extended e-governance service system readiness assessment

Extended E-Governance Service System Readiness

Assessment Framework

By

Ashraf Ali Waseem

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

(Computer Science)

Department of Computing

Graduate School of Engineering Sciences and Information Technology

Faculty of Engineering Science and Technology

Hamdard University

Karachi, Pakistan

2019

Extended E-Governance Service System Readiness

Assessment Framework

PhD Thesis

By

Ashraf Ali Waseem

Thesis Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Zubair Ahmed Shaikh

Thesis Co-Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Aqeel-ur-Rehman



Hamdard University

Karachi, Pakistan

2019

I



Hamdard University

Karachi, Pakistan

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION

This is to certify that Mr. Ashraf Ali Waseem S/o Mr. Ghous Bakhsh Shaikh (Late) has

successfully completed his thesis entitled “Extended E-Governance Service System

Readiness Assessment Framework” to my utmost satisfaction in partial fulfillment of

prescribed Hamdard University requirements.

————————————————

PhD Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Zubair Ahmed Shaikh

HEC approved PhD Supervisor PhD (Computer Science), Polytechnic University, New York, United States M.S (Computer Science), Polytechnic University, New York, United States

President

Mohammad Ali Jinnah University (MAJU),

Karachi, Pakistan.

II



Hamdard University

Karachi, Pakistan

CERTIFICATE OF ASSESSMENT

The undersigned certify that they have read and accepted this thesis entitled “Extended E-

Governance Service System Readiness Assessment Framework” submitted by Ashraf Ali

Waseem in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD),

Computer Science (CS).

————————————— —————————————

Supervisor External Examiner

Dated: February 08, 2019

III

ABSTRACT

Research and surveyed data shows that E-Governance service systems, with respect to their

usability, effectiveness and participatory governance, help in improving transparency,

corruption control, and good governance. In practice, the open government data, E-

Participation initiatives, and their collaborative workspaces are essential ingredients of E-

Governance service systems. The debate about what constitutes E-Governance success, their

quantifiable and qualitative variables, their divergent socio-technical dependencies, etc. is

still on-going. E-Governance has been emerged as a large-scale socio-technical and human-

centered problem space. We, therefore, assert that Human-Computer Interaction’s Computer

Supported Cooperative Work (HCI’s CSCW) based system modeling and it’s supporting

socio-technical tools and technologies can effectively be used to design and develop E-

Participatory governance systems. For this purpose, in this thesis, research gap analyses

between one of the identified perceived governance indexes and some International agencies’

E-readiness survey indexes have been compared. A Gap analysis of the results highlights

weak correlation between United Nation’s provided E-Participation Index and a perceived

governance index by Transparency International. This weak correlation serves as a strong

motivation of our work.

We, therefore, propose a distinct human-centered and socio-technical design of E-

Governance service system readiness assessment framework by redefining E-Participation

model in the context of Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). For prototype

implementation and validation of this framework, some case-specific readiness assessment

toolkits have also been designed for identifying case-specific readiness performance

measures of E-Participation. A sample of E-Governance Service System Readiness

Assessment (E-GovSSRA) index has been proposed that results in a relatively strong positive

correlation with the perceived governance index.

This thesis, therefore, identifies some insignificant correlations with United Nation’s and

other likewise agencies’ perceived E-Governance parameters. We believe that one way to

achieve a highly significant correlation if principles of HCI’s CSCW framework are applied.

This thesis has successfully proven our claim through the development of our own E-

GovSSRA framework and index as a perceived governance index.

IV

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AT Activity theory

BER Bid Evaluation Report

BSC Balanced Scorecard

C2C Citizens to Citizens

C2G Citizens to Government

CMI Computer Mediated Interaction

CPI Corruption Perception Index

CSCW Computer Supported Cooperative Work

DSS Decision Support System

EGDI E-Government Development Index

E-Gov E-Governance System

E-GovSSRA E-Governance Service System Readiness Assessment

EOI Expression of Interest

E-PartM E-Participation maturity

EPI E-Participation Index

Eq WT Equal Weights

G2C Government to Citizens

G2G Government to Government

GDP Gross Domestic Product

HCI Human Computer Interaction

ICT Information and Communication Technologies

IDI ICT Development Index

ITU International Telecommunication Unit

ITUIDI International Telecommunication Unit ICT Development Index

IS Information system

V

KPI Key Performance Indicators

LSSTCS Large-scale Socio-technical Cooperative Systems

MUEs Multi-user environments

NIP Notice Inviting Prequalification

NIT Notice Inviting Tender

ODB Open Data Barometer

OGD Open Government Data

PA Procuring Agencies

PPMS Procurement Performance Management System

PPRA Procurement Process Readiness Assessment

PQR Prequalification Report

RPM Readiness Performance Measure

RSS Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site

SPPRA Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority

UN United Nation

UNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

UNDP United Nations Development Project

UnEq WT Unequal Weights

UNPAN United Nation’s Public Administration Network

W3C World Wide Web Consortium

WGI Worldwide Governance Indicators

WT Weights

WWWF World Wide Web Foundation

VI

DEDICATION

Dedicated to my Teachers, Family, Colleagues, Well-Wishers, and

Friends

VII

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

It is only the innumerable praises and thanks to Almighty Allah, the most merciful, the most

gracious, the sources of knowledge and wisdom endowed to human beings, who gave me

power and potential to complete this PhD thesis work. All respects and honors are for our

most beloved last Holy Prophet “Hazrat Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم)”, who is forever a flash of

guidance in the darkness for humanity as a whole.

Acknowledgment and gratitude have to be given to the UN research staff, Transparency

International and other likewise organizations such as ITU, and WWWF, whose surveyed

data, statistics, indexes and their measuring indicators are made available and helpful for this

research work and analyses.

I would acknowledge and thankful to Dean FEST, Director HIET, and Director GSESIT,

Hamdard University, for giving me an opportunity to conduct this research study as a PhD

scholar in Computer Science field.

I would also like to express my honor and pay high gratitude to my valued mentor and thesis

supervisor, Prof. Dr. Zubair Ahmed Shaikh for his generous guidance and supervision. His

continuous leadership qualities, guidance, valuable suggestions, and feedback helped me to

conclude this dissertation in the right direction.

My sincere gratitude and appreciation to my thesis co-supervisor, Prof. Dr. Aqeel-ur-

Rehman, for his immeasurable technical support, recommendations, and encouragement to

complete this thesis work timely.

And special regard to my concerned department head, faculty colleagues, and support staff

for providing me such a caring, friendly and productive working environment.

I am also grateful to “Guidance & Evaluation Committee (GEC)” members, Dr. Syed Jamal

Hussain, Department of Computer Science, UBIT, University of Karachi, and Dr. Tariq

Javid, Chairman, Biomedical Engineering Department, HIET-FEST, Hamdard University,

for technical review and assistance of overall progress of my work.

Finally, special thanks are presented to my wife, my children, teachers, and friends, for their

continuous prayers and moral support.

VIII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION ............................................................................................................. .I

CERTIFICATE OF ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. II

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................... III

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................ IV

DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................................ VI

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................ VIII

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... XI

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ XII

CHAPTER 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Problem Statement................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Importance of the Problem ..................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Purpose of this research study ................................................................................................ 3

1.4 Problem Domain of E-Governance System ........................................................................... 4

1.4.1 E-Governance as a problem of DSS ............................................................................... 4

1.4.2 E-Governance as a problem of LSSTCS ......................................................................... 4

1.4.3 E-Governance as a problem of CSCW ........................................................................... 5

1.5 Further Classification of this Report ..................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 9

Literature Review .............................................................................................................................. 9

2.1 Perceived Governance Indexes ............................................................................................. 10 2.1.1 Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) ...................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) .................................. 11

2.2 Comparative Analysis ............................................................................................................ 12

2.3 Readiness Assessment Indicators of E-Governance Model ................................................ 15 2.3.1 E-Participation ................................................................................................................ 15 2.3.2 Impact of Socio-Technical Tools and Technologies on E-Participation ........................ 16

2.4 E-Participation between the Stakeholders of E-Governance System using the context of

CSCW ..................................................................................................................................... 17

CHAPTER 3 ..................................................................................................................................... 21

Conceptual Model and Methodology ............................................................................................. 21

3.1 Testing of Hypotheses ............................................................................................................ 21

3.2 Gap Analyses .......................................................................................................................... 22

IX

3.2.1 Hypothesis Test–1 ........................................................................................................... 23 3.2.2 Hypothesis Test–2 ........................................................................................................... 24 3.2.3 Hypothesis Test–3 ........................................................................................................... 25 3.2.4 Further analyses .............................................................................................................. 27 3.2.5 Previous Editions of the Selected Indexes ...................................................................... 28

3.3 Implications of the above Results ......................................................................................... 29

CHAPTER 4 ..................................................................................................................................... 31

Proposed Theoretical Frameworks ................................................................................................ 31

4.1 Design of E-Participation Maturity (E-PartM) Model ....................................................... 31

4.2 Importance of Four Stages of E-PartM Model ................................................................... 33

4.3 Mapping E-PartM Model with Stakeholders’ Group of Interactions ............................... 34 4.3.1 Results of Data Analyses of a Research Field Survey .................................................... 34 4.3.2 Hypothesis Test–4 ........................................................................................................... 36

4.4 Mapping of E-PartM Model with CSCW Groupware Matrix .......................................... 37

4.5 Proof of the impact of Open and Connected-Governments as Technical Tools on E-

Participation ........................................................................................................................... 39

4.6 Design of E-GovSSRA Framework ...................................................................................... 40

CHAPTER 5 ..................................................................................................................................... 43

Design of Toolkits for Prototype Implementation of E-GovSSRA Framework ......................... 43

5.1 Overview of Balanced Scorecard .......................................................................................... 43 5.1.1 Readiness Performance Measures ................................................................................... 44

5.2 Measuring Score for Precursors of E-Participation ........................................................... 44

5.3 Technical Tools for E-Participation in the context of CSCW ............................................ 45

5.4 Social Tools for E-Participation in the context of CSCW .................................................. 47

5.5 Case-specific Readiness Assessment Toolkits ...................................................................... 47

5.6 SPPRA as a Case Study-1...................................................................................................... 48 5.6.1 Understanding Procurement Process and Complaint Redress Workflows of SPPRA .... 49 5.6.2 Understanding a Detailed Public Procurement Process .................................................. 50 5.6.3 Mapping of E-PartM model with Procurement Processes of SPPRA ............................. 52 5.6.4 Design of the Procurement Process Readiness Assessment (PPRA) Toolkit ................. 53 5.6.5 Functional Vision of PPMS ............................................................................................ 55

5.7 Government Official Web Portal as a Case Study-2........................................................... 55 5.7.1 Design of E-GovSSRA Toolkit ...................................................................................... 57 5.7.2 Functional Vision of the Government official Web Portal ............................................. 60

CHAPTER 6 ..................................................................................................................................... 61

Experiment Design........................................................................................................................... 61

6.1 Mechanism for Data Collection ............................................................................................ 61

6.2 Selecting a Sample.................................................................................................................. 62

6.3 Measuring-Scale for E-GovSSRA Toolkit ........................................................................... 62

6.4 Weighing Scheme for the Stages of E-PartM Model………………………………….…..63

6.5 Snapshot of a Sample Record ............................................................................................... 64

CHAPTER 7 ..................................................................................................................................... 65

Results and Major Findings ............................................................................................................ 65

X

7.1 Results of E-GovSSRA Index ............................................................................................... 65

7.2 Hypothesis Test–5 .................................................................................................................. 66

7.3 Hypothesis Test–6 .................................................................................................................. 68

7.4 Summary of Major Findings and their Solutions ............................................................... 70

7.5 Benefits of E-GovSSRA Framework .................................................................................... 73

CHAPTER 8 ..................................................................................................................................... 75

Conclusion and Afterthoughts ........................................................................................................ 75

8.1 Limitations and Risks to Validity ......................................................................................... 76

8.2 Lessons Learned ..................................................................................................................... 77

8.3 Future Works ......................................................................................................................... 77

8.4 Exceptions ............................................................................................................................... 78

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................. 79 Appendix A: Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010 .............................................................. 79 Appendix B: Official Web Portals for a Sample of 50 Countries……………………...…….82

Appendix C: Country-wise Sample Data…………………………………………………….84

Appendix D: Glossary.............................................................................................................. 94 Appendix E: List of Publications and Submissions ................................................................. 97

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 98

XI

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 The problem domain of E-Governance system is highlighted as the junction of three areas: IS, AT and

HCI and their focused sub-areas: Com DSS, LSSTCS and CSCW respectively, depicted as the central

triangle. .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 2 Showing the growth of average scores of three Indexes namely EGDI, EPI, and CPI from 2012 to

2016. .....................................................................................................................................................13 Figure 3 Showing the average scores of three stages of E-Participation for 2014 & 2016 and their total average

score. ....................................................................................................................................................14 Figure 4 Showing the average EPI-2016 scores for Income-wise groups of countries. A prominent rise is

shown in only e-Information bars for all Income groups, whereas e-Consultation is raised accordingly

and e-Decision making is far lagged behind. ........................................................................................14 Figure 5 Face-to-Face interaction .......................................................................................................................18 Figure 6 Computer-mediated interaction (CMI) in an E-Governance System ....................................................18 Figure 7 Time/space groupware matrix of CSCW ..............................................................................................19 Figure 8 Illustrates the range of values of r against their approximate degrees of Association ..........................23 Figure 9 A correlation between CPI-16 Scores having >=50 and corresponding EGDI-16 is found to be r=

0.640 showing moderately positive correlation. ...................................................................................23 Figure 10A correlation between CPI-16 Scores having < 50 and corresponding EGDI-16 is found to be r=

0.562 showing moderately weak positive correlation...........................................................................24 Figure 11The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having >=50 and corresponding EPI-14 is found only to be r

= 0.321 showing weak positive correlation. .........................................................................................25 Figure 12The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having <50 and corresponding EPI-14 is found to be r =

0.490 showing weak positive correlation. ............................................................................................25 Figure 13The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having >=50 and corresponding EPI-16 is found to be r =

0.498 showing weak positive correlation. ............................................................................................26 Figure 14The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having <50 and corresponding EPI-16 is found to be r =

