E government _guest_lecture
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


E government _guest_lecture






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

E government _guest_lecture Presentation Transcript

  • 1. E-government Guest Lecture Khan, G. F., PhDDept. of Media & Communication,YeungNam University gohar.feroz@gmail.com
  • 2. Table of contents Trends for better e-society Electronic Government Stages of e-government Types & Modes of service delivery Advantages and disadvantages How to measure? Collaborative e-government research Issues Digital divide  Technological issues  Social issues  How to overcome it?
  • 3. What is e-government?
  • 4. What is E-government Several definitions Electronic government or e-government (from consumer’s point of view) is defined as the practice of public service provisioning to citizens, businesses, and other government agencies where government services can be accessed through:  The internet  Mobile  Fax  Mail  Telephone and  Personal Khan et al., (2011)
  • 5. E-government defined (2) Use of information technologies and new business processes to transform how Governments interact with citizens, businesses, and other government agencies. Transformation of..  Information about services  Access channels  Levels of service  Business processes (front and back  office)  Organizational structures
  • 6. E-govt. V.S traditional governance
  • 7. End Goals
  • 8. How does e-government develop over time?Is it one step implementation project or process?
  • 9. E-government modelsTo understand E-government developmental process different models are proposed
  • 10. Layne and Lee (2001) Four stage Model <Figure 1> Dimensions and stages of e-government development (Layne and Lee, 2001)
  • 11. Six stage model by Silcock (2001)Stage 1: Information publishing and dissemination,Stage 2: Official two-way transaction,Stage 3: Multi-purpose portals,Stage 4: Portal personalization,Stage 5: Clustering of common services,Stage 6: Finally full integration and enterprise transformation
  • 12. UN (2002) five stage model Emerging Enhancing Interactive Transactional, and Full integration
  • 13. Example of one stop service
  • 14. Types of Services Deshazo et al. (2001) identified 51 different e- governments’ services and organized them into 12 categories: online payments, registration and permits, customer service, communication, license, images, audio/video, documents, applications, and procurement, among others. These services are mainly provided to the users in the G2C, G2B, G2E, and G2G e-government relationships
  • 15. Modes of ServicesGovernment to Citizens (G2C) e.g. Birth certificates, Passports, home tax, etcGovernment to Business (G2B) E.g. E-customs, paperless tradeGovernment to Employees (G2E) E.g. Payroll, paying tax, and e-learningGovernment to Government (G2G) E.g. information sharing
  • 16. Can you name some of the advantages of E-government?
  • 17. Advantages Transparency:  what the government is working on as well as the policies they are trying to implement  Due to governments web presence citizens can easily know about projects, plans, and outcomes. Democratization  Greater citizen participation in governments policy and decision making  E.g. through e-voting, blogging, chat rooms, emails etc Convenience  Any where any time services  Reduction in physical contacts no need to travel to govt. office Speed and efficiency  Improved accounting and record keeping through computerization, and information and forms can be easily accessed, updated, and modified resulting greater speed and efficiency.
  • 18. Disadvantages?
  • 19. DisadvantagesReliability & Trust  Reliability of information on the web, and Hidden agendas of government that could influence and bias public opinions.
  • 20. Disadvantages (2) Surveillance & Privacy More and more information with governments about citizens When the government has easy access to countless information on its citizens, personal privacy is lost False sense of transparency and accountability E-government system maintained by the governments themselves.  Information can be added or removed from the public eye Very few organizations monitor and provide accountability for these modifications
  • 21. Can we measure e-government?How?
  • 22. E-government readiness indexMeasures the status of e-governments around the worldSeveral International rankings of e- government maturity are available.UN e-Government Readiness Index are among the most frequently cited
  • 23. What they measure? E-government readiness index Web measure index Infrastructure index Human capital index Internet and PCs index Telephone and cellular index TV and online population index Education index Service deliver per stages E-participation index
  • 24. E-government development index UN2010
  • 25. UN E-participation Index A country’s strength in e-participation is measured against three benchmarks: Does the national government publish information on items under consideration? Are there ways for the public to engage in consultations with policy makers, government officials and one another? Can citizens directly influence decisions, for example by voting online or using a mobile telephone?
  • 26. Digital Participation Increasing the reach, breadth and depth of digital technology use across all sections of society, to maximize digital participation and the economic and social benefits it can bring. (The Digital Britain report of June 2009 )  www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/digitalbritain-finalreport-jun09.pdf
  • 27. How can digital participation bemeasured?1) Reach Access: number of households online, and numbers using the Internet outside the home;2) Breadth of engagement Modes of usage and consumption (communication, retail, content consumed, public services used);
  • 28. How can digital participation bemeasured? 3) Depth of engagement: user contributions, comments, joining networks, user generated content, self publishing, content creation, photos uploaded and shared, etc; and 4) Social and economic impact: particularly the impact on economic recovery and benefits for disadvantaged groups and communities
  • 29. Collaborative research within EG domainsource: Khan et al. 2011
  • 30. Collaborative research within EG domainCountry level Collaboration Figure 2: The co-authorship network of countries source: Khan et al. 2011
