• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
eGovernment research in the EU member states
 

eGovernment research in the EU member states

on

  • 1,927 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,927
Views on SlideShare
1,927
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
34
Comments
1

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

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.

Cancel

11 of 1 previous next

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • Glitter Graphics



    Hello, hope everything is oky by the grace of GOD im fine.its attractive yr profile ,i wanna talk to u,have a little time for me.my yahoo id is:
    gift_willian@yahoo.com
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    eGovernment research in the EU member states eGovernment research in the EU member states Presentation Transcript

    • eGovernment Research in the EU: an overview Symposium IRC 2007, Bordeaux, 27th Sep 2007 (pre-conference event of Ministerial Conference on eGov 20-21 st Sep 2007) D. Osimo, C. Centeno Institute for Prospective Technological Studies - IPTS Joint Research Centre - European Commission www.jrc.es The views expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the EC
    • IPTS : Part of DG JRC of the EC: 7 Research Institutes across Europe Mission : “to provide customer-driven support to the EU policy-making process by researching science-based responses to policy challenges that have both a socio-economic as well as a scientific/technological dimension”
          • JRC -IPTS
      Modus operandi: desk research, expert groups, modelling, centres of expertise
    • EGOVERNET project
      • Aim: Coordinate the creation of national eGovernment RTD programmes and initiatives while also encouraging the integration of existing national eGovernment programmes.
      • Partners: organisations with national programming responsibilities for innovation and research in eGovernment
      • Coordination action supported by FP6 IST programme
      • www.egovernet.org
    • The approach: 3 different policy domains of e-gov R&D
    • Research needs to reach the vision (top 10)
      • Data and knowledge mgt
      • Value chains
      • Integration and interoperability
      • Trust and security
      • eDemocracy
      • Change in public sector
      • User needs
      • Multi-channel
      • Quality and performance
      • Networked government
      User needs eDemocracy Value chains Trust and security Networked government Innovative governance Socio-economic inclusion Public value creation Change in public sector Data and knowledge mgt Past and current research (2002-05) Future research needs (2006-) 397 articles / interviews, 875 stakeholders 131 interviews Source: IPTS (2006) Towards the eGovernment vision for the EU in 2010: Research Policy challenges , by DTI, EIPA
    • Country overview
      • Countries with DEDicated programmes: Sweden, Norway, regions of Flanders and Emilia-Romagna
      • Countries with programmes EXPLictly stating eGovernment : FI, ES, FR, D, IE, HU, LV, SK, SI, BG, CZ
      • Countries with programmes POTentially funding eGovernment : all others
      • But in reality, each country is a mix of the different forms
      • Fragmentation very much exists at national level too
      • National information sheets published on www.egovernet.org
    • Other cases
      • Institutional funding to universities
      • Procurement of research (Slovenia, IPTS, and all)
        • Specifically to support policy-making
        • Focus on socio-economic research, policy impact, foresight
      • Research embedded in deployment projects
      • Bottom-up funding (no priority indicated ex-ante)
      • Creation of dedicated research centres (Ireland, Flanders, Toscana, Estonia, etc.)
        • Partnerships with universities
        • Strong relation with e-gov deployment
      • Soft coordination efforts under way in many countries
    • Conclusions
      • Contrast between the:
      • (high) declared policy importance of eGovernment research,
      • (small) actual funding and fragmented in different programmes and instruments, and
      • (large) amount and growing integration of research projects carried out on the ground
      Policy Projects Programmes
    • Conclusions
      • DED: not the only or best solution, but effective in integrating the research field across boundaries
      • Research programmes are not the only or the largest source of funding: institutional research, procurement and partnership.
      • Thematic priorities not consistent across countries. Future recommended research themes such as users needs not visible in research programmes
      • Fragmentation of eGovernment research even at the national level, between different policy areas, strategic goals and funding mechanisms
      • Programmes and funding mechanisms are often more fragmented than the actual research carried out
    • From parallel funding streams…
    • … to an integrated approach
    • Next steps
      • EGOVERNET: definition of a common framework for eGovernment research
      • IPTS: Supporting the definition of research priorities on eGovernment
      • IPTS: Researching the impact of web2.0 on public services
    • Merci
      • [email_address]
      • http://is.jrc.es
      • http://www.egovernet.org
    • BACK-UP SLIDES
    • Institutional setting
      • Most research programmes falling under R&D policy
      • Only in 5 cases e-government implementation programmes include measures for research
      • Important role of EU cohesion/structural funds in Portugal, Greece and some New Member States
      • Significant role of regional level (Flanders, Emilia-Romagna, French regions)
      • Joined-up e-government R&D not yet there…
      1 2 3 4
    • Budget
      • DED programmes: multi-annual, budget between 2 and 6 Million Euros per year. Met by equivalent co-funding by private players.
      • Difficult to measure budget of EXPL and POT, but likely to be smaller
      • Overall investment: marginal if compared to eGovernment implementation
      • By comparison, eHealth attracts greater research investment, despite smaller implementation expenditure
      Sources: EGOVERNET, EC, EGEP 1 2 3 4 11,900 eGovernment implementation programmes, EU Member States 2004 (latest available data) 46 Budget for eGovernment research in FP6 WP 2005/2006 34 Total budget of eGovernment research programmes in EU Member States, 2005-2006 Budget (M €) Type of programme
    • Stages of research and multi-disciplinary approach
      • eGovernment as field of applied IST research
      • General problem of separation between research and deployment (see also WP5)
      • Specific policies to address the issue in Norway and Sweden
      • Most research programmes are technology-centred
      • Some require multidisciplinarity: DED and France
      • Socio-economic research is mostly for policy support and often funded through procurement and partnership with universities.
      1 2 3 4
    • Thematic priorities
      • Few national research programmes define priorities in such a precise way as FP 6 did
      • The themes most often mentioned are: e-democracy, security, knowledge management, semantic web in government context, services to citizens and business, broadband application, and, of course, socio-economic studies in support of eGovernment policies
      • The research theme "understanding users needs", indicated by previous research as one of the key research challenges, appear not to be considered in any research programmes, although “customer satisfaction” surveys are often carried out.
      • DED programmes often have a cross-public sector and are more precise in priorities-setting; procurement used for specific requests and (relatively) clear needs
      1 2 3 4
    • Beneficiaries
      • In order of importance:
      • Universities and companies
      • Public authorities
      • Strongly related to strategic goals
      • Strengthening the R&D system and a competitive ICT sector
      • Improving public services
      1 2 3 4
    • Project selection and programme evaluation
      • In research programmes, open calls are used, and proposals are evaluated by external experts (see also wp7)
      • Sometimes consultation/negotiation procedures are used (Netherlands, Flanders-B), also in combination with open calls.
      • Finally, as previously mentioned, procurement procedures are often used for socio-economic studies for policy support.
      • Programme evaluation not available, also because of their recent history
      • Generally successful in leveraging private investment, if national eGovernment market is significant
      1 2 3 4
    • Research and competence centres
      • Widely felt need to consolidate eGovernment research
      • Many countries created dedicated central research centres, physical or virtual, in partnership with university
      • Centres sometimes also used to distribute funds
      • Dedicated umbrella project being created
      1 2 3 4