The Korean Journal of Public Administration
[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Public Administration - Vol. 62, No. 4, pp.233-261
ISSN: 1229-6694 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2024
Received 20 Aug 2024 Revised 10 Sep 2024 Accepted 29 Sep 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24145/KJPA.62.4.8

공공데이터와 지식공유재: 지식공유재 관리 프레임워크를 통한 이해를 중심으로

방인식* ; 신승윤**
*제1저자, 고려대학교 정부학연구소 선임연구원 isbang83@gmail.com
**교신저자, 소프트웨어정책연구소 선임연구원 seungyoon@spri.kr
Public Data and Knowledge Commons: A Case Study of the Public Data Portal in South Korea
Insik Bang* ; Seung-Yoon Shin**

초록

효율적이고 민주적인 공공데이터 관리를 위해서는 관리 전략의 개선, 민간의 적극적인 참여, 그리고 정보 공유의 필요성이 강조되고 있다. 이에 본 연구는 공공재와 지식공유재 개념을 살펴보고, 지식공유재 관리 프레임워크를 공공데이터포털에 적용하여 이를 지식공유재로 이해할 가능성을 검토하고자 한다. 공공데이터포털은 법적, 재정적, 관리적인 측면에서는 공공재로 여겨지지만, 민간이 데이터를 생산하고 환류하는 가능성을 고려할 때 지식공유재로 이해될 수 있다. 특히 기업과 국민이 정보통신 기술을 활용해 일부 공공데이터를 생산하고, 기술 개발 및 의견을 제시함으로써 공공데이터의 범위를 확장하고 품질을 향상했다. 그러나 이러한 협력적 활동은 지속해서 이루어지지 않았으며, 이는 제도의 부족에서 기인한 것으로 보인다. 공공데이터포털을 공공재에서 지식공유재로 인식하는 전환은 다양한 정보 정책 수립과 비공식적 제도의 확장을 통해 공공데이터의 지속 가능한 관리에 기여할 것으로 기대된다.

Abstract

Ensuring the efficient and democratic management of public data has entailed a strong emphasis on improving management strategies, promoting active public participation, and encouraging information sharing. This study explores the concepts of public goods and knowledge commons and applies the governing knowledge commons framework to South Korea’s public data portal to assess the potential of viewing it as a knowledge commons. The public data portal is typically seen as a public good in terms of legal, financial, and management aspects though it can also be understood as a knowledge commons when considering the possibility of data production and feedback from private users. In particular, firms and citizens have expanded the scope and enhanced the quality of public data by leveraging information and communications technology to produce data and provide feedback. However, these collaborative efforts have not been consistently sustained, largely due to inadequate institutional support. Reframing public data portals from public goods to knowledge commons could lead to more sustainable management of public data, supported by diverse information policies and the expansion of informal institutions.

Keywords:

open government data, public data portal, knowledge commons, institutions, and sustainability

키워드:

