topic sEVEN: Network Delivery and E-Government Topic 7.pdfNetwork Delivery and E-Government ......

319t o p i c s E V E N : n e t w o r k d e l i v e r y a n d e - G o v e r n m e n t

topic sEVEN: Network Delivery and E-Government

overviewThis topic introduces the potentially radical impact of information and communication technologies (ICT) on the way information in the public sector is collected, stored, analysed and accessed. It examines the nature and dynamic character of e-government, and reviews some of the rationales for its embrace by governments internationally. It explores the nature and dynamism of e-government, and evaluates the extent to which the claims of proponents of e-government – improved information access, cost efficiencies, responsiveness and service quality – have been achieved in implementation. The topic concludes with an assessment of future opportunities for e-government and some of the lessons from international experience.

Learning objectiveson successful completion of this topic, you should be able to:

1. describe the concept of e-government and its significance to public policy and service delivery.

2. appreciate the dynamic nature of e-government and some of the problems associated with its implementation.

3. identify and critique the current trends in e-government, particularly with respect to access, take-up and community responsiveness.

4. discuss the future opportunities and next steps of network delivery and e-government.

7.1 Network Delivery and E-Government

Since the early 1990s, governments and organisations around the world have devoted enormous resources towards understanding, documenting and participating in the digital revolution in communications. New information and communications technologies have come to be seen as central to economic growth, community development and the modernisation of public administration. ‘Electronic government’, or simply ‘e-government’, has become a priority for governments around the world.

320 p s M U N i t 2 : m a n a G i n G o u t : t h e p u b l i c s e c t o r i n t h e c o m m u n i t y

In this topic we explore the concept of e-government and review some of the ways in which governments internationally are adapting the potential uses of technology to policy development and service delivery. Australia’s Commonwealth, state and local governments have now made significant, but not uniform, progress in enabling government information to be more widely available, in providing services electronically, and in enabling citizens to engage more closely with government.

However, there is a wide understanding that e-government is about much more than improvements in service delivery or the availability of information: it involves a transformation in civic aspirations. For some the e-government revolution is a cause for optimism and celebration because it will enable and further the causes of democracy, while for critics it is a stumbling block that throws the public sphere into peril (see for example West 2003). Whatever your view, in Australia as elsewhere, recent experience underlines the complexity and difficulty of adapting government to the rigours of the information era and the challenges of network governance.

7.2 Network Delivery and the innovation imperative

As earlier topics have shown, network governance demands the incorporation of vast numbers of different actors into the policy-making process. Contractual relationships, by their very nature, demand huge information resources in order to deal with the accountability, supervisory, information asymmetry and technical requirements inherent in the complex webs that are established within and between agencies and communities. A broad way to conceive the relevance of e-government to the network delivery landscape is to conceptualise the links that can be achieved amongst these parties. Hughes (2003:189–192) notes three basic links within which any number of initiatives can operate to facilitate partnership arrangements:

• government-to-citizenlinks

• government-to-businesslinks

• government-to-governmentlinks

But partnerships are not the only implication to flow from network delivery approaches. Another imperative is the continuous demand for innovation and leadership. We have already noted the significance of knowledge management to the reformed public sector and the growing trend towards information sharing. As the Management Advisory Committee (MAC 2004:57) noted:

Working more successfully across Australian government agencies, other jurisdictions and the private sector relies on better information sharing and requires structured approaches to the collection, reuse and sharing of data and information.

According to MAC (2004:59–61), the need to share information among agencies or across the whole-of-government broadly falls into four categories. These are:

• dealingwithanemergency–theneedtopulltogetherallavailableinformationabouta specific issue such as responding to the Bali bombing


• integratinginformationholdings–theneedtoinformpolicydevelopmentandfoster effective policy outcomes by acquiring, integrating and analysing available information across government agencies

• integratedservicedelivery–theneedtoprovideservicesacrossagenciesinaseamlessway

• managingareasofsharedresponsibility.

Electronic service delivery is now an established practice in some areas of the public sector; government portals are used to provide single entry point access to government services to encourage usage ease and coordinated delivery, while experiments with online democracy initiatives are seeking to reinvigorate public participation in government and facilitate new ways of forging direct, personalised community contact and consultation (Bellamy 2003).

These are all instances where information and electronic knowledge is either being used or is driving reform in governance. It is thus within the context of network delivery and the innovation imperative that e-government can be assessed. E-government has the potential to operationalise many of the theories of reform because it can service the information, technological and system needs that underscore contracting out, budgeting and accounting change and performance management. Thus as Hughes (2003:195) observes:

E-governmentformsapowerfulcombinationwiththenewpublicmanagementreforms… Perhaps the public management reforms and e-government can be seen as separate movements, but also as reforms that are mutually reinforcing.

Increasingly, e-government initiatives are occurring in tandem with business process re-engineering strategies. Halligan and Moore (2004:1) note that ‘the early uses of ICT were largely applied to automating existing processes such as through the internet… Lately, however, ICT has been used to transform the way in which business is done with a consequent impact on the experience we have of the organisations with which we deal’.

