Abstract： Public data empower the development of digital economy.On the basis of conceptual definitionand scope framing，thelegalatributesofpublicdatashouldbeusedtodetermine theattributionoftherighttouse，andtodeduce the mechanism of utilization of public data with public nature as thelogical starting point.Basedon the current situation，theuseof publicdata faces multipledificulties intermsof normative basis，boundarydelimitation，procedural rules，and protectionpolicies.Therefore，publicityshould bethecore principleandthe principleof convenience should be deepened，soas toclarifytheboundaries between theuseof publicdataand theprotection of personal information rights and interests as wellas legitimatecommercial behavior.As asingle platformcanhardly meet therequirements of use，it shouldoptimize theservice procedures toadapt to differentstages ofuse，standardizethe wayof datause supervision，and clarify the supervisory responsibilities of the government and the platform.

Keywords： public data; use mechanism; publicity

CLC：D912 DC： A ArticleID：2096-9783（2025）03-0127-07

1FormulationoftheProblem

In 2017，XiJinping proposed \"building a digital economy with data as akeyelement\" during the collective study of the Political Bureau ofthe Central Commitee，emphasizing the importance ofdata governance.In2O22，the \"Twenty Articles on Data\"，as a national-level special policydocument，deployedthe useof data ata high levelfrom the perspective of production and production factors.The datause work was deployedfromthe height of production factors.In the sameyear，Zhejiang Province issued China's first public data-themed local regulations-\"Zhejiang Province Public DataRegulations\"，taking akeystep in constructing a mechanism for Utilization ofPublic Data.Subsequently，the Measures for Openness of Public Datain Shandong Province and the Data Regulations of Sichuan Province were enactedoneafteranothertosharetheexperienceoflocallegislation.Againstthis backdrop，andYunnanhave also issued management measures and solicited comments to explore appropriate data use mechanisms.The effective release of the valueofpublicdatacannotbeseparated fromthe standardizationoftheuseofbehavior，butbasedonthecurrent situation，theuseof publicdatais facing manydilemmas，which need tobe solvedurgently.This paper intends to take the mechanismoftheuseof publicdataas thebasisofthethesis，toanalyzethe institutional bariers fromtheuseof the basis ofthe boundary，the procedure，the protectionofthe policyof the four-dimensional analysis，andto put forward countermeasures.

2Basic Framework forUtilization ofPublic Data

The concept of public data was initiallydefined with reference to \"government data\"and \"government data\".Later，local regulations expanded the subject elements，extended the use process，enriched the purpose of use，and replacedthe aforementioned withthe conceptof\"public data\".Clarifying theconcept and scope of\"Utilizationof Public Data\" is a prerequisite for understanding the nature of its public nature.

2.1Definition of the Concept of Utilization of Public Data

The use of public data is evolving from traditional governmental public data to a broader concept.On the one hand，in termsof thedimensionofuse，UtilizationofPublicDataisdiferentiatedbywhetheritisforprofitornot.In the caseof publicuse，open data serves the public good，and users accessand utilize thedata through application and acquisition.In the case offor-profit use，relevant platforms are operated through analysis and processng，and data products and services are promoted to facilitate the marketization of public data.

On theother hand，from the perspective of the dimension of use atributes，it covers both purposes and subjects. First，the purpose level，theuseof publicdatainthepublic interest first，thevalueof miningand innovative applications for the latter，with therealizationof the public interest and data elements ofthe dual purposeof marketization. The second is the subjectlevel，theopen useof public dataisopen to the society，andanysubjectcan obtainand use it through open channels1].

2.2Anchoringthe Scopeof UtilizationofPublic Data

The scope of use of public data has gone throughthe stage of \"government information- government data-public data\"，resulting in the formationof public data that are unconditionally，conditionallyand notopenly available，as expresslystipulated.The mainbasis of the \"government information\"stage is the \"Regulations on the Disclosure of Goverment Information\"，whichisnotofahigh levelandaffcts thestrengthofinformationdisclosure2.The \"government data\" stage is guidedby the guidelines of using on-demandand opening up moderately，andthe scopeof use is not wide.Inthe \"public data\"stage，Shanghai，Zhejiang，Shandong andother places are no longer limited to the scopeof open use of datafrom administrative organs，butalso include in the scopeof data collectedby public management and service institutions，authorized enterprises and institutions.

