copy the linklink copied!8.3. Data accessibility: Open, free and accessible formats

For government data to be accessible, they must be made available free of charge and without any barriers that may restrict their access and re-use. Governments can create frameworks with standards on data formats and publication procedures for greater accessibility and quality. Open licenses allow the reuse and redistribution of government data, but to benefit from them, data must be easy to process and use by both humans and machines. Furthermore, creating channels to access open government data (OGD) and interact with government institutions enhances data accessibility by allowing citizens to report issues or provide suggestions, and promote collaboration, thus enabling the government as a platform.

Central open data portals can help in providing a single point of access to open government data (e.g. through data federation or harvesting), thus reducing fragmentation. According to the survey results, with the exception of the Bahamas, Dominica and Honduras, all LAC countries have established central OGD portals. Around half of the governments with accessible portals include a user feedback section but only three countries (Colombia, Paraguay and Uruguay) display users’ comments. By contrast, 47% of OECD countries display such comments.

In terms of the format in which data can be accessed, 62% of countries including Costa Rica, Dominican Republic and Guatemala always provide data in machine-readable format; another 62% including Argentina, Brazil and Chile provide the associated metadata. Fewer countries (six out of 16 LAC countries) always include visualisation tools, while only one out of 32 OECD countries do so. The most popular datasets in Mexico include census data and surveys on housing and agriculture, and economic indicators; while in Uruguay, the most downloaded dataset are bus timetables. This shows the wide range of purposes for OGD, which range from making informed decisions to conducting academic research.

Pillar 2 of the OURdata Index on Accessibility of government data has three sub-pillars: content of unrestricted access to data policy, stakeholder engagement for data quality and completeness, and implementation, each scoring a maximum of 0.33 points. The LAC average for 2019 is 0.55, compared to 0.70 for the OECD. These results signal that countries could share more high-value datasets and enhance their accessibility. LAC countries need to make more effort in stakeholder engagement where they averaged 0.08, compared to an OECD average of 0.14.

Colombia is the LAC country with the highest overall score, obtaining the highest score (0.33) in content of the access to data policy. It also obtained a high score in implementation (0.32) and in stakeholder engagement (0.30). Colombia’s success is driven by the Ministry of Information Technologies and Communications’ strong efforts to plan and implement a digital strategy nationwide.

Uruguay scored 0.33 in implementation, and 0.32 in content of the access to data policy. It performs better than the LAC average in stakeholder engagement (0.23), yet more efforts could be made to collect and publish usage statistics, and to foster the interaction among users through the portal. Chile and Mexico obtained 0.33 in content of the access to data policy, and performed well on implementation (0.26 and 0.28 respectively), but fared poorly in stakeholder engagement.

copy the linklink copied!
Methodology and definitions

Data accessibility measures the extent to which government data are provided in open and re-usable formats, with their associated metadata. The indicator covers primarily principles 3 “Accessible and usable” and 4 “Comparable and interoperable” of the International Open Data Charter. It consists of the three sub-indicators: content of the free and open access to data policy; stakeholder engagement for data quality and completeness; and implementation. The three sub-pillars have an equal weight and each ranges from 0 to 0.33. Hence, the indicator ranges from 0 (minimum) to 1 (maximum). When aggregating to the final OURData Index, the data accessibility score is transformed to a range from 0 to 0.33 and with this, it is assigned an equal weight as the other two indicators. The composite OURdata Index is based on the OECD analytical methodology described by Lafortune and Ubaldi (2018), which also maps the principles of the International Open Data Charter.

Data for the OURdata Index and for the data accessibility indicator for the region were collected from the OECD Open Government Data Survey in collaboration with the IDB. Survey respondents were predominantly senior government department officials in charge of digital or open government policies. Responses represent countries’ own assessment of current practices and procedures regarding data availability. Data refer only to central/federal governments and exclude practices at the state/local level.

For more information on the methodology and underlying data, see Annex D.

Further reading

Muente, A. and F. Serale (2018), Los datos abiertos en América Latina y el Caribe, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.18235/0001202

Figure notes

Data for Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Mexico were collected through the 2018 OECD Open Government Data Survey. Honduras established a central OGD portal in mid-2019, after the survey was conducted. In Brazil, since July 2019, the office of the comptroller general is responsible for OGD policies, and therefore, there have been some changes in implementation.

copy the linklink copied!
8.6. Central data portals, 2019

Country

Existence of central one-stop shop portal

Features…

Data are provided…

User feedback section

User feedback visible

In machine readable format

With data visualisation tool

With associated metadata

Argentina

🞖

Bahamas

Brazil

🞖

Chile

Colombia

Costa Rica

Dominica

Dominican Republic

Ecuador

El Salvador

🞖

Guatemala

🞖

Honduras

Mexico

🞖

Panama

🞖

🞖

Paraguay

🞖

🞖

Uruguay

LAC total

 

 

 

 

 

 

● Yes / ■ All

13

7

3

8

6

8

🞖 Most

 

 

 

5

0

4

▣ Some

 

 

 

0

5

1

❍ No/ □ None

3

6

6

0

2

0

OECD total

 

 

 

 

 

 

● Yes / ■ All

32

29

15

8

1

21

🞖 Most

 

 

 

21

2

7

▣ Some

 

 

 

3

22

4

❍ No / □ None

0

3

17

0

7

0

Source: OECD -IDB (2019), “Open Government Data Survey”, OECD (2018) “Open Government Data Survey.

 StatLink https://doi.org/10.1787/888934092835

copy the linklink copied!
8.7. Data accessibility, 2019
8.7. Data accessibility, 2019

Source: OECD - IDB (2019), “Open Government Data Survey”, OECD (2018) “Open Government Data Survey”.

 StatLink https://doi.org/10.1787/888934092854

Metadata, Legal and Rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

https://doi.org/10.1787/13130fbb-en

© OECD 2020

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at http://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.