Open Government Foundations: Depolarization and Social Cohesion

Depolarization and Social Cohesion

Political polarization threatens democratic stability and government effectiveness. Longstanding polarization, or “pernicious polarization,” erodes trust in institutions, increases conflict, and makes it harder to reach consensus. To counter this, open government can build bridges across divides and strengthen democratic culture through inclusive dialogue, transparency that counters misinformation, and accountability mechanisms that prevent political capture. In some cases, it can also help disincentivize profiteering from dividing societies.

Key Terms The Evidence Reform
Guidance Benchmarking
Data Guidance
& Standards

Key Terms

Definitions for key terms such as social cohesion, elite polarization, and affective polarization.

Affective Polarization: Affective polarization occurs when citizens develop strong negative feelings toward members of opposing political groups, viewing them as threats rather than legitimate political opponents.
Deliberation: Structured processes that bring diverse citizens together for reasoned discussion and collective decision-making on public issues. It emphasizes the importance of dialogue, mutual understanding, and collective reasoning among participants. In this context, deliberation should actively ensure that people from all backgrounds—regardless of gender, age, ability, or other identity—can meaningfully participate in governance processes, particularly those most at risk of exclusion during periods of polarization.
Elite Polarization: Elite polarization occurs when division among political leaders and elites manifests in increasingly hostile rhetoric, policy extremism, and the breakdown of cross-party cooperation. Elite polarization has numerous causes, including political capture, economic inequality, unequal institutions, breakdown of checks and balances, and corruption.
Pernicious Polarization: Pernicious polarization refers to a severe form of polarization that threatens democratic functioning. This is characterized by rejection of democratic norms, the dehumanization of opponents, and a willingness to undermine institutions.
Social Cohesion: Social cohesion is the strength of relationships and sense of solidarity among members of a community or society, characterized by trust, shared values, and willingness to cooperate.

SHOW KEY TERMS

HIDE SHOW KEY TERMS

The Evidence

Research shows that elite polarization typically drives affective polarization among citizens. Political leaders who use divisive rhetoric, undermine democratic norms, or vilify those who disagree with them consistently drive increased polarization among their citizens. Polarizers may specifically target perceived political enemies, minorities, and women.

To break this pattern, depolarization requires deliberate intervention during windows of political opportunity.

Multi-faceted solutions are required to tackle dangerous polarization. Effective depolarization strategies combine three elements: structured deliberation and cross-group exposure, policies that improve social cohesion and inclusion, and cultivation of shared civic values and democratic culture.
There is growing evidence that local government-led approaches can support depolarization from the ground up. When national governments are led by polarizing figures, subnational governments can take the lead and work on less politically charged issues to “practice” depolarization and prepare for future windows of opportunity.

Reform Guidance

The recommendations below represent reforms that national and local governments, representatives of civil society organizations, and others can consider for their action plans and the Open Gov Challenge. The reforms are categorized according to OGP’s principal values: transparency, civic participation, and public accountability. Reforms should be adapted to fit the domestic context, and involve and coordinate with other levels and branches of government.

Reforms across policy areas are also tagged by the estimated degree of difficulty in implementation. Though progress is often not linear, the recommendations have been categorized using these labels to give the reader a sense of how different reforms can work together to raise the ambition of open government approaches.

Recommended Reforms Key

OGP Values

Transparency: Transparency empowers citizens to exercise their rights, hold the government accountable, and participate in decision-making processes. Examples of relevant activities include the proactive or reactive publication of government-held information, legal or institutional frameworks to strengthen the right to access information, and disclosing information using open data standards.

Civic Participation: When people are engaged, governments and public institutions are more responsive, innovative, and effective. Examples of relevant initiatives include new or improved processes and mechanisms for the public to contribute to decisions, participatory mechanisms to involve underrepresented groups in policy making, and a legal environment that guarantees civil and political rights.
Public Accountability: Public accountability occurs when public institutions must justify their actions, act upon requirements and criticisms, and take responsibility for failure to perform according to laws or commitments. Importantly, public accountability means that members of the public can also access and trigger accountability mechanisms. Examples of relevant activities include citizen audits of performance, new or improved mechanisms or institutions that respond to citizen-initiated appeals processes, and improved access to justice.
Inclusion: Inclusion is fundamental to achieving more equitable, representative, and accountable policies that truly serve all people. This includes increasing the voice, agency, and influence of historically discriminated or underrepresented groups. Depending on the context, traditionally underrepresented groups may experience discrimination based on gender, sexual identity, race, ethnicity, age, geography, differing ability, legal, or socioeconomic status.