공공데이터 개방, 공공데이터포털, 지식공유재, 제도, 지속가능성

References

  • 강은숙・김종석. (2016). 엘리너 오스트롬, 공유의 비극을 넘어. 커뮤니케이션북스.
  • 김은선. (2023). “공공데이터의 개방・ 활용 촉진을 위한 법제도 개선방안 연구-공공데이터 제공거부 사례를 중심으로”. 「정보화정책」, 30(2), 46-67.
  • 박치성・고길곤, (2008). 인터넷 공간에서 행정학 지식의 수요와 공급: 지식 공유재 비극의 관점에서“. 「한국행정학보」, 43(2), 201-225.
  • 배성훈・이종용・송석현・장주병・강상규・윤진선・김제완. (2013). “공공데이터 민간개방 확대를 위한 법률제정의 필요성에 관한 연구”. 「한국지역정보화학회지」, 16(3), 67-86.
  • 서형준・명승환. (2014). “수요자 중심의 공공 데이터 민간 활용 방안: 민간부문 정보통신 담당자의 인식 조사를 중심으로”. 「한국지역정보화학회지」, 17(3), 61-86.
  • 송석현・이삼열・신열・이재용 (2017). “한국의 공공데이터 개방 정책의 효과에 대한 연구: 생태계 관점에서”. 「한국지역정보학회지」, 20(4), 1-34.
  • 윤종수. (2020). “사물인터넷, 블록체인, 인공지능의 상호운용에 있어서 개인정보자기결정권의 실현 및 데이터 이용 활성화”. 「정보법학」, 24(3), 107-148.
  • 윤홍근・안도경. (2010). 「공유의 비극을 넘어 (Ostrom E., 1990. Governing the Commons, Cambridge University Press, New York)」. 알에이치코리아.
  • 오윤경・차남준. (2023). 공공분야 데이터플랫폼 활용성 제고방안 연구. 한국행정연구원 연구보고서. 2023-15.
  • 이민석. (2021). “오픈소스를 통해 진정한 개발자로 성장하기 위한 조언”. 오픈소스 소프트웨어 포털 기고문.
  • 이보옥. (2021). “공공데이터 활용 활성화를 위한 법적 개선방안-데이터 기본법 제정을 통한 법적개선방안을 중심으로”. 「성균관법학」, 33(2), 623-688.
  • 이재용・고경훈・김정숙. (2021). “데이터기반행정 정착을 위한 지방자치단체 관리체계 정립방안 연구”. 한국지방행정연구원 기본연구과제, 2021, 1-274.
  • 이재원. (2020). “키워드 네트워크 분석을 이용한 공공데이터 수요 예측”. 「정보화정책」, 27(4), 24-46.
  • 조재인. (2018). “공공데이터포털을 통해 개방된 도서관 관련 데이터 분석”. 「한국비블리아학회지」, 29(2), 35-56.
  • 전병진・김희웅. (2017). “공공 빅데이터 개방 및 활용 활성화 방안에 대한 연구”. 「정보화정책」, 24(3), 27-41.
  • 정준화. (2014). “공공데이터 개방 및 빅데이터 활용 지원 서비스 현황과 과제”. 「NARS 현장보고서」, 제35호. 2014.12.31.
  • 전자신문. (2023). “행안부, 공공데이터포털 전면 개편・・・2026년까지 246억 투입”. 2023.09.07.
  • 최재송・이명석・배인명. (2001). “공유재 문제의 자치적 해결: 충남보령시 장고도 어촌계의 사례를 중심으로”. 「한국행정연구」, 10(2), 152-172.
  • 한국지능정보사회진흥원. (2022). 「2022년 빅데이터 플랫폼 데이터 활용 우수사례집」.
  • 한희정・황성욱・이정민・오효정. (2020). “공공데이터포털 이용자 서비스 현황 분석 및 개선방안-시민참여형 데이터포털을 중심으로”. 「한국도서관・정보학회지」, 51(1), 255-279.
  • 행정안전부・환경부・산업통상자원부・국토교통부. (2021). “요소수 판매 데이터 대국민 제공, 민관협업 새 지평 열다”. 대한민국 정책브리핑.
  • 행정안전부. (2021). 「공공데이터 제공・관리 실무매뉴얼」. 2021.10.
  • 행정안전부. (2018). “2022년까지 범정부 공공데이터 용어・형식 표준화한다” 경제정책해설.
  • 행정안전부. (2017). “공공데이터 활용해 국민이 직접 사회 문제 해결한다: 국민 중심의 오픈데이터포럼 발족”. 행정안전부 보도자료. 2017.07.28.
  • 행정안전부・한국지능정보사회진흥원. (2021). 「공공부문 데이터 활용・우수 사례집」.
  • 황주성. (2016). “공공데이터 개방정책의 효과에 대한 분석, 선형 모델인가 생태계 모델인가?”. 「한국지역정보화학회지」, 19(2), 1-28.
  • Basurto, X. (2005). How locally designed access and use controls can prevent the tragedy of the commons in a Mexican small-scale fishing community. Society and natural resources, 18(7), 643-659. [https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920590959631]
  • Benefeldt, O., Persson, J. S., & Madsen, S. (2020). Data governance as a collective action problem. Information Systems Frontiers, 22, 299-313. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09923-z]
  • Cabrera, A., & Cabrera, E. F. (2002). Knowledge=sharing dilemmas, Organization Studies, 23(5), 687-710. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840602235001]
  • Chhatre, A., & Agrawal, A. (2008). Forest commons and local enforcement. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 105(36), 13268-13291. [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0803399105]
  • Frischmann, B. M., Strandburg, K.J., & Madison, M. J. (2014). Governing medical knowledge commons. Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199972036.001.0001]
  • Frischmann, B. M., Madison, M. J., & Sanfilippo, M. R. (Eds.). (2023). Governing smart cities as knowledge commons. Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108938532]
  • Fulk, J., et al. (2004). A test of the individual action model for organizational information commons. Organizational Studies, 15(5), 569-585. [https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0081]
  • Gagliardi, D., Schina, L., Sarcinella, M. L., Mangialardi, G., Niglia, F., & Corallo, A. (2017). Information and communication technologies and public participation: interactive maps and value added for citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 34(1), 153-166. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.09.002]
  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons: the population problem has no technical solution: it requires a fundamental extension in morality. science, 162(3859), 1243-1248. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243]
  • Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (2003). Ideas, artifacts, and facilities: information as a common-pool resource. Law and contemporary problems, 66(1/2), 111-145.
  • Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Understanding knowledge as a commons. MIT press. [https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6980.001.0001]
  • Huijboom, N., & Van den Broek, T. (2011). Open data: an international comparison of strategies. European journal of ePractice, 12(1), 4-16. http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/ groups/public/documents/UN-DPADM/UNPAN046727.pdf
  • Juell-Skielse, G., Hjalmarsson, A., Johannesson, P., & Rudmark, D. (2014). Is the public motivated to engage in open data innovation?. In Electronic Government: 13th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2014, Dublin, Ireland, September 1-3, 2014. Proceedings 13 (pp. 277-288). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44426-9_23]
  • Libecap, G. D. (2009). The tragedy of the commons: property rights and markets as solutions to resource and environmental problems. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Extraction, 53(1), 129-144. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2007.00425.x]
  • Lnenicka, M., & Nikiforova, A. (2021). Transparency-by-design: What is the role of open data portals?. Telematics and Informatics, 61, 101605. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101605]