7.2.1 Defining E-government

As with many areas involving new technologies, meanings and definitions of key terms remain unsettled, and this area is no exception in having a host of potentially confusing terms. Writers use expressions like ‘e-government’, ‘digital government’ and ‘online government’ interchangeably. These terms convey the essential idea of transforming government through the use of new information technologies. But this is a vague and all-embracing idea, taking in a wide variety of typical but quite different uses of new technologies. Examples include:

• thepublicationofadepartmentaldirectoryontheweb

• thepublicationofanofficialreportontheweb

• aportalorgatewaysitedesignedtoprovideinformationforfamilies

• aserviceenablingpeopletorenewdrivers’licencesonline

• asystemenablingbusinessestotenderelectronicallyforthesupplyofgoodsor services to government


• anopt-inemaillistenablingamemberofparliamenttokeepintouchwithconstituents.

All these activities could be described as forms of e-government, but they involve distinct uses of the Internet. These uses fall into several broad categories:

• thedistributionofpublicinformationonthewebisaformof electronic publishing

• websitesenablingcitizensorbusinessestodothings,likepaybillsordealwithroutine legal matters online, are examples of electronic service delivery

• onlinecommunicationsbetweengovernments,politiciansandcitizens,enabling new forms of consultation and feedback in both directions are forms of electronic democracy.

There is, of course, no single ‘correct’ version of e-government. Contemporary practice tends to combine all these elements. But as indicated, commentators and practitioners often use the term ‘e-government’ to mean different things. And underlying these different meanings are different ways of thinking about what the online transformation of government is about, and how it should proceed.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines e-government as ‘the use of information and communication technologies and particularly the Internet as a tool to achieve better government’ (OECD 2003). E-government is widely perceived to be fundamental to reform, modernisation and improvement in government (Halligan & Moore 2004). It enables better policy outcomes, higher quality services and greater engagement with citizens. According to the OECD (2003), e-government initiatives refocus attention on strategic issues including how to:

• collaboratemoreeffectivelyacrossagenciestoaddresscomplexsharedproblems

• enhancecustomerfocus

• buildrelationshipswithprivatesectorpartners.

The World Bank also offers a useful definition of the field:

E-government refers to the use by government agencies of information technologies (such asWideAreaNetworks,theInternet,andmobilecomputing)thathavetheabilitytotransformrelationswithcitizens,businesses,andotherarmsofgovernment.

Analogoustoe-commerce,whichallowsbusinessestotransactwitheachothermoreefficiently(B2B)andbringscustomersclosertobusinesses(B2C),e-governmentaimstomaketheinteractionbetweengovernmentandcitizens(G2C),governmentandbusinessenterprises(G2B),andinter-agencyrelationships(G2G)morefriendly,convenient,transparent, and inexpensive.

E-Commercehasevolvedalreadythroughfourstages:1)publishing,2)interactivity,3)completingtransactions,and4)delivery.Todate,moste-governmentactivityhascenteredonpublishing.AstudybyAndersonConsultingfindsvastdifferencesamongcountriesinthematurityoftheire-governmenteffort.Perhapsthekeyfinding,however,isthateventhe most mature countries have tapped less than 20% of the potential (World Bank 2005).


The World Bank definition of e-government suggests both a typology and a staged history of e-government initiatives. Other typologies are also available. One can also consider e-government initiatives within a division of front office and back office functions. While e-government has often been thought of in terms of front office and marketing and client service delivery systems, there has been a large public sector investment in back office systems. Business process re-engineering and redevelopment of these systems is likely to generate new electronic approaches to customer service delivery.

Chadwick (2001) describes different visions of e-government through a more policy-focused typology of three models:

table 7.1 three models of e-government

the managerial model

characterised by:

• the ‘efficient’ delivery of government/state information to citizens and other groups of ‘users’ to enable information dissemination

• improved flows of information within and around the state

• use of ‘control’ as the defining logic

• the importance of ‘service delivery’

• the speeding up of information provision serving to ‘open up’ government

• focus on regulatory issues and law-making, so responding to the needs of the ‘new economy’

• general absence of user resource issues (that is, those relating to the ability of citizens to receive and interpret information)

• a unilinear model of information.

the consultative model

characterised by:

• polling, with access of voters and other interested parties to government, so providing a representation of views

• advisory referendums

• ‘push-button democracy’ with ‘e-voting’ – direct democracy – enabling instantaneous opinion polling

• access as a technical issue, with problems of self-selection of citizen respondents

• direct and unmediated contact between citizen and state

• ‘electronic town meetings’

• agenda-framing as critical issue

• a technological lag among citizens and their representatives

• a unilinear model of information.


Activity 7.1 – E-government typologies and your agency

1. can any of the typologies of e-government activities be applied to the e-business services provided by your agency?

2. are they client or agency focused, managerial, consultative or participatory? or does your agency provide a diverse mixture of electronic services?

