Tomasz Janowski. From Electronic Governance to Policy-Driven Electronic Governance

From Electronic Governance to Policy-Driven Electronic Governance
Evolution of Technology Use In Government
Tomasz Janowski
UNU-EGOV, Guimaraes, Portugal
janowski@unu.edu

CEDEM ASIA, HONG KONG, 4 DECEMBER 2014, 2
FROM EGOV TO POLICY-DRIVEN EGOV
AIM
1
Toexplaintheevolutionoftechnologyusebygovernment
2
Topresentatheorytoexplainthisevolution
3
Topostulatethenextstepinthisevolution–Policy-DrivenEGOV
4
Topresentsomeevidenceinsupportofthispostulate
5
ToexplainwhatthetransitionfromEGOVtoPolicy-DrivenEGOVentails
6
Toputthetransitioninthebigpictureofthepost-2015UNdevelopmentagenda

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
Howistechnologyusebygovernmentevolving?
2
THEORY
Howtoexplainthisevolution?
3
NEXTSTEP
IsPolicy-DrivenElectronicGovernancethenextstep?
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
IsdiffusionofEGOVtodifferentsectorshappening?
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
WhatdoesthetransitionfromEGOVtoPolicy-DrivenEGOVentail?
6
BIGPICTURE
Post-2015UNDevelopmentAgendaandPolicy-DrivenEGOV
7
CONCLUSIONS
Whatarethehighlightsofthislecture?

EVOLUTION OF TECHNOLOGY USE IN GOVERNMENT
Twodecades of research, innovation and development
GOALS
CONTEXT
TIME
Increasing the quality and efficiency of internal government operations
Delivering better public services across traditional and electronic channels
Facilitating administrative and institutional reform in government
Engaging citizens and other non-state actors in policy-and decision-making processes
Technological
Organizational
Socio-economic

STAGE 1: TECHNOLOGY IN GOVERNMENT
GOALS
Establishing government portals
Automatingadministrative processes
Providing online access to public services
CHALLENGES
Connecting agencies, citizens and businesses to the Internet
Ensuring interoperability of systems run by differentagencies
Connecting legacy systems to other systems and the Internet
LIMITATIONS
Technologycan only deliver if accompanied by organizational change
Developing more mature servicesraises organizational issues
Technological development alone does not produce public value

STAGE 2: ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT
GOALS
Reengineering administrative processes
Enabling collaboration between governmentagencies
Offering services acrossagenciesaccording to the needs of citizens
CHALLENGES
Hierarchical organization,inward looking culture and lack of collaboration
Orientation on maintenance,notoutcomes
Resistance to change
LIMITATIONS
Higherservicematurity may not lead to higher usage
Lackof public consultation and capacity buildingare sources of failure
Internal governmenttransformation alone does not create public value

STAGE 3: ELECTRONIC GOVERNANCE
GOALS
Utilizing social media to engage citizens in government decision-making
Making government data available forbusinesses to build publicservices
Integrating public, private and non-profit services into one service space
CHALLENGES
Digital divide –gender, age, socio-economic, geographic, etc.
Lackof trust –citizens not trusting government, government not trusting citizens
Engaging non-state actors in public servicedelivery
LIMITATIONS
Beyondbetter relationships –how to directly improveconditions for citizens?
oWhat local policy objectives topursue?
oHow to pursue such objectivesin given local conditions?
oWhat is the impact of meeting such objectives on the local environment?

STAGE 1-3 CHARACTERIZATION
STAGES
CHARACTERIZATIONS
Transformation of government?
Includes
non-state actors?
1
Technology in Government
no
no
2
Electronic Government
yes
no
3
Electronic Governance
yes
yes

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
2
THEORY
3
NEXTSTEP
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
6
BIGPICTURE
7
CONCLUSIONS

THEORY: GLOBAL CHANGE DRIVERS
DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES
GLOBAL CHANGE
DRIVERS
NEW GOVERNANCE PARADIGMS
Global economic crisis
Global energy transition
Population and demographics
Global health and pandemics
Scienceandtechnology
Globalizationandmigration
Unrest,conflictsandwar
Governance2.0
PRESSUREONGOVERNMENT
INNOVATION

