5. Creating an enabling environment for an Open Government Strategy in Romania
This chapter supports Romania in the creation of governance structures and mechanisms that are suitable for a holistic and integrated open government agenda and that can facilitate the successful implementation of the country’s first holistic Open Government Strategy. The chapter starts by discussing Romania’s current institutional framework and co-ordination mechanisms for open government. It then focuses on ways to build an open government culture in the Romanian administration and in society and discusses means to foster public communications around open government policies and practices.
In most countries, the enabling environment for open government is the result of a combination of different layers of laws, policies, and institutions, coupled with diverse implementation modalities, practices and processes (OECD, 2022[1]). This is largely because, traditionally, public policies that aim to foster the open government principles of transparency, accountability, integrity, and stakeholder participation have been treated as separate policy agendas (OECD, 2022[1]). Integrated open government agendas aim to further empower these existing agendas by putting them under one common umbrella, allowing them to achieve more and better outcomes for citizens (OECD, forthcoming[2]).
An Open Government Strategy (OGS) is the cornerstone of any country’s integrated open government agenda. However, for Open Government Strategies not to remain “on paper” and lead to tangible gains for citizens and stakeholders, countries need to pay particular attention to the frameworks and mechanisms that enable their implementation. In fact, the design of an Open Government Strategy provides a unique momentum to review and upgrade their existing governance arrangements to make them more suitable for a holistic approach to open government.
In line with the OECD Framework for Assessing the Openness of Government (OECD, 2020[3]) this chapter focuses on the key “inputs” and “processes” for open government in Romania, i.e. the measures the government takes to steer the government towards more openness in practice. As such, the chapter assesses Romania against Provisions 3, 4, and 6 of the Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (Box 5.1). It finds that the Strategy process provides an opportunity to strengthen the institutional framework for open government, including by empowering the Open Government Service in the General Secretariat of the Government to reflect its increased levels of responsibilities. It further highlights the need to create more encompassing mechanisms to co-ordinate the implementation of the OGS across government and with non-public stakeholders. The chapter also identifies opportunities to use the OGS as a tool to make additional efforts to foster open government literacy, including by creating a dedicated community of practice in the field. Finally, the chapter highlights that the adoption of the Open Government Strategy will require more far-reaching public communications, including for example the creation of an integrated Open Government Portal.
Taken together, the recommendations provide in this chapter support Romania in the creation of an integrated open government ecosystem that can enable the successful implementation of the country’s first holistic Open Government Strategy. Throughout, this chapter provides policy advice based on Romania’s responses to the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government (OECD, 2021[4]) (hereafter “OECD Survey”) and draws on experience from OECD Member and Partner Countries to illustrate good practices in this field.
Provision 3
“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”.
Provision 4
“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”.
Provision 6
“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[5]), “Recommendation of the Council on Open Government”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0438, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
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 are usually spread across a number of public institutions in OECD Member and Partner Countries (OECD, forthcoming[2]). This fragmentation of responsibilities is common across the OECD, and it creates a strong need for effective co-ordination between institutions.
In Romania, in contrast to many OECD Member and Partner countries, most key responsibilities for open government policies are concentrated under the General Secretariat of the Government (and its Open Government Service) (Table 5.1).
Empowering the Open Government Service in the General Secretariat of the Government
In 2012, Romania appointed a Minister Delegate for Social Dialogue, followed by the creation of a Ministry of Public Consultation and Civic Dialogue in 2016 (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). While the co-ordination of the OGP action plan has always been the responsibility of the General Secretariat of the Government (GSG), the Ministry had responsibilities in different areas of open government, including public consultation, transparency and access to information, social dialogue, as well as the development of associations and foundations (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). However, the Ministry of Public Consultation and Social Dialogue was abolished in 2018 due to a change of government and a subsequent restructuring of Ministries’ portfolios and its responsibilities were transferred to the General Secretariat of the Government (GSG). As outlined in Government Decision no. 137/2020, the GSG has today a very broad set of responsibilities in the field of open government (Box 5.2).
a) identifies, develops and promotes public policies and normative acts in the fields of open governance, public consultation, transparency, access to information of public interest, development of non-governmental organisations;
b) conducts bilateral relations with ministries and institutions with powers in the fields of open governance, public consultation, transparency, access to information of public interest, social dialogue, development of non-governmental organisations from other states;
c) contributes to increasing the Government’s capacity to implement public policies for an open, participatory, responsible and efficient governance, including the relationship with legally established non-governmental organisations, citizens and social partners;
d) contributes to increasing the capacity of public authorities and institutions to apply the provisions of the legislation on free access to information of public interest;
e) monitors and evaluates the application by public authorities and institutions of the legal provisions on free access to information of public interest in the public administration;
f) elaborates on annual reports on the implementation by the central public administration of legislation on free access to information of public interest, providing recommendations for improving legislation and practices in the field;
g) contributes to increasing the capacity of public authorities and institutions to apply the provisions of the legislation on transparency of decision-making;
h) monitors and evaluates the application by public authorities and institutions of the legal provisions on decision transparency;
i) prepares summaries on the annual reports on the implementation by the central government of the legislation on transparency of decision-making, providing recommendations for improving legislation and practices in the field;
j) conducts the dialogue framework between the Government and non-governmental organisations, on the public policy priorities assumed by the Government;
k) co-ordinate government strategies on non-governmental organisations, increase its capacity to contribute ideas and expertise to the public policy process and contribute to continuous communication with citizens, including for the European synchronisation of co-operation policies and strategies with civil society organisations and citizens;
l) provides support and collaborates with the relevant ministries, under the conditions of the law, regarding the activity of structures within ministries, with responsibilities related to public policies for an open, participatory, responsible and efficient governance, including those with responsibilities regarding the relationship with non-governmental organisations and citizens;
m) elaborates and approves, as appropriate, the procedures for proposing civil society representatives in national and international public structures, in accordance with the law;
n) develop strategies for the financing of non-governmental organisations by central and local public authorities from public funds;
o) supports, in accordance with the law, the implementation of programmes or activities initiated by legally established non-governmental organisations;
p) supports, in accordance with the law, the increase of the operational capacity of legally established non-governmental organisations;
q) provides the secretariat of the Interministerial Committee for the Coordination of Romania’s Relations with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OCDE);
r) co-ordinates and monitors the implementation of the National Action Plan within the Open Government Partnership, ensuring the Secretariat of the National Coordination Committee together with the person designated National Contact Point;
s) provides the secretariat of the advisory bodies set up at the level of the Government and the General Secretariat of the Government, and may allocate, in accordance with the legal provisions in force, funds related to the current expenses for the meetings of the advisory bodies and the expenses necessary for the payment of transport and accommodation for members of advisory bodies who are not domiciled in Bucharest;
ș) co-ordinates the publication and update of information on the decision transparency portal www.e-consultare.gov.ro, on the Single Register of Interest Transparency Portal, www.ruti.gov.ro, as well as on the portal on encouraging the development of non-governmental organisations Catalogue of non-governmental organisations for record, consultation and transparency CONECT www.conect.gov.ro;
t) co-operates with governmental organisations and entities in the country and abroad with similar roles or tasks in the fields of open governance, transparency, public consultations and relations with civil society, ensuring participation in events and working groups in these fields
ț) co-ordinates the realisation and implementation of the Open Government Partnership, being the national point of contact for it. In this sense, it has the following attributions:
co-ordinating the adoption, implementation and evaluation of the National Action Plan within the Open Government Partnership
co-ordinating and monitoring the implementation of the specific commitments assumed through the National Action Plan, by the responsible ministries and agencies
ensuring the co-ordination of the multi-party forum "National Coordination Committee" according to the standards of the Partnership for an Open Government
Romania's representation within the international initiative Partnership for Open Government.
u) administers and maintains the national open data portal www.data.gov.ro and contributes to the publication and reuse of open data.
Source: Government of Romania (2020), Decision no.137/2020 on the organisation, functioning and attributions of the GSG.