The idea of harnessing government to the information economy has its immediate origins in the policy debates surrounding computer networks in the early and mid-1990s. New communications technologies are now seen as the key to improved delivery of important government services, especially in health and education. They are also seen as major drivers for economic growth, offering improved productivity, more open markets, and new demand for skilled labour.

In Australia, the Commonwealth Department of Communications began to consolidate responsibility for information technology in the mid-1990s. Under the Howard federal government, the National Office for the Information Economy (NOIE) was established within the portfolio of the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. NOIE had broad responsibilities for the Commonwealth’s online initiatives, Internet policy, and information industry issues. But the complexity of implementing e-government is illustrated by continuing re-adjustments in the allocation of responsibilities between NOIE and the Department. In April 2004, NOIE was replaced by the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO). Its functions are now divided between AGIMO and the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. Indeed, the very fact that the Rudd government introduced a Department of Broadband Communications and Digital Economy indicates the increased importance of information technology and its uses.

Want to know more?For a comprehensive and informative presentation of topical issues relating to e-government and technology-related government activity, visit the AGIMO website at <http://www.agimo.gov.au/>.

the participatory model

characterised by:

• civil society existing away from the state and in due course being mediated electronically

• the organic emergence of democracy

• voluntary associations and spontaneous interactions within cyberspace

• access being sufficient to encourage wider political participation

• state protection of free speech and rights of expression

• the participatory model replacing the other two models through the logic of the information society

• a discursive model of information.


7.2.2 Why E-government?

The concept of the information economy, embodied in the old NOIE’s title, is critical to current Australian political debate, although it may be called different things by different governments and political parties.

It involves, firstly, an economic objective – the need to foster and sustain electronic commerce. Here, governments often aim to act as a catalyst for the wider economy, using their influence in the market and attempting to provide best practice examples of the adoption of new technologies, especially in the areas of encryption, information security and accessibility. These measures are aimed particularly at building trust in new electronic forms of communication and exchange. Without confidence and security, the benefits of electronic transactions will be limited to niche markets and not the broader community as desired.

There is also an important civic dimension to the knowledge economy. The growing ubiquity of information technologies in the daily lives of citizens has spurred governments to develop policies aimed at fostering greater community participation. In AStrategicFrameworkfortheInformationEconomyDecember1998, for example, the Commonwealth government stated its commitment to provide all Australians with open and equitable access to information available online as a way of securing ‘a strong democratic, informed and inclusive society’, and to avoid a social polarisation between the so-called ‘information rich’ and ‘information poor’ (Commonwealth of Australia 1998). This principle was reiterated in the most recent version of this strategy (Commonwealth of Australia 2004a). In the 2006 report ResponsiveGovernment:ANewServiceAgenda the vision is ‘electronic and voice-based services will be fully integrated into government service delivery. Electronic delivery will underpin all other delivery channels, ensuring a consistent base to all activities and providing consistent service no matter how government is approached’ (AGIMO 2006).

The Internet has evolved rapidly from a rarefied network for the technologically minded to an everyday communications medium. But it remains true that sections of the community are much slower at adopting the Internet, whether for economic, cultural or other reasons. It is critically important that these groups are not left behind as they are very often the groups who have the greatest need for access to government services, for example senior citizens.

Acknowledging these new demands means moving beyond the era of online directories and downloadable reports. Users now need to be able to interact with government as fully integrated online services increasingly provide greater ease of access and less time involvement than face-to-face business.

The trend to e-government has been driven by many of the same change forces that have underpinned the broader public service reform agenda. Information and communication technologies are important enablers of reform strategies aimed at making government more efficient and effective, and public services more responsive and citizen-centred (Kernaghan, Marson & Borins 2000; Rimmer 2002).

Accelerating technological advances and the increasingly rapid acceptance of new technologies have both created pressures for government to adopt and implement e-government initiatives. Other drivers include:


• Citizensexpectfromgovernmentsthesameconvenienceandefficiencytheyexperience in using commercial electronic services, such as airlines, online retailers, and electronic banking.

• Onlineservicescostlesstodeliver,enablinggovernmentstoreducetaxesordivert resources elsewhere.

• OnlinepublicationsandservicescanbeaccessedfromanywherewithanInternet connection, and therefore ameliorate the ‘tyranny of distance’ experienced in regional and remote areas – although variable bandwidth connections pose a significant impediment to equitable access (Halligan & Moore 2004: 4).

• Goingonlineprovidestheopportunitytoredesigngovernmentservicedelivery around the needs of customers and citizens, rather than entrenched bureaucratic or political interests.

• Onlineprocurementsystemsprovidebusinesseswithmoreeconomicalandefficient access to government markets, and will encourage e-commerce more generally.

• Thewebandemailenhancedemocracyandcivicparticipationbyenablinggovernments and citizens to communicate more directly and efficiently.

• TheInternetenablesgovernmenttopromoteitselfdirectlytothebroaderpublic and to targeted groups, bypassing or supplementing traditional media channels.