  • 31. Collaborative research within EG domain Country level CollaborationTable 1 Key players (countries) in terms of network centrality Country Degree Betweenness Eigenvector The U.S. 20 279.45 0.432 Germany 15 161.679 0.318 The UK 14 87.312 0.356 Canada 12 51.25 0.333 Australia 9 55.381 0.249 Singapore 8 18.868 0.253 France 6 42.809 0.146 Greece 6 25.024 0.201 Spain 6 13.263 0.174 Norway 6 3.555 0.216 Figure 3: The co-authorship network of countries: Centrality
  • 32. Collaborative research within EG domainCountry level Collaboration Table 2 Network-level characteristics of the co-authorship network at the country level No. of Links Density Average Degree Clustering Coefficient 170 0.055 3.036 0.498
  • 33. Collaborative research within EG domainInstitution Level Collaboration Figure 4 Institution-level network in the EG research domain (only those institutions with at least three links are shown)
  • 34. Collaborative research within EG domain Institution Level Collaboration University Degree Betweenness Local Eigenvector The University of Maryland 14 2766.167 52 The National University of Singapore 14 4876.334 63 The University of Illinois 12 2521.900 49 The National Technical University of Athens 12 223.000 42 The University of Macedonia 11 146.000 50 Korea University 10 3853.732 58 The University of Arizona 10 2351.500 47 The University of Manchester 9 4221.000 48 The University of Georgia 9 6224.296 69 The State University of New York (Albany) 9 2807.500 23 The Aristotle University of Thessaloniki 9 71.000 36Table 3 Network characteristics of the institution-level networkNumber of Links Density Average Degree Clustering Coefficient1,142 0.002 1.462 0.712
  • 35. Collaborative research in EG domainRegional Level Collaboration Figure 5 The EG research domain: The regional collaboration network
  • 36. IssuesDigital Divide
  • 37. What is Digital Divide?
  • 38. “Haves" and "Have-Nots" V.S
  • 39. Digital Divide Digital divide can be classified as access divide and social digital divide.  Access digital divide is the gap between people who have access to digital infrastructure and information and those who have no or limited access.  Social digital divide exist due to perception, culture, and interpersonal relationships
  • 40. Digital Divide (2) Access Divide:  E-service access  Resource availability and convenience of access to service  E-service access quality  Timeliness (speed), Trust, and Stability of the service  E-service access Skills  Technical and applied e-skills for using the service Social Divide:  E-service Awareness  Knowledge of the services availability  E-service Social Support  Technical assistance and emotional reinforcement from friends and family  E-service Culturability  National colors, pictures, and local language Source: Khan et al., 2010
  • 41. Why we have DD?
  • 42. Digital Divide: Problems Irrelevance of the Internet • To expensive, no electricity, no skills, etc • Better things to spend money on: • Health, water, food, roads, education• Problem of government control and corruption
  • 43. Problems Access & Resources  No internet, time, money, experience, etc Literacy and Skills • Basic literacy • Information age literacy Motivation • Social and individual issues • Life-stage• We can remove barriers, but not create motivations
  • 44. Result-> ‘Digital’ exclusion Poor Jobs Limited Government services (e-government) Limited Information (jobs, consumer, politics) Few Consumer benefits (cost of not shopping online) Isolation from new culture New excluded groups - older menDigital exclusion intensifies as society and the economy become increasingly based on the Internet
  • 45. Never Catch up Many interlocking issues. Always new technologies Increased commercialisation Are the forerunner opening up the gap?
  • 46. Global Digital Divide May be due to..Economic division,Geographical Division, orSocial division http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjfAFsET28c&NR=1
  • 47. Second level DDE.g. Inequality in the Internet use (Hargittai, 2002)
  • 48. How can we over come DD?
  • 49. We need…Economic incentives e.g. to buy computers (laptops) To have internet connection at homePublic access to computers User friendly spaces - cybercafes, telecentres, E.g. public libraries, free internet access points
  • 50. We need… Provide skills (Technical & Applied)  e.g. The European Computer Driving License (ECDL) Free computers+ for whole communities Government-industry partnerships  E.g. One laptop per child project
  • 51. We need.. Donors • Provide Education, tele-centres, etc. • Donate old computers to less developed countries Liberalization • Foreign investment • Infrastructure - Mobile phones • New markets • Industry (outsourcing)
  • 52. References Khan, G. F., Moon, J., Rhee, C., and Rho, J.J. (2010). E-government skills Identification and Development: Toward a Staged-Based User-Centric Approach for Developing Countries, Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems, Vol.20, No.1, March 2010. http://apjis.or.kr/issue/Past_sub.asp?uid=3493 -Khan, G. F., Moon, J., Park, H. W., Swar, B., and Rho, J.J.(2011). A Socio-Technical Perspective on E-government Issues in Developing Countries: A Scientometrics Approach, Scientometrics, Vol. 87, Issue 2, p-267–286. DOI:10.1007/s11192-010-0322-5 Khan, G. F. & Park, H. W.(2011). International collaboration within e-government domain: A scientometrics analysis, presented at 2011 KAPA-ASPA International Conference, October 28-29, 2011, Seoul Korea. http://www.kapa21.or.kr/english/2011conference.htm www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/digitalbritain-finalreport-jun09.pdf Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully function e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(1), 122-136. Deshazo, R.C. Kaylor, and D.V. Eck, Gauging e-government: A report on implementing services among small American cities, Foundations of Electronic Government in America’s Cities: A Multi-Disciplinary Workshop, Chicago, IL, 2001 Silcock, R., "What is e-Government?," Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 54, 2001, pp. 88-101. UN, E-government index: http://unpan1.un.org/in tradoc/groups/public/documents/un/ unpan021888.pdf, 2005. UN 2008, e-Government Survey: From e Government to Connected Governance, New York, ST/ESA/PAD/SER.E/112, URL: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan028607.pdf http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/942/864
  • 53. Thank YouQuestions & Comments