EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i1.4134 |
Resumo: | In this thematic issue, the question whether EU decision making might be characterised by an excess of transparency stands central. This contribution addresses an issue that precedes such questions of quantity: that of transparency’s qualities, i.e., its specific shape. From an early point in time, transparency in the EU has been equated with the narrow and legalistic notion of ‘access to documents.’ Although since then, transparency has become associated with a wider range of practices, the Union has not managed to shake off the concept’s association with bureaucracy, opacity, and complexity. This remains the case, in spite of the fact that administrations and decision-makers across the world increasingly utilise the possibilities of technological innovation to communicate more directly with their electorates. In this changing communicative context, this commentary considers whether EU transparency as access to documents is still fit for purpose. It does so by exploring access policy from the vantage point of legal developments, administrative practices, political dynamics, and technological innovations. The commentary concludes that while improvements are needed, the access to documents concept endures. However, access to documents needs to be complemented by constructive (rather than predatory) public justification and contestation, to remain viable. |
id |
RCAP_f51df9b8e7f745def034868d4ca66926 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4134 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose?access to documents; administrative circumvention; document base; European Union; record keeping; transparencyIn this thematic issue, the question whether EU decision making might be characterised by an excess of transparency stands central. This contribution addresses an issue that precedes such questions of quantity: that of transparency’s qualities, i.e., its specific shape. From an early point in time, transparency in the EU has been equated with the narrow and legalistic notion of ‘access to documents.’ Although since then, transparency has become associated with a wider range of practices, the Union has not managed to shake off the concept’s association with bureaucracy, opacity, and complexity. This remains the case, in spite of the fact that administrations and decision-makers across the world increasingly utilise the possibilities of technological innovation to communicate more directly with their electorates. In this changing communicative context, this commentary considers whether EU transparency as access to documents is still fit for purpose. It does so by exploring access policy from the vantage point of legal developments, administrative practices, political dynamics, and technological innovations. The commentary concludes that while improvements are needed, the access to documents concept endures. However, access to documents needs to be complemented by constructive (rather than predatory) public justification and contestation, to remain viable.Cogitatio2021-03-31info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i1.4134oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4134Politics and Governance; Vol 9, No 1 (2021): Access or Excess? Redefining the Boundaries of Transparency in the EU’s Decision-Making; 292-2952183-2463reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4134https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i1.4134https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4134/4134Copyright (c) 2021 Maarten Hillebrandthttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessHillebrandt, Maarten2022-12-22T15:16:10Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4134Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:22:16.025205Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
title |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
spellingShingle |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? Hillebrandt, Maarten access to documents; administrative circumvention; document base; European Union; record keeping; transparency |
title_short |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
title_full |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
title_fullStr |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
title_full_unstemmed |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
title_sort |
EU Transparency as ‘Documents’: Still Fit for Purpose? |
author |
Hillebrandt, Maarten |
author_facet |
Hillebrandt, Maarten |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Hillebrandt, Maarten |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
access to documents; administrative circumvention; document base; European Union; record keeping; transparency |
topic |
access to documents; administrative circumvention; document base; European Union; record keeping; transparency |
description |
In this thematic issue, the question whether EU decision making might be characterised by an excess of transparency stands central. This contribution addresses an issue that precedes such questions of quantity: that of transparency’s qualities, i.e., its specific shape. From an early point in time, transparency in the EU has been equated with the narrow and legalistic notion of ‘access to documents.’ Although since then, transparency has become associated with a wider range of practices, the Union has not managed to shake off the concept’s association with bureaucracy, opacity, and complexity. This remains the case, in spite of the fact that administrations and decision-makers across the world increasingly utilise the possibilities of technological innovation to communicate more directly with their electorates. In this changing communicative context, this commentary considers whether EU transparency as access to documents is still fit for purpose. It does so by exploring access policy from the vantage point of legal developments, administrative practices, political dynamics, and technological innovations. The commentary concludes that while improvements are needed, the access to documents concept endures. However, access to documents needs to be complemented by constructive (rather than predatory) public justification and contestation, to remain viable. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-03-31 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i1.4134 oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4134 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i1.4134 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4134 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4134 https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i1.4134 https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4134/4134 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Maarten Hillebrandt http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Maarten Hillebrandt http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Politics and Governance; Vol 9, No 1 (2021): Access or Excess? Redefining the Boundaries of Transparency in the EU’s Decision-Making; 292-295 2183-2463 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130668717834240 |