Palavras-chave:
Governo Aberto
Políticas Públicas
transparência
Participação Cidadã
Colaboração

  • Resumo

    O estudo tem como objetivo analisar o Governo Aberto (GA) a partir de uma perspectiva instrumental, entendendo-o como um mecanismo capaz de orientar políticas públicas por meio de seus princípios de transparência, participação e colaboração. Trata-se de um ensaio teórico, fundamentado em revisão de literatura que discutisse, de forma conceitual ou empírica, o GA e sua dimensão instrumental aplicada a políticas públicas. O referencial teórico engloba a origem, evolução, alinhamento teórico-conceitual, tendências e desafios do GA. Os resultados indicam a existência de diferentes modelos de adoção do GA, evidenciando tanto políticas voltadas para a promoção de maior abertura governamental quanto ações que incorporam seus princípios na construção de soluções públicas. A distinção entre essas abordagens ressalta a importância de indicadores capazes de avaliar o impacto efetivo do GA em diversos contextos institucionais e culturais. Conclui-se que o desenvolvimento desses indicadores e a análise de casos concretos podem fortalecer a compreensão sobre o GA e ampliar sua efetividade, contribuindo para a consolidação de um Estado efetivamente aberto.

  • Referências

    1. Ben-Aaron, J., Denny, M., Desmarais, B., & Wallach, H. (2017). Transparency by Conformity: A Field Experiment Evaluating Openness in Local Governments. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12596
    2. Blasio, E. de, & Sorice, M. (2016). Open Government: A Tool for Democracy? Medijske Studije, 7(14), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.20901/ms.7.14.3
    3. Calderón, C. (2012). Por qué un Gobierno Abierto. In G. Concha & A. Naser (Eds.), El desafío hacia el gobierno abierto en la hora de la igualdad (pp. 27–47). Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Clarke, A., & Francoli, M. (2014). What’s in a name? A comparison of “open government” definitions across seven Open Government Partnership members. JeDEM - EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 6(1), 248–266. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.15.2943
    5. Cruz-Rubio, C. N. (2015). ¿Qué es (y que no es) gobierno abierto? Una discusión conceptual. Eunomía. Revista En Cultura de La Legalidad, marzo-agos(8), 37–53.
    6. Cucciniello, M., Porumbescu, G. A., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2017). 25 Years of Transparency Research: Evidence and Future Directions. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12685
    7. Cuninghame, W. (1811). Principles of the Constitution of Governments. In James Ridgway. James Ridgway.
    8. Dawes, S. S. (2010). Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 377–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.07.001
    9. Open Government Directive, 1 (2009). https://doi.org/02/12/2018
    10. García, J. G. (2014). Gobierno abierto: transparencia, participación y colaboración en las Administraciones Públicas. Innovar, 24(54), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v24n54.46441
    11. Gascó, M. (2015). Special Issue on Open Government: An Introduction. Social Science Computer Review, 33(5), 535–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314560676
    12. Gavelin, K., Burall, S., & Wilson, R. (2009). Open government: beyond static measures. Involve, July, 1–35.
    13. Hansson, K., Belkacem, K., & Ekenberg, L. (2014). Open Government and Democracy: A Research Review. Social Science Computer Review, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314560847
    14. Hernández, M. G. (2013). No es oro todo lo que reluce: ¿qué hay detrás de las promesas de gobierno abierto en Iberoamérica? XVIII Congreso Internacional Del CLAD Sobre La Reforma Del Estado y de La Administración Pública, 15.
    15. Ingersoll, C. (1875). Fears for democracy regarded from the American point of view. J. B. Lippincott & CO.
    16. Ingrams, A. (2016). Assessing Open Government Performance through Three Public Administration Perspectives : Efficiency, Democratic Responsiveness, and Legal-rational Process. Chinese Public Administration Review, 7(1), 110–145.
    17. Ingrams, A. (2017). The transparency performance puzzle: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis of policy failure in open government initiatives. Information Polity, 22, 25–39. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-160014
    18. Ingrams, A. (2018). Transparency for Results: Testing a Model of Performance Management in Open Government Initiatives. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(13), 1033–1046. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1318400