0.512 showing weak positive correlation. ............................................................................................26 Figure 15Highlights percentage polygons of countries engaged in three stages of EPI-16 grouped by low to

very high EPI rankings of countries [15]. .............................................................................................33 Figure 16Superimposition of E-PartM model on a 4-staged group of interactions of stakeholders respectively as

a 4 quadrant matrix [89]. ......................................................................................................................34 Figure 17Time/space groupware matrix of CSCW ..............................................................................................38 Figure 18Superimposition of Fig. 16 and Fig. 17 ................................................................................................38 Figure 19The text boxes on each quadrant shows those emergent web tools and technologies, which are found

suitable to create interfaces for stakeholders and to obtain E-Participation services corresponding to

each stage and to each time/space quadrant. The Passive and Active citizens’ areas are approaching

maturity stages as we move from left to right stage of their respective areas shaded with different

colors. ...................................................................................................................................................40 Figure 20Basic Procurement Process Workflow .................................................................................................49 Figure 21Complaint Redress Mechanism ............................................................................................................50 Figure 22A Detailed Public Procurement Process ...............................................................................................51 Figure 23Bifurcation of Basic Process Workflow into 1

st, 2

nd, 3

rd modules; mapping with e-informing, e-

consulting, and e-collaborating stages respectively of E-PartM model ................................................52 Figure 24Selecting entire CR Workflow into the 4

th module mapping with the e-empowering stage of E-PartM

model ....................................................................................................................................................52 Figure 25Structural snapshot of the Procurement Process Readiness Assessment (PPRA) Toolkit for evaluating

Procuring Agencies of SPPRA under Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010, derived from World

Bank Procurement guidelines. ..............................................................................................................54 Figure 26Functional Vision of PPMS ..................................................................................................................55 Figure 27Snapshot of E-GovSSRA Toolkit .........................................................................................................59 Figure 28Functional Vision of Government official Web Portal .........................................................................60 Figure 29Snapshot of a sample record .................................................................................................................64 Figure 30The correlation between CPI-16 and EPI-16 scores for the selected sample is found to be r = 0.315

which is showing weak positive correlation. ........................................................................................66 Figure 31The correlation between CPI-16 and E-GovSSRA (with Unequal weights) scores for the selected

sample is found to be r = 0.829 which is showing strong positive correlation. ....................................67 Figure 32The correlation between CPI-16 and E-GovSSRA (with Equal weights) scores for the selected sample

is found to be r = 0.745 which is also showing strong positive correlation. .........................................67

XII

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Illustrate the correlation between CPI-16 and ITUIDI-16 Scores ........................................................... 27 Table 2 Illustrate the correlation between CPI-16 and ODB-15 Scores ............................................................... 28 Table 3 Illustrates the list of selected indexes with their available editions......................................................... 28 Table 4 Illustrates the correlations between various editions of CPI Scores and various editions of the selected

indexes for CPI Scores >= 50 ................................................................................................................. 28 Table 5 Illustrates the correlations between various editions of CPI Scores and various editions of the selected

indexes for CPI Scores < 50 ................................................................................................................... 28 Table 6 E-Governance Service System Readiness Initiatives in Govt. Departments of Pakistan ........................ 35 Table 7 Illustrates the Correlation between EPI-16 & ODB-15, and between EPI-16 & ITUIDI-16 .................. 40 Table 8 Readiness Performance Measures of Technical Tools ............................................................................ 45 Table 9 Readiness Performance Measures of Social Tools ................................................................................. 47 Table 10 Mapping all 4 Modules with the 4 Stages of E-PartM Model ............................................................... 53 Table 11 Stage wise mapping of E-PartM model with Readiness performance measures of E-GovSSRA Toolkit

and supporting Web tools and technologies against each stage............................................................ 57 Table 12 Weighing Scheme for the stages of E-PartM model ............................................................................. 63 Table 13 Sample of 50 outcomes is generated through E-GovSSRA Toolkit ..................................................... 65 Table 14 Calibration of PMs with Supporting Tools & Technologies ................................................................. 68 Table 15 Summary of the results of our hypotheses ............................................................................................ 70

of 102

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

1.1 Problem Statement

Increasing awareness of open government and E-Participation for creating an environment of

participatory governance has apparently shifted the focus towards developing integrated and

collaborative E-Governance service systems. In practice, the open government data, E-

Participation initiatives, their maturity levels, their performance measures, and their

collaborative workspaces, are essential ingredients of E-Governance service systems. The

debate about what constitutes E-Governance success, their quantifiable and qualitative

variables, their divergent socio-technical dependencies, etc. is still on-going. E-Governance

has emerged as a large-scale socio-technical and human-centered problem space. We,

therefore, assert that Human-Computer Interaction’s Computer Supported Cooperative Work

(HCI’s CSCW) based system modeling and it’s supporting socio-technical tools and

technologies can effectively be used to design and develop E-Participatory governance

systems.

In our gap analyses study, the correlation evaluations between one of the identified

perceived governance indexes and some International agencies’ E-readiness survey indexes

have been carried out. A Gap analysis of the results highlights weak correlation between

United Nation’s provided E-Participation Index and a perceived governance index provided

by Transparency International. It spotlights the need for this research study and endeavors to

develop a distinct human-centered and socio-technical design of E-Governance service system

readiness assessment framework by redefining E-Participation model in the context of CSCW

that aimed to present a strong positive correlation with a perceived governance index.

of 102

1.2 Importance of the Problem

E-Participation is the practice by which citizens’ concerns, needs, and values are

incorporated into corporate decision making [1] and thus can resolve most of the community

problems [2]. It is agreed that E-Participation services are flourishing in the countries where

democracy is mature enough. If a democratic government wants to deliver, respect citizens’

voice and trust, then it requires converting all public sector agencies from bureaucratic

institutions to more responsive and citizen-participatory institutions, making them more open,

accountable, trusted and transparent. The advancing in Web tools and technologies also forces

the governments over the world to reassess their E-Governance readiness models in order to

identify the most relevant and humanistic governance models that shall be more effective in

usability, decision making and in socio-technical participatory governance. A recent spread in

digital media presents a diversity of novel tools and technologies related to interactivity and

ubiquitous connectivity, whereas expansion in social networking allowing new types of

society-wide associations with a potential impact on participatory governance [3]. United

Nation (UN) also describes E-Governance as participatory, transparent, accountable,

responsive, and unbiased. The key E-Governance indicator, suggested by UN and other bodies

all agreed that E-Participation of citizens in decision making is necessary for the revival of

democracy and for participatory governance (e.g. in [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,

16]). Still an extensive study is needed that can strongly associate Good Governance with E-

Governance.

Classically, E-Government has been understood as to support government operations and

provide a single point of contact for all types of government services to their citizens [17, 18,

19]. Much of the literature on E-Government recommends that by taking the advantage of

emergent W3C standards and technologies (may include web 2.0, web 3.0, and onward

technologies [20, 21]), these systems convert the relationship of governments and citizens into

new forms of social networks, knowledge sharing and artificial intelligent connections that

promote increased service delivery, precise knowledge and making public institutions more

responsive and accountable (e.g. in [22, 23, 24, 25]).

Whereas, E-Governance is understood as to extend the scope of E-Government by adding

E-Participation services in decision making and in policy making to the government processes

using the emerging and human-centered technologies of Community-web (e.g. in [3, 26, 27,

28]) or even more advanced technologies of Semantic and Symbiotic webs [21, 29], where the

accurate decisions would be made through symbiosis, immersion, and connected knowledge.

of 102

E-Participation sustainability is also dependent on organizational development and

performance of its precursors such as social and technical measures that require a holistic

engineering approach [30, 31, 32]. Thus E-Governance is mostly about connectivity,

connected people, connected knowledge and connected systems in which various human and

socio-technical factors are involved. For example, a centralized public procurement system,

centralized government hiring, and management system, smart city/country web portals,

social security systems, health care systems, etc; where wrong decisions create severe

consequences on the society as a whole. Hence, E-Governance system has emerged as a large-

scale, socio-technical and human-centered problem space. We, therefore, assert that CSCW

based system modeling and its advanced socio-technical tools and technologies can

effectively be used to design and develop E-Participatory governance systems.

1.3 Purpose of this research study

The basic purpose behind this research is to design and develop an effective E-Governance

Service System Readiness Assessment (E-GovSSRA) framework to find a realistic

association between E-Governance and corruption control indices, identify associated key

indicators, redefine E-Participation maturity (E-PartM) model in HCI’s CSCW [33]

perspective, find the impact of CSCW matrix and its emerging web tools and technologies on

E-Governance system. Thus approaching a formal and yet another framework which also

hints towards a perceived governance model but from HCI and computing domain.

For prototype implementation of the proposed framework, two case studies related to

governance processes, business processes, human behavior, and other social-technical aspects

are discussed in detail while one of it is used in the experimental design and data analysis. In

the end, results and conclusions are drawn to validate our system.

Our proposed E-GovSSRA framework can be used to promote a socio-technical and

human-centered approach for the development of interactive applications related to

participatory governance and citizen-sourcing. It can serve the governments to reassess their

state of readiness, identify their levels of citizen-participation, identify their gaps and

priorities, and then redesign E-Governance strategies nation-wide up to their maturity levels.

of 102

1.4 Problem Domain of E-Governance System

It is understood that Governance and its measurement is multi-dimensional, interconnected,

human-centered and large-scaled; hence lie under the domain of a complex problem. Its

execution through E-Governance model will also become complex, socio-technical, and

humanistic. Three major intersecting areas are identified as core problem domain of E-

Governance as discussed below.

1.4.1 E-Governance as a problem of DSS

In a democratic government, citizens shall become the owner of the government to keep an

eye on government stakeholders so that they perform their work effectively and transparently.

The citizens’ participation on government activities is best done when the government has the

capacity to enforce a human-centered and a socio-technical design of E-Governance system

nationwide and implement an integrated Communication-driven Decision Support System

(DSS) [34] where all government departments are connected vertically and horizontally

through an Information system. In accordance to E-Governance, a communication-driven

DSS enables corporation, supporting more than one stakeholder working on a shared task for

promoting shared decision-making [35].

It is obvious that if decisions are based on information of lower quality the probability of

unsatisfactory or even harmful results increases. The need for high-quality information rises in

accordance with the importance of decisions and actions to be taken [36]. As an essential

treatment of database schema optimization, we had also proposed an enhanced synthesis

algorithm [37] to produce an optimal schema design with minimum redundancy in a relational

information system.

1.4.2 E-Governance as a problem of LSSTCS

Socio-technical approach explicitly focuses on the relationship of technical, organizational,

economic and social needs that can help to create the humanistic and effective systems [38].

Whereas, the subject of Large-scale Socio-technical Cooperative Systems (LSSTCS) is vast

and complex, spread in various concepts and technologies that find their origins in diverse

disciplines. A Socio-technical Cooperative system, in view of Information system (IS) and

Activity theory (AT), fundamentally focuses on the cooperative work between the

communities of stakeholders by using various socio-technical tools and technologies of the

system [39]. The Socio-technical Cooperative system is framing IS and AT together because

of 102

'cooperative information processing' is not seen as something to be modeled in the same way

for humans and machines whereas AT proposes a strong notion of consciousness and motive

which is central to a representation of everyday experience of human activities shaped by the

mediating artifacts we use [40]. Thus LSSTCS has the ability to engage a sufficiently large

group of individuals to create an emergent solution as a collective intelligence for a specific

class of problem or task [41].

Likewise, E-Governance system is a class of interconnected subsystems with wide-ranging

social, technical, economic, political and environmental impacts. It has emerged as a class of

dynamic integrations of distributed, autonomous and heterogeneous systems that collaborate

to achieve a common goal. The behavior of such system is difficult to predict because of the

many interacting and nested subsystems, the uncertainty in subsystems’ behavior and their

interactions, the socio-technical readiness, the degree of human factors involved and the

multi-stakeholders environment [42]. Moreover, the development and deployment

environment of such systems must include support for representing and reasoning about

human behavior and their socio-technical dependencies [43]. E-Participation in E-Governance

system is also referred to a group of humans working in a social context to find innovative

solutions collaboratively with the emerging features of supported web tools and technologies.

Hence, E-Governance system problem can, therefore, be understood as a complex large-scale

socio-technical cooperative system problem that enables the realization of collective

intelligence.

1.4.3 E-Governance as a problem of CSCW

It is understood from the previous section that E-Governance system must include support for

representing and reasoning about human behavior, their socio-technical dependencies, their

interactions with connected artifacts, their reliability and usability, etc, to facilitate human

activities. In this connection, we characterize the organization of E-Governance model and its

performance measures in Human Computer Interaction’s (HCI) perspective, preferably when

working with W3C technologies and platforms of social networking.

HCI has a number of strengths, including its ability to embrace complex settings and

provide better tools to users. It is agreed that online social media with the surfacing of

emergent web tools and technologies have permitted fast mobilization of citizens and sharing

of immediate information and support [44, 45, 46]. It, therefore, constitutes a ready-made

knowledge base, although it lacks any formal organization [47]. Citizens are able to group

peers to discuss aspects of their common interests, sharing their knowledge and improving

of 102

their working relationships, trust and business [48]. In short, emergent Web tools and

technologies not only empower citizens to become active users by increasing their

participation and involvement in policy making but also facilitate government agencies by

adopting collective intelligence technologies and systems in their business activities and in

decision-making processes.

Activity Theory (AT), on the other hand, is a theory of social and work psychologies, their

dynamics and their developmental transformations in collective human activities. AT focuses

on collaborative human activities, which are distinguished by their respective objects. As [39]

described, coordination and cooperation are understood as collaborative activities in the AT

system, which includes a shared objective, distributed onto several actors, each performing

actions accordingly to such a shared objective of a goal-directed subject by using mediating

artifacts with their supporting tools. AT recognizes the internalization and externalization of

cognitive processes involved in the use of tools, as well as the transformation or development

that results from the socio-technical interactions of actors. AT helps explain how social

artifacts mediate social actions in a socio-technical system. AT is most often used to describe

actions through its related conceptual mediating artifact and group of actors [49]. Here

mediating artifact shall be any of the supporting CSCW groupware.

