E-government – The future of federal and municipal institutions · 2002-04-16 · Introduction -...

E-government –

The future of federal and municipal institutions

Daniela Haase

Registration Number: 161189

Magdeburg, January 2002

Abstract

This paper deals with the idea of a virtual one-stop-government and attempts to explain the

benefits and problems connected with the virtual representation of a government on the Internet.

Current developments as well as strategies for the implementation of e-government in the future

are critically examined. The focus of this paper is set on Germany, and the present problems

and deficits of its administrations concerning e-government are described.

Finally, international efforts regarding e-government solutions are compared, wherein more

weight is put upon the European Union.

Keywords

• E-government

• One-stop-government

Contents - 2 -

E-government – The future of federal and municipal institutions

Contents

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................... 3 2. What is e-government.......................................................................................... 5 2.1 Basic definitions................................................................................................... 5 3.2 What does an e-government portal have to achieve........................................... 6 3. The virtues of e-government............................................................................... 7 3.1 Administration..................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Politics................................................................................................................. 9 3.3 Economy.............................................................................................................. 10 3.4 The general public.............................................................................................. 10 4. Implementation problems................................................................................... 11 4.1 Basic prerequisites............................................................................................. 11 4.2 Legislative, regulative and security barriers..................................................... 12 4.2.1 Security, Privacy......................................................................................... 12 4.2.2 Legal considerations.................................................................................... 13 4.3 Technical barriers.............................................................................................. 13 4.3.1 Security keys and electronic signature ....................................................... 13 4.3.2 Disability Access.......................................................................................... 14 4.3.3 Foreign Language Access............................................................................ 14 4.4 Financial barriers............................................................................................... 15 4.5 Personnel barriers.............................................................................................. 15 4.6 Barriers concerning a national strategy and social barriers............................ 15 4.6.1 Social Barriers.............................................................................................. 15 4.6.2 Strategy of national concepts....................................................................... 16

5. The actual deficiencies concerning e-government........................................... 17 5.1 Strategy deficits.................................................................................................. 17 5.2 Insufficient Internet Accessibility....................................................................... 18 5.3 Bottlenecks: Finance, Law and Personnel........................................................ 18 6. International Comparison – Where does Germany stand?............................. 20 6.1 Europe................................................................................................................ 20 6.1.1 Italy.............................................................................................................. 21 6.1.2 Germany...................................................................................................... 22 6.2 International examples of e-government projects............................................. 23 6.2.1 Australia....................................................................................................... 23 6.2.2 USA.............................................................................................................. 23 6.2.3 New Zealand................................................................................................ 24

7. Development Strategies for Germany................................................................ 25 8. A practical approach: e-government and the City of Magdeburg................... 27 9. Conclusion........................................................................................................... 29 10. List of references............................................................................................... 30 11. Bibliography...................................................................................................... 31 Appendix– E-government examples and statistics................................................ 34

Introduction - 3 -


1. Introduction

“Interestingly, the impact of the Internet may be much greater on the nonprofits than on the for-

profit businesses” (Peter Drucker in “Sage Advice”, Business 2.0, August 22, 2000, p. 136)

In the year 2000 more than 300 million people worldwide had access to the Internet.1 In

Germany alone 19 million users of the Internet were counted in the same year.2

Society is standing at the threshold of a new era, an era in which the role of the Internet as a tool

for communication, information, work and personal issues will be powerful.

According to Peter Drucker, every institution in modern society “and increasingly government

agencies too, has to be globally competitive, even though most organizations will continue to be

local in their activities and in their markets.”3

Thus, there is an urgent need for administration to lay the foundations for a carefully planned

and strategic Internet representation. Nowadays, no municipal administration can afford not to

publish its own homepage, which will develop more and more into an investment in the future.

The digital revolution has resulted in a wide range of materials, from publications and databases

to actual government services that have already been put online by governmental units.

However, e-government is still in its infancy, but it is the term which will define the future of a

government, and which will represent one of the critical success factors of an administration.

The process of transforming administration into an ‘ever-accessible’, transparent virtual portal,

a service station for the general public, is inevitable.

1 Nua Internet Surveys, PwC, Fachabend zum Thema: “Internet und e-government – Die Zukunft von Stadt und kommunalen

Gebietskörperschaften”, 09.11.2000

2 Regulierungsbehörde für Post und Telekommunikation, PwC, Fachabend zum Thema: “Internet und e-government – Die Zukunft von Stadt und kommunalen Gebietskörperschaften”, 09.11.2000

3 Drucker, P. ”The next society“, The Economist, November 3rd, 2000, p.4

Introduction - 4 -


Within this process, not only have the ideas of virtual town halls4 and a transparent policy yet to

be realized, but also the role of government as well as the framework in which it is operating

need to be redefined.

4 The virtual representation of an administration in the Internet. Since the town hall epitomizes the head of any municipal institution,

it is used in this context as the symbol for a virtually present local government.

What is e-government - 5 -


2. What is e-government?

“Data must move, not the citizens.”

(Gerhard Schröder in his speech at the opening of the EXPO in Hanover, September 18, 2000)

2.1 Basic definitions

Electronic Government (e-government) refers to the delivery of information and services online

via the Internet or other digital media in order to ‘embed’ the general public and companies in

governmental acts and to guarantee smooth internal administrative co-operation.

Furthermore, it involves the “digital support of information, communication and transaction in

administration.”5

However, e-government is more than simply building websites and executing transactions. Its

final goal is to redefine administration in such a way that governmental processes are

transformed into citizen-centric processes, i.e. government is to become more easily accessible

to every citizen.

5 “Die Zukunft heißt e-government – Deutschlands Städte auf dem Weg zur virtuellen Verwaltung” PwC Deutsche Revision 8/2000,

p. 5

Thus, the central task of e-government can be defined as the strategic management of

information and communication that will bring citizens closer to their governments. This can

only be achieved by enabling constant dialog to take place between the public and government,

which implies guaranteeing an interactivity that will serve as a democratic outreach-facilitating

communication.

What is e-government - 6 -


2.2 What does an e-government portal have to achieve?

An e-government portal should offer a wide-range service spectrum in the form of a one-stop-

government and e-business in all stages of life.

One-stop-government denotes the possibility of reaching all institutions, governmental agencies,

authorities and administration via one single entry point on the Internet. In order to offer an

individual presentation without office boundaries, the e-government portal has to be

interconnected with other local administrative portals.

Thus, one-stop-government offers citizens tailor-made access to the desired services, data and

applications without them having to navigate around or to use several websites.

The virtues of e-government - 7 -


3. The virtues of e-government

“If we use the chances and possibilities which are offered by e-government, we will be able to

create a new kind of service culture.” (Brigitte Zypries, secretary of the state, July 6, 2001)

Human society is developing towards a knowledge society; “knowledge will be its key

resource” as it was vividly expressed by the economist Peter Drucker.6 Furthermore, it will be a

society in which the multimedia and their applications gain an important central role. New

forms of organizing and transmitting information are being created; with them new forms of

communication and co-operation are arising. These new technologies can provide tools for

dealing with economic and social tasks on a community and a regional basis.

Information is becoming necessary for survival in our modern society, with knowledge

embodying one of the most important and invaluable types of capital which are available.

