of key steps and milestones for the development of the Strategy (e.g. planned launching date; intermediary steps that are needed; etc.)
A citizen and stakeholder participation plan, including an analysis of interested public / non-public stakeholders.
This publication that was developed jointly by the OECD and the Open Government Partnership provides a step-by-step process to developing a communications plan for an open government strategy or initiative. It also contains insights about communication tools and their use for open government reforms as well as guidance on how to partner within and beyond public administrations for effective communication.
The publication targets public officials in charge of steering and implementing strategies and initiatives in the field of open government, as well as communication officers in public institutions that are looking to play a bigger role in this context. The guide is also a useful tool for anyone who is interested in making governments more open, including journalists and civil society.
Source: OECD/OGP (2018[7]), Communicating Open Government: A How-to Guide, https://www.oecd.org/gov/Open-Government-Guide.pdf.
Open government, as a policy area, is slowly becoming more institutionalized. Across the OECD, in the past 10 years, numerous countries have started adopting laws, decrees and regulations on open government (e.g. Open Government Directives) and the open government principles (e.g. Access to Information Laws; Participation Laws; etc.) and on mechanisms and processes associated with them (e.g. Decree on the composition of open government co-ordination mechanisms). This section provides recommendations that could be considered to embed Canada’s Open Government Strategy in the wider legal, regulatory and policy frameworks of the country.
“Ensure the existence and implementation of the necessary open government legal and regulatory framework, including through the provision of supporting documents such as guidelines and manuals, while establishing adequate oversight mechanisms to ensure compliance.”
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris,
https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
The design of an OGS could be coupled with a review of Canada’s Directive on Open Government.
In an ideal case, Canada’s Open Government Strategy would be mentioned in some kind of regulation, or even legislation, in order to ensure sustainability and protect it from changing political priorities. As discussed above, Canada already has a Directive on Open Government in place (Government of Canada, 2014[3]). This Directive constitutes a policy instrument under the larger Policy on Service and Digital. As such, the existing Directive on Open Government is strongly focused on data and information management2.
Canada could consider coupling the design of its Open Government Strategy with a review of the existing Directive or – eventually – with the design of a Policy on Open Government.
The updated Directive or a new Policy could, for example, be used to:
Introduce the new broader understanding of open government and fully integrate the wider participation and accountability agenda into the open government agenda;
Mandate the adoption of open government implementation plans by all federal government departments, in case Canada decides on using this model (see Annex A for an overview of models for Open Government Strategies);
Review the institutional architecture in the Government of Canada as regards the different elements of the open government file;
The OGS should complement and strengthen existing policy frameworks
An Open Government Strategy can and should never operate in isolation: giving its cross-cutting ambition, an OGS needs to complement and be embedded in the existing policy framework of a country. As open government affects all areas of the public administration, policies and initiatives to foster its adoption are usually spread throughout several strategic documents. In this regard, Figure 2.2 shows the main policy documents on open government that OECD Member and Partner countries are implementing.
The OGS can provide an umbrella policy framework for Canada’s National Action Plan on Open Government.
As in many other OECD Member Countries, Canada’s National Action Plan on Open Government (the “OGP action plan”) currently constitutes the main policy documents that Canada implements in the area of open government3. The OGP action plan constitutes an action-oriented series of priority initiatives focusing mainly on short-term policy issues. For example, Canada’s 2018-2020 OGP action plan (Government of Canada, 2018[8]) includes commitments as diverse as “Feminist and inclusive dialogue” (commitment 8), “corporate transparency” (commitment 3) and “open science” (commitment 5). While all of these commitments are important, they are not “woven together” through a strong and coherent narrative. Additionally, as also pointed out by the Government of Canada (2021[2]), the action plan cycle is not necessarily aligned with government planning and budget cycles and action plans tend to be political document that do not address internally needed reforms or change management within the government. This is no surprise as the commitments are co-created with non-public stakeholders and mirror priority initiatives with important external visibility, rather than work on the needed governance back office for the implementation of a wider open government agenda (e.g. co-ordination mechanisms, issues relating to HRM, budgeting; or laws and policies). As such, the OGP action plan does not constitute a comprehensive roadmap for open government reforms in Canada.
By providing a wider context and a vision coupled with concrete measurable objectives to the wider open government agenda, the Open Government Strategy can function as the overarching umbrella to Canada’s OGP action plan and improve the internal coherence and overall impact. The Open Government Strategy can further be a tool to promote initiatives that are less appealing to an external audience but that are nevertheless fundamental to a successful open government agenda, such as the establishment of governance mechanisms and processes, as discussed above. Taken as such, an Open Government Strategy and an OGP action plan are indeed perfectly complimentary.
The OGS should be co-ordinated with the Policy on Service and Digital and associated policy documents.
In many countries, the digital government agenda has developed in parallel to the open government movement. With the rise of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), governments across the world started integrating digital tools and platforms to modernise the back office of the public administration and to simplify the interaction with citizens. The digitalisation of governments, and especially the new possibilities of interaction with citizens offered by ICTs, is sometimes understood as part of the movement towards increased openness. Both a digital and an open government aim at enhancing the relationship between governments and citizens. However, open government does not see the implementation of digital technologies as the goal, but rather as the mean to achieve the broader goal of a more transparent, accountable and participatory government.
Canada’s digital government agenda currently provides the umbrella to the open government agenda. Under the Policy on Service and Digital (Government of Canada, 2020[9]), which sets out the requirements in terms of digital government for the whole of the federal government, Canada is implementing a Digital Government Strategy (which provides the political directions to the digital government agenda) and a Digital Operations Strategic Plan (which elaborates on how the Digital Government Strategy will be put into action including government-wide priorities and key activities in a 3-year timeframe).
Whether the government of Canada elevates the level of the open government agenda to put it at the same level as the digital government agenda, as recommended below, or not, the open and digital government agendas should continue to be fully co-ordinated. Many elements of the digital government agenda can and should be leveraged to further open government goals. For example, elements relating to open data / open information are cross-cutting between both agendas and digital government tools and ICTs are today key to achieve all different kinds of open government objectives in Canada (e.g. fostering interaction with citizens through digital platforms, etc.). Along similar lines, the open government agenda can be a key tool to achieve goals of the digital government agenda. Figure 2.3 explains how the OGS could be anchored in Canada’s existing policy framework.
Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Given the breadth of strategies and initiatives that relate to the promotion of openness, responsibilities and mandates for designing, co-ordinating and implementing different open government policies and practices are usually spread across a number of public institutions in OECD Member and Partner Countries (OECD, forthcoming). This fragmentation of responsibilities is common across the OECD and it creates a strong need for effective co-ordination between them. Accordingly, provision 4 of the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (2017[1]) highlights the importance of effective horizontal and vertical co-ordination of open government policies “through the necessary institutional mechanisms (…) to ensure that they are aligned with and contribute to all relevant socioeconomic objectives” (Box 2.4). Along similar lines, the OECD Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance (OECD, 2020) underlines the need to foster co-ordination and address fragmentation across institutions of major policy initiatives and priorities.
“Coordinate, through the necessary institutional mechanisms, open government strategies and initiatives - horizontally and vertically - across all levels of government to ensure that they are aligned with and contribute to all relevant socio-economic objectives.”
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris,
https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
The design and implementation of the OGS may require empowering the Open Government Office of TBS.
While many public institutions are involved in fostering government-citizens relationships in Canada (see Table 2.1), the primary responsibility for co-ordinating Canada’s open government agenda is currently situated at the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS). Within the larger institutional architecture of TBS, the Open Government Office is situated under the Office of the Chief Information Officer of Canada (CIO), the mandate of which is to “provide strategic direction and leadership in the pursuit of excellence in information management, information technology, security, privacy and access to information across the Government of Canada” (Government of Canada, n.d.[10]).
The Open Government Office is headed by an Executive Director for Open Government who reports to the Assistant Secretary in charge of Digital and Services Policy who himself/herself reports to the Chief Information Officer. While this institutional location of the Open Government Office (OGO) has resulted in strong links between the digital and open government agendas, it also means that open government is essentially seen as one of the tools of the wider digital government agenda, as mentioned above.
Source: Government of Canada (2021[2]), Answers to the background questionnaire for the OECD Open Government Scan of Canada (unpublished working paper).
The successful design and implementation of a broader OGS that brings open government beyond the realm of digitalisation (while keeping it fully coordinated with it), will require reviewing the institutional mandate of the Open Government Office in TBS, as well as empowering it to become the co-ordinator of and / or centre of expertise for a new broader open government approach that fully integrates the transparency, accountability, citizen participation and civic space agendas.
The Open Government Office could move towards becoming a centre of expertise in order to facilitate the implementation of the OGS
In the medium to long term, the successful implementation of Canada’s Open Government Strategy may require that the team leading open government reforms in TBS makes a shift from its current role as service / infrastructure provide on open data / open information to becoming a centre of expertise on a much broader range of open government issues (e.g. participation, accountability mechanisms, etc.).
In line with a new broader understanding of open government, the OGO’s role will be to promote an open government culture across the whole federal government and provide advice to departments in the implementation of different kinds of open government initiative / facilitate contact with competent departments. This may include the development of an open government maturity model, additional trainings and toolkits, the creation of communities of practice, as well as the provision of informal support (e.g. sharing of best practices, etc.), as further discussed below.
The government of Canada could consider giving the leadership of the citizen and stakeholder participation file to TBS.
At the moment, the citizen/stakeholder participation file has no clear institutional leadership at the level of the federal government in Canada. Participatory practices such as public consultations or co-creation processes are mostly implemented on an ad hoc basis by federal government departments and agencies. Moreover, interviews conducted for this Scan revealed that participation is often understood as communication / cooperation with local level or consultation with First Nations, rather than a wider policy to hear (consultation) and integrate (engagement) in public decision making the views, perspectives, and inputs from citizens and stakeholders. This narrow understanding of participation isolates impactful participatory processes organized at the Federal and subnational levels of government, such as deliberative processes. In fact, the OECD (2020[11]) gathered more than 40 case studies of the use of representative deliberative processes in Canada, and none of these experiences is integrated in the wider open government agenda (or the civil society ecosystem involved in those processes).
Given the experience that the Open Government Office gathered through the co-ordination of the OGP co-creation process and through the inclusion of relevant initiative in the National Action Plans on Open Government, the OGO would be in a primary position to become the co-ordinator of the federal government’s citizen participation / engagement policy, as part of the open government agenda. In this scenario, the OGO could become the policy steward and the centre of expertise on participation, combining both the policy and hands-on approaches currently defended by TBS. This would mean that the OGO would, for example, take ownership for disseminating the existing Public Engagement Principles (Government of Canada, 2019[12]) and ensure that they are applied across the whole federal government. The OGO would further become the primary entry point for advice and support on any kind of participatory initiative conducted by departments and agencies and for leading the elaborating of regulatory and policy frameworks on citizen participation. Under this scenario, the proposed Open Government Strategy, co-ordinated by the OGO, would be the primary tool to move forward the participation agenda.
In case Canada decides not to formally give the participation file to the Open Government Office, the OGO could still start playing a more active role in fostering citizen and stakeholder participation across the government. The OGO could take a practical approach on this matter by supporting other departments and agencies in their participation efforts, with tools, resources, knowledge and capacities. This could be done for example by producing dedicated resources to support acculturation and provide guidance through for example handbooks or guidelines. The Government of Canada could get inspiration in the forthcoming OECD Citizen Participation Guidelines or the OECD Handbook on Open Government for Peruvian Civil Servants (2021[13]). The OGO could also support the continuous learning of public officials across the federal government by developing trainings, tutorials or courses on participation. Building on TBS’ start-up approach, this office could increase the impact of participatory practices by scaling up successful initiatives (e.g. deliberative assemblies, participatory budgeting, etc.) and by developing dedicated tools (digital platform, methodologies, etc.). Ultimately, taking a more active de facto role in the participation agenda will allow the OGO to move towards becoming a centre of expertise on participation. On this matter, the Government of Canada could take inspiration from the French Centre of Citizen Participation (see Box 2.5).
The Inter-Ministerial Directorate for Public Transformation (DITP) is the public institution in charge of the open government and participation agendas in France. In 2019, it created the Centre of Citizen Participation (Centre de la Participation Citoyenne) as a Centre of Expertise, a physical space and a community of practice for all public servants.