While framing HCI and AT together, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

framework is providing a comprehensive cooperative workspace to support group working in

the time and space coordinates [33, 50]. The concept of CSCW in computer systems is not

new. Mills, in [51], believed that it will be the future of crowd-sourcing anytime and

anywhere with the allowable technologies of computer and wireless networks, positioning

devices, continued maturation of internet and ubiquitous computing, evolution of associated

hardware/software technologies, and applications and services of emerging social context

models. CSCW, with the notion of coordinative artifacts [52, 53], spotlights the study of

quadrant-wise interactive tools and technologies in collaborative pervasive environment as

well as their psychological, organizational, and socio-technical impacts [54]. As

technical dependencies of artifacts result in social dependencies of collaborating crowd

members that create them [55]. Now CSCW can encompass both the technical and social

challenges encountered by using W3C standards and technologies when supporting

crowdsourcing [56], Crowdsourcing is used to utilize the notion of human-computation for

collecting and processing complex heterogeneous data to produce precise and actionable

knowledge [57]. It also offers many redundant workforces that can be used on demand [58]

and collective intelligence used to rate items and vote for best decisions [59, 60]. Therefore,

of 102

for expressing participatory design of citizen sourcing in terms of time and space coordinates

for Multi-user environments (MUEs) specifically between Government and Citizens, we

suggest CSCW groupware matrix as a useful approach to consider for a large-scale, socio-

technical and human-centered design of E-Governance model. Further discussion about

CSCW, relating E-Participation between the stakeholders of E-Governance system with

CSCW, mapping E-PartM model with CSCW matrix can be found in section 2.4 and in

chapter 4.

Fig. 1 is the illustration of the problem domain of E-Governance which is highlighted as

the junction of the above three stated areas, depicted as the central triangle. It illustrates that

E-Governance service system is an LSSTCS; based on CSCW matrix as a crowd-ware [61] by

using emerging socio-technical tools and technologies, and making decisions through

Communication-driven DSS.

Figure 1 The problem domain of E-Governance service system is highlighted as the junction of three areas: IS, AT

and HCI and their focused sub-areas: Com DSS, LSSTCS and CSCW respectively, depicted as the central triangle

1.5 Further Classification of this Report

We have surveyed various international reports, research papers and analyzed their data for

this applied research study. The relevant data is mainly gathered from survey reports and

readiness indexes published by United Nation and other international agencies. During

literature review, some interesting gaps were found in the performance indicators of the

reports highlighting perceived governance indexes. The detailed discussions about these

indicators are in chapter 2 of Literature review. This chapter also includes sections related to

of 102

Comparative analyses and relationship between E-Participation and CSCW. Methodology

and approach we used in the study are discussed in chapter 3. By analyzing further, the data of

key performance indicators are tested for relevance with the data of perceived governance

indicators in chapter 3. After presenting the related work and their gap analyses, we have

derived technical implications in the same chapter about the gap analyses and for the need of

an enhanced E-Participation maturity model from CSCW’s perspective to make it strongly

correlate with the perceived governance indexes. Design of E-Participation Maturity (E-

PartM) model in the context of CSCW and thereby E-Governance Service System Readiness

Assessment (E-GovSSRA) framework is discussed and proposed in chapter 4. Some ideally

designed case-specific readiness assessment toolkits are elaborated in chapters 5. Data

collection and analysis on these toolkits for a prototype implementation of the framework are

depicted in chapter 6. The results and interpretations of the data analyses to validate our

system are derived in chapter 7 along with some important benefits of E-GovSSRA

framework. Finally, a relevant conclusion and important afterthoughts are drawn in chapter 8,

along with some limitations, lessons learned, future works and exceptions of this research

dissertation.

of 102

CHAPTER 2

Literature Review

Measuring governance is basically a qualitative phenomenon; the quantification of which

would always be subject to considerable empirical limitations. Researchers have so far

captured several complex and multi‐faceted dimensions of governance and measured them on

some predefined criteria. Various works on the perceived governance models have been

witnessed in literature survey. Mostly are focused on domain-specific or administrative

workflows of governance such as Political Governance, Social Governance, Legal & Judicial

Governance, Economic Governance, Government effectiveness, etc. A distinct E-Governance

readiness assessment model explicitly using the approach of socio-technical and human

aspects of participatory governance is hard to witness.

On the other hand, readiness assessment of E-Government model has been flourished now.

Various worldwide organizations have been working on E-Government development for

decades. The E-Government models help to understand the status of E-Readiness on various

dimensions. So far, none of them could be used as the single source for the recommendations

on E-Governance priorities and indicators alone. However, as a whole, it is believed that E-

Governance increases with the increase in E-Government.

The United Nation in UN General Assembly Resolution [62] recognized the potential of E-

Government in encouraging transparency, accountability, and citizen engagement in public

service delivery in order to reduce corruption. Thus at least theoretically, as claimed by UN,

the most pertinent, ICT-based and nearer to the performance measures of E-Governance

readiness assessment are the indicators of United Nation’s E-Government Development Index

(EGDI). Hence, we preferably consider the data of EGDI to check any of its association with a

perceived governance index.

EGDI has been produced by United Nation since 2003. The United Nation’s Public

Administration Network (UNPAN) publishes this survey report after every two years which

has been proposed to measure the E-Government readiness of 193 member states of the

United Nations. It is considered to be a relatively comprehensive report of assessing E-

Government development of most of the countries of the world beside others.

The latest report of United Nation on EGDI is published in 2016 [15]. EGDI is comprised

of four sub-indexes.

of 102

1) Online Service Index (OSI)

2) Telecommunication Infrastructure Index (TII)

3) Human-Capital Index (HI)

4) E-Participation Index (EPI)

Each sub-index is a composite of various relevant indicators. The overall EGDI is

calculated by the first three sub-indexes with the same weight for each that is:

EGDI = (⅓*OSI + ⅓*TII + ⅓*HI) (1)

However, EPI is still to be considered here as a supplementary index of EGDI. In the next

section, we highlight some perceived Governance indexes.

2.1 Perceived Governance Indexes

Governance and its measurement are a complex and debatable subjects. It is hard to measure

governance directly; instead, proxies for governance are used. So far various works have been

witnessed for assessing performance measures of good governance. Distinct area specific

dimensions and their suggested indicators are introduced. Most of them are focusing on one or

more of the popular domains of perceived governance that is from social and economic

domains, such as economy and GDP growth rate, corruption control, transparency,

accountability, business environment, poverty reduction, violence and terrorism, human

development, educational, infrastructural, political, social, judicial governance, etc. In [63],

The UNDP Governance Indicators Users’ Guide characteristically presented an overview of

all such data sources and their governance indicators. Out of which some widely used

perceived governance indexes developed by pioneer organizations, especially in relevance and

have covered most of the countries of the world, are focused by us. In addition, for making the

indicators comparable, we are more focusing on the indexes considering specifically the basic

dimensions of good governance such as corruption control, transparency, accountability, etc.

Hence only two suitable and popular indexes are filtered out as follows:

2.1.1 Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI)

The “Worldwide Governance Indicators” (WGI) has been gathered by the World Bank

Institute since 1996 and published annually since 2002. The latest WGI reports data on the

quality of governance for 213 countries over the period of 1996-2015 on six areas: Voice and

Accountability; Control of Corruption; Regulatory Quality; Political Stability and Absence of

Violence/Terrorism; Government Effectiveness and Rule of Law [64]. All six indicators are

of 102

aggregated and measured separately based on various data sources created by different

organizations from around the world [9, 65]. Although, WGI provides effective scores for

comparing countries for each of the six indicators and can be used as the dataset of underlying

split sources of governance data but an overall aggregative WGI index or methodology for

each country is not provided yet. As a result, this resource is not as much suitable for our

research study.

2.1.2 Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI)

The most commonly used index for measuring the perceived levels of public sector corruption

is known as the Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI). It is widely

used by investors, donors, analysts, academics, etc. and is available since 1995 [14, 66, 67, 68,

69]. The CPI does appear to consistently and validly measure the magnitude of corruption

across the world [70]. United Nations has also recommended and used it in [15]. CPI uses a

comprehensive list of worldwide sources of indicators for assessing 168 countries of the

world. The CPI includes only those sources that measure perceptions of corruption in the

public sectors for a set of countries/territories specializing in the governance and business

climate analyses [69]. The Corruption Perceptions Index 2016 is a composite index, which is

drawn on the following 13 accepted and widely used data sources [69]:

African Development Bank Governance Ratings 2015

Bertelsmann Foundation Sustainable Governance Indicators 2016

Bertelsmann Foundation Transformation Index 2016

Economist Intelligence Unit Country Risk Ratings 2016

Freedom House Nations in Transit 2016

Global Insight Country Risk Ratings 2015

IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2016

Political and Economic Risk Consultancy Asian Intelligence 2016

Political Risk Services International Country Risk Guide 2016

World Bank - Country Policy and Institutional Assessment 2015

World Economic Forum Executive Opinion Survey (EOS) 2016

World Justice Project Rule of Law Index 2016

Varieties of Democracy (VDEM) Project 2016

The data sources listed above are more or less included in the previous editions of CPI as

well.

of 102

Transparency International also recommended global community to take the following

actions to control corruption:

Minimize regulations on media, Press freedom

Open Government Data (OGD) policy

Open and engage civil society

Most of the researchers are agreed that corruption is the mother of all root causes of bad

governance. Hence, we consider here CPI-2016 index [69], latest so far, as measuring stick

yard for countries level of governance when comparing it with other such indexes.

According to the measuring scale of CPI-2016, any country, scoring 0 means highest level

of perceived corruption and scoring 100 means lowest level of perceived corruption. The

report also claimed that almost two-thirds of countries scoring less than 50 out of 100 are

perceived to have a serious corruption problem. No country achieves a perfect score [69]. UN

also highlighted this split as digital divide between developed and developing countries [15].

Thus for precise analyses and to avoid any impact (coupling indicators) of developed and

developing nations, we split the data of CPI into two slabs. The first slab is comprising of

mostly developed countries with CPI scores >= 50 that perceived to have less corruption and

second of mostly developing and least developed countries in terms of GDP (Gross Domestic

Product per capita) growth rate with CPI scores < 50 that perceived to have more corruption

[69]. The comparable indexes shall also be categorized accordingly. This approach is true for

all previous editions of CPI as well.

For comparison purpose, each index is also standardized to be compatible with the CPI

scale. The standardization converts all data sources to a scale of 0-100.

We prefer here CPI as measuring stick yard of perceived governance at the countries level.

Its analytical view with E-Governance indicators is discussed in detail in Comparative

Analysis section 2.2 and in Gap Analysis section 3.2.

2.2 Comparative Analyses

For analytical comparison, we consider here two filtered out indexes, one is UN’s EGDI

representing as an E-readiness index of promoting transparency and the other is Transparency

International’s CPI representing as a perceived governance index.

Some interesting comparisons of indexes provided by EGDI 2016-2012 [10, 12, 15] and

Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2016-2012 [14, 66, 67, 68, 69] are shown in Fig. 2.

of 102

In Fig. 2, the growth of EGDI is looking nearly synchronized with the growth of CPI on

the average scores of last five years data. UN has also acknowledged this influence by

declaring that EGDI is supporting transparency and accountability [10, 12, 15]. But, on the

other hand, the growth of EPI, which is the core indicator of transparency, accountability,

reducing corruption and participatory governance, is totally deviated from CPI growth. Steep

rises in EPI 2014 and EPI 2016 are not reflected by CPI growth. This is also acknowledged by

UN as by considering EPI still a supplementary index [10, 12, 15]. A relative data analyses

and hypothesis testing on these indexes are discussed in chapter 3.

Figure 2 Showing the growth of average scores of three Indexes namely EGDI, EPI, and CPI from 2012 to 2016. Sources:

UNDESA [10, 12, 15] and Transparency International [14, 66, 67, 68, 69].

The situation has become more fragile when we analyzed EPI graph further. The UN

measures the E-Participation Index as the composite index of its three stages which are: e-

information, e-consultation, and e-decision-making [12, 15]. Although UN has measured all

three stages of EPI with equal weights, certainly a maturity model shall not be given equal

weights as each stage or level has its own importance and influence greater than its preceding

stage.

Stage-wise EPI scores of UN have started being published from 2014 onwards. Fig. 3

illustrates the growth of EPI and its stages for 2014 and 2016. Interestingly, in Fig. 3, the total

average score 0.3643 of EPI-2014 does not reflect the actual picture of three distinct scores of

EPI, especially if comparing it with the e-decision making score of only 0.0731. Here the total

average score of EPI-2014 seems to be influenced by the higher score of the e-information

stage. Initial stages shall not be given higher weights as compared to the weights given to

mature stages in a maturity model.

Whereas in EPI-2016, UN has tried to adjust this error by accelerating the corresponding

bar of the e-consultation stage which is found to be 0.431 in 2016, chasing towards its total

average score which is 0.471. This adjustment creates a new anomaly. As we know that the

of 102

scores of E-Participation stages are declining in hierarchical order. Logically, the stages of E-

Participation obtain maturity in a sequence one after the other. Therefore, it is hard to accept

that the behavior of e-information stage yet remains same during 2014 and 2016, only a

meager increase from 0.5573 to 0.564. But, on the other hand, e-consultation stage increases

tremendously during this period from 0.2466 to 0.431. This results in an instant increase of

75%. Similar is the case for the last stage which is increased by 76% during this period. UN

has defended that the increase in the e-decision-making stage is due to the increase in the e-

consultation stage, but increase in the e-consultation stage is neither justified nor referenced

anywhere.

Figure 3 Shows the average scores of three stages of E-Participation for 2014 & 2016 and their total average score. Source:

UNDESA [12, 15]

Figure 4 Shows the average EPI-2016 scores for Income-wise groups of countries. A prominent rise is shown in only e-

Information bars for all Income groups, whereas e-Consultation is raised accordingly and e-Decision making is far lagged

behind. Source: UNDESA [15].