These responsibilities are carried out by the GSG’s Open Government Directorate which is in turn organised into two services: The Open Government Service and the Service for Cooperation with the Associative Environment (Decision no. 1 465/2022). The Open Government Service’s portfolio includes the development and implementation of policy in the fields of open government, transparency and access to information, public consultation, innovation in public administration and the development of the operational capacity of associations and foundations (Government Decision no. 137/2020). This includes elaborating and promoting suitable public policies and normative acts, as well as developing bilateral relations with ministries and institutions in these areas. Further, the Open Government Service is mandated to build capacities in public authorities and provide support during the implementation of relevant laws and policies. Lastly, the Service is responsible for administering several government portals (E-consultare, RUTI, CONECT; see also the section on open government portals below). The Open Government Service currently consists of 11 employees, both civil servants and contract officials. Most of the employees have been part of the Service for many years, and previously worked in the Ministry of Consultation and Social Dialogue (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). Evidence collected during the OECD fact-finding mission revealed that the OGS has a very well-trained, dedicated and experienced staff working on open government.
Romania has had a structure responsible for the government’s relationship with civil society stakeholders (often called “associative environment” in the Romanian context) since 2001 (General Secretariat of the Government, n.d.[7]). Today, GSG’s Service for Cooperation Policies with the Associate Environment is mainly responsible for the government’s relationship with civil society stakeholders (see also the Civic Space Review of Romania (OECD, 2023[8])). It facilitates the creation of institutional mechanisms for consultation and co-operation with the associative environment (colleges, interministerial committees, working groups) and supports initiatives of civil society stakeholders that aim to enhance representation in the design and implementation of government policies. This Service also facilitates the creation of institutional mechanisms for consultation and co-operation with the associative environment.
Source: Adapted from General Secretariat of the Government (n.d.[9]), Organigramme of the General Secretariat of the Government, https://sgg.gov.ro/1/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Structura-organizatorica-a-SGG.pdf.
The clustering of responsibilities for different open government policies under the GSG represents an opportunity to foster a smooth design and implementation of Romania’s first Open Government Strategy. However, some changes to the structure and additional resources may be needed for the Open Government Service to be able to lead a successful OGS process. To successfully co-ordinate and lead the Strategy-process, the Open Government Service could become a centre of expertise on open government. As a centre of expertise, its role will be to promote an open government culture across the whole national government and provide support and advice to public institutions at all levels in the implementation of different kinds of open government initiatives. Moving towards the creation of a centre of expertise on open government may also include the development of an open government index or maturity model (see Chapter 7), the creation of additional trainings and toolkits, as well as the establishment of a community of practice, as further discussed below. The Open Government Service’s extended role will further require increased human, technical and financial resources, including, for example, additional staff to provide targeted technical support to public institutions, as well as additional technical / IT resources.
Furthermore, open government, as a transversal and transformational policy agenda, requires high-level leadership (OECD, 2022[10]). As further discussed in Chapter 6, 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 have identified institutional champions that lead reform efforts across the whole government. To elevate the profile of the open government file, the government of Romania could consider reviewing its positioning within GSG. For example, the Open Government Service could be attached directly to a Secretary of State. Putting the open government file at this level would reinforce accountability structures and provide more leverage to the Open Government Service to push for the implementation of ambitious reforms.
Constructive dialogue between public and non-public stakeholders is essential for open government (OECD, 2022[1]). In this regard, Provision 4 of the Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (2017[5]) 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”. Along similar lines, the OECD Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance underlines the need to foster co-ordination and address fragmentation across institutions of major policy initiatives and priorities (OECD, 2020[11]).
The government of Romania, led by the GSG, has created mechanisms to co-ordinate parts of the country’s open government agenda, including the National Coordination Committee for OGP which was first established in 2016 to oversee and co-ordinate the OGP action plan. Moreover, in addition to having people in charge of the implementation of key open government laws (such as Law no. 544/2001 on free access to information), most Ministries have mandated both a senior and a technical public official with responsibilities for the OGP process.
Despite these efforts, good practices often remain “confined” in specific institutions and are not mainstreamed. Co-ordination and collaboration across the public sector and with non-public stakeholders will become even more important once Romania’s Open Government Strategy will have been adopted. As the OECD report on Enhancing Policy Coherence and Coordination in Romania states, “mechanisms for interministerial co-ordination on cross-cutting issues could be diversified and supported by appropriate tools to increase their effectiveness in promoting policy coherence” (OECD, forthcoming[12]). Ultimately, each public institution has to be involved in the implementation of the Strategy.
Upgrading the National Coordination Committee for the implementation of the Open Government Partnership
Romania’s multi-stakeholder forum, the National Coordination Committee for the implementation of the Open Government Partnership (the “CNC”), was first created in 2016 to co-ordinate the development, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation of the country’s OGP action plans. Since then, while the Committee broadly maintained the same format with changing members, it has at times been discontinued. For example, according to the OGP’s Independent Report Mechanism, during the co-creation period of the fifth action plan (February to August 2020), Romania did not maintain an active multi-stakeholder forum (OGP IRM, 2022[13]).
Data collected through the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government shows that 81.8% of Adherents that are part of OGP (27 out of 33) have established a multi-stakeholder forum (MSF) that involves non-public stakeholders (SOG). Civil society organisations are the most common non-public stakeholders that are represented in the MSF (92.3%), followed by academia (69.2%) and private sector/business organisations (34.6%) (OECD, forthcoming[2]). In line with practice in OECD Member and Partner countries (see (OECD, forthcoming[2])), at the time of writing, Romania’s CNC included representatives from the GSG and the ministries implementing OGP action plan commitments, as well as an equal number of representatives from civil society.1 In 2022, the representatives of civil society were selected for the first time by the previous CNC civil society members.
According to the Organization and Operation Regulation (Decision no. 1/2021), “representation shall be provided at the level of secretary of state and substitute members from among the technical staff” and the technical secretariat related to the process of co-ordinating the implementation of the Open Government Partnership is provided by the Open Government Service and the OGP Contact Point. The expenses related to the organisation and operation of the Committee are provided from the budget of the General Secretariat of the Government. In line with practice in OECD Member and Partner countries that are part of the OGP (see (OECD, forthcoming[2])), Romania’s Committee has a minimum of four meetings per year. Additional meetings can be organised at the proposal of at least 2/3 of the total members. Meeting agendas and the decisions taken are published on the ogp.gov.ro website.
Usually, MSFs have a broad set of responsibilities as regards the OGP process. In OGP countries that have adhered to the OECD Open Government Recommendation, the most important responsibilities include monitoring the implementation of the action plan (88.9%), overseeing the co-creation process (77.8%), and setting directions for the action plan process (85.2%). Only 7.4% of MSFs are currently involved in mobilising financial resources for the action plan process (OECD, forthcoming[2]). In Romania, the Committee’s functioning and responsibilities are regulated by the Memorandum regarding the establishment of the National Committee for Coordination of the Partnership for Open Government in Romania (Government of Romania, 2020[14]) and the Organization and Operation Regulation (General Secretariat of the Government, 2022[15]). These documents foresee that the CNC’s duties include co-ordinating the development and implementation of national action plans, as well as monitoring and evaluating them.
Recognising the usefulness of the MSF as a general platform for dialogue with non-public stakeholders, 30.8% of Adherents’ MSFs (8 out of 26) in Adhering countries that are part of the OGP have started taking over responsibilities for the wider open government agenda (OECD, forthcoming[2]). For example, the Czech Republic’s Working Commission for Open Government and State Administration Transparency has a broad mandate to support integrity. As a permanent advisory body to the government and chaired by the Minister of Justice, it evaluates anti-corruption measures, monitors their implementation and proposes measures to reduce corruption risks, including by fostering transparency of the public administration (OECD, forthcoming[2]). The responsibilities of Romania’s CNC are, however, limited to the OGP process. For the moment, it is not involved in co-ordinating other open government initiatives. Moving forward, Romania could consider extending the CNC’s portfolio and using it to co-create, co-ordinate and monitor and evaluate the forthcoming Open Government Strategy. This would also require enlarging the participation of different types of stakeholders (both public and non-public) and increasing the level of representation from the highest level of government. In particular, a close co-ordination between the GSG and the Prime Minister Chancellery (PMC) within the framework of the CNC could be useful to ensure that both centre-of-government institutions pull into the same direction, and that the committee has the political support needed to fully deliver on its mandate (see also Box 5.3 and OECD (forthcoming[12])). Opportunities to exploit synergies exist in particular given the PMC’s competencies in the field of consultation, institutional dialogue, civic dialogue and in the relationship with civil society (Art. 3(1), Decision no. 832/2022).
