3. Concepts: Government & Technology
Governments' use of ICTs is now well
established:
from the use of mainframes for mass-
processing tasks,
to email, WWW and the full-range of
enterprise IT technologies.
Governments adopt new technological
solutions.
Governments facilitate the
development of ICT industries.
Governments benefit from embracing
ICT.
4. Concepts : Government & Society
Governments are under pressure:
from globalisation
from fiscal demands
from evolving societies
from citizen expectations
They are expected to be responsive to
social change, to address
public concerns, to manage public
funds efficiently, etc.
The expectations on governments
grow as IS is more widespread.
5. Concepts: Response
Public reform:
customer orientation
business-like management
citizen engagement and trust, etc.
ICT on governments' agendas:
e-government strategies
e-government development targets
e-government coordination offices and
structures
6. Concepts: Resistance
At the same time:
governments adapt slowly
they tend to regard e-government as only
one among
many challenges they confront
7. Concepts: e-Government
Different definitions:
Internet (on-line) service delivery and other Internetbased
activity by governments – front-office only
All uses of ICT by governments, on-line and off-line,
frontoffice and back-office
Capacity to transform public administration through the
use of ICT or new forms of government built around ICT
They reflect different priorities in
government strategies, and shift as
priorities change and progress is
made.
9. Concepts: e-Government as a Tool
e-Government is not an aim in itself.
It is a tool to enable:
better policy outcomes
higher quality of services
more efficient use of public funds
more efficient government processes
greater engagement with citizens and businesses
improvements in other selected performance indicators,
etc.
e-Government is more about government
than about “e”!
What starts as a technical exercise at
developing more responsive public services
becomes an exercise in governance.
12. Reasons for e-Government
The main reasons to embrace e-
government:
e-government improves efficiency
e-government improves service quality
e-government helps achieve policy outcomes
e-government contributes to achieving
economic objectives
e-government can be the major contributor to
reform
e-government builds trust between citizens and
government
13. Reasons for e-Government
Until now, the main drivers for e-government
have been efficiency gains and effective
delivery of policy outcomes.
Recently, the focus has shifted to other
objectives: improving services, increasing
accountability, facilitating engagement.
14. Efficiency
Cost reduction is the major driver for ICT use
by governments:
replacing paper-based application processes with Internet
applications – cut down costs of data re-entry and checking
improved booking arrangements – more efficient use of
scarce resources: skilled staff and facilities
greater sharing of data within government – eliminate costs
of multiple collections, data reconciliation and checking
reduce government publication and distribution costs by
relying more on on-line publications, etc.
Greater efficiencies are generated from ICT
projects that involve transformation of
business processes.
16. Customer Focus
Adopting customer focus is the main part of
the countries' public reform agendas and e-
government strategies.
Definition: Customer focus is about
providing citizens and businesses with a
coherent interface with government
which reflects their needs rather than the
structure of the government.
17. Customer Focus Initiatives
e-Government initiatives to improve customer
focus:
on-line portals focused on particular topics or groups,
bringing together relevant information and services
targeting of on-line information to specific groups of citizen
so that relevant information can be found more readily
e-mail lists to push customised information to specific
groups,
whenever the information becomes available
allowing identified users to carry out routine transactions with
the government as on-line government services
19. Improve Policy Outcome
e-Government can help achieve better
outcomes in major policy areas, such as:
taxation policy - improved collection of taxes through
increased sharing of information by agencies
health policy - reduced demand for health services through
better use of health information and scarce health resources
fiscal policy - reduced unemployment payments owing to
better matching of the unemployed and vacancies
social policy - promoting the use of native languages and
awareness of indigenous people
environmental policy – through better sharing of information
between national and sub-national governments
It is expected that all policy areas will be
affected by e-government.
20. Economic Objectives
Through reduced corruption, greater openness
and increased trust in government, e-
government contributes to economic
objectives.
Specific measures:
improving business productivity by administrative
simplification and on-line support for small and medium-size
businesses
business portals providing access to economic information -
market trends, export opportunities, assistance programmes
reduced government calls on public funds through more
effective programs and operations
direct consumption of ICT goods and services by
government is significant and more stable than by private
sector
21. Public Management Reform
Public management reform has been on the
agendas of many countries long before e-
government emerged.
Reform and e-government are mutually
dependant:
reform is necessary for e-government to deliver
e-government is an enabler of the reform
22. Reform for e-Government
Reform is necessary for e-government to
deliver:
The promise of e-government will not materialise
by simply digitising government information and
placing it on-line.
Instead, e-government is about the use of ICT to
transform the structures, operations and the
culture of government.
23. e-Government for Reform
e-Government is an enabler of the reform:
• it serves as a tool for reform:
simplifies administrative processes
makes such processes more transparent
helps to deliver services in more efficient ways
facilitates the integration of services and
processes
enables seamless government
24. e-Government for Reform
e-Government is an enabler of the reform:
• it serves as a tool for reform:
it renews public interest in the reform
Captures imagination of political leaders and civil
servants.
Raises citizen expectations, creating pressure on
government.
it highlights internal government inconsistencies
it underscores commitment to good governance
objectives
25. Citizens Engagement
Building trust between government and
citizens is fundamental.
In the absence of trust:
the rule of law
legitimacy of government decisions
support for specific government reforms
may be all called into question.
ICT is an enabler to build trust by engaging
citizens.
26. Citizens Engagement
Ways of engagement:
consultation and feedback by service users – web
logs, questionnaires and feedback contacts
citizen engagement in policy making –
consultation and active participation to better
address constituents' needs
helping individual's voice be heard
29. Challenges to e-Government
Implementation of e-government can face a
number of challenges.