• Governmentstrategieshavesettargetsforrollingoutonlineservices–centralagency monitoring of these provide incentive for agencies to act.

But, as with other aspects of the public sector reform agenda, sometimes the goals of e-government may conflict with other reform agendas. The goal of enhancing opportunities for civic participation may not, for example, always coincide with providing the most economical online service. Promoting the role of ministers or heads of government may not always be conducive to making online government as easy for citizens to access and navigate as might otherwise be possible. The way in which different governments present themselves online says a lot about what they think e-government is all about.

Activity 7.2 – Online activity in your own workplace

which of these drivers for online activity do you think has been most important for your organisation? why? what other factors have been important?

Required Reading 7.1Read Chen P 2007 ‘Definitions, Distinctions and Approaches to eEngagement’ in his book Electronic Engagement: A Guide for Public Sector Managers, anZsoG monograph, anu e-press.


7.3 E-government: Lessons from Experience

7.3.1 The International Landscape

Since 2000, the international consultancy firm, Accenture, has conducted an annual survey of the world e-government landscape. The survey provides insights into trends in e-government and promotes learning and improvement by highlighting examples of innovative service delivery (Accenture 2006). The survey compares the e-government performance and maturity of twenty-two national governments. It assesses high performance governments as those that use ICT in ways that enhance services and make government operations more cost-effective.

In 2006, as in preceding surveys, Canada ranked highest, followed by the United States. Denmark and Singapore both ranked third. Australia ranked equal fourth with France and Japan. Distinctive features of the Canadian approach are its focus on evaluation and soliciting user feedback. Gordon and Cuddihey (2005:138) note that Canada’s federal government:

…hasrealizedthatprovidingservicesonlineisnotanendinitself,butpartofamuchlargerandlongerjourney,onethatinvolvesrethinkinghowthegovernmentanditsagenciesdeliverservicesandinteractwithbusinesses,communitiesandcitizens.

Accenture’s 2006 survey confirmed that the leaders in service delivery in the countries under study share the following general attributes:

• Leadinggovernmentsareintroducingservicesonparwiththebestoftheprivate sector. In Australia the perception was that the private sector was ahead by an average of 21% in delivery of online services.

• Governmentsareatacriticaljunctureforservicesuccess.Theyhaverecognized that they have ‘reached the limit’ with current approaches and must look at transformation – put the ‘custom’ back in government customer service. Australia was defined as ‘moving towards Value Creation’ as were the others in the top categories.

• Successfulgovernmentsareadvancingbyintroducingnewmodesofe-government operation that vary dramatically from the past.

• Successfulgovernmentsareusingacombinationof4proactivetacticsto promote adoption of their service strategies. These are – the stick, the carrot, marketing put and high-touch pull. Australia was among the countries that have relatively high internet use (86%) yet only a 30% enthusiasm for e-government which indicated a need for consideration of such service strategies.


Activity 7.3 – Innovation in e-government

The Accenture 2006 report has a chapter titled ‘While this year’s findings provide a snapshot of leading countries’ accomplishments, many governments hunger for concrete advice on how to move ahead’. It also provides a specific country report on australia that is set out below as the required reading for this section. read both these chapters and ask how such advice provided in the one on moving ahead can benefit australia. how might such innovations be achieved? do you think there is potential for similar innovations in your agency?

Want to know more?Read Accenture’s 2006 Leadership in Customer Service: Building the Trust report in its entirety. http://www.accenture.com/xdoc/en/industries/government/acn_2006_govt_report_FINAL2.pdf

7.3.2 The Australian Experience

In December 1997, the federal government committed itself to delivering all ‘appropriate’ services over the Internet by the end of 2001, thereby complementing but not replacing existing services. While the federal government now claims to have met this target, NOIE’s October 2001 survey of agencies found that only 48 per cent had met the target at that stage. A number of state governments have made similar commitments and claims.

While much of what has been done to date involves the online publication of static data, there is no doubt that there is now a significant range of federal and state government services available online. Examples of Commonwealth online services include:

• DepartmentofVeterans’Affairsnewwebsitededicatedtomaximisingmentalhealth covering both veterans and their families. Provides information in relation to the uniqueness of the veteran experience, access to services to help cope with mental illness and links to other mental health resources.

• TheAustralianBureauofStatisticsCensuswasavailableforthefirsttimein2006 as an alternative to the paper Census form. Included in this eCensus to improve accessibility were technologies such as screen reader software for those with disabilities.

• TheAustralianElectoralCommissiontrialledanelectronicvotinginitiativefor the first time in the 2007 Federal election. They also trialled remote electronic voting for Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel serving overseas.

• NationalArchivesShoppermitsInternetuserstopurchaseNationalArchivepublications.

As demonstrated in some of these examples, a new generation of government portals has been developed that are aimed towards the specific needs of different groups of users and organised around specific topics. The next challenging phase of policy in


this area will involve more closely integrating services across government agencies, integrating financial management and budget processes, and developing a more strategic, whole-of-government approach, for example the Office of e-government in Western Australia.