“Information technology [...] is already having one hugely important effect: it is allowing

knowledge to spread near-instantly, and making it accessible to everyone.”7 Time is becoming

scarce and time-management is gaining fame as one of the magic keywords of the 21st century.

Flexibility, responsibility and accessibility are demanded from everyone – no matter whether as

employees or as citizens –, and people demand the same from government and administration.

The use of the Internet to deliver government information and services has become a growth

industry in the United States already.8

As experience shows, this development will strongly affect the European continent sooner or

later as the dramatic changes in e-commerce and e-trading have already done.

6 Drucker, P. “The next society”, The Economist, November 3rd, 2001, p. 4

7 ibid

8 West, D. “Assessing e-government: The Internet, Democracy and Service Delivery by State and Federal Government”, www.insidepolitics.org/egovtreport00.html



The resulting e-government revolution will not only offer the potential to reshape the public

sector but also the possibility of redesigning the relationship between citizens and government.

Above all, economic development will be enhanced by pursuing an e-government strategy and

implementing a virtual administration. Developing new technologies and giving more orders to

the IT-sector will bring about an increase in productivity and therefore result in a higher

economic output.

The following four areas of interest have to be distinguished: administration, politics, economy

and the general public.

3.1 Administration

For the administration, e-government will provide the opportunity of spreading important

information without having to store papers and thus having to cover additional storage costs. In

addition, the requests which reach the administration via the Internet will immediately reduce

the ‘stream of customers’ within an authority. Furthermore, the delivery of services online

benefits the administration, as it lowers costs and makes services more accessible.

However, e-government will not only increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the

administration due to a speeding up of administrative processes, but it will also result in a more

informed administration, improved internal communication, and probably higher motivation

and satisfaction of employees since the possibility of creating new work forms arises.9

Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that high investments will first have to be made in order to

implement an e-government portal.

Yet these costs can be reduced by financing part of the implementation processes and

afterwards part of the running costs by means of advertising on e-government websites.

9 Dr. Grabow, B. “Ergebnisse der Städteumfrage: virtuelle Rathäuser und Marktplätze in Stadt und Region“, KommOn 2001, p. 4



Using advertising by profit-making and non-profit-making corporations would benefit both the

government and the corporations. The government might be able to cover part of the

administrative costs by placing advertisements on its websites. This will certainly have the

elegant side effect of promoting local businesses and institutions, which will almost

automatically constitute a kind of location marketing. The corporations will reach many citizens

and that way also many potential customers, by being directly linked to the e-government pages

via advertising. An additional benefit will arise for the citizens who no longer have to spend so

much time searching the relevant websites for requested services, if they are offered direct links

to the corresponding companies and institutions.

3.2 Politics

E-government will generate a better access to and a faster flow of information, which will not

only increase the effectiveness of political work but will also counter the current political

annoyance among some sections of the population. Furthermore, communication between

government and citizens as well as between government and administration will be improved.10

The political leadership will get a faster feedback from far more citizens, and will be

encouraged to improve its information sharing and opinion gathering systems. However, for

politics e-government will also be linked with the obligation to guarantee continuous hardware-

support and the responsibility of ensuring that people are connected to them and to each other.

Furthermore, it will be “the responsibility of the government to educate employees to work with

the emerging technologies to further benefit their citizens and regions.”11

10 Dr. Grabow, B. “Ergebnisse der Städteumfrage: virtuelle Rathäuser und Marktplätze in Stadt und Region“, KommOn 2001, p. 4

11 Steuker, B. “E-government: Rethinking Government”, Verwaltung ans Netz – Neue Medien halten Einzug in die öffentlichen Verwaltungen, Springer Verlag, 2001, p. 196



3.3 Economy

For the economy, e-government will enhance location marketing, and therefore bring about a

strengthening in the location competition of communities and countries. Additionally, the

quality of administrative services for companies will be improved and the networks of

enterprises will be reinforced.

In addition, the IT-sector will be propelled forward by the new flood of orders for the

implementation and maintenance of administrative websites flowing in from government

agencies. Research and development in the relevant industries will thus be encouraged,

resulting in an increased competitiveness, a development which is self-enforcing.

3.4. The general public

Finally, the general public will benefit from governmental services that are offered via a virtual

portal, as they will be able to reach the administration every time from every location around

the world. The accessibility of administrative services will be simplified and their quality will

be improved.

The public will save time, money and energy when they have to contact the administration, and

they will be encouraged to make use of their right to inform themselves about political acts,

administrative procedures and all other community relevant issues.

Additionally, the public’s growing desire for participation and transparency of government

would be taken into account, since their opportunities for participation will be increased.

Implementation problems - 11 -


4. Implementation problems

“The improvement of the service quality cannot be gained by a one-to-one transformation of the

old administrative workflows to the Internet.” (Brigitte Zypries, secretary of state, March 21,

2001)

4.1 Basic prerequisites

Implementing an e-government system will not only have far-reaching consequences but does

also demand certain prerequisites, which have to be satisfied if the system is not to be doomed

to failure from the beginning. First of all, it is important to derive a specific implementation

strategy, which graphs all necessary steps that have to be undertaken versus a time basis.

Basically, the best strategy will fail if the necessary acceptance within the administration itself

and within the population of the community or country has not been successfully created.

Furthermore, it has to be taken into account that the system will need to be at least partially

adjusted to the respective working habits within an administration and vice versa: workflows

within the administration will have to be redefined, and new working rules will probably have

to be introduced. However, as mentioned previously, the adjustment of the system to the

particular demands of an administration is not enough to guarantee a successful implementation

of e-government. In addition, it is vitally important to define uniform administrative standards

for data processing, including the use of the same software for the administrative network and

databanks.

External and internal training for civil servants who have to operate the system also represents

an important issue when setting up any e-government strategy, as it involves considerable costs

and consumes valuable time.



As can be concluded from the previously stated prerequisites, the major risks of pursuing any e-

government strategy include acceptance problems, a lack of compatibility with other systems of

administration, as well as a strong dependence upon the partner corporations that develop the

necessary software or maintain the hardware components. The last point reflects the need for

strong, flexible partners who have a vital interest in the success of and a moral obligation

towards the whole project and who are quick to adopt new technologies, do not hesitate to put

new ideas into practice and are open to the needs of the administration.

There are still many other barriers which will slow down the realization of a virtual government

portal, barriers such as legislation and regulation, finance, technology, security, personnel, and

the barriers concerning the strategy of national concepts.

4.2 Legislative, regulative and security barriers

4.2.1 Security, Privacy

Since the Internet is virtually unregulated, many questions arise concerning the security and

privacy of disclosing personal information on websites. However, in order to ensure privacy,

national and international regulations have to be considered. Thus, security and privacy

warnings or protection devices will definitely have to be implemented on government websites

(privacy statement), particularly on those where users can or need to send personal information

through the site.



4.2.2 Legal considerations

As discussed earlier, the ultimate goal of e-government is that of enabling the public to

participate in political processes and to manage all their correspondence with the administration

(including tasks such as ordering a new passport, paying for parking fines or even applying for

citizenship) via the Internet.

Since the civil law explicitly demands the written form for such documents,12 legally valid

communication at Internet portals can only be guaranteed if the relevant formal requirements in

the civil law are adjusted in accordance with the new technologies.

