This document compares the development and integration of e-government services in Ireland and the Netherlands, examining issues encountered and their resolutions. The findings indicate that while Ireland began its e-government initiatives earlier, the Netherlands has achieved greater user engagement and service sophistication, attributed to higher internet penetration and cultural factors. Recommendations for Ireland include creating a 'killer service' and increasing broadband access to enhance citizen engagement with e-government services.

1. DEVELOPMENTS IN E-GOVERNMENT A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN IRELAND AND THE NETHERLANDS

2. Content Introduction Goal and Scope Research Question Sub Questions Scope Methodology Findings & Results Discussion and Conclusions EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan Lessons Learned Time for questions

3. News of the day (22 oct.) EU: New eGovernment website launched providing information on the Commission’s general policy lines in this area and on the various EU programmes supporting eGovernment development http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/egovernment/index.htm

4. Introduction Definition E-Government What is E-Government History of E-Government

5. Definition E-Government E-government Refers to the federal government’s use of information technologies (such as Wide Area Networks, the Internet, and mobile computing) to exchange information and services with citizens, businesses, and other arms of government (source: whitehouse.gov)

6. What is E-Government Communication government and citizens Communication government and businesses Communication between government departments

7. History of E-Government Yr. Netherlands Ireland 1994 The National Action Programme on Electronic Highways Launch Strategic Management Initiative 1998 The Electronic Government Action Programme 1999 The Dutch Digital Delta Action Plan on implementing the Information Society in Ireland. Information Society Fund 2000 Lisbon Strategy 2000 Better Government for Citizens and Business (2002) Launch Reach 2001 Launch OASIS 2003 eGovernment - More than an automation of Government Services 2004 eCabinet 2005 DigiD Citizens DigiD Companies Live Reachservices

8. Content Introduction Goal and Scope Research Question Sub Questions Scope Methodology Findings & Results Discussion and Conclusions EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan Lessons Learned Time for questions

9. Goal - Research Question In our paper, we compare the developments and integration of services in E-government in Ireland and The Netherlands. We are looking at problems that were encountered by both countries, and how they were dealt with. Based on these findings, we will try to formulate an advice on how to make further improvements to E-Government facilities in the near future for both countries. Therefore, our research question is: What are the differences between The Netherlands and Ireland in E-Government measured by use and sophistication, and how can these E-Government ‘missions’ be improved?

10. Goal - Sub Questions To find out how the Service Brokers were doing, we had to find answers to some other questions: How does the government succeed in using the potential of ICT to improve the communication with citizens? What kind of innovative E-Government projects are currently under development? Is this a succes-factor? Which problems did both governments encounter in their development of E-Government services, and creating a broad interest within the population?

11. Scope E-Government is about a lot of different systems, applications, and services. We had to create an understanding about what we wanted to explore, in order to have a valid research. The constrictions we put on research are as followed: We narrowed the subject of E-Government to the delivery of services to citizens and government departments. We did not look at the business area, because that would be to broad. E-Government services are very broad, which is why it is hard to make direct comparisons between them. To make a generalization, we only considered the Public Service Brokers: Reach and DigiD.

12. Content Introduction Goal and Scope Research Question Sub Questions Scope Methodology Findings & Results Discussion and Conclusions EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan Lessons Learned Time for questions

13. Methodology In the Netherlands we looked at DigiD and in Ireland we regarded Reach (services). These services function as Service Brokers; they try to bring E-Government services together. In Dublin, we visited Reach, and the ministry of Taoiseach. Before our visit to Dublin we did a lot of research about E-Government in Ireland, The Netherlands and Europe. Statistics and other information was gathered and stored.

14. Content Introduction Goal and Scope Research Question Sub Questions Scope Methodology Findings & Results Discussion and Conclusions EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan Lessons Learned Time for questions

15. Findings & Results Several interesting findings: Ireland started earlier with their E-Government development; The Dutch government has since then been ‘catching up’. Right now, the Irish and the Dutch governments have about the same number of E-Government Services deployed.

16. Online Sophistication

17. Online Sophistication

18. Findings & Results – continued Therefore, we found it strange to hear about the fact that Reach Services is not as well integrated and has far less users than the counterpart of DigiD in The Netherlands: Reach has been unable to acquire a large user group; about 300.000 users at the current time (around 20% of the population). DigiD has about 6.000.000 registrations, which is about one third of the Dutch population (around 55% of the population). E-Government in Ireland has thus far not been as successful as it has been in The Netherlands.