A Centre of Expertise: The DITP provides public officials and civil society technical support and guidance to implement participatory processes. Public officials have access to knowledge resources, examples and templates to organize a participatory mechanisms as well as ready-to-use digital tools. As part of this Centre, the DITP has dedicated teams to support the organisation of participatory processes by other public institutions as well as to train public officials and interested stakeholders.
A digital platform for participation: The DITP has established a centralised platform for participatory opportunities at the national level. The platform allows citizens to easily find opportunities and monitor the impact of their participation. It also allows public authorities to provide feedback and communicate about their participatory opportunities in a simple and harmonized platform.
A physical space: The Centre of Citizen Participation is a physical space open to public institutions, civil society and citizens. Public authorities can use this space to organize meetings or any other activity with citizens and stakeholders.
A community of practice: the DITP has put in place a digital hub to group the communities of practice related to open government and State modernisation. With more than 50 communities, the hub allows all public officials to discover and join the communities that interest them, according to a topics of interest (participation, digital services, collective intelligence, design thinking etc.) or a geographical area.
Source: Author’s own elaboration based on interviews with the Inter-Ministerial Directorate for Public Transformation (DITP).
The government of Canada could consider reviewing the positioning of the open government file within TBS.
Open government, as a transversal and transformational agenda, requires high-level leadership, as highlighted above. It is only through commitment from the most senior levels of government that a change towards an open government culture can be achieved. As a means of highlighting the importance of a particular policy file, many OECD Member and Partner countries usually identify a “champion” that leads reform efforts across the whole central / federal government.
Evidence collected by the OECD shows that Open Government Offices across the Membership often face reorganization challenges that can negatively affect senior leaders’ levels of commitment to open government. While reorganization is a fact of life in government, it has sometimes shown to be problematic for Open Government Offices, mostly due to the broad scope of the concept and the wide variety of policies that fall under it. In some cases Open Government Offices have been placed in niche settings that restrict their ability to achieve the full potential of open government reforms. In other cases, multidisciplinary teams (which are typical of open government) were split along more traditional lines which, as a consequence, undercut their ability to deliver positive outcomes.
In order to reflect a broader approach to openness and elevate the profile of the open government file, the government of Canada could consider reviewing its positioning within TBS. For example, the current Open Government Office could be elevated to the Assistant Deputy Minister level and be given additional responsibilities (e.g. the citizen participation file, as proposed above). According to the Key Leadership Competency profile of the Government of Canada (Government of Canada, 2015[14]), Assistant Deputy Ministers are for example tasked with “modelling and building a culture of commitment to citizen-focused service and the public interest” and “seeking and forming strategic alliances with partners and stakeholders to continuously improve upon results”. Putting the open government file at this level would, hence, reinforce accountability structures and provide more leverage to the Open Government Office.
In the long-term and as a means to further raise the profile of the open government file, Canada could be the first OECD Member country to create the position of the Chief Open Government Officer (COGO) at the Deputy Minister level. This could be coupled with the creation of a Centre of Expertise for Open Government (CEFOG) within the structure of TBS. The CEFOG could have sub-ordinate structures (“Directorates”), each composed of multidisciplinary teams that focus on different open government topics (e.g. open government data; access to information; citizen participation; etc.).
Data from the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government reveals that the implementation of almost one third of their most relevant policy documents on open government (30.53 %) are coordinated by the office of the Head of Government or Cabinet. This is followed by the Ministry of Public Administration / Reform and the Ministry of Justice (both 13.68 %) as the most frequent open government office locations.
To be impactful, these offices further require personnel with sufficient competences. The successful implementation of open government also depends on public officials’ mandate to design and implement successful open government strategies and initiatives (OECD, 2017[1]). Considering the level of the most senior employee in the open government offices, in 60 % of cases, the most highly ranked member is a public official of the highest managerial level below the Minister or Secretary of State. More than one-fifth of open government policy documents is coordinated by an office that includes a senior civil servant (21.25%). Lower managerial levels are rarely present (combined 13.75%).
Note: Preliminary data. Includes the responses of 33 OECD countries and 2 key partner countries.
Source: OECD (2021[4]), 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government.
Source: Author’s own elaboration.
The process to design and implement the OGS needs to be coordinated across government and with non-public stakeholders.
The implementation of an Open Government Strategy needs to be well co-ordinated across the public sector and with non-public stakeholders in order to achieve a lasting impact. Ultimately, each federal government department and each agency has to be involved in moving towards an open government culture. Recognising that the implementation of open government policies requires co-ordination and collaboration, Canada has already created a number of co-ordination mechanisms over the past years (Table 2.2).
Canada could consider updating the mandates of Departmental Open Government Coordinators.
Recognising that the effective implementation of open government policies requires co-ordination and collaboration across government, Canada has created Open Government Coordinators at the Department level. The Coordinators are usually at working level (Director and below) and they act as the Open Government Office’s main point of contact (see Box 2.7) for a list of responsibilities). Coordinators meet regularly in a dedicated Working Group (Table 2.2). While the establishment of the Coordinators is a good practice, evidence collected during the OECD fact-finding mission revealed that many Coordinators are fulfilling this role as a “side-of-desk” activity and they usually do not sit within an office dedicated to open government.
In addition, Canada has established an Open Government Directors General Committee. Members of the Committee are engaged in their institutions’ open government-related activities. They often assume a leadership role to support key open government issues within their institutions and/or at a government-wide level. That said, this work is also commonly performed as a “side-of-desk” task and many lack a clear line of responsibility over open government matters.
While the establishment of these two groups can be considered a good practice, interviews conducted during the OECD fact-finding mission revealed that both the Open Government Co-ordinators and the Director Generals (DGs) in charge of open government are in fact mainly open data / open information co-ordinators, rather than co-ordinators of the wider open government agenda of their departments / agencies. In practice, most Co-ordinators / DGs do not co-ordinate their departments’ participatory policies and they are rarely in charge of initiatives that aim to foster accountability / responsiveness.
The activities, roles, and responsibilities of both the Open Government Co-ordinators and Director Generals (DGs) should be updated to reflect Canada’s new approach to open government, once the OGS has been adopted. The Co-ordinations could, for example, function as their departments’ contact points for the OGS, while the Director Generals (DGs) could support efforts to ensure policies their institutions design and implement follow open government approaches (e.g. citizen and stakeholders are involved in the design of the policy; information about the policy is made available in a timely and accessible manner; performance data is easily accessible; etc.).
