Tina Jukić

Although open government data (OGD) and co-creation are increasingly recognised as important components of smart public governance (SPG), less is known about the organisational capacities relevant to the development of OGD-driven co-creation. This study examines the extent to which Slovenian ministries, as central government organisations responsible for policymaking, possess selected OGD-related and co-creation-related organisational capacities that may represent potential preconditions for OGD-driven co-creation. This study draws on a focused re-analysis of semi-structured interview material collected in eight Slovenian ministries and examines seven capacities: data stewardship and institutional data governance, data-driven policymaking and decision-making, monitoring of data reuse, sensitive-data awareness and responsible openness, stakeholder participation, feedback mechanisms, and co-creation practices. Based on participants’ accounts, data stewardship arrangements and awareness of sensitive-data requirements were reported across all eight ministries, while data-driven policymaking and decision-making and monitoring of data reuse showed greater variation. Stakeholder participation was reported in all eight ministries, although its extent and form varied, while feedback mechanisms were well established across the ministries. At the same time, reported co-creation practices were predominantly at lower or intermediate levels of the co-creation ladder. Participation practices primarily reflected stakeholder input, while feedback mechanisms mainly reflected institutional responsiveness rather than co-creation in themselves. This study provides an empirical assessment of the reported presence and extent of seven selected organisational capacities relevant to OGD-driven co-creation in the participating Slovenian ministries.

Purpose: This article explores the concept of open government data (OGD)-driven co-creation, which combines the principles of OGD and cocreation to stimulate innovation and create public value. It focuses specifically on the organisational characteristics and capacities that enable public organisations to engage effectively in OGD-based co-creation.Design/Methodology/Approach: Existing literature has primarily examined drivers and barriers from the perspective of data publication capabilities, while less attention has been paid to the capacities required to use OGD co-creatively. This study therefore seeks to identify the organisational features and capacities that enable public organisations to engage in OGD-driven co-creation as constructive partners. To this end, it employs a systematic literature review, synthesising findings from two distinct but related bodies of research: one focusing on OGD implementation and the other on OGD-driven co-creation.Findings: The results suggest that the capacity of public organisations to publish open data is a necessary but not sufficient condition for engaging in OGD-based co-creation. Effective engagement in such practices requires deeper organisational transformation. Specifically, public organisations must adopt co-creation as a strategic orientation, embrace a service-dominant logic, use agile and participatory approaches, and invest in building trust, leadership, and employee capabilities to support collaborative innovation based on OGD.Practical Implications: The study identifies and synthesises organisational factors that serve as preconditions for public organisations to take a constructive and active role in OGD-driven co-creation. It offers insights into the types of internal reform and capacity-building needed to prepare public organisations to co-create within open data ecosystems.Originality/Value: The article represents an initial attempt to systematically synthesise the organisational prerequisites for OGD-driven co-creation. As such, it provides a basis for further research on the development of an integrated framework for organisational readiness for OGD-driven co-creation, as well as practical tools for its assessment.

Prispevek predstavlja celovito analizo stanja in trendov na področju odprtih podatkov javnega sektorja (OPJS) v Sloveniji z vključeno mednarodno primerjavo. Analiza zasleduje dva cilja: (1) kronološko opredeliti in slediti trendom ter napredkom znotraj države ter (2) umestiti Slovenijo na globalni oz. regionalni ravni glede stanja na področju OPJS. Prvi vidik omogoča vpogled v dinamiko razvoja politike OPJS skozi čas. Kronološki prikaz trendov implementacije OPJS omogoča boljše razumevanje določenih dosežkov (oz. stagnacije ali celo neuspehov) v luči širše politične, ekonomske in družbene situacije. Strateška prizadevanja in implementacija OPJS se ne izvajajo v vakuumu, ampak so podvrženi vplivu širšega konteksta. Zato vpogled v širšo sliko omogoča boljše razumevanje nacionalnega okolja, bodisi kot (ne)posrednega spodbujevalnega dejavnika bodisi kot ovire pri izvajanju OPJS. Drugi vidik opredeli pozicijo, ki jo je Slovenija dosegla na globalni oz. regionalni ravni v obravnavanem časovnem obdobju. Predstavljene so pomembnejše mednarodne raziskave, ki merijo zrelost OPJS in v te meritve redno vključujejo tudi Slovenijo: (1) indeks EU Open Data Maturity, ki ga spremlja Evropska komisija; (2) indeks OURdata, ki ga spremlja OECD, in (3) ODIN (Open Data Inventory), ki ga pripravlja organizacija Open Data Watch. S tem prispevek zapolnjuje manko usklajene predstavitve sicer kompatibilnih raziskav, ki vse stremijo k istemu cilju – izboljšanju stanja OPJS. Analiza vseh treh raziskav na enem mestu omogoča preglednejšo in celovitejšo sliko o napredku Slovenije in globalnih trendih.

