regions using an in-depth methodology that combines contextual data, technical assessments, and secondary indicators.<sup>119</sup> For each year, a country is given an overall data set score (1–100) for the completeness of OGD data sets based on a standardized rubric<sup>120</sup> across a number of areas, including: maps, land ownership, census, government budget, government spending, company registration, legislation, public transport, international trade, health, education, crime statistics, environment statistics, election results, and contracts. For the purposes of the present analysis, raw scores provided by the ODB were slightly remixed to obtain a certain operationalization of the variables based on the theoretical literature and conceptual framework.<sup>121</sup>

- **Accountability:** Since the research will focus on Sub-Saharan Africa, accountability data were obtained from the Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG), which has rated accountability in virtually every African country since 2001. The data set relies on an accountability index based on an inclusive list of sub-indicators, including those listed Annex 3. As noted in the theoretical literature, there are many definitions of accountability and there are likewise many different measures of what constitutes accountability across different international institutions’ indices. Accordingly, such an indexed variable—which draws on many of the principle accountability indexes including those produced by the World Bank, African Development Bank, Economist Intelligence Unit, Bertelsmann, the World Economic Forum, and others—ensures that the concept is broadly operationalized.<sup>122</sup>

- **Service Delivery:** Measuring service delivery can be difficult, as it has many different dimensions including access, quality, timeliness, price, efficacy, and satisfaction. For the sake of simplicity, service delivery will be operationalized in two dimensions: (i) provision of services and (ii) outcomes of services. The rationale for this is that provision (e.g. number of teachers in a district, number of books purchased) may be more easily impacted by improvements in OGD as opposed to outcomes (e.g. primary school completion, literacy, etc.). This index will likewise draw upon the IIAG, which rates education and health at the aggregate level. Based on a review of the sub-indicators, the IIAG aggregate indicators were remixed in order to better parse out provision and outcomes in both the health and education sectors. Annex 2 provides a listing of all the sub-indicators used.

119 See https://opendatabarometer.org/barometer/ 120 For instance, these indicators measure the existence and extent of OGD based on the following questions, for which countries receive a score between 1–100: Do the data exist? Are data available online from government in any form? Is the data set provided in machine-readable formats? Are the machine-readable data available in bulk? Is the data set available free of charge? Are the data openly licensed? Is the data set up to date?

121 In the regression specification related to the relationship between OGD on government accountability, the Open Data Barometer Raw Scores were used for the Overall OGD Index, which measure the extent to which data are open on a de facto basis across more than a dozen categories. This figure averages the performance across all data categories on a yearly basis in order to provide an aggregate snapshot of the openness of the data environment. These broad scores were used since they best reflect the actual situation on the ground, and have the most direct effect on accountability, irrespective of the different dimensions of OGD that they may cover. These include the aggregate score for data on maps, land ownership, census, government budget, government spending, company registration, legislation, public transport, international trade, health, education, crime statistics, environment statistics, election results, and contracts. Conversely, in the regression specification related to the relationship between OGD and service delivery, the Open Data Barometer Raw Scores were used **_only in selected data dimensions._** Based on the literature, for governments to make informed policy, budgetary, and service delivery decisions based on data, data on sector performance are needed as well as data on budget allocation and execution. To be sure, the results would be skewed if for instance a country had a high degree of public transport data, but a low level of health sector data—and the aggregated levels of data openness were used. Accordingly, this analysis re-constructs the OGD variables as follows: Health OGD: quality of health sector data (50% weight), budget data (25% weight), spending data (25% weight). OGD related to the health sector typically includes data on Mortality and survival rates; Levels of vaccination; Levels of access to health care; Health care outcomes for particular groups; Patient satisfaction with health services; Waiting times for medical treatment; and Spend per admission. Education OGD: quality of education sector data (50% weight), budget data (25% weight), spending data (25% weight). OGD related to the education sector typically includes data on Test scores for pupils in national examinations (not only rates of approvals); School attendance rates; and Teacher attendance rates.

> 122 Importantly, in order to reduce the chance for a distorted correlation between OGD and accountability, three sub-indicators that are particularly endogenous were removed and the index was recalculated (see annex 2 for details)..

23