creating smarter cities 2011 - 09 - gianluca misuraca - emerging scenarios and strategies in...
DESCRIPTION
The presentation provides an overview of the evolution of e-Government in Europe, highlighting the current policy directions and instruments available. It introduces the need for a multidimensional perspective in addressing local governance and ICTs challenges in a global complex landscape. The presentation concludes by envisioning scenarios for Digital Europe 2030 and debating ICT-enabling ‘policy modelling’ issues for evidence-based policy making.TRANSCRIPT
Emerging Scenarios &Strategies in eGovernment
Gianluca Misuraca,
JRC IPTS, European Commission
Creating Smarter Cities 2011, 30th June – 1st July, Edinburgh, UK
The views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of the EC
Outline
1. A decade of policy lessons from e-Government
e-Gov at the crossroads between the past and the future
2. State of play: the EU eGovernment Policy Context
Renewed Digital Plans (& the way of measuring progresses?)
3. The impacts of Web2.0 on society and eGovernment
Understanding eGov use and digital divides
4. A multidimensional perspective on Governance & ICTs
Building the Information Society addressing local challenges
5. Research and Policy Challenges
Re-thinking the way we assess eGovernment?
2
IPTS: Part of DG JRC of the EC: 7 Research Institutes across Europe
Mission: “to provide customer-
driven support to the EU policy-
making process by developing
science-based responses to
policy challenges that have both
a socio-economic as well as a
scientific or technological
dimension”
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
Como 03Brussels 01 Manchester 05 Lisbon 07 Malmö 09 Today
Modernisation
Access to all
Multi-channel
Privacy
Participation
Coh
er
en
ce
AccountabilityReorganisation
Efficiency
Improved service delivery
Productiveness
Mult
i-la
ye
r
Transparency
Indicators
Cooperation
Sharing of best practices
Inclusion by design
TRANSFORMATION
Use
r-c
entric
ity
Effectiveness
Innovation
eP
roc
ur
em
en
t
Electronic Identity
Interoperability
CROSS-BORDER
Mutually authenticated
Openness
Use
r N
eeds
QualityFlexibility
En
ga
ge
me
nt
Personalised services
Brussels 01 Como 03 Manchester 05 Lisbon 07 Malmö 09
The evolving eGovernment landscape
The eGovernment paradox: widening unbalance growth of supply and consumption
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
2001 2007
Full online availability index for citizens EU15
10% 50%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
2003 2007
% of Internet users sending eGovernment
forms EU15 12% 24%
+ 400%+ 100%
Online availability index for citizens EU 15: 2001/2007
Online availability index Austria : 2001/2007
% of Internet users sending eGov forms EU 15: 2003/2008
% of Internet users sending eGov forms Austria: 2003/2008
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2001 2007
Full online availability index Austria
15% 100%
+ 567%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
2003 2007
% of Internet users sending eGovernment
forms Austria13% 20%
+ 54%
Sources: Elaboration by Codagnone & Osimo, European Commission, 2008
State of Play: eGovernment Policy ContextA renewed political interest?
eGovernment Ministerial Declaration (Malmö, Sweden, November 2009)
EU Swedish Presidency Conclusions from Visby Conference (Nov. 2009)
The Granada Strategy for a Digital Europe (April 2010)
Granada Ministerial Declaration on the DAE2020 (April 2010)
A Digital Agenda for Europe COM(2010)245 – 19.05.2010 to deliver sustainable economic and social benefits from a Single
Market based on fast and ultra fast Internet and interoperableapplications
Digital Agenda Implementation Guidelines
eGovernment Action Plan 2011-2015 (December 2010)
eGoverment in the DAE2020 EU MS are committed to making user-centric,
personalised, multi-platform eGovernment services a reality by 2015 Develop and deploy cross-border public services online
Implement seamless eProcurement services
Mutual recognition of eIdentification and eAuthentication
Make eGovernment services fully interoperable Overcoming organizational, technical and semantic barriers
Supporting IPv6 implementation
Apply the EIF at national level by 2013
Trust and Security in the Digital Society Europeans will not embrace technology they do not trust – the digital
age is neither ‘big brother’ nor ‘cyber wild west’
Enhancing digital literacy, skills and inclusion The digital era should be about empowerment and emancipation;
background or skills should not be a barrier to access
Inclusive digital services
For, w
ith
, a
nd
by
Cit
ize
ns +
Bu
sin
esse
s
eGov Action Plan 2011-2015
Measure benefits
Establish pre-conditions
Promote innovation
weGovernment
eProcure
at local, regional, national and EU level
We
b2
.0
Sh
are
eID
Inte
rope
ra
bilit
y
roll out cross-border services
move towards openmodels of design, production,
& delivery
Empower users
Improve transparencyEnable efficiency & effectiveness
do more with less
Create common key enablers Clouds
SOA
Collaborateto produce
services
Set targets
Design for inclusionP
SI
Re-u
se
Involve citizens in policy makingSPOCS
STORK
PEPPOL
epSOS
ECMSs
Increase use of eGov services
Me
et u
se
rs’ r
ea
l n
ee
ds
Potential disruptive impacts of Web2.0
Users empowerment in content creation, peersupport and service delivery
Driver of social and organisational innovation
Improvement of internal work processes,products and services
New knowledge and tools for learning,healthcare management and socio-economicinclusion
Gathering of collective knowledge to enhancepolitical participation and mass-collaboration
Better informed and evidence-based policy-decision making
Source: IPTS, Impact of Social Computing, JRC-ST Report 2009
Social Computing uptake in EU27
26%
64% 36%
74%
0 100 200 300 400
Internet users
SC users
users non users
EU 27
500 millions
58%
91%
42%
8%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Internet users
SC users
users non users
Young (15-24)
millions
Source: IPTS estimation based on EUROSTAT 2008 & Flash EB N.241
Source: Codagnone & Osimo, European Commission, 2008
L M0 H
L
M
H
Digital inclusion
So
cia
l in
clu
sio
n
= currently potential eGov consumers
= currently eGov Non-consumers
basics:
simple,
but better
targeted services
DIGITAL
NATIVES
Colour of forms indicatesRadical
innovations:
Trendy & Mobile
(new services/ cross-
border services)
Web 2.0
Web 3.0
Highly
interactive
services
Mashed-up
govtDropouts :
multi-channel ,
eIntermediaries,
better policy and
service design, pre-
emptive solutions
Digital reluctant:
win minds
plus
simple
but useful
services
Potential
climbers:
ad hoc most
needed
services
eGov Users (and non users)
How to cope with the multi-dimensional nature of ICTs
in developing the Information Society?