In the EU countries the form of the written requirements for certain documents can be met in

many cases by electronic signatures. This is mainly because the EU governments have recently

introduced common frameworks for electronic signatures and e-commerce.

Furthermore, smooth transaction processes between administration and citizens definitely

require the acceptance of credit cards, as has long since been common in e-commerce.

However, this can only be happen if the relevant administrative rules that regulate payments are

altered accordingly.

4.3 Technical barriers

4.3.1 Security keys and electronic signature

A first technical challenge arises due to the attempt to organize the websites in a way that as

little personal data as possible is transferred via the Internet.

12 formal requirements in the civil laws comprise BGB § 126a (for the written form) and BGB § 126a for the electronic form



Therefore, adequate IT-security concepts will have to be developed in order to preserve the

integrity, privacy and authenticity of information supplied and of transaction processes, which

could be accomplished by using security keys and electronic signature systems.

4.3.2 Disability Access

In order to really pursue the final goal of e-government, i.e. reaching virtually all citizens via the

Internet, and thus granting them the right to participate in politics to a certain degree, disability

access to all administrative and governmental websites is vitally important. “If a site is ill-

equipped to provide access to individuals with disabilities, the site fails in its attempt to reach

out to as many people as possible. To be recorded as accessible to the disabled, the site has to

have either a TTY (Text Telephone) or TDD (Telephonic Device for the Deaf) phone number,

which allows hearing-impaired individuals to contact the agency by phone.”13

4.3.3 Foreign Language Access

The ongoing process of globalization and the resulting intercultural migrations lead to a

mingling of nationalities within one country. Of course, e-government strategies have to take

into account the different native languages of their citizens. In order to help these immigrants to

integrate into a foreign society and culture, the administrative web-pages have to contain

foreign language access.

13 West, D. “Assessing e-government: The Internet, Democracy and Service Delivery by State and Federal Governments”,

www.insidepolitics.org/egovtreport00.html



4.4 Financial barriers

Due to the growing demands in the public sector and the constantly decreasing financial

margins of public budgets, many communities have to face a nearly insoluble financial problem.

IT-projects already consume a great deal of public money, and many local administrations quite

simply have to contend with other basic problems, which causes them to postpone such an

ambitious, ‘visionary’ project as e-government.

4.5 Personnel barriers

The desired interactivity can only be achieved if email addresses are available on government

websites. However, these email addresses will only serve their purpose if emails are promptly

read and answered. Thus, additional personnel are needed, a fact which runs counter to the

financial difficulties of communities and federal agencies, and the adverse contractual tariff

terms for employees, which do not allow for pay differentials based on education, qualities and

qualifications.

4.6 Barriers concerning a national strategy and social barriers

4.6.1 Social Barriers

The new media are definitely going to change society. Knowledge can be considered as capital.

Actually, there is a danger of splitting society into “user” and “loser”,14 into people who are

14 Kraft, A. “MEDIA@Komm Esslingen: flexible e-government Lösungen aus Anwendersicht“, p. 3



intellectually and financially able to use the new media, and those who do not have this

possibility.

At the normative level, concerns have already been expressed about the gap between

technology haves and have-nots (the so-called "digital divide"), and whether e-government will

exacerbate inequalities among citizens. With studies indicating that women, minorities, senior

citizens and the poor lack access to computers and the Internet, there is a need to chart what

services are ending up online, and how citizen access is being affected.15

4.6.2 Strategy of national concepts

In order to establish e-government as a sustained national project, a lasting political investment

is needed. This might be carried out by a central committee for coordination which combines

the role of political leader and organizer of collaboration among different authorities, industry

and science.

One-stop-government clearly demands a national entity, which in turn requires that

communities and federal government co-operate in order to be accessible via a single Internet

portal.

15 West, D. “Assessing e-government: The Internet, Democracy and Service Delivery by State and Federal Governments”,


The actual deficiencies concerning e-government - 17 -


5. The actual deficiencies concerning e-government

“For many authorities, the topic e-government is new ground.” (Dr. Dirk Henze, president of

the BSI)

5.1 Strategy deficits

What is definitely needed for the implementation of a seamless e-government network that links

and employs all official agencies and institutions, and provides a one-stop-government for the

public, is a proper, timely strategy that considers all factors, interacting with the redefinition of

administration. Without strategic planning and effective risk management the high investments

in technical infrastructure and human resources that e-government demands might be lost

investments which will not yield any rationalization and quality effects.

However, it becomes apparent that only about 20 out of 200 German cities have formulated

such a specific e-government strategy, 16 while hardly any time-management or personnel

planning is involved in current e-government activities. Furthermore, most of the

administrations polled do not possess clear information about the expectations of the public

concerning the e-government service of their city.17

Thus, the high expectations concerning e-government are not solidly backed up by strategic

planning, but rather are opposed by a lack of conceptual framework and explicit, detailed plans

of action. Due to this strategy deficit, politicians and administrations run into danger of being

infected by the apparent Internet-hype, and push for short-term success with the introduction of

easy-to-realize e-government solutions rather than considering the long-term.

16 “Die Zukunft heißt e-government – Deutschlands Städte auf dem Weg zur virtuellen Verwaltung“, PwC, p. 7

17 ibid



5.2 Insufficient Accessibility to the Internet

The systematic connection of employees with modern digital media is the main concern of

many companies, and it is also an essential prerequisite for learning the professional use of the

new media and overcoming internal resistance. Of course, the same can be applied to the

administration. However, the scarce distribution of e-mail accounts with access to the Internet

among civil servants shows that much still has to be done in this area. In more than 69 % of 200

German cities less than one quarter of all employees have access to the Internet.18

5.3 Bottlenecks: Finance, Law and Personnel

Among the biggest obstacles to a sustained extension of Internet-services offered by local and

federal administrations are: the lack of financial margins of the communities’ budgets, the

insufficient formulation of the legal framework and the lack of qualified and skilled employees.

€ 2.5 - 3.5 billion will be needed in the public sector within the next three to five years in order

to put into place effective and appropriate e-government solutions.19

However, only one third of 200 German cities have developed a financing strategy for

implementing e-government, 20 since the lack of financial margins has discouraged most

communities from setting up any proper planning for it at all.

Furthermore, the still unsatisfactory level of co-operation between private and public investors

in Germany prevents a smooth development towards virtual administration. Public-Private

Partnerships in the form of co-operation or operating models are rare in Germany compared to

many other European countries like Great Britain.

18 “Die Zukunft heißt e-government – Deutschlands Städte auf dem Weg zur virtuellen Verwaltung“, PwC, pp.14f

19 ibid

20 ibid



This makes it even harder to finance such an ambitious project as e-government.

A second central bottleneck can be found within the legal framework, which does not fit in with

the demands of e-government as regards the form of the written requirements.21 According to

German legislation the legal validity of certain acts when administration and citizens interact,

depends upon the fulfillment of several requirements, of which the written requirement is the

strongest one. Thus, the introduction of administrative services online calls for making about

3,700 German laws (Federal Department of Commerce) capable of being used on the Internet.

This represents, of course, a major task for politicians who will have to review and rewrite

legislation in order to authorize the administration to continue with the virtualization of

government.