HIDE OGP VALUES

Degree of Difficulty

Foundational: This tag is used for reforms that are the essential building blocks of a policy area. “Foundational” does not mean low ambition or low impact. These recommendations often establish basic legal frameworks and institutional structures.
Intermediate: This tag is used for reforms that are complex and often involve coordination and outreach between branches, institutions, and levels of government, with the public or between countries.
Advanced: This tag is used for reforms that close important loopholes to make existing work more effective and impactful. Specifically, “Advanced” reforms are particularly ambitious, innovative or close important loopholes to make existing work more effective, impactful or sustainable. They are often applied in mature environments where they seek to institutionalize a good practice that has already shown results.

HIDE DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY

Branch of Government

Executive: The executive branch of government is responsible for designing, implementing, and enforcing laws, policies, and initiatives. It is typically led by the head of state or government, such as a president or prime minister, along with their appointed cabinet members. The executive branch’s functions also include overseeing the day-to-day operations of the government, managing foreign affairs, and directing the country’s armed forces. In democratic systems, the executive branch is accountable to the legislature and the electorate, with its powers and limitations outlined in the constitution or legal framework of the respective country.
Legislative: The legislative branch of government is responsible for making laws and regulations and overseeing the functioning of the government. It typically consists of a body of elected representatives, such as a parliament, congress, or assembly, which is tasked with proposing, debating, amending, and ultimately passing legislation. The legislative branch plays a crucial role in representing the interests of the people, as its members are elected to office by the public. In addition to law-making, this branch often holds the power to levy taxes, allocate funds, and conduct certain investigations into matters of public concern. The structure and powers of the legislative branch are usually outlined in a country’s constitution or legal framework, and it serves as a check on the executive and judicial branches to ensure a system of checks and balances within a state.

