Eif brochure final

New European Interoperability Framework
Promoting seamless services and data flows
for European public administrations

Neither the European Commission nor ant person acting on behalf of the Commission
is responsible for the use wich might be made of the following information.
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some
operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu)
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017
© European Union, 2017
Cover image: Closeup of unfinished jigsaw puzzle, tadamichi, © Adobe Stock, 2017
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Printed in Belgium
printed on elemental chlorine-free bleached paper (ecf)
ISBN 978-92-79-63756-8
doi:10.2799/78681

Introduction | 3
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Relationship between EIF, NIFs and DIFs 7
Figure 2: Interoperability principles 10
Figure 3: Interoperability model 22
Figure 4: Conceptual model for integrated public services 34
Figure 5: EIF conceptual model relations 44
CONTENTS
1. Introduction 4
1.1 Definitions 5
1.2 The EIF’s purpose and legal framework 5
1.3 Scope, readership and usage of the EIF 6
2. Underlying principles of European public services 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Underlying principle 1: subsidiarity and proportionality 11
2.3 Underlying principle 2: openness 11
2.4 Underlying principle 3: transparency 13
2.5 Underlying principle 4: reusability 13
2.6 Underlying principle 5: technological neutrality and data portability 14
2.7 Underlying principle 6: user-centricity 15
2.8 Underlying principle 7: inclusion and accessibility 16
2.9 Underlying principle 8: security and privacy 17
2.10 Underlying principle 9: multilingualism 18
2.11 Underlying principle 10: administrative simplification 18
2.12 Underlying principle 11: preservation of information 19
2.13 Underlying principle 12: assessment of effectiveness and efficiency 20
3. Interoperability layers 21
3.1 Interoperability governance 22
3.2 Integrated public service governance 25
3.3 Legal interoperability 27
3.4 Organisational interoperability 28
3.5 Semantic interoperability 29
3.6 Technical interoperability 30
4. The conceptual model for integrated public services provision 32
4.1 Introduction 33
4.2 Model overview 33
4.3 Basic components 35
5. Conclusion 43
6. Annex 45
6.1 Abbreviations 45

1.
1. Introduction
As stipulated in the Treaties of the European Union (EU), the
EU’s internal market guarantees four ‘freedoms’ - the free
movement of goods, capital, services and people between
the 28 Member States. These freedoms are assured by
common policies supported by interconnected, interoperable
networks and systems. People are free to work and relocate
and businesses are free to trade and operate in all EU Member
States. In doing so, they inevitably have to interact
electronicallywithMemberStatepublicadministrations.
To make these interactions efficient, effective, timely and of
high quality, and to help cut red-tape and reduce the cost and
effort involved, Member States are modernising their public
administrations by introducing digital public services. However,
in doing so, they risk creating isolated digital environments
and consequently electronic barriers that may prevent public
administrations from connecting with each other, and citizens
and businesses from identifying and using available digital
public services in countries other than their own. For this
reason, efforts to digitise the public sector should be
well coordinated at European and national levels to
avoid digital fragmentation of services and data, and
help the EU’s digital single market to work smoothly.
At the same time, the challenges facing the Union require
common policy responses from the Member States and the
Commission, through EU legislation that requires interaction
across borders and policy sectors. This also involves
setting up and running interoperable systems. Such systems,
as set out in the digital single market strategy1
, are intended to
ensure effective communication between digital components
such as devices, networks and data repositories. They also
provide more efficient connections across borders, between
communities and between public services and authorities.
The EIF gives guidance, through a set of recommendations,
to public administrations on how to improve governance of
their interoperability activities, establish cross-organisational
relationships, streamline processes supporting end-to-end
digital services, and ensure that existing and new legislation
do not compromise interoperability efforts.
4 | New Interoperability Framework for European Public Services
1
COM(2015) 192 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - A Digital Single
Market Strategy for Europe, Brussels, 06.05.2015.

Introduction | 5
1.1 Definitions
1.1.1 Interoperability
For the purpose of the EIF, interoperability is the ability of organisations2
to
interact towards mutually beneficial goals, involving the sharing of information
and knowledge between these organisations, through the business processes
they support, by means of the exchange of data between their ICT systems.
1.1.2 European public service
A European public service comprises any public sector service exposed to a
cross-border dimension and supplied by public administrations, either to one
another or to businesses and citizens in the Union.
1.1.3 European interoperability framework
The European interoperability framework is a commonly agreed approach
to the delivery of European public services in an interoperable manner. It defines
basic interoperability guidelines in the form of common principles, models
and recommendations.
1.2 The EIF’s purpose and legal
framework
The purpose of the EIF is to:
•• inspire European public administrations in their efforts to design and
deliver seamless European public services to other public administrations,
citizens and businesses which are to the degree possible, digital-by-default
(i.e. providing services and data preferably via digital channels), cross-border-
by-default (i.e. accessible for all citizens in the EU) and open-by-default (i.e.
enabling reuse, participation/access and transparency);
•• provide guidance to public administrations on the design and update
of national interoperability frameworks (NIFs), or national policies, strategies
and guidelines promoting interoperability;
•• contribute to the establishment of the digital single market by
fostering cross-border and cross-sectoral interoperability for the delivery of
European public services.
The main
challenge now
is to guarantee
the secure
free flow of
data, develop
standards
ensure
interoperability
Andrus Ansip
Vice-President of the European
Commission for the Digital Single
Market
2
‘Organisations’ here means public administration units or any entity acting on their behalf, or EU institutions or bodies.

6 | New Interoperability Frameworak for European Public Services
The lack of interoperability is a major obstacle to progress on the digital single
market. Using the EIF to steer European interoperability initiatives contributes
to a coherent European interoperable environment, and facilitates the
delivery of services that work together, within and across organisations
or domains.
The EIF is principally promoted and maintained by the ISA² programme3
in close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission in
the spirit of Articles 26, 170 and 171 of the Treaty on the Functioning
of the European Union4
calling for the establishment of interoperable
trans-European networks that will enable citizens to derive full benefit
from a European internal market.
1.3 Scope, readership and usage of the EIF
The EIF is meant to be a generic framework applicable to all public
administrations in the EU. It lays out the basic conditions for achieving
interoperability, acting as the common denominator for relevant initiatives at
all levels including European, national, regional and local, embracing public
administrations, citizens and businesses. This document is addressed to
all those involved in defining, designing, developing and delivering
European public services.
As Member States have different administrative and political systems, national
specificities have to be taken into account when transposing the EIF into the
national context. EU and national policies (e.g. NIFs) are expected to build
upon the EIF, by adding new or fine-tuning existing elements. In a similar way,
domain-specific interoperability frameworks (DIFs)5
should remain compatible
with, and where necessary extend, the scope of the EIF to capture the specific
interoperability requirements of the domain in question. This means that some
of the EIF elements can be directly copied into a NIF or DIF, while others might
need to be contextualised and further tailored to cover the particular needs.
The relationship among EIF, NIFs and DIFs is described in figure 1. The EIF
provides a common core of interoperability elements to European
NIFs and DIFs. Compliance with the EIF guarantees that NIFs and DIFs are
developed in a coordinated and aligned way while providing the necessary
flexibility to address specific requirements coming from national or domain-
specific requirements.
The EIF gives
guidance,
through a set of
recommendations,
to public
administrations
3
Established by Decision (EU) 2015/2240 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015.
4
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXTfrom=EN.
5
For example Directive 2007/2/EC establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE), and
the relevant implementing regulations and guidelines.