Fig. 4 illustrates more details about the growth of stages of E-Participation with respect to

Income-wise groups of countries for the year 2016. The results verify that only a few

countries of the High-Income group offer E-Participation services up to the e-decision-making

stage, rest of the groups show negligible scores for stage 3, which again highlights an

of 102

alarming issue for transparency, accountability and active citizens’ participation for rest of the

world.

Though E-Participation has been witnessed to be a dominating indicator for measuring E-

Governance, the above results, if accepted as it is, show that most of the countries yet only

inform citizens, consult rarely and keep them away from decision-making processes. This

illustrates that the potential for E-Participation is still in its early stages of maturity.

2.3 Readiness Assessment Indicators of E-Governance Model

We concentrate here only the ICT specific key performance indicators of E-Governance

model. From research study (e.g. in [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15]) and from our gap analyses

and implications discussed in chapter 3, it is revealed that E-Participation shall be the major

indicator for E-Governance system while Socio-technical tools and technologies be its logical

precursors for effective functioning of participatory governance system (e.g. in [71, 72, 73]).

Thus E-Participation services are dependent on the joint optimization of social and technical

tools offered by the concerned government in a respective environment. A discussion on the

impact of Social and Technical tools on E-Participation services can be seen in section 2.3.2.

While this is not an exhaustive list of indicators for good governance, there are many other

important and popular lists of indicators for the governance that are related to political, social,

legal & judicial, business environment, human development, poverty reduction, anti-

terrorism, etc. These indicators are no doubt playing important role and have some significant

weights in measuring the performance of governance but they are all out of the scope of our

problem domain thus we left their analyses for social scientists and researchers of their

domain. We consider here only the ICT and Web-specific indicators of E-Governance. The

indicators being considered here are wide enough to cover all the important aspects of

participatory governance and can, at the same time, be narrowed down to provide useful

recommendations on future policy prioritization and activities. Hence, the framework we

proposed and designed here uses E-Participation as core indicator to describe and understand

the realities that influence readiness of a country’s level of CSCW’s based Participatory

Governance.

2.3.1 E-Participation

In most of the literature survey and in some well-known reports such as [4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,

13, 15, 16, 69, 74, 75, 76], highlighting measuring indicators of participatory governance

of 102

models, they endorsed that E-Participation of citizens has been making a direct influence on

an E-Governance model.

Since near past, E-Participation has been emerged as a Citizen-sourcing agent, a subset of

crowd-sourcing, as citizens have rich knowledge in their concerns [77]. Citizens interact with

authorities, communities, and even outside of the community boundaries, collaboratively and

actively, using various and emerging E-Participation tools and technologies [16].

As Governments adopting W3C technologies, the participation processes are easier to

implement. The European Commission (EC) also funded various E-Participation projects

under the E-Participation readiness action. The setting up of ICT infrastructure, its

connectivity, and the development of social networking were the common features of the

projects [44].

A range of Community-web, Semantic-web and Symbiotic-web tools and technologies are

being introduced as facilitators for interactive processes and enablers for communications that

bypassing time and space limits in MUEs [78]. Hence today E-Participation is being more

facilitated for the creation of new political spaces for collaboration, policy making, decision

making and to the revival of democracy [78] [11]. Further discussion of the impact of

technologies on E-Participation services is in the following section.

2.3.2 Impact of Socio-Technical Tools and Technologies on E-Participation

A socio-technical system is a complex organizational work design that recognizes the

interaction between humans and machines in workspaces by using their system provided

social and technical tools and technologies.

Human development is the core responsibility of the state. It depends on various social

tools that a government shall address, such as political and economic stability, GDP growth

rate, education, social benefits, social-ownership, employment opportunities, training and

capacity building opportunities, safety, trust, etc. Social tools refine the behavior of humans

against the task, job, or services offering to them. It is revealed that countries those are good

in social development also well-responded in E-Participation services and hence in better

governance.

For E-Governance service system, Technical tools require a maturity of ICT-infrastructure

& connectivity, ICT usage, web services and other likewise indicators for backend automation

and process re-engineering of various interoperable systems of government agencies (e.g. in

[7, 15, 72, 79, 80]). Further, in E-Government environment, the concept of Connected

Knowledge or Web-of-Data of recent web technologies is termed as Connected Government.

of 102

In other words, the concept of connected government is derived from the whole-of-

government approach which is centralizing the entry point of service delivery to a single

portal where citizens can access all government-supplied information and services

semantically and ubiquitously, regardless of which government agency provides them.

Genuine cost savings and quality improvements will occur only if there is a re-engineering

of the internal structures and processes of the systems for true back-end automation and

integration [81]. Modern service systems, which may be classified as a system of systems

(SoS), are offering well-defined integration and management of service operations for the

real-time dynamic delivery of services [82]. Socio-technical Service Systems are increasingly

looking towards human-friendly technologies as strategic tools for the real-time integration of

E-Participation services provided to the end-users.

Technical tools in E-Governance system also consist of maturity of Open Government

Data (OGD) policies & regulations as prerequisite performance measures of E-Participation

[71]. In Open Government, the government focuses on how to make institutions more open,

transparent, accountable, participatory, and collaborative. OGD also brings up challenges of

data accuracy, data protection and privacy concerns [74]. Other instruments are also desired to

support effective public accountability, such as well-defined code of conduct, effective

supreme audit institutions, human resource development, etc. [15].

Hence it is all assumed that there is a linear relationship between OGD, human

development, development of technical tools and technologies, and E-Participation. That is,

the greater the openness, human development, development of technical tools and

technologies the higher will be the E-Participation (e.g. in [9, 13]), and hence approaching

better governance.

Some social and technical tools that characteristically be imposing more impact on E-

Participation services in the context of CSCW are illustrated in section 5.3 and section 5.4 of

chapter 5.

2.4 E-Participation between the Stakeholders of E-Governance System

using the context of CSCW

Stakeholders are primarily the actors of initiatives. They play an active role in their functions.

For example, they can influence the implementation of organization’s decisions and subject-

matters. Companies engage their employees in dialogue to find out what social and

of 102

environmental issues matter most to them about their performance in order to improve

decision-making and accountability.

As an example, by considering a company and its employees as two distinct stakeholders,

Fig. 5 illustrates the communication between the two stakeholders and their deliverables in a

Face-to-Face interaction.

Figure 5 Face-to-Face interaction

Focusing our discussion to an E-Governance system, many researchers are agreed that

citizens’ participation plays a key role in a governance system. Characteristically, this role

requires a computer-mediated interaction (CMI) for initiating E-Participation. The researchers

distinguished citizens (C) and government (G) as two major stakeholders in the E-Governance

interactive processes. As an example of a computer-mediated interaction, Fig. 6 illustrates the

communication between Government and Citizens as two distinct stakeholders and their

deliverables in an E-Governance system.

Figure 6 Computer-mediated interaction (CMI) in an E-Governance System

As we know, E-Participation services are well facilitated by the expansion in e-community

through emerging web technologies of W3C standards that bypassing time and space limits of

the workspaces of groupware in a MUE. Both social and technical (generally called ‘socio-

technical’) factors play an important role in the development of collaborative systems for E-

Participation.

of 102

The CSCW groupware matrix, represented by [83], is classically and efficiently available

for the purpose. CSCW focuses on the study of enabling tools and technologies of

groupware as well as their social and organizational effects. It is analyzed on the two

dimensions of cooperation namely; time and space. The stakeholders can interact with each

other using the four quadrants of CSCW depicted as in Fig. 7 and described as follows:

Figure 7 Time/space groupware matrix of CSCW

1) Same place and the same time: These are the workspaces that support group working

at the same time and at the same place (physical as well as virtual).

2) Same place and different times: The stakeholders in these workspaces share

information, consult with other stakeholders, and work together on a continuous task

towards a common goal at different times but at the same place. The technology can

interact with stakeholders asynchronously.

3) Different places and the same time: From different places, the stakeholders interact

with each other at the same time to perform online collaboration towards a common

task. This requires a strong network of communication to perform well-coordinated

activities.

4) Different places and different times: This quadrant includes workspaces that support

collaborative workflows from crowdsourcing to crowd voting and from crowdfunding

to crowd empowering from different places asynchronously. This requires strong

asynchronous web tools and technologies.

By using these communication channels of CSCW, stakeholders can participate more

efficiently [84, 85], productivity and efficiency can be increased [86, 87, 88] and

competitiveness can be improved [84, 89].

of 102

Further discussion about the mapping of the stages of E-PartM model, mapping of a 4-

staged group of interactions of stakeholders and mapping of emerging web tools and

technologies to each quadrant of CSCW matrix can be seen in chapter 4.

of 102

CHAPTER 3

Conceptual Model and Methodology

The conceptual model of our research study is based on the analyses of some survey-based

hypotheses on the data of some perceived governance indexes, highlighted in chapter 2,

elaborated as follows:

3.1 Testing of Hypotheses

The research study is progressed through hypothetical testing of the following six analytically

discovered hypotheses:

H1: It is assumed that higher E-Government Development Index (EGDI) of

countries is producing higher Corruption Perception Index (CPI) of those

countries.

H2: On the other hand, we can also suppose that Lower E-Government

Development Index (EGDI) of countries means lower Corruption Perception

Index (CPI) of those countries.

H3: As per criteria, there shall be a strong positive correlation between CPI and

existing EPI provided by UN.

H4: It is all presumed that E-Governance without E-Participation services is

incomplete

H5: The proposed E-GovSSRA framework by using E-GovSSRA index is likely to

produce a strong positive correlation with CPI

H6: E-Participation services in the socio-technical environment can be most

efficiently modeled using the context of CSCW and its supporting socio-

technical tools and technologies

These hypotheses are chosen and finalized in such a way that their results are considered to

be the concluding implications for further proceedings of the analytical workflow of our

dissertation problem accomplished as follows:

1) First three hypotheses are analyzed in the next section of this chapter, whereas

analysis for H4 is discussed in chapter 4 and H5 & H6 in chapter 7.

2) For testing of first three hypotheses, gap analyses of some relevant E-readiness

indexes have been carried out and tested in section 3.2 of this chapter.

3) After drawing conclusions on first three hypotheses, results and their implications are

discussed in section 3.3.

4) The 4th

hypothesis is tested on the defining indicator of E-Governance system. A

research field survey was conducted and discussed for this purpose in section 4.3.1 of

chapter 4.

of 102

5) On the basis of implications discussed in section 3.3, an enhanced and redefined E-

Participation Maturity (E-PartM) model in a collaborative workspace of CSCW and

hence a human-centered and a socio-technical design of E-Governance Service

System Readiness Assessment (E-GovSSRA) framework for the development of

interactive applications related to participatory governance and citizen-sourcing is

proposed in chapter 4.

6) Social and technical tools as precursors of E-GovSSRA framework in the context of

CSCW is discussed in chapter 5.

7) To identify the case-specific performance measures of each stage of E-PartM model,

two real-time and classical case studies related to participatory governance systems

are proposed and discussed in chapter 5.

8) The toolkits are also developed for each case study for a prototype implementation of

E-GovSSRA framework in chapter 5.

9) In this connection, a conference paper is published [90], proposing a readiness

assessment toolkit for a continuing and an indigenous case-study associated to public

procurements for the prototype implementation of E-GovSSRA framework.

10) A survey based design of the experiment is conducted in chapter 6, by selecting one

of the toolkits as our test-bed model for a prototype implementation of the framework.

11) The 5th

hypothesis is validated after generating the results of experimental design in

chapter 7, to identify a better correlation using the E-GovSSRA toolkit of the

proposed E-GovSSRA framework.

12) The 6th

hypothesis is also verified in Result section of chapter 7 to prove the impact of

CSCW framework and its supporting tools and technologies on E-PartM model.

13) Hence, this aims to improve the scores of existing E-Participation assessment index

and thereby improve country’s economy through efficient, accountable and

transparent business processes and transactions.

In the following section gap analyses of some relevant E-readiness indexes have been

carried out and tested with above listed analytically discovered hypotheses.

3.2 Gap Analyses

Bivariate Correlation is a popular measure to find the degree of relationship between the two

variables. A classical bivariate coefficient of correlation, to find a linear association, is

popularly known as Karl Pearson's Coefficient of Correlation (r). Here, we consider this

of 102

measure to test the linear relationship between the two indexes with the level of significance

(α) equal to 0.01 for all tests.

As we know, the interpretation of the strength of a correlation coefficient depends on the

context and purpose. The most common guidelines to estimate the strength of Karl Pearson's

Coefficient of Correlation are given in Fig. 8. However, all such principles are in some ways

arbitrary and should be observed accordingly [91].

Figure 8 Illustrates the range of values of r against their approximated degrees of Association

By testing first three hypotheses as Gap Analyses, some interesting results are obtained in

order to find any significant relationship between CPI-2016 index [69] and other popular

indexes such as EGDI-16, EPI-16 [15], ITUIDI-16 [80] and ODB-15 [74] as E-Governance

readiness indexes. The relevance of ITUIDI and ODB with CPI index is discussed in section

3.2.4 and with previous editions in section 3.2.5.

3.2.1 Hypothesis Test–1

H1o: It is assumed that higher E-Government Development Index (EGDI) of

countries is producing higher Corruption Perception Index (CPI) of those

countries.

H1A: There is no strong correlation between the two indexes (2-tailed).

Illustration of Test–1:

Figure 9 A correlation between CPI-16 Scores having >=50 and corresponding EGDI-16 is found to be r= 0.640 showing

moderately positive correlation.

of 102

The conclusion of Test–1:

With r=0.640 which is showing moderately positive correlation, the graph in Fig.6 is

not providing sufficient evidence to conclude that higher E-Government development

index of countries is producing higher corruption perception index of those countries.

Thus no doubt the relationship between them is positive but it is not strong enough as

claimed in H1o.

Therefore, we reject H1o and accept H1A


On the other hand, we can also suppose that:

H2o: Lower E-Government Development Index (EGDI) of countries means lower

Corruption Perception Index (CPI) of those countries.



Figure 10 A correlation between CPI-16 Scores having < 50 and corresponding EGDI-16 is found to be r= 0.562

showing moderately weak positive correlation.


With r=0.562 (moderately weak positive correlation), the graph in Fig. 10 is not

providing sufficient evidence to conclude that the CPI-16 of the countries having scores

less than 50 out of 100 that perceived to have a serious corruption problem, may

strongly correlate with their corresponding EGDI-16 scores.