However, achieving ambitious and necessarily arbitrary policy goals in this field is notoriously difficult. Citizens’ needs are not always clear; uncertainty over the future of the information economy prevails; financial budgeting systems are not designed for these kinds of initiatives; costs and benefits are not spread evenly; skilled personnel are scarce; and networked information systems are not easy for the non-technically trained to understand. An obvious further problem with global targets is that they do not necessarily lead to strategic priority setting.

Required Reading 7.2Read the country report for Australia in Accenture’s 2006 Leadership in Customer Service: Building the Trust report.

http://www.accenture.com/xdoc/en/industries/government/acn_2006_govt_report_FINAL2.pdf

what factors does the report identify as needing attention if australia is to maximise the benefits of its e-government initiatives? how might some of these be progressed?

Activity 7.4 – E-government in your jurisdiction

conduct some research to find out the current state of play with e-government initiatives in your jurisdiction.

or

Go to <http://www.egov.dpc.wa.gov.au> or <http://www.egovernment.tas.gov.au> and see how the western australian and tasmanian governments are addressing the issue. observe if either of these is more comprehensive, easier to use than the other.

7.4 taking Electronic Government Further?

There is a widespread perception running through many government reports, academic writing and industry reviews, including the Accenture (2006) report, that e-government is at a crossroads. A recurring theme is that the phase of placing existing information products and services on the web is substantially completed and is likely to prove to be the easier part of the process. In the next phase, the complexity of interdepartmental work to achieve ‘joined-up government’ or new services using networked services will require larger budgets and longer timeframes for planning, negotiation and implementation.

In 2007 there were over 800 government websites in Australia with an annual growth of 10%. But this growth, rather than improving accessibility, may merely add


to complexity and confuse citizens in their navigation of government information and services. The government has therefore been reviewing and attempting to consolidate the number of websites and also endeavouring to ensure consistency in their appearance (StateoftheServiceReport2006–07). As well, in April 2008 the Rudd government announced an independent review of the Australian Government’s use of Information and Communication Technology to be led by Sir Peter Gershon, former Chief Executive of the UK Treasury Office of Government Commerce.

7.5 challenges in E-government

7.5.1 The Digital Divide

An important issue lying at the heart of e-government relates to the ability of citizens and clients to actually be able to access technology in order to utilise its benefits and exploit the power it offers. It is crucial that all sections of the community have the ability to access the Internet and are not ‘left behind’ in the rush to provide e-government. While the issue of access has always been regarded as significant, it becomes crucial as new web-based services are developed. Until recently, many aspects of e-government represented enhancements to services offered in alternative forms. If one had limited access to the Internet, access to information could still occur, if only through more cumbersome approaches. One implication of this is that for many e-government services, there has been little achieved in the way of savings to government as two delivery systems have been maintained. As the focus of e-government shifts towards the development of new services for which a non-electronic service may not be used as a substitute, issues of access become paramount.

The digital divide refers basically to those members of society who are the most disadvantaged in terms of having the lowest levels of access to ICT and the Internet. This is the group who quite often have high levels of interaction with the government and its various agencies and would therefore miss out on the benefits (information and independent search capacity, linkages etc.) of e-government. People within society who fall into this grouping are the unemployed, people with older model computers, the aged, those with disabilities, those with few or inadequate resources, those in rural and remote areas, and those who are not literate in the language of the country in which they reside.

This issue was raised in the 2002 Victorian government policy statement Putting people at the centre and a program to promote broader community based access has been initiated. Data on Internet access in Victoria in 2005 indicated:

...10,000publicInternetaccessterminalsacrosstheState...and57percentofadultVictoriansnowusetheinternetandthenumberofhouseholdswithinternetaccesshasmorethandoubledto54percentsince1999’(VictorianGovernment2005).

A broader picture of Internet access patterns in Australia is presented in the document CurrentStateofPlay 2004 from the Commonwealth Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (DCITA) (Commonwealth


of Australia 2004b). This indicates Internet access varies by age, family income and level of education. Although Internet access by the aged is growing fast, the survey indicated only 33% of people aged above 55 as Internet users. A broader picture of Internet access patterns in Australia is presented in the document Current State of Play 2004 from the Commonwealth Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (DCITA) (Commonwealth of Australia 2004b). This indicates Internet access varies by age, family income and level of education. Although Internet access by the aged is growing fast, the survey indicated only 33% of people aged above 55 as Internet users. A 2007 OECD report found the percentage of Australian households with access to home computers increased from 66% in 2003 to 70% in 2005. Figures for the percentage of Australian households with access to the internet during the same period increased at a slightly slower rate – from 53% to 60%. Meanwhile e-government usage in Australia rose from 39% in 2004-05 to 48% in 2006-07. The proportion of people who dealt with government mainly over the Internet increased from 14% to 19% in the same period while more than two out of five internet users (44%) indicated that their use of government websites had increased in the previous 12 months (State of the ServiceReport2006−07).