Point of contact for TBS and other government departments
Central coordinating role within department
Open government requirements span across various programs and sections, including information management, IT, access to information, strategic planning, and communications
Identify and create dedicated programming and material for department adoption and advancement of open government, including the data and information release process, communication materials, learning materials and events
Coordination and support function for GC data stewards and program owners with releasing open data and responding to open data requests on the open government portal (e.g. suggest a dataset function, online or email comments received)
Support the adoption of digitally enabled release process, including open by default and automation
Maturing open government as an ongoing government priority
Better support with designated coordinators with core responsibilities
Able to develop and provide support on advancing open government initiatives, such as publish with a purpose / prioritizing based on public demand
Provide department perspective and working knowledge on advancing open government across the Government of Canada.
Maintaining departmental resources on the open government portal
Understanding of the open data release process on the open government registry, including metadata requirements, accessibility, official languages and supporting documentation
Support the management of open data holdings including meeting data quality requirements
Source: Government of Canada (2021[2]), Answers to the background questionnaire for the OECD Open Government Scan (unpublished working paper).
Canada could consider upgrading existing co-ordination mechanisms for open government.
A broader approach to open government and the eventual adoption of an Open Government Strategy may require a review of the existing co-ordination spaces for open government in Canada. In the short- to medium-term, Canada could for example consider creating a mechanism that facilitates the implementation of the OGS. This mechanism could be based on the existing MSF, retaking its current composition and expanding its mandate. As such, the Open Government Co-ordination Mechanism could have a broader scope of responsibilities, including co-ordinating and monitoring the implementation of the OGS and the wider citizen participation agenda.
Once the open government agenda of Canada has reached full maturity, in the long-term, Canada could consider creating a National Open Government Committee composed of all relevant public and non-public stakeholders. The Open Government Committee would be a co-ordination mechanism for all policies and practices that fall under the realm of the concept of open government.
In practical terms, an eventual Open Government Committee would integrate other existing mechanisms such as the Multi-stakeholder Forum (and the Open Government Co-ordination Mechanism, as recommended above) as sub-committees. The Open Government Committee could be chaired by TBS and the recommended Chief Open Government Officer, if Canada decides to implement this Recommendation. It would be comprised of senior representatives from the key institutions of the federal open government ecosystem, as well as key civil society representatives, academics, private sector representatives and trade unions.
In February 2018, the Government of Spain launched the Open Government Forum, the first open dialogue between all levels of government and civil society on transparency, participation and accountability.
The Plenary meets once or twice a year. It brings together public administrations from all levels and civil society including:
representatives of the General State Administration (AGE), all the Autonomous Communities and Cities (CC. AA.) and the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP)
representatives of the Royal Academy of Moral and Political Sciences, university professors, non-profit associations and foundations, the Council of Consumers and Users, and entities of the third sector.
The Permanent Commission is the executive organ of the Forum. It comprises the following members of the Plenary:
six members representing the public administration (including subnational governments) and six vocal representatives of civil society
other members of the Plenary that are not part of the Permanent Commission, as well as experts or advisors in matters to be discussed.
The working groups are spaces for reflection where information is grouped, knowledge is generated and different points of view are contrasted on specific topics of open government. Experts or advisors on the topics to be discussed may be invited to the meetings, as well as any member of the Plenary. There are currently three working groups:
Source: Government of Spain (n.d.[15]), Foro de Gobierno Abierto [Open Government Forum], Madrid, http://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/ForoGA.html (accessed 10 December 2018)
Given their multidimensional and cross-cutting nature, open government policies are inherently difficult to monitor and evaluate (OECD, 2019[16]). Notwithstanding this complexity, the necessity of being able to prove the positive impacts of open government reforms, including a more concrete understanding of their dynamics and effects, has made monitoring and evaluation (M&E) particularly relevant (OECD, 2019[16]).
Canada is not alone in needing to show the impact of open government reforms. The creation of more solid M&E systems for open government is a challenge faced by many OECD Member and Partner countries. Data collected through the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government (OECD, 2021[4]) suggests that – for the time being – most countries only monitor the implementation of their OGP action plans (rather than the wider open government agenda) and collect limited data and evidence on the broader effects of open government initiatives (OECD, forthcoming[17]). Evaluations are still mostly conducted on an ad hoc basis, if at all.
In Canada, like in most other OECD Member countries, there is currently no integrated system to monitor the openness of the federal government. Nevertheless, Canada already gathers ample data on different open government policies. For example, the Open Government Portal includes a dedicated section providing statistics on the Access to Information and Privacy Acts, including data on requests received during the identified period; requests completed or carried forward to the next period; etc.
“Develop and implement monitoring, evaluation and learning mechanisms for open government strategies and initiatives by:
1. Identifying institutional actors to be in charge of collecting and disseminating up-to-date and reliable information and data in an open format;
2. Developing comparable indicators to measure processes, outputs, outcomes, and impact in collaboration with stakeholders; and
3. Fostering a culture of monitoring, evaluation and learning among public officials by increasing their capacity to regularly conduct exercises for these purposes in collaboration with relevant stakeholders”.
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris,
https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
Canada could consider coupling the development of the OGS with an open government maturity model.
A maturity model is a reference instrument for assessing an entity's transition towards a given objective during a given period. Maturity models are increasingly being developed in different areas of public governance, including in the field of open government.
Canada’s OGS could be coupled with a maturity model that allow them to assess their openness and take initiatives to foster it. In particular, Open Government Maturity Models can:
Set a baseline standard of what good practices in the field of open government looks like;
Allow public institutions to assess their levels of openness at a given point in time and identify where they are situated in relation to national good practice.
Allow building a coherent and flexible trajectory towards high levels of maturity, adaptable to the situation of each public institution;
Show the stages of this progression and the necessary achievements that at each stage are useful and consolidate the passage into the subsequent stages;
Allow for comparison between public institutions within a defined framework;
In order to be useful, Open Government Maturity Models need to be based on a shared understanding of what different stages of openness in a public institution look like. This implies finding an answer to the questions: When can a public institution be considered fully open? What does being closed imply? In order to be able to answer these questions, an Open Government Maturity Model should be based on a clear theory of change and coupled with indicators, targets and benchmarks.
