[Purpose/Significance] Based on the perspective of government departments, clarifying the formation mechanism of participation willingness in cross-agency government data sharing (CGDS), is helpful for promoting the cross-border flow of government data. [Method/Process] Combined with literature research and logical analysis, this paper constructed a theoretical framework to explain the formation mechanism of the participation willingness in CGDS. [Result/Conclusion] From the theoretical connotation, CGDS is a process in which all agencies jointly allocate the stewardship of government data and create its asset value without destroying the administrative boundary. In this process, the formation of shared participation willingness of departments is a comprehensive assessment of the expected risks, costs, and benefits of data sharing in a specific institutional environment. Theoretical analysis shows that collaborative relationships that support CGDS, strong scalability of sharing performance, and low data asset specificity are important drivers for the formation of shared participation willingness of departments. Based on the research results, it can be concluded that data regulatory departments should enhance the cross-agency collaborative coordination skills, scalability of shared performance, and classify data into different levels to promote the formation of agencies’ willingness to participate in cross-agency data sharing and to solve the dilemma of continuous participation.
[1] 孟庆国,李晓方.公共部门数字化转型:供需视角与转型深化[J].电子政务, 2022(5):2-8.
[2] 李季.中国数字政府建设报告(2021):加快推进数字政府建设,打造高质量发展新引擎[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2021.
[3] 赵丹宁,郭晓慧,孙宗锋.数据治理机构推动跨部门数据共享面临的困境及原因分析——基于山东两地市的案例分析[J].公共管理与政策评论, 2023, 12(1):156-168.
[4] 朱扬勇,叶雅珍.从数据的属性看数据资产[J].大数据, 2018, 4(6):65-76.
[5] PARDO T A, TAYI G K. Interorganizational information integration:a key enabler for digital government[J]. Government information quarterly, 2007, 24(4):691-715.
[6] 谭海波,孟庆国,张楠.信息技术应用中的政府运作机制研究——以J市政府网上行政服务系统建设为例[J].社会学研究, 2015, 30(6):73-98, 243-244.
[7] GIL-GARCIA J R, GULER A, PARDO T A, et al. Characterizing the importance of clarity of roles and responsibilities in government inter-organizational collaboration and information sharing initiatives[J]. Government information quarterly, 2019, 36(4):101393.
[8] 任建娇.多元行动主体参与跨部门政府数据共享的运行机制研究[D].重庆:重庆工商大学, 2021:9-48.
[9] 王硕,刘鸿宇.基于组织视角的政府数据跨部门共享研究[J].情报杂志, 2023, 42(2):126-133.
[10] 王雨萌,顾光海.政务数据共享的现状、困境与出路——以银川市为例[J].中共银川市委党校学报, 2022(5):81-88.
[11] DAWES S S. Interagency information sharing:expected benefits, manageable risks[J]. Journal of policy analysis and management, 1996, 15(3):377-394.
[12] BIGDELI A Z, KAMAL M M, DE CESARE S. Electronic information sharing in local government authorities:factors influencing the decision-making process[J]. International journal of information management, 2013, 33(5):816-830.
[13] 王芳.情报学视角下的政府信息公开、共享与数据开放研究:二十年回顾与未来展望[J].图书与情报, 2022(4):51-65.
[14] 赖茂生,樊振佳.政治利益对政府信息资源共享的影响分析:基于理性选择制度主义的视角[J].图书情报工作, 2012, 56(7):112-116.
[15] WANG F. Understanding the dynamic mechanism of interagency government data sharing[J]. Government information quarterly, 2018, 35(4):536-546.
[16] ZHOU L, CHEN L, HAN Y. Data stickiness in interagency government data sharing:a case study[J]. Journal of documentation, 2021, 77(6):1286-1303.
[17] 陆皓,郭忠文. Micro C-CDS/ISIS与DBASE间的数据共享[J].现代图书情报技术, 1987, 3(4):7-10.