The General Secretariat of the Government (GSG) and the Prime Minister's Chancellery (PMC), the two main institutions of the Romanian Government Offices, have had varied institutional arrangements, setups, and mandates in recent years. Both organisations participated in interministerial co-ordination up until January 2017. The PMC offered policy knowledge while the GSG concentrated on formal co-ordination. In January 2017, Prime Minister Grindeanu disbanded the PMC and transferred its duties to the GSG.
Throughout succeeding administrations, particularly those of Prime Ministers Tudose and Dăncilă, the PMC was re-established as a structure without legal personality and was predominantly made up of scientific advisors and sector specialists. Under the Orban administration, the Chancellery's staff was gradually reduced to six. This changed in 2021 when the Chancellery of the Prime Ministers was established as a structure with legal personality that was funded from the General Secretariat of the Government budget. Most recently, the Prime Minister's Chancellery's new duties, structure, and operations were established by Government Decision no. 832/2022. In the field of consultation, institutional dialogue, civic dialogue and in the relationship with civil society, this includes to:
identify and organise consultations with institutional and social actors in order to complete the government agenda
ensures the dialogue framework between the prime minister and civil society, the associative structures of the local public administration, employer and trade union organisations, other professional associations
analyses the proposals of the associative and business environment, in order to determine the directions of strategic action
facilitates and monitors inter-ministerial and inter-institutional collaboration and communication at the level of government structures
participates in interministerial councils and committees, established according to legal provisions, and organises working groups on certain fields of interest or for the management of current problems
ensures, in its field of activity, the relationship with the ministries, as well as the other specialised bodies of the central public administration.
Albeit difficult to apply in practice, stakeholders engaged for the report on the Romanian centre of government frequently reported their understanding of the division of responsibilities between the PMC and the GSG as broadly “political v. technical” delineation, in which the PMC would be the “political” arm of the centre of government, and the GSG would be the “technical arm”.
Source: OECD (forthcoming[12]), Enhancing Policy Coherence and Co-ordination in Romania; Government of Romania, Decision no. 832/2022 regarding the establishment of the duties, organisation and operation of the Chancellery of the Prime Minister.
Alternatively, Romania could consider creating a National Open Government Steering Committee (OGSC) to co-ordinate and oversee the Strategy-process. According to Article 9(1) of the Methodology on Romanian government strategies “depending on the field to be regulated by the draft strategy, interministerial structures may be established” to co-ordinate Strategy implementation (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). As stated by the OECD Report on Enhancing policy coherence and co-ordination in Romania (forthcoming[12]):
Inter-ministerial committees can truly embody the multidimensional nature and resulting importance of for cross-government coordination of the issue at hand, and often seem to be an ideal forum to align policies, facilitate cross-sectoral arbitration and exchange of good practices. The creation of these entities can also signal high level leadership and political will if they are chaired by the Head of Government, or if participation at ministerial level is mandatory.
The OGSC could involve non-public stakeholders and be presided by the Open Government Service. In addition, it could supervise working groups consisting of public institutions and civil society organisations, academic and private sector representatives and focus on the implementation of specific (thematic) areas of the Strategy. As such, the OGSC would become the main co-ordination mechanism for the new, integrated open government approach, co-ordinating all policies and practices that fall under the realm of the concept of open government. Under this model, the OGSC could integrate the existing CNC as a sub-committee.
While such an inter-ministerial committee can bring substantial benefits, its concrete implementation needs to be designed carefully. Inter-ministerial committees sometimes overlap in scope and exist with varying functions, which can prevent a clear and sustainable role in political decision-making (OECD, forthcoming[12]). Further, it can put excessive additional burden upon line ministry staff (Ibid.). Under the GSG’s leadership, it should therefore be ensured that line ministries have the capacity to meaningfully engage during these committee meetings, that there is no substantial overlap between committees covering similar issue areas, and that inter-ministerial committee findings, opinions and decisions are integrated within the broader decision-making process and the Government Meeting (Ibid.). If Romania decides to establish such an inter-ministerial committee, close collaboration with the Prime Minister Chancellery would be pivotal given the PMC’s mandate as a facilitator in inter-ministerial and inter-institutional collaboration (Decision no. 832/2022). Fully co-ordinating with the PMC can therefore be key to ensure effective implementation of the OGSC.
The OGSC could meet twice a year at the Ministerial level and frequently at the level of senior public officials (e.g. Secretaries of State, Directors). The OGSC’s Ministerial meetings would serve to set the agenda and discuss progress in implementing Romania’s Open Government Strategy, while the more regular meetings at the level of senior public officials could have the following tasks (among others):
Ensure co-ordination and alignment between ongoing policies in the areas of transparency, accountability and citizen and stakeholder participation.
Lead the design and implementation of the Open Government Strategy.
Provide direction to and co-ordinating the implementation of Romania’s Open Government Strategy.
Provide a forum for dialogue and exchange of good practices between institutions.
Monitor and evaluate the implementation of the Open Government Strategy and of the OGP Action Plan.
Promote Romania’s open government agenda nationally and internationally; and
Foster the creation of an open government culture in the Romanian public sector.
The creation of the OGSC could be institutionalised through the Government Decision that will adopt the forthcoming National Open Government Strategy (see Chapter 6).
Strengthening mandates and capacities at the level of each public institution
For the Strategy to be effectively implemented by the whole of government, all public institutions need to be involved. Romanian legislation mandates that public institutions at the central level establish people/offices with responsibilities in different fields of open government. The following responsibilities are mandated by law or exist in practice:
OGP process: Since 2018, within each ministry, persons responsible for the implementation of the OGP process both at the at decision-making level (secretary of state, secretary general) and at the technical level have been appointed. In theory, these people should co-ordinate all open government-related activities within their institutions (access to information, open data, participation, Open Government Partnership commitments etc.). However, evidence collected during the OECD fact-finding missions showed that this is rarely the case.
Access to information (see also Chapter 4): Law no. 544/2001 asks each public institution in Romania to establish a dedicated ATI office or to assign the responsibility to designated person(s). In addition, at least one public official needs to be in the role of a spokesperson to ensure access to information of public interest for media representatives (Art. 16 of Law no. 544/2001). For central government institutions, the law prescribes respectively one office in charge of public information and one press relations office (Art. 6, Methodological Norms 2002). The public information office is responsible for receiving, co-ordinating and responding to ATI requests, as well as documenting them. It is also in charge of the public institution’s proactive disclosure of information and of its reporting on access to information (Chapter IV, Methodological norms 2002). The press relations office, on the other hand, is responsible for providing journalists with information of public interest and for facilitating the take-up of information, for example by granting journalists accreditation and inviting them to press briefings (Chapter V, Methodological norms 2002). According to the government’s monitoring, in 2020, all public institutions had dedicated officers or offices in charge of the implementation of Law no. 544/2001 (General Secretariat of the Government, 2021[16]).
Open data: Article 12(4) of the recently adopted Law no. 179/2022 regarding open data and the reuse of public sector information stipulates that “public entities will designate persons responsible for data access and reuse and will develop and implement internal working procedures, dedicated to data collection”.
Participation and relationship with civil society: Law no. 52/2003 mandates the establishment of a person responsible for receiving proposals, suggestions and opinions on draft normative acts prepared by the institution to which he/she belongs and to invite and organise public debates and meetings (art. 7 para. (7) and art. 8 para. (2)) of Law no. 52/2003.
In addition, authorities under the scope of Ordinance no. 26/2000 have to create “structures for the relationship with the associative environment”. Through these structures, they consult with representatives of associations and foundations that operate in their sphere of competence to establish joint programmes or activities (Art. 51; see also Chapter 4). According to an evaluation conducted by the General Secretariat of the Government in 2021 (General Secretariat of the Government, 2021[17]), 73.3% of the institutions that answered had in fact established a person responsible for the relationship with civil society, while 20% had a structure for the relationship with civil society (i.e. more than one person).
