Open Data; e-Government; Data Quality; Multi-Criteria Decision Making; Analytic Hierarchy Process; Information Quality
Résumé :
[en] During recent years, more and more Open Data becomes available and used as part of the Open Data movement. However, there are reported issues with the quality of the metadata in data portals and the data itself. This is a seri- ous risk that could disrupt the Open Data project, as well as e-government initiatives since the data quality needs to be managed to guarantee the reliability of e-government to the public. First quality assessment frameworks emerge to eval- uate the quality for a given dataset or portal along various dimensions (e.g., information completeness). Nonetheless, a common problem with such frameworks is to provide mean- ingful ranking mechanisms that are able to integrate sev- eral quality dimensions and user preferences (e.g., a portal provider is likely to have different quality preferences than a portal consumer). To address this multi-criteria decision making problem, our research work applies AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), which compares 146 active Open Data portals across 44 countries, powered by the CKAN software.
Disciplines :
Sciences informatiques
Auteur, co-auteur :
KUBLER, Sylvain ; University of Luxembourg > Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust (SNT)
ROBERT, Jérémy ; University of Luxembourg > Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust (SNT)
LE TRAON, Yves ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Science, Technology and Communication (FSTC) > Computer Science and Communications Research Unit (CSC)
Umbrich, Jürgen; Vienna University of Economics and Business > Institute for Information Business > Dr.
Neumaier, Sebastian; Vienna University of Economics and Business > Institute for Information Business > Dr.
Co-auteurs externes :
yes
Langue du document :
Anglais
Titre :
Open Data Portal Quality Comparison using AHP
Titre traduit :
[en] Comparison de la Qualité des Open Data portails utilisant AHP
Date de publication/diffusion :
07 juin 2016
Nom de la manifestation :
17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research
Lieu de la manifestation :
Shanghai, Chine
Date de la manifestation :
from 08-06-2016 to 10-06-2016
Manifestation à portée :
International
Titre de l'ouvrage principal :
Proceedings of the 17th International Digital Government Research Conference on Digital Government Research
J. Attard, F. Orlandi, S. Scerri, and S. Auer. A systematic review of open government data initiatives. Government Information Quarterly, 32(4):399-418, 2015.
C. Batini, C. Cappiello, C. Francalanci, and A. Maurino. Methodologies for data quality assessment and improvement. ACM Computing Surveys, 41(3):1-52, 2009.
B. Behkamal, M. Kahani, E. Bagheri, and Z. Jeremic. A metrics-driven approach for quality assessment of linked open data. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 9(2):64-79, 2014.
A. L. Blumenthal. The process of cognition. Prentice Hall/Pearson Education, 1977.
J.-G. Cegarra-Navarro, A. Garcia-Perez, and J. L. Moreno-Cegarra. Technology knowledge and governance: Empowering citizen engagement and participation. Government Information Quarterly, 31:660-668, 2014.
P. Conradie and S. Choenni. On the barriers for local government releasing open data. Government Information Quarterly, 31:S10-S17, 2014.
J. Figueira, S. Greco, and M. Ehrgott. Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer Science & Business Media, 2005.
K. Främling, S. Kubler, and A. Buda. Universal messaging standards for the iot from a lifecycle management perspective. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 1(4):319-327, 2014.
M. B. Gurstein. Open data: Empowering the empowered or effective data use for everyone? First Monday, 16(2), 2011.
Y. Jarrar, G. Schiuma, and F. Salem. Benchmarking the e-government bulldozer: Beyond measuring the tread marks. Measuring business excellence, 11(4):9-22, 2007.
S. Kubler, A. Voisin, W. Derigent, A. Thomas, E. Rondeau, and K. Främling. Group fuzzy ahp approach to embed relevant data on "communicating material". Computers in Industry, 65(4):675-692, 2014.
J. Kǔcera, D. Chlapek, and M. Něcasky. Open government data catalogs: Current approaches and quality perspective. In Springer, editor, Technology-Enabled Innovation for Democracy, Government and Governance, pages 152-166, 2013.
A. Mardani, A. Jusoh, and E. K. Zavadskas. Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications-Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(8):4126-4148, 2015.
A. Molnar, M. Janssen, and V. Weerakkody. e-government theories and challenges: findings from a plenary expert panel. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, 2015.
J. L. Mumpower, L. D. Phillips, O. Renn, and V. R. R. Uppuluri. Expert Judgment and Expert Systems, volume 35. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
K. J. Reiche, E. Höfig, and I. Schieferdecker. Assessment and visualization of metadata quality for open government data. In Conference for E-Democracy and Open Governement, 2014.
T. L. Saaty. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
T. L. Saaty. Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process, volume 4922. RWS publications Pittsburgh, 1996.
J. Umbrich, S. Neumaier, and A. Polleres. Quality assessment & evolution of open data portals. In 3rd International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud, pages 404-411, Roma, Italy, 2015.
A. Zuiderwijk and M. Janssen. The negative effects of open government data-investigating the dark side of open data. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, pages 147-152, 2014.
A. Zuiderwijk, M. Janssen, K. Poulis, and G. van de Kaa. Open data for competitive advantage: insights from open data use by companies. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, 2015.
