The Global Anti-Corruption Summit in London this past May was an opportunity to make real progress on fighting corruption, building on the momentum of the Panama Papers that put the issue high on the public agenda. At the Web Foundation, we believe that open data and the open Web are key tools for increasing transparency. We attended the civil society day and supported a number of initiatives to drive home this point to global leaders.
Following the event, we analysed the country statements of the over 40 countries making commitments at the summit. We wanted to know how many truly committed to our three key open data asks. Our analysis is based primarily on the country statements, taking into consideration some prior country commitments that may not have been mentioned in the statements. We welcome feedback and new information on these categorisations where we may have missed an existing commitment not mentioned in the communiques – please do leave a comment or tweet at us.
- Adoption of the Open Data Charter
The international Open Data Charter provides a common foundation for governments to realise the full potential of open data by implementing six principles. The benefits of open government data are many, from stimulating innovation to increasing transparency to creating efficiencies in how public money is spent.
The summit communique endorsed by attendees recognised the value of global open data principles and pointed to the Open Data Charter – a very welcome step forward. Yet the majority of countries still failed to even mention open data in their country statements, let alone the Charter. This reflects our worrying finding in our latest Open Data Barometer that only six of the 92 countries studied have an explicit policy commitment to make government data open by default. This needs to change. If we are to combat corruption, we need governments to see opening up their data as a key part of that mission. The Charter can provide a community of expertise to help.
| Countries committed to the Open Data Charter | Countries exploring the Open Data Charter | No mention of the Charter, but mention open data | No mention of open data in country statement |
|---|---|---|---|
| France Georgia Italy Mexico Nigeria Russia South Korea* United Kingdom | Afghanistan Norway Indonesia** | Australia Bulgaria Colombia Germany Ghana*** Netherlands*** New Zealand*** Romania*** Tunisia Ukraine United States | Argentina Brazil Canada China India Ireland Japan Jordan Kenya Malta Senegal South Africa Singapore Spain Sri Lanka Switzerland Tanzania Trinidad & Tobago Turkey UAE |
*Note: South Korea did not mention the Charter in its statement, but it is a full adopter of the Charter already.
**Note: statement says Indonesia is committing to the G20 open data principles, which are based on the Charter principles, although there is no explicit mention of the Charter in this particular statement.
*** Note: have not mentioned “open data” explicitly, but have committed to the OCDS
- Adoption of the Open Contracting Data Standard
The Open Contracting Data Standard targets transparency in government procurement through the use of open data in contracting. It offers a best practice guide for governments who want to combat corruption in public procurement – one of the most notorious areas for kickbacks and nepotism. However, according to our latest Open Data Barometer research, only 8% of contracting data across the 92 countries studied is fully open.
We agree that shining a light on which companies get contracts and for what amounts will help deter those seeking to take advantage of tax payer funded projects, and ensure that the maximum amount of public money goes to the projects it is intended for.
We were delighted to see that on balance, the Open Contracting Data Standard was a relative success, being mentioned in nearly half of all country statements – with 15 countries committing to its implementation and four more agreeing to explore it further. Although the summit communique did not mention the standard by name, it endorsed making public contracting data open by default. We will keep pushing to build on this progress and have the standard adopted far and wide so more citizens can benefit from it.
| Committed | Exploring | No mention |
|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan Argentina Bulgaria Canada* Colombia France Georgia Ghana Italy Malta Mexico Nigeria Romania Tunisia Ukraine* United Kingdom United States | Australia Germany** Norway Switzerland | Brazil China India Indonesia Ireland Japan Jordan Kenya Netherlands New Zealand Russia Senegal Singapore South Africa South Korea Spain Sri Lanka Tanzania Trinidad & Tobago Turkey UAE |
*Note: Canada and the Ukraine did not explicitly mention the OCDS in their statements, but both are already adopters of the standard and publishing open data on some contracts.
**Note: Germany doesn’t mention the exact OCDS standard explicitly, but has committed to exploring open contracting and procurement generally. We hope they will consider the OCDS as a valuable tool.