Therefore, we reject H2o and accept H2A.

Summary of conclusion Tests–1 & 2:

On the basis of Hypothesis Tests–1 & 2, it is concluded that the results of both tests are

showing a positive correlation between them but their relationships are not strong enough to

of 102

provide evidence that the existing measuring indicators of EGDI are sufficient enough for

suggesting as performance measures for an E-Governance model.


E-Participation is found to be the key indicator for E-Governance readiness models. This hints

that:

H3o: There shall be a strong positive correlation between CPI and existing EPI

provided by UN.



For testing this hypothesis, we consider both years’ data of EPI that is 2014 and 2016 because

of the variations found in their aggregated values highlighted in Fig. 2 & Fig. 3 of section 2.2.

Interestingly, both years’ analysis is showing weak results against H3o illustrated as follows:

1) CPI-16 vs. EPI-14:

Figure 11 The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having >=50 and corresponding EPI-14 is found only to be r =

0.321 showing weak positive correlation.

Figure 12 The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having <50 and corresponding EPI-14 is found to be r = 0.490

showing weak positive correlation.

of 102

2) CPI-16 vs. EPI-16:

Figure 13 The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having >=50 and corresponding EPI-16 is found to be r = 0.498


Figure 14 The correlation between CPI-16 Scores having <50 and corresponding EPI-16 is found to be r = 0.512



Results of Fig. 11, Fig. 12, Fig. 13 and Fig. 14 have shown that there is a weaker

relationship between CPI-2016 & EPI-2014 or between CPI-2016 & EPI-2016.

Whereas much improvement can be seen in r=0.498 of Fig. 13 as compared to r=0.321 of

Fig. 11. This is because of the acceleration is seen in EPI-2016 data, which is discussed in

detail in section 2.2.

Here we, therefore, reject H3o and accept H3A.

Summary of conclusion Test–3:

On the basis of the results obtained from Hypothesis Test–3, it is proved that the relationship

between EPI and CPI is much weaker than the relationship between EGDI and CPI, even if

we overlook the anomalies discussed in section 2.2.. Hence there is a need to revisit the

existing E-Participation model, re-examine its measuring parameters and their weight analyses

to make it strongly compatible with an E-Governance model.

of 102

3.2.4 Further analyses

To discover any other significant association with CPI index, some of the other closely related

indexes to E-Governance readiness assessment model are analyzed as follows:

1) International Telecommunication Unit (ITU) publishes ICT Development Index (IDI)

since 2009. Recently, it published ICT Development Index-2016 in a report called

‘Measuring the Information Society 2016’ [80]. ITUIDI-16 analyzes 175 countries to

assess their ICT readiness in order to use the openings created by the new emerging

ICT tools and paradigms. ICT infrastructure and its relevant technical tools are the

basis for successful implementation of E-Governance that is why this index is

incorporated here. The ITUIDI-16 comprises of three sub-indexes. The ICT Access

sub-index (40%), the ICT Use sub-index (40%) and ICT Skills sub-index (20%). Each

sub-index comprises of indicators with the same weight [80]. The ITU also introduces

an e-Government Quick-check Tool [92] to represent a country’s readiness position of

the e-government environment using the sub-indexes of IDI. Table 1 shows the

correlation between ITUIDI-16 and CPI-16 scores.

Table 1 Illustrate the correlation between CPI-16 and ITUIDI-16 Scores

2) The World Wide Web Foundation (WWWF) delivers its third edition for the readiness

of governments for Open Government Data called Open Data Barometer-2015 [74].

Open Data Barometer (ODB) aims the government’s data should be accessible for

anyone to share and use. It also intends to uncover the impact of open data initiatives

around the world. Open Government Data is also a prerequisite for E-Governance. The

WWWF evaluates 92 countries for the ODB-15 index, representing a large variety of

social, political, and economic circumstances. The report scores countries on three sub-

indexes [74]:

The “readiness” of governments, businesses, citizens and civil society to benefit

from available open data,

The “implementation” of open data practice on accountability, innovation, and

social policy, and

The “impact” of open data initiatives on the country's economy, politics, and

society.

of 102

The weighted average of all three sub-indexes is used to produce the overall Open Data

Barometer score for each country. Table 2 shows the correlation between ODB-15 and

CPI-16 scores.

Table 2 Illustrate the correlation between CPI-16 and ODB-15 Scores

3.2.5 Previous Editions of the Selected Indexes

The correlation evaluations of at least three editions of each selected index such as EGDI,

EPI, ODB, and ITUIDI against three editions of CPI are illustrated below to highlight any

variation in their patterns. Table 3 shows the list of selected indexes with their three available

editions. On the safe side, we ignore their first editions to avoid any underdeveloped practice.

Table 3 Illustrates the list of selected indexes with their available editions

Table 4 and Table 5 illustrate the correlation evaluation of these indexes against CPI

indexes for CPI Scores>=50 and CPI Scores<50 respectively. The level of significance for all

values is 0.01 (2-tailed):

Table 4 Illustrates the correlations between various editions of CPI Scores and various editions of the selected indexes for

CPI Scores >= 50

Table 5 Illustrates the correlations between various editions of CPI Scores and various editions of the selected indexes for

CPI Scores < 50

All such values of previous editions of each selected index against CPI indexes show an

almost same pattern of correlations (from weak to moderate) as compare to their latest

EGDI EGDI16 [15], EGDI14 [12], EGDI12 [10]

EPI EPI16 [15], EPI14 [12] (only two are available, ignoring its first edition)

ODB ODB15 [74], ODB14 [13] (only two are available, ignoring its first edition)

ITUIDI ITUIDI16 [80], ITUIDI15 [93], ITUIDI13 [94]

CPI CPI16 [69], CPI15 [14], CPI14 [68]

of 102

editions except a major variation found in between EPI16 and EPI14 as shown in Table 4. The

detailed discussion on this variation is already illustrated in sections 2.2 and 3.2.3.

Hence for comparison purpose; we consider here only the latest editions of the selected

indexes.

3.3 Implications of the above Results

The results of Hypothesis Tests–1 & 2 are providing sufficient evidence that the existing

measuring indicators of EGDI are not strong enough for suggesting as measuring indicators of

an E-Governance model.

However, E-Participation has been found to be a defining pillar in providing public voice,

openness and increasing transparency in public sector agencies thereby reducing corruption in

the human-centered and socio-technical environment of E-Governance. Conversely, the only

available UN’s EPI index representing E-Participation scores of all UN member states are not

significantly or not even moderately correlated with CPI index, whether considering >=50 or

<50 scores, as discussed in section 3.2.3. Thus, it is found that EPI-14 or EPI-16 index is more

insignificant in correlation with corruption control as compared to other evaluated indexes

such as EGDI-16, ITUIDI-16, ODB-15, etc. We also highlighted this comparison in Waseem,

et al [95].

Hence, above analyses inference that the performance measures of E-Participation index

and its existing maturity model need to be improved accordingly to make it significantly

correlate with perceived governance indexes.

This is logically agreed that E-Government supports E-Governance but cannot replace it.

Characteristically, E-Governance increases with the increase in the maturity stages of E-

Participation (e.g. in [16, 30, 78, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106]), whereas

E-Government increases with the increase in the maturity stages of online service delivery

(e.g. in [5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15]). Hence, E-Participation is the core ingredient of E-Governance,

not E-Government. E-Government can support transparency and accountability to some extent

by providing online services directly to the citizens whether in democratic or in non-

democratic nations. Similar are the cases for ITUIDI, ODB and other likewise indexes. If our

main purpose is to reduce corruption from public sector agencies through participatory

governance then E-Participation is the best tool to be inducted as collective intelligence

besides online service delivery of E-Government.

Further, in all of the above results, it has been found that CPI Scores having >=50 are

moderately correlated with all indexes under consideration except EPI as shown in Table 4

of 102

and Table 5. Although their relationships are not shown significantly strong enough, at least

give us a pattern that, in the category of CPI Scores >=50, the group of countries included

mostly belonged to the high-income group or upper-middle-income group where generally

ICT infrastructure & connectivity, OGD policies, and regulations, citizens-engagement,

human development, socio-technical environment, GDP growth rate, E-democracy and other

likewise indicators are mature enough, thus making a positive impact on reducing corruption

from their societies. This supports and motivates our point of view that these indicators are

also operating as prerequisite performance measures of E-Governance.

To fill the gap, we are suggesting an enhanced E-Participation maturity (E-PartM) model

thereby proposing a human-centered design of E-Governance Service System Readiness

Assessment (E-GovSSRA) framework from CSCW’s perspective which is discussed in detail

in chapter 4 and also proposed in Waseem, et al [107]. Thus it would be a formal and yet

another framework which also hints towards a perceived governance model but from HCI’s

major CSCW theory and computing domain.

Eventually, E-Participation and its precursors related to social and technical tools should

be further investigated for their performance measures and their weight analyses in the light of

illustrated gap analyses so as to increase the efficacy of E-Governance. Such evaluations also

need an investigation on country-specific diagnostic data and case studies to discover the

relevant limitations on governance issues for particular country circumstances.

of 102

CHAPTER 4

Proposed Theoretical Frameworks

At this stage, we are able to propose theoretical frameworks and their components from HCI’s

CSCW perspective.

It is learned that the maturity of E-Participation stages is crucial for the maturity of E-

Governance system. But, as it is demonstrated in chapters 2 and 3 of this report that the

potential of EPI of UN, up to the last edition [15], is still in its early stages of development.

Thus there is also a practical need to re-address the stages and their related performance

measures of existing E-Participation maturity model used by UN.

4.1 Design of E-Participation Maturity (E-PartM) Model

Traditionally the stages of participation establish the degree of involvement to which the

citizens engage in the process of E-Participation. Different topologies of E-Participation

engagement levels are introduced, discussed and applied in general. After a comprehensive

literature survey (e.g. from [16, 30, 71, 76, 78, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105,

106, 108]), the authors are able to introduce an improved schema of E-Participation especially

from CSCW’s perspective of E-Governance. We call it a 4-staged application of E-PartM

model. The relationship between these stages shall have a logical sequence as in other related

literature. Government agencies should pay attention to achieving one maturity level at a time

approaching it in an orderly manner, where lower levels must be all-inclusive. The proposed

4-staged E-PartM model is discussed below:

1) E-Informing. In stage 1, the government agency is providing information in a limited

one-way communication channel. The government information is accessible as well as

functions and processes are described here. Citizens can use search-engines for

information retrieval and be able to download related documents and forms. In this

stage, only limited catalog data is readily available to the public which is also not

updated frequently. The citizens, therefore, are not being able to participate in the

agency's governing processes in a meaningful way but take only a passive role. The

possible interaction here is only {G2C}.

of 102

2) E-Consulting. In stage 2, citizens are allowed to send their feedbacks on issues of

their interests again in a one-way channel consultation without having online

interactions. The agency, with stage 2, assures data quality in terms of openness,

accuracy, timeliness, and consistency. Here possible interactions are {G2C and C2G}.

3) E-Collaborating. In stage 3, the citizens can play an active role in offering and

suggesting policies in two-way channel collaboration, but the final authority of

decision making on public issues is in the government hand. The citizens’ ideas,

common interests, knowledge, and expertise are crowd-sourced {C2C} at this stage.

The collective efforts facilitate government agencies to make reliable decisions and

consensus-building. To do so, back-end automation of internal functions has to be

redesigned for vertical integration of online services. Here possible interactions are

{G2C, C2G, and C2C}.

4) E-Empowering. In stage 4, the agency delegates transfer of power, influence, and

policy-making to the citizens, so the final decision is in the control of public hands

through an advanced two-way channel communication. The agency, in this stage,

works together with other agencies {G2G} by using their data, public inputs &

feedbacks and co-creates value-added services to the public. To do so, all distinct

information and service systems are horizontally integrated and interoperable. As a

result, all government services are seamlessly integrated within and across government

agencies. One single point of contact for all services is the ultimate goal in this stage.

Here possible interactions are {G2C, C2G, C2C, and G2G}.

This schema of E-PartM model is mainly based on work discussed by Wimmer in [100];

however, we acknowledge that some variations in descriptions of these hierarchical stages

might be used. We believe that in our proposed E-GovSSRA framework, these four stages of

E-PartM model will form a more coherent and well-defined E-Participation initiatives, when

using it with CSCW’s groupware matrix of citizens’ engagement that focuses on interactive,

participatory, and collaborative citizen sourcing environment which will largely drive by E-

Governance directives and supported by emerging Web tools and technologies.

of 102

4.2 Importance of Four Stages of E-PartM Model

All E-Participation maturity models have one thing in common; they start with information

level, followed by citizen’s consultations, and end at the level where E-Participation really

facilitates citizen’s empowerment. Here the need for the four stages of E-Participation

maturity model is established by the following four implications.

1) By validating four stages of E-Participation maturity model, Wimmer in [100] claimed

that there should be an e-collaborating stage before the e-empowering stage in the

models mentioned by [96, 97], to ensure that citizen sourcing can efficiently be

provided in an advanced two-way communication.

2) By efficiently fitting the four stages of E-PartM model on the prescribed CSCW

time/space groupware matrix of citizens’ collaborations. The CSCW matrix

implementation on E-Participation model can enhance the participatory processes and

citizen sourcing among all groups of stakeholders’ interactions by using the supporting

technologies and standards of W3C. The detailed discussion on this mapping is in

section 4.4.

3) The United Nations, in its E-Government survey report-2016 [15], highlighted a

prominent gap in percentage polygons, shown in between e-consultation and e-

decision-making stages for the countries engaged in three stages of UN’s EPI-16 index

while grouped by low to very high EPI rankings of countries as shown in Fig. 15

below. To fill the gap between the polygons and to facilitate citizen sourcing in an

advanced two-way communication, e-collaborating stage can effectively be inducted

in between e-consultation and e-decision-making stages of UN’s EPI model. Most of

the recent literatures, on E-Participation maturity models, are also suggesting that at

least four stages of E-Participation are required to complete its maturity cycle

smoothly.

