Freedom-of-Information Backlogs After the Pandemic

Abstract

Background: Differences in how institutions address freedom of information raise important questions about accountability, administrative consistency, and effective implementation.

Objective: The research compared approaches to freedom of information and explored which governance features were most closely associated with outcomes involving transparency.

Methods: Evidence from 4 jurisdictions and 22 institutions was assessed in a mixed-method observational design. Standardized coding of documentary and administrative material was supplemented where appropriate by stakeholder or practitioner data, followed by descriptive and multivariable analysis.

Results: The comparative analysis showed uneven implementation of freedom of information: 34% of institutions reached the procedural-consistency threshold. Coordination was positively associated with performance, with a 12% improvement on the principal measure, while capacity limitations and ambiguous responsibility dominated the barrier profile.

Conclusion: These findings place institutional capacity at the centre of effective governance relating to freedom of information. Accordingly, effective information governance depends on turning formal data or records obligations into routine, auditable administrative practice.

Study design: agency-level workload study.

Publication history: Originally published in print on 15 June 2022, Volume 2, Article 16. Online abstract record added on 16 September 2026. Full-text PDF will be added when the digital galley is ready.