Resolutions of petitions: Article 6(1) of Ordinance no. 27/2002 regarding the regulation of the petition settlement activity stipulates that “public authorities and institutions (…) are obliged to organise a separate department for relations with the public, which will receive, register, deal with the petitions and send the answers to the petitioners”. In case the petition is misdirected, the department needs to forward the petition to the competent authority.
The data collected through the OECD Open Government Survey for Romanian Public Institutions confirmed that most public institutions have established institutional responsibilities for different open government-related tasks (Figure 5.2).
However, evidence collected by the OECD and by the General Secretariat of the Government (General Secretariat of the Government, 2021[17]) also shows that, in most public institutions, the number of staff in charge of implementing relevant open government policies and practices is small and those responsible for implementing them often have responsibilities in other areas. The General Secretariat of the Government’s evaluation (General Secretariat of the Government, 2021[17]) finds that human resources need to be increased and that there needs to be a move towards more encompassing structures (i.e. offices) in charge of relevant open government policies (rather than having a single public official deal with them). Moreover, the results of the OECD fact-finding missions showed that relevant offices rarely co-ordinate and that processes are often not mature enough to be sustained independent of personnel.
To streamline responsibilities and as a means to foster the successful implementation of the upcoming Open Government Strategy, Romania could consider creating dedicated Open Government Offices at the level of each individual public institution. Ideally headed by a senior civil servant, the institutional Open Government Offices would bring together the existing people/offices in charge of the OGP process, access to information, open government data, decisional transparency in public administration and relationship with civil society, as well as resolutions of petitions in order to foster synergies between the different areas and ensure a harmonious implementation of the Strategy. The Open Government Offices could be the public institution’s focal point for the implementation of the Strategy. This may include the co-ordination of the public institution’s public policy units responsible for monitoring and evaluation at the level of each institution involved in the strategy (Art. 21, Regulation of 14 July 2005).
In this regard, Spain has created Transparency and Open Government Information Units within all ministries at the central level. These Open Government Offices are representing their Institution in both the Open Government Interministerial Group for the co-ordination of Open Government initiatives in the central government administration, as well as in the Open Government Sector Commission (see Box 5.4).
Given the strong decentralised nature of decision-making in Spain, many open government initiatives are designed and implemented by a variety of actors at both national and subnational levels. This requires two co-ordination mechanisms: one horizontal between Ministries and one vertical between different levels of government.
The Open Government Interministerial Group
The Open Government inter-ministerial group is the primary body for horizontal co-ordination. It is a working group on Open Government initiatives in the General State Administration. Under the co-ordination of the General Director of Public Governance, the Transparency and Open Government Information Units from all Ministries participate. These units are specialised in a variety of functions in the area of transparency and access to information, such as receiving and processing access to information requests and ensuring the availability of the most frequently requested information on the institution’s website. Coming together in this working group plays a paramount role in promoting the commitments included in the Open government Action plan as well as in raising awareness on communication initiatives, such as the Open Government Week.
The Open Government Sector Commission
The Open Government Sector Commission is a space for co-ordination, collaboration and debate between the different public administrations across the level of government. It further serves the exchange of experiences and the development and monitoring of joint initiatives in the field of Open Government. The Sector Commission was established on 6 March 2017, at a meeting held between representatives of the General State Administration, the Autonomous Administrations and Local Entities, through the Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces (FEMP). It is a collegiate body for inter-administrative co-operation of a technical nature, for the establishment of measures, strategies, objectives and guidelines on Open Government, which can submit its proposals to the Public Administration Sector Conference.
Source: Government of Spain (2023), Law no. 19/2013 on transparency, access to information and good governance throughout the General State Administration; Government of Spain (n.d.[18]), “Grupo interministerial de Gobierno Abierto”; Government of Spain (n.d.[19]), “Comisión Sectorial de Gobierno Abierto”.
The successful implementation of an Open Government Strategy requires that a country’s entire public sector moves towards an open government culture and that citizens and non-public stakeholders are empowered, active, and engaged, and have agency and efficacy to take part in decision-making. Accordingly, Provision 3 of the Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (OECD, 2017[5]) invites countries to promote “open government literacy2 in the administration, at all levels of government and among stakeholders”.
The OECD Recommendation on Public Service Leadership and Capability (2019[20]) underlines the importance of investing in public service capability to develop an effective and trusted public service. This can be achieved through the identification of needed skills and competencies, attracting, retaining and recruiting employees that have these required qualifications in a transparent and merit-based system, as well as by developing these required qualifications through a culture of learning in public service (OECD, 2019[20]).
First efforts to foster public officials’ open government literacy have been made by the General Secretariat of the Government and the results of the OECD Survey on Open Government for Romanian Public Institutions show that a large number of responding public institutions have indeed received guidance from the GSG (82% of respondents) or have participated in trainings offered by it (64%) (Figure 5.3).
Nevertheless, public officials and civil society stakeholders in Romania still lack a citizen focus and an “open government culture”. Human resources dedicated to and skills in terms of open government remain limited across the Romanian administration. Public officials mostly implement open government policies and practices because there is a legal obligation to do so. Few public institutions have dared to open beyond the legal requirements, mostly due to the lack of skills and capacities.
To move towards a truly open government culture and enable the implementation of its Open Government Strategy, Romania should put further emphasis on building skills, awareness and knowledge of open government in all parts of the administration and in society.
Streamlining and mainstreaming existing guidelines and toolkits on open government policies and practices
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[2]). According to the results of the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government (OECD, 2021[4]), 33 out of 35 OECD countries (94%) had guidelines on open government data, and 29 OECD countries (83%) had guidelines on citizen and stakeholder participation. Twenty-four OECD countries (69%) had guidelines on reactive disclosure of information, and 23 (66%) on proactive disclosure. However, only nine OECD countries (26%) had guidelines that explicitly focused on the concept of open government (Figure 5.4).
On budget transparency
Having identified the lack of budget transparency in Romania as a persisting problem, this guide addresses NGOs to make them understand what to look out for in the budgeting of Romanian public authorities. At the same time, it can also serve as a tool for public authorities to understand their duties and how to fulfil their obligations better. Besides a section on how to develop an advocacy strategy and how to work with local public authorities, the guide covers the main legislative framework on the topic. Further, it explains step by step the circular process of public budgeting from the preliminary draft budget to the audit report and how to assess its openness through the lenses of transparency, public participation, and budgetary oversight.
On public procurement
This guide follows a very similar approach and structure to Funky Citizen’s guide on budget transparency. It is equally primarily targeting NGOs, including through a dedicated section on advocacy strategies and how to work with local public administrations, but is also useful for public officials who would like to increase their knowledge on the topic. The guide summarises the main elements of the legal framework of public procurement. It then explains how to evaluate the transparency of public procurement going through each step of the process from the initial preparation of documents over the tendering process to the signing of the contract.
Source: Funky Citizens (2020[21]), Budget transparency, https://funky.ong/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Ghid-de-transparenta-in-bugete-Funky-Citizens.pdf; Funky Citizens (2020[22]), Public procurement, https://funky.ong/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Ghid-in-transparenta-achizitiilor-publice-Funky-Citizens.pdf.
The number of guidelines and toolkits in different areas of open government in Romania is impressive. Many of them are of high quality and provide useful recommendations on ways to foster openness. However, evidence collected by the OECD shows that many of the existing guidelines are not widely known and, as a consequence, rarely used. The design of the Open Government Strategy provides an opportunity for Romania to review the existing guiding material and evaluate if it is still adequate. A review could allow discarding of guiding material that is outdated or no longer relevant (due to the adoption of more recent GDs, etc.). In addition, to facilitate accessibility and use, Romania could create a compendium of available resources (which could be based on Table 5.2) and include it in the Open Government Portal.
In addition, the Open Government Strategy could be coupled with the development of a holistic (online) Open Government Toolkit made available free of charge to all public servants. The Toolkit could provide an overview of concrete actions that any public official can take to foster interactions with citizens and increase his/her institution’s openness. Similarly, the Open Government Service could lead to the development of an Open Government Toolkit for citizens, explaining their rights and providing an overview of avenues for collaboration with public institutions.