HIDE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT

Recommended Reforms

Policy Area	Recommendation	OGP Value	Degree of Difficulty	Government Branch
Transparency	Publish data on social cohesion indicators Gather or support the gathering of data on inter-group trust, civic engagement, hate crimes, and community safety to establish baselines and track progress. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Transparency Inclusion	Foundational	Executive
Transparency	Establish early warning systems Create transparent monitoring systems for polarization indicators (such as hate crimes, violence, and institutional trust) with public reporting to enable early intervention. Some jurisdictions have used existing public data to help predict where there may be future violence or crime in order to move resources to the areas most in need. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive	Transparency	Advanced	Executive
Transparency	Create accessible fact-checking mechanisms Establish or support independent fact-checking and media literacy programs to counter misinformation that fuels polarization. This may focus specifically on critical infrastructure such as voting, health, as well as crisis preparedness and response. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Transparency Civic Participation	Intermediate	Executive
Transparency	Disclose political finance and lobbying Implement comprehensive transparency of campaign contributions, party financing, and lobbying activities to expose political capture and unequal influence (See the “Political Finance” chapter of the Open Gov Guide and the 2022 Broken Links report for more guidance.) Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Public Accountability Transparency Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability Transparency	Intermediate	Executive Legislative
Transparency	Report on diversity in public institutions Regularly publish data on representation within government institutions (such as by gender, age, ability, and other relevant identities) to identify exclusion patterns and track inclusion efforts. Policy Area Transparency OGP Value Transparency Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Transparency Inclusion	Foundational	Executive
Civic Participation	Support community dialogue programs Fund and facilitate local-level dialogue initiatives that build relationships across social divides on less politically charged issues. This can include dialogue on topics such as neighborhood planning and development, discussing shared community spaces and events, environmental issues and local services. Encouraging collaborative engagement through community-level projects is a key strategy for depolarization. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation	Foundational	Executive
Civic Participation	Create socially and regionally diverse deliberative forums Establish citizens’ assemblies, deliberative polls, or town halls that bring together people from different political, regional, or social backgrounds to discuss shared challenges and solutions. In order to reach scale, it may make sense to create additional educational and cultural products like film, movies or testimony on how deliberation matters that can reach beyond the room. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive Legislative	Civic Participation Inclusion	Intermediate	Executive Legislative
Civic Participation	Directly engage communities that do not regularly take part in policy-making Create formal mechanisms for historically excluded groups to participate in policy design, particularly on issues affecting social cohesion and inclusion. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Intermediate Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation Inclusion	Intermediate	Executive
Civic Participation	Design civic education programs to create bridges Develop civic education that emphasizes shared democratic values, critical thinking, media literacy, and respect for pluralism. For example, such programs can help teach each other viewpoints through respectful debates, with reasonable disagreement and clear argumentation. This can be delivered through schools and community organizations, including existing organizations like scouting and rotary organizations as well as public media. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation Inclusion	Advanced	Executive
Civic Participation	Establish youth dialogue initiatives Young people have a key role to play in depolarization. Create sustained programs for young people from different backgrounds to interact, collaborate on projects, and develop connections to increase and leverage social capital and cultivate a sense of shared humanity. Policy Area Civic Participation OGP Value Civic Participation Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Foundational Government Branch Executive	Civic Participation Inclusion	Foundational	Executive
Public Accountability	Strengthen checks and balances Reinforce the institutional independence of courts, electoral management bodies, anti-corruption agencies, and oversight bodies that prevent political capture. For details, see the Anti-Corruption chapters of the Open Gov Guide. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability	Advanced	Executive Legislative
Public Accountability	Enforce anti-discrimination laws Ensure robust implementation and monitoring of laws protecting against discrimination, hate speech, and violence targeting groups based on identity. For details, see the Civic Space chapters of the Open Gov Guide. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability	Advanced	Executive Legislative
Public Accountability	Create independent bodies for social cohesion Establish parliamentary committees, independent commissions, or ombudspersons focused on promoting equality, monitoring polarization, and addressing inter-group conflicts. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Civic Participation Inclusion Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability Civic Participation Inclusion	Advanced	Executive Legislative
Public Accountability	Hold platforms accountable for content Implement regulations requiring social media platforms to report on and address hate speech, misinformation, and algorithmic amplification of polarizing content. (See the “Disinformation and Information Integrity” chapter of the Open Gov Guide. Policy Area Public Accountability OGP Value Public Accountability Degree of Difficulty Advanced Government Branch Executive Legislative	Public Accountability	Advanced	Executive Legislative

Examples of Reforms from OGP and Beyond

The following examples are commitments previously made within or beyond OGP that demonstrate elements of the recommendations made above. Social cohesion and depolarization commitments are relatively rare in OGP action plans, as polarization is often addressed through other thematic areas like civic participation, anti-corruption, access to justice, and open parliament. However, some OGP Local members have expressly named social cohesion as a goal in their action plans.

OGP Reforms

ELGEYO MARAKWET, KENYA Broaden Public Participation for Inclusive Decision-Making: Committed to creating structured engagement mechanisms and a CSO liaison office. The stated aim of this commitment is to design better policies, allocate resources more fairly, and improve social cohesion, especially for people with disabilities.
FINLAND National Dialogues to Increase Cohesion and Public Participation: Committed to collaborating with civil society to increase participation in national dialogues and make it easier to shape policies based on public input, building on past initiatives. The aim of the commitment is to strengthen trust in society by giving citizens the chance to meet people from diverse sectors and discuss issues.
KYIV, UKRAINE Government Platform to Support Civil Society: Committed to expanding the Vcentri HUB as a participatory platform for the local government, businesses, and the community. The goal of the Vcentri HUB is to engage different social groups in dialogue and partnership as a way to promote “social cohesion and the development of civil society.”
ZVIAHEL, UKRAINE Action Plan to Enhance Social Cohesion: Committed to creating a Youth Council, supporting veterans, and piloting an inclusive participatory budgeting process as part of its first OGP action plan. The action plan as a whole aims to improve social cohesion, civic activity, and public trust, with all commitments supporting this goal.