A third central bottleneck can be described as a lack of adequately trained personnel, which can

be traced back to the strict tariff contracts and to the additional requirements that have to be met

by the employees. Suddenly, former back office workers see themselves confronted with direct

contact with the public via the Internet. This new situation demands new methods of

communication such as the comprehensible explanation of administrative issues to members of

the public avoiding the use of legal jargon. Thus, proper training and a different hiring policy

will be needed within governmental institutions.

In addition, the previously mentioned strict tariffs grant civil servants a certain level of payment

which is mainly determined by age, social status and position, but does not allow for quality or

skill payments. Thus, the famous phenomena of ‘moral hazard’22 and ‘adverse selection’ can be

observed in governmental agencies and administrative institutions. The administration lacks

qualified personnel, since highly qualified employees choose rather to work in industry, where

they will receive higher wages.

21 A requirement that demands the written form for certain documents in order to have them gain legal validity. (See “E-government

– the future of federal and municipal institutions”, p. 13)

22 Moral hazard is a problem of information asymmetry. It comprises ex-post strategic behavior, and thus refers to opportunistic hidden action after the formulation of a contract. (Reekie, D. “Managerial Economics”, Prentice Hall, 1995, p. 68)

International comparison - Where does Germany stand? - 20 -


6. International comparison – Where does Germany stand?

“We will only be successful if e-government is dealt with as the chief issue by the federal

government, the authorities. We not only need changes in technology but also in our heads.”

(Brigitte Zypries, secretary of state, July 09, 2001)

Ironically, currently successful e-government projects are typically found in regions or countries

where there has been an industrial decline. For governments economic development is claimed

to be a strong motivator to encourage and enforce e-government projects. Since it is a basic task

for governments to ensure the economic well-being of a country and its citizens, the close

relationship between economic performance and e-government may explain why regions in

economic decline have often been the first ones to adopt new technologies and to be innovative

in the implementation of e-government systems.

6.1 Europe

Today, most European governments publish information on their own websites. Many of them

have already started putting “transactions, such as the payment of parking fines, online but these

are single-agency transactions, providing only one function of government.”23

There has hardly been any process-reengineering or integration of transaction between multiple

agencies in order to achieve a better way of accessing governments on their way towards a one-

stop-government.

23 Steuker, B. ”E-government: Rethinking Government“. Verwaltung ans Netz – Neue Medien halten Einzug in die öffentlichen

Verwaltungen, Springer 2001, p. 186



During the last two years, and especially in the aftermath of the Lisbon Summit in 2000, when

the European Commission defined a universal European e-government strategy and outlined

specific targets that each country needs to achieve, European administrations realized the

importance of developing e-government portals, and therefore set out strategy papers to define

these services. However, the gap between what governments aim to achieve and where they

currently stand is still large.

6.1.1 Italy

The Italian Ministry of Finance is engaged in one of the most successful European e-

government projects. In a collaboration of IBM, Sogei (an Italian government IT company) and

the Ministry of Finance, the process of filing taxes was put online, which itself is nothing new.

However, this project is unique since it is one of the first ones in Europe that uses digital

signature legislation and technology.24

The new ability to file a tax declaration online helped the Ministry of Finance to cut costs, and –

due to the opportunity for the citizens to bring their several tax declarations (e.g. in their

functions as company owners and as private citizens) all together under one entry in one online

form – reduced annual tax declarations from 42 million to 23 million.

Another interesting example of how government can work alongside e-commerce has been

given by the city of Bologna. The municipal government of Bologna decided to share one

website together with the financial industry and a major supermarket chain. This means for the

citizens that they can now visit one website to pay fines, to do the shopping or to visit a bank.

This project shows how a portal can combine e-government functions with e-commerce, and

represents an important step towards one-stop-government.

24 ibid, p. 192



6.1.2 Germany

Considering the four main developmental steps of digital administration

1. Internet as plain “shop window”

2. Offering electronic forms

3. Possibility of online-transactions

4. Having the general public participate in the political process,

it becomes obvious that Germany still has a long way to go until its e-government system

achieves its final goal of a one-stop-government including tailored access to all necessary data

and applications.

For the time being, only 2,500 German town halls have their own homepage; 80% of these

homepages are plain “shop windows”, which do not allow for any interaction, only 20% offer

the possibility of downloading forms, and only 3% are interactive (November 2001).25

Although most German cities are working at building a virtual town hall, they are still occupied

with laying the foundations.

On the other hand, the Deutsche Post project, which has the Deutsche Post work together with

the government in order to provide online facilities to small and medium-sized businesses,

demonstrates that post offices can generally succeed in taking an active role in the e-

government process, because “no other organization has better access to, and the trust of,

citizens.”26

25 Backes, H.. “Portale – singulärer Ansatz oder vernetzter Föderalismus“, KommOn 2001, p. 2

26 Steuker, B. “E-government: Rethinking Government“. Verwaltung ans Netz – Neue Medien halten Einzug in die öffentlichen Verwaltungen, Springer 2001, p. 193



6.2 International examples of e-government projects

6.2.1 Australia

Australia, known for its innovation, has created an interesting working model for implementing

e-government. The Australian government not only publishes its e-government strategy and its

final goals but also the milestones and the overall development of the project on the Internet. In

this way, it informs the public about the actual situation, and also puts itself under the pressure

to pursue its strategy to the planned extent within the given time horizon.

6.2.2 USA

It is out of the USA that some of the more visible though but not necessarily the most

technically advanced examples of e-government have emerged.

However, concerning security, privacy and disability access the American government portal27

is one of the better-equipped ones compared with other countries.

Additionally, it already offers a substantial amount of federal forms such as Official Bankruptcy

Forms, International Trade Administration Forms, Public Health Services Forms or

Immigration and Naturalization Service Forms28 online.

One of the major challenges that many US administrations face is service provision. The State

of Arizona has taken the lead with a project that allows citizens to renew their motor vehicle

licensing via the Internet or by telephone. This project has yielded huge cost reductions for the

State of Arizona that in turn could reduce the cost of renewing the license from $7 to $2.

27 www.firstgov.gov/index.html

28 www.fedforms.gov/scripts



6.2.3 New Zealand

New Zealand is a country which pursues one of the more challenging e-government strategies

aimed at revolutionizing its administrative and policy sector by adopting the new technologies

in virtually all authorities, agencies and institutions, and creating a multi-channel government

portal with all public services being offered online.

The New Zealand government has published not only a detailed vision, 29 which can be

compared to a well-defined mission statement, but also a distinct strategy concerning e-

government.

According to this strategy, New Zealand will use the Internet as “the dominant means of

enabling ready access to government information, services and processes”30 by as soon as 2004.

Furthermore, its e-government strategy encourages a very close collaboration with the Ministry

of Economic Development on e-commerce, and the Department of Labor on fighting the digital

divide,31 which is not only an interesting but also a very promising approach.

29 “New Zealand e-government Programme – Strategy”, 26 April 2001, www.e-government.govt.nz

30 ibid

31 New divisions in society that can be created by e-government between those who have the skills and the tools to use the new technologies and to participate in e-government and those who have not. (See “E-government – the future of federal and municipal institutions”, p. 16)

Development strategies for Germany - 25 -


7. Development strategies for Germany

“From central government to political partnership – that is the way we have to go”

(Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, May 14, 2001)

The complexity of the implementation of e-government, which can be compared to an extensive

infrastructure measure requires a national strategy. To reach this goal, the initiative

“BundOnline 2005” was brought into being. This initiative not only provides a national

framework, but has also set up an e-government strategy for Germany.