Providing trainings and capacity-buildings on open government policies and practices
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[23]). According to the 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, 27 out of 35 OECD countries surveyed (77%) provide training on access to information, and 23 (66%) on open government data. Seventeen of the OECD countries (49%) have training on citizen and stakeholder participation. Nine OECD countries (26%) have training on open government as an integrated concept (e.g. explaining what open government means).
Romania is mostly aligned with OECD practice, also offering trainings in some of these areas (Figure 5.5). In particular, the Open Government Service conducts information sessions and trainings in its area of competence (e.g. on the Open Government Partnership, the GSG’s guide on innovation on participation, the use of the RUTI platform and on access to information, the relationship with civil society and the efficiency of the structures intended for this field). In addition, the Ministry of Justice conducts information and training sessions for staff engaged in implementing the National Anticorruption Strategy (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). However, while these trainings are very relevant, the GSG’s resources are limited and insufficient to cater for the whole of the Romanian public administration.
The National Institute for Public Administration (INA), under the authority of the Ministry of Public Works, Development and Administration, is tasked with training the staff of both central and local public administrations (National Institute for Public Administration, 2022[24]). However, the catalogue of the Institute does not include any trainings on open government and citizen participation, and very few trainings on other relevant areas of open government. For example, open data is part of a course on “communication and public relations”. Other courses cover the administrative code and relate to transparency and participation in decision-making (National Institute for Public Administration, 2022[24]).
The GSG’s evaluation from 2021 notes that “specialisation courses or trainings, important elements in ensuring a qualitative activity in the provision of information of public interest, are provided by only 33.3% of the responding institutions, although access to such courses is considered as very useful by 66.7% of them and 33.3% useful” (General Secretariat of the Government, 2021[17]). In a positive step, within Target 407 of the RRP, the GSG will run until 2026 with the support of national experts a series of courses, dedicated both to staff from public institutions and to the associative environment (including unions and employers), that will cover topics such as: increasing administrative capacity and digitising civil society structures, access to information of public interest and decisional transparency in public administration, and implementing the principles of open government (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). Moving forward, Romania could foster co-ordination between the GSG and the National Institute for Public Administration to ensure that trainings on open government policies and practices find their way into core curricula for public officials. As part of the efforts to create an enabling environment for the implementation of the Open Government Strategy, Romania could further consider including a dedicated course on open government in mandatory training requirements for public officials, including for senior public officials. Further efforts could also be made to make resources for trainings and capacity-building activities for public officials more accessible, for example via virtual libraries and Massive Online Open Courses. Good practices from Argentina and Brazil can provide inspiration (Box 5.6).
The Virtual School of Government in Brazil
For civil servants or citizens seeking training in the Brazilian public service, the Virtual School of Government (Escola Virtual de Governo) offers a unified course catalogue from the main government schools and Public Administration training centres. It contains 501 freely accessible courses and structures them into 49 blocks for which a certification can be earned. Certifications in the area of open government include how to operate the +Brasil platform on fiscal government data, simple language, and transformation of the public service towards being more digital, transparent and open, among others. It is an opportunity for public officials to continue their training process independently. Upon successfully completing the set of courses that make up each of the certifications, the public official has access to the certificate with the total workload of the chosen certification and can signal his improved competencies.
MOOCs on Open Government in Argentina
Two courses that are part of Argentina’s Federal Open Government Program are available on Argentina’s Virtual Learning Platform. One of them is the Introduction to the open government approach, which provides a first understanding of the different conceptualisations of open government and the context in which they emerge. The Methodology course for the design of open government projects, on the other hand, offers methodological tools for the preparation of projects, emphasising the stages and elements that must be present in their design to achieve a successful implementation. These courses are open to the entire community, virtual and at any time, so that the participants can manage their schedules at their convenience.
Source: Government of Brazil (n.d.[25]), “Meet the School”, https://www.escolavirtual.gov.br/conheca-a-escola; Government of Argentina (n.d.[26]), “Guía inicial de gobierno abierto”, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/jefatura/innovacion-publica/servicios-y-pais-digital/gobierno-abierto/recursos-utiles.
Romania could further consider creating a single training catalogue that lists all trainings on open government policies and practices that are offered by different public institutions. This training catalogue could be included in the recommended one-stop-shop Open Government Portal (see below). Finally, in order to stimulate more ambitious reforms and provide incentives to public officials and non-public stakeholders to implement the Open Government Strategy, Romania could consider creating an annual Open Government Award. A prize could be awarded to public officials and non-public stakeholders (e.g. citizens, civil society organisations, academics, etc.) that have significantly enhanced the openness of the state through their actions. The Award could be handed out by the GSG and could include recognition of good practices at the subnational level of government and in the other branches of the state, similar to the previously existing Network of Champions in the field of Integrity (Box 5.7). Alternatively, a focus on open government principles could be promoted in the framework of existing competitions, such as the annual competition on best practices in public administration organised by the National Agency for Civil Servants (ANFP, n.d.[27]).
The Ministry for Development, Public Works and Administration (MDLPA) organised in 2019 and 2020 the competition "Network of Champions in the field of integrity". This competition was an opportunity for local public administrations to present their most innovative and impactful initiatives on open government. During its initial round in 2019, 10 out of 29 projects were awarded this title by the evaluation commission consisting of representatives from the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, the General Secretariat of the Government and the National Agency of Civil Servants. Winning projects included the smart city project of Alba Iulia, an interactive map of Arad for citizen reports and the online platform for the participatory budgeting process in Suceava. Together with the other projects, they could be presented at the 2019 “Smart City Expo World Congress”. In the second edition in 2020, 6 out of 25 proposals were distinguished, among them the first “smart” school in the countryside in Ciugud.
Source: Government of Romania (n.d.[28]), REȚEAUA CAMPIONILOR ÎN DOMENIUL INTEGRITĂȚII, https://www.mdlpa.ro/uploads/articole/attachments/5daeee67bd041497028948.doc; Background report.
Romania could further develop dedicated educational resources on open government. These could introduce the concept of open government to citizens in simple language. One example in this regard are the materials provided by Spain for teachers (Box 5.8). Moreover, while trainings for public officials are common practice in OECD countries nowadays, data from the 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government shows that governments make fewer efforts to foster the open government literacy of non-public stakeholders (OECD, forthcoming[2]). For example, only half of OECD countries that responded to the Survey 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. Similarly, in Romania, the government currently does not provide dedicated support to non-public stakeholders to improve their open government literacy (OECD, 2021[4]). Moreover, guidelines and manuals in the area, while also relevant for non-public stakeholders, are primarily addressed by public officials. Civil society organisations’ own efforts to develop resources are scattered and their uptake is limited (see also (OECD, 2023[8])).
In Spain, education in Open Government is a commitment that began in the third OGP National Action Plan 2017-2019. The objective is to develop civic and social skills of pupils, students and teachers, for the future exercise of a more democratic citizenship. The expectation is that the future citizenry will be more committed, will demand more transparent and upright public administrations and will exercise a more responsible, collaborative and participatory civic attitude in public affairs.
The project is aimed at teachers and students of all educational stages and consists of:
Open Government Education Guides: The Open Government Education Guides include theoretical and practical aspects of Open Government. They have been published in collaboration between the National Institute of Educational Technologies and Teacher Training, INTEF (Ministry of Education and Vocational Training) and the General Directorate of Public Governance (Ministry of Territorial Policy and Public Function). The educational guides are also presented in an accessible and easy-to-read mode to ensure that people with reading and/or comprehension difficulties can read and understand them.
Teacher training: The MOOC (massive open online course) of "Education in Open Government" provides fundamental knowledge about Open Government and its pillars: transparency and accountability, public integrity, citizen participation and collaboration. The MOOC videos can be consulted on the INTEF YouTube space. The MOOC is especially recommended for teachers and the main objective is to train them to transfer the principles, experiences and values of Open Government to their students. Its online format allows participants flexibility and to obtain useful resources for putting educational projects into practice in their schools. These training experiences have been organised by the INTEF, in collaboration with the General Directorate of Public Governance, and have been aimed at a broad profile of people interested in education and Open Government.