[18] GIL-GARCIA J R, PARDO T A, BURKE G B. Conceptualizing information integration in government[M]//E-government:information, technology, and transformation. New York:M.E. Sharpe, 2010:179-202.
[19] YANG T M, WU Y J. What to share and why to share?a case study of cross-boundary information sharing in Taiwan e-government[J]. Journal of library and information studies, 2013, 11(1):25-53.
[20] 夏义堃,管茜.政府数据资产管理的内涵、要素框架与运行模式[J].电子政务, 2022(1):2-13.
[21] 易明,冯翠翠,莫富传,等.政府数据资产的价值发现:概念模型和实施路径[J].电子政务, 2022(1):27-39.
[22] 戴一帆.共享发展理念研究述评[J].社会科学动态, 2022(3):79-85.
[23] 谷民崇,孟庆国.数据统筹视角下的跨部门行政协同问题研究[J].东北大学学报(社会科学版), 2017, 19(2):167-172.
[24] 锁利铭.府际数据共享的双重困境:生成逻辑与政策启示[J].探索, 2020, 215(5):126-140.
[25] 张振华.当奥尔森遇上奥斯特罗姆:集体行动理论的演化与发展[J].人文杂志, 2013(10):113-121.
[26] 仁恒.重视埃莉诺·奥斯特罗姆的学术遗产——来看美国布鲁明顿多中心学派的启示[J].社会科学论坛, 2020(3):64-73.
[27] FEIOCK R C. Metropolitan governance and institutional collective action[J]. Urban affairs review, 2009, 44(3):356-377.
[28] FEIOCK R C. Rational choice and regional governance[J]. Journal of urban affairs, 2007, 29(1):49-65.
[29] TERMAN J N, RICHARD C F, YOUM J. When collaboration is risky business:the influence of collaboration risks on formal and informal collaboration[J]. The American review of public administration, 2020, 50(1):33-44.
[30] 马捷,锁利铭.城市间环境治理合作:行动、网络及其演变——基于长三角30个城市的府际协议数据分析[J].中国行政管理, 2019(9):41-49.
[31] 锁利铭,阐艳秋,李雪.制度性集体行动、领域差异与府际协作治理[J].公共管理与政策评论, 2020, 9(4):3-14.
[32] OSTROM E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems[J]. Science, 2009, 325(5939):419-422.
[33] 高轩,朱满良.我国政府部门间关系的探讨[J].四川行政学院学报, 2010, 61(1):5-8.
[34] 聂勇浩,李霞.迂回策略:监管部门如何破解数字化治理中的协同困境[J].电子政务, 2018, 181(1):22-30.
[35] 宋懿,安小米,范灵俊,等.大数据时代政府信息资源共享的协同机制研究——基于宁波市海曙区政府信息资源中心的案例分析[J].情报理论与实践, 2018, 41(6):64-69.
[36] KLISCHEWSKI R, SCHOLL H J. Information quality as capstone in negotiating e-government integration, interoperation and information sharing[J]. Electronic government, an international journal, 2008, 5(2):203-225.
[37] 马亮.中国数字政府建设的理论框架、研究议题与未来展望[J].中共天津市委党校学报, 2021, 23(2):71-85.
[38] 许鹿,黄未.资产专用性:政府跨部门数据共享困境的形成缘由[J].东岳论丛, 2021, 42(8):126-135.
[39] 吕欣,裴瑞敏,刘凡.电子政务信息资源共享的影响因素及安全风险分析[J].管理评论, 2013, 25(6):161-169.
[40] 聂辉华.交易费用经济学:过去、现在和未来——兼评威廉姆森《资本主义经济制度》[J].管理世界, 2004(12):146-153.
[41] 张会平,顾勤.政府数据流动:方式、实践困境与协同治理[J].治理研究, 2022, 38(3):59-69, 126.
[42] 叶战备,朱倩.政务数据跨界治理的逻辑架构、现实痛点与实践进路[J].贵州省党校学报, 2022(4):38-47.