THEORY: PRESSURE ON GOVERNMENT
DISRPUTIVETECHNOLOGIES
GLOBAL CHANGEDRIVERS
PRESSUREON GOVERNMENT
Fiscal austerity
Loss oflegitimacy
Goodpolicy is bad politics
Crisisofcompetence
Informationoverload
Governance2.0
Balancingsecurityandprivacy
Managingdigital space
INNOVATION

THEORY: DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES
PRESSURE ON GOVERNMENT
Socialmedia
Cloudcomputing
Mobiletechnologies
TECHNOLOGY-ENABLED INNOVATION
Softwareas service
Bigdata
Virtualworlds
Globaldigitalidentity
Governance2.0

EGOV STRATEGY HIGHLIGHTS
SINGAPORE 2015
KOREA 2012
ESTONIA 2013
Next generation
infocomminfrastructure
Public-private collaborative governance
One service space -public, private and third sectors
Innovation centers and entrepreneurship
Seamless and converged informatization
Paperless document management
Infocommcompetency framework
Active response to adverse effects of informatization
Traceability of the use of one’s own data
Electronichealth records
Utilization-focused services
Internet in rural areas
EUROPEAN UNION 2015
UNITED NATIONS 2010
WASEDA 2011
Improve (seamless)services to caterfor different needs
Government data sharing based on open standards
Increase of social media applications for participation
Invitethird parties in EGOV development
From readiness to development
Cloud computing and data center virtualization
Involvestakeholders in public policy processes
Agility to respond to more demands as revenues drop
Disaster management and business continuity
Reducecarbon footprint
Citizen-centric practice
Smart grid and green technology

THEORY: TECHNOLOGY-ENABLED INNOVATION
DISRPUTIVE TECHNOLOGIES
Socialmedia
Cloudcomputing
Mobiletechnologies
TECHNOLOGY-ENABLEDINNOVATION
Softwareas service
Bigdata
Infocomminfrastructure
Virtualworlds
Competencyframeworks
Opengovernmentdata
Citizen-centricpractice
Governance2.0
Oneservicespace
Location-awareservices
Government

1
Connected Governance
Public sector management, involving culturalchanges, that supports, models, understands and aspires to whole of government solutions [Connected Government, 2004,CISCO]
2
Participatory Governance
Empowering citizens to participate in public decision-making that affects their lives, andto achievemore transparent, responsive, accountable and effective governance [PG Exchange,2012]
3
Mobile Government
ExtendingEGOV to mobile platforms, and delivery of location-awarepublic services and applications anytime and anywhere, which are only possible using mobile technologies.
4
Globale-Governance
Delivering publicservices toenable citizens and businesses to participate in theglobal economy,and to enable state actors to contribute to solving regional and global problems.
5
Local e-Governance
Emphasis increasingly shifting from the national-level to state-and local-level EGOVto ensurethat the benefits are directly delivered to citizens and communities

THEORY: NEW GOVERNANCE PARADIGMS
Socialmedia
Collaborativegovernance
Cloudcomputing
Participatory governance
Mobiletechnologies
Mobile governance
Softwareas service
Globale-governance
Bigdata
Locale-governance
Virtualworlds
Reuseofpublicinformation
Agilegovernance
EGOV4SD
Oneservicespace
Governance2.0
Readinesstodevelopment
Seamlessmobileservices
ChiefInformationOfficers

VALIDATION: SINGAPORE STRATEGY 2015
Socialmedia
Collaborativegovernment
Cloudcomputing
Participatory government
Mobiletechnologies
Mobilegovernment
Softwareas service
Agilegovernment
Bigdata
LocalEGOV
Virtualworlds
EGOV4D
EGOV4SD
Oneservicespace
Governance2.0

