Open Culture and Sports Data (GR0075)
Overview
At-a-Glance
Action Plan: Greece Action Plan 2019-2022
Action Plan Cycle: 2019
Status:
Institutions
Lead Institution: Ministry of Culture and Sports
Support Institution(s): NA
Policy Areas
Access to Information, Open DataIRM Review
IRM Report: Greece Results Report 2019-2022, Greece Design Report 2019-2021
Early Results: Marginal
Design i
Verifiable: Yes
Relevant to OGP Values: Yes
Ambition (see definition): Low
Implementation i
Description
Commitment 11: Open access to data of the Ministry of Culture and Sports
Current situation
The information is now covered by Law 4305/2014 on the «Open access and re-use of documents,
information and public sector data, amendment of Law 3448/2006 (Α΄ 57), adaptation of national
legislation to the provisions of Directive 2013/37/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,
further strengthening of the transparency, regulation of issues regarding the recruitment competition
of the National School of Public Administration and Local Government and other provisions» (Official
Gazette Α’ 237/31.10.2014), with the differentiations provided for under the Directive regarding
libraries, museums and archives, and a specific provisions regarding the protection of cultural
heritage.
Description of Commitment
A wealth of data falling within the scope of Law 4305/2014 is available to the Ministry of Culture and
Sports and its supervised entities and will be made available for re-use in order to contribute to the
development and participation of citizens.
OGP Principles
Access to public information
Implementation entities, stakeholders
Implementation: Ministry of Culture and Sports
Cooperation with supervised entities.
Contact details: Ministry of Culture and Sport, Directorate for e-Government, Department for
Innovative Services & Simplification of Procedures
Objective
1. Open data release decisions
2. Updating of the datasets
3. Adaptation of datasets in accordance with the new structure of the Ministry’s services
4. Grouping and homogenisation of the datasets of the Ministry
Key milestones - Timetable
Milestone Completion
1. Open data release decisions
2. Updating of the datasets
3. Adaptation of datasets in accordance with the new structure of the Ministry’s services
4. Grouping and homogenisation of the datasets of the Ministry
IRM Midterm Status Summary
11. Open access to data of the Ministry of Culture and Sports
Main Objective
The published NAP mentions (p.35) the main objective for this commitment as follows:
"Description of Commitment: A wealth of data falling within the scope of Law 4305/2014 is available to the Ministry of Culture and Sports and its supervised entities and will be made available for re-use in order to contribute to the development and participation of citizens."
"Objectives: 1. Open data release decisions
- Updating of the datasets
- Adaptation of datasets in accordance with the new structure of the Ministry's services
- Grouping and homogenisation of the datasets of the Ministry."
Milestones
The published NAP mentions (p.35-36) the milestones for this commitment as follows:
"1. Open data release decisions
- Updating of the datasets
- Adaptation of datasets in accordance with the new structure of the Ministry's services
- Grouping and homogenisation of the datasets of the Ministry."
Editorial Note: For the complete text of this commitment, please see Greece's action plan at https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Greece_Action-Plan_2019-2021_EN.pdf, p.35-36.
IRM Design Report Assessment | |
Verifiable: | Yes |
Relevant: | Yes Access to Information |
Potential impact: | None |
Commitment analysis
This commitment aims to restructure the way data are published by the Ministry of Culture and Sport (MCS) and ensure datasets are updated. It is relevant to the Access to Information OGP value because it commits to making open data release decisions that will lead to data being published.
Data.gov.gr contains more than 40 open datasets published by MCS as of May 2019, including lists of archaeological sites, educational facilities and archives of events and exhibitions. [89] These have many different formats and contain document collections, [90] along with some structured data, in non-machine-readable formats, [91] on fragmented topics and grouped in no particular order. The official MCS [92] website does not contain published reports on the lead agency's open data policy and practice. However, a number of published open data release decisions do exist (5 decisions) as of May 2019 in compliance with Law 4305/2014. [93]
No potential impact stemming from the implementation of this commitment. The Ministry did not mention any learning from implementation of the previous action plan in the design of this commitment, or integrating into this commitment feedback from the action plan co-design process. MCS explained that the grouping and homogenization process of datasets is critical because the units use different formats and data storage methods which leads to duplication of information. The Ministry explained that internal unit collaboration on this matter in an ad hoc manner will lead to homogenization of the information held within the Ministry. This cannot be considered to have sufficiently clear public facing impact. MCS did not clarify the rationale for selecting data sets to open, neither mentioned involvement of relevant stakeholders involved in the choice of the datasets. Civil society stakeholders stated that the lack of clarity of dataset release provisions means implementation of the commitment is far from the needs of stakeholders. [94]
Any changes to planned implementation could consider more structured internal collaboration to ensure a more complete and coherent overhaul of information storage and structure in the ministry rather than using an ad hoc approach. The grouping of datasets could be done in collaboration with dataset users to ensure that the logic for grouping is relevant to users and to the public sector. Greater collaboration with users and citizens could help in identifying datasets to publish. Desktop research [95] revealed a number of topical issues for this ministry's domain of responsibility for which publishing open data would have value and could help to improve policies and processes. An indicative example is information on protection of antiquities against catastrophes and theft (such as policies or data about incidents of theft) or information around the privatisation process of management of cultural monuments.
IRM End of Term Status Summary
Commitment 11. Open access to data of the Ministry of Culture and Sports
● Verifiable: Yes
● Relevant: Yes, access to information
● Potential impact: None
● Completion: Completed
● Did it open government? Marginal
This commitment was completed. A public official from the Ministry’s Directorate of e-Governance confirmed that it has continuously published [40] datasets in a cloud link, [41] adapting, grouping, and homogenizing the datasets according to the new structure of the services of the Ministry of Culture and improving metadata. [42] It also published data disposal decisions in 2016, 2019, and 2022. [43] The datasets are available through a link at the bottom of the Ministry website and on a specific Ministry webpage for open data. [44] The comparison of the quantity and quality of available data before and after the commitment’s implementation shows that 23 new datasets were introduced, increasing from 41 to 64, following the 2022 dataset disposal decision, on a free and open basis. [45] They encompass topics such as lists of sites, digital applications, cultural events, and cultural geospatial information and also information touching on public policy decision-making, such as financial reports, committee meeting minutes, daily provisions, etc. [46] The data portal data.gov.gr does not contain data on culture as, according to the government’s digital policy, culture is not one of the 10 topics included. [47]
As reported by the Ministry’s representative, “even when the information is in ‘under no further disposal status,’ the Ministry still helps and provides the information to citizens by anonymization or pseudonymization of the datasets.” [48] Despite being fully completed, this commitment saw, at best, marginal changes toward opening government as new information was released, but there is no evidence this created a greater change in practice or that the information released was of particular importance for decision-making or reuse.