Introduction | 7
Figure 1 Relationship between EIF, NIFs and DIFs
In general, the EIF provides value in two directions:
•• bottom-up: when a NIF aligned with the EIF is used for the implementation
of public services at all levels of national administrations, it creates the
interoperability conditions for extending the scope of these services across
borders;
•• top-down: when the EIF is considered in EU legislation and policy domains,
either through ad hoc references or more structurally using DIFs, it increases
the interoperability potential of the follow-up national actions resulting from
transposition.
In both cases, the end result is the development of a European public
services ecosystem in which owners and designers of systems and public
services become aware of interoperability requirements, public administrations
are ready to collaborate with each other and with businesses and citizens, and
information flows seamlessly across borders to support a digital single market
in Europe.
1.3.1 Interoperability areas
The EIF’s scope covers three types of interactions:
•• A2A (administration to administration), which refers to interactions
between public administrations (e.g. Member State or EU Institutions);
•• A2B (administration to business), which refers to interactions between
publicadministrations(inaMemberStateoranEUInstitution)andbusinesses;
•• A2C (administration to citizen), which refers to interactions between
public administrations (in a Member State or an EU institution) and citizens.
(NIF)
National
Interoperability
Framework
Member State 1
(NIF)
National
Interoperability
Framework
Member State 2
(DIFs)
Domain Interoperability
Frameworks
(EIF)
European
Interoperability
Framework
The lack of
interoperability is
a major obstacle
to progress on
the digital single
market

1.3.2 Content and structure
The EIF content and structure is presented below:
•• Chapter 2 presents a set of principles intended to establish general
behaviours on interoperability;
•• Chapter 3 presents a layered interoperability model which organises in
layers the different interoperability aspects to be addressed when designing
European public services;
•• Chapter 4 outlines a conceptual model for interoperable public services.
The model is aligned with the interoperability principles and promotes the
idea of ‘interoperability by design’ as a standard approach for the design
and operation of European public services;
•• Chapter 5 concludes the document by providing an overview and tying
together the major elements of the EIF;
•• A set of 47 recommendations, as actionable items to be implemented by
public administrations, is discussed across the different chapters.
47
recommendations
4
levels of interoperability
12
underlying principles
1
conceptual model
EIF
8 | New Interoperability Frameworak for European Public Services

Underlying principles of European Public Services | 9
2. Underlying
principles
of European
public services
2.1 Introduction
The interoperability principles are fundamental
behavioural aspects to drive interoperability actions. This
chapter sets out general interoperability principles which
are relevant to the process of establishing interoperable
Europeanpublicservices.Theydescribethecontextinwhich
European public services are designed and implemented.
The twelve underlying principles6
of the EIF are
grouped into four categories:
1. Principle setting the context for EU actions on
interoperability (No 1);
2. Core interoperability principles (Nos 2 to 5);
3. Principles related to generic user needs and
expectations (Nos 6 to 9);
4. Foundation principles for cooperation among public
administrations (Nos 10 to 12).
6
The principles remain practically the same as in the previous EIF. Their grouping and the exact scope
of each recommendation have been updated to reflect recent policy and technical development.

1: Subsidiarity and proportionality
1 recommendation
4: Reusability
2 recommendations
7: Inclusion and accessibility
1 recommendation
10: Administrative simplification
1 recommendation
2: Openness
3 recommendations
5: Technological neutrality and data portability
2 recommendations
8: Security and privacy
1 recommendation
11: Preservation of information
1 recommendation
3: Transparency
1 recommendation
6: User-centricity
4 recommendations
9: Multilingualism
1 recommendation
12: Assessment of Effectiveness and Efficiency
1 recommendation
Figure 2 Interoperability principles

2.2 Underlying principle 1:
subsidiarity and proportionality
The subsidiarity principle requires EU decisions to be taken as closely as possible
to the citizen. In other words, the EU does not take action unless this is more
effective than the same action taken at national level. The proportionality
principle limits EU actions to what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the
Treaties.
Concerning interoperability, a European framework is justified to overcome
differences in policies that result in heterogeneity and lack of interoperability and
that put at risk the digital single market.
The EIF is envisaged as the ‘common denominator’ of interoperability policies in
Member States. Member States should enjoy sufficient freedom to develop their
NIFs with respect to EIF recommendations. NIFs are expected to be tailored and
extended in such a way that national specificities are properly addressed.
openness
In the context of interoperable public services, the concept of openness mainly
relates to data, specifications and software.
Open government data (here simply referred ‘open data’) refers to the idea
that all public data should be freely available for use and reuse by others, unless
restrictions apply e.g. for protection of personal data, confidentiality, or intellectual
property rights. Public administrations collect and generate huge amounts of
data. The Directive on the reuse of public sector information (PSI)7
encourages
Member States to make public information available for access and reuse as open
data. The INSPIRE Directive8
requires, in addition, sharing of spatial datasets and
services between public authorities with no restrictions or practical obstacles to its
reuse. This data should be published with as few restrictions as possible and clear
licences for its use to allow better scrutiny of administrations’ decision-making
processes and realise transparency in practice.
Recommendation 1:
Ensure that national interoperability frameworks and interoperability
strategies are aligned with the EIF and, if needed, tailor and extend them
to address the national context and needs.
7
Directive 2003/98/EC and as revised by Directive 2013/37/EU.
8
Directive 2007/2/EC establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE). The recent REFIT evalua-
tion (COM(2016)478 and SWD(2016)273) has shown that there are still serious obstacles to the principle of openness throughout the EU.

Open data is discussed in more detail in section 4.3.4.
Recommendation 2:
Publish the data you own as open data unless certain restrictions apply.
The use of open source software technologies and products can help save
development cost, avoid a lock-in effect and allow fast adaptation to specific
business needs because the developer communities that support them are
constantly adapting them. Public administrations should not only use open source
software but whenever possible contribute to the pertinent developer communities.
Open source is an enabler of the underlying EIF principle on reusability.
Recommendation 3:
Ensure a level playing field for open source software and demonstrate active
and fair consideration of using open source software, taking into account the
total cost of ownership of the solution.
The level of openness of a specification/standard is decisive for the reuse of
software components implementing that specification. This also applies when such
components are used to introduce new European public services. If the openness
principle applies in full:
•• all stakeholders have the opportunity to contribute to the development of the
specification and a public review is part of the decision-making process;
•• the specification is available for everyone to study;
•• intellectual property rights to the specification are licensed on FRAND9
terms,
in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source
software10
, and preferably on a royalty-free basis.
Due to their positive effect on interoperability, the use of open specifications has
been promoted in many policy statements and is encouraged for European public
service delivery. The positive effect of open specifications is demonstrated by the
internet ecosystem. However, public administrations may decide to use less open
specifications if open ones do not exist or do not meet functional needs. In all
cases, specifications should be mature and sufficiently supported by the market,
unless they are being used to create innovative solutions.
Recommendation 4:
Give preference to open specifications, taking due account of the coverage of
functional needs, maturity and market support and innovation.
9
FRAND: fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory.
10
This fosters competition since providers working under various business models may compete to deliver products, technologies and
services based on such specifications.