VALIDATION: EU 2015 STRATEGY
DISRUPTIVETECHNOLOGIES
GLOBALCHANGEDRIVERS
Socialmedia
Collaborativegovernment
Cloudcomputing
Participatory government
Mobiletechnologies
TECHNOLOGY-ENABLEDINNOVATION
Mobilegovernment
Softwareas service
Agilegovernment
Bigdata
LocalEGOV
Virtualworlds
EGOV4D
EGOV4SD
Oneservicespace
Governance2.0

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
2
THEORY
3
NEXTSTEP
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
6
BIGPICTURE
7
CONCLUSIONS

EVOLUTION CONTINUES
GOALS
CONTEXT
TIME
Increasing the quality and efficiency of internal government operations
Delivering better public services across traditional and electronic channels
Facilitating administrative and institutional reform in government
Engaging citizens and other non-state actors in policy-and decision-making processes
Supporting policy and development goals in specific sectors and localities
Technological
Organizational
Socio-economic
Context-specific

STAGE 4: POLICY-DRIVEN ELECTRONIC GOVERNANCE
GOAL
From improving the relationships between government and its constituencies
Toimproving conditions of these constituenciesto develop themselves
CHALLENGE
Inorder to fulfill its goal, EGOV cannot restrict itself to working on the national level or focus on addressing cross-sectorial issues alone.
APPROACH
Focus on specific application environments:
oLOCATIONS:national, provincial and local levels
oSECTORS: health, education, economy, environment, security, etc.
Tailor response to the needs and circumstances of this environment in terms of:
ochoice of locally-relevant and/or sector-specific goals,
olocally-acceptable and sectorally-feasible ways of pursuing such goals,
omanaging the impact of meeting such goals on the locationsand sectors involved

STAGE 1-4 CHARACTERIZATION
STAGES
CHARACTERIZATIONS
Transformation of government?
Includes
non-state actors?
Location-and sector-specific?
1
Technology in Government
no
no
no
2
Electronic Government
yes
no
no
3
Electronic Governance
yes
yes
no
4
Policy-Driven Electronic Governance
yes
yes
yes

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
2
THEORY
3
NEXTSTEP
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
6
BIGPICTURE
7
CONCLUSIONS

EGOV FOR SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
SINGAPORE 2015
KOREA 2012
ESTONIA 2013
Next generation
EUROPEAN UNION 2015
UNITED NATIONS 2010
WASEDA 2011

SINGAPORE 2015
KOREA 2012
ESTONIA 2013
Next generation
EUROPEAN UNION 2015
UNITED NATIONS 2010
WASEDA 2011
EGOV FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

SINGAPORE 2015
KOREA 2012
ESTONIA 2013
Next generation
EUROPEAN UNION 2015
UNITED NATIONS 2010
WASEDA 2011
EGOV FOR ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SINGAPORE 2015
KOREA 2012
ESTONIA 2013
Next generation
EUROPEAN UNION 2015
UNITED NATIONS 2010
WASEDA 2011
EGOV FOR SUSTAINABILITY TRANSITION

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
2
THEORY
3
NEXTSTEP
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
6
BIGPICTURE
7
CONCLUSIONS

TRANSITION CHALLENGES
1
Research
Shortage of research and understanding about developing EGOV in specific locations/sectors
2
Tools
Absence of EGOV policy and development tools adapted to the requirements and conditions in particular locations/sectors
3
Capacity
Shortage of human capacity within locations/sector to be able to build and utilize such tools
4
Networks
Lack of models of engaging universities and other non-private actors in EGOV initiatives
5
Transition
Incremental development is difficult-different nature of transitions: earlier transitions –widening application context, transition from EGOV to Policy-Driven EGOV –narrowing application context

CHALLENGE 1: RESEARCH
Growing experience and body of research on how to plan, develop and sustain EGOV initiatives in general.
Scarce studies and cases of how EGOV initiatives are being deployed in different locations and sectors.
Scarceresearch into theories, methods and tools forlocation-and sector-focused EGOV development.
Some of the probing questions are:
oIn what aspects is the choice of a particular location/sector affecting EGOV development?
oWhich stages –planning, design, implementation, operation, sustainability –are affected and how?
oHow to adapt location-and sector-independent instruments to particular locations and sectors?
oHow to transfer adaptation experience between locations and sectors?
A focused research effort is required to develop a better understanding of location-and sector-aware EGOV and to explore and answer these and other relevant questions.

