MARCH 3 — Malaysia has much to be proud of. In the 2024/2025 Open Data Inventory (ODIN) by Open Data Watch, Malaysia ranked first globally, outperforming 198 countries with an overall score of 90 and an openness score of 99, according to the Department of Statistics Malaysia.
This dramatic rise from 67th place just two years ago reflects strong institutional leadership, sustained investment and a clear national commitment to open data. Yet rankings, while important, are only a starting point.
The more pressing question is not how open our data is, but how effectively it is shaping better policy, better decisions and better outcomes for people. Because data alone does not save societies. Better policy does.
This reality is felt keenly within the research community. Many Malaysian researchers remain cautious about sharing the data they have painstakingly collected using allocations from various funders often over years of fieldwork, navigating budget constraints and managing complex ethical and methodological processes.
The concern is familiar: once data is shared openly, will it be taken out of context, misused or reused without proper recognition? These concerns are understandable. Research data represents intellectual labour, professional credibility and scholarly identity. However, this becoming rooted in outdated assumptions about how open science works.
According to the author, research data reflects years of work, expertise, and academic credibility, though misconceptions about open science persist. — Pexels.com pic
When data is shared through structured institutional platforms, such as the Universiti Malaya Open Science Platform, ownership is not surrendered it is formalised. Datasets are published with clear metadata, licensing conditions and persistent reference links. Any reuse must cite the original source, just as journal articles do. In this model, data sharing is not about giving away hard-earned work; it is about enabling collaboration while protecting credit.
Far from weakening research, responsible data sharing strengthens it. When data becomes discoverable and reusable, it attracts interdisciplinary interest, encourages replication and opens pathways into policy discussions. Visibility increases, not diminishes. Open data does not dilute contribution; it extends its influence and collaboration.
At the national level, the ODIN assessment also offers an important reminder: openness alone is not enough. While Malaysia performed exceptionally overall, gaps remain in areas central to public policy and social wellbeing. These include limitations in the availability and disaggregation of data related to health outcomes, gender-based violence, crime and justice, community-level vulnerability, as well as energy supply and consumption patterns and greenhouse gas emissions.
Beyond data gaps, there is another issue that deserves attention reproducibility. Methodological notes, data collection protocols, version histories, definitions of variables and limitations are not always clearly explained.
Without such contextual information, data may be accessible but not fully reproducible or interpretable. For policymakers, researchers and analysts, this weakens confidence and limits the ability to validate findings or build upon existing work.
In policy terms, reproducibility is not a technical luxury; it is a safeguard. Policies grounded in data must also be grounded in transparent methods. When platforms do not provide adequate information about how data was generated, cleaned, updated or revised, decision-making risks being built on incomplete understanding.
These gaps matter. They shape what policymakers can see, measure and prioritise. When data on social risks, energy use or emissions lacks granularity, timeliness or methodological clarity, policies risk being blunt, reactive or poorly targeted.
Another challenge lies beyond government and academia. While Malaysia’s open data ecosystem is strong within institutional and research settings, public engagement remains limited. Many datasets are technically accessible yet difficult for non-experts to interpret or apply. Without sufficient data and policy literacy, openness becoming symbolic rather than transformative.
Malaysia’s open data must now focus on people, investing in public education and engagement not just infrastructure. Regular training sessions, simplified dashboards and user-friendly applications can help citizens interact meaningfully with data. More importantly, citizen science initiatives where members of the public contribute to real research can bridge the gap between data producers and data users.
Environmental monitoring such as energy efficiency tracking and emissions observation, community-based health and communication monitoring such as mosquito breeding site observations, water quality monitoring, mental wellbeing indicators, diet patterns and local sustainability challenges offer natural entry points. School-based and community outreach programmes can ensure that young Malaysians grow up seeing data as something they can question, use and contribute to not something reserved for experts.
However, meaningful participation requires preparation. Structured training and accessible online platforms must equip citizens with basic research ethics, data accuracy standards and reporting guidelines before they contribute.
With proper guidance and quality controls, citizen science can move beyond enthusiasm and become a credible contributor to research and policy. A local airline once declared, “Now everyone can fly.” The same philosophy can guide our data future: not only can everyone fly, everyone can participate and contribute in science.
Industry also has a role to play. Companies that responsibly share selected operational, environmental or process data stand to benefit from improved efficiency, innovation and future collaboration.
Open data need not be a liability, it can be a strategic asset that informs better operations, supports evidence-based regulation and strengthens long-term competitiveness. To support this cultural shift, institutions that adopt open data practices should be recognised through targeted government accreditation or incentives.
Malaysia has shown that it can lead globally in opening data. The more difficult task now is human and institutional rather than technical: turning open data into better understanding, better judgement and better policy. Data alone won’t save us. Better policy shaped by people who understand, trust and use data will.
* The author is a Data Steward for UM Open Science (UMOS) and a Research Officer at the Universiti Malaya Sustainable Development Centre (UMSDC) and may be reached at [email protected].
** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