Figure 15 Highlights percentage polygons of countries engaged in three stages of EPI-16 grouped by low to very high EPI

rankings of countries [15].

of 102

4) The authors highlighted in Fig. 2 of Comparative analyses of section 2.2 that e-

information stage of UN’s EPI is unnecessarily presented as a single source of open

government data. It can characteristically be bifurcated into two stages of passive

citizens’ area to make it a total of 4 stages. So that high peak of e-information stage

shall be normalized, as compared to other stages, at least from the analysis point of

view.

All these implications establish a concrete basis to induct an intermediate stage among the

three stages of UN’s E-Participation model that could help close the existing gaps thereby

improving the scores of E-Participation index.

4.3 Mapping E-PartM Model with Stakeholders’ Group of Interactions

Waseem, et al., in [90], have discussed two primary interactive stakeholders, distinguished in

E-Governance concept as Citizens (C) and Government (G) itself, such that E-Governance

readiness assessment plan can effectively be executed by their all possible 4-staged group of

interactions that is G2C, C2G, C2C, and G2G. This is also acknowledged by Linders, in [32],

presenting a typology for ICT-facilitated citizen co-production initiatives.

In [90], we have also suggested that E-PartM model, as elaborated in section 4.1 of this

chapter, can efficiently be superimposed on the 4-staged group of interactions of stakeholders

respectively as a 4-quadrant matrix shown in Fig. 16 below:

Figure 16 Superimposition of E-PartM model on a 4-staged group of interactions of stakeholders respectively as a 4 quadrant

matrix [90].

For validating a real-time execution of our E-PartM model depicted in Fig. 16, a research-

based field survey was conducted to endorse our study in the following section.

4.3.1 Results of Data Analyses of a Research Field Survey

For validating our research hypothesis that “Maturity of E-Participation stages improves the

readiness of E-Governance service systems”, a field survey was conducted, among 29

participants of officer’s rank from 29 different government agencies of Pakistan, in a local

context. Most of them were invited from federal agencies and as representatives of their

of 102

departments. Remember that Pakistan is a country with strong diversity in opportunities,

poverty indexes, literacy, justice, failing governance, and accountability. The survey was

conducted in a two-day workshop organized by National Institute of Management (NIM)

Karachi, Pakistan in June 2015; to find the stage-wise online participatory servicing tools

offered to the citizens through the website(s) of their respective departments for E-

Governance initiatives. One of the questions asked to the participants of the field survey was:

“What types of servicing tools and techniques are offered in your department’s website(s) for

E-Governance Service System Readiness Initiatives?” The data obtained are compiled in

Table 6.

Table 6 E-Governance Service System Readiness Initiatives in Govt. Departments of Pakistan

Survey Conclusion:

Table 6 is showing that not a single E-participatory servicing tool or technique is offered

up to the 4th

stage of G2G interaction in any of the government departments of Pakistan.

Whereas, very limited tools or techniques of C2C interactions of the 3rd

stage with partial

backend automation and limited online interactions between the stakeholders, are found in

few of the departments. Most of the agencies are offering basic information about their

departments as the stage-1 of G2C interactions and to some extent, consultation is carried

out as stage-2 of C2G interactions. This verifies that the potential for online participatory

of 102

servicing tools and techniques is still in its early stages of maturity in the countries with

weak governance. Secondly, the total score of the departments for each stage of E-PartM

model is declining in the order from lower to higher stage; however, this is true for some

better-case countries as well. Certainly, this ratio will improve smoothly for best-

performing countries.

The developed countries, those are good in E-Governance initiatives are also playing well

in all stages of E-Participation [79]. This has also been proved in Fig. 3 of section 2.2 of

chapter 2. Hence, it is found that E-Participation services up to the last maturity stage are

essential for a total readiness of E-Governance service system.

Above analyses about E-Participation are providing concrete bases to validate our fourth

hypothesis as follows:


H4o: It is all presumed that E-Governance without E-Participation services is

incomplete

H4A: There is no impact of E-Participation services on E-Governance.

Analyses for Test–4:

1) From research study (e.g. in [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15]) and from our gap analyses

and implications discussed in chapter 3, it is revealed that E-Participation has been

found to be a defining pillar in providing public voice, openness and increasing

transparency in public sector agencies thereby reducing corruption in the human-

centered and socio-technical environment of E-Governance system while Socio-

technical tools and technologies be its logical precursors for effective functioning of

participatory governance (e.g. in [71, 72, 73]).

2) Some well-known reports and articles also endorsed that E-Participation of citizens

has been making a direct influence on an E-Governance model [9, 13, 16, 74, 76].

3) The data analysis provided in section 4.3.1 is also ended with a conclusion that E-

Participation services up to the last maturity stage are essential for a total readiness of

E-Governance service system.

4) As discussed in the Implications section 3.3, E-Governance increases with the increase

in the maturity stages of E-Participation (e.g. in [16, 30, 78, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101,

102, 103, 104, 105, 106]), whereas E-Government increases with the increase in the

of 102

maturity stages of online service delivery (e.g. in [5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15]). Thus, E-

Participation is the core ingredient of E-Governance not E-Government. If our main

purpose is to reduce corruption from public sector agencies through participatory

governance then E-Participation is the best tool to be inducted as collective

intelligence in an E-Governance system.

Conclusion of Test–4:

All of the arguments in the above analyses section endorse our null hypothesis,

therefore, we accept H4o that E-Governance without E-Participation services is

incomplete.

4.4 Mapping E-PartM Model with CSCW Groupware Matrix

It is agreed that implementation of E-Participation maturity levels also requires

implementation of a multitude of interdependent key dimensions, including openness,

backend automation, and connectivity, promotion of HCI and online social networking, web

supporting tools and technologies, stakeholders’ trust, subjective norms, sustainability,

accessibility, etc. [97]. These are the critical success factors for implementing true E-

Participation.

The expansion in e-community, through the expansion in W3C technologies, seeks to

optimize E-Participation by enhancing collaboration among the systems of stakeholders [109].

This raises the inspiration to engage a broader community for creating socially enabled and

human-centered processes of citizen-sourcing, known as a crowd-ware. It is used here for the

creation of awareness and involvement on the process outcomes of E-Governance [110].

Whereas, the crowd-ware members as compare to groupware members share or do not share

some kind of interest, collaborate even if unconsciously, may or may not know each other, but

are interested in a common context [61]. Schneider, et al in [61] also defined crowd-ware as a

class of systems for supporting virtual and real crowds, inheriting the main components of

groupware matrix of CSCW, along with Web 3.0 and Cloud Computing, to provide advanced

services anywhere and anytime and connecting individuals in heterogeneous environments.

Thus CSCW time/space groupware matrix is an effective approach to consider for

expressing participatory crowd-working, escaping time and space limits by using emerging

socio-technical tools and technologies. The classical time/space groupware matrix of CSCW,

represented by [83], is depicted in the Fig. 17 below:

of 102

Figure 17 Time/space groupware matrix of CSCW

Whereas the proposed 4-stages of E-PartM model illustrated in Fig. 16 are the

participatory stages to support crowds in carrying out their works, breaking down time and

space barriers, if supporting web tools and technologies are available. On the other hand, the

web tools on each quadrant of CSCW showing those technical and collaborative tools of

CSCW, that could be found suitable to create interfaces for citizens to obtain web services

corresponding to each stage of E-PartM model; hence E-PartM model can be mapped to each

time/space quadrant respectively. It helps the government in collecting the wisdom of the

crowds so that citizens can participate in various functions and processes of government. Thus

E-PartM model can efficiently be superimposed on the groupware (crowd-ware) matrix of

CSCW illustrated in Fig. 17 is represented in the Fig. 18 below:

Figure 18 Superimposition of Fig. 16 and Fig. 17

The interaction of stakeholders is also extending in this framework as we move through

the stages of E-Participation from one-way to multi-way channel consultation that is from

G2C to G2G.

It has been observed that the job of citizens (C) are also varying during E-Participation

stages, from passive information consumers to active decision-makers [12, 71].

Passive-Citizens acquire E-Participation services in relatively preliminary interactive-

communications. As in [71], Lee & Kwak said, it mainly depends on expressive web 1.0 tools

and technologies to connect people and help share their idea so that citizens can play here only

passive role. Active-Citizens, on the other hand, acquire E-Participation services in composite

of 102

tasks or projects that seek to co-create specific results [111] using advanced two-way real-

time communications. Such tasks contain group writing and editing of documents, open

source software development, Wiki applications development, web content voting, blogging,

data-sourcing, etc. It relies on collaborative web 2.0 and semantic web 3.0 tools and

technologies so that citizens can play an active role here [71]. In recent past W3C has also

standardized Web 4.0 tools and technologies to offer symbiotic web services whereas

standardization of web 5.0 and web 6.0 technologies are also on the way. These emerging

technologies thus shift the paradigm of governance, management, and sourcing of LSSTC

systems.

By finalizing E-Participation roadmap, depicted in Fig. 19, it is logically suggested that

Passive-Citizens area can be well synchronized with the first two stages of E-PartM model,

whereas Active-Citizens area is effectively mapped with the last two stages of the maturity

model. Hence the 4-stages of E-Participation can efficiently be divided into Passive and

Active Participation areas as follows:

Passive Citizens Area: E-Informing & E-Consulting, and

Active Citizens Area: E-Collaborating & E-Empowering.

Further discussion about the framework is in section 4.6.

4.5 Proof of the impact of Open and Connected-Governments as

Technical Tools on E-Participation

To validate the relationship of E-Participation with Open Government and Connected

Government, we analyze here the following two associated indexes of Open and Connected

Governments, latest so far, to find any significant correlation with a currently available E-

Participation Index-2016 (EPI-16) provided by UN [15].

1) Open Data Barometer-2015 (ODB-15) [74], we also illustrated its relationship with

CPI-16 in section 3.2.4 of chapter 3, which is, in our context, a better example of

describing Open Government Data index, and

2) International Telecommunication Unit-ICT Development Index-2016 (ITUIDI-16)

[80], we also illustrated its relationship with CPI-16 in section 3.2.4 of chapter 3,

which is, in our context, a better example of describing Connected Government Data

index.

of 102

Table 7 Illustrates the Correlation between EPI-16 & ODB-15, and between EPI-16 & ITUIDI-16

The Table 7 shows that EPI-16 is strongly correlated with ODB-15 and ITUIDI-16. This

supports our point of view that E-PartM model is strongly associated with Open Government

and Connected Government. Thus we are recommending here Open Government and

Connected Government as our technical tools for initiating E-PartM model.

4.6 Design of E-GovSSRA Framework

All of the above discussions about the concluding structure of E-PartM model in the context

of CSCW lead to the final diagrammatic representation of E-Governance Service System

Readiness Assessment (E-GovSSRA) framework as illustrated in Fig. 19 below:

Figure 19 The text boxes on each quadrant shows those emergent web tools and technologies, which are found

suitable to create interfaces for stakeholders and to obtain E-Participation services corresponding to each stage and to each

time/space quadrant. The Passive and Active citizens’ areas are approaching maturity stages as we move from left to right

stage of their respective areas shaded with different colors.

of 102

In Fig. 19, the four stages of E-Participation are efficiently superimposed on the

Time/Space groupware matrix of CSCW, also proposed in Waseem, et al [107]. The text

boxes on each quadrant show those supported web tools and technologies (e.g. in [78, 104,

105, 112]), which are found suitable to create interfaces for the stakeholders to obtain E-

Participation services corresponding to each stage in its collaborative workspace. The

supporting web tools and technologies associated with each quadrant are also changing as we

move through these stages. By associating these tools along E-Participation roadmap, the

quadrant-I tools can efficiently be used for the first stage of E-Participation services {E-

informing} so as to share information related to basic functionaries and initiatives sponsored

by the government. In the second stage {E-consulting}, the quadrant-II tools and technologies

can be used to allow citizens’ consultations on the diverse topic(s) defined by the government.

As a result, first two stages would approach Passive-citizens’ area maturity. Finally, in the last

two stages {E-collaborating and E-empowering}, quadrant-III and quadrant-IV tools,

respectively, can support stakeholders in their common interests to collaborate with each other

{C2C and G2G} in crowdsourcing, policy formulation, knowledge base, decision-making

processes, etc. Hence this will provide multichannel service delivery tools and real-time

integrated services and thus approaching Active-citizens’ area maturity.

Researchers are continuously investigating on the growing list of tools and technologies

that might be used to promote creative citizen-sourcing and participation activities. Because of

changing nature of organizations’ work, researchers often have the complexity to decide

which set(s) of tools will help a particular group. Therefore the set of tools depicted in Fig. 19

are overlapping and non-exhaustive. Glossary of such web tools and technologies can be

viewed in Appendix D.

The Passive and Active citizens’ areas are also labeled in accordance with the tools and

technologies available in their respective areas and approaching their maturity stages as we

move from left to right stage of their respective areas shaded with different colors.

Next, the four stages of E-Participation should be further investigated for their

performance measures and their weight analyses in the light of advancement in web tools and

technologies to increase the efficacy of E-Governance. Such evaluations need further

investigation on country-specific diagnostic data to discover the relevant constraints on

governance issues for particular country circumstances.

We are using here a CSCW perspective of E-Governance seems to pursue two broad

goals. The first, the more theoretical goal is to understand how and what emergent web tools

and technologies can support and improve stakeholders’ participatory activities and citizen

of 102

sourcing in E-PartM model. The second goal is to sort out a respective set of tools for each

stage of E-PartM model corresponding to each quadrant of CSCW matrix so as to

communicate effectively with each group of interactions of stakeholders.

We hope that the proposed human-centered design of E-GovSSRA framework using

HCI’s CSCW perspective will extend the relationship of E-Participation and CSCW with E-

Governance; and will help to spotlight within the research community as to how to best assess

the real-life complex problem of E-Governance readiness system as a perceived governance

model.

of 102

CHAPTER 5

Design of Toolkits for Prototype Implementation of E-

GovSSRA Framework

After proposing and designing E-GoveSSRA framework, the next step is to validate the

framework. For this purpose, the design of an experiment is needed on a case-specific test-

data for a prototype implementation of E-GovSSRA framework. Therefore, we are striving

first to select an ideal case-specific study and then identify list of its applicable readiness

performance measures to assess E-Participation services, which has been identified as the key

indicator of E-GovSSRA framework. The set of performance measures of E-Participation

obtained in this way shall be labeled as a case-specific Readiness Assessment Toolkit. Each

set of toolkit shall be composed of one or more components corresponding to each stage of E-

PartM model.