Educational projects at all school levels: Since 2017, various didactic projects have been developed in educational centres in Spain and abroad.
Source: Government of Spain (n.d.[29]), “Educación en Gobierno Abierto”; Government of Spain (2018[30]), “Educación en Gobierno Abierto (2ª edición)”; YouTube channel (17 December 2022), “MOOC Educación en Gobierno Abierto”, #EduGobAbierto.
Promoting open government policies and practices in public officials’ competency frameworks
In 2017, the OECD Report Skills for a High Performing Civil Service (2017[31]) introduces a framework for skills needed by today’s public officials. One of the four pillars of this framework focuses on service delivery and citizen engagement as “public officials work directly with citizens and users of government services. New skills are required for public officials to effectively engage citizens, crowdsource ideas and co-create better services” (OECD, 2017, p. 9[31]). As OECD data shows, 25 out of 30 OECD countries (83%) allude to central themes of open government in their competency frameworks. Public values/integrity is most commonly present (83%), followed by communication and engagement skills (respectively 73%) (OECD, 2021[4]).
In Romania, the National Agency of Public Servants (ANFP) under the Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration (MDLPA) is the public institution of the central government that is responsible for the management of civil servants. Its tasks include elaborating competency frameworks. It provides assistance to public institutions’ human resources departments to apply the legislation and to monitor and control its application.
In collaboration with the World Bank (National Agency of Civil Servants, n.d.[32]), the ANFP recently established new competency frameworks for different levels of public officials, as well as specialised job profiles (Government of Romania, 2020[33]). The general competency frameworks refer to integrity and citizen orientation under the category of social responsibility. In particular, the competency of citizen orientation presents an essential cornerstone of open government as it asks to take “into account the needs and the interests of citizens”, as well as to “work effectively with citizens, partners and stakeholders”.
The adoption and implementation of the competency frameworks will be essential to entrench a culture that is centred on collaborating with and serving citizens in the Romanian civil service. The competency frameworks should be applied widely, including by using them when hiring new public officials, and when evaluating existing public officials’ performance, thereby making open government values fundamental for career development.
Creating a community of practice on open government to foster informal sharing of information and experiences
Some countries across the OECD, such as Spain, have started creating communities of practice on open government policies to exchange good practices and facilitate the sharing of resources and experiences (OECD, 2022[1]). A community of practice can be defined as a group of people that “share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly" (Lave and Wenger, 1991[34]).
In Romania, the Network of Stewards on OGP/Open Government - composed of the OGP co-ordinators within all ministries – aims to co-ordinate open government activities, maintain dialogue with the GSG, share good practices and challenges and raise awareness and participate in international or regional open government events (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). Further, there exists a network of public officials on open data in ministries. This network is maintained, updated and expanded regularly by the GSG, at both central and local levels, and all members are regularly invited to open data webinars, information sessions or consultations and kept up to date on new developments. There are open data-appointed stewards in all ministries and many agencies from the central level, as well as an increasing number from the local level, many of which are part of this network. At local level, there is also a network of public officials in charge of civil society relations.
In addition, the General Secretariat of the Government created the “OGP Club” to mainstream open government topics across the government. The OGP Club brings together public and non-public stakeholders to discuss open government issues. During 2021-2022, five OGP Clubs were held on topics such as anti-corruption, digitalisation and the need to move towards an open government culture (Government of Romania, 2022[6]). Moreover, the GSG regularly organises working meetings that bring together representatives from government and civil society. For example, over the course of 2021, it organised multiple blocks of meetings concerning two of Romania’s OGP Action Plan commitments on access to information and participation. These were attended by 35-45 institutions each.
As part of the process to implement the Open Government Strategy and in order to create a more permanent platform for learning and dialogue, Romania could build on the existing Network of Stewards and the OGP Club to create a stable community of practice on open government. The community of practice could bring together public officials 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 community could be animated by the GSG through a dedicated online space. In addition to being a platform for dialogue, learning and sharing of good practices, the community could provide GSG 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 (see Box 5.9).
Spain’s Community of Practice on Participation
At the meeting of the Participation Working Group of Spain’s Open Government Forum on 2 March 2021, it was decided to create a community of practice that would take advantage of the experience of all the actors, and of the promoters of the numerous initiatives that are being developed in the country’s fourth Open Government Plan regarding citizen participation in public affairs. The community includes representatives of the three levels of public administrations, civil society (with the presence of organisations with solvency in terms of participation) and some international ones (specifically from Colombia, Mexico, Italy and the participation of the OECD). It has three subject domains: processes of participation, experimentation for the discovery of innovative forms of participation, and platforms including the use of digital tools for implementation. The primary objective of this Community lies in the design and exchange of practical elements and, when possible, the co-creation of experiences that help implement, within the sphere of responsibility of each sector or agency, specific issues to facilitate citizen participation in the scope of its powers. The community is supported by the General Directorate of Public Governance at the central government level.
The Argentina Abierta Forum
Argentina Abierta is an innovative conference convened by the national Government Secretariat of Modernisation that aims to foster the exchange of good practices and encourage discussion on issues related to transparency, accountability, new technologies, public innovation and open data. The conference brings together students, journalists, public officials, entrepreneurs and civil society organisations. The Federal Council for Modernisation and Innovation in Public Management (COFEMOD) participates actively in the meetings. Over the years, Argentina Abierta has won national and international recognition as a platform to foster collaboration across branches of power and levels of government, and it has allowed the national government to involve new actors in the open government agenda.
US OpenGov Community of Practice
The United States Government 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 the government can discuss 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. These type of communities allow for a continuous exchange of information, peer learning, it supports co-ordination and collaboration across government.
Source: https://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/Comunidad-de-Practica-Participacion.html; US General Services Administration (2022), OpenGov Community, https://digital.gov/communities/open-gov/.
Provision 6 of the OECD Recommendation on Open Government stipulates that countries should “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” (OECD, 2017[5]). 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 for policy implementation and service design and delivery. It implies a two-way relationship that allows understanding, listening and responding to citizens (OECD, 2021[35]). Effective public communication remains one of the main challenges that OECD Member and Partner countries face in implementing successful open government reforms (OECD, forthcoming[2]).
Websites and portals are among the most common tools used by OECD Members and Partner countries to communicate about open government reforms3 (OECD, 2022[1]) (OECD, 2021[23]). Most importantly, websites and portals can serve to publicise relevant information and engage with a broad variety of audiences, circumventing possible time or distance constraints (OECD, 2022[1]). Generally, one can differentiate between government-wide portals and institution or policy-specific websites (OECD, 2021[23]). Government-wide portals centralise information and interaction channels across the government. They have the advantage of facilitating the identification of relevant websites and thereby reducing searching costs for information or services. On the other hand, institution or policy-specific portals are more easily adapted to specific circumstances and therefore may have a better fit for the website’s objectives (OECD, 2021[23]).
Over the past years, Romania has established multiple portals and websites on open government policies and practices. The most important government-wide of them at the level of the Romanian national government include:
The government website (https://gov.ro/ro/) introduces the structures, competences and activities of the Prime Minister and her Cabinet. This includes the Prime Minister’s Agenda as well as introductions of all Ministers and strategic documents, such as the Government Programme.
The E-Consultare platform (https://e-consultare.gov.ro), administered by the GSG, contains information on draft normative acts initiated by the public administration and facilitates the sending of proposals directly to the initiating institutions. It also displays information on upcoming public debates, specifying the date, time, location and topic. Users can participate in public consultations, by sending recommendations through a contact form and can subscribe to the weekly newsletter containing the list of the latest draft regulations under public consultation. This portal is further discussed in Chapter 4.
The OGP website (https://ogp.gov.ro/nou/) provides information about Romania’s OGP process and (partly) the government’s wider open government agenda. For example, the website provides access to past and present action plans and IRM-report. It also includes the regulations of Romania’s National Co-ordinating Committee (CNC) and describes its functioning. Interested stakeholders can further access information on the legal framework for open government and explore the OGP local programme.