There are not barriers between public data with diferent openness conditions.For unconditionallyopen public data，it is easiertoanchoritsscopeofuse.Conditionalyopenpublicdata，ontheotherhand，needtogothrough techniques such as de-encryptionand desensitization，andtheconditions of use and behavioral restrictions need to be clarified bythe management departmentbefore theycan be included in the scope of use3l.Itcan be seen thatby seting conditions，public data that are not open and conditionally open can be transformed into each other.

2.3Logical StartingPoint forUtilization of Public Data

Local legislation has experienced the expansion from \"governmentdata\" to \"public data\"，the deepening from \"information disclosure\"to\"dataopenness\"，andthe transformation from theconcept of \"on-demand provision\"to \"full openaccess\"，revealing that publicity is thecore essenceof public data andthelogical starting pointfor theuse ofpublic data.The deepening of \"information disclosure\" to\"data opennes\"，andthe transformationof theconceptfrom\"ondemand provision\"to \"fullopenness of use\"have revealed that publicityis thecore essence of publicdata，andis the logical starting point for the use of public data.

On the one hand，publicness starts from a judgment of actual need.The logic of public data generation can be sen as imposing disinterest or burdens on personal data4，but the processof generation and use actually strengthens individualcontroloverthegenerateddata.Suchcontrolensuresstabilityandflexibilityinthecirculationofpublicdata： publicdata canbe diluted into personal data to serve individual interests，and personaldata can participate in the opening of publicresources to realize public interests.This is in line with the public's judgment and choice of actual needs.

On the other hand，the interests of all parties coexist in the circulation anduse of public data.First，data power and rights coexist.Public nature requires that the rightof controlbythe governmentand public service organizations bebalanced withthe minimumrightofusebycitizens.Thelimitationontheright touseliesinthelaw'ssetingof restrictive conditions oncitizens'accessanduse behavior.Second，thecoexistence ofoperator'sdata legal interestsand user's data rightsand interests.Theprotectionofuserdatalegalinterestsandthedefinitionofoperatordatalegal interests must be balancedl5l.Operators utilize data technology to form public data products and services，and users purchase or use them in response to their needs，andthe economic interests of both parties coexist and are shared.Third， thecoexistenceand sharing of diferent interests have procedural requirements.Theadministrative subject declares the scope of use of public data by means of an expression of meaning or other means that can be inferred.The significanceof thisprocedureis toprovideasuitableruleorder fortheconstructionoftheUtilizationofPublic Data system.

Utilizationof Public Data conforms to theadvanced formof public governancetheoryand practice，andachievesa higher-order flow of data benefits based on dynamic cooperation and coordinated cooperation of resources.

3Reviewof the Current Situation and Analysisof Issues

The basic premise of institutional analysis is to define the problems of coordination and cooperation among multiple individuals，groups and organizations@.This paper analyzes thedata barriers that prevent individuals and groups from cooperating in terms of rationale，boundaries，procedures，and safeguards in public data access regimes.

3.1InadequateBasisforData Use

Public data management methods around the world mostly regulatethe use ofdata in terms of behavioral requirements，responsibilitiesandassessmentrules，anditisdificult toprovidearigorousandreasonableexplanationof \"why public data can be used\".

First，the supply of public data is misaligned with demand，and the basis for its use lacks real support.Data supplyshouldalwaysbe higherthanthelevelof use inordertoleadtheupgradingofdatause.However，the supplyof public data elements isnowatthelowlevelof\"whether\"and\"how much\"，anditisdificult toreachtheidealstateof data demand.Secondly，thepublicdata policyprovisionsneed tobeimproved，theuseof thebasisof thelack ofcontingent support. Shenzhen and are stillin the public data management approach to the consultation stage.Tianjin， Shanghai，Chongqingand other places in the trial approach is a temporary norms，the binding force is limited.Although some regions have initiallyestablished amulti-level public data legal system intheform oflocal regulations and government rules，and in the formof construction gudelines，management methods，implementation rules and assessment norms.However，the form，content and binding force of the norms are not uniform.