ICTs as monitoring,
productivity and
communication
Tools
ICTs as Structural
Effect transforming
society
ICTs as
Industrial
Domain of
their own
Governance
«with» ICTs
Governance
«of» ICTs
Management of technology Policy-making
Source: Misuraca, 2007
In spatial, economic and cultural terms, the Information Society is
dominated by cities and metropolitan regions [Graham, 2004]
around 70% of all Europeans live in cities
dominant space of ICTs industries and uses, but are also the area
where most of the poor, the disadvantaged and excluded live
government layer closest to citizens and neighborhood initiatives
most public services are offered on the city government level
in some EU-MS this share amounts to 70% of all public services
city governments are in an excellent position to engage in necessary
strategic partnerships across the public, private and third sector
Going local?
Multiple Initiatives and funding opportunities
FP7 (Pre-competitive research) and future CSF (FP+CIP+EIP+EIT)
CIP: Open Innovation for Future Internet Enabled services in Smartcities• City2020: an ICT driven transition strategy to the Low Carbon City• JPI Urban Europe
Smart Cities and Communities Initiative
Structural Funds Funds allocated to ICTs show an important absolute and relative increase to over
EUR 15 billion or 4.4% of the total cohesion policy budget.
Clear shift in the investment priorities from infrastructure to support for content development, both in the public sector (eHealth, eGovernment, etc.) and for SMEs (eLearning, eBusiness, etc.)
In the future SFs will also fund eInclusion initiatives in the ESF
Localizing the Digital Agenda…
….
Cities can play a key role in the development of the IS especially when their capacities are used in an integrated way
that allows the highest impact on social cohesion and local economies
It is at the city level that the appropriate use and integration of ICT in the governance mechanisms support better social and institutional innovation
However, so far, research has been examining mainly thesupply side and the sophistication of e-Services offered reliable data on measuring the effects of ICT-enabled
applications on governance and the impacts on specific policyareas are lacking
or where existing not yet harmonized, incomplete or difficult touse for comparison in other contexts or at EU level
Research & Policy Challenges
Measuring impacts of ICT onGovernance (not just eServices)
• The measurement of governance mainly suffers from the lack of relevantobjective data, which has forced many organisations, which attempt tomeasure governance to rely on subjective data (UN, 2002)
• According to the OECD (2009) there are several categories of internationalmeasurement frameworks and models to assess ICT-enabled user-focusedservices and modes of delivery:
– Internally focused approaches consisting of frameworks which aremainly applied within an organisation and focus on quality assuranceprocesses, addressing areas such as: leadership, strategy and planning,human resource management, process and change management, etc.
– Externally focused approaches consisting of frameworks assessing areassuch as: customer satisfaction, portal/site quality, and quality of servicefor web services.
Linking e-Government to
governance innovation & public value
• Adopting a broad definition of e-Government, such as the one suggested by
OECD (2003): e-Government can be considered as the process of innovation
of Public Administration in order to achieve innovative forms of government
and governance through the use of ICTs
– the evaluation of an e-Government system must be referred to its capacity of
improving on the whole the performance of the organisation adopting it
• In this perspective, the concept of public value can provide an interesting
point of view for the evaluation of the performances of PAs
• In a broad sense, public value refers to the value created by government
through services, law regulations and other actions
– Public value provides a broader measure than is conventionally used within the
NPM literature, covering outcomes, the means used to deliver them as well as
trust and legitimacy.
– It also addresses issues such as equity, ethos and accountability
Source: Kelly, Mulgan, Muers, 2002
Measuring Public Value(s) of e-Government
Taking into consideration different roles of stakeholders…
– external roles, in which citizens receive a value from PA as users of
services or participants in democratic processes;
– internal roles, in which citizens, as directly or indirectly involved in the
processes of production of value, nevertheless receive a public value
from PA (for instance in terms of good functioning of PA);
– mixed roles, external to PA and yet involved on different levels in the
production of public value
• …the evaluation of the outcomes of different ICT-enabled policies should
consider also their capability to increase:
– the degree of policy integration in homogeneous territorial areas;
– the organizational and operational simplification of the single
institutions forming the governance network;
– the capability to maintain cooperative relations with other
administrations, suppliers, and associations
Source: Bannister, 2002, and Castelnovo and Simonetta, 2008