  • Lourenço, R. P. (2015). An analysis of open government portals: A perspective of transparency for accountability. Government information quarterly, 32(3), 323-332. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.05.006]
  • Madison, M. J. (2014). Commons at the intersection of peer production, citizen science, and big data: galaxy zoo. Governing knowledge commons, 209, 215. [https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199972036.003.0007]
  • Magalhaes, G., & Roseira, C. (2020). Open government data and the private sector: An empirical view on business models and value creation. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101248. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.08.004]
  • Mansbridge, J. (2014). The role of the state in governing the commons. Environmental Science & Policy, 36, 8-10. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.07.006]
  • Matheus, R., & Janssen, M. (2020). A systematic literature study to unravel transparency enabled by open government data: The window theory. Public Performance & Management Review, 43(3), 503-534. [https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2019.1691025]
  • Matheus, R, Janssen, M., & Janowski, T. (2021). Design principles for creating digital transparency in government. Government Information Quarterly, 38(1), 101550. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101550]
  • McGinnis, M. D. (2011). An Introduction to IAD and the language of the Ostrom workshop: a simple guide to a complex framework. Policy studies journal, 39(1), 169-183. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00401.x]
  • Mokobombang, N. N., Gutierrez, J., & Petrova, K. (2020). Value-creating roles played by the actors in open government data: A systematic literature review. Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 2020, Wellington.
  • Murtazashvili, I., et al. (2022). Blockchain networks as knowledge commons. International Journal of the Commons, 16(1). [https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.1146]
  • Nikiforova, A. (2021). Smarter open government data for society 5.0: are your open data smart enough? Sensors, 21(15), 5204. [https://doi.org/10.3390/s21155204]
  • OECD. (2018). Open Government Data Report: Enhancing Policy Maturity for Sustainable Impact. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/opengovernment-data-report_9789264305847-en
  • Open Data Charter. (2023). International Open Data Charter. https://opendatacharter.net/principles/, (검색일: 2024.5.26.).
  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge university press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763]
  • Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond the markets and states: polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American economic review, 100(3), 641-672. [https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.3.641]
  • Ostrom, E. (2011). Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy studies journal, 39(1), 7-27. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00394.x]
  • Ostrom E., Gardner R., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, games, and common-pool resources. University of Michigan press. [https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9739]
  • Ostrom, E., & Hess, C. (2007). A Framework for Analyzing the Knowledge Commons: a chapter from Understanding Knolwedge as a commons: from Theory to Practices. MIT press. [https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6980.003.0005]
  • Purtova, N., & van Maanen, G. (2023). Data as an economic good, data as a commons, and data governance. Law, Innovation and Technology, 1-42. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2265270]
  • Ruijer, E., Grimmelikhuijsen, S., & Meijer, A. (2017). Open data for democracy: Developing a theoretical framework for open data use. Government Information Quarterly, 34(1), 45-52. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.01.001]
  • Smith, G., Ofe, H. A., & Sandberg, J. (2016, January). Digital service innovation from open data: exploring the value proposition of an open data marketplace. In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 1277-1286). IEEE. [https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.162]
  • Susha, I., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2019). A collaborative governance approach to partnerships addressing public problems with private data. Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. [https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.350]
  • Villamayor-Tomas, S., et al. (2019). Diagnosing the role of the statefor local collective action: Types of action situations and policy instruments. Environmental Science & Policy, 97, 44-57. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.03.009]
  • Vining, A. R., & Weimer, D. L. (1990). Government supply and governmnet production failure: A framework based on contestability. Jorunal of Public Policy, 10(1), 1-22. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00004657]
  • White House. (2009). Open Government Directive. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/open/documents/open-government-directive, . (검색일: 2024.5.26.).
  • Wirtz, B. W., & Birkmeyer, S. (2015). Open government: Origin, development, and conceptual perspectives. International journal of public administration, 38(5), 381-396. [https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.942735]
  • Zuiderwijk, A., & Janssen, M. (2015, June). Participation and data quality in open data use: Open data infrastructures evaluated. In Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on e-Government (pp. 351-359).