Heterogeneity

After the critical review of the available literature in both fields of study, FOI and OGD, in Chapter 2, it becomes evident that further analysis of international civil society actors is needed, not only because they are key stakeholders in the government information and data ecosystem but also because this analysis provides a clearer understanding of the divergences and similarities between FOI and OGD. It is necessary to clarify that this particular research focuses on civil society organisations at the international level, which operate in several countries in more than one region, as they present the capacity/ability to influence the ideas and

Civil society organisations working on the diffusion of FOI have provided their own particular approach and have covered particular aspects of the topic. Despite their differences, these organisations are generally portrayed as a homogeneous group of actors, they advocate for and promote the adoption of FOI legislation but present their own vision and their particular expertise, e.g. legal, journalism, privacy, media, among others (Stubbs 2012 p.43).

A clear example of this variety and heterogeneity is portrayed by Kasuya (2013) in her study. It can also be observed in the variety of the members of Foianet as well as the groups included in Sunlight’s Foundation transparency organisations’ emailing list124_{. The number and diversity of}

actors working in the transparency field in all its forms adds to the difficulty of delimiting the actors for this thesis.

Kasuya (2013) focuses on a much larger universe of organisations than the ones included in this current thesis. Kasuya (2013) includes domestic and international groups working in different sectors within the transparency field, not only FOI, listed in some of the main mailing list such as Foianet. Despite the divergences between that research and this

124 _{Most of these lists are crowd-sourced. The inclusion is voluntary and therefore, it}

consists of a self-identification process. In that sense, many actors working in related areas (privacy, for example) are also included even though they are not the main subjects of this particular study. The previous practical knowledge on these actors (due to my working experience in the field) allow for a more accurate selection of the actors included in this thesis.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uLeuKYxpQtVI98ytZsK169Tas6RlVCEhBCaNc vT5Pgw/edit#gid=0

thesis and despite the fact that most of the organisations surveyed for that research work at the domestic level, Kasuya (2013) presents a valuable picture (Figure 5) of the rapid increase in the number of organisations working with FOI related topics.

FIGURE 5- Transparency NGOs and their years of creation

Source: (Kasuya 2013 p.5)

The Kasuya (2013) figure provides a clear picture of the rapid increase in the number of actors in the field mostly from the late part of second stage to these days. This graphic also provides validity for the arguments included in the early pages of this chapter in terms of the increasing number of actors in the field, in particular during what Darch and Underwood (2010) label the Golden Period. In this context, the identification of the actors from the FOI field, for inclusion in this thesis,

identification of the actors in the OGD field. A large number of organisations belong to the FOI advocacy group, however, a very small number of them work on an international of transnational level. Most of the organisations surveyed in Kasuya’s study as well as those included in different transparency emailing lists (Foianet 125 and Sunlight Foundation’s126) focus their main activities in the domestic and/or regional sphere.

Adding to that geographical delimitation, not all of those actors fit into the concept or groups, which are actively working on the promotion/diffusion of FOI principles and legislation. Many of those organisations work in other aspects of the government transparency field. In addition to the large variety of particular sectors within the transparency field, it is also important to highlight that these transparency-oriented lists present a self- identification policy. Thus, any organisation can include and define themselves as members of these lists to participate in discussions and activities.

After applying all these filters, and taking into account the relevance of the organisations in the field in terms of public participation in events and initiatives127, the organisations selected to be included in this thesis are: Article 19, Transparency International, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, the Carter Center, and the newly-created Canada-based Centre

125 _{Foianet website: http://foiadvocates.net/}

126 _{Sunlight Foundation website; http://sunlightfoundation.com/}

127 _{Leaving outside of the scope of this thesis to the organisations which are focused on}

for Law and Democracy. A brief overview of each of them is included in Table 4.

TABLE 4- Brief overview of the main international NGOs working on FOI Article 19 is one of the most renowned organisations working in the promotion of freedom of expression as well as freedom of information. It was created in 1987 and the headquarters is located in London, UK. Their work throughout the years has presented a strong focus on human rights, as indicated even by the origin of their name from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Some of the most recognised names in the field came from this organisation’s legal program, e.g., Mendel, Darbishire, and Banisar, who is the current head of the legal program

Centre for Law and Democracy (CLD). Several renowned advocates in the field worked for Article 19. After a few years, some of those professionals created their own organisations. That is the case of Darbishire and Access Info Europe, a Spain-based organisation working on the promotion of the right to access governmental information in Europe. It is also the case of Mendel and the Center for Law and Democracy. The Centre for Law and Democracy is a small Canada-based organisation, created in 2010, that works internationally to promote ‘those human rights which serve as the foundation for or underpin democracy, including the rights to freedom of expression, to vote and participate in governance, to access information and to freedom of assembly and association’.128

Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (known as CHRI). As its name indicates they are created to promote the Human Rights agenda within the countries of the Commonwealth of Nations. After a few years, they focused on the implementation of the principles of the Herare Declaration, which sets the principles and core values of the Commonwealth of Nations.

It is also created in 1987 and its headquarters is located in London until 1991 when the head office moves to New Delhi.

Transparency International was founded in 1993 with the internationalisation of the transparency and anticorruption agendas. This is the only organisation within this set of 5 organisations that presents a clear focus on an anticorruption agenda, besides the promotion of the access to information. Despite the differences with the other organisations, the activities carried out by Transparency International within the FOI

The difficulty of precisely defining the concept of non-governmental organisation is exacerbated by the variety of civil society actors within the FOI civil society ecosystem. In this context, some common variables are explored in order to better understand the common characteristics of international civil society groups working on FOI and OGD. These variables relate to the activities, content and approaches, engage, and structure. All these variables are influenced by the changes and developments in ICT. The exploration of these variables allows for a better understanding of that influence in both the groups and later the entire government information and data field.