The following groups of people have been particularly identified as potentially suffering from access issues if action is not taken by the government to ensure effective e-government accessibility:

Peoplewithdisabilitiesorimpairmentsareonegroupthathasahighpotentialforbeingdisadvantaged.Othergroups,suchaspeoplewithlowbandwidthconnections,olderequipment,lowtechnologyskillsorliteracyproblemscanhaveneedssimilartothoseofpeoplewithdisabilitiesorimpairments.InsomeIndigenousorruralandremotecommunitiesthesedisadvantagescompound(ArchandHardy2004).

The range of groups and the extent of the lack of access to electronic information sources is indicated in Table 7.2 below.


table 7.2 percentage not using home computer and internet for key disadvantaged groups compared to Australian average

Source:*AustralianBureauofStatistics2003,customtables,CensusofPopulationandHousing(Lloyd&Bill2003,p.40.

AustralianBureauofStatistics,customtables,2006CensusforPopulationandHousing

Pleasenote:*statisticsinthiscolumnarebasedon2003percentages.Newpercentagesnotavailableattimeofprinting.

In recognising the needs of these sections of the community, Arch and Hardy (2004) note that the accessibility of both the online and off-line aspects of an interaction with government need to be considered. They point to the example of Service Tasmania as demonstrating the importance of a physical access point, to complement e-government initiatives. They state:

Forpeoplewithdisabilitiesthesealternativemeansoftransactingbusinesswithgovernmentarecritical(TasmanianGovernment2005).

Want to know more?Refer to the AGIMO website (now located in Finance) < http://www.finance.gov.au/e-government/index.html >. This will provide information and links to a series of government ICT infrastructure initiatives.

7.5.2 Privacy and Security Concerns

Privacy and security concerns are of major concern to ICT users. ‘The use of information technology for transactions with the public sector inevitably involves

Not using the internet

42%

60%

65%

65.9%

64%

68.7%

63%

49%

45%

36%

37%

Not using home computer

94.6%

93.9%

90.9%

88.3%

85.5%

77.4%

78.7%

78.4%

70.8%

68.7%

54%

does not speak english at all

did not go to school

attended school to year 8 or below

Aged 65+ (women)

aged 65+

Family Income ($300–$399 pw)

indigenous

born in southern and eastern europe

not in labour force

labourers

all australians


the creation, manipulation and potential sharing of databases that contain a great deal of personal information’ (Kernaghan Marson & Borins 2000). With this in mind, many users have concerns about invasion of privacy and security of personal data. Governments have a special responsibility to ensure that access and usage of ICT does not compromise integrity when dealing with personal and sensitive information. If the public loses faith in e-government transactions, then the whole process is devalued and the uptake of such technology is slowed and possibly impaired, particularly if the problems are not identified and solved. The private sector solutions to similar problems may not be adequate solutions for government requirements, thus further innovations are necessitated in this sector.

The Commonwealth government's ‘Gatekeeper’ strategy was launched in 1998 as a national strategy for the use of public key technology and the security of electronic transactions between Commonwealth agencies, and to provide a consistent framework and engender confidence that adequate security standards were in place. While it is claimed to be a national framework, commitment by state governments has been hesitant and take-up even by Commonwealth agencies has been slow. In part, the slowness in adoption of security protocols consistent with Gatekeeper has resulted from the cost to users to authenticate identities and secure digital keys.

In 2004, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit published a report entitled EnquiryintotheManagementandIntegrityofElectronicInformationintheCommonwealthwhich recommended:

TheDepartmentofthePrimeMinisterandCabinetshouldreviewandreporttotheCommitteeonthecosteffectivenessofGatekeeperversesothercommerciallyavailablepublickeyinfrastructureproductsandsystems(CommonwealthofAustralia(JCPAA)2004).

The Joint Committee urged all agencies to weigh other options against Gatekeeper when reviewing their security needs, and to carefully assess the costs and benefits of each system before reaching a decision. In Europe, a broader variety of approaches to data and digital identity security issues are being tried, including separated digital key pads and biometric security systems. If the Gatekeeper protocols are unable to become more fully embedded in Australian e-government practice, it is possible we will see more varied approaches to security.

Want to know more?Go to the Department of Finance and Deregulation website <http://www.finance.gov.au/e-government/better-practice-and-collaboration/better-practice-checklists/index.html> accessed 21 aug 2008. think about how your agency compares with the better practice checklists set out there.

7.5.3 Budgetary Framework and Restrictions

Budgetary arrangements can restrict the efficient implementation of e-government. Staff expenditure and the relatively short life of existing systems put extra pressure on the development of e-government. The need for incentives to aid cross-organisational projects and tools for measuring returns on investment can be


achieved through a government-wide approach to the assessment of e-government benefits and the sharing of savings. Cooperative funding mechanisms, such as coordinated bids for new funds and the pooling of funds, and ICT expenditure being treated as an investment should provide a degree of certainty for future funding, shared infrastructure and cost-effective solutions leading to seamless e-government services.