Lastly, openness also means empowering citizens and businesses to get involved
in the design of new services, to contribute to service improvement and to give
feedback about the quality of the existing public services.
transparency
Transparency in the EIF context refers to:
1. Enabling visibility inside the administrative environment of a public
administration. This is about allowing other public administrations, citizens
and businesses to view and understand administrative rules, processes11
,
data, services and decision-making.
2. Ensuring availability of interfaces with internal information systems.
Public administrations operate a large number of what are often
heterogeneous and disparate information systems in support of their
internal processes. Interoperability depends on ensuring the availability
of interfaces to these systems and the data they handle. In turn,
interoperability facilitates reuse of systems and data, and enables these
to be integrated into larger systems.
3. Securing the right to the protection of personal data, by respecting
the applicable legal framework for the large volumes of personal data of
citizens, held and managed by Public administrations.
Recommendation 5:
Ensure internal visibility and provide external interfaces for European
public services.
reusability
Reuse means that public administrations confronted with a specific problem
seek to benefit from the work of others by looking at what is available, assessing
its usefulness or relevance to the problem at hand, and where appropriate,
adopting solutions that have proven their value elsewhere. This requires the
public administration to be open to sharing its interoperability solutions, concepts,
frameworks, specifications, tools and components with others.
11
For example, with the establishment of the Digital Single Gateway, a DSM action.

Reusability of IT solutions (e.g. software components, Application Programming
Interfaces, standards), information and data, is an enabler of interoperability and
improves quality because it extends operational use, as well as saving money
and time. This makes it a major contributor to the development of a digital single
market in the EU. Some EU standards and specifications also exist in the DIFs
and should be applied more widely. For example, the INSPIRE Directive sets out
interoperability standards for addresses, cadastres, roads and many other data
topics of relevance to many public administrations. These existing standards
and specifications can and should be used more widely beyond the domain for
which they were originally developed.
Several public administrations and governments across the EU already promote
sharing and reuse of IT solutions by adopting new business models,
promoting the use of open source software for key ICT services and when
deploying digital service infrastructure.
There are some key challenges that limit the sharing and reuse of IT solutions,
at technical, organisational, legal and communication levels. The ISA² sharing
and reuse framework for IT solutions12
provides recommendations for
public administrations to help them overcome these challenges and share/
reuse common IT solutions. Reuse and sharing can be effectively supported by
collaborative platforms.13
Recommendation 6:
Reuse and share solutions, and cooperate in the development of joint
solutions when implementing European public services.
Recommendation 7:
Reuse and share information and data when implementing European
public services, unless certain privacy or confidentiality restrictions apply.
technological neutrality
and data portability
When establishing European public services, public administrations should focus
on functional needs and defer decisions on technology as long as possible
in order to minimise technological dependencies, to avoid imposing specific
technical implementations or products on their constituents and to be able to
adapt to the rapidly evolving technological environment.
12
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/isa/document/sharing-and-reuse-framework-fostering-collaboration-among-public-administrati
13
At EU level, the Joinup platform (https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/) has been set up to share open source software components, semantic assets,
building blocks and best practices. The European Commission has also introduced the EUPL licence to encourage sharing of software
components.

Public administrations should provide for access and reuse of their public services
and data irrespective of specific technologies or products.
Recommendation 8:
Do not impose any technological solutions on citizens, businesses and
other administrations that are technology-specific or disproportionate to
their real needs.
The functioning of the digital single market requires data to be easily transferable
among different systems to avoid lock-in, support the free movement of data.
This requirement relates to data portability - the ability to move and reuse
data easily among different applications and systems, which becomes even
more challenging in cross-border scenarios.
Recommendation 9:
Ensure data portability, namely that data is easily transferable between
systems and applications supporting the implementation and evolution of
European public services without unjustified restrictions, if legally possible.
user-centricity
Users of European public services are meant to be any public administration,
citizen or businesses accessing and benefiting from the use of these services.
Users’ needs should be considered when determining which public services
should be provided and how they should be delivered.
Therefore, as far as possible, user needs and requirements should guide the
design and development of public services, in accordance with the following
expectations:
•• A multi-channel service delivery approach, meaning the availability of
alternative channels, physical and digital, to access a service, is an important
part of public service design, as users may prefer different channels
depending on the circumstances and their needs;
•• A single point of contact should be made available to users, to hide
internal administrative complexity and facilitate access to public services,
e.g. when multiple bodies have to work together to provide a public service;
•• Users’ feedback should be systematically collected, assessed and used to
design new public services and to further improve existing ones;

•• As far as possible, under the legislation in force, users should be able to
provide data once only, and administrations should be able to retrieve and
share this data to serve the user, in accordance with data protection rules;
•• Users should be asked to provide only the information that is absolutely
necessary to obtain a given public service.
Recommendation 10:
Use multiple channels to provide the European public service, to ensure
that users can select the channel that best suits their needs.
Recommendation 11:
Provide a single point of contact in order to hide internal administrative
complexity and facilitate users’ access to European public services.
Recommendation 12:
Put in place mechanisms to involve users in analysis, design, assessment
and further development of European public services.
Recommendation 13:
As far as possible under the legislation in force, ask users of European
public services once-only and relevant-only information.
inclusion and accessibility
Inclusion is about enabling everyone to take full advantage of the opportunities
offered by new technologies to access and make use of European public services,
overcoming social and economic divides and exclusion.
Accessibility ensures that people with disabilities, the elderly and other
disadvantaged groups can use public services at service levels comparable to
those provided to other citizens.14
14
Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on the accessibility of websites and mobile
applications of public sector bodies, and work launched by the Commission on a ‘European Accessibility Act’.

Inclusion and accessibility must be part of the whole development
lifecycle of a European public service in terms of design, information
content and delivery. It should comply with e-accessibility specifications widely
recognised at European or international level15
.
Inclusion and accessibility usually involve multi-channel delivery.
Traditional paper-based or face-to-face service delivery may need to co-
exist with electronic delivery.
Inclusion and accessibility can also be improved by an information system’s ability
to allow third parties to act on behalf of citizens who are unable, either permanently
or temporarily, to make direct use of public services.
Recommendation 14:
Ensure that all European public services are accessible to all citizens,
including persons with disabilities, the elderly and other disadvantaged
groups. For digital public services, public administrations should comply
with e-accessibility specifications that are widely recognised at European
or international level.
security and privacy
Citizens and businesses must be confident that when they interact with public
authorities they are doing so in a secure and trustworthy environment and in full
compliance with relevant regulations, e.g. the Regulation and Directive on data
protection16
, and the Regulation on electronic identification and trust services17
.
Public administrations must guarantee the citizens’ privacy, and the confidentiality,
authenticity, integrity and non-repudiation of information provided by citizens and
businesses. Security and privacy are discussed in more detail in section 4.3.7.
Recommendation 15:
Define a common security and privacy framework and establish processes
for public services to ensure secure and trustworthy data exchange between
public administrations and in interactions with citizens and businesses.
15
See also EC standardisation mandate No 376 on the development of European standards for public procurement of accessible ICT
products and services.
16
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard
to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities
for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties.
17
Regulation (EU) 910/2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market.

multilingualism
European public services can potentially be used by anyone in any Member
State. So multilingualism needs to be carefully considered when designing
them. Citizens across Europe often have problems in accessing and using digital
public services if these are not available in the languages they speak.
A balance needs to be found between the expectations of citizens and businesses
to be served in their own language(s) or their preferred language(s) and the
ability of Member States’ public administrations to offer services in all official
EU languages. A suitable balance could be that European public services are
available in the languages of the expected end-users, i.e. the number of
languages is decided on the basis of users’ needs, such as the level to which the
service is critical for the implementation of the digital single market or national
policies, or the size of the relevant audience.
Multilingualism comes into play not just in the user interface, but at all levels in
the design of European public services. For example, the choices made on data
representation in an electronic database should not limit its ability to support
different languages.
The multilingual aspect of interoperability becomes also relevant when a public
service requires exchanges between information systems across language
boundaries, as the meaning of the information exchanged must be preserved.
Recommendation 16:
Use information systems and technical architectures that cater for
multilingualism when establishing a European public service. Decide on the
level of multilingualism support based on the needs of the expected users.
administrative simplification
Where possible, public administrations should seek to streamline and simplify
their administrative processes by improving them or eliminating any that does
not provide public value. Administrative simplification can help businesses and
citizenstoreducetheadministrative burdenofcomplyingwithEUlegislationor
national obligations. Likewise, public administrations should introduce European
public services supported by electronic means, including their interactions with
other public administrations, citizens and businesses.