The Single Register of Transparency of Interests (RUTI) (http://ruti.gov.ro/) was established through the Memorandum for increasing Transparency and Standardizing the display of information of public interest in 2016 and its procedures recently updated through GSG Order no. 1056/2022. RUTI constitutes a catalogue of meetings between decision makers and specialised groups. The platform displays information on legal persons who interact with the institutions of the central public administration and local public administration (prefects, presidents of county councils, mayors). Public officials are encouraged to create an account and publish a record of their meetings with representatives of interest groups (OECD, 2022[36]). While both public officials and civil society stakeholders that were interviewed for this Review were generally positive about the RUTI platform, uptake could be further enhanced. For the moment, RUTI only brings together 633 decision makers and 253 specialised interest groups.
The Catalogue of Non-Governmental Organizations for Evidence, Consultation and Transparency (CONECT) (https://conect.gov.ro/1/) is a tool managed by the General Secretariat of the Government that aims to promote the activities of registered CSOs and help improve their volunteering work. Its targeted users that are members of civil society and officials in public institutions that deal with civil society relations and participation. Overall, this platform aims to be a primary “source of information on active and relevant associations and foundations in Romania”. CSOs can register on the platform by filling in an online form and signing an agreement wherein they permit their data entered on the platform to be made public and to be used by representatives of public authorities at the central and local levels. The website also provides information on pending calls for CSO projects (see also the Civic Space Review of Romania for further information (OECD, 2023[8])).
The national open data portal (https://data.gov.ro/), managed by the General Secretariat of the Government, ensures the co-ordination of the process of opening public data in Romania. The portal constitutes the central access point for open data sets published by Romanian public institutions and the point of contact in the relationship with the pan-European open data portal (europeandataportal.eu). At the time of writing, the portal included more than 3000 data sets from 118 different institutions.
In addition to these whole of government portals, all public institutions now have sections on access to information (Law no. 544/2001) and on participation (Law no. 52/2003) on their own websites. Some institutions also provide electronic forms for the transmission of proposals to improve the normative acts launched in public consultation, extending the advertising channels of public consultations on social networks to encourage citizen participation.
Interviews conducted for this OECD Open Government Review confirmed that citizens and stakeholders sometimes face challenges in identifying the most relevant portal for their particular needs and that the complex interplay between the different portals is not always clear. To simplify the current complex architecture of websites and portals and provide better accessibility, Romania could create an integrated Open Government Portal as a one-stop-shop for all open government-related websites. Such an initiative would not aim to delete or replace any of the existing portals, which already fulfil many important functions. Instead, it would gather all of them – semantically and structurally – under a coherent open government narrative that is aligned with the integrated open government agenda that the Open Government Strategy will promote. The creation of an Open Government Portal could also provide an opportunity to implement recommended actions, such as the establishment of a single access point for access to information requests and the tracking of submitted requests (see Chapter 4).
The current transformation of the E-consultare platform already points in the direction of an Open Government Portal and this dynamic could be exploited further. In the medium term, E-consultare could become the central platform to also exercise the right of access to information and the right to petition, thereby making it the first central-level platform integrating all essential open government areas in one place. This Open Government Portal could help in mapping and navigating to other, already existing central portals in related areas, such as RUTI on lobbying activities and SEAP on public procurement.
The Government of Canada’s website on open government provides content about a wide range of open government topics in an easily accessible manner. The start page is divided into three sections. The first section allows users to directly search for data and information that has been disclosed either proactively or as a result of an Access to Information request. Alternatively, resources on how to request information and background material on this topic can be consulted. The second section contains four themes which structure open government content:
About Open Government: Canada’s involvement in the OGP process, open government initiatives across Canada, FAQs on open government, the Open Government Licence, and other background material:
Open data: Open government data in the open data portal, instructions on their use, helpful tools and inspirational use cases;
Open information: Information from digital government records in the open information portal, request summaries of access to information requests, grouped information on government expenditure, public procurement, regulatory plans, government service performance and others;
Open dialogue: Participation in government decision-making, principles and guidelines for engagement, consultation data, space for interaction with other actors from the open government community in the Public Engagement Community of Practice
The third section at the bottom of the page features the latest news on everything related to open government.
Source: OECD (2022[1]), Open Government Review of Brazil: Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda; Government of Canada (2022[37]) Open Government website, https://open.canada.ca/en.
The design and implementation of Romania’s first Open Government Strategy will put the country’s open government agenda on a new level and contribute to further integrating policies and practices in different areas of open government under one holistic umbrella. Assessing Romania against Provisions 3, 4 and 6 of the OECD Recommendation on Open Government, it finds that Romania possesses already has relevant governance structures for open government in place. However, for the Strategy not to remain “on paper”, some reforms to the existing governance frameworks for open government in Romania may be warranted.
In particular, the current clustering of competences under the General Secretariat of Government presents a unique opportunity to establish the GSG as the central actor of an Open Government Strategy. The Open Government Service would need to be empowered through a corresponding mandate and sufficient resources that reflect its expanded responsibilities. To ensure successful implementation of the Strategy, co-ordination mechanisms across government and including non-public stakeholders need to be strengthened beyond the existing National Coordination Committee on Open Government. While there exists an impressive number of guidelines, more trainings across the whole of the government would be needed to improve open government literacy, in particular regarding participatory processes. To make full use of digital technologies for increased impact of the Strategy, an Open Government Portal that enhances and combines the various existing portals can improve the communication with citizens and civil society. The recommendations made in this chapter assist Romania in building a comprehensive open government ecosystem that can support the implementation of the nation's first all-encompassing open government strategy.
1. Empower the Open Government Directorate of the General Secretariat of the Government.
Transform the Open Government Directorate into a Centre of Expertise on Open Government that promotes an open government culture across the whole national government and provides support and advice to public institutions at all levels in the implementation of different kinds of open government initiatives
Provide the Directorate with increased human, technical and financial resources to successfully fulfil its new role, including the co-ordination of the Strategy-process.
Attach the Open Government Service directly to a Secretary of State to secure high-level political commitment and accountability for open government reforms.
2. Improve the co-ordination and mainstreaming of open government policies and practices across the whole state.
Extend the National Coordination Committee’s (CNC) portfolio and use it to co-create, co-ordinate and monitor and evaluate the forthcoming Open Government Strategy or establish a new National Open Government Steering Committee for the same purpose and integrate the existing CNC as a sub-committee to continue co-ordinating the OGP process.
Enlarge the participation of different types of stakeholders (both public and non-public) in co-ordination mechanisms and increase the level of representation from the highest level of government, including by collaborating closely with the Chancellery of the Prime Minister.
3. Create dedicated Open Government Offices at the level of each individual public institution that bring together the existing people/offices in charge of the OGP process, access to information, open government data, decisional transparency in public administration and relationship with civil society, as well as resolutions of petitions in order to foster synergies across topics.
4. Increase the effectiveness of guiding material on open government topics.
Review existing guiding material and create a compendium of available resources, for example in an envisaged Open Government Portal.
Develop a holistic (online) Open Government Toolkit made available to all public servants.
Develop an Open Government Toolkit for citizens, explaining their rights and providing an overview of avenues for collaboration with public institutions.
5. Extend and streamline trainings on open government.
In collaboration with the National Institute for Public Administration, develop an integrated course on open government policies and practices and consider making it a mandatory training requirement for public officials, including for senior public officials.
Enhance the free and easy access to trainings on open government by providing them, for example, in a virtual library or in the format of Massive Online Open Courses, like in Brazil.
Create a single training catalogue that lists all trainings on open government policies and practices that are offered by different public institutions.
6. Establish an annual Open Government Award to reward public officials and non-public stakeholders (e.g. citizens, civil society organisations, academics, etc.) that have significantly enhanced the openness of the state through their actions.
7. Continue the application of the recently adopted competency frameworks for public officials to make open government values fundamental for career development and entrench a culture of open government in the public sector.
8. Build on the existing Network of Stewards and the OGP Club to create a stable community of practice on open government that brings together public officials 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
9. Create an integrated Open Government Portal as a one-stop-shop for all open government-related websites (see also Chapter 4). The Open Government Portal could gather all current websites on topics of open government (e.g. the Transparency of Interests Register (RUTI)) – semantically and structurally – under a coherent open government narrative that is aligned with the forthcoming Open Government Strategy.