Beyond OGP Action Plans

The following examples illustrate conscious efforts at depolarization, mostly through dialogue outside of OGP action plans.

COLOMBIA Territorial Peace Building and Community Dialogues: Established Development Programs with a Territorial Focus (PDET) in conflict-affected regions after the 2016 peace process. These programs created participatory planning processes that brought together former combatants, victims, and local residents to design Action Plans for Regional Transformation.
KENYA National Cohesion and Integration Commission: Established an independent National Cohesion and Integration Commission with powers to monitor hate speech, audit diversity in public institutions, and facilitate inter-ethnic dialogue. This effort took place after post-election violence in 2007-2008 killed over 1,000 people along ethnic lines.
NORTH MACEDONIA Inter-Community Dialogue on Education: Implemented confidence-building programs including integrated schools of Macedonian and Albanian students, multi‑ethnic municipal councils with power‑sharing arrangements, and participatory processes for local service delivery following ethnic conflict in 2001. There are also requirements for monitoring ethnic representation in public institutions and creating multi-ethnic municipal councils with power-sharing arrangements to address Albanian minority grievances. (See Nansen Dialogue Centre Skopje for details.)
RWANDA Umuganda and Ingando Programs for Social Cohesion: Institutionalized monthly community work days known as Umuganda, where citizens from all backgrounds work together to upgrade local infrastructure and discuss issues, following the 1994 genocide. The government also established “solidarity camps” called Ingando that brought together diverse groups such as returning refugees, demobilized soldiers, former combatants, and students for intensive programs on national history, unity and reconciliation, reintegration, and government policies.
SIERRA LEONE Inter-Religious Council and Community Peace-Building: Created the Inter-Religious Council of Sierra Leone (IRCSL) of Christian and Muslim leaders following the 1991–2002 civil war. The council became a widely trusted mediator in peace and reconciliation initiatives at the national and local levels by working alongside traditional authorities, civil society, and transitional justice mechanisms. These initiatives convened chiefs, youth, women’s groups, and ex‑combatants to address local tensions and support post‑war reintegration. Later, during the 2014–2016 Ebola crisis and subsequent electoral cycles, including the 2018 elections, the IRCSL and other faith actors led joint public outreach and peace messaging that emphasized shared moral values, encouraged compliance with public‑health measures, and sought to discourage the use of ethnic or religious identities to fuel mistrust or political violence.
SOUTH AFRICA District Development Model and Community Dialogues: Developed the District Development Model through post-apartheid structures to create spaces (notably through Operation Sukuma Sakhe in Kwazulu-Natal) where national, provincial, and local government officials often meet with community representatives to collaboratively plan public service delivery and address local challenges. The model explicitly aims to bring people together through shared problem-solving on practical issues like water, electricity, and public safety.
TUNISIA National Dialogue and Transitional Justice: Facilitated negotiations among polarized secular and Islamist political forces during the country’s democratic transition (2011–2014) through the Nobel Peace Prize-winning National Dialogue Quartet. This group has since helped prevent violence during constitutional crises. Tunisia also established the Truth and Dignity Commission with transparent public hearings to document abuses under the dictatorship and create a shared historical narrative.
UNITED KINGDOM Strategy to Improve Social Cohesion: Launched the “Pride in Place” strategy in 2025, which includes a focus on improving social cohesion. One part of this multipronged strategy is the government’s commitment to deliver £20 million over the next decade in 75 locations around the country. Each locality will create multi-stakeholder decision-making boards to identify and fund projects that are important to their respective communities. Other initiatives, such as the Waltham Forest Citizens’ Assembly to end hate and foster social cohesion run by the CSO Involve, used a deliberative model to create recommendations that the Council Cabinet allocated £150,000 to fund.