Digitisation of public services should take place in accordance with the following
concepts:
•• digital-by-default, whenever appropriate, so that there is at least one
digital channel available for accessing and using a given European public
service;
•• digital-first which means that priority is given to using public services via
digital channels while applying the multi-channel delivery concept and the
no-wrong-door policy, i.e. physical and digital channels co-exist.
Recommendation 17:
Simplify processes and use digital channels whenever appropriate for the
delivery of European public services, to respond promptly and with high
quality to users’ requests and reduce the administrative burden on public
administrations, businesses and citizens.
preservation of information
Legislation requires that decisions and data are stored and can be accessed for
a specified time. This means that records18
and information in electronic form
held by public administrations for the purpose of documenting procedures and
decisions must be preserved and be converted, where necessary, to new
media when old media become obsolete. The goal is to ensure that records and
other forms of information keep their legibility, reliability and integrity and can
be accessed as long as needed subject to security and privacy provisions.
To guarantee the long-term preservation of electronic records and other kinds
of information, formats should be chosen to ensure long-term accessibility,
including preservation of associated electronic signatures or seals. In this regard,
the use of qualified preservation services, in line with Regulation (EU) 910/2014,
can ensure the long-term preservation of information.
For information sources owned and managed by national administrations,
preservation is a purely national matter. For information that is not strictly
national, preservation becomes a European issue. In that case, an appropriate
‘preservation policy’ should be applied by the Member States concerned,
to cope with any difficulties arising if the relevant information is used under
different jurisdictions.
18
As defined by the second version of the model requirements for the management of electronic records (MoReq2): a record is ‘information
created, received, and maintained as evidence and information by an organisation or person, in pursuance of legal obligations or in the
transaction of businesses.

Recommendation 18:
Formulate a long-term preservation policy for information related to
European public services and especially for information that is exchanged
across borders.
assessment of effectiveness
and efficiency
There are many ways to take stock of the value of interoperable European public
services, including considerations such as return on investment, total cost of
ownership, level of flexibility and adaptability, reduced administrative burden,
efficiency, reduced risk, transparency, simplification, improved working methods,
and level of user satisfaction.
Various technological solutions19
should be evaluated when striving to
ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of a European public service.
Recommendation 19:
Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of different interoperability
solutions and technological options considering user needs, proportionality
and balance between costs and benefits.
19
e.g. cloud computing, Internet of Things, big data, and software-as-a-service.

Interoperability layers | 21
3. Interoperability
layers
Interoperability governance
5 recommendations
Organisational interoperability
2 recommendations
Integrated public service governance
2 recommendations
Semantic interoperability
3 recommendations
Legal interoperability
1 recommendation
Technical interoperability
1 recommendation

This chapter describes an interoperability model which is applicable to all
digital public services and may also be considered as an integral element of the
interoperability-by-design paradigm. It includes:
•• four layers of interoperability: legal, organisational, semantic and technical;
•• a cross-cutting component of the four layers, ‘integrated public service
governance’;
•• a background layer, ‘interoperability governance’.
The model is depicted below:
Figure 3 Interoperability model
3.1 Interoperability governance
Interoperability governance refers to decisions on interoperability frameworks,
institutional arrangements, organisational structures, roles and responsibilities,
policies, agreements and other aspects of ensuring and monitoring interoperability
at national and EU levels.
The European interoperability framework, the Interoperability Action
Plan (Annex 1 to the Communication) and the European interoperability
architecture (EIRA) are important parts of interoperability governance at
the EU level.
The INSPIRE Directive is an important domain-specific illustration20
of an
interoperability framework including legal interoperability, coordination structures
and technical interoperability arrangements.
European public services operate in a complex and changing environment.
Interoperability Governance
Legal
Interoperability
Organisational
Interoperability
Semantic
Interoperability
Technical
Interoperability
Integrated
PublicServiceGovernance
20
Article 1 of the INSPIRE Directive restricts its scope to ‘the purposes of Community environmental policies or activities which may have an
impact on the environment’.

Political support is necessary for cross-sectoral and/or cross-border interoperability
efforts to facilitate cooperation between public administrations.21
For effective
cooperation,allstakeholdersmustshareavision,agreeonobjectivesandtimeframes
and align priorities. Interoperability between public administrations at different
administrative levels will only be successful if governments give sufficient priority
and assign resources to their respective interoperability efforts.22
The lack of the necessary in-house skill sets is another barrier to implementing
interoperability policies. Member States should include interoperability skills in their
interoperability strategies, acknowledging that interoperability is a multi-dimensional
issuethatneedsawarenessandskillsinlegal,organisational,semanticandtechnical.
The implementation and delivery of a given European public service often relies on
components that are common to many European public services. The sustainability of
these components, which are covered by interoperability agreements reached outside
the scope of a particular European public service, should be guaranteed over time. This
is fundamental, as interoperability should be guaranteed in a sustainable way
and not as a one-off target or project. As common components and interoperability
agreements are the results of work done by public administrations at different levels
(local,regional,national,andEU),coordinationandmonitoringrequiresaholisticapproach.
Interoperability governance is the key to a holistic approach on interoperability,
as it brings together all the instruments needed to apply it.
Recommendation 20:
Ensure holistic governance of interoperability activities across
administrative levels and sectors.
Coordination, communication and monitoring are of the utmost importance for
successful governance. The European Commission, through the ISA2
programme,
supports a National Interoperability Framework Observatory (NIFO). Its main
objective is to provide information about NIFs and related interoperability and digital
strategies/policies, to help public administrations share and reuse experiences and to
support the ‘transposition’ of the EIF nationally. A NIF can be one or more
documents that define frameworks, policies, strategies, guidelines and action plans
on interoperability in a Member State.
21
The ISA² programme is an example of such political support
22
See for example the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of Directive 2007/2/
EC of March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) pursuant to Article 23, 2016..