References
[27] ANFP (n.d.), Best practices competition, https://www.anfp.gov.ro/continut/Competitie_bune_practici (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[21] Funky Citizens (2020), Budget transparency, https://funky.ong/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Ghid-de-transparenta-in-bugete-Funky-Citizens.pdf.
[22] Funky Citizens (2020), Public procurement, https://funky.ong/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Ghid-in-transparenta-achizitiilor-publice-Funky-Citizens.pdf.
[15] General Secretariat of the Government (2022), Ordinance to approve the Regulation of the Organisation and Operation of the General Secretariat of the Government, https://sgg.gov.ro/1/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Anexa-ROF-OSGG-1017-din-2022-.pdf.
[17] General Secretariat of the Government (2021), Analysis on the Evaluation of Central and Local Public Administration Practices in the Decision-making Process and Ensuring Access to Information of Public Interest, https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=http://ogp.gov.ro/nou/wp-content/uploads/psp/Analiza-privind-evaluarea-practicilor-administratiei-publice_V30.06.2021.pdf&hl=en (accessed on 16 June 2022).
[16] General Secretariat of the Government (2021), Synthesis of the annual reports on the implementation by the authorities and institutions of the central and local public administration of the legislation on free access to information of public interest in 2020, https://sgg.gov.ro/1/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Sinteza-rapoartelor-anuale-privind-implementarea-de-catre-autoritati-si-institutii-ale-administratiei-publice-centrale-si-locale-a-legislatiei-privind-liberul-acces-la-informatii-de-interes-public-in.pdf.
[9] General Secretariat of the Government (n.d.), Organigramme of the General Secretariat of the Government, https://sgg.gov.ro/1/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Structura-organizatorica-a-SGG.pdf (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[7] General Secretariat of the Government (n.d.), Synopsis of the relationship between the Government of Romania and the associative environment, https://sgg.gov.ro/1/despre-serviciul-politici-de-cooperare-cu-mediul-asociativ/ (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[26] Government of Argentina (n.d.), “Guía inicial de gobierno abierto”, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/jefatura/innovacion-publica/servicios-y-pais-digital/gobierno-abierto/recursos-utiles (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[25] Government of Brazil (n.d.), “Meet the School”, National School of Public Administration – Enap, https://www.escolavirtual.gov.br/conheca-a-escola# (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[37] Government of Canada (2022), Open Government website, https://open.canada.ca/en (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[6] Government of Romania (2022), Background Report prepared for the OECD Open Government Review of Romania.
[33] Government of Romania (2020), Deliverable 3.2 - Proposal for the Competence Framework, http://www.anfp.gov.ro/R/Doc/2021/Proiecte/SIPOCA%20136/Output-uri/3.2%20Competency%20frameworkRO%20CNCISCAP.pdf.
[14] Government of Romania (2020), OGP National Steering Committee - of the implementation of the Open Government Partnership in Romania, https://conect.gov.ro/1/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Comitetul-National-de-Coordonare-OGP.pdf.
[28] Government of Romania (n.d.), REȚEAUA CAMPIONILOR ÎN DOMENIUL INTEGRITĂȚII, https://www.mdlpa.ro/uploads/articole/attachments/5daeee67bd041497028948.doc (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[30] Government of Spain (2018), “Educación en Gobierno Abierto (2ª edición)”, https://enlinea.intef.es/courses/course-v1:INTEF+EduGobAbierto+2018_ED2/about (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[19] Government of Spain (n.d.), “Comisión Sectorial de Gobierno Abierto”, https://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/comision-sectorialGA.html (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[29] Government of Spain (n.d.), “Educación en Gobierno Abierto”, https://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/sensibilizacion-formacion/EduGobAbierto.html (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[18] Government of Spain (n.d.), “Grupo interministerial de Gobierno Abierto”, https://transparencia.gob.es/transparencia/transparencia_Home/index/Gobierno-abierto/grupo-interministerialGA.html (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[34] Lave, J. and E. Wenger (1991), Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355.
[32] National Agency of Civil Servants (n.d.), Development of a unitary management system of human resources in the public administration, http://www.anfp.gov.ro/continut/SIPOCA136 (accessed on 13 November 2022).
[24] National Institute for Public Administration (2022), Introduction, https://ina.gov.ro/introduction/.
[8] OECD (2023), Civic Space Review of Romania, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f11191be-en.
[36] OECD (2022), Evaluation of the Romanian National Anti-corruption Strategy 2016-2020, OECD, Paris, https://search.oecd.org/gov/ethics/evaluation-romanian-national-anti-corruption-strategy-2016-2020.pdf.
[1] OECD (2022), Open Government Review of Brazil: Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f9009d4-en.
[10] OECD (2022), Open Government Scan of Canada, Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris.
[4] OECD (2021), 2020 OECD Survey on Open Government.
[23] OECD (2021), Government at a Glance 2021, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1c258f55-en.
[35] OECD (2021), OECD Report on Public Communication: The Global Context and the Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22f8031c-en.
[3] OECD (2020), A Roadmap for Assessing the Impact of Open Government Reform, Paper presented to the OECD Working Party on Open Government, GOV/PGC/OG(2020)5.
[11] OECD (2020), Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance: Baseline Features of Governments that Work Well, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c03e01b3-en.
[20] OECD (2019), “Recommendation of the Council on Public Service Leadership and Capability”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0445, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0445.
[5] OECD (2017), “Recommendation of the Council on Open Government”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0438, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[31] OECD (2017), Skills for a High Performing Civil Service, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264280724-en.
[12] OECD (forthcoming), Enhancing policy coherence and coordination in Romania.
[2] OECD (forthcoming), Monitoring Report on the Implementation of the 2017 OECD Recommendation on Open Government.
[13] OGP IRM (2022), Independent Reporting Mechanism Action Plan Review: Romania 2020–2022, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Romania_Action-Plan-Review_2020-2022_EN.pdf.
General Secretariat of the Government (2022), “Order no. 1 056/2022”, OFFICIAL MONITOR no. 948 of September 28, 2022, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/259719.
Government of Romania (2022), “Decision no. 1 465/2022”, OFFICIAL MONITOR no. 1 193 of December 12, 2022, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocumentAfis/262403.
Government of Romania (2022), “Decision no. 832/2022 regarding the establishment of the duties, organization and operation of the Chancellery of the Prime Minister”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/256873.
Government of Romania (2021), “Decision no. 1/2021 on the National Steering Committee of the Partnership for Open Government in Romania, https://ogp.gov.ro/nou/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/ROF-CNC_versiune-finala.pdf.
Government of Romania (2020), “Decision no. 137/2020 on the organisation, functioning and attributions of the GSG”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/223115.
Government of Romania (2005), “Regulation of July 14, 2005, regarding the procedures for the development, monitoring and evaluation of public policies at the central level updated as of July 28, 2016”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocumentAfis/180532.
Government of Romania (2002), “Ordinance no. 27/2002 regarding the regulation of the petition settlement activity”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/33817.
Government of Romania (2000), “Ordinance no. 26/2000 regarding associations and foundations”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/20740.
Parliament of Romania (2022), “Law no. 179/2022 on open data and re-use of public sector information”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/256414.
Parliament of Romania (2007), “Law no. 109/2007 on the re-use of public sector information”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/81689.
Parliament of Romania (2005), “Law no. 350/2005 regarding the regime of non-refundable financing from public funds allocated for non-profit activities of general interest”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/66812.
Parliament of Romania (2003), “Law no. 52/2003 on Decisional Transparency in Public Administration”, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/41571.
Notes
← 1. Public stakeholders: General Secretariat of the Government; Ministry of Culture; Ministry of Energy; Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration; The National Agency for the Administration of Undisposed Assets; National Agency for Natural Protected Areas; National Agency for Equal Opportunities for Women and Men.
Members present from civil society: Romanian Quantitative Studies Association; Foundation for the Development of Civil Society; Expert Forum; Smart City Timisoara Association; CIVICA Iași Association.
← 2. The Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (OECD, 2017[5]) 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.”
← 3. Recognising that public communication is a wide field, this section focuses only on the use of portals and websites as communication tools.