In accordance with this strategy, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder announced in September 2000 at

the Expo in Hanover that by 2005 all governmental services capable of being used on the

Internet are to be accessible via the world-wide-web.

The virtual German government portal is to be built up in three developmental stages, of which

the first stage has already been brought to life at the CeBIT 2001. Within this stage the basic

Internet portal (www.bund.de) has been established, and can now be used for the core tasks,

“searching” and “finding”. Thus, the portal is presented to the users in the form of a search

engine, which provides databank information on more than 630 institutions.32 Step by step, the

lower governmental authorities as well as large museums and libraries will be included.

During the second stage the databank will be further developed. In addition, the areas of

responsibility of the different authorities will be explained in such a way that specific questions

can be answered precisely, and that the service in question – if it can already be provided via the

Internet - is offered online. Furthermore, the second stage involves the development of a central

online platform for payments of all kinds. As in a finance department, it should be possible to

complete the payment processes for different institutions and products.

32 Dr. Held, B. “Das Internet-Portal des Bundes“, Electronic Office XI, Innovation, Spring 2001, p. 192

Development strategies for Germany - 26 -


By 2005 the third developmental stage is to be completed. Until then, all governmental and

administrative services capable of being used on the Internet are to be available on the virtual

portal of the German government. Electronic services for all stages of life are to be offered

under a single entry.

As already explained previously, it is still a long way to one-stop-government, requiring many

changes, adjustments and the introduction of revolutionary technologies.

The main points that have to be achieved along the way to virtual town halls are listed below in

a condensed form:

• creation of standards and compatibilities of signature cards

• coordination of card users and sellers

• redesigning the laws that demand the written form

• standardizing administrative processes

• developing system architectures of platforms for municipal online-service

• developing basic concepts for data-protection

• better coordination between federal government, Länder and communities

A practical approach: e-government and the city of Magdeburg - 27 -


8. A practical approach – e-government and the city of Magdeburg

“We are working hard at implementing a central server providing forms and documents. Thus,

the public will first have the opportunity to download forms. As soon as it will have been

decided on all details concerning privacy and security, it will be possible to immediately return

the forms to the administration via the Internet.” (Dr. Lutz Trümper, mayor of Magdeburg, July

17, 2001)

As many communities and administrations do, the city of Magdeburg presents itself in the

Internet with its own website (www.magdeburg.de). This official Internet portal is explicitly

structured in seven main parts: city, economy, traffic, science and research, tourism, leisure time

& sports and news & service.

Searching this site, citizens can inform themselves about virtually everything concerning the

city of Magdeburg, from geographical data, economic strategies, historical and political facts

and figures to the structure of administration, the results of recent city council meetings and up

and coming cultural events.

Though www.magdeburg.de represents a well-structured, informative and attractive website, it

does not yet really offer more than other city portals. It still lacks possibilities for interaction,

and is thus currently a mere ‘Internet shop-window’, which displays information and data of all

kinds but does not supply the public with the opportunity to download electronic forms or to

carry out online transactions.

However, this cannot be considered as a poor performance since, as shown previously, e-

government is still in its infancy and interactive government portals are still a very rare

exception.

A practical approach: e-government and the city of Magdeburg - 28 -


Magdeburg’s government and administration is indeed working very hard at implementing an e-

government which allows for online transactions and integrates all major authorities under the

official city portal. It follows a strategy of integrating multimedia components into its Internet

presentation, which aims at not only providing necessary information material but also at

making a unique three-dimensional interactive world available that will allow users to get to

know the city in a different way. Within the next few years, the city’s official website is to be

developed into an Internet portal which combines a platform for information, e-government

applications, e-business and networks for the general public. The latter represents a podium for

the citizens, registered societies and clubs to articulate and portray themselves.

With the help of a central server providing forms and documents to download or fill in directly,

administrative services will be virtualized so that all citizens gain the opportunity to deal with

all official procedures and correspondence online.

The public will be provided with an easy, fast, trustworthy and dedicated connection to

administration that will make it possible to transfer administrative processes, such as applying

for public housing allowances, registering an enterprise, applying for a new passport or even

naturalization, from the authorities to the individual’s home or office.

Furthermore, the city of Magdeburg is considering adding a virtual, interactive city map to their

prospective e-government portal, which will link the topography to data bases of upcoming

events, authorities, restaurants, etc. with their addresses.

In this ambitious strategy, the city of Magdeburg is collaborating with several local businesses

in the IT- and marketing sector. These companies have formed a committee that pursues the

challenging mission of implementing a competitive e-government portal for the capital of

Saxony-Anhalt.

Conclusion - 29 -


9. Conclusion – The future of e-government

"It's time to get out of line and get online." (Several federal U.S. states marketing e-government)

Without doubt, e-government provides administration and politics with the chance to improve

their accessibility and image, offer a better transparency and modernize administrative and

political processes.

However, currently a large gap can still be observed between what is yet to be achieved and

what has already been done or planned.

Given that e-government has the potential to renegotiate the social contracts between

government and public sector employees by its impact on work rules and the kinds of workers

needed, it is no surprise that many government agencies have been slow to embrace new

technology.

However, most local administrations have already realized how important it will be for the

future success of a community to set up an appropriate e-government strategy and start adopting

new technologies, introducing new workflows and publishing their own websites. Under federal

leadership which is working hard at developing a national e-government strategy, and which

aims to offer a wide range of administrative services online by 2005, e-government is changing

from a visionary project to a realistic and necessary one which will determine the global

competitiveness of the German economy.

References - 30 -


10. List of References

Drucker, Peter. ”The next society“, The Economist. November 3rd, 2000 Grabow, Dr. Busso. “Ergebnisse der Städteumfrage: ’virtuelle Rathäuser und Marktplätze in

Stadt und Region’“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Held, Dr. B. “Das Internet-Portal des Bundes“. Optimierung von Geschäfts- und IT-Prozessen.

Electronic Office XI. Der Know-How-Pool. Innovation. Gräfelfing, Spring 2001 Kraft, Andreas. “MEDIA@Komm Esslingen: flexible E-government Lösungen aus Anwender-

sicht“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Steuker, Bart. “E-government: Rethinking Government“. Verwaltung ans Netz – Neue Medien

halten Einzug in die öffentlichen Verwaltungen. Springer Verlag, 2001 West, Darrell M. “Assessing E-government: The Internet, Democracy, and Service Delivery by

State and Federal Governments”, September 2000 (www.insidepolitics.org/egovtreport00.html)

Die Zukunft heißt E-government – Deutschlands Städte auf dem Weg zur virtuellen

Verwaltung. Ergebnisse einer Umfrage von PwC Deutsche Revision mit dem Deutschen Städte- und Gemeindebund. Industriestudie. WIBERA, August 2000

“Nua Internet Surveys“, PwC, Fachabend zum Thema: “Internet und E-government – Die

Zukunft von Stadt und kommunalen Gebietskörperschaften”, 09.11.2000 “Regulierungsbehörde für Post und Telekommunikation“, PwC, Fachabend zum Thema:

“Internet und E-government – Die Zukunft von Stadt und kommunalen Gebietskörperschaften”, 09.11.2000

www.bsi.bund.de/egov. “E-government-Handbuch. Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informa-

tionstechnik“, BSI, December 2001 www.e-government.govt.nz. “New Zealand e-government Programme – Strategy”. April 26th, 2001 www.fedforms.gov/scripts. “FedForms - Agency Forms Management Web Sites”. January 15th, 2002 www.firstgov.gov/index.html. January 12th, 2002

Bibliography - 31 -


11. Bibliography

11.1 Printed Publications Ahrens, Dr. Harald. “Meldeauskünfte über das Internet –eine sichere Sache“. KommOn 2001.

Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Backes, Helmut. “Portale – singulärer Ansatz oder vernetzter Föderalismus“. KommOn 2001.

Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗

Berndt, Ralph. (Publisher) E-Business Management. 1st ed. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York:

Springer Verlag, 2001 Brisch, Klaus M. “Praxisrelevante Rechtsfragen beim Aufbau kommunaler Internet-Portale“.

KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Bütow, Steffi; Floeting, Holger. Elektronische Stadt- und Wirtschaftsinformationssysteme in

den deutschen Städten. 1st ed. Stuttgart. Deutscher Sparkassen Verlag, 1999 Crook, Jonathan N., Reekie, Duncan W. Managerial Economics – A European Text. 4th ed.

Hemel Hempstead. Prentice Hall, 1995 Daly, James. “Sage Advice. Exclusive Interview: Peter Drucker”. Business 2.0., August 22nd,

2000 Drucker, Peter. The Essential Peter Drucker. Harperbusiness, 2001 Drucker, Peter. “The Next Society”. The Economist. November 3rd, 2001∗ Ehrhardt, Dr. Ralf. “Einsatz Digitaler Signaturen in kommunalen Prozessen“. KommOn 2001.

Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗

Engel, Dr. Andreas. “Strategisches Informations- und Kommunikationsmanagement als zentrale

Aufgabe des Electronic Government bei der Stadt Köln“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗

Grabow, Dr. Busso. “Ergebnisse der Städteumfrage: ’virtuelle Rathäuser und Marktplätze in

Stadt und Region’“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Harnisch, Gerhard. “Von Insel zu Netzen – Vorstellung einer kommunalen Handlungsstrategie

E-government“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗

∗ Conference paper

Owing to the fact that e-government is a quite young topic, there is not much printed material available. Thus, this paper mainly relies on conferences, public speeches of politicians, seminars and web-sites.

Bibliography - 32 -


Kraft, Andreas. “MEDIA@Komm Esslingen: flexible E-government Lösungen aus Anwender-

sicht“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Kubicek, Herbert. “Versuch und Irrtum – Es gibt kaum noch eine Stadt in Deutschland, die

nicht im Internet zu finden ist. Der Weg von der Website zum One-stop-government ist aber noch weit.“. Der Gemeinderat spezial, Sonderheft Kommunen im 21. Jahrhundert, August 1999

Lüttich, Hans-Jürgen; Rautenstrauch, Claus. (editors) Verwaltungsinformatik 2000 - 3. Interna-

tionale Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik. 1st ed. Halle/Saale. mdv Mitteldeutscher Verlag GmbH, 2000

Mankiw, Gregory M. Macroeconomics. 4th ed. New York. Worth Publishers, 1999 Müller, Wolfgang. “Die Mythen der schönen Arbeitswelt”. Focus, 34/2001 Picot, Arnold; Quadt, Hans-Peter. (editors) Verwaltung ans Netz – Neue Medien halten Einzug

in die öffentlichen Verwaltungen. 1st ed. Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer Verlag GmbH, 2001

Sauerland, Wolfgang. “Internetbasiertes Informationssystem für Bürger, Politik und

Verwaltung“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗ Schmitzer, Dr. Benno. “Transaktionen zwischen dem Bürger und der Kommune – organisa-

torische, technische und fachliche Voraussetzungen am Beispiel Einwohnermelde-wesen“. KommOn 2001. Erlangen, November 7th/8th, 2001∗

Steuker, Bart. “E-government: Rethinking Government“. Verwaltung ans Netz – Neue Medien

halten Einzug in die öffentlichen Verwaltungen. Springer Verlag, 2001 Die Zukunft heißt E-government – Deutschlands Städte auf dem Weg zur virtuellen

Verwaltung. Ergebnisse einer Umfrage von PwC Deutsche Revision mit dem Deutschen Städte- und Gemeindebund. Industriestudie. WIBERA, August 2000

„Erste Formulare und Ratsinformationssystem RAIS unter magdeburg.de – Neuer Service der

Landeshauptstadt im Internet“. Landeshauptstadt Magdeburg: Presseinformationen. Magdeburg, January 10th, 2002

Internet und E-government – Die Zukunft von Stadt und kommunalen Gebietskörperschaften.

Fachabend zum v.g. Thema. WIBERA, August 2000∗ „Landeshauptstadt Magdeburg modernisiert ihren Web-Auftritt“. Landeshauptstadt Magdeburg:

Presseinformationen. Magdeburg, July 17th, 2001 Optimierung von Geschäftsabläufen und Verwaltung P+P. Electronic Office X. Der Know-

How-Pool. Innovation. Gräfelfing, Fall 2000

Bibliography - 33 -


Optimierung von Geschäfts- und IT-Prozessen. Electronic Office XI. Der Know-How-Pool.

Innovation. Gräfelfing, Spring 2001 11.2 Websites∗∗ West, Darrell M. “Assessing E-government: The Internet, Democracy, and Service Delivery by

State and Federal Governments”, September 2000 (www.insidepolitics.org/egovtreport00.html)

www.australia.gov.au. “Government Services for Australians” January 3rd, 2002 www.az.gov. January 3rd, 2002 www.bsi.bund.de/egov. “E-government-Handbuch. Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informa-

tionstechnik“, BSI, December 2001 www.bund.de. “Das Dienstleistungsportal des Bundes”. January 3rd, 2002 www.digitale-region.de. “Lebenslagen und Bürgerberatung“. January 3rd, 2002 www.e-government.govt.nz. “New Zealand e-government Programme – Strategy”. April 26th, 2001 www.egovlinks.com. January 3rd, 2002 www.europa.eu.int. January 3rd, 2002 www.fedforms.gov/scripts. “FedForms - Agency Forms Management Web Sites”. January 15th, 2002 www.firstgov.gov/index.html. January 12th, 2002 www.governo.it. “Governo Italiano – Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri”. January 3rd, 2002 www.kid-magdeburg.de. December 21st, 2001 www.magdeburg.de. “Die offizielle Website der Landeshaupstadt Magdeburg“. January 3rd, 2002

∗∗ Since mainly official government websites or companies’ homepages, which are usually designed in a cooperative effort, were used

for this paper, it was impossible to state the author of all websites referred to.

Appendix - 34 -


Appendix – E government examples and statistics

The following websites reveal some examples of how certain e-government applications have

already been put into practice.

Among other things, links to the official website of the City of Magdeburg as well as entry

pages to the portals of the Australian, American, German and Italian governments, which this

paper referred to, are attached.

www.australia.gov.au

www.az.gov

www.bund.de

www.digitale-region.de

www.e-government.govt.nz

www.europa.eu.int

www.fedforms.gov/scripts

www.firstgov.gov/index.html

www.governo.it

www.magdeburg.de


On the following pages a table set up by the world markets research centre can be found.