3.1.1 Identifying and selecting standards and specifications
Standards and specifications are fundamental to interoperability. There are six
steps to managing them appropriately:
•• identifying candidate standards and specifications based upon specific
needs and requirements;
•• assessing candidate standards and specifications using standardised,
transparent, fair and non-discriminatory methods;23
•• implementing the standards and specifications according to plans and
practical guidelines;
•• monitoring compliance24
with the standards and specifications;
•• managing change with appropriate procedures;
•• documenting standards and specifications, in open catalogues, using a
standardised description.25
Recommendation 21:
Put in place processes to select relevant standards and specifications,
evaluate them, monitor their implementation, check compliance and test
their interoperability.
Recommendation 22:
Use a structured, transparent, objective and common approach to
assessing and selecting standards and specifications. Take into account
relevant EU recommendations and seek to make the approach consistent
across borders.
Recommendation 23:
Consult relevant catalogues of standards, specifications and guidelines
at national and EU level, in accordance with your NIF and relevant DIFs,
when procuring and developing ICT solutions.
Standards and specifications can be mapped to the EIRA and catalogued
in the European interoperability cartography (EIC).
In some cases, public administrations may find that no suitable standards/
specifications are available for a specific need in a specific domain. Active
participation in the standardisation process mitigates concerns about delays,
improves the alignment of standards and specifications with public sector needs
and can help governments keep pace with technological innovation.
23
For example the common assessment method for standards and specifications (CAMSS) developed in the context of the ISA programme.
24
Compliance models could include options like mandatory, comply-or-explain, good-to-have, optional, etc.
25
For example the asset description metadata schema (ADMS) developed in the context of the ISA programme.

Recommendation 24:
Actively participate in standardisation work relevant to your needs
to ensure your requirements are met.
3.2 Integrated public service
governance
European public service provision often requires different public administrations
to work together to meet end users’ needs and provide public services in an
integrated way. When multiple organisations are involved there is a need for
coordination and governance by the authorities with a mandate for planning,
implementing and operating European public services. Services should be
governed to ensure: integration, seamless execution, reuse of services and data,
and development of new services and ‘building blocks’.26
More is said about
the aspects of ‘integrated public service provision’ in section 4.3.1.
Focusing here on the governance part, this should cover all layers: legal,
organisational, semantic and technical. Ensuring interoperability when preparing
legal instruments, organisation business processes, information exchange,
services and components that support European public services is a continuous
task, as interoperability is regularly disrupted by changes to the environment, i.e.
in legislation, the needs of businesses or citizens, the organisational structure
of public administrations, the business processes, and by the emergence of new
technologies. It requires, among other things, organisational structures and roles
and responsibilities for the delivery and operation of public services, service level
agreements, establishment and management of interoperability agreements,
change management procedures, and plans for business continuity and data
quality.
Integrated public service governance should include as a minimum:
•• the definition of organisational structures, roles responsibilities
and the decision-making process for the stakeholders involved;
•• the imposition of requirements for:
-- aspects of interoperability including quality, scalability and availability of
reusable building blocks including information sources (base registries,
open data portals, etc.) and other interconnected services;
-- external information/services, translated into clear service level
agreements (including on interoperability);
26
A ‘building block’ is a self-contained, interoperable and replaceable unit encapsulating an internal structure.

•• a change management plan, to define the procedures and processes
needed to deal with and control changes;
•• a business continuity/disaster recovery plan to ensure that digital
public services and their building blocks continue to work in a range of
situations, e.g. cyberattacks or the failure of building blocks.
Recommendation 25:
Ensure interoperability and coordination over time when operating and
delivering integrated public services by putting in place the necessary
governance structure.
3.2.1 Interoperability agreements
Organisations involved in European public service provision should make formal
arrangements for cooperation through interoperability agreements.
Setting up and managing these agreements is part of public service governance.
Agreements should be detailed enough to achieve their aim, i.e. to provide
European public services, while leaving each organisation the maximum feasible
internal and national autonomy.
At semantic and technical levels, but also in some cases at organisational
level, interoperability agreements usually include standards and specifications.
At legal level, interoperability agreements are made specific and binding via
legislation at EU and/or national level or via bilateral and multilateral agreements.
Othertypesofagreementscancomplementinteroperabilityagreements,
addressing operational matters. For example, memoranda of understanding
(MoUs), service level agreements (SLAs), support/escalation procedures and
contact details, referring, if necessary, to underlying agreements at semantic
and technical levels.
Since delivering a European public service is the result of collective work with
parties that produce or consume parts of the service, it is critical to include
appropriate change management processes in the interoperability
agreements to ensure the accuracy, reliability, continuity and evolution of the
service delivered to other public administrations, businesses and citizens.
Recommendation 26:
Establish interoperability agreements in all layers, complemented by
operational agreements and change management procedures.

3.3 Legal interoperability
Each public administration contributing to the provision of a European public
service works within its own national legal framework. Legal interoperability is
about ensuring that organisations operating under different legal frameworks,
policies and strategies are able to work together. This might require that
legislation does not block the establishment of European public services within
and between Member States and that there are clear agreements about how to
deal with differences in legislation across borders, including the option of putting
in place new legislation.
The first step towards addressing legal interoperability, is to perform
‘interoperability checks’ by screening existing legislation to identify
interoperability barriers: sectoral or geographical restrictions in the use
and storage of data, different and vague data licence models, over-restrictive
obligations to use specific digital technologies or delivery modes to provide public
services, contradictory requirements for the same or similar business processes,
outdated security and data protection needs, etc.
Coherence between legislation, in view of ensuring interoperability, should be
assessed before adoption and through evaluating their performance regularly
once they are put into application.
Bearing in mind that European public services are clearly meant to be provided
- amongst others - from digital channels, ICT must be considered as early as
possible in the law-making process. In particular, proposed legislation should
undergo a ‘digital check’:
•• to ensure that it suits not only the physical but also the digital world (e.g.
the internet);
•• to identify any barriers to digital exchange; and
•• to identify and assess its ICT impact on stakeholders.
This will facilitate interoperability between public services at lower
levels (semantic and technical) as well, and increase the potential for
reusing existing ICT solutions, so reducing cost and implementation
time.
The legal value of any information exchanged between Member States should
be maintained across borders, and data protection legislation in both originating
and receiving countries complied with. This might require additional agreements
to overcome potential differences in the implementation of the applicable
legislation.

Recommendation 27:
Ensure that legislation is screened by means of ‘interoperability checks’,
to identify any barriers to interoperability. When drafting legislation
to establish a European public service, seek to make it consistent with
relevant legislation, perform a ‘digital check’ and consider data protection
requirements.
3.4 Organisational interoperability
This refers to the way in which public administrations align their business
processes, responsibilities and expectations to achieve commonly agreed
and mutually beneficial goals. In practice, organisational interoperability means
documenting and integrating or aligning business processes and relevant
information exchanged. Organisational interoperability also aims to meet the
requirements of the user community by making services available, easily
identifiable, accessible and user-focused.
3.4.1 Business process alignment
In order for different administrative entities to be able to work together efficiently
and effectively to provide European public services, they may need to align their
existing business processes or define and establish new ones.
Aligning business processes implies documenting them in an agreed way
and with commonly accepted modelling techniques, including the associated
information exchanged, so that all public administrations contributing to the
delivery of European public services can understand the overall (end-to-end)
business process and their role in it.
Recommendation 28:
Document your business processes using commonly accepted modelling
techniques and agree on how these processes should be aligned to deliver
a European public service.
3.4.2 Organisational relationships
Service orientation, upon which the conceptual model for public services is
conceived, means that the relationship between service providers and
service consumers must be clearly defined.
This involves finding instruments to formalise mutual assistance, joint action
and interconnected business processes as part of service provision e.g. MoUs
and SLAs between participating public administrations.