This paper applies a case study approach to test a multi-attribute decision-support model for assessing smart public governance maturity in real-life settings. Developed on prior research, verified through synthetic cases, and validated through expert focus group discussions, the model enables a structured, criteria-based assessment of smart public governance maturity across four dimensions: ICT-enabled innovations for public sector governance, institutional changes, empowered citizens, and outcomes: public value creation. Two public administration organisations in charge of policy making in Slovenia, each operating in a distinct policy sector, were used as case studies for testing the proposed assessment tool. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with policy makers, and responses were aligned with predefined attribute value scales. The findings confirm that the model can be applied in practice as a useful tool for public sector organisations seeking to assess their smart public governance maturity level and identify areas for further improvement.

This article presents a decision support model (DSM) for assessing the quality of co‐creation processes and critically reflects on its applicability in the context of climate change mitigation in urban settings. While cities have become pivotal in addressing climate change, often through co‐creation, tools for evaluating urban climate‐related co‐creation initiatives remain scarce. Rather than advocating for a tool specifically designed for this context, the article seeks to offer a universal DSM developed through a systematic literature review and empirical case studies within the framework of the COGOV Horizon project. The DSM incorporates 19 attributes across three phases of co‐creation: stakeholder identification and mobilisation, the act of co‐creation, and its effects. The model is tested on the Bee Path initiative of the City of Ljubljana, a successful co‐creation project aimed at fostering a bee‐friendly urban environment and promoting self‐sufficiency. The results confirm the DSM’s applicability in assessing the success of co‐creation in the context of climate change policies at the city level of governance. Moreover, this tool offers a foundation model for further integration with emerging technologies to enhance decision‐making and guidance for public organisations. As such, the DSM serves as a practical tool enabling public organisations to critically reflect on their roles in co‐creation initiatives, identify areas for improvement, and enhance their capacity as co‐creators in future urban climate policies and beyond.

Odprti podatki javnega sektorja (OPJS) so javno dobro, katerih vpliv presega okvir javnega sektorja ter lahko prispevajo k razvoju gospodarstva in družbeni blaginji. Vendar podatki sami po sebi ne ustvarjajo vrednosti, saj zgolj objava podatkov ne zagotavlja samodejnih pozitivnih učinkov in vpliva v praksi. Ključno vlogo pri tem imajo javne organizacije, ki morajo zagotavljati kakovostne, dostopne in pravočasno objavljene podatke ter konstruktivno sodelovati v širšem ekosistemu uporabnikov podatkov. Čeprav ima Slovenija ugoden zakonodajni in institucionalni okvir za OPJS, se največji izzivi pojavljajo na organizacijski ravni. Z namenom lažjega razumevanja teh izzivov in načinov, kako jih premagati, prispevek analizira znanstvene članke (iz baz WoS in Scopus) ter prepoznava spodbujevalne in zaviralne dejavnike znotraj javnih organizacij, ki vplivajo na odpiranje podatkov. Sistematični pregled teh »univerzalnih« dejavnikov ponuja osnovo za poglobljeno razumevanje slovenskih posebnosti in premagovanje izzivov pri odpiranju podatkov javnega sektorja.

