Skip Navigation

Denmark

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 3

ON THE PAGE

Current Action Plan

2017-2019

Action Plan 3

  • Number of Commitments: 14
  • Policy Area Focus: Actionable Open Data, Cohesive and Efficient Public Sector, Promote Openness Globally

Denmark is currently implementing 14 commitments from their 2017-2019 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to open data, participation, public services, civic space and international initiatives.

Point of Contact

Marie Bechgaard Madsen Head of Section, Agency for Digitisation, Ministry of Finance mabem@digst.dk
Mie Foged Filtenborg Intern, Agency for Digitisation, Ministry of Finance mifof@digst.dk

Commitments

  1. Open Data for Citizens and Media

    DK0050, 2017, E-Government

  2. Data Registers on a Shared Public Distribution Platform

    DK0051, 2017, E-Government

  3. Information Portal for Day-Care Facilities

    DK0052, 2017, E-Government

  4. Open Data and Smart City Forum

    DK0053, 2017, Capacity Building

  5. Open Data DK

    DK0054, 2017, Capacity Building

  6. Overview of Own Cases and Benefits

    DK0055, 2017, E-Government

  7. Nationwide Deployment of Telemedicine

    DK0056, 2017, E-Government

  8. My Log

    DK0057, 2017, E-Government

  9. Civil Society National Strategy

    DK0058, 2017, Marginalized Communities

  10. Report a Rule

    DK0059, 2017, E-Government

  11. OGP Forum

    DK0060, 2017, OGP

  12. Denmark’S Country Program for Uganda

    DK0061, 2017, Aid

  13. The 18Th International Anti-Corruption Conference

    DK0062, 2017, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  14. IATI (International Aid Transparency Initiative)

    DK0063, 2017, Aid

  15. Service Check of Local Government Consultations

    DK0034, 2014, Public Participation

  16. Call on All Municipalities to Facilitate Advance Voting

    DK0035, 2014, Marginalized Communities

  17. Letter of Invitation to First-Time Voters Urging Them to Vote

    DK0036, 2014, Marginalized Communities

  18. User Friendliness Requirements Regarding Digital Self-Service Solutions

    DK0037, 2014, Capacity Building

  19. Plan for Inclusion During the Transition to Digital Communication

    DK0038, 2014, Capacity Building

  20. Common Public Sector Digital Communication Campaign

    DK0039, 2014, Capacity Building

  21. Principles for Collaboration on the Modernisation of the Public Sector as Well as the Establishment of a Centre for Public Innovation

    DK0040, 2014, Capacity Building

  22. “Free Municipality” Pilot Projects

    DK0041, 2014, Subnational

  23. Recommendations from Growth Teams

    DK0042, 2014, Private Sector

  24. Strategy for Digital Welfare

    DK0043, 2014, E-Government

  25. Implementation of a New Charter for Interaction Between Volunteer Denmark/Associations Denmark and the Public Sector

    DK0044, 2014, Civic Space

  26. “Open Data Innovation Strategy” (ODIS)