As we know that LSSTCSs are influenced by their socio-technical aspects of the systems.

We call it Social and Technical tools of the system. E-Participation is therefore logically

dependent on both of these essential precursors. A discussion on the impact of social and

technical tools on E-Participation is discussed in section 2.3.2. We have performed a number

of optimizations to identify the components and their possible performance measures of

precursors of E-Governance service system.

5.1 Overview of Balanced Scorecard

A variety of qualitative and quantitative evaluation techniques can be applied to assess the

performance, impact, and citizen-centricity of the organizations and their businesses. While

Qualitative indicators provide a measure through people’s opinions and perceptions and

Quantitative indicators are based on numerical or statistical facts that are used to make sense

of, monitor, or evaluate some phenomenon.

The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a strategic performance measurement tool - a semi-

standard structured report, supported by design methods and automation tools that can be used

by managers to keep track of the execution of business activities to the vision and strategy of

the organization and monitor organizational performance against strategic goals. The balanced

scorecard is seen as a quantitative strategic management system enabling business leaders to

of 102

give a more 'balanced' view of organizational performance in terms of key and coupled areas

of the business and their weights [113].

5.1.1 Readiness Performance Measures

The readiness performance measure is a measure that points out something about the

performance status of its respective indicator in terms of the balanced score it acquired. They

are usually narrowed down to measure more specific areas of their respective components.

However, it is a challenge to come up with a new set of performance measures for

assessing E-Governance systems given the complexity and controversy involving the subject.

The toolkits of the indicator(s), suggested in this chapter, provide a sound conceptual basis for

constructing E-Governance framework mainly based on the literature survey carried out and

our own experience. For this purpose, some important set of readiness performance measures

are identified first for the precursors say social and technical tools discussed in sections 5.3

and 5.4 and then for KPI say E-Participation in the form of readiness assessment toolkits

discussed in sections 5.6 and 5.7 related to the case-specific studies.

5.2 Measuring Score for Precursors of E-Participation

The Social and technical tools reflect the elements of the enabling environment at government

levels that should be evaluated before initiating readiness of E-Governance service systems.

Governments should not view evaluation as a onetime activity and should regularly assess the

E-Governance initiatives to ensure the success of the Plan.

For evaluation purpose, each performance measure of precursors may be scored on a five-

point scale and in this way a respective percentage can be assigned for standardization of each

component as follows:

Very Good: 5 (100%);

Good: 4 (80%);

Fair: 3 (60%);

Poor: 2 (40%);

Very Poor: 1 (20%).

The final score of each component can be obtained by taking the percentage of the total

score after that the proportion of its assigned weight shall be taken. After getting the total

score of each component, we can obtain the overall score of each precursor just by

aggregating them. If the response to any of the measures is ‘No’, this indicates possible

obstacles for the successful implementation.

of 102

5.3 Technical Tools for E-Participation in the context of CSCW

As discussed in gap analyses and Implications sections of chapter 3, it is found that the group

of countries with high-income group or upper-middle-income group where generally ICT

infrastructure & connectivity, OGD policies, and regulations, citizens-engagement, human

development, socio-technical environment, GDP growth rate, E-democracy and other likewise

indicators are mature enough, thus making a positive impact on reducing corruption from their

societies. Hence these indicators are also operating as prerequisite performance measures of

E-Governance system.

In this section, some of the components of technical tools (prerequisites) and their

performance measures to enhance E-Participation in E-Governance system in the context of

CSCW are presented.

Table 8 Readiness Performance Measures of Technical Tools

Components of Technical Tools Readiness Performance Measures

1. ICT infrastructure &

Connectivity

- Government spend on ICT (proportion of GDP)

- ICT/Technology Standards

- State Level Data Centers & Standards

- State level Network Backbones & Gateways

- Internal Back-end Automation (digitalizing and re-engineering of

processes/workflows)

- Digital Identity of e-service request (digital barcode stickers attachment)

and Time stamping.

- ISP market Regulation

- Service Gateways/Payment Gateways etc

- Rural Area Connectivity

2. ICT Usage - Internet Reach per 100 persons

- Mobile cellular per 100 persons

- Fixed broadband per 100 persons

- Wireless broadband per 100 persons

- Internet bandwidth per internet user

3. OGD Policy & Regulations

- National OGD Policy & Regulations

- Legal Policy

- Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Protection

- e-payment and data protection legislation

- Digital Development Strategy

- Level of Censorship

of 102

4. Supporting Web tools and

technologies

- Asynchronous conferencing

- Blogs/ Weblogs

- Bulletin board/ Noticeboard/ Digital board

- E-petition/Online petition

- E-polling/ online polling

- E-voting

- Instant messaging/ virtual meetings/ online virtual communities

- Like buttons

- Mashups

- Multi-user virtual environment (MUVE)

- Online Shared Screen Interactive Whiteboards /Shared Screen

Workspaces

- Podcasts

- RSS (Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site

- Summary) feed

- Semantic Blogs/Forums

- Semantic Wiki

- Social bookmarking

- Social networking/ Social media/ virtual community

- Tagging

- Version control

- Videocasts

- Virtual world

- Web 1.0

- Web 2.0/ Community-Web

- Web 3.0/ Semantic-Web

- Web 4.0/ Symbiotic-Web

- Webcasting

- Web conferencing

- Wikis

The proposed modules listed as components, presented in the above table, shall be

considered as separate units. It is therefore not necessary to work through the performance

measures in any specific order. The selection and order of components would depend on the

specific needs of the system.

Some of the components of technical tools such as their maintenance & operations,

management, implementation, etc., belong to the peripheral areas of our problem domain,

therefore, we left them for management sciences researchers and students.

We are just presenting here, as a sample, the list of component(s) of some technical tools

and their possible readiness performance measures that influenced on E-Participation services

as precursors which are also acknowledged in most of the E-readiness reports and articles

(e.g. in [15, 71, 72, 73, 74, 79, 80, 92, 114, 115]). The impact of socio-technical tools and

technologies on E-Participation is also discussed in section 2.3.2.

Some of the technical tools are more case-specific, therefore discussed later with their

respective case studies’ sections in 5.6 and 5.7

of 102

5.4 Social Tools for E-Participation in the context of CSCW

In this section, certain components of social tools (prerequisites) and their performance

measures to enhance E-Participation in E-Governance system in the context of CSCW are

presented.

Table 9 Readiness Performance Measures of Social Tools

Component of Social

Tools

Readiness Performance Measures

Social Environment

- Adult Literacy Rate

- Secondary Schools Gross Enrollment ratio

- ICT Education in Schools and Colleges

- ICT Skills & Capacity building

- Social Inclusiveness

o Employment opportunities

o Social benefits (Pension, Health insurance to unemployed/ elder/

younger citizens)

o Equity/Democracy

o Safety, Trust

- Social-ownership awareness Policy

The above component of Social tools and similarly the other components such as its

implementation, impact on country’s economy, business environment & adoption, GDP

growth rate, political culture, judicial independence, government will, etc, are belong to the

peripheral areas of our problem domain therefore we are not focusing on it in our research

study and left them for social sciences researchers and students.

We are just presenting here, as a sample, the list of component(s) of social tools and their

possible readiness performance measures that influenced on E-Participation services as

precursors which are also acknowledged in most of the E-readiness reports and articles (e.g. in

[5, 11, 15, 63, 74, 80, 111, 115, 116, 117]. The impact of socio-technical tools and

technologies on E-Participation is also discussed in section 2.3.2.

5.5 Case-specific Readiness Assessment Toolkits

We have developed readiness assessment toolkits of two case studies for prototype

implementation and validation of the proposed framework. In doing so, we have selected Case

study 01- the SPPRA’s Procurement Performance Management System (PPMS), as our case-

bed model and have successfully designed the functional diagrams and readiness assessment

toolkit for it. In this toolkit, some essential technical tools called agencies’ servicing rules and

regulations are required to perform the assessment of the toolkit. The PPMS is an

internationally sponsored project. It is an agency based case study, choosing and describing

of 102

here for the emergent application of E-Participation services in public procurements which if

implemented effectively can improve governance, transparency and corruption issues in the

public procurements. We consider this as a case-bed model because it serves only the

procuring agencies or procuring authorities. Its data cannot be comparable at countries level.

Case study 02- Government official Web Portal is finalized as our test-bed model. We have

also designed its readiness assessment toolkit. We consider it as our test-bed model as it is a

country-wide study and its data can be comparable at countries level. It requires W3C

standard tools and technologies as essential technical tools, necessary for web services and

web semantics. The experimental design on case study 02 can be seen in chapter 6.

The precursors of E-Participation contain readiness performance measures generic to all

cases of studies while E-Participation as key performance indicator contains case-specific

readiness performance measures; we call it a Readiness Assessment Toolkit. For example, as

in our cases of:

Case Study-01: Procurement Process Readiness Assessment Toolkit for PAs of

SPPRA’s PPMS using rules and regulations of SPPRA derived under the

guidelines of World Bank.

Case Study-02: E-Governance Service System Readiness Assessment Toolkit for

Government official Web Portals using emerging Web tools and

technologies.

5.6 SPPRA as a Case Study-1

The Sindh Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (SPPRA) is a body corporate responsible

for prescribing regulations and procedures for the procurements procured by public sector

agencies of Sindh Government.

The SPPRA become fully functional in October 2008. Procurement Legislation introduced

in May 2009 with the enactment of SPPRA Act 2009. A new set of Rules i.e. Sindh Public

Procurement Rules-2010, derived from World Bank Procurement guidelines, notified on 8th

March 2010 [118].

The ideology of the authority is centered on improving management, governance,

transparency, accountability, and quality of public procurements of goods, works, and

services; including consultancy and public-private partnership.

Presently SPPRA has a massive task of monitoring and evaluating the procurement

activities of around 800 Procuring Agencies (PAs), whereas PA is any department or office of

of 102

Government or district Government who is registered to procure. This number is expected to

rise in coming days. Therefore, SPPRA requires a readiness assessment toolkit that not only

facilitates Bidders, PAs and the Authority about the procurement processes but also provides

an assessment scorecard of each PA for their procurement performances evaluating in terms

of compliance of regulations, efficient governance, transparency and decision making.

SPPRA has signed the services of a multinational firm, providing consultancy in IT System

Solutions, for this purpose to develop and deploy an internationally sponsored project called

PPMS (Procurement Performance Management System). The project has been in development

process since 2015. We have also joined this team as advisory and support members for the

development of the project. The database schema design of PPMS was aided by [37]. The

deployment process of PPMS is now in progress, approaching towards its completion stage.

We can also generate data from PPMS, when it will become fully functional, by using our

proposed PPRA toolkit discussed in section 5.6.4.

5.6.1 Understanding Procurement Process and Complaint Redress Workflows of

SPPRA

Figure 20 Basic Procurement Process Workflow [119]

of 102

Figure 21 Complaint Redress Mechanism [120]

5.6.2 Understanding a Detailed Public Procurement Process

Fig. 22 shows a comprehensive and detailed workflow of the public procurement process

under the regulations of Sindh public procurement rules 2010, derived from World Bank

Procurement guidelines. These rules are also served here as essential technical tools, designed

specifically for public procuring agencies/authorities only. The details of these rules and

regulations can be viewed under Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010 of SPPRA in

Appendix A.

of 102

Figure 22 A Detailed Public Procurement Process

R-15 Bidding Types International Competitive

Bidding (ICB) Open to Local & Intl. parties Default method for

>=US$10M

National Competitive Bidding (NCB) Open to Local but Intl. may participate Default method for < US$10M

n

R18: Response Time NCB≥15 DAYS &ICB≥45

days

n

R-23 Bid Modification /Clarification

Response to the inquiry of one bidder to be communicated to all bidder, but material infirmities shall result in re-issuance of NIT or bidding documents.

n

Consideration prior to Procurement

What is to be procured?

Which rules are relevant?

Does the procurement match the

procurement plan?

What is the budgetary provision?

Which method of procurement is to be

used?

Are the bidding documents ready?

Who will oversee the bidding process?

R-11 & 12 Procurement Plan

Good

s

Work

s

Services

Consultancy

PPP Projects

Notice Inviting Tenders (NIT)

Pro

cure

me

nt C

om

mitte

e (P

C)

R-7 constitution of PC Approval of head of the

department Headed by BS-18/Highest Grade The odd number of persons 1/3

rd members –other agency

R-8 Functions OF PC Prepare bidding document Carry outbid evaluation Prepare BER(Rule 45) Recommend contract award Perform any other function

R-16 Procurement Methods

Petty Purchases <=25,000 3 Quotations for > 25,000 to

100,000 rupees Direct Contracting - single source Standardized Proprietary Performance Guarantee

related Extension of ongoing job Incompatibility Government Fixed prices Locally manufactured

vehicles Emergency-HOD/BS-20

Force Account - Using Agency's

own personnel and equipment Repeat Orders - <=15% original No Advertisement for Petty

Purchase, Direct Contracting, Force Account and Repeat Orders

n

R-27 Cases for Prequalification

Large & Complex Contracts with high bid preparation costs.

Turnkey, Design & Build, or Management Contracts

Expensive and Technically complex Equipment and Works

n

R-21 Contents Letter of invitation Dataset Instruction for preparing bids Manner, place, date, and time for

submission of bids %age of bid security and

performance guarantee(where applicable )

Method of procurement Manner, place, date and time of

opening of bids Unambiguous evaluation criteria Terms and condition of the

contract agreement Technical specifications to be

subject to Rule 13 Tender price assessment manner Bid validity period and currency Integrity pact (Rule-89) Any other information specified in

regulations by the authority

n

Pu

blica

tion

Ad

ve

rtisem

en

t

R-6 NIT Language English ,Sindhi and Urdu

n

R17: Advertisement Method

If >100,000 to 1,000,000 then SPPRA +Procuring Agency Website

If >1,000,000 then SPPRA +procuring agency website +3 widely circulated (EUS) NEWSPAPAERS

n

R19: Exceptions to R17 &18

Emergency, National security or Intellectual Property

n

R-46 & 47 Bidding Procedures & Conditions

Single Stage – one Envelop standard bidding procedures for procurement of goods, works and services of simple and routine nature

Single stage – two Envelop Where price is taken into account after technical evaluation.