For cross-border actions, these should preferably be multilateral or global
European agreements.
Recommendation 29:
Clarify and formalise your organisational relationships for establishing
and operating European public services.
3.5 Semantic interoperability
Semantic interoperability ensures that the precise format and meaning of
exchanged data and information is preserved and understood throughout
exchanges between parties, in other words ‘what is sent is what is understood’.
In the EIF, semantic interoperability covers both semantic and syntactic aspects:
•• The semantic aspect refers to the meaning of data elements and the
relationshipbetweenthem.Itincludesdevelopingvocabulariesandschemata
to describe data exchanges, and ensures that data elements are understood
in the same way by all communicating parties;
•• The syntactic aspect refers to describing the exact format of the
information to be exchanged in terms of grammar and format.
A starting point for improving semantic interoperability is to perceive data and
information as a valuable public asset.
Recommendation 30:
Perceive data and information as a public asset that should be
appropriately generated, collected, managed, shared, protected and
preserved.
An information management strategy should be drafted and coordinated at the
highest possible level (corporate or enterprise) to avoid fragmentation and set
priorities.
For example, agreements on reference data, in the form of taxonomies, controlled
vocabularies, thesauri, code lists27
and reusable data structures/models28
are
key prerequisites for achieving semantic interoperability. Approaches like data-
driven-design, coupled with linked data technologies, are innovative ways of
substantially improving semantic interoperability.
27
For example the Eurovoc thesaurus and the European skills, competence and occupations (ESCO) taxonomy.
28
The core person, core business, core location and core public service developed by the ISA Programme are examples of cross-sector,
reusable data models.

Recommendation 31:
Put in place an information management strategy at the highest possible
level to avoid fragmentation and duplication. Management of metadata,
master data and reference data should be prioritised.
Similarly to the way technical standards have fostered technical interoperability
(e.g. network connectivity) for decades now, robust, coherent and universally
applicable information standards and specifications are needed to enable
meaningful information exchange among European public organisations.29
Given the different linguistic, cultural, legal, and administrative environments
in the Member States, this interoperability layer poses significant challenges.
However, unless standardisation efforts mature in the semantic interoperability
layer, it is difficult to ensure seamless information exchange, free movement
of data, and data portability among Member States to support a digital single
market in the EU.
Recommendation 32:
Support the establishment of sector-specific and cross-sectoral
communities that aim to create open information specifications and
encourage relevant communities to share their results on national and
European platforms.
3.6 Technical interoperability
This covers the applications and infrastructures linking systems and
services. Aspects of technical interoperability include interface specifications,
interconnection services, data integration services, data presentation and
exchange, and secure communication protocols.
A major obstacle to interoperability arises from legacy systems.
Historically, applications and information systems in public administrations
were developed in a bottom-up fashion, trying to solve domain-specific and
local problems. This resulted in fragmented ICT islands which are difficult to
interoperate.
29
Peristeras V., ‘Semantic Standards: Preventing Waste in the Information Industry’, IEEE Intelligent Systems, No 4, July-Aug. 2013, vol. 28,
pp: 72-75.

Due to the size of public administration and the fragmentation of ICT solutions,
the plethora of legacy systems creates an additional interoperability barrier in
the technical layer.
Technical interoperability should be ensured, whenever possible, via the use of
formal technical specifications.
Recommendation 33:
Use open specifications, where available, to ensure technical interoperability
when establishing European public services.

4. The conceptual
model for
integrated
public services
provision
Conceptual model
2 recommendations
Base registries
4 recommendations
Open data
3 recommendations
Internal information sources and services
1 recommendation
Catalogues
1 recommendation
External information sources and services
1 recommendation
Security and Privacy
2 recommendations

The conceptual model for integrated public services provision | 33
4.1 Introduction
This chapter proposes a conceptual model for integrated public services to
guidetheirplanning,development,operationandmaintenancebyMemberStates.
It is relevant to all governmental levels, from local to EU. The model is modular
and comprises loosely coupled service components30
interconnected
through shared infrastructure.
Recommendation 34:
Use the conceptual model for European public services to design new
services or reengineer existing ones and reuse, whenever possible, existing
service and data components.
Public administrations need to identify, negotiate and agree on a common
approach to interconnecting service components. This will be done at
different national administrative levels according to each country’s organisational
set-up. Access boundaries for services and information should be defined through
interfaces and conditions of access.
There are well-known and widely used technical solutions, e.g. web services,
to do this, but implementing them at EU level will require concerted efforts by
public administrations, including common or compatible models, standards and
agreements on common infrastructure.
Recommendation 35:
Decide on a common scheme for interconnecting loosely coupled service
components and put in place and maintain the necessary infrastructure
for establishing and maintaining European public services.
4.2 Model overview
The conceptual model promotes the idea of interoperability by design. It
means that for European public services to be interoperable, they should be
designed in accordance with the proposed model and with certain interoperability
and reusability requirements31
in mind.
30
Service oriented architecture (SOA) is an implementation of that concept.
31
The interoperability maturity model (IMM) developed in the context of the ISA programme can be used to assess a service’s
readiness for interoperability.

The model promotes reusability as a driver for interoperability, recognising
that the European public services should reuse information and services that
already exist and may be available from various sources inside or beyond the
organisational boundaries of public administrations. Information and services
should be retrievable and be made available in interoperable formats.
The basic components of the conceptual model are presented below.
The model’s structure comprises:
•• ‘integrated service delivery’ based on a ‘coordination function’ to
remove complexity for the end-user;
•• a ‘no wrong door’ service delivery policy, to provide alternative options
and channels for service delivery, while securing the availability of digital
channels (digital-by-default);
•• reuse of data and services to decrease costs and increase service quality
and interoperability;
•• catalogues describing reusable services and other assets to increase
their findability and usage;
•• integrated public service governance;
•• security and privacy.
Integrated Public Service Governance
Information Sources Services
• Shared Services
• Basic Services
Base
Registries
Other
Authentic
Sources
Open
Data
Internal Information Sources and Services
Integrated Public Services
External
Information
sources
and Services
Catalogues
SecurityandPrivacy
Coordination for Integrated
Service Delivery
Figure 4 Conceptual model for integrated public services

4.3 Basic components
4.3.1 Coordination function
The coordination function ensures that needs are identified and appropriate
services are invoked and orchestrated to provide a European public service. This
function should select the appropriate sources and services and integrate them.
Coordination can be automated or manual. The following process phases are part
of ‘integrated public service provision’ and executed by the coordination
function.
•• Need identification: This is prompted by a public service request by a
citizen or business.
•• Planning: This entails identifying the services and information sources
needed, using the available catalogues, and aggregating them in a single
process, considering specific user needs (e.g. personalisation).
•• Execution: This entails collecting and exchanging information, applying
business rules (as required by the relevant legislation and policies) to grant
or reject access to a service and then providing the requested service to
citizens or businesses.
•• Evaluation: After service provision, users’ feedback is collected and
evaluated.
4.3.2 Internal information sources and services
Public administrations produce and make available a large number of services,
while they maintain and manage a huge number and variety of information
sources. These information sources are often unknown outside the boundaries
of a particular administration (and sometimes even inside those boundaries).
The result is duplication of effort and under-exploitation of available resources
and solutions.
Information sources (base registries, open data portals, and other authoritative
sources of information) and services available not only inside the administrative
system but also in the external environment can be used to create integrated
public services as building blocks. Building blocks (information sources and
services) should make their data or functionality accessible using service-
oriented approaches.
Recommendation 36:
Develop a shared infrastructure of reusable services and information
sources that can be used by all public administrations.