3.2UncertaintyabouttheBoundariesofDataUse

As the first typical case of publicdata in China，the \"Ant Gold Service case\"has basicall clarified the boundariesof thecommercialuse of public data.However，there is alack of subsequent judicial practice cases，failing to form a \"high court- middle court-basecourt\" \"judgment-ruling-mediation\" parallel resource base，the boundaries of the use of public data is still not clear enough.

First，the boundary between the use of public data and the protection of personal information rights and interests is unclear.Unlikeenterprises thatcapture personal data sets held by rivalsand infringeontherights and interests of individuals throughdisguised profit-making，theimproperuseof behaviorhas involved thepublic interest，enterprises capture and downloadthe useof publicdata relatedto transportation，health and hygiene，etc.，andthe targetof the infringementispublicsecurityand personalsecurity.Part of the judicialdecision tends toadopt\"Anti-Unfair CompetitionLaw\"thinking，andpublicdataforthepublicinterestandpersonalrightsandinterestsoftheprotectionof the goal is difcult tobe nestedAndthe lawreferee viewcan beusedasaunifiedrefereerules，stilltobetestedby judicial practice.Secondly，the boundary between the use of public data and commercial profit-making behavior is unclear. The Anti-Unfair Competition Law（Draft Revision）regulates theunfair use of data from the perspectiveof market competition order，focusing on stabilizing the competition mechanismon a macro level，and not muchon the legitimacy standardof theuse behavioritself.Inaddition，duetothelack of clarityofthesupremelaw，mostofthelocalities have adopted administrative measures，which is difficult to meet the needs of stabilizingthe economic orderof data.

3.3ProceduralFlawsinUtilizationofData

From the point of view of the existing procedural rules，the whole process specifications，such as data catalogs and shared services，have not yet formed aunified standard;the acces，reading and analysis procedures are not flexible enough;the implementation rules for processing，handlingand application need tobe improvedurgently;and the behavioral efficiency of data use is not high.

On the one hand，procedures for accessing，reading and analyzing public data are not flexible enough.Access and synergystandardsand norms are mostlyglossedover in policy texts.There are few specific provisions inlocal documents on data that areconditionallyopen.The Shenzhen Special Economic Zone Data Regulations do not make a distinctionbetweendiferent typesofdata intermsofhowtheyareused.Theinterfacecallislocatedintheoverlapof unconditionaland conditional open data，but thereare diferences in the procedures forreading andanalyzing the two， so it is necessry to differentiate between their use scenarios and flexiblyincorporate \"other ways stipulated by laws， regulationsandthe state\"under the premise ofsafeguarding securityand public interests.On the other hand，the implementation rules forthe handling，processing and application of publicdata need to be improved.Many places have issued authorizedoperation management methods，focusingonbehavioralnorms and safetysupervision，andtheoperating rules derived from the social welfare functionsof theoperating body are not suiciently reflected.The Wenzhou MunicipalPublic Data AuthorizationandOperation Management Rules （forTrial Implementation）stillacksprovisions on the authorization filingauthority，theoperationagreement program，thenecesityof pre-trialandexpertreview，and specific measures.

The purpose of public data openness is \"ease of access and processing\"， which encompasses the requirement of easeof original useand re-use.This requirement needs tobe implemented in the whole process ofdatause，so that the use processerves the entity.The flaws in the Utilizationof Public Data process make it diffcult to forma closed loop of data flow from \"data supply-scenario application-quality feedback-improvement\".

3.4InadequatePoliciesofDataProtection

Mechanisms forsafeguarding theuse of public data are weak，and policies are not wellthought out.At the national level，thereareonlytwolawsrelated todata protection：theDataSecurityLawandthe Network SecurityLaw.Atthe locallevel，various places are exploring theestablishment of supervision andconstraint mechanisms fortheopen useof data，butinpractice，thediscretionofvariousdepartmentsislarge，anditisdifculttoeffctivelyimplementthexisting guarantee mechanisms.