It discloses statistical data that allows for comparisons among the nations of the world

concerning their stage of implementation of e-government systems.

1 0 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 0

GLOBAL E-GOVERNMENT SURVEY

APPENDIX

Note: The following table shows e-government rank orderings for the 196 countries.

Table A-1 Complete E-Government Rankings by Country

Country %

US 57.2

Taiwan 52.5

Australia 50.7

Canada 49.6

UK 47.1

Ireland 46.9

Israel 46.2

Singapore 43.4

Germany 40.6

Finland 40.2

France 40.1

Lesotho 40.0

St. Kitts 40.0

Vatican 40.0

Bahamas 39.7

Malaysia 39.0

Iceland 38.3

Belgium 38.0

Bolivia 38.0

Argentina 38.0

Italy 37.8

Switzerland 37.7

Slovenia 37.6

St. Lucia 37.0

Denmark 37.0

New Zealand 36.8

Saudi Arabia 36.8

Austria 36.8

Norway 36.5

Estonia 36.2

Peru 36.1

Mauritania 36.0

Morocco 36.0

Luxembourg 35.9

El Salvador 35.6

Armenia 35.3

Lithuania 35.1

Japan 34.9

Bulgaria 34.5

Country %

Greece 34.2

South Africa 34.2

Bosnia 34.1

Brazil 33.8

Latvia 33.8

Iran 33.4

St. Vincent 33.4

South Korea 33.4

Mexico 33.1

Egypt 33.0

Hungary 33.0

Spain 32.8

Philippines 32.8

Vietnam 32.8

Georgia 32.7

Nepal 32.7

Brunei 32.7

Chile 32.6

Netherlands 32.6

Croatia 32.6

Maldives 32.5

Russia 32.5

Jamaica 32.3

Mongolia 32.3

Libya 32.0

Poland 32.0

Slovakia 32.0

Djibouti 32.0

Antigua 32.0

India 31.8

Lebanon 31.3

Thailand 30.8

Cyprus-Republic 30.8

Guyana 30.8

Romania 30.7

Rwanda 30.7

Albania 30.7

Ecuador 30.7

Costa Rica 30.6

Country %

Barbados 30.6

Ethiopia 30.5

Ukraine 30.4

Turkey 30.3

China 30.2

Tajikistan 30.0

Vanuatu 30.0

DR Congo 30.0

Lao PDR 30.0

Indonesia 30.0

Sri Lanka 29.8

Macedonia (FYR) 29.7

Cambodia 29.6

Cook Islands 29.5

Sweden 29.4

Mauritius 29.4

Monaco 29.3

Oman 29.1

Paraguay 29.0

Pakistan 28.8

Algeria 28.7

Kuwait 28.7

Bangladesh 28.5

Panama 28.4

Uruguay 28.4

Jordan 28.1

Malawi 28.0

Micronesia 28.0

Palau 28.0

Samoa 28.0

Turkmenistan 28.0

Bhutan 28.0

Guatemala 28.0

San Marino 27.7

Nicaragua 27.7

Seychelles 27.6

Malta 27.6

Honduras 27.3

Dominican Republic 27.2

continued

1 1 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 1


Country %

Sierra Leone 27.0

Myanmar 26.8

Yemen 26.7

Eritrea 26.7

Kenya 26.7

Liechtenstein 26.6

Angola 26.4

Bahrain 26.2

Belarus 26.2

United Arab Emirates 26.1

Czech Republic 26.1

Ghana 26.1

Madagascar 26.0

Namibia 26.0

Senegal 26.0

Suriname 26.0

Togo 26.0

Grenada 26.0

Kyrgyzstan 26.0

Colombia 25.7

Botswana 25.3

Cuba 24.6

Fiji 24.4

Trinidad 24.4

Niue 24.0

Syria 24.0

Tuvalu 24.0

Country %

Cape Verde 24.0

Iraq 24.0

North Korea 24.0

Tunisia 23.8

Belize 23.8

Sudan 23.0

Gabon 22.7

Zambia 22.5

Cameroon 22.2

Sao Tome 22.0

Moldova 21.6

Papua New Guinea 21.6

Tonga 21.3

Azerbaijan 20.5

Uganda 20.5

Mali 20.0

Somalia 20.0

Uzbekistan 20.0

Chad 20.0

Andorra 20.0

Comoros 20.0

Cote d’Ivoire 20.0

Cyprus (Turkish Rep) 20.0

Kazakhstan 20.0

Kiribati 20.0

Solomon Islands 19.8

Country %

Yugoslavia (FR) 19.7

Burkina Faso 19.6

Gambia 19.5

Niger 18.7

Marshall Islands 18.6

Benin 18.6

Tanzania 17.6

Portugal 17.5

Liberia 17.3

Swaziland 16.2

Afghanistan 16.0

Mozambique 16.0

Zimbabwe 16.0

Central African Republic 16.0

Equatorial Guinea 16.0

Nigeria 15.2

Burundi 14.6

Haiti 13.0

Qatar 12.8

Somalia 12.4

Guinea 12.3

Nauru 12.0

Dominica 12.0

Venezuela 9.3

Congo-Brazzaville 8.0

Guinea-Bissau 8.0

Table A-1 Complete E-Government Rankings by Country (continued)

1 2 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 2


APPENDIX

Note: The following table shows the percentage of websites in each country that have each feature, such as onlineservices, publications, and databases.

Table A-2 Individual Country Profiles for Selected Features

Online Privacy Security HandicapServices Publications Data bases Policy Policy Accessibility

Afghanistan 0% 33% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Albania 0 78 33 0 0 0

Algeria 0 76 65 0 0 0

Andorra 0 60 20 0 0 0

Angola 0 40 60 0 0 0

Antigua 0 100 0 0 0 0

Argentina 0 81 38 0 0 0

Armenia 10 90 50 0 0 0

Australia 50 100 85 96 54 23

Austria 15 93 36 0 0 0

Azerbaijan 7 40 20 0 0 0

Bahamas 33 67 67 33 33 0

Bahrain 11 32 58 0 0 0

Bangladesh 6 59 41 0 0 0

Barbados 20 40 40 0 0 0

Belarus 0 47 33 0 0 0

Belgium 11 95 21 5 0 0

Belize 0 65 12 0 0 0

Benin 0 18 9 0 0 0

Bhutan 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bolivia 0 100 50 0 0 0

Bosnia 0 7 100 0 0 0

Botswana 0 100 0 0 0 0

Brazil 6 100 50 0 0 0

Brunei 0 100 100 0 0 0

Bulgaria 0 100 23 0 0 0

Burkina Faso 0 60 20 0 0 0

Burundi 0 36 18 0 0 0

Cambodia 13 50 50 0 0 0

Cameroon 0 44 33 0 0 0

Canada 34 100 72 79 14 7

Cape Verde 0 100 0 0 0 0

Central African Republic 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chad 0 0 0 0 0 0

Chile 12 100 59 0 0 0

China 26 70 30 0 0 0

Colombia 0 74 42 0 0 0

Continued

1 3

Comoros 0 100 100 0 0 0

Congo-Brazzaville 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cook Islands 50 50 25 0 0 0

