From adoption to rejection of a digital commons to shift the boundary between state and citizens

Few studies in political science and the sociology of the State have empirically examined the implementation of a digital commons by public actors. This article seeks to fill this gap, based on the case study of the National Address Database (BAN), launched in 2015. This public database is presented as a digital commons, open to citizen contribution, open access and democratically governed by public, semi-private and civil society actors. How did the adoption of this unusual socio-technical form in the administration take place and what did it shift in the boundary between the State and society? The author’s survey consisted of a series of twenty-three interviews, observations of working meetings and analysis of grey literature. The two main findings: (i) explain the adoption by reform entrepreneurs in a context of technological uncertainty; and (ii) show that the form of the digital commons—and in particular shared governance—was abandoned with the arrival of a new political majority that preferred a more sovereign, administrative and pro-market management of the BAN, in the perspective of “government as a platform” (O’Reilly, 2010).