From the viewpointof the form of policies and regulations，the policy system for guaranteeing the useof public dataislagging behind.Foronething，relevantpolicies around the worldare notfullycompatiblewiththestageofdevelopmentofthedigital economy.There is insuffcientspaceforexisting rules toaccommodate thedevelopmentof new public data.Second，the efectivenesslevel of policies and regulations is low，and the supporting policies are incomplete. Mostoftherelevant policiesarenormativedocuments，andthenumberoflocallawsandregulations isrelativelysmall， making it dificult to playanoverarching role.Third，theresultsofthepilot phaseof policies and regulations are unclear. Shenzhen's previous \"Special Economic Zone Data Regulations\" are not specialized data policies and regulations，and the description of public data opening is relatively briefl7l.

In terms of the content of policies and regulations，the comprehensiveness of the contentof data use protection is insuffcient，andthere are limitations inthe structure.First，the provisions ofthe safeguard policyareunclear.The Interim Measures forOpen Management ofPublic Data Resources of Tianjin Municipality duplicates the provisions of safeguards in the chapters of development and utilization and supervision and guarantee.Hainan and Jilin cross-provide for security management and supervision and safeguards，which is more clutered.Second，thestatus of theuse of assessmentisvague，anditisdificult toensuretherationalityoftheuseofdifferenttypesofdata.Evaluationisinthe statusof post-eventprotection，orinthestatusof theadjustmentof theork，orfordataaggregation，corelationanalysis and therreasons maybeconfidential，sensitivityandotherdatauseof theriskof priorassessment，whichisstilto be examined.

To summarize，there is duplication and clutter inthe provisions ofthe relevant policiesand regulations on the content of protection，and there is still room for improvement in terms of form and content.

4Improvement of AccessSystemof the Public Data

Bycontouring the principles of data use，clarifying the boundaries ofdata use behaviors，optimizing service procedures，and standardizing supervision methods，we willexplore thedata relationshipand order between providingand using subjects，and grasp the initiative of data use[8].

4.1Clarifyingthe Principlesfor Utilization of Public Data

On theone hand，itis necessryto introduce the principleof publicnesstoconsolidate the foundationof Utilizationof Public Data.Bytransformingatributes intoprinciples，the\"original intent\"ofthe Utilizationof Public Dataregime is fundamentallystrengthened.Data openness shapes a strong public space，ensuring that anyone can participate in it and frelyaccessuseand sharedata resourcesAtthesame time，itisnecessarytoabandon therigidand undifferentiated path of data supply，and judge thedigital technological capabilitiesof diferent users，soas tocategorize and open up the use of different scenarios with differentiated needs[1ol.

On the otherhand，the principle of convenience should be deepened to meet the requirements of open access in differentscenarios.Theshiftin the Beijing MunicipalPublic Data Management Measures fromthe principleof \"sharing on demand\" to that of \"fullsharing\"fully reveals the undesirabilityof passiveopenness on the partof the Government.The government should adopt the principle of actively building the ecosystem of data opening，circulation and utilizationandthe infrastructureofdatafactormarket1.The principleofaccessibilityshouldnotonlyfocusonteefficiencyof data access and use，but alsoon the supplyand use of public data under the premise of assessing technological risks and guaranteeing the security of data management.

4.2ClarifyingtheBoundariesofLegitimateUtilizationofData

Public datahas both \"personal nature\"and \"property nature\".For itspersonal nature，itis necessryto clarify the boundaries between the useof behaviorand the protection of personal information rightsand interests，and to protect individualrightsand interests;foritspropertynature，itis necessarytoclarifytheboundarieswith legitimatecommercial behavior，and to release the value of data.

On the one hand，the boundary between theuse of dataandthe protection of personal information rights andinterests shouldbeclarified.Duetothecomplexityandhomologous heterogeneityofdata，the legislativelevelneeds torestrictthetransformationof propertyrightsintopublicdatarights.For example，thePersonal InformationProtection Law sets uprules for the operation of the useof information.Forthebehavior ofdata usethat harmsthe rights and interestsof personal information，adverselegalconsequences suchasreducing thevalidityof theagreementandrestrictingthe qualificationofrightsare stipulated，soas toachieve thefunctionoffiling inand preventing thelossof the rightsand interestsof personalinformationtothegreatest extent posible.Inaddition to the limitationsofprivate law， thebehaviorof using data shallalsobe subject to therelevantobligations basedon publicinterestunder public law[12l.