Coupling the OGS with a maturity model can have several advantages: First of all, it can provide incentives to public officials to report on progress relating to open government, thereby fostering a culture of M&E and of accountability more generally. Secondly, it can foster the involvement of senior leaders, thereby “creating sticks”.
The Strategy should include a solid system to monitor and evaluate implementation
The implementation of the Open Government Strategy needs to be systematically monitored and, eventually, evaluated. Monitoring could, for example, be done through an integrated monitoring system, available on the Open Government Portal. The system should allow public and non-public stakeholders to track strategy implementation on a day-to-day basis.
The strategy could provide a mandate to TBS to develop an annual M&E plan for the Open Government Strategy. The National Open Government Committee, recommended above, could serve as an institutional platform to follow up and discuss progress on the strategic goals in a systematic manner. Meanwhile, the newly created Office of the Chief Open Government Officer at TBS could be responsible for ensuring the monitoring of the implementation of the strategy on a daily basis.
Mexico’s Open Government Metrics were developed by the Centre for Economic Research and Teaching (CIDE), and were based on an initiative of the National Institute for Transparency, Access to Information and Personal Data Protection (INAI). The metrics are designed as a baseline to measure the current state of the National System of Transparency, Access to Information and Protection of Personal Data (SNT) and open government policies more generally. Aiming to be an “x-ray of the starting point of the open government policy of the Mexican State” at the national and subnational level, its focus goes beyond measuring the compliance with regulations, and aims to capture performance information on the outcomes of open government policies from the perspective of both government and citizens.
The metrics start with an operational definition of open government structured around two dimensions: transparency and public participation. Each dimension is approached from two perspectives: government and citizens.
The CIDE team developed an Open Government Index, consisting of measurements of transparency and participation from the perspective of both government and citizens. The construction of these indexes involved the analysis of existing regulations, a review of government websites, and user simulations, including information requests. The Metrics survey included a sample of 908 governmental bodies at the national and subnational level; 754 portals were reviewed and 3 635 requests for information were sent. The resulting Open Government Index of Mexico was 0.39 (on a scale of 0 to 1). The index showed that the transparency dimension has a much higher value (0.50) than the participation dimension (0.28).
Source: INAI (2017[18]), Resultados Edición 2017, http://eventos.inai.org.mx/metricasga/index.php/descargables (accessed 11 January 2019).
Public communication is a key lever of government that can be deployed both internally (across and within public entities) and externally (with the broader public) and serve as a tool of policy implementation and service design and delivery.
“Actively communicate on open government strategies and initiatives, as well as on their outputs, outcomes and impacts, in order to ensure that they are well-known within and outside government, to favour their uptake, as well as to stimulate stakeholder buy-in.”
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
The OGS needs to be communicated widely both internally and externally.
The design and implementation of an OGS could be an opportunity for Canada to build a more coherent communication approach to open government and an occasion to coordinate messages with communication officers across the Government of Canada.
Ensuring that the strategy is communicated to relevant stakeholders is essential, as per the Communicating Open Government: a How-to Guide (OECD; OGP, 2018[7]), developed jointly by the OECD and OGP. The Strategy’s vision has to become relevant to the day-to-day activities of each individual public servant. TBS could therefore make dedicated efforts to ensure that all public officials are aware of its existence and that high-ranking officials hold their institutions accountable for implementation. This may involve the organisation of high visibility events and the establishment of a dedicated communication strategy. Internal communication around the OGS can also help create synergies by bringing policy makers and public communicators more closely together.
The design of an Open Government Strategy will put Canada’s open government agenda on a new level. The move towards an open government culture of governance will need to involve changes in individual and institutional values, beliefs, norms of conduct, and expectations (OECD, 2021[19]). Recognising that the creation of awareness, knowledge and skills play an important role in fostering a change towards an open government culture, Provision 3 of the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government for example invites countries to promote “open government literacy”4 (Box 2.12).
“Ensure the successful operationalisation and take-up of open government strategies and initiatives by:
(i) Providing public officials with the mandate to design and implement successful open government strategies and initiatives, as well as the adequate human, financial, and technical resources, while promoting a supportive organisational culture;
(ii) Promoting open government literacy in the administration, at all levels of government, and among stakeholders.”
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris,
https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
Canada could consider designing an Open Government Toolkit to facilitate the implementation of the Strategy
To raise awareness, create buy-in and build their staff’s and civil society’s open government literacy, most governments across the OECD membership have elaborated guidelines, toolkits and manuals on open government policies and practices (OECD, forthcoming). According to the results of the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government (OECD, 2021[4]), 30 out of 33 OECD countries (91%) had guidelines on open government data, and 26 OECD countries (79%) had guidelines on citizen and stakeholder participation. Twenty-two OECD countries (67%) had guidelines on reactive disclosure of information, and 21 (64%) on proactive disclosure. Only ten OECD countries (30%) had guidelines that explicitly focused on the concept of open government (Figure 2.6).
Canada has already elaborated toolkits and guidelines in different areas of open government, including, for example, a Do-it-Yourself Open Data Toolkit (Government of Canada, 2019[20]) which provides a step-by-step guide on how to develop and implement an open data initiative. The design of the Open Government Strategy and the much broader approach to the open government principles that it promoted could be coupled with the development of a holistic (online) Open Government Toolkit made available free-of-charge to all public servants and society. The Toolkit could provide an overview of concrete actions that any public official can take to foster interactions with citizens and increase his or her institution’s openness. In addition to including TBS’ knowledge and experience on open data / open information, the Toolkit would need to provide concrete tools / advice on participatory tools and mechanisms, as well as accountability and integrity practices that are relevant for openness (e.g. lobbying transparency, asset declarations, etc.).
Similarly, the Open Government Office at TBS could lead the development of an online Open Government Toolkit for citizens, explaining their rights and providing an overview of avenues for collaboration with public institutions. The OECD’s Toolkit and Case Navigator for Open Government5 provides an overview of available toolkits, manuals and guidelines on different open government policies around the world.
Open Policy Making toolkit (United Kingdom)
Developed by the UK Cabinet Office, this toolkit provides tools and techniques for policy makers to develop user-centred policies in four stages: diagnosis, discovery, development and delivery.
