CeDEM Asia 2016 paper presentation on 7 December in Dague, South Korea. For paper: http://bit.ly/2h1AEzv For conference: http://bit.ly/2h4eahQ For conference programme: http://bit.ly/2g9f9uY

1. PUBLIC POLICY:
CeDEM ASIA 2016
Morten Meyerhoff Nielsen
UNU-EGOV / TTU-RNS
Daegu (SK), 6-9 December 2016
eGOVERNMENT AND GOVERNANCE:
THE DANISH-JAPANESE MODELS
AND TIMELINES COMPARED

2. BACKGROUND
AND KEY QUESTION

3. • Authors compared the eGovernment efforts, achievements and
governance models of Denmark and Japan
• Found that Japan compared to Denmark had:
- Superior infrastructure
- Similar % of citizen online
• Concluded that Japan could learn from the Danish approach to:
- Standardized formats and processes
- Share components and contents, esp. unique identifiers and digital signatures
- Coordinated and convenient services for the users
- Involve users to develop user-centric services
- Inter-agency collaboration to achieve those goals
• Question is whether this still holds?
MEYERHOFF & IGARI 2012

4. THE METHODOLOGY

5. Step 1: Classic literature review
with “berry picking” to identify
theoretical and conceptual
model and/or research gaps
Step 2: Classic qualitative multi-
case country studies on
governance and cooperation
models (iterations)
Step 3: Update country studies
(iterations), conceptual model,
conclusions
OVERALL APPROACH

6. BACKGROUND INDICATORS
• Internet access
• Internet use
• eBanking use
• eCommerce use
• eService use
NATIONAL GOVERNANCE AND COOPERATION MODEL
• Institutional framework and governance
• Decentralisation of government authority
EFFECTS
• eServices in place
• Service delivery volumes per channel
CONCEPTURAL FRAMEWORK
NATIONAL APPROACH TO eGOVERNMENT
Responsibility for eGovernment:
• Strategy
• Action plan
• Initiation, development, coordination,
monitoring and evaluation
• Chair
• Host organisation and secretariate
• Member oragnisations
eGovernment elements:
• Strategy underpinned by action plan and KPIs
• Legality of strategy and action plan

7. Regional
administrations
MunicipalitiesMinistries and
agencies
CENTRAL REGIONAL LOCAL
KEY INFLUENCING FACTORS
Governance structure
(e.g. entralised / top-down
vs. federal, top-down)
Level of autonomy
(e.g. high vs. low)
Proportion of service provision at each
level of government
(e.g. central vs. decentral)
Society, pre-conditions, attitudes,
level of influence
(e.g. high vs. low)
STAKEHOLDERS
Private sector
vendors, academia,
civic society, end-
users
SOCIETY

8. Public service is service provided by government to people living
within its jurisdiction, either directly (through the public sector)
or by financing provision of services (McGregor et. al., 1982).
Two types of public service: Core public services (i.e. what you
must do as a citizen, thus legally required), and;
Public value adding service (i.e. what you like to do as an
individual or out of civic duty)
Service consist of a combination of
information, transaction and data.
DEFINITIONS

9. eGovernment is the use of IT and technology
in the provision of information and services to citizens
and businesses.
…eGovernance encompass all processes of governing,
thus relating to the processes and decisions oriented toward
defining actions, granting power and verifying performance.
… the e is for electronic.
DEFINITIONS

10. CONTEXTS AND FINDINGS
DENMARK, JAPAN

11. Denmark [41] Japan [41]
Population 5,581,503 126,919,659
Territorial size 43,094 km2 377,915 km2
Population density 129.5 per km2 335.8 per km2
Official languages Danish Japanese
GDP (billion) €260.74 bill (est’15) 3,697.82 (est’15)
GDP per capita €46,715 (est’15) €29,315 (est’15)
GDP growth 1.6% (est’15) 0.6% (est’15)
Unemployment 4.7% (est’15) 3.3% (est’15)
Imports (billion) €75.12 (est’15) €560.45 (est’15)
Exports (billion) €84.32 (est’15) €559.03 (est’15)
SIMILAR BUT DIFFERENT, SOCIO-ECONOMIC
DATA 2015