Onthe other hand，the boundary between data useand commercial profitability should be clarified.The first is the legalityof theprocedures forapplying forandobtaining publicdata.Fordata that are conditionalyopen，under the premise ofcomplying with specific conditions，specific scenarios and security requirements，the mode of use and time limit should be clarified，andasecurity guarantee agreement shouldbe signedand thenaccessd in accordance with thelaw.Second，thelegitimacyoftheuse behavior.The results ofuse shallindicate the sourceof data and comply with thesafeguard agreement and platform security management norms.Ilegal abuseand unauthorized proliferation and leakage are strictly prohibited.Third，thelegitimacyofpurpose.The main purposeof theuse behaviorshould be tobalance the interests of the \"ternary superposition\" and to connect and interact with different types of use.

4.3OptimizationofServiceProceduresforUtilizationofData

It is difficultforasingle platform to meet the service requirements fortheuseof data circulation.The effciencyof usage behaviors willbe improved by refining the countermeasures of usage service procedures adapted to thecharacteristics of different stages.

First，the formationof effective operationalrules foraccessing，reading and analyzingdata.It will review the conditionsof data openness and provide feedback channels forusers’complaints;verifytheunits of data sources to ensure the statusand frequencyof updates;and expanddata summaries tofullsummarize thecontent of use.Ensure that the datadomainhas theability toprovideaccuratedata identification forutilizationof publicdata throughdata interface calls and algorithmic model construction.Restrictions on internal readingandanalyzing behavior should be based on whetherthe publicdata productsand services ultimately presentedare detrimental to the public interest，therights and interestsofindividuals，or thefaircompetition system，and shouldnotsetupa\"no-goarea\"for useprematurely.With regard to complaints abouttherights and interests of individuals，coordination should becariedout with data-providing organizations to examineand judge theatributesoffieldsandopenness andto safeguardtherights and interestsof personal information.

Second，it is planning arepresentative practicalpath for data reuse.Beijing as arepresentative ofthe \"public data + industryapplications\"model，the government clear intention touse the subjectofthe declaration conditions andoperationalrequirements，refine the authorizationof the subjectandobject，applicationscope and supervision mechanism and other provisions，to beter serve the authorization of the object and content.In the \"top-level coordination + pilot landing\" mode represented by Zhejiang Province，it is necessary to expeditiously promote the \"Zhejiang Province Public DataAuthorizationandOperation Management Measures （forTrial Implementation）\"to transform itintoahigherorder specification that meets the needs of operation and development.

Optimizing theuse of service procedures involves not only the formation of efective operational rules for access， reading and analysis，but also the establishment of clear rules on reuse andthe adoption of practical measures to regulate use.

4.4Standardizing theMonitoringMethodsofDataUse

The prescriptive and planning nature of a public data policy is the basis and prerequisite for ensuring that it can beimplemented oroperationalized，byclearlydefining thepurposes，practices and conditionsor behaviors that should be in place for public data management.

On theonehand，the policies andregulations of each regionshould clarifythe status of requirements，legal responsibilitiesand assessment in the textof policies on the useof public datal7l.Requirements，as preventive measures， provide a stable expectation of behavioral results for the subject of use;legal responsibility，as aconsequence to be born bythe subjectofuse inviolationoftherequirements，needs toembodythe spiritofthe policyofstrictleniency;assessment，as the supervisionof the whole process ofopenuse，the results of which notonlyserveas a reference forthe construction of the digital government，but also feed back to the useof therequirementsand responsibilities.Onthe otherhand，itisnecessrytoclarifythesupervisoryresponsibilitiesof thegovernmentandtheplatform.The mainresponsibilityof the government is to supervise theuseof public dataunder differentopenconditions and hold the trading platform responsible for the problems，focusing onthe entity.The platform's supervisory responsibilitylies in providing rulesof use，auditing the qualificationof the subjectof use，etc.，focusingonthe procedure.The governmentand the platform should supervise each other in a coordinated manner.