    DK0045, 2014, Capacity Building

  27. Data Distributor for the Distribution of Basic Data

    DK0046, 2014, Open Data

  28. Open Government Camp 2014

    DK0047, 2014, Capacity Building

  29. Open Government Assistance to Myanmar

    DK0048, 2014, Aid

  30. Opening Key Public Datasets

    DK0049, 2014, Capacity Building

  31. Online Open Government Partnership Community

    DK0001, 2012, E-Government

  32. Online OGP Handbook for Public Authorities and Institutions

    DK0002, 2012, E-Government

  33. Starred commitment Management Labs and New Forms of Co-Operation

    DK0003, 2012, Public Participation

  34. Consultation and Transparency of Development Aid Programmes: Design Aid Programmes

    DK0004, 2012, Aid

  35. Innovate with Aarhus

    DK0005, 2012, Capacity Building

  36. Citizen Self-Services: Increasing the Use of User Ratings in the Citizen’s Port Borger.Dk

    DK0006, 2012, E-Government

  37. Open Government Camp

    DK0007, 2012, OGP

  38. Renewed Effort for Open Government Data

    DK0008, 2012, E-Government

  39. Regional Initiative on Open Data

    DK0009, 2012, Open Data

  40. Reuse of Open Source Software in the Public Sector

    DK0010, 2012, E-Government

  41. Citizen Self-Services: Binding Guidelines for Self-Service Solutions

    DK0011, 2012, Capacity Building

  42. Citizen Self-Services: Guidance and Information on Accessibility to Digital Solutions

    DK0012, 2012, E-Government

  43. Citizen Self-Services: Peer-To-Peer Learning Programmes to Help Citizens Use Digital Self-Service

    DK0013, 2012, Capacity Building

  44. Citizen Self-Services: Location-Based Content and Re-Use of Content in Borger.Dk

    DK0014, 2012, E-Government

  45. Less Reporting Through Increased Re-Use of Key Data

    DK0015, 2012, E-Government

  46. Mypage” for Businesses

    DK0016, 2012, E-Government

  47. Companies to Be “Born Digitally”

    DK0017, 2012, E-Government

  48. Creating a Mediation and Complaints Institution for Responsible Business Behaviour

    DK0018, 2012, Human Rights

  49. International Human Rights Conference

    DK0019, 2012, Human Rights

  50. Promote Social Responsibility in the Fashion Business

    DK0020, 2012, Private Sector

  51. Reporting on Human Rights and the Climate

    DK0021, 2012, Human Rights

  52. Country by Country Reporting in the Extractive and Forestry Industries

    DK0022, 2012, Extractive Industries

  53. Legislative Principles for the Digital Age

    DK0023, 2012, Legislature

  54. Consolidated Key Data

    DK0024, 2012, E-Government

  55. App Store for Digital Learning Resources

    DK0025, 2012, E-Government

  56. Starred commitment Preparing a Digital Reform of the Public Welfare Areas

    DK0026, 2012, E-Government

  57. Consultation and Transparency of Development Aid Programmes: Transparency in Aid

    DK0027, 2012, Aid

  58. Tracking Progress of Universities’ Transition to Digital-Only Administrative Communication

    DK0028, 2012, Education

  59. Disclosure of Status Reporting From the National IT Project Council

    DK0029, 2012, E-Government

  60. Overview of Public ICT Architecture

    DK0030, 2012, E-Government

  61. Publication of Educational Materials on the Government’s ICT Project Model

    DK0031, 2012, Capacity Building

  62. Smart Aarhus and Smart Region: Smart Aarhus

    DK0032, 2012, E-Government

  63. Smart Aarhus and Smart Region: Smart Region

    DK0033, 2012, E-Government

Resources

  1. Denmark 2014-2015 IRM Progress Report for Public Comment

    2016, Report Comments, Web page

  2. Denmark Action Plan 2012

    2013, Action Plan, Web page

  3. Denmark Action Plan 2013-2014

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  4. Denmark Action Plan 2017-2019

    2017, Action Plan, Web page

  5. Denmark Design Report 2017-2019 – For Public Comment

    2019, Report Comments, Web page

  6. Denmark Design Report 2017–2019

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  7. Denmark End-of-Term Report 2014-2016

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  8. Denmark End-of-Term Report 2014-2016 – For Public Comment

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  9. Denmark End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2014-2016

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  10. Denmark IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  11. Denmark IRM statusrapport 2014-2015

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  12. Denmark Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  13. Denmark Mid-Term Self-Assessment Report 2017-2019

    2018, Self Assessment, Web page

  14. Denmark, Midterm Self Assessment Report, 2014-2016

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  15. Late Letter – November 2016 – Denmark

    2016, Letter, Web page

  16. OGP Letter – Denmark – January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  17. OGP Letter – Denmark – November 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  18. OGP Letter to Denmark Regarding Late Action Plan: November 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  19. OGP Letter to Denmark Regarding Shift to ‘Odd Year’ Action Plan Schedule: January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

Current Data

The data below is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
2
Action Plan 2
1
0
0
Action Plan 3

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Download
Action Plan 3

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.00 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.42 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.92 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.97 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.77 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
4.00 Sources
Open Regulations
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.80 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.44 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.00 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.27 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.50 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Participation
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data
Oversight
Action Implications
No data
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
No data

Recent Posts

6203558248_45a438dd6c_o
Norway · Denmark · Finland · Sweden

What’s Next for Open Government in the Nordics

The Nordics top the rankings on good governance, showing strong institutions, rule of law, and high levels of public trust See what they're doing in OGP.

presidential palace in Bratislava, Slovakia in the sunny summer day
Denmark · Slovak Republic

Using Slovakia’s Beneficial Ownership Register for Impact

Lessons from Reformers: Along with Denmark, Slovakia was one of the first countries to publish beneficial ownership information.

Denmark · United Kingdom · Ukraine

Revealing true corporate owners is key to fighting “dirty money”

Money laundering and corruption keeps making headlines. Danske Bank, Denmark’s largest lender, is reeling from a EUR 200 billion money-laundering scandal that erupted in September, the same month Dutch bank ING was hit with a EUR 775 million fine for…

Show More