    19. Lee, G., & Kwak, Y. H. (2012). An Open Government Maturity Model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 492–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.001
    20. Marino, P. de B. L. P., Sucupira, G. I. C. S., Siqueira, W. R. de, & Bermejo, P. H. de S. (2017). Public Transparency in the Brazilian Context: An Integrative Review. In M. Themistocleous & V. Morabito (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing (Vol. 299, pp. 261–274). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65930-5_22
    21. Mendoza, R. E. V. (2013). El federalismo cooperativo como factor catalizador de un Gobierno Abierto. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 58(219), 19–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0185-1918(13)72302-X
    22. Nam, T. (2012). Citizens’ attitudes toward Open Government and Government 2.0. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(2), 346–368. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852312438783
    23. Nam, T. (2015). Challenges and Concerns of Open Government: A Case of Government 3.0 in Korea. Social Science Computer Review, 33(5), 556–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314560848
    24. O’Reilly, T. (2010). Government as a Platform. In D. Lathrop & L. Ruma (Eds.), Open Government: Collaboration, Transparency, and Participation in Practice (Issue 1, pp. 11–42). O’Reilly.
    25. O’Toole, L. J. J. (1997). Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and Research-Based Agendas in Public Administration. Public Administration Review, 57(1), 45–52.
    26. OECD. (2016). Open Government: The Global Context and the Way Forward. In OECD Publishing.
    27. OECD. (2017). Recommendation of the Council on Open Government. (Issue December).
    28. Open Government Partnership. (2011). Open Government Declaration.
    29. Open Government Partnership. (2016). How about defining Open Government principles?
    30. Open Government Partnership. (2018). What is the Open Government Partnership?
    31. Parks, W. (1957). The open government principle: applying the right to know under the constitution. The George Washington Law Review, 26(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2011.0005
    32. Parycek, P., & Sachs, M. (2010). Open Government – Information Flow in Web 2.0. European Journal of EPractice, 9(March), 57–68.
    33. Piotrowski, S. J. (2016). The “ Open Government Reform ” Movement : The Case of the Open Government Partnership and U. S. Transparency Policies. American Review of Public Administration, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016676575
    34. Piotrowski, S. J., & Rosenbloom, D. H. (2002). Nonmission-Based Values in Results-Oriented Public Management: The Case of Freedom of Information. Public Administration Review, 62(6), 643–657.
    35. Piotrowski, S., Rosenbloom, D. H., Kang, S., & Ingrams, A. (2018). Levels of Value Integration in Federal Agencies’ Mission and Value Statements: Is Open Government a Performance Target of U.S. Federal Agencies? Public Administration Review, 00(00), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12937.Levels
    36. The White House. (2009). Transparency and Open Government. In Federal Register (Vol. 74, Issue 15, pp. 4685–4686).
    37. Veljković, N., Bogdanović-Dinić, S., & Stoimenov, L. (2014). Benchmarking open government: An open data perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 31(2), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.011
    38. Wirtz, B. W., & Birkmeyer, S. (2015). Open Government: Origin, Development, and Conceptual Perspectives. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(5), 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.942735
    39. Yang, K., & Holzer, M. (2006). The performance-trust link: implications for performance measurement. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 114–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00560.x
    40. Yu, H., & Robinson, D. G. (2012). The New Ambiguity of “Open Government.” UCLA Law Review Discourse, 59, 178–208.
Creative Commons License

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2025 Derecho y Cambio Social

Como citar

Siqueira, W. R. de, Sucupira, G. I. C. S., Freitas, L. S. de, Silva, J. R. da, Filho, W. K. S., Júnior, E. B., & Costa, V. G. da. (2025). POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS PARA GOVERNO ABERTO OU POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS ABERTAS: UMA META A SER ALCANÇADA OU UM MECANISMO DE (RE)ORIENTAR AS AÇÕES PÚBLICAS!. Derecho Y Cambio Social, 22(79). https://doi.org/10.54899/dcs.v22i79.104
  • Artigo visto - 63
  • PDF baixado - 24