The Role of Local Governments

Reducing polarization is an ongoing process that requires continuous reflection and adaptation. Local governments can play an important role in this process, especially when national politics are deeply divided. Provinces and municipalities can test and adapt practical ways to bring people together, create opportunities for face-to-face dialogue, and adopt inclusion policies that build social cohesion. They often focus on everyday issues that unite residents across political, demographic, and attitudinal lines, like local services, neighborhood development, or the environment. Local governments can also build depolarization into a specific goal by using participatory budgeting, citizens’ assemblies, and community planning mechanisms that require people with different views to work together.

When opportunities for national depolarization emerge, often after elections or political transitions, local governments with experience in these approaches can help scale successful models and share lessons at the national level. Where polarization follows geographic lines, such as between urban and rural areas, cooperation among local governments across jurisdictions can also help bridge divides.

Local governments are also well-positioned to implement gender-responsive participatory practices. These include publishing disaggregated consultation data and setting inclusion targets in community planning processes. These may serve as models for national-level reform.

Who is working on this topic?

A

Abuja, Nigeria

Agadir, Morocco

Albania

Anloga District, Ghana

Aragón, Spain

Argentina

Armenia

Athens, Greece

Austin, United States

Australia

B

Banggai, Indonesia

Banská Bystrica, Slovak Republic

Bar, Montenegro

Basque Country, Spain

Bogotá, Colombia

Bosnia And Herzegovina

Brazil

Brebes, Indonesia

Buenos Aires, Argentina

Bulgaria

Burkina Faso

C

Cabo Verde

Cajamarca, Peru

Canada

Carthage, Tunisia (Former Ogp Member)

Catalonia, Spain

Chihuahua (Municipality), Mexico

Chile

Colombia

Córdoba (Province), Argentina

Costa Rica

Côte D'ivoire

Croatia

Czech Republic

D

Dominican Republic

Drâa-Tafilalet, Morocco

E

Ecuador

El Kef, Tunisia

Elgeyo Marakwet, Kenya

F

Finland

France

Fuvahmulah, Maldives

G

Georgia (Withdrawn)