The Auditor-General’s report Measuring the Efficiency and Effectiveness of E-government (ANAO 2004–5) identified many of the complexities that arise in the area of web services and e-government. In 2007 AGIMO released Australian Government Architecture (AGA) to assist the delivery of more consistent and cohesive service to citizens and support the more cost-effective delivery of ICT services by government – see <http://www.finance.gov.au/e-government/strategy-and-governance/australian-government-architecture.html> (accessed 21 Aug 2008). In 2007 AGA published various sets of principles. For example in relation to cross-agency services its key principles are stated as:

• thebusinessrequirementsdefinetheserviceandtheservicedefinesanyrequired technology support

• consumersprovidedwithevidencetoengendertrustthatinformationprovided by service is accurate and reliable

• servicewillappeartotheconsumerwithaconsistentlookandfeel

• servicesshallbedesignedandbuilttobechannelindependent

• availabilityofservicewillbeclearlydefinedandpublishedincludingrecognition of demand for services outside traditional office hours

• servicewillbeavailabletoconsumersforthetermftheservicerequirement

• servicewillprotecttheprivacyandinformationsecurityofcitizens,businessand community

• cross-agencyservicemustbefoundedonafullcostbenefitanalysis

• servicebeadaptabletomeetchangingfunctionalityandcapacityneedsincluding minimisation of risk within any such changes

• servicewillbedependableandoutcomeshouldbeconsistent

• serviceswillbemanageableandtraceablebothatserviceandtransactionlevel

(see AGA at <http://www.finance.gov.au/e-government/strategy-and-governance/australian-government-architecture.html> accessed on 16 September 2008).

As a final issue we can look briefly at two very different approaches to e-government adopted in other countries.

case study:

singapore

in the last half century singapore has moved from a colonial third world backwater to a wealthy cosmopolitan hub in the world economy. Integral to Singapore’s remarkable success has been its investments in a knowledge economy interconnected by a physical and virtual (ICT) grid. singapore has become tightly networked through its investment in network infrastructure, in education and in public-private partnerships. as a result it has one of the highest pc internet and wireless penetrations in the world.


In respect to e-government the central objective is to reduce transaction costs for the government and the private sector; not included are initiatives to increase inclusiveness of processes of governance (eg e-democracy). The centrepiece of e-government is e-citizen; a one-stop shopping portal from which citizens can access all government services online (<http://www.ecitizen.gov.sg>). It is organized by needs within different areas of a citizen’s life cycle (culture, recreation and sports, defence and security, education learning and employment, family and community development, health and environment, housing, transport and travel). ‘My e-citizen’ is a web-site that can be customized for each citizen with e-services and payment notification by short message service (SMS) or e-mail, such as road tax renewal, library book reminders, season parking reminders etc.

initial efforts at e-government were not fully successful. the government was able to provide services online in a notably integrated fashion. However, moving citizens to the efficient virtual offices of government away from bricks and mortar proved to be a more difficult challenge. the government responded through the development and launch in 2003 of “Singpass” (Singapore personal access). singpass is a unique identifier offering access to a wide array of online government services; and, perhaps more important in terms of providing impetus for adoption, it facilitates a wide array of private-sector transactions, from banking transactions to ordering drinks in bars. singpass has rapidly gained users since it was instituted. as of december 2005 roughly one-third of Singapore’s inhabitants had a Singpass, where the number of transactions averages about 1.2 million per month.

mergel i 2007, Governance and Information Technology: From Electronic Government to Information Government Mayer-Schonberger V & Lazer D (eds) MIT Press USA.

Dubai:

dubai is part of the united arab emirates. it is small but has over one million inhabitants. in contrast to most middle-eastern countries dubai has diversified with now less than 6% of Gdp coming directly from oil. tourism and real estate have been central to the growth of this wealthy economy.

In contrast to Singapore’s centralized ICT strategy Dubai has chosen de-centralization with Dubai Electronic Government (DEG) the public agency responsible for advancing e-government in the emirate adopting a role of coordination and cooperation. For example, deG offers public agencies often used and branded building blocks for their e-government initiatives – electronic payment (‘pay’), for example – but refrains from mandating adoption of particular standards and technologies. It also collects expertise on e-government implementation in the form of ‘best practices’ that are then shared with public agencies.

The only ‘stick’ that DEG wields is making transparent the development of e-government projects through extensive measuring based on a customized framework of criteria, capturing everything from the planning process to the implementation and subsequent use of particular functionalities. this information is made available to all public agencies, thus putting pressure on agencies to perform well against these benchmarks.

since deG began offering this information, compliance of e-government activities in the various government agencies with deG guidelines have increased substantially. by 2005, 81 percent of Dubai’s public services had been offered online, with DEG reporting quarterly savings of at least 37m Dirhan (US$10M).

