Skip Navigation

Denmark Implementation Report 2017-2019

Denmark’s third action plan focused on increasing open data, improving transparency in the public sector, and promoting open government globally. Notably, the action plan resulted in the creation of a new portal with data on day-care facilities (Commitment 3) as well as strengthening the volunteer sector in Denmark (Commitment 9). However, while most commitments were either fully or substantially completed, their influence on opening government was generally marginal.

Table 1. At a glance

Participating since: 2011
Action plan under review: Third
Report type: Implementation
Number of commitments: 14

Action plan development
Is there a Multistakeholder forum:  Yes
Level of public influence:  Involve
Acted contrary to OGP process:  No

Action plan design
Commitments relevant to OGP values       12 (86%)
Transformative commitments                     0
Potentially starred:                                    0

Action plan implementation
Starred commitments: 0
Completed commitments: 7 (50%)
Commitments with Major DIOG*: 0
Commitments with Outstanding DIOG*: 0
Level of public influence:  Consult
Acted contrary to OGP process: No

*DIOG: Did it Open Government?

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) is a global partnership that brings together government reformers and civil society leaders to create action plans that make governments more inclusive, responsive, and accountable. The Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) monitors all action plans to ensure governments follow through on commitments. Denmark joined OGP in 2011. Since, Denmark has implemented three action plans. This report evaluates the implementation of Denmark’s third action plan.

General overview of action plan

Denmark fully completed half of the commitments from its third action plan, and remaining milestones have been initiated to various degrees. As lead agencies tend to be public institutions charged with digitization and technical solutions, the role of civil society was limited during implementation.

Most commitments in Denmark’s third action plan saw marginal results, due to their generally modest levels of ambition. However, Commitment 9 provided sustainable mechanisms for civic participation while strengthening the infrastructure of volunteerism throughout Denmark.

Table 2. Noteworthy commitments

Commitment description Status at the end of implementation cycle.
1. More open data

Publish datasets of historical significance in dialogue with stakeholders, and provide video instructions on the use of this data.

The implementation was limited due to the legal constraints of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A more pragmatic approach to dissemination of historical data with a focus on usability is planned for 2020.
3. Information portals for day-care facilities

Develop a common platform to collect data from municipal and day- care institutions across the country. Present the data in publicly available and easily accessible portals.

The Ministry of Children and Education created a portal that provides parents with a user-friendly overview of day-care facilities, as well as the ability to compare facilities. However, the available data is limited and there is no consensus among stakeholders that the portal will serve its intended purpose.
9. National strategy for a stronger civil society

Implement the national civil society strategy to improve collaboration between the public sector and civil society, particularly in local communities.

Implementation of the national strategy has so far led to improvement on more locally anchored volunteerism in Denmark through a gradual restructuring of the sector. The process facilitated dialogue and collaboration between local communities and national authorities.

Five Key IRM Recommendations

The IRM key recommendations are prepared in the IRM Design Report. They aim to inform the development of the next action plan and guide implementation of the current action plan. In Denmark’s 2017–2019 Design Report, the IRM recommended the following:

1. Expand participation in the multi-stakeholder forum.
2. Introduce whistleblower protection measures in the next action plan.
3. Address the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation.
4. Take measures to improve beneficial ownership transparency.
5. Focus on further strengthening foreign aid transparency.


Filed under: IRM IRM Report

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open Government Partnership