Explain the Open Policy Making Model in Realizing Principle of Open Government

Document Type : Research Article (with qualitative approaches)


1 Ph.D. Student, Public Management, Decision making and public policy, Faculty of Management, Islamic Azad University, khorasgan branch, Isfahan, Iran.

2 .Department of Public Management, Faculty of Management, Islamic Azad University, khorasganbranch, Isfahan, Iran,

3 Faculty Member, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management, Islamic Azad Eslami University, Isfahan(Khorasgan) Branch

4 Department of Public Management, Faculty of Management, Islamic Azad University, khorasgan branch, Isfahan, Iran.


purpose: The aim is to survey the concept of open government and open policy making models, to explain this model as a support for open government.
Design/ Methodology/ Approach: The interpretive-critical meta-analysis method has been used. After searching for relevant content and evaluating them, 37 sources were selected, then using MAXQDA2020 for coding, extracting themes and dimensions of the model were discussed.
Research finding: It is concluded that the open government, which includes the three principles of transparency, participation, and cooperation, needs to use the open policy making model, which is to open the policy-making process and listen to the voices. It's to be able to support these three principles.
Limitations & Consequences: In this research, the open policy making model has been studied as a supporter of the realization of the open government. In future researches, issues such as open data & open innovation role or legal foundations of open government realization can be addressed.
Practical Consequences: In accordance with the principle of open government transparency, the open data approach is used in problem identification and the agenda-setting stage of the policy-making process. In accordance with the principle of participation in open government in the policy design stage, open innovation approach, using the challenge mechanism to find solutions and principles of co-design, and in the policy legitimacy phase of electronic voting or participatory budgeting will be used. Finally, in accordance with the principle of cooperation in the policy implementation and evaluation phase, the effective cooperation of citizens in accepting policies and using monitoring tools based on information technology is exploited.
Innovation or Value of the Article: The concept of open government has been formed in the last decade and since the most important work of governments is public policy, it is necessary to identify and introduce a policy-making model that supports the open government.


  1. Abdolhosseinzadeh Mohammad, Sanaei Mehdi, Zolfagharzadeh Mohammad Mehdi. (2017). The concept of open government data policy and explaining its advantages and benefits in various policy areas. Strategic Studies in Public Policy, 7(22), 55-74. (in Persian)
  2. Ani Matei and Sergiu Ioan Irimia. (2014). Open Source Governance—A More Ambitious Cousin of Collaborative Governance. International Journal of Public Administration, (37), 812-823.
  3. Bakıcı, T., Almirall, E., & Wareham, J. (2013). A smart city initiative: The case of Barcelona. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, (4), 135-148. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13132- 012-084-9.
  4. Ball, C. (2009). What is transparency? Public Integrity, (11), 293–307.
  5. Bench, S., & Day, T. (2010). The user experience of critical care discharge: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research. International journal of nursing studies, (47), 487-499.