Mayer-Schonberger V & Lazer D 2007, Governance and Information Technology: From Electronic Government to Information Government Mayer-Schonberger V & Lazer D (eds) MIT Press USA


Review and conclusionthis topic has enabled us to review some of the main features of initiatives aimed at delivering services online to all citizens. We have discussed the expectations associated with the prospect of being able to provide information and services at the touch of a button, noting the extent to which this has generated enthusiasm in governments and consumer groups in different national contexts. there is real potential for change in the ways in which information is collected, stored and used by agencies, and in the ways in which citizens can access it. We have begun to explore ways in which these possibilities may begin to affect your own workplace and the aspirations of agencies across the public sector, especially if they are able to meet expectations of more coordinated and consolidated information sharing and collection.

however, we have also noted some unresolved problems, including issues associated with access and equity, and with privacy concerns. there are resources for negotiating these issues, and we have offered some problem-solving strategies.

at this stage in the Managing Out unit, you should be able to:

1. describe the concept of e-government and its significance to public policy and service delivery.

2. appreciate the dynamic nature of e-government and some of the problems associated with its implementation.

3. identify and critique the current trends in e-government, particularly with respect to access, take-up and community responsiveness.

4. discuss the future opportunities and next steps of network delivery and e-government.

Required ReadingReading 7.1 Chen P 2007, ‘Definitions, Distinctions and Approaches to

eEngagement’ in his book Electronic Engagement: A Guide for Public Sector Managers, ANZSOG monograph, ANU e-press.

Reading 7.2 Accenture’s 2006 Leadership in Customer Service: Building the Trust report.

http://www.accenture.com/xdoc/en/industries/government/acn_2006_govt_report_FINAL2.pdf

Further ReadingAkesson M, Skalen P & Edvardsson B 2008, ‘E-government and service orientation:

gaps between theory and Practice’ International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 21 No. 1 pp. 74–92.

Ancarani A 2005, ‘Towards quality e-service in the public sector: the evolution of web sites in the local public service sector’ Managing Service Quality Vol. 15 No. 1 pp. 6–23.


Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) 2006, Responsive Government: A New Service Agenda. 2006 e-Government Strategy, viewed on 16 September 2008 <http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/2006-e-government-strategy/docs/e-gov_strategy.pdf>

Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) 2004–5, Measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of e-government, report by the Auditor-General, Audit Report No.26 2004–05, Performance Audit, viewed 16 September 2008 <http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2004-05_Audit_Report_26.pdf>.

Chen Y & Thurmaier K 2008, ‘Advancing E-Government: Financing Challenges and Opportunities’ Public Administration Review, Vol. 68 (3) PP. 537–548.

Foley, P 2005, ‘The real beneficiaries and value of e-government’, Public Money and Management, January pp. 4–6.

Griffin D, Trevorrow P & Halpin E 2007, Developments in E-Government: a critical analysis, IOS Press. Read chapter titled ‘Evaluation of E-Government’. This is part of the EBook library series.

Hughes, O 2003, Public Management and Administration: an introduction, 3rd edn, Palgrave MacMillan, Hampshire, see particularly Chapter 10.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2005, E-government for Better Government, particularly Chapter 1.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2003, ‘The e-government imperative: main findings’, Policy Brief, OECD Observer, March.

Shackleton P, Fisher J & Dawson L 2006, ‘E-government services in the local government context: an Australian case study’ Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 12 No. 1 pp. 88–100.

Smith, R 2004, ‘Centralisation and flexibility in delivering e-services: tensions and complements’, in Future challenges for e-government, AGIMO/IPAA, ACT Division

Teicher, J, Hughes, O & Dow, N 2002, ‘E-government: a new route to public sector quality’, Managing Service Quality, vol. 12, no. 6 pp. 384–393, accessed via Emerald.

Ward S, Lusoli W & Gibson R 2007, ‘Australian MPs and the Internet: Avoiding the Digital Age? Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 66 No. 2 pp. 210–222

West D 2007, ‘Global Perspectives on E-Government’ Governance & Information Technology. From Electronic Government to Information Government, Mayer-Schönberger V & Lazer D (eds) MIT Press USA


topi

c 7:

Req

uire

d R

eadi

ng

Che

n P

2007

, ‘D

efini

tions

, Dist

inct

ions

and

A

ppro

ache

s to

eE

ngag

emen

t’ in

his

book

Electro

nic Eng

agem

ent:

A G

uide

for

Pub

lic

Sec

tor M

anag

ers,

AN

ZSO

G m

onog

raph

, A

NU

e-p

ress

.


topic 7: Required Reading

Accenture’s 2006 Leadership in Customer Service: Building the Trust report. <http://www.accenture.com/xdoc/en/industries/government/acn_2006_govt_report_FINAL2.pdf

topic sEVEN: Network Delivery and E-Government Topic 7.pdfNetwork Delivery and E-Government ......

Documents

Transcript of topic sEVEN: Network Delivery and E-Government Topic 7.pdfNetwork Delivery and E-Government ......