Public administrations should promote policies for sharing services and
information sources in three main ways.
1. Reuse: When designing new services or revising existing ones, the first step
should be to investigate whether existing services and information sources
can be reused;
2. Publish: When designing new services and information sources or revising
existing ones, reusable services and information sources should be made
available to others for reuse;
3. Aggregate: Once appropriate services and information sources are
identified, they should be aggregated to form an integrated service provision
process. The building blocks should exhibit native capability of being
combined (‘interoperability by design’), to be ready for mash-up in different
environments with minimum customisation. This aggregation is relevant to
information, services and other interoperability solutions (e.g. software).
The reusable building block approach finds a suitable application by
mapping solutions against the conceptual building blocks of a reference
architecture32
that allows reusable components to be detected, which also
promotes rationalisation. The result of this mapping is a cartography33
of solutions, including their building blocks, that can be reused to serve common
business needs and ensure interoperability.
More specifically, to avoid duplication of effort, extra costs and further
interoperability problems, while increasing the quality of services offered, the
conceptual model features two types of reuse.
•• Reuse of services: Different types of services can be reused. Examples
include basic public services, e.g. issuing a birth certificate, and shared
services like electronic identification and electronic signature. Shared
services may be provided by the public sector, the private sector or in public-
private partnership (PPP) models;
•• Reuse of information: Public administrations already store large amounts
of information with a potential for reuse. Examples include: master data
from base registries as authoritative data used by multiple applications and
systems;opendataunderopenuselicencespublishedbypublicorganisations;
other types of authoritative data validated and managed under the aegis
of public authorities. Base registries and open data are discussed in more
detail in the next section.
32
For example the European interoperability reference Architecture (EIRA).
33
At European level, the European interoperability cartography (EIC), available via the Joinup platform, is a valuable tool for identifying
reusable interoperability solutions.

4.3.3 Base registries
Base registries are the cornerstone of European public service delivery. A base
registry is a trusted and authoritative source of information which can and
should be digitally reused by others, where one organisation is responsible and
accountable for the collection, use, updating and preservation of information.
Base registries are reliable sources of basic information on data items such as
people, companies, vehicles, licences, buildings, locations and roads. This type
of information constitutes the ‘master data’ for public administrations and
European public service delivery. ‘Authoritative’ here means that a base registry
is considered to be the ‘source’ of information, i.e. it shows the correct status, is
up-to-date and is of the highest possible quality and integrity.
In case of centralised registries, a single organisational entity is responsible
and accountable for ensuring data quality and for having measures in place to
ensure the correctness of the data. Such registries are under the legal control of
public administrations, whereas operation and maintenance can be outsourced
to other organisations if required. There are several types of base registries,
e.g. population, businesses, vehicles, cadastres. For the administrations, it is
important to obtain a high level overview of the operation of base registries and
of the data they store (a registry of registries).
In case of distributed registries there must be a single organisational entity
responsible and accountable for every part of the register. Additionally a single
entity must be responsible and accountable for the coordination of all parts of
the distributed registry.
A base registry framework, ‘describes the agreements and infrastructure for
operating base registries and the relationships with other entities’.
Access to base registries should be regulated to comply with privacy and
other regulations; base registries are governed by the principles of information
stewardship.
The information steward is the body (or possibly individual) responsible
and accountable for collecting, using, updating, maintaining and deleting
information. This includes defining permissible information use, complying with
privacy regulations and security policies, ensuring that information is current
and ensuring the accessibility of data by authorised users.
Base registries should draw up and implement a data quality assurance plan
to ensure the quality of their data. Citizens and businesses should be able to
check the accuracy, correctness and completeness of any of their data contained
in base registries.

A guide to the terminology used and/or a glossary of relevant terms used in
each base registry should be made available for both human and machine-
readable information purposes.
Recommendation 38:
Develop interfaces with base registries and authoritative sources
of information, publish the semantic and technical means and
documentation needed for others to connect and reuse available
information.
Recommendation 39:
Match each base registry with appropriate metadata including the
description of its content, service assurance and responsibilities, the type
of master data it keeps, conditions of access and the relevant licences,
terminology, a glossary, and information about any master data it uses
from other base registries.
Recommendation 40:
Create and follow data quality assurance plans for base registries and
related master data.
4.3.4 Open data
The Directive on the reuse of public sector information provides a common legal
framework for reuse of public sector data. The focus is on releasing machine-
readable data for use by others to stimulate transparency, fair competition,
innovation and a data-driven economy. To ensure a level playing field, the
opening and reuse of data must be non-discriminatory, meaning that data must
be interoperable so that can be found, discovered and processed.
Recommendation 41:
Establish procedures and processes to integrate the opening of data
in your common business processes, working routines, and in the
development of new information systems.
Recommendation 37:
Make authoritative sources of information available to others while
implementing access and control mechanisms to ensure security and
privacy in accordance with the relevant legislation.

There are currently many barriers to the use of open data. It is often published
in different formats or formats that hinder easy use, it can lack appropriate
metadata, the data itself can be of low quality, etc. Ideally basic metadata34
and the semantics of open datasets should be described in a standard format
readable by machines.
Recommendation 42:
Publish open data in machine-readable, non-proprietary formats. Ensure
that open data is accompanied by high quality, machine-readable
metadata in non-proprietary formats, including a description of their
content, the way data is collected and its level of quality and the licence
terms under which it is made available. The use of common vocabularies
for expressing metadata is recommended.
Data can be used in different ways and for various purposes and open data
publishing should allow this. Nevertheless, users might find problems with
datasets or might comment on their quality or might prefer other ways of
publishing. Feedback loops can help in learning more about the way datasets are
used and how to improve their publication.
For reuse of open data to reach its full potential, legal interoperability and
certainty is essential. For this reason, the right for anyone to reuse open data
should be communicated clearly throughout the Member States, and legal
regimes to facilitate the reuse of data, such as licences, should as far as possible
be promoted and standardised.
Recommendation 43:
Communicate clearly the right to access and reuse open data. The legal
regimes for facilitating access and reuse, such as licences, should be
standardised as much as possible.
4.3.5 Catalogues
Catalogues help others to find reusable resources (e.g. services, data, software,
data models). Various types of catalogue exist, e.g. directories of services,
libraries of software components, open data portals, registries of base registries,
metadata catalogues, catalogues of standards, specifications and guidelines.
Commonly agreed descriptions of the services, data, registries and interoperable
solutions published in catalogues are needed to enable interoperability between
catalogues.35
34
For example those included in the DCAT-AP specification developed in the context of the ISA programme
35
The DCAT-AP, the Core Public Service Vocabulary and the Asset Description Metadata Schema are examples of specifications used to
describe open data, public services and interoperability solutions respectively. For example: GeoDCAT-AP is an extension of DCAT-AP for
describing geospatial datasets, dataset series, and services. It provides an RDF syntax binding for the union of metadata elements defined
in the core profile of ISO 19115:2003 and those defined in the framework of the INSPIRE Directive..