The need to better understand the knowledge co-production potential through citizen science is increasingly acknowledged. This perspective goes beyond merely viewing citizen science as a way of community-based monitoring or volunteer-based data collection. Based on a conceptual framework by Yu et al. (in press), this study validates and measures the impact of key factors on knowledge co-production outcomes through citizen science. Using exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), we develop a model that suggests causative relationships between three exogenous constructs—“volunteer trust”, “researcher-volunteer connectedness”, “openness and accessibility”—and two endogenous constructs—“scientific citizenship” and “technoscientific outputs”. “Researcher-volunteer connectedness” and “volunteer trust” appear to be more impactful for “scientific citizenship” than “openness and accessibility”, while “openness and accessibility” demonstrate the highest impact on “technoscientific outputs”. “Scientific citizenship” and “technoscientific outputs” do not exhibit strong direct correlations. Our results provide valuable input for strengthening the potential of citizen science to co-produce knowledge.

Purpose: The paper adopts a holistic approach to studying the scale and scope of organisational change resulting from the COVID-19 crisis within the Slovenian public administration. It aims to go beyond the relatively narrow research focus of existing literature, which is confined to short-term responses to the crisis affecting specific organisational aspects of public administration. Design/methodology/approach: Theoretically underpinned by Nograšek and Vintar’s (2014) upgrade of Leavitt’s diamond model, the paper employs a multi-case study design to explore the long-term implications of COVID-19-induced changes within the Slovenian public administration. Findings: The findings reveal an uneven impact of the COVID-19 crisis across Slovenian state administration organisations in terms of the scale and scope of changes, noting that the two key long-term changes – telework and new digital communication channels – have not become equivalent alternatives to traditional work and communication methods. Moreover, the paper identifies changes within the element “people” as the primary disruptors of organisational equilibrium, triggering a ripple effect of changes within other organisational elements. Originality/value: The paper debunks the myth about the “radical” impact of COVID-19 by concluding that long-term changes have not altered the essence of (Slovenian) public organisations, characterised as traditional public administration. Theoretically, it demonstrates the need for a new adaptation of Leavitt’s diamond model to explain organisational changes in turbulent/crisis times.

Purpose: This paper aims to develop a model that supports public organisations in making informed strategic decisions as to which public services are most suitable to be improved through co-creation. Thus, it first identifies the features that make public services (un)suitable for co-creation and then applies this knowledge to develop a multi-criteria decision support model for the assessment of their co-creation readiness. Design/methodology/approach: The decision support model is the result of design science research. While its structure is determined by a qualitative multi-criteria decision analysis, its substance builds on a content analysis of Web of Science papers and over a dozen empirical case studies. Findings: The model is comprised of 13 criteria clustered into two groups: service readiness criteria from the perspective of service users and service readiness criteria from the perspective of a public organisation. Research limitations/implications: The model attributes rely on a limited number of empirical cases and references from the literature review. The model was tested by only one public organisation on four of its services. Originality/value: The paper shifts the research focus from organisational properties and capacity, as the key co-creation drivers and barriers, to features of public services as additional factors that affect the prospect of co-creation. Thus, it makes a pioneering step towards the conceptualisation of the idea of “service readiness for co-creation” and the development of a practical instrument that supports co-creation in the public sector.

This paper presents the results of the content analysis of 139 Web of Science papers focused on collaborative innovation with external stakeholders of public administration, specifically on co-production and co-creation. The analysis included papers published between 2009 and 2018 and was based on a coding scheme consisting of 12 parameters grouped into four groups: paper descriptors, financial support of the research, methodological framework, and co-creation characteristics. The results reveal a considerable increase in researchers’ interest in co-production and co-creation in the context of public administration in the last few years. This is particularly the case in Northern and Western Europe, where Anglo-Saxon and Nordic administrative traditions dominate. Furthermore, the results show that co-creation is most often placed in the contexts of social policy and welfare, as well as health care. Over the selected period, research seldom addressed companies as a target group in the co-creation of public services—in comparison to citizens and internal users. More than three quarters of the papers observed were empirical and less than 20% were quantitative. In general, a lack of conceptual clarity was often identified through the interchangeable usage of the terms co-creation and co-creation and the low level of international comparison—the majority of the papers focused on case descriptions at a national level, even though collaborative innovation is strongly related to administrative traditions dominating in specific regions.