OGPtoolbox (OGP)
The OGP Toolbox is a collaborative project which currently contains 263 open government cases and provides information about 1445 tools from 651 organisations. This repository of digital tools allows policy-makers to find the suitable tool for their own context and to learn from the experiences of the whole open government community.
bE-Open toolkit on open government (Council of Europe)
With a focus on Armenia, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, and Ukraine, this toolkit aims to support democracy through improved local governance. It provides information about international standards, legislation, guidelines and good practices on four themes: public ethics and accountability, prevention of corruption, transparency, and citizen participation.
Implementing Innovation: A User’s Manual for Open Government Programs (Reboot)
This manual covers an eight-phase process from concept development to implementation for building an open government programme.
Source: UK Cabinet Office (2017[21]), Open Policy Making toolkit, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-policy-making-toolkit; OGPtoolbox (n.d.[22]), https://ogptoolbox.org/de/; Council of Europe (n.d.[23]), bE-Open: Open Local Government, https://www.beopen-congress.eu/en/; Reboot (n.d.[24]), Implementing Innovation: A User’s Manual for Open Government Programs, https://implementinginnovation.org/manual/
Canada could consider creating an online course on the Open Government Strategy
The provision of trainings, information sessions and capacity-building events is another way of ensuring that public officials and non-public stakeholders embody open government principles and increase their levels of open government literacy (OECD, 2021[19]). According to results of the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government (OECD, 2021[4]), most governments across the OECD propose specific trainings on different open government policies and practices to their staff.
For example, 25 out of 33 OECD countries surveyed (76%) provide training on access to information, and 23 (70%) on open government data. Nineteen of the OECD countries (58%) have training on citizen and stakeholder participation. Ten OECD countries (30%) have training on open government as an integrated concept (e.g. explaining what open government means)6. Canada is in line with OECD practice, also offering trainings in most of these areas (Figure 2.7)
While trainings for public officials are common practice in OECD countries nowadays, data from the Survey shows that governments make fewer efforts to foster the open government literacy of non-public stakeholders. For example, only half of OECD countries that responded provide some sort of training related to open government for non-public stakeholders. Most commonly, these trainings cover open government data as well as access to information.
As part of the efforts to create an enabling environment for the implementation of the Open Government Strategy, Canada could consider creating an introductory course on open government that could be made available free of charge on the Open Government Portal, as for example done by Brazil.
The Directorate for Transparency and Social Control of the CGU (in partnership with the Federal University of Goiás) has prepared an online training environment on different open government policies and practices. All of the courses are available for free and can be taken by both public officials and non-public stakeholders (most of them are targeting public officials though). In addition to courses focusing on the CGU’s core mandate (e.g. access to information), the catalogue includes a 20-hour course that is specifically dedicated to the concept of open government.
Source: OECD (2022[25]), Open Government Review of Brazil: Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f9009d4-en.
Canada could consider fostering the creation of an open government community of practice
Communities of practice can be useful tools to exchange good practices and facilitate the sharing of resources and experiences. As part of the process to implement the OGS, Canada could consider setting up a dedicated community of practice on open government, bringing together public officials and non-public stakeholders from all branches of the state and all levels of government that are interested in open government topics and / or have participated in trainings on open government policies and practices. The open government community of practice could integrate the existing Public Engagement Community of Practice.
The open government community could be animated by TBS through a dedicated online space. In addition to being a platform for dialogue, learning and sharing of good practices, the community could provide TBS with an effective informal co-ordination tool. In an ideal case, the community of practice would also involve non-public stakeholders such as civil society leaders as well as representatives from academia, the private sector, and trade unions.
US OpenGov Community of Practice
The United States Government has established a series of communities of practices across the Federal Government to collaborate and share resources on different policy areas. The Open Government Community of Practice is a digital space and a network where civil servants across government can discuss about open government related initiatives and practices. The Open Government community consists of government employees and civil society members working in the field of Open Government to share best practices to promote transparency, participation, and collaboration, and advocate for opening government information. This type of communities allow for a continuous exchange of information, peer learning, it supports co-ordination and collaboration across government.
UCLG Community of Practice on Transparency and Open Government
The United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) Community of Practice on Transparency and Open Government was created with the objectives of supporting peer-to-peer learning, networking, awareness-raising and capacity building on open government and public integrity at local level and promoting the role of local and regional governments in the development and promotion of practices of transparency, participation and accountability for the achievement of sustainable cities and territories. The Community of Practice is constituted by a group of local and regional governments, as well as experts, academics and public institutions and representatives of international city networks interested in discussing and advancing joint solutions, learning opportunities and exchange of public policies on issues of Open Government. It is co-ordinated by the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP) with the support of the Open Government Partnership and the United Nations Human Settlement Program (UN-Habitat).
Hub of communities working on State modernisation in France
The Inter-Ministerial Directorate for Public Transformation has put in place a digital hub to install the communities of practice related to state modernisation, including open government. With more than 50 communities, the hub allows all public officials to discover and join the communities that interest them, according to a topics of interest (participation, digital services, collective intelligence, design thinking etc.) or a geographical area.
Sources: US General Services Administration (2021[26]), OpenGov Community, https://digital.gov/communities/open-gov/; United Cities and Local Governments (n.d.[27]), About the Community, https://opengov.uclg.org/en/community-practice; Interministerial Directorate of Public Sector Transformation (n.d.[28]), Public sector transformation communities, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/boite-outils/communautes-de-la-transformation-publique.
The implementation of the Open Government Strategy could be linked with ministers’ mandate letters
In 2015, the Government of Canada publicly released ministerial mandate letters for the first time (Government of Canada, 2021[2]). While the original letters have been replaced following subsequent elections, they serve as an excellent example of how such letters can be successfully employed to advance open government. The mandate letters outlined the policy objectives that each minister would work to accomplish, as well as the pressing challenges they would address in their role. The letters described the Prime Minister's expectations for each minister, and were supposed to give Canadians a clear idea of how the government would deliver its agenda. Mandate letters were coupled with a tracker which allow citizens and stakeholders to review the progress of government commitments. This tracker in itself constituted a very interesting open government practice.
The letters included a direction that “Government and its information should be open by default” and indicated that ministers were expected “to continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency in government.” Moving forward, Canada could for example consider linking the implementation of the Open Government Strategy explicitly with the mandate letters that Ministers receive from the Prime Minister. The document “Open and Accountable Government” which was referenced within all of the Ministerial Mandate Letters provides an excellent basis to do so. Open and Accountable Government set out core principles regarding the roles and responsibilities of Ministers in Canada’s system of responsible parliamentary government.