12. Denmark [52, 53] Japan [52, 53]
National institutional
framework and
governance
Centralised model.
National, regional and local
government level.
Consists of 5 regions and 98
municipalities.
Centralised model.
National, regional and local
government level.
Complex system of 47 prefecturas,
multiple sub-prefectures and
districts, 1719 municipalites of four
“Kanje” types incl. cities, towns,
wards, non-municipalities.
Decentralisation of
government authority
Large degree of local autonomy
and decision making incl. tax and
budget spending. C.70-80% of
citizen services are provided by
municipalities. Degree of central
control via annual budget
negotiations.
National government control
prefecturas and municipalities incl.
tax collection, borrowing. C. 70% of
budget is allocated to municipalities.
Lack of progress on intergov.
Cooperation and decentralisation.
Separate tax collection.
GENERAL GOVERNANCE AND INSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORK

13. USERS ARE INCREASINGLY ONLINE
2000 2005 2010 2014
Denmark 63,01 / 1,26 100,58 / 24,80 115,67 / 38,44 125,89 / 42,34
Japan 53,12 / 0,68 75,98 / 18,35 96,81 / 28,04 120,23 / 29,31
2000 2005 2010 2014
Denmark 39,17 82,74 88,72 95,99
Japan 29,99 66,92 78,21 90,58
MOBILE / BROADBAND SUBSCRIPTIONS PER 100 INHABITANTS, 2000-2014
INDIVIDUAL USE OF THE INTERNET, 2000-2014

14. eService availability Degree of digitisation (i.e. % of service delivery volume online)
2012 2015
Denmark Japan Denmark Japan Denmark Japan
eID/eSignature NemID MyNumber 79.1% -- 89.2% *7.9%
Digital post Digital Post no -- -- 89.2% --
Tax declaration Yes yes 100% *51.4% 100% *56.5%
Register for school yes no #57% -- 96% --
Register for university yes no 80% -- 100% --
Apply for student grant yes No, see debt 100% -- 100% --
Change address yes yes 63% 0.0000021% -- n/a
Housing subsidy yes no, but others 77% -- 79% --
Apply for pension yes yes 94% -- 95% --
Report vermin (fix my street) yes some #56% some 73% --
Report theft yes no 41% -- 84% --
2010 2015
Denmark Japan Denmark Japan
Online banking 71% -- 85% *16%
Online commerce 68% *55% 79% *62%
Interacted with government online 78% -- 88% --
Obtained info. from a gov. website 76% -- 86% --
Submitted a complete form (eService) 51% -- 69% --
INDIVIDUAL USE OF eSERVICES, 2012-2015
INDIVIDUAL USE OF INTERNET CONTENT, 2012-2015

15. ‘
Danish Regions
(5 regions)
Management
committee of Danish
Regions
Cabinet
committee of
coordination
Cabinet
committee on
economic affairs
Ministries
Ministry of Finance:
Agency for Digitisation
(regulatory and mandated body)
Secretariat for
steering committee
and STS
Local Government
Denmark
(98 municipalities)
Management
committee of LGDK
Private industry
and civic society
Industry and civic
groups
Governmentcabinet
Steering committee for the eGovernment strategy
Representatives from the Ministry of Finance (chair), key ministries like Economy, Taxation, Justice,
Science, Health and Interior, Danish Regions and Local Government Denmark
Joint committee for cross government cooperation (STS)
Permanent secretaries from the Ministry of Finance (chair), Economy, Taxation,Science, Health and
Interior, Managing Directors from the Danish Regions andLocal GovernmentDenmark
STONG MANDATE, COORDINATION, CONSENSUS
AND FOLLOW-UP.
ENTRENCED, TESTED BUT COULD BE STREAMLINED.

16. WEAK MANDATES, OVERLAPPING ROLES,
NATIONAL BUT FRAGMENTED COORDINATION,
LIMITED FOLLOW-UP, KEY ACTORS EXCLUDED

17. CONCLUDING
OBSERVATIONS

18. The Danish governance model continue to prove its worth.
Current 2016-2020 strategy seems less ambitious with weaker KPIs.
Japan have introduced a CIO layer but seem to overlap with the Council
and mandate is weak. Key actors still excluded.
Increased focus on KPIs and eIDs being rolled out for
citizens and businesses.
CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS

19. CONTACT
MORTEN MEYERHOFF NIELSEN
United Nations University, Operating Unit on Policy-Driven Electronic Governance /
Tallinn University of Technology, Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance
Tel (DK): +45 23 92 22 91
Tel (PT): +351 93 059 70 09
Tel (EE): +372 59 06 07 09
Mail: mortenmeyerhoff@gmail.com
Twitter: @mortenmeyerhoff
LinkedIN: mortenmeyerhoff