Costa Rica 7 93 57 7 7 0

Cote d'Ivoire 0 75 50 0 0 0

Croatia 0 81 48 0 0 0

Cuba 3 42 35 0 0 0

Cyprus-Rep 0 54 54 0 0 0

Cyprus-Turk 0 0 100 0 0 0

Czech Rep 0 50 17 0 0 0

Denmark 12 92 58 0 0 0

Djibouti 0 100 0 0 0 0

Dominica 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dominican Rep 4 71 33 0 0 0

DR Congo 0 100 0 0 0 0

Ecuador 0 89 44 0 0 0

Egypt 5 74 42 0 0 0

El Salvador 0 100 89 0 0 0

Eq Guinea 0 0 0 0 0 0

Eritrea 0 33 0 0 0 0

Estonia 0 84 32 0 0 0

Ethiopia 0 63 38 0 0 0

Fiji 3 10 3 0 0 0

Finland 0 100 76 0 0 0

France 25 100 63 0 0 0

Gabon 0 67 33 0 0 0

Gambia 0 38 13 0 0 0

Georgia 0 82 55 0 0 0

Germany 59 88 56 0 0 0

Ghana 6 72 50 0 0 0

Greece 0 100 18 0 0 0

Grenada 0 0 0 0 0 0

Guatemala 0 92 25 0 0 0

Guinea 0 15 8 0 0 0

Guinea-Bissau 0 0 0 0 0 0

Guyana 0 85 46 0 0 0

Haiti 11 44 11 0 0 0

Honduras 0 67 0 0 0 0

Hungary 0 94 41 0 0 0

Iceland 6 100 22 0 0 0

India 7 97 40 0 0 3

Indonesia 4 87 52 0 0 0

Continued

S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 3


Table A-2 Individual Country Profiles for Selected Features (continued)


1 4 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 4


Iran 8 67 50 0 0 0

Iraq 0 100 0 0 0 0

Ireland 14 100 43 5 0 24

Israel 27 96 65 19 0 0

Italy 10 100 75 0 0 20

Jamaica 25 83 25 0 8 8

Japan 0 94 72 6 6 0

Jordan 6 44 44 0 0 0

Kazakhstan 0 100 0 0 0 0

Kenya 0 33 33 0 0 0

Kiribati 0 0 100 0 0 0

Korea, North 0 100 0 0 0 0

Korea, South 8 92 60 0 0 8

Kuwait 0 50 50 0 0 0

Kyrgyzstan 0 75 25 0 0 0

Lao PDR 0 100 50 0 0 0

Latvia 0 72 28 0 0 6

Lebanon 14 86 50 0 0 0

Lesotho 0 100 0 0 0 0

Liberia 0 67 33 0 0 0

Libya 0 100 0 0 0 0

Liechtenstein 20 0 0 0 0 0

Lithuania 7 80 60 0 0 0

Luxembourg 13 94 38 0 0 6

Macedonia (FYR) 0 76 29 0 0 0

Madagascar 0 50 0 0 0 17

Malawi 0 50 100 0 0 0

Malaysia 16 84 48 0 0 0

Maldives 0 81 69 0 0 0

Mali 0 67 0 0 0 0

Malta 6 38 6 0 0 0

Marshall Islands 0 7 50 0 0 0

Mauritania 0 100 0 0 0 0

Mauritius 0 92 31 0 0 0

Mexico 0 94 78 0 0 0

Micronesia 0 50 0 0 0 0

Moldova 0 60 20 0 0 0

Monaco 0 67 33 0 0 0

Mongolia 0 87 53 0 0 0

Morocco 0 100 0 0 0 0

Mozambique 0 0 50 0 0 0

Myanmar 0 70 90 0 0 0

Continued



1 5 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 5


Namibia 0 50 25 0 0 0

Nauru 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nepal 0 83 67 0 0 0

Netherlands 7 87 40 0 0 0

New Zealand 48 100 48 8 0 0

Nicaragua 0 83 33 0 0 0

Niger 0 67 0 0 0 0

Nigeria 0 40 0 0 0 0

Niue 0 100 100 0 0 0

Norway 5 100 53 0 0 0

Oman 7 47 27 7 0 0

Pakistan 0 73 40 0 0 0

Palau 0 0 0 0 0 0

Panama 0 90 70 0 0 0

Papua New Guinea 9 45 27 0 0 0

Paraguay 0 83 67 0 0 0

Peru 7 100 67 0 0 0

Philippines 6 100 56 0 0 0

Poland 0 95 42 0 0 0

Portugal 0 38 8 0 0 0

Qatar 0 20 20 0 0 0

Romania 9 100 18 0 0 0

Russia 0 92 33 0 0 0

Rwanda 0 100 33 0 0 0

Sao Tome 0 100 0 0 0 0

St. Kitts/Nevis 0 100 100 0 0 0

St. Lucia 0 75 0 100 0 0

St. Vincent 0 29 24 88 0 0

Samoa 0 0 0 0 0 0

San Marino 14 29 14 0 0 0

Saudi Arabia 11 78 67 0 0 0

Senegal 0 67 50 0 0 0

Seychelles 40 60 60 0 0 0

Sierra Leone 0 100 0 0 0 0

Singapore 47 95 53 5 0 0

Slovakia 0 100 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 90 40 0 0 0

Solomon Islands 0 18 6 0 0 0

Somalia 0 0 0 0 0 0

Somaliland 0 50 50 0 0 0

South Africa 13 100 33 0 0 0

Spain 17 100 61 0 0 0

Continued



1 6 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 0 1 1 6


Sri Lanka 0 56 44 11 0 0

Sudan 0 63 25 0 0 0

Suriname 0 50 0 0 0 0

Swaziland 0 4 0 0 0 0

Sweden 8 75 0 0 0 0

Switzerland 15 100 23 0 0 0

Syria 0 67 33 0 0 0

Taiwan 65 100 87 17 22 0

Tajikistan 0 50 50 0 0 0

Tanzania 0 13 4 0 0 0

Thailand 0 100 41 6 0 0

Togo 0 50 0 0 0 0

Tonga 0 0 0 0 0 0

Trinidad 0 11 6 0 0 0

Tunisia 0 4 8 0 0 0

Turkey 9 27 59 5 0 0

Turkmenistan 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tuvalu 0 100 0 0 0 0

Uganda 0 25 19 0 0 0

UK 30 100 67 7 0 7

Ukraine 0 71 53 0 6 0

United Arab Emirates 7 43 50 0 0 0

US 34 98 90 81 56 37

Uruguay 0 85 45 0 0 0

Uzbekistan 0 33 0 0 0 0

Vanuatu 0 100 0 0 0 0

Vatican 0 100 0 0 0 0

Venezuela 0 17 0 0 0 0

Vietnam 0 100 20 0 0 0

Yemen 0 67 50 0 0 0

Yugoslavia (FR) 0 62 23 0 0 0

Zambia 0 58 0 0 0 0

Zimbabwe 0 50 25 0 0 0



E-government – The future of federal and municipal institutions · 2002-04-16 · Introduction -...

Documents

Transcript of E-government – The future of federal and municipal institutions · 2002-04-16 · Introduction -...