A specific kind of catalogue is the European interoperability cartography
(EIC) of interoperability solutions available for reuse and sharing.
Recommendation 44:
Put in place catalogues of public services, public data, and interoperability
solutions and use common models for describing them.
4.3.6 External information sources and services
Public administrations need to exploit services delivered outside their
organisational boundaries by third parties, such as payment services provided
by financial institutions or connectivity services provided by telecommunications
providers. They need also to exploit external information sources such as open
data and data from international organisations, chambers of commerce, etc.
Moreover, useful data can be collected through the Internet of Things (e.g.
sensors) and social web applications.
Recommendation 45:
Where useful and feasible to do so, use external information sources and
services while developing European public services.
4.3.7 Security and privacy
Security and privacy are primary concerns in the provision of public services.
Public administrations should ensure that:
•• they follow the privacy-by-design and security-by-design approach to
secure their complete infrastructure and building blocks;
•• services are not vulnerable to attacks which might interrupt their
operation and cause data theft or data damage; and
•• they are compliant with the legal requirements and obligations regarding
data protection and privacy acknowledging the risks to privacy from
advanced data processing and analytics.
They should also ensure that controllers comply with data protection legislation,
by covering the following points.
•• ‘Risk management plans’ to identify risks, assess their potential impact
and plan responses with appropriate technical and organisational measures.
Based on the latest technological developments, those measures must
ensure that the level of security is commensurate with the degree of risk;
•• ‘Business continuity plans’ and ‘Back-up and recovery plans’ to put
in place the procedures needed for functions to operate after a disastrous
event and bring all functions back to normal the earliest possible;

•• A ‘data access and authorisation plan’ which determines who has access
to what data and under what conditions, to ensure privacy. Unauthorised
access and security breaches should be monitored and appropriate actions
should be taken to prevent any recurrence of breaches;
•• Use of qualified trust services in line with the eIDAS regulation36
to
ensure the integrity, authenticity, confidentiality and non-repudiation of data.
When public administrations and other entities exchange official information,
the information should be transferred, depending on security requirements, via
a secure, harmonised, managed and controlled network.37
Transfer mechanisms
should facilitate information exchanges between administrations, businesses
and citizens that are:
•• registered and verified, so that both sender and receiver have been
identified and authenticated through agreed procedures and mechanisms;
•• encrypted, so that the confidentiality of the exchanged data is ensured;
•• time stamped, to maintain accurate time of electronic records’ transfer
and access;
•• logged, for electronic records to be archived, thus ensuring a legal audit
trail.
Appropriate mechanisms should allow secure exchange of electronically
verified messages, records, forms and other kinds of information between the
different systems; should handle specific security requirements and electronic
identification and trust services such as electronic signatures/seals creation and
verification; and should monitor traffic to detect intrusions, changes of data and
other type of attacks.
Information must also be appropriately protected during transmission, processing
and storage by different security processes such as:
•• defining and applying security policies;
•• security training and awareness;
•• physical security (including access control);
•• security in development;
•• security in operations (including security monitoring, incident handling,
vulnerability management);
•• security reviews (including audits and technical checks).
As data from different Member States may be subject to different data protection
36
Regulation (EU) No 910/ 2014.
37
For example the TestaNG secured network.

implementation approaches, common requirements for data protection should
be agreed before providing aggregated services.
The provision of secure data exchange also requires several management
functions, including:
•• service management to oversee all communications on identification,
authentication, authorisation, data transport, etc., including access
authorisations, revocation and audit;
•• service registration to provide, subject to proper authorisation, access to
available services through prior localisation and verification that the service
is trustworthy;
•• service logging to ensure that all data exchanges are logged for future
reference and archived when necessary.
Recommendation 46:
Consider the specific security and privacy requirements and identify
measures for the provision of each public service according to risk
management plans.
Recommendation 47:
Use trust services according to the Regulation on eID and Trust Services
as mechanisms that ensure secure and protected data exchange in public
services.

Conclusion | 43
5. Conclusion
In recent decades, European public administrations have
invested in ICT to modernise their internal operations,
reduce costs and improve the services they offer to
citizens and businesses. Despite the significant progress
made and benefits obtained already, administrations
still face considerable barriers to exchanging
information and collaborating electronically.
These include legislative barriers, incompatible business
processes and information models, and the diversity of
technologies used. This is because, historically, information
systems were set up in the public sector independently
of each other and not in a coordinated way. The diversity
of institutional configurations across Europe adds another
layer of complexity at EU level.
Interoperability is a prerequisite for enabling
electronic communication and exchange of
information between public administrations. This
makes it also a prerequisite for achieving a digital
single market. Interoperability programmes in the EU
have evolved over time. At first, they were concerned with
achieving interoperability in particular domains, then with
putting in place common infrastructure. More recently,
they have started to address interoperability at the
semantic level. Governance, compatibility of legal regimes,
alignment of business processes and secure access to
data sources are some of the issues to be addressed next,
to provide fully fledged public services.
The EIF promotes electronic communication among
European public administrations by providing a set
ofcommon models,principlesandrecommendations.
It acknowledges and stresses the fact that interoperability
is not only an ICT matter, as it has layers of implications
ranging from the legal to the technical. Addressing issues
in a holistic approach in all these layers and at different
administrative levels from local to EU remains a challenge.
The EIF identifies four layers of interoperability
challenges (legal, organisational, semantic and technical)
at the same time pointing out the essential
role of governance to ensure coordination of
relevant activities across all levels and sectors of
administration.

The EIF conceptual model for public services covers the design, planning,
development, operation and maintenance of integrated public services
at all governmental levels from local to EU level. The principles set out here
guide decision-making on establishing interoperable European public services.
Moreover, the EIF offers practical tools in the form of a set of actionable
recommendations.
The components of the EIF are depicted in Figure 5.
EIF Conceptual Model
Integrated Public Service Governance
Coordination for Integrated
Service Delivery
Information Sources Services
• Shared Services
• Basic Services
Base
Registries
Other
Authentic
Sources
Open
Data
Internal Information Sources and Services
Integrated Public Services
External
Information
sources
and Services
Catalogues
SecurityandPrivacy
Interoperability Principles
Legal
Interoperability
Organisational
Interoperability
Semantic
Interoperability
Technical
Interoperability
Integrated
PublicServiceGovernance
Interoperability Governance
The revised EIF is a key instrument for establishing interoperable digital public
services at regional, national and EU level, thereby contributing to making the
digital single market a reality.
The revised EIF is
a key instrument
for establishing
interoperable
digital public
services at
regional, national
and EU level
Figure 5 EIF conceptual model relations

Annex | 45
6.1 Abbreviations
6. Annex
Abbreviation Meaning
A2A Administration to administration
A2B Administration to business
A2C Administration to citizen
DIF Domain-specific interoperability framework
DSM Digital single market
EC European Commission
EIC European interoperability cartography
EIF European interoperability framework
EIRA European interoperability reference architecture
EU European Union
EUPL European Union public licence
ICT Information and communication technology
INSPIRE
Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information
in the European Community (INSPIRE)
ISA Interoperability solutions for European public administrations
ISA²
Interoperability solutions and common frameworks for European public
administrations, business and citizens
MoU Memorandum of understanding
MS Member State
NIF National interoperability framework
NIFO National Interoperability Framework Observatory
PSI Public sector information
SLA Service level agreement
SOA Service-oriented architecture

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS
Free publications:
• one copy: via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu)
• more than one copy or posters/maps:
from the European Union's representations (http://ec.europa.eu/
represent_en.htm);
from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/
delegations/index_en.htm);
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/
index_en.htm) or
calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the
EU)(*).
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators,
phone boxes or hotels may charge you).
Priced publications:
• via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu)

NO-07-16-042-EN-N
ISBN 978-92-79-63756-8

Eif brochure final

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Eif brochure final (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Eif brochure final