Skip Navigation

Netherlands

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 3

Current Action Plan

2018-2020

Action Plan 3

  • Number of Commitments: 11
  • Policy Area Focus: Openness in Local Democracy, Transparency Financial Political Parties, Open Parliament

Netherlands is currently implementing 11 commitments from their 2018-2020 action plan.


Point of Contact

Joep Severens Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations Joep.Severens@minbzk.nl

Commitments

  1. local digital democracy

    NL0028, 2018, E-Government

  2. dilemma logic

    NL0029, 2018, Capacity Building

  3. Join EITI

    NL0030, 2018, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  4. Open Algorithms

    NL0031, 2018, Capacity Building

  5. open local decision-making

    NL0032, 2018, Capacity Building

  6. ‘Open by Design’ pilots

    NL0033, 2018, E-Government

  7. Open contracting

    NL0034, 2018, Open Contracting and Procurement

  8. Open Parliament

    NL0035, 2018, Audits and Controls

  9. Open government standard and dashboard

    NL0036, 2018, E-Government

  10. Pioneering Network for an Open Government for Municipalities

    NL0037, 2018, Capacity Building

  11. Transparent political party finance

    NL0038, 2018, Legislation & Regulation

  12. National Open Data Agenda

    NL0019, 2016, Capacity Building

  13. Stuiveling Open Data Award

    NL0020, 2016, Open Data

  14. Groningen Open Data Re-use

    NL0021, 2016, Infrastructure & Transport

  15. Releasing ministerial research reports

    NL0022, 2016, Health

  16. Detailed open spending data

    NL0023, 2016, Fiscal Transparency

  17. Open local authority decision-making

    NL0024, 2016, Open Data

  18. Training civil servants on public participation

    NL0025, 2016, Capacity Building

  19. Easier freedom of information requests

    NL0026, 2016, Capacity Building

  20. Open Government Expertise Centre (LEOO)

    NL0027, 2016, Capacity Building

  21. Further develop and promote disclosure and use of Open Data

    NL0001, 2013, E-Government

  22. Increase financial transparency through Open Budget and experiments with Open Spending and Budget Monitoring

    NL0002, 2013, E-Government

  23. Open House of Representatives

    NL0003, 2013, E-Government

  24. Instruments for integrity

    NL0004, 2013, Anti-Corruption Institutions

  25. Revamp the legislative calendar

    NL0005, 2013, E-Government

  26. More online consultation

    NL0006, 2013, E-Government

  27. More transparency in decision-making through Volgdewet.nl legislation-tracking website

    NL0007, 2013, E-Government

  28. Informal approach to freedom of information requests

    NL0008, 2013, Right to Information

  29. From Rules to Freedom

    NL0009, 2013, Public Participation

  30. Change attitudes and procedures through Smarter Working and ‘Public Servant 2.0’

    NL0010, 2013, Capacity Building

  31. Water Coalition

    NL0011, 2013, Public Participation

  32. Develop and implement participation policy at the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

    NL0012, 2013, Public Participation

  33. Make government information accessible and easy to find

    NL0013, 2013, Capacity Building

  34. Make citizens better informed and more empowered: public inspection and correction of information

    NL0014, 2013, E-Government

  35. Open announcements and notifications

    NL0015, 2013, E-Government

  36. Public services and the user perspective

    NL0016, 2013, E-Government

  37. Designate categories of government information for active access

    NL0017, 2013, Capacity Building

  38. Rethink information management and active access: four ‘open by design’ pilot projects

    NL0018, 2013, E-Government


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

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

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

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.

Anti-Corruption

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Civic Space

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Open Policy Making

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Access to Information

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

Fiscal Openness

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

Resources

  1. Netherlands 2016-2018 National Action Plan

    2016, Action Plan, Web page

  2. Netherlands Action Plan 2013-2014

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  3. Netherlands Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  4. Netherlands Final Report 2013-2014

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  5. Netherlands First IRM EOTR Report – Public Comments Received

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  6. Netherlands Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  7. Netherlands Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

  8. Netherlands Mid-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  9. Netherlands Mid-Term Self-Assessment 2016-2018

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  10. Netherlands Progress Report 2013-2014

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  11. The Netherlands OGP Self Assessment Report 2014

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page


Recent Posts

Municipal Budget and Spending Data for Water in the Netherlands

Lessons from Reformers: Starting in 2015, Dutch local governments began providing financial data through a web portal at www.openspending.nl...

OGP in the News – #OGP16 Global Summit 2016 Edition

Summit Recap 2016 came to an impressive close for OGP with the 4th Open Government Partnership Global Summit in Paris from December 7-9, which attracted significant interest from media around the world. Set to a backdrop of concerning geopolitical developments…

Show More