# Linked Open Government Data: Still a Viable Option for Sharing and Integrating Public Data?
## 8 Discussion and Conclusions
This approach aligns organizational efforts with the practicalities of user interactions, fostering a more meaningful and user-centric approach. _Longer-term maintenance activities_ must be explicitly factored into the equation. Maintaining up-to-date data and the continuous operation of servers, including those supporting SPARQL endpoints, incurs costs that must be carefully considered. This financial aspect must be accounted for to prevent the squandering of the already invested efforts. Coordinated approaches should also consider a _pay-as-you-go perspective_, as not every dataset requires the same extent of LD. For example, not every dataset needs to be interlinked with the others to be reused: the adoption of URIs and dereferenceable standard data terms provided by shared LD vocabularies is a step forward in balancing the effort between publisher and consumer. While the inherently decentralized nature aligns with the spirit of the Web of Data, the heterogeneity and complexity within public administrations and their, often intricate, organizational practices suggest a need for _centralized, domain-focused solutions_. These solutions can effectively handle the intricate processes of data transformation and integration--from raw to structured and interlinked data--thus enhancing the efficiency of published data. When recurrent issues are addressed in a centralized hub, organizations can implement a more cohesive and systematic approach to problem-solving. This centralization fosters a comprehensive understanding of recurring issues, paving the way for the implementation of more effective and standardized solutions. Instead of mandating an LD expert in each administration, a coordinated approach should prioritize shared and domain-targeted tools accessible even to smaller administrations, allowing them to participate without requiring specialized expertise. This strategy empowers public administrations to contribute effectively, emphasizing the integration of user-friendly tools to address this essential need. The tensions and frictions under discussion serve as a catalyst for re-evaluating certain assumptions commonly held in the LD framework, which may not seamlessly align with the LOGD. Unlike the broader LD perspective, where data is often disseminated in an entirely unregulated manner without an explicit public mandate for data production, the governmental context demands a distinct approach. In the realm of Government Data, the combined governance of LD and OGD practices within the collaborative network of stakeholders and initiatives becomes crucial and, in our view, inevitable, in order to best benefit from the potential offered by LD. Unlike the more generalized LD viewpoint, the LOGD framework necessitates a deliberate and explicit commitment to a public mandate in data production. This shift underscores the significance of orchestrating effective governance mechanisms among the diverse actors involved in LOGD initiatives, acknowledging their pivotal role in fulfilling the public mandate for data accessibility and transparency in governmental operations. Establishing a seamlessly interconnected global data space for OGD on a worldwide scale might be deemed unattainable and could potentially lead to disillusionment. Nevertheless, the endeavor to align with LD principles and technologies should be viewed as a strategic investment. This investment is aimed at maximizing the efficiency of data production efforts, refining the streamlined data production processes and unlocking future multiplication factors within the data value chain to extract enhanced value. In essence, the commitment to LD principles becomes a proactive approach to optimize the generation and utilization of data, paving the way for greater efficiency and value realization in the broader data ecosystem.