19. Comparison between supply and use of online public services for citizens

20. Comparison between supply and use of online public services for citizens

21. Findings & Results – continued What is/are the reason(s) for this observable fact? As we looked for an explanation, we used the Holistic Measurement model, which is based on indicators necessary to successfully put E-Government services into operation. (borrowed from CapGemini) With this model in mind, we talked to a representative at Reach Services in Ireland, and a coworker at DigiD Nederland. This led to some interesting conclusions…

24. Findings & Results - continued Technical cause: Despite the economic growth, and developments in the area of ICT, the Internet penetration is still very low in Ireland. Only about 52% of the population has an internet connection, of which 26% have a broadband connection. In the Netherlands, 86% of the population has an internet connection, of which 85% is a broadband connection.

25. Findings & Results - continued Cultural cause: The Irish people have always been suspicious regarding their government. This is probably caused by the political disturbances in the last and for last century. The Irish population is therefore resilient in their communication with the government and not anxious to use new government services .

26. Findings & Results - continued Probable Organizational Cause: There is no ‘Killer-application’ which has been able to convince the Irish citizens to use the E-Government services on a large basis. The car-tax service, enrolled by Revenue (Irelands tax collecting agency) has been very successful, but is a stand-alone service which has no connection with Reach Services. In The Netherlands, businesses are for example obliged to do all their tax reports online. This is not the same in Ireland. Although we didn’t consider the business area of E-Government, we think this has been a great enforcer of the number of users. Dutch students are also obliged to use DigiD to login to their accounts at IB-Groep: the organization which regulates government funding for studies (student grants).

27. Discussion and Conclusions With our findings, we try to give an advice on how the Irish government can overcome the encountered problems, and increase the usage of their E-Government services in the near future. The cultural problem will probably not easily go away. Although we’re not sociologists, we think that a so-called ‘Killer service’ (like the car-tax service) will have a big pull-effect on Irish citizens. We believe this car-tax service should be governed by Reach (or at least create some sort of strategic cooperation). Besides that, a new service to remove a lot of bureaucracy can be launched: We advice a (obliged?) passport or permits service, because every citizen has an advantage with it. It means reduced standing in line for something you don’t want to stand in line for.

28. Discussion and Conclusions Besides that, the Irish government should actively encourage and support citizens taking up (broadband) internet connections. They could create a coalition of interested parties. There are plenty of modern and interested providers in Ireland. As we believe, an increase in internet penetration will benefit the whole Irish population. The common key success factor in leapfrogging countries can be attributed to the centralized political sponsorship of E-Government programs that have been implemented with great success the last two years.

29. Content Introduction Goal and Scope Research Question Sub Questions Scope Methodology Findings & Results Discussion and Conlusions EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan Lessons Learned Time for questions

30. EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan (1/2) No citizen left behind Advancing inclusion through eGovernment so that by 2010 all citizens benefit from trusted, innovative services and easy access for all; Making efficiency and effectiveness a reality Significantly contributing, by 2010, to high user satisfaction, transparency and accountability, a lighter administrative burden and efficiency gains; Implementing high-impact key services for citizens and businesses By 2010, 100% of public procurement will be available electronically, with 50% actual usage, with agreement on cooperation on further high-impact online citizen services;

31. EU i2010 E-Government Action Plan (2/2) Putting key enablers in place enabling citizens and businesses to benefit, by 2010, from convenient, secure and interoperable authenticated access across Europe to public services; Strengthening participation and democratic decision-making demonstrating, by 2010, tools for effective public debate and participation in democratic decision-making.

32. Lessons Learned We encountered several problems during our research. Too little time. As we had already suspected in advance, it would be hard to do our research in the designated time. Because of that, we had to work hard, and change two other things: The scope was still to broad; we had to narrow it. Because of that, not all E-Government services were regarded, but only the Public Service Brokers. We changed the research methods; we had neither the time nor the power to do all our research by ourselves. We used several sources to gain insight in current E-Government practices (e.g. developments / current usage / sophistication / etc.)

33. End of presentation Are there any questions? First one is for free.

34. VRiSBI International Research Project Innovation and ICT - Comparing Ireland with The Netherlands Please visit http://studiereis2007.vrisbi.nl for the complete paper of this presentation. Other papers and presentations are also available.