Skip Navigation

Uruguay

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 4

ON THE PAGE


Current Action Plan

2018-2020

Action Plan 4

  • Number of Commitments: 39
  • Policy Area Focus: Environmental Protection and Sustainability, Gender and Generational Equality, Open Justice

Uruguay joined OGP in 2011. They are currently implementing 39 commitments from their 2018-2020 action plan.
This action plan features commitments related to the environment, anti-corruption, access to information, inclusion, open justice, local governments and health.


Democracy, a Precious Asset We Must Protect

Uruguay’s Fourth Open Government Action Plan Strengthening democracy requires ongoing work and the willingness to take up new challenges and to recognize the value of collective knowledge. Efforts made by the State to promote transparency, participation, justice, and the protection…


Contact

Virginia Pardo Director of the Digital Citizens Area, Development of Electronic Government and Information Society and Knowledge Agency virginia.pardo@agesic.gub.uy

Commitments


Resources

  1. Implementing SDG16+ Through the Open Government Partnership

    2019, Perspective, Web page

  2. OGP Report Card – Uruguay (2017)

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  3. Open Government in Uruguay: Strengthening dialogue to make up for institutional challenges

    2015, Research Product, Web page

  4. The social impact of open data in the global south

    2015, Web page

  5. U4 Poster – Croatia, Uruguay, Georgia

    2015, Case Study, Web page

  6. Uruguay Action Plan 2012

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  7. Uruguay Action Plan 2014-2016

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  8. Uruguay Action Plan 2014-2016 – Annex 1

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  9. Uruguay Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  10. Uruguay Annex 1 – Fichas de Proyectos

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  11. Uruguay Design Report 2018-2020

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  12. Uruguay Design Report 2018-2020 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  13. Uruguay End-of-Term Report 2014-2016

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  14. Uruguay End-of-Term Report 2014-2016 – For Public Comment

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  15. Uruguay End-of-Term Report 2016-2018

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  16. Uruguay End-of-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2019, Report Comments, Web page

  17. Uruguay End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2014-2016

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  18. Uruguay End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2018-2020

    2021, Self Assessment, Web page

  19. Uruguay End-Term Self-Assessment Report 2016-2018

    2018, Self Assessment, Web page

  20. Uruguay IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  21. Uruguay Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2018, IRM Report, Web page

  22. Uruguay Mid-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  23. Uruguay Mid-Term Self-Assessment 2016-2018

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  24. Uruguay Mid-Term Self-Assessment 2018-2020

    2019, Self Assessment, Web page

  25. Uruguay Plan Accion 2014-16 – Anexo 1 – Fichas de Proyectos

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  26. Uruguay Plan Accion 2014-2016 – Anexo 2 y 3 – Compromisos y Recomendaciones

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  27. Uruguay Plan Accion 2014-2016 – Anexo 4 – Relatorias mesa 1 y 2 comendaciones

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  28. Uruguay Progress Report 2014-2015

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  29. Uruguay Reporte de Auto Evaluación 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  30. Uruguay Self-Assessment Report 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  31. Uruguay Third National Action Plan 2016-2018

    2016, Action Plan, Web page

  32. Uruguay, Informe de Autoevaluacion, 2014-16

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  33. Uruguay, Midterm Self-Assessment, 2014-16 (English)

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  34. Uruguay, Second Action Plan, 2014-2016

    2015, Action Plan, 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

Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
3
Action Plan 2
18
1
4
Action Plan 3
4
Action Plan 4

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
2
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 4

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
Action Plan 4
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4

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
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
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)

Access to Information

Action Implications
Implement for Results
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)
Action Implications
Implement for Results
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)

Fiscal Openness

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

Recent Posts

Water CitizENGAGE in Paraguay

Making Waves: Improving Water Governance through Open Government Approaches

Clean and readily available water for all is a human right. Learn how open government approaches can improve accessibility, transparency and government accountability over this precious natural resource.

Group with post-its

Closed Democracies in Latin America? Openness at a Crossroads

Democracy is facing challenging times globally and especially in Latin America. In this region, only three countries are considered full democracies and democracy is backsliding overall.

Pride Image Unsplash

Let’s Put Some Pride into Open Government Action Plans

See how OGP members are using their action plans to engage LGBTQIA+ communities and address their values and needs.

28893014307_dc4f4b2001_k

Environmental Democracy: Where Open Government and the Escazu Agreement Meet

In 2018, 22 countries from Latin America and the Caribbean reached a historical milestone in environmental democracy by signing the Escazu Agreement. In 2020, 20 countries have ratified the treaty and one more ratification is missing to make this a reality...

Show More
Open Government Partnership