Future governments could consider paying a similar level of attention to open government in future mandate letters. In line with the broader approach to open government discussed above, Canada could consider renaming the document “Open, Responsive and Participatory Government” and updating it to include explicit provisions on participatory practices.
2021 Mandate Letter Commitments
President of the Treasury Board (TBS)
“Building on the vision outlined in Canada’s Digital Government Strategy, lead our Government’s work to advance digital government to better serve Canadians by: 1) Serving as the champion for Digital Standards, encouraging your colleagues to utilize more agile, open and user-focused methods when designing services for Canadians; 2) Further expanding open data initiatives and making more data available digitally.”
“Continue leading our regulatory reform efforts in collaboration with your Cabinet colleagues to improve transparency, reduce administrative burden and lead our efforts to harmonize regulations that maintain high safety standards and improve the competitiveness of Canadian businesses.”
“Continuing to build a whole-of-government approach for the improved collection, analysis, availability and publication of disaggregated data, with the support of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.”
2019 Mandate Letters
Common language in mandate letters to all Ministers:
"That starts with a commitment to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way."
"They expect us to be diligent, honest, open and sincere in our efforts to serve the public interest."
"I also expect us to continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency in government. This means a government that is open by default. It means better digital capacity and services for Canadians. It means a strong and resilient public service. It also means humility and continuing to acknowledge mistakes when we make them. Canadians do not expect us to be perfect; they expect us to be diligent, honest, open and sincere in our efforts to serve the public interest."
"You will do your part to continue our Government’s commitment to transparent, merit-based appointments, to help ensure that people of all gender identities, Indigenous Peoples, racialized people, persons with disabilities and minority groups are reflected in positions of leadership."
"Tracking and publicly reporting on the progress of our commitments; assessing the effectiveness of our work; aligning our resources with priorities; and adapting to events as they unfold, in order to get the results Canadians rightly demand of us."
"We have committed to an open, honest government that is accountable to Canadians, lives up to the highest ethical standards and applies the utmost care and prudence in the handling of public funds. I expect you to embody these values in your work and observe the highest ethical standards in everything you do. I want Canadians to look on their own government with pride and trust."
"You will be provided with a copy of Open and Accountable Government to assist you as you undertake your responsibilities. I ask that you carefully read it, including elements that have been added to strengthen it, and ensure that your staff does so as well."
Source: Government of Canada (2021[2]), Answers to the background questionnaire for the OECD Open Government Scan (unpublished working paper).
The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government invites countries to explore the potential of moving from the concept of open government towards that of open state (Box 2.17). In the Recommendation an open state is defined as “when the executive, legislature, judiciary, independent public institutions, and all levels of government - recognising their respective roles, prerogatives, and overall independence according to their existing legal and institutional frameworks - collaborate, exploit synergies, and share good practices and lessons learned among themselves and with other stakeholders to promote transparency, integrity, accountability, and stakeholder participation, in support of democracy and inclusive growth”.
“While recognising the roles, prerogatives, and overall independence of all concerned parties and according to their existing legal and institutional frameworks, explore the potential of moving from the concept of open government toward that of open state.”
Source: OECD (2017[1]), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris,
https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed 30 November 2018).
The development of an OGS can be a powerful way to create a shared commitment to the principles of open government across the entire Canadian public sector, including in all branches of power and at all levels of government. Taking into the account the Federal nature and the prerogatives of all levels of government (Box 2.18), the OGS could support a new ambition for open government across the country and promote a substantive dialogue on it across levels of government. TBS has already initiated a constructive dialogue with provinces and territories, especially in the areas of open data and open information. The Strategy could be an opportunity to bring this collaboration to a new level, improving the co-ordination of open government agendas and creating synergies. This open state perspective could also include actors from the Legislative and the Judicial powers, which have implemented open government initiatives but are still working in isolation from the other branches of the State.
The Canadian Constitution (1867) and Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) define Canada as a federal system of shared powers in which the federal government and the provinces have equal status (OECD, UCLG, 2016[29]). The subnational system is two-tiered and made up of 10 provinces and 3 territories at the upper level and 3 805 municipalities at the lower level. Municipalities are not formally recognised in the federal constitution, but they are mentioned as “coming under the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces”. Therefore, there are a variety of municipal structures which differ from one province to another (municipal intermunicipal authorities, metropolitan and regional municipalities, towns, townships, cities, etc.).
Provinces and territories have own and shared responsibilities with the federal government. Own responsibilities include education, health care (including hospitals), highways, prisons, natural resources, municipal affairs. Shared responsibilities include pensions, energy, water, agriculture and immigration. Municipal tasks are set by provinces and vary considerably. In addition, provinces can delegate some of their responsibilities to municipalities. Municipal functions typically include transport (roads and transit); protection (police and fire); water and sewerage, waste, recreation and culture, land use planning, social housing. Education, social and health services are not included in municipal responsibilities, except when they are shared with the province (e.g. social assistance in Ontario). Primary and secondary education lies with independently elected local authorities (schools boards) who are directly answerable to provinces and territories (OECD, UCLG, 2016[29]). According to the OECD (OECD, UCLG, 2016[29]), the share in GDP and public spending of subnational government is by far the highest of the OECD, well above the OECD average (16.6% of GDP and 40.0% of public spending in 2013). A vast majority is made by the provinces (78%). Subnational governments are also key employers (SNG share in public staff spending is 20 percentage points above the OECD average of 63.2%).
Source: OECD, UCLG (2016[29]), Country profile: Canada, https://www.oecd.org/regional/regional-policy/profile-Canada.pdf.
Canada could use the OGS to foster the maturity of open government agendas at the subnational level
In order to strengthen collaboration on open government initiatives between the various levels of governments, Canada launched the Canada Open Government Working Group (COGWG) in 2017. According to its mandate (a revision took place in 2021), the COGWG provides a space for Canadian jurisdictions to collaborate and share information on (Government of Canada, 2021[2]):
Making information and data easier to find by improving search capacity on government websites;
Making more information and data available in standardized formats with improved metadata, tagging, and indexing;
Being more open with Canadians by improving policies and rules so that government data and information is open by default; and
Proactively engaging the Canadian public and giving them an opportunity for a two-way dialogue on government’s work.
