Skip to content

Use: Participation uses of public data

The following indicator is under consideration for this pilot edition of the Barometer: To what extent is there evidence of public data being used to support public engagement in rule-making processes?

Feedback on draft Global Data Barometer Indicators

You are looking at a draft indicator to be included in the expert survey of the Global Data Barometer. Between now and May 10th we are inviting your feedback on this indicator and the elements it contains. You can provide your feedback by (a) completing the feedback form below; or (b) adding in-line annotations.

Feedback form

You can share your feedback on the Use: Participation uses of public data indicator here, or make use of Hypothes.is annotations

Show/hide supporting questions

Existence

  • Is there evidence of public data being used to support public participation in rule-making?
    • There is no evidence of civil society and/or academia using public data to participate in rule-making.
    • There is evidence that civil society, academia, or individual members of the public occasionally use and/or analyze public data to support their participation in rule-making.
    • There is evidence that civil society or academia regularly use and/or analyze public data to support their participation in rule-making.
    • There is evidence that civil society or academia use and/or analyze public data to support their participation in rule-making whenever this may be relevant.

Elements

  • There are cases where public data has been used by academia or civil society to promote greater inclusion, or to address the needs of marginalized groups in rule-making. (No, Partially, Yes)

    Supporting questions (conditional)

    If Partially or Yes: Please briefly explain and provide URLs to relevant examples.

  • There are cases where public data has been used by academia or civil society to address rule-making regarding COVID response and recovery. (No, Partially, Yes)

    Supporting questions (conditional)

    If Partially or Yes: Please briefly explain and provide URLs to relevant examples.

  • There are cases where public data has been used by academia or civil society to address rule-making related to AI or machine learning. (No, Partially, Yes)

    Supporting questions (conditional)

    If Partially or Yes: Please briefly explain and provide URLs to relevant examples.

Extent

  • There is evidence that these uses are having meaningful positive impacts.
    • No
    • Partially
      Supporting questions: Please briefly explain and provide URLs to relevant evidence.
    • Yes
      Supporting questions: Please briefly explain and provide URLs to relevant evidence.

Definitions and Identification

A positive culture of political integrity provides opportunities for a wide range of actors to be involved in public rule-making. When data—about political integrity, but also other subjects—is available, actors outside of government can have greater opportunity to shape policy, for example, by:

  • Monitoring draft legislation or rule-making and making comments;
  • Using government-provided data to generate more informed analysis, or alternative analysis, to input into rule-making;
  • Using government-provided data to craft ballot initiatives or make legislative or regulatory proposals through citizen assemblies that carry binding government commitments to legislative or regulatory action;
  • Using data to report on the potential impacts of new rule-making through media and support campaigning for changes to rules;
  • Analyzing data on who participated in rule-making or comments submitted, to promote an open and inclusive public discourse or highlight abuses or biases in a comment process.

In this question we prioritize institutionalized forms of participation, particularly the activity of academia or civil society as representatives of public interests; citizen assemblies and similar convenings may also qualify, if they have sufficient force. For example, in some countries, citizen assemblies generate policy recommendations that carry a mandate for specific legislative or regulatory action, such as direct implementation or being put to a parliamentary vote. Where significant obligations for rule-making don't exist, convenings would not meet this standard.

For lower scores on this metric, engagement by individual members of the public (as opposed to organized civil society or academia) may also be taken into account. However, for higher scores, there should be evidence that the use of data to support participation in rule-making has become institutionalized.

It is important to note however, that we do not expect all public participation in rule-making that invokes evidence to draw on public data. Many times, people and institutions participating in rule-making processes will draw on lived experience or data collected directly by their organization. Researchers should use their judgement to decide when public data could have been relevant.

Different countries have different processes around rule-making. For the purpose of this question, respond with respect to the most formal national process available. For example:

  • In the United States, Regulations.gov lists all regulations proposed through the federal register, manages comment periods, and enables access to drafts and comments through APIs.
  • In France, citizen assemblies prepare legislative and regulatory proposals that the president has committed to either directly implementing or putting to referendum or vote in Parliament.
  • In ??? there is no formal process for public engagement in rule-making, but civil society and academia make use of the media to lobby on selected rules.

Research strategy

Pursue a strategy of falsification. Look for up to five examples of recent public engagement around (formal or informal) rule-making, and check whether there is any evidence that civil society or academia:

  • (a) Used public data in submissions to consultation processes or in public campaigning;
  • (b) Used data to track rule-making;
  • (c) Independently analyzed data on consultation responses.

If you find a case where there is no evidence of any of these three data uses being present, only the first three existence scores are available. If you find more than two cases where there is no evidence, only the first two existence scores are available.

Your sampling strategy should involve:

  • Using your own knowledge, or consulting with a range of academic or civil society informants, to identify significant rule-making processes across the research period where there has been public engagement. Where this generates more than three cases, select three diverse cases (for example, don't only choose examples focused on technology policy).
  • Checking for public lists of rule-making engagement processes and, where possible, including at least two randomly selected cases.

Please briefly note in the justification box the sampling strategy you have used.

Starting points

  • Search:

    • Public comments for terms such as "data," "percent," or "per cent" (note that these should be checked to ascertain if they are referencing specific data and if that data is public).
    • News media for articles that use public data to report on the potential impacts of new rule-making and support campaigning for changes to rules; in some countries, searching for key legislative and regulatory issues paired with terms like "data journalism" can help surface these, as can solutions journalism sites like SolutionsU.

  • Consult:

    • Officials of civil society organizations experienced in running campaigns to mobilize members and the public to comment on proposed laws or regulation.
    • Academic researchers who study public participation in rule-making or governance, or who have significant profiles as public scholars calling for evidence-based policy.
    • Individuals who have organized ballot initiatives or participated in citizen assemblies.
    • Government officials who run consultation or comment processes.

What to look for?

In addition to the basic questions around the participatory use of public data as seen in the examples above, please look for evidence that can answer the following questions:

  • Has public data been used by academia or civil society to promote greater inclusion, or to address the needs of marginalized groups in rule-making?
  • Has public data been used by academia or civil society to address rule-making regarding COVID response and recovery?
  • Has public data been used by academia or civil society to address rule-making related to AI or machine learning?

Data can be used to support a more informed and vibrant public sphere, in which a wide variety of actors input into rule making. For this to happen relies upon the availability of relevant data, the capability of key groups to use data, and opportunities and freedoms to support public input.

Public participation is a key component of political integrity. In our political integrity module we draw on secondary data to understand whether states have a framework that supports public engagement in law-making and rule-making. In this indicator we explore how far there is evidence that stakeholders are drawing on available datasets and data analysis skills to support their engagement in these opportunities.