The following have to be addressed on a
whole-of-government basis in order to be
overcome:
legislative barriers – e-government processes must have the
same standing as paper-based processes
financial barriers – funding arrangements should account for
the agencies working together on e-government projects
technology change – adoption of whole-of-government
standards, software integration and middleware technologies
digital divide – large differences in the level of access to the
Internet and therefore ability to benefit from e-government
30. Legislative Barriers
Governments must ensure that a proper legal
framework exists before e-government
initiatives and processes can take up.
What is needed:
Recognition of electronic processes and services as
equivalent with paper-based processes and services. The
legal recognition of digital signatures is necessary!
Clarification of requirements on the agencies implementing
e-government: what they can and cannot do. Attention
areas: data security, technical standards, existing ICT
regulations, agency cooperation frameworks.
31. Legislative Barriers
What is needed:
Overcoming collaboration barriers:
• accountability rules designed to ensure responsible use of
public resources by clearly identifying who does what Who
is responsible for the shared project?
• performance management also follows clear distinction of
who does what
How to evaluate shared project?
Legislations designed to protect the privacy and security of
data, to balance free access with society's expectations.
32. Budgetary Barriers
Traditional public management funding:
vertical funding structure
agency is held accountable for achieving its
mission
agency receives the resources to accomplish its
mission
the resources are budgeted on the annual or bi-
annual basis
This principle does not act in favour of e-
government projects that involve long-term
funding and collaboration across agencies.
33. Barriers to e-Gov Funding
Factors acting against e-government funding:
e-government is unlikely to win out in competition with other
public policy objectives e.g. health, education, security
it is difficult to measure costs and potential benefits of e-
government, so to develop funding cases for projects
if not treated as capital investment, e-government has to
compete with other pressing recurrent funding proposals,
and will seem to involve comparatively large expenditure
governments are reluctant to commit expenditure beyond
budgeting horizons, and yet many e-government projects are
of multi-annual nature
34. Barriers to e-Gov Funding
Factors acting against e-government
collaboration:
the vertical nature of traditional budget arrangements do not
encourage shared funding of collaborative projects
difficulties to assess the extent to which agencies benefit
from (and should contribute to) shared projects
performance-based budgeting rewards independent projects
at the expense of collaborative projects
no framework for benefit-sharing, so no incentives to
eliminate redundant systems by sharing systems with other
agencies
35. Measures to e-Gov Funding
Measures to assist e-government funding:
classifying major e-government projects as capital
investment with up-front capital outlays and subsequent
benefits
separate approval by the e-government coordination office to
ensure no duplication of inconsistency with broader
strategies
public-private partnerships to overcome: capital limitations,
budget-time horizons, disincentives for collaboration
central funding for innovation for high-risk demonstration
project that wouldn't receive funding otherwise
a government-wide approach to the assessment of costs
and benefits of e-government
ability for agencies to retain savings created by e-
government
36. Measures to e-Gov Collaboration
Measures to assist e-government
collaboration:
central register of e-government initiatives seeking funding
central funds to encourage certain initiatives e.g.
collaboration
lead agency model – an agency funds a project that benefits
other agencies as well as itself
several agencies coordinating their approach to obtain
funding
pooled funding – several agencies share funding for a
common project, under a semi-contractual arrangement
agency payment model – co-ordinating agency funds the
project, other agencies then pay to use the service
a mandatory levy on agencies to enable some joint projects
37. Technology Change
Technology-related barriers to e-government:
legacy systems
lack of shared infrastructure
too rapid technological changes, etc.
Complex technical issues arise.
38. Legacy Systems
Legacy systems can be a major barrier to e-
government.
Integrating back-office information systems
with Internet to provide on-line access to
clients, has occupied many e-government
projects.
Common solutions:
middleware and web services
data-exchange standards relying on XML
Also, promotion of government-wide
frameworks, standards and data definitions by
e-government coordinators.
39. Lack of Shared Infrastructure
Technology-related barriers to collaboration
between agencies and the uptake of e-
government:
lack of shared standards
lack of compatible infrastructure between
agencies
Infrastructure development is too expensive
for a single agency.
Shared development faces budgetary and
collaboration barriers. What can be done?
40. Shared Infrastructure & e-Gov
Governments can provide a technological,
legal and organizational framework for
delivering electronic services:
common technical standards
common technical infrastructure
whole-of-government approach to lower the legal
and technical barriers for inter-agency cooperation
whole-of-government approach to reduce
redundancy, e.g. by adopting common back-office
processes
41. Technology Change
How to plan development of e-government
facing uncertainty over the fast-moving
technological change?
Public-private partnership is one solution,
provided they are in the areas where
established standards already exist in the
market.
42. Technology Change
Other approaches:
technology neutrality in legislation and regulation
flexibility within broad regulatory frameworks
adaptation of current laws to a digital world
involvement of all stakeholders in the regulatory
process
international cooperation to harmonise
approaches
performance requirements rather than technical
specifications when procuring new technologies
43. Digital Divide
e-Government can indirectly improve services
to citizens with no Internet access - back-
office improvements, however:
Advantages of on-line services cannot be replicated off-line,
so people without Internet access will be unable to benefit.
The groups in society with lower level of access are already
disengaged - the target of government intervention. Such
groups have higher level of interaction with government:
• establishing identity
• entitlement for assistance
• complex medical or social intervention
Some, but not all, suited for on-line provision.
Many governments pursue policies to reduce
digital divide.