Germany

Ghana

Goias, Brazil

Greater Karak, Jordan

Guatemala

Gyumri, Armenia

H

Hamburg, Germany

Honduras

I

Indonesia

Ireland

Italy

J

Jalisco, Mexico

Jamaica

Jordan

K

Kaduna State, Nigeria

Kakamega, Kenya

Kenya

Ketu South, Ghana

Khmelnytskyi, Ukraine

Khoni, Georgia

Kutaisi, Georgia

Kyiv, Ukraine

L

La Paz, Bolivia

Laâyoune-Sakia El Hamra , Morocco

Latvia

Leova, Republic Of Moldova

Liberia

M

Machakos, Kenya

Madrid, Spain

Maipú, Chile

Makueni, Kenya

Malawi

Malta

Medellin, Colombia

Metsamor, Armenia

Mexico

Modriča, Bosnia-Herzegovina

Mongolia

Montenegro

Monterrey, Mexico

Morocco

N

Nairobi, Kenya

Nandi, Kenya

Navarra, Spain

Netherlands

New Zealand

Nigeria

North Macedonia

Norway

Novi Pazar, Serbia

Nuevo Leon (State), Mexico

O

Oriental, Morocco

Orzhytsia, Ukraine

Osasco, Brazil

Ouellé, Côte D’ivoire

Ozurgeti, Georgia

P

Panama

Papua New Guinea

Paraguay

Paris, France

Pastaza, Ecuador

Peñalolén, Chile

Peru

Philippines

Pichincha, Ecuador

Plateau, Nigeria

Plav, Montenegro

Portugal

Pristina, Kosovo

Q

Quintana Roo, Mexico

Quito, Ecuador

R

Republic Of Korea

Republic Of Moldova

Romania

Rosario, Argentina

S

Salcedo, Dominican Republic

San Jeronimo, Guatemala

Santo Domingo De Los Tsáchilas, Ecuador

Sarchí, Costa Rica

Scotland, United Kingdom

Sekondi-Takoradi, Ghana

Semarang, Indonesia

Senegal

Serbia

Seychelles

Shama, Ghana

Sierra Leone

Slovak Republic

Souss-Massa, Morocco

South Africa

South Cotabato, Philippines

Spain

T

Tamale, Ghana

Tangier - Tetouan - Al Hoceima, Morocco

Tarkwa Nsuaem, Ghana

Tbilisi, Georgia

Tétouan (Municipality), Morocco

Timișoara, Romania

Tirana, Albania

Tlalnepantla De Baz, Mexico

Travnik, Bosnia Herzegovina

Tunisia

U

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Uruguay

V

Valencian Community, Spain

Vanadzor, Armenia

W

Wassa Amenfi East, Ghana

West Sumbawa, Indonesia

Y

Yerevan, Armenia

Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Z

Zviahel, Ukraine

This list reflects members with commitments in the “Inclusion” policy area of the Data Dashboard.

Benchmarking Data

The OGP 2023-2028 Strategy sets out the Open Gov Challenge and aims to provide clear benchmarks for performance through reliable data.

Good data helps track polarization trends, identify drivers, and measure the effectiveness of interventions. Most of these resources are tracked at the general level and are perception or expert-based, not based on presentation of specific policies or governance practices.

While benchmarks for individual countries and Open Gov Guide recommendations are not yet integrated, for this chapter, interested individuals may rely on the following data sets:

Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) provides annual data on political polarization indicators, including elite polarization, political violence, and erosion of democratic norms across 200+ countries. Specifically, V-Dem has a particular set of indicators on political polarization. In its “Deliberative Component” measurement of democracy, V-Dem has indicators on “Respect for counterarguments,” “Engaged society,” and “Reasoned justification” for government decisions.
The World Values Survey (WVS) collects data on social trust, tolerance, civic engagement, and inter-group attitudes across 120 countries, enabling cross-national comparisons of affective polarization. The WVS has specific indicators on social trust, strength of partisan division, and inequality, which are all strongly associated with one another.
The Fragile States Indextracks indicators directly referring to group grievances, uneven development, and factionalized elites that contribute to polarization.

Guidance & Standards

While the list below is not exhaustive, it aims to provide a range of recommendations, standards, and analysis to guide reform in this policy area.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace offers practical research on depolarization strategies, including:

Rachel Kleinfeld’s work on deliberation, exposure, and cross-cutting dialogue as interventions. Includes case studies and policy recommendations).
The Democracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarizationreport, edited by Thomas Carothers and Andrew O’Donohue, provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of the causes and consequences of polarization across diverse democracies. This report is essential reading for understanding why elites polarize and how institutions break down.
Jennifer McCoy and others discuss the processes societies undergo to depolarize effectively.

Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societiesresearch on social cohesion emphasizes three intervention areas: breaking apart entrenched networks of exclusion, implementing inclusion policies, and promoting positive visions for society. Their SDG16+ framework links polarization to inequality and governance outcomes.

International IDEA resources on democracy and polarization offer practical guidance on electoral systems, constitutional design, and governance reforms that can reduce polarization risks, particularly during democratic transitions. Some recent work focuses on the role of institutions in driving polarization in the United States.
Contact theory and intergroup dialogue research from social psychology provides evidence-based practices for designing effective bridging encounters, including conditions for successful contact between groups and facilitation techniques. Some resources include the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Evidence in Governance and Politics study on depolarization effectiveness and a Harvard Universityreview of public sector communications.
The Institute for Capacity Strengthening pulled together lessons from its depolarization work in the Central African Republic and other countries. This set of modules provides step-by-step guidance on how to strengthen both horizontal and vertical social cohesion.
Involve created a framework to increase social cohesion at the community level, which builds on the organization’s research into the relationship between local-level public participation and community cohesion.

Featured Resources

Data Dashboard

Access data on OGP commitments. Filter commitments by location, policy area, and year. Search by keyword.

21st January 2023

Broken Links

How can open data help shine a light on political corruption and make political systems fairer and more inclusive? How can we further link people and data to create a chain of accountability? Explore our new report.

13th September 2022

The Skeptic’s Guide to Open Government – 2022 Edition

Evidence continues to show that open government affects people’s lives. But there are still skeptics who are not aware of all the benefits associated with this approach. Use this guide to convince them to take an open government approach when implementing reforms.

16th May 2022

Open Government Foundations