Mid Sweden University

Purpose: This paper examines the implementation of the Public Sector Information (PSI) directive in two Swedish municipalities amidst a changing information management landscape impacted by e-government development. Government information is currently looked upon as a “gold mine” and “raw material” to be explored by interested parties. The PSI directive grants European citizens a right to access government information flows (PSI) in order to develop new electronic services. The Swedish government implemented its PSI directive in July 2010. Swedish municipalities have to embrace the directive and make the PSI available to the general public. The literature review highlighted a number of critical issues that should be addressed if PSI initiatives are to succeed. This study revealed that the two municipalities had different resource capacities, and the levels of e-government development varied. This meant that the implementation of the PSI directive also varied. The bigger municipality with a bigger budget had implemented the PSI directive and was publishing data sets on its website, while the smaller municipality with a smaller budget only published a few documents. This paper, therefore, argues that the municipalities should have the same capacity if the PSI is to be a democratic endeavor to serve all citizens. Good quality PSI will also require the municipalities to embrace a records and information continua thinking, which highlights the necessity to proactively and holistically manage the information for pluralization in different contexts. Design/methodology/approach: This paper builds on interviews that were conducted with four municipal officers. The number of respondents is quite small because the focus was specifically on people who were responsible for the implementation of the PSI directive in the municipalities. The respondents were identified through their fellow colleagues and they also recommended each other. Pickard refers to this kind of approach as a snow-bowling approach. Through interviews and observation, one participant advises on issues that need further inquiry and, hence, directs the researcher to another person who might offer more answers. A general interview guide approach was used to solicit answers to issues such as the implementation of the PSI directive, guidelines for PSI publication, if terms such as big data and open data were being used in the municipalities, if the municipalities had an information governance plan and how it was understood, if the information systems were well aligned to meet with the requirements of the PSI directive, how e-government development affected information management and information security and if the municipalities had information security guidelines. Findings: The Swedish government requires its administrations to engage in e-government development. This development has led to increased amounts of information that the municipalities have to effectively manage and make available to the general public. However, the municipalities operate under different conditions. Municipalities that are financially stronger are better placed to invest in measures that will lead to better quality PSI. All municipalities are, however, expected to implement the PSI directive. The two municipalities that were the subjects of this study had different information management environments and the capacity to invest in information management systems that would facilitate the management of their information resources. The budgetary constraints faced by smaller municipalities might impact the implementation of the PSI directive and, hence, hinder the publication of the PSI. e-Government is meant to be an inclusive project, and the PSI is meant for all citizens with innovative ideas. There is a risk that citizens who belong to poorer municipalities might not be equally privileged compared to those living in resourceful municipalities. This poses a democratic challenge that should concern all people interested in an open and inclusive society. Originality/value: Little research has so far been published on the implementation process of the PSI directive. The discourses that have started to emerge discuss the challenges of open data without paying much attention to the creation, capture and the management aspects of the PSI. The originality of this paper, therefore, lies in the application of the records and information continua thinking, which highlights dimensions that enhance information management and the democratic challenges that will be caused by the data divide, as municipalities have different capabilities when it comes to the publication of the PSI.