Members of the Working Group are, for example, responsible for “promoting the implementation of open data, open information and public engagement principles in their respective jurisdiction” (Ibid.). They elaborate a joint annual work plan to “set a strategic direction to pan-Canadian open government initiatives”. The Evaluation of the Open Government Program that was prepared by the TBS Internal Audit and Evaluation Bureau (Government of Canada, 2021[30]) found that “the working group’s efforts have yielded positive results for open government initiatives across the country”, including the following:
federation of open data search capabilities between the federal government and the government of Alberta;
building data literacy and associated technical skills among public servants;
establishing a coordinated mechanism for public dialogue and engagement across Canada.
The Evaluation continues stating that “evidence gathered from both the interviews and the focus groups reveals widespread agreement that the federal government has played an important role in creating a baseline for open government activities in all provinces and territories that have open government programs” (Ibid.).
While the positive contribution of the Working Group to Canada’s national open government agenda is undeniable, interviews conducted for this OECD Open Government Scan showed that the Working Group has made most progress in the field of open data / open information. Despite the fact that the mandate of the Working Group includes a specific reference to participation / engagement, little of its work has in practice focused on the participation-side of open government. Similar to the federal level, many Provinces also separate the open data / open information agenda from the participation / democracy agenda.
The OGS provides an opportunity to support the uptake of a new understanding and foster the maturity of open government agendas at the subnational level. Once created, the new definition of open government (see above) could for example be shared with the subnational level in order to increase coherence and harmonization of practices across Canada. Similarly, as part of its effort to foster the monitoring and evaluation of open government reforms in Canada, TBS could create an open government maturity model adopted to the subnational level, thereby allowing provinces and territories (and possibly even municipalities) to assess their own levels of openness and take initiatives to increase them. Lastly, according to the preferences of TBS, the OGS could include a dedicated section on open government at the subnational level, allowing provinces and territories to outline their own vision and objectives as part of the federal strategy.
References
[23] Council of Europe (n.d.), bE-Open: Open Local Government, https://www.beopen-congress.eu/en/.
[2] Government of Canada (2021), Answers to the background questionnaire for the OECD Open Government Scan of Canada.
[30] Government of Canada (2021), Evaluation of the Open Government Program, https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/corporate/reports/evaluation-open-government-program.html.
[9] Government of Canada (2020), Policy on Service and Digital, https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32603.
[20] Government of Canada (2019), Do-it-Yourself Open Data Toolkit, https://open.canada.ca/en/toolkit/diy.
[12] Government of Canada (2019), Public engagement principles, https://open.canada.ca/en/content/principles-and-guidelines.
[8] Government of Canada (2018), Canada’s 2018-2020 National Action Plan on Open Government, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Canada_Action-Plan_2018-2020_EN.pdf.
[14] Government of Canada (2015), Key Leadership Competencies, https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/professional-development/key-leadership-competency-profile.html.
[3] Government of Canada (2014), Directive on Open Government, https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=28108.
[10] Government of Canada (n.d.), Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Organization, https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/corporate/organization.html.
[15] Government of Spain (n.d.), Foro de Gobierno Abierto [Open Government Forum], Madrid, http://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/ForoGA.html (accessed on 10 December 2018).
[18] INAI (2017), Resultados Edición 2017, http://eventos.inai.org.mx/metricasga/index.php/descargables (accessed on 11 January 2019).
[28] Interministerial Directorate of Public Sector Transformation (n.d.), Public sector transformation communities, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/boite-outils/communautes-de-la-transformation-publique.
[25] OECD (2022), Open Government Review of Brazil : Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f9009d4-en.
[4] OECD (2021), 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government.
[19] OECD (2021), Government at a Glance 2021, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1c258f55-en.
[13] OECD (2021), Guía de la OCDE sobre Gobierno Abierto para Funcionarios Públicos Peruanos, https://www.oecd.org/gov/open-government/guia-de-la-ocde-sobre-gobierno-abierto-para-funcionarios-publicos-peruanos-2021.pdf.
[6] OECD (2021), Perception Survey among Delegates to the OECD Working Party on Open Government.
[11] OECD (2020), Catching the Deliberative Wave: Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions.
[16] OECD (2019), Open Government in Argentina, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1988ccef-en.
[1] OECD (2017), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[5] OECD (2016), Open Government: The Global Context and the Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268104-en.
[17] OECD (forthcoming), Open Government: Global Report.
[29] OECD, UCLG (2016), Country profile: Canada, https://www.oecd.org/regional/regional-policy/profile-Canada.pdf.
[7] OECD; OGP (2018), Communicating Open Government: A How-to Guide, https://www.oecd.org/gov/Open-Government-Guide.pdf.
[22] OGP (n.d.), OGPtoolbox, https://ogptoolbox.org/de/.
[24] Reboot (n.d.), Implementing Innovation: A User’s Manual for Open Government Programs,, https://implementinginnovation.org/manual/.
[21] UK Cabinet Office (2017), Open Policy Making toolkit, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-policy-making-toolkit.
[27] United Cities and Local Governments (n.d.), About the Community, https://opengov.uclg.org/en/community-practice.
[26] US General Services Administration (2021), OpenGov Community, https://digital.gov/communities/open-gov/.
Notes
← 1. Canada is already taking this agenda forward, with for example, its Algorithmic Impact Assessment Tool: https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/digital-government/digital-government-innovations/responsible-use-ai/algorithmic-impact-assessment.html
← 2. The objective of the Directive is to “maximize the release of government information and data of business value to support transparency, accountability, citizen engagement, and socio-economic benefits through reuse, subject to applicable restrictions associated with privacy, confidentiality, and security”.
← 3. 29 out pf 38 OECD Member countries are members of the OGP.
← 4. The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (OECD, 2017) defines open government literacy as “the combination of awareness, knowledge, and skills that public officials and stakeholders require to engage successfully in open government strategies and initiatives.”
← 5. The OECD Toolkit and Case Navigator for Open Government can be found here: https://www.oecd.org/gov/open-government-toolkit-navigator.htm
← 6. Some countries do not have a centralised training catalogue, with each ministry and institution responsible for designing the training it offers its employees. These trainings would not be captured by these data.