- Commitment to an open beneficial ownership register
Following the Panama Papers scandal, beneficial ownership and offshore holdings have been at the forefront of the public anti-corruption debate. Our latest Open Data Barometer showed that company ownership data is the least open in the world – with only 1% of data across 92 countries fully open. The UK took the lead in declaring it would allow public access to beneficial ownership information (although it is not yet clear whether all crown dependencies and overseas territories will take part), and calling on countries attending the summit to do likewise was a cornerstone of David Cameron’s policy.
So how did the UK do in convincing others to follow suit? Seven more countries committed to a public beneficial ownership register, and eight more will look into it. In contrast to the the Open Contracting Data Standard and Open Data Charter, nearly all country statements at least mentioned beneficial ownership – but unfortunately less progress was made than on open contracting, with more than half of countries still reluctant to allow full public transparency of beneficial ownership. Instead the tendency was to keep their registers private or available to law enforcement only. This is just not good enough if we want the public, civil society and the media to play their role as watchdogs.
| Committed | Exploring | Public beneficial ownership register limited to certain sectors | Beneficial ownership register will be private, open only to law enforcement or the language is too ambiguous to tell | No mention of beneficial ownership register |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan Bulgaria France Ghana Kenya Netherlands Nigeria South Africa* United Kingdom | Australia Georgia Indonesia Ireland Jordan Norway New Zealand Senegal | Tanzania** | Argentina Brazil Canada Colombia Germany Italy Japan Malta Mexico Romania* Russia Singapore Spain South Korea Sri Lanka Switzerland Trinidad & Tobago Tunisia Turkey Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States | China India |
*Note: South Africa does not mention a public beneficial ownership register in its summit country statement, but it did announce its commitment to create one at the recent Open Government Partnership Africa summit.
**Note: register will be public but limited to companies in the extractives sector only.
Winners and losers of the summit
Which citizens truly gained a new tool in the fight against corruption during the summit? The proof will be in the implementation and enforcement of the new commitments, but here’s what it looks like on paper.
Winners
Over 1.2 billion citizens of the 19 who made at least one new commitment to use open data for transparency: Afghanistan, Argentina, Bulgaria, Colombia, France, Georgia, Ghana, Italy, Kenya, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Romania, Russia, South Korea, Tunisia, United Kingdom, United States.
Afghanistan, Bulgaria, France, Georgia, Nigeria and the United Kingdom deserve a special mention for committing to more than one initiative and making open data for transparency a clear priority in their country statements.
But while statements are important, they’re not enough for real change. We need keep the pressure on to see these promises put into practice.
Losers
Citizens of the following countries got none of the new commitments to open data and transparency that we advocated for: Brazil, China, India, Japan, Sri Lanka, Trinidad & Tobago, Turkey, UAE.
The fact that major world economies such as Brazil, China, India, Japan and Turkey make this list is certainly disheartening and cause for concern that efforts to fight corruption will not benefit billions of citizens who have no way of ensuring their tax money is being spent as promised.
Honourable mentions
Citizens of Australia, Germany, Indonesia, Jordan, New Zealand, Norway, Senegal, Switzerland and Tanzania received some commitments to look into things, but no firm commitments yet.
Canada and Spain (who is hosting this year’s International Open Data Conference), are pursuing open data policies as part of their broader commitment to accountability, and are actively engaged in the Open Data Charter process. Canada has in fact already previously adopted the Open Contracting Data Standard. We hope these governments will formally adopt the Charter principles, continue to pursue their open data policies and making its use in the fight against corruption a key tenant of their strategy.
It will be important for citizens and civil society in all of these countries to push the door fully open, and advocate for firmer commitments to open data for transparency.
What’s next?
At the Web Foundation, we will continue advocating for these three open data initiatives as a key plank of our participation and open data work. We believe the full power of the open Web will only be realised once citizens are able to translate access to a free and open Web into active citizenship, shaping the societies in which they live for the better.
The Open Data Charter is currently developing a set of recommendations for using open data to combat corruption. Once completed, it will include suggestions of core datasets that should be made available and interoperable, as well as outlining key use cases to prevent, detect, investigate and sanction corruption.
The mission is large and the road will be long, so please follow us on Twitter @webfoundation to see the latest updates on our open data research and advocacy.