  1. Bennett, C. (1985). From the Dark to the Light: The Open Government Debate in Britain. Journal of Public Policy, (5), 187-213
  2. Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, (6), 78–91.
  3. Bremer, E. S (2013). Incorporation by reference in an open-government age. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, (36), 131–190.
  4. Chun, S. A, Shulmann, S., Sandoval, R., & Hovy, E. (2010). Government 2.0: Making connections between citizens, data and government. Information Polity, (15), 1–9.
  5. Dawes, S. (2010). Stewardship and usefulness: Policy Principles for information-based transparency.. Government Information Quarterly, (27), 377–383.
  6. Deckert, M., Stern, A., & Sack W. (2011). Peer to PCAST: What does open video have to do with open government? Information Polity, (16), 215–231.
  7. Dixon-Woods, M., Cavers, D., Agarwal, S., Annandale, E., Arthur, A., Harvey, J.,... & Riley, R. (2006). Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable. BMC medical research methodology, (6), 35.
  8. Dulong de Rosnay, M., & Janssen, K. (2014). Legal and institutional challenges for opening data across public sectors: Towards common policy solutions. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, (9), 1-14.
  9. Edwards, J., & Kaimal, G. (2016). Using meta-synthesis to support application of qualitative methods findings in practice: A discussion of meta-ethnography, narrative synthesis, and critical interpretive synthesis. The Arts in Psychotherapy, (51), 30-35.
  10. Elbadawi, I. A. (2012). The State of Open Government Data in GCC Countries. 12th European Conference on eGovernment (ECEG 2012), 193-200. Barcelona, Spain.
  11. Gholipour Rahmatallah, Hamedi Mohsen, Mansoorzadeh SayedAli. (2019). Provide an Open Policy Framework in the Field of Transportation. Scientific Journal of Transportation Research. 16(1). 137-150. (in Persian)
  12. Goldar Zahra, Amiri Mojtaba, Gholipour Soteh Rahmatallah, Moazami Mansour. (2017). Designing a conceptual framework for stakeholder engagement in public policy-making. Journal of Audit science. 17(66). 81-105. (in Persian)
  13. Hadi Paykani, Mehrabaan. (2016). An Introduction to the Process of Public Policy Making. Isfahan. Islamic Azad University, Khorasgan Branch. (in Persian)
  14. J. Scholl and R. Klischewski. (2007). E-Government Integration and Interoperability: Framing the Research Agenda. International Journal of Public Administration, (30),889-920.
  15. Harrison, T. M, Guerrero, S., Burke, B. G, & Cook, M. (2012). Open government and e-government: Democratic challenges from a public value perspective. Information Polity, (17), 83–97.
  16. Kalampokis, E., Tambouris, E., & Tarabanis, K.. (2011). A classification scheme for open government data: Towards linking decentralised data. International Journal of Web Engineering and Technology, 6, 266-285. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJWET.2011.
  17. Lewis, J. R. (2000). FOIA and the Emergence of Federal Information Policy in the1980s and1990s. In E. G. D. Garson, Handbook of Public Information Systems 41-52. New York: Marcel Dekker.
  18. Luna-Reyes, L. F & Chun, S. A (2012). Open government and public participation: Issues and challenges in creating public value. Information Polity, (17), 77–81.
  19. McDermott, P. (2010). Building open government. Government Information Quarterly, (27),401_413.
  20. Mergel, I. (2012). The social media innovation challenge in the public sector. Information Polity, (17), 281-292
  21. Mohaghar Ali, Ansari Manoucher, Sadeghi Moghaddam Mohammad Reza, Mirkazemi Mood Mohammad. (2018). A Meta Synthesis of the Modeling Methods of Complex Socio-technica Systems with a Multi Paradigm-multi Methodology Approach. Industrial Management Journal. 10(2). 247-278. (in Persian)
  22. Mutuku, L.N., & Colaco, J.. (2012). Increasing kenyan open data consumption: A design thinking approach.. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, 18-21. New York, NY, USA: ICEGOV '12, ACM.
  23. Noblit, G.W., & Hare, R.D. (1988). Meta-Ethnography: synthesizing qualitative studies. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
  24. (2009 September 15, 2012, ). Open government directive. The White House. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/memoranda_2010/ m10-06. pdf
  25. (2016,). Open policy making in a digital age. Ottawa: public policy forum.
  26. (April 2016). Open Policy Making in the EU Lessons and Opportunities, The Democratic Society.



  1. Orszag, P. R. (2009). Open Government Directive: Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies,", Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. 1-11: Ed. Washington DC: The White House.
  2. Parycek, P., Hochtl, J., & Ginner, M. (2014). Open government data implementation evaluation. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 80–99. Retrieved fro
  3. http:// www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext pid=S0718-18762014000200007 nrm
  4. Paterson, B. L., Dubouloz, C. J., Chevrier, J., Ashe, B., King, J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2009). Conducting qualitative metasynthesis research: Insights from a metasynthesis project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, (8), 22-33
  5. Reddick, C. & Ganapati, S. (2011). Open government achievement and satisfaction in US Federal Agencies: Survey Evidence for the three pillars. Journal of E-Governance,(34), 193–202.
  6. Roberts, A. S. (2000). Less Government, More Secrecy: Reinvention and the Weakening of Freedom of Information Law. Public Administration Review. (60). 308-320.
  7. Scholl, H. J., & Scholl, M. C. (2014). Smart Governance: A Roadmap for Research and Practice. iConference, 163–176. doi:10.9776/14060
  8. Shkabaturm, J. (2013). Transparency with (out) accountability: Open government in the United States. Yale Law & Policy Review. (31). 1–66.
  9. Smith, Kevin B. & Larimer, Christopher W. (2013). The Public Policy Theory Primer. Tehran: saffar Press. (in Persian)
  10. Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 8, 45.
  11. Tim Hughes, Kaela Scott Paul Maassen, (2012), Improving Public Services: Guidance for developing
  12. Van Dooren, W., Caluwe, C. de, & Lonti, Z. (2012). How to measure public administration performance. A conceptual model with applications for budgeting, human resources management, and open government. Public Performance & Management Review, 35(3) , 489