From Information to Interaction: Comprehensive Understanding of the Public Authorities Openness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU2070-1381-114-2026-110-119Keywords:
Political openness, public authorities, institutional trust, levels of openness, publicity.Abstract
In modern world, characterized by increased demands on public administration due to globalization and greater interaction with society as a result of the growing capabilities of information and communication technologies, the issue of openness in public authorities has become one of the key issues in their activities. However, there is no single, universally accepted approach to this issue in the scientific literature. A number of researchers reduce the concept of openness to simple access to information, i.e. to information openness. Opposing them, another part of the scientific community notes the need to separate information openness and openness in general, justifying their differences as the relationship between the part and the whole. In this regard, the conceptualization of the concept of openness beyond information openness remains outside the focus of researchers. To this end, the article attempts to provide a comprehensive description of the phenomenon of openness by defining and substantiating the concept of political openness, which goes beyond simple information practices and covers the broader area of interaction between the authorities and civil society with a view to involving the latter in the decision-making process. The article identifies the content of political openness and outlines its main elements. In addition, attention is paid to the relationship between the openness of public authorities and the trust placed in them by citizens. On this basis, the complexity and multifaceted nature of the openness of public authorities is noted, and the advisability of further scientific research on the conceptualization of the main elements of openness in their interrelation with such related concepts as publicity, accessibility and transparency is indicated.
References
Дамм И.А., Акунченко Е.А., Щедрин Н.В. Открытость публичной власти: вопросы понятийно категориального аппарата // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Право. 2019. Т. 10. № 2. С. 226–242. DOI: 10.21638/spbu14.2019.203
Кононенко П.Б. Информационная открытость парламентов субъектов Российской Федерации: экспериментальный анализ // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 4: История. Регионоведение. Международные отношения. 2015. № 1(31). С. 99–109. DOI: 10.15688/jvolsu4.2015.1.10
Корченкова Н.Ю. Принцип информационной открытости как требование современной демократии // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н.И. Лобачевского. Серия: Право. 2000. № 1. С. 124–128.
Косарецкий С.Н. Информационная открытость сайтов законодательных органов государственной власти субъектов РФ // Среднерусский вестник общественных наук. 2010. № 2(15). С. 57–61.
Кузьмин А.В. Основы обеспечения открытости в деятельности органов государственной власти в РФ // Ученые записки Тамбовского отделения РоСМУ. 2018. № 9. С. 188–197.
Муртазалиев А.М., Рагимханова К.Т. Информационная открытость органов государственной власти: перспективы и совершенствование развития законодательства // Государственная служба и кадры. 2024. № 1. C. 89–91. DOI: 10.24412/2312–0444–2024–1-89–91
Никитина А.С., Зерчанинова Т.Е. Информационная открытость государства в условиях цифровой трансформации: социологический анализ // Власть. 2023. Т. 31. № 1. С. 148–156. DOI: 10.31171/vlast.v31i1.9479
Пугачёв А.Н. Опыт исследования открытости института регионального парламентаризма в России // Региональные исследования. 2022. № 2(76). С. 90–105. DOI: 10.5922/1994–5280–2022–2-8
Страхов К.А., Пугачёв А.Н. Парламент на ладони. Рейтинг открытости парламентов российских регионов. Исследование третье. СПб.: Фонд развития городского самоуправления «1870», 2023.
Федосеев И.В., Васильев А.Н. Государственное стратегическое планирование и открытость государства // Известия СПбГЭУ. 2022. № 5–1(137). С. 47–54.
Ariansyah K., Muttaqin M., Pusvita V., Takariani C.S.D., Darmanto D., Budhirianto S., Nuryana M. Revisiting E-Government and Public Trust Relationship: Does Higher Maturity of E-Government Promote Greater Trust in Public Officials? // Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. 2025. Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. DOI: 10.1108/TG-07–2025–0219
Bugaric B. Openness and Transparency in Public Administration: Challenges for Public Law // Wisconsin International Law Journal. 2004. Vol. 22. P. 483–521.
Fedozzi L., Furtado A., Rangel R. Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Elements for a Brief Evaluation // Hope for Democracy. 30 Years of Participatory Budgeting Worldwide. Faro: Oficina, 2019. P. 105–121.
Galindo-Silva H. Political Openness and Armed Conflict: Evidence from Local Councils in Colombia // European Journal of Political Economy. 2021. Vol. 67. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2020.101984
Matheus R., Faber R., Ismagilova E., Janssen M. Digital Transparency and the Usefulness for Open Government // International Journal of Information Management. 2023. Vol. 73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102690
Rodrigues J.G. Publicity, Transparency, and Openness in Public Administration // Revista de Derecho. 2022. Vol. 58. P. 9–37. DOI: 10.14482/dere.58.004.223
Schmidthuber L., Ingrams A., Hilgers D. Government Openness and Public Trust: The Mediating Role of Democratic Capacity // Public Administration Review. 2021. Vol. 81. Is. 1. P. 91–109. DOI: 10.1111/puar.13298
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
Similar Articles
- Galina V. Pushkareva, Vladislav V. Sychev, Political Institutional Trust in the Russian Society , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 100 (2023)
- Ruslan V. Nadtoka, Openness of State Data in the Field of Implementing Priority Directions of National Policy in the Subjects of the Russian Federation , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 86 (2021)
- Artem A. Kosorukov, Daniil A. Kruglyakov , Public Sphere Development in the Context of Interaction between the State and Civil Structures , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 85 (2021)
- Kirill O. Telin, Kirill G. Filimonov, On the Politics of Governability in Contemporary Russia , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 88 (2021)
- Dmitry I. Petropolskiy, Political Leadership in the Plural: Problems of Conceptualization , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 109 (2025)
- Antonina V. Selezneva, Viktotia Ye. Zinenko, Youth Political Leadership in Institutional Dimension: Shaping Environment andDevelopment Features , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 87 (2021)
- Dmitriy P. Arkalov, Customer-Centricity as a Vector of Trust Economy , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 106 (2024)
- Vladimir Yu. Razumovsky, Regional Regimes of Government in the Context of Russian Federalism Genesis: Essence, Contradictions, Results of Activity , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 88 (2021)
- Andrei B. Il’in, Anna I. Dudnik, Institutional Continuity in the Russian Strategic Planning System , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 114 (2026)
- Sergey A. Sobolev, Toolkit for Integrated Assessment of Socio-Economic Development Scale of Urban Agglomerations , Public Administration. E-journal (Russia): No. 103 (2024)
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.