5 Conclusion

The system of utilization of public data，with \"realizing the value of data elements”as its distinguishing mark， needs to establish a mechanism that takes publicityas its logical starting point.In the faceof the dilemmaof insufficientbasis foruse，unclearboundaries，proceduralflawsandinadequatesafeguards，itisnecessrytofirstlyclarifythe principle ofuse，introduce the principle of publicityand enrich theconnotation of the principle ofconvenience.Second，through thedesign of specific behavioral rules，to forma stableexpectation of the boundaryof data use.Once again，optimize the procedure of public data original use and re-use service，and fix itasa policy text.Finall，standardize the wayof data use supervision，clarify thesupervision responsibilities of the government and the platform， make clearthe textual statusof behavioral requirements，legal responsibilities and assssment，and continue this idea to thesubsequent legislative framework，so thatpublicdataandnon-publicdataare deplycombined，opensubjects and use subjects collide in multiple directions，and data use and data circulation co-exist and co-grow.

Reference：

[1]ChinaTrial.InternetRuleofLawlLegitimate Useand Legal Regulationof Public Data[EB/OL].（202O-08-13）[2024-03- 05].https：//m.thepaper.cn/baijiahao_8703502.

[2]DILY.Theanalysisof \"thetragedyof anti-commons\"ofopengovernmentdataphenomenon[J].Information Studies： Theory amp; Application，2016，39（7）： 8-60.

[3]XIAO WB.Clarifying exceptions inChineselawofopengovernmental information[J].SJTULawReview，2O18（1）：128-143.

[4] ZHANG SH，WANGN.Thejurisprudentialbasisandimplementationof stateownershipf publicdatalJ].Gansu SocialSciences，2023（4）： 146-158.

[5]RENY.Datalegislationtransformation：fromincludingdatarightsintolawtoprotectinglegalinterestsofdata[J].Political Science and Law，2020（6）： 135-147.

[6]DENG SX.Institutional analysisand public governanceM].Zhang Tieqin，Zhang Yinqi，Translated in Shanghai： Fudan Press，2019.

[7]SUJH，DENGR M. on qualitycontrol of open public data[J].Digital LibraryForum，2023，19（8）： 52-59.

[8]XIAYK.Theconnotation，boundary，nddivisionprinciplesofpublicdatainthedigitalenvironment[J].JournalofLibrary Science in China，2024，50（2）：100-114.

[9] Open Definition：Defining Open inOpen Data，Open Content and Open Knowledge[EB/OL].（2024-02-12）[2024-03-17]. https：//opendefinition. org/od/2.1/en/.

[10]CHANGJ.Reflectionontheprinciplesofpublicdataopenlegislationandtheconstructionofopenpathways[J].Joualf East China of Science and Technology（Social Science Edition），2022，37（5）： 135-148.

[1]DINGXD.romopenesstosrvice： jurisprudentialreflectionandinstitutionalimprovementofoengovermntdata[J]. Studies in Law and Business，2022，39（2）： 131-145.

[12]JIANGCX.oncapacityofdata propertyrightJ].ScienceofLaw（JouralofNorthwestofPoliticalScience and Law），2024（3）： 130-138.

摘要：公共數(shù)據(jù)賦能數(shù)字經(jīng)濟發(fā)展。在概念界定和范圍框定基礎上，應立足于公共數(shù)據(jù)的法律屬性認定使用權歸屬，并演繹出以公共性為邏輯起點的公共數(shù)據(jù)使用機理?；诂F(xiàn)狀考察，公共數(shù)據(jù)使用在規(guī)范依據(jù)、邊界劃分、程序規(guī)則、保障政策上面臨多重困境。鑒于此，應以公共性為核心原則并深化便捷性原則，明晰公共數(shù)據(jù)使用與個人信息權益保護以及正當商業(yè)行為的邊界。單一平臺難以滿足使用要求，應優(yōu)化適應不同使用階段的服務程序，并規(guī)范數(shù)據(jù)使用監(jiān)督方式，厘清政府與平臺的監(jiān)督職責。

關鍵詞：公共數(shù)據(jù)；使用機理；公共性