CHALLENGE 2: POLICY INSTRUMENTS
Each location and sector comes with own set of conditions, goals and acceptable ways of pursuing such goals given the conditions,EGOV must rely on location-and sector-specific policies andinstruments.
For example:
oapplying generic one-size-fits-all EGOV maturity stages like e.g. information, interaction, transactions and data-sharing to track progress in EGOV development (the higher maturity, the better) may be appropriate for some countries but not for others
omeasuring the performance of EGOV should rely on the indicators that reflect locally-defined policy goals, not on the one-size-fits-all generic benchmark instruments
ocontext-aware benchmarking would allow locations or sectors to learn from their peers –locations and sectors in similar development conditions, or leaders –locations and sectors most successful in pursuing the relevant public policy goals
A focused research, development and policy efforts are required to build, apply and institutionalize the use of such instruments.

CHALLENGE 3: HUMAN/INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY
Critical tosuccessful planning and implementation of Policy-Driven EGOV:
oknowledge of the local or sectorial conditions,
oownership of the local or sectorial development goals and
oawareness of locally-or sectorially-acceptable ways of pursing such goals
However, the capacity to engage in such planning and implementation is increasingly scarce for lower levels of government and within different sectors.
A focused effort is required to build human and institutional capacity:
oat the local level, choosing the right level to balance effectiveness and efficiency of the response, and promoting collaboration between levels.
oto refocus EGOV initiatives from cross-sectorial issues to sectorial issues to address the needs of health, education, security, economy, environment and other sectors.
Location-and sector-specific EGOV education programs are also required to enable a new generation of government leaders, managers and experts to emerge.

CHALLENGE 4: STAKEHOLDER NETWORKS
The outcomes of EGOV depends on government being able to engage citizens, businesses, academia, non-profits and other non-state actors in various network forms aimed at formulating and pursuing location-and sector-specific development goals through EGOV initiatives.
Within multi-stakeholder EGOV networks:
oacademia could contribute to planning and design of EGOV initiatives
othe private sector could contribute to development and implementation
othe non-profit sector would ensure the delivery of benefits from EGOV initiatives to the target group of stakeholders, thus contributing to their sustainability
As part of such networks, local and sector-specificuniversities have a key role to play in:
oformulating location-and sector-specific policies
oconstructing development instruments to support such policies
obuilding local capacity to apply such instruments
In addition, such networks could also facilitate the transfer of local-level and sector-specific EGOV innovations within and between countries, thus contributing to accelerating local development.

CHALLENGE 5: TRANSITION
Different nature of the transitions:
oFromPhase 1 to Phase 2 –expandthe application context
oFromPhase 2 to Phase 3 –expandthe application context
oFrom Phase 3 to Phase 4 –narrow (localize or specialize) the application context
Given this difference, it is difficult to carry out the transition from EGOV to Policy-Driven EGOV by building incrementally upon earlier phases. The transition requires investment into:
1.research and innovation including location-and sector-specific EGOV research
2.policy support including development of location-and sector-specific EGOV policies and instruments
3.location-and sector-specific EGOV capacity at both individual and institutional levels
4.network development including multi-stakeholder location-and sector-specific EGOV networks
Italso requires running controlled experiments in applying EGOV to various location-and sector-specific policy goals, and to develop and validate theories while learning from such experiments.

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
2
THEORY
3
NEXTSTEP
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
6
BIGPICTURE
7
CONCLUSIONS

UNSYSTEM
THEMATICCONSULTATIONS
NATIONALCONSULTATIONS
UNSystemTaskTeam
High-LevelPanel
OpenWorkingGroup
Etc.
ConflictandFragility
Education
Energy
EnvironmentalSustainability
FoodSecurity
Governance
GrowthandEmployment
Health
Inequalities
PopulationDynamics
Water
83countriesincluding:
ogovernments,
ocivilsociety,
otheprivatesector,
omedia,universities
othinktanks
GLOBALONLINECONVERSATION
worldwewant2015.org
MYWorldsurvey
POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT –AGENDA

WhatcanwelearnfromMDGs?
Strengths
ofocusing on a limited number of concrete human development goals
oimproved policy monitoring/accountability due to clear goals, targets and indicators
opromoting concrete action and making goals explicit in the national development policies
Weaknesses
ofocusing on the goals but not enough on the means of achieving them
onot accounting for local circumstances and differences in conditions between countries
olack of consultation and ownership-building, leading to donor-driven agenda
POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT –LESSONS LEARNT

Whatarethekeydevelopmentchallengestowhichthepost-2015shouldrespond?
oSocial –1 billion of people are undernourished
oSocial –28% of the population is covered by social protection system
oSocial –Income and wealth inequalities increase within and between countries
oEconomic –1 billion of people are international or internal migrants
oEconomic –1 billion of the world’s population lives in slums
oEconomic –Financial, food and energy crises show interconnectedness of the world’s economy, etc.
oEnvironmental –Carbon dioxide emissions increased by 40% between 1990 and 2008
oEnvironmental –The incidence of natural disasters increased five times since 1970s
oSecurity –20% of the world’s population lives under violence, insecurity or fragility
oSecurity –Countries affected by violence or fragility did not achieve a single MDG, etc.
New development pathways are needed that encourage creativity and innovation in the pursuit of inclusive, equitable and sustainable growth and development.
POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT –CHALLENGES

POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT –VISION
Whatshouldbethevisionforpost-2015development?

Howshouldpost-2015developmentbecarriedout?
Post-2015 development should:
recognize the diversity of contexts within and among countries
not prescribe specific development policies but support priority setting
leave space for national policy design and adaptation to local settings
ensure high policy coherence at global, national and sub-national levels
rely on development enablers within and across dimensions
facilitate transformative change:
‒in existing patterns of production and consumption,
‒in management of natural resources and
‒in mechanisms of governance
POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT –AGENDA

Howshouldpost-2015developmentbecarriedout?
Post-2015 development should:
Policy-Driven EGOV
recognize the diversity of contexts within and among countries
X
not prescribe specific development policies but support priority setting
leave space for national policy design and adaptation to local settings
X
ensure high policy coherence at global, national and sub-national levels
rely on development enablers within and across dimensions
X
facilitate transformative change:
‒in existing patterns of production and consumption,
‒in management of natural resources and
‒in mechanisms of governance
X
POST-2015 AGENDA VERSUS POLICY-DRIVEN EGOV

OVERVIEW
1
EVOLUTION
2
THEORY
3
NEXTSTEP
4
SOMEEVIDENCE
5
TRANSITIONAGENDA
6
BIGPICTURE
7
CONCLUSIONS

CONCLUSIONS
1
Theuse of technologyin government is evolving, from technology in government, through electronic government and electronic governance, to policy-driven electronic governance
2
Theevolution can be explained by global change drivers that cause pressure on governments,
that respond by applying and innovating with new technologies,
that cause new governance paradigms to emerge
3
Thereis evidence to show that policy-driven EGOV is the next stage in the evolution but the transition from EGOV to Policy-Driven EGOV requires a focused research, policy, capacity building and network building effort
4
Policy-DrivenEGOV is well-aligned with the forthcoming Post-2015 UN Development Agenda and could serve as an important enabler for this agenda

Thank you for listening.
Any questions?
Tomasz Janowski
janowski@unu.edu

Tomasz Janowski. From Electronic Governance to Policy-Driven Electronic Governance

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Tomasz Janowski. From Electronic Governance to Policy-Driven Electronic Governance

Similar to Tomasz Janowski. From Electronic Governance to Policy-Driven Electronic Governance (20)

More from Danube University Krems, Centre for E-Governance

More from Danube University Krems, Centre for E-Governance (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Tomasz Janowski. From Electronic Governance to Policy-Driven Electronic Governance