Two-stage Large and complex contracts where technically unequal proposals are likely to be encountered.

n

R22: Bid Extension

Fewer than 3 bids received

Extraordinary circumstances

n

Issue Tender Documents

R-18 & 20: Bidding Documents

Bids to be available from 1

st date of

publication in 1st

Newspaper or website

PC to issue bidding documents to all interested parties

The fee may be charged but not exceeding the cost of preparation of documents

n

R-44: No Discrimination

No conditions in bidding documents discriminating among bidders

n

R-29: Eligibility of Bidders

Not from a prohibited country

Not a blacklisted party Government officer

meeting conditions No enlistment

/Registration n

n

R-26: Reissuance of Tenders

In case bidding process is canceled

Infirmity of material nature in bidding documents

Miss –procurement under Rule 56 has been declared

n

R-57 Contract

Close

R-14: Approval No procurement without clear

authorization and delegation of powers by Competent Authority

For Routine Procurement

Notice Inviting Prequalification

(NIP)

Issue Tender Documents

Issue Prequalifying Documents

R-41: Bid Opening Within one hour of

submission Bidder to assign

attendance sheet PC members to sign

Bids PC shall issue minutes

n

R-48: single bid Even one bid is also

valid if in accordance with rules and prices are comparable to last awarded contract or the market prices

n

R-37: bid security 1% to 5%of the bid price Valid for 28 days

beyond bid validity Released to the

unsuccessful bidders on the signing of contract or expiry of the validity period.

n

R-38: Bid validity 90days (NCB) & 120

days (ICB) May be extended by PA

to 1/3rd

but refused by bidders

If not extended will result in cancellation of the bidding process

If extended will automatically extend bid security validity.

Will not change the price of the other conditions of the bid.

n

R-42: Bid Evaluation In accordance with

evaluation criteria provided with bidding documents

Bids in foreign currency to be converted into local currency

n

R-52: No Negotiations No negotiation with the

lowest evaluated bidder n

R- 43: Clarification No bid alteration after

opening Clarifications may be

sought both ways n

R- 53: Confidentiality PA to keep all

information confidential until publication of BER.

n

R-45: Bid Evaluation report

BER shall be in a standard format

BER shall contain reasons for acceptance or rejection of bids

BER to be hoisted on SPPRA website and issued to bidders before 7 days of contract award

n

R-30: Disqualification On false or materially

incomplete information On corrupt and

fraudulent practices n

Disqualification

R-49: Award of contract

To the bidder with lowest evacuated cost, but not necessarily the lowest submitted price

R-39: Performance security

≤10% of contract value/price in form of pay order or demand draft

Shall remain valid for 90 days beyond contract completion date

n

R-55: Contract in force On the date of signing

of contract agreement by the procuring agency and the bidder

R-50: Publication of Award of Contract

Within 7 days of award, PA shall publish on SPPRA and its own website the following Letter of award Contract Evaluation

Report (CER) Bill of quantities

(BOQ)

Co

ntra

ct Aw

ard

R-25: Cancellation of Bidding Process Any time prior to bid /proposal acceptance Shall not result in any liability to PA Bidders promptly informed and Bid security

returned

Co

nsu

ltan

cy Se

lectio

n C

om

mitte

e

R-67 & 68: Composition &Quorum

CSC headed by BS-19/Highest grade officer/Project Directors, coordinators or Managers of the Respective Projects or programs

Quorum- Head+ P&DD+FD(Rule 68

The decision by a simple majority(Rule 70)

See Rule 69 for LG CSC

H

e

a

d

+

P

&

D

D

+

F

D

(

R

u

l

e

6

8

)

The decision by a simple

majority(Rule 70)

See Rule 69 for LG CSC

n

R-71: Functions of CSC Approval of request for

Proposal before issuance Short listing of consultants Evaluation of proposals

n

R_73: ROEI Advt. as per R 17& 18 name and address scope of assignment deadline and place of the

submission of ROEI criteria for shortlisting; and any other information

n

R-74: Short-Listing criteria

qualification; experience; financial capability; and any other factor

Other Relevant Rules for Consultancy Services Consultants with conflict of interest shall not be hired(R-

62) Governments servants meetings criteria may be hired(R-

63) Rights and Obligation of Procuring Agency and consultant

to be governed by the Consultancy Contract/Agreement Signed(R-65)

Prequalification Criteria to be included in ROI

Request for EOI Shortlisting Issue RFP Open Technical Evaluation Open

Financial BER Contract

Award

R-72: Method of Consultant Selection Least Cost Selection Method Quality Based Selection Method Quality and Cost Based Selection Method Direct Selection Method Fixed Budget Design Contest Consultant's Qualification Selection Method Selection Process of Individual Consultants

R-75: RFP Contents Letter of Invitation Instruction to

Consultants Terms of Reference Form of Contract Evaluation Criteria Types of Contract Special provisions

R-76: Evaluation Criteria

Specialization Experience Financial Capability Understanding of the

Assignment Proposal Methodology Quality Management

Te

chn

ical &

Fun

ction

al

Ev

alu

atio

n C

om

mitte

e

R-82(2): Committee The Government shall appoint a committee for each Public Private Partnership project. The terms of reference of each such committee shall be approved by the Government

Notice Inviting Prequalification

(NIP)

Bidding Documents /RFP Evaluation BER Contract Award

See Rule-82(5-7)

See Rule-84

COMPLAINT Rule 31-32

R-66: Selection Steps Terms of reference A cost estimate or budget Request for Expressions of

Interest Short-listing Issuance of RFP Submission of proposals Opening and Evaluation of

Technical proposals Opening and Evaluation of

Financial proposals Contract negotiations Award and signing of the

contract

R-81(3): Approval The competent Authority to

approve PPP Projects and related processes are Public-Private Partnership Policy Board

Also, refer Section 4(3) of PPP Act 2010

Complaint Redressal

Committee (CRC)

CRC Decision within 7 days

Stop PC from acting further The annual decision of PC Reverse/Substitute PC

decision Do Nothing

Aggrieved Bidder + SPPRA

Review Panel

Recommendation

SPPRA CS

MISPROCUREMENT (Rule 56)

A complaint can be lodged to CRC at any time during the bidding process by: SPPRA Aggrieved Bidder Suo-Moto Notice of CRC

Headed by Head of PA or officer one rank above the officer heading PC

AG/DAO representative as a member at Provincial/District level

Independent professional nominated by the head of PA

Decision Communicated in 3 days

If not satisfied

R-31(9-10): Conditions for Appeal The bidder has exhausted the forum

of CRC The bidder has not withdrawn Bid

Security The bidder has deposited Complaint

Registration Fee to SPPRA

1st meeting to be convened within 5 days

The decision to be made within 30 days and communicated to the Authority

The decision shall be hosted on Authority's website within 3 days

Others

Appeal to CS through SPPRA

Bidding Process annulled and started

afresh

If Contract is not awarded

If Contract is awarded

Anti-corruption Case against offices/

officials responsible

) MISPROCUREMENT (Rule 56)

Compensation (cost of bid preparation + complaint registration fee) paid to the aggrieved bidder by the officers/official responsible

A DETAILED PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PROCESS UNDER SINDH PUBLIC PROCUREMENT RULES 2010

Bid

Op

en

ing

& E

va

lua

tion

Bid

Su

bm

ission

LEGEND

Procurement Process for Goods, Works & Services Procurement Process for Consultancy Procurement Process for PPP Projects

Input in respective Box or Flow

of 102

5.6.3 Mapping of E-PartM model with Procurement Processes of SPPRA

It is believed that the proposed E-PartM model can be mapped to any type of participatory

processes workflows that may contain some sort of maturity levels to accomplish a task or a

service. The following demonstrates the mapping of 4 stages of E-PartM model with the

procurement processes of SPPRA.

As such, if we divide the flowcharts of Basic Procurement Process and Complaint Redress

Mechanism of SPPRA [119] and [120] into four modules corresponding to the 4-stages of E-

PartM model, we get Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 illustrated as below:

Figure 23 Bifurcation of Basic Process Workflow [119] into 1st, 2nd, 3rd modules; mapping with e-informing, e-consulting,

and e-collaborating stages respectively of E-PartM model

Figure 24 Selecting entire CR Workflow [120] into the 4th module mapping with the e-empowering stage of E-PartM model

of 102

If we synchronize and map the processes of highlighted modules altogether of both figures

with the four stages of E-Participation maturity model, we can get Table 10 as follows:

Table 10 Mapping all 4 Modules with the 4 Stages of E-PartM Model

Table 10 shows that how the workflows of SPPRA are efficiently synchronized with the 4-

stages of E-PartM model.

5.6.4 Design of the Procurement Process Readiness Assessment (PPRA) Toolkit

The Toolkit is designed to assess the readiness of procuring agencies by using the score they

get in the compliance of rules and regulations under Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010

[118] during their procurement practices. This toolkit facilitates all types of procurements

carried out by all PAs like goods, works, services, consultancy services and public-private

partnership projects. It proceeds and evaluates each prescribed rule while the workflow

advances up to the last stage of procurement process as seen in Fig. 25 below. The stages of

procurements are mapped with the 4-stages of E-PartM model as discussed above. The

procurement stages are mapped according to their relevance. Total score of each procurement

activity of PA is calculated by aggregating all component/stage totals. The details of rules and

regulations required and used in this toolkit under Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010 of

SPPRA, derived from World Bank Procurement guidelines, can be viewed in Appendix A.

The set of rules and regulations considered here as essential technical tools of this case study.

For evaluating each PA’s procurement practices, the scorecard shall be measured on some

prescribed scale. It shall be measured on the basis of the compliance or not compliance with

the rules that are to be encountered during procurement processes and business rules. The

scale of the score varies depending on the nature of the rules. It may be any numerical range

of values or a Boolean value. Each procurement stage contains a set of key rules appropriate

for evaluation of a particular procurement type.

PPRA toolkit is necessary to keep an eye on the track record of all procuring agencies for

corruption control, transparency, openness, and for any miss-procurement. A precise decision

can be made easily on the bases of such evaluations. Consequently, this assessment Toolkit of

SPPRA is endorsing as a prototype implementation of E-Governance Service System

of 102

Readiness Assessment framework that reflects the E-Participation concepts in the structure,

operations and policy-making value chain of governments and public administration. A

structural snapshot of the toolkit is shown in Fig. 25. As explained earlier, this case study is

considered here because of its significance in E-Governance systems. Its generated data are all

about PAs therefore cannot be comparable at countries level. This is just a case-bed model.

The following toolkit is designed here only for demonstrating superimposition of E-PartM

model on a participatory processes workflow of procurement guidelines of SPPRA that

contain some sort of maturity levels to accomplish a task or a service.

Figure 25 Structural snapshot of the Procurement Process Readiness Assessment (PPRA) Toolkit for evaluating Procuring

Agencies of SPPRA under Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010 [118], derived from World Bank Procurement guidelines.

of 102

This toolkit is also proposed and published in [90]. Details of rules and regulations used in

this toolkit can be viewed in Appendix A. Consequently, it can be served as a prototype

implementation of proposed E-GovSSRA framework.

5.6.5 Functional Vision of PPMS

Some significant functional components/sub-components of PPMS is illustrated as an

example in Fig. 26 below:

Figure 26 Functional Vision of PPMS

5.7 Government Official Web Portal as a Case Study-2

As a second Case study, we preferred to design and develop a toolkit for assessing the state-

owned Web Portals of the countries for E-Participation services which they are offering to

their citizens. This is a real life and ideal citizen-centric E-Governance service system

problem of today’s world. The model of this case study can efficiently be superimposed on

our E-GovSSRA framework to all of its maturity stages. No additional technical tools are

required beside web tools, its data can also be comparable at countries level; therefore, we

consider this as our Test-bed Model.

The government official web portal is likely to provide all information about

departments/agencies of the government who offer their services to

citizens/business/government. It shall provide a single point of contact for all types of services

in terms of E-Government and E-Governance. However, it needs integration of all

of 102

departments’ Information systems and backend automation of internal processes so that online

collaborations are made possible among different stakeholders.

The citizens can access all available information of existing departments, contact to office

bearers, collaborate with their functionaries, services, and so on. The citizens can participate

in governments’ offered activities/services through web portals in 4 possible ways:

a) Very limited one way interaction; in this interaction, the government departments are

providing only limited information/ contacts/ and downloadable forms to their citizens.

The possible interaction here is only {G2C}.

b) Departments are allowing citizens to consult their opinions/feedbacks on issues of

their interests/services; again in a one-way channel consultation without having online

interactions. Here possible interactions are {G2C and C2G}.

c) The citizens can play an active role here in offering and suggesting policies in two-

way channel collaboration. This online collaboration can be performed through

audio/video conferencing, online forums, online polls participation, online

community/social networks, webinars, etc.; but the responsibility of final decisions on

the given suggestions is on the official hands. To do so, back-end automation of

internal functions is needed for vertical integration of online services. Here possible

interactions are {G2C, C2G, and C2C}.

d) The citizens are given advanced two-way channel communications with the

government as elaborated in c) plus they are given additional power in influence and

control in policy making, such that the final decision becomes on the citizen's hands,

not on the official hands. As a result, various E-Participation services such as e-juries,

e-petitioning, e-voting, and e-polling are enabled and assisted as delegated decisions.

The agency, in this stage, works together with other agencies {G2G} by using their

data, public inputs & feedbacks and co-creates value-added services to the public. To

do so, all distinct information and service systems are horizontally integrated and

interoperable. As a result, all government services are seamlessly integrated within and

across government agencies. One single point of contact for all services is the ultimate

goal in this stage. Here possible interactions are {G2C, C2G, C2C, and G2G}.

of 102

5.7.1 Design of E-GovSSRA Toolkit

Our proposed E-PartM model discussed in section 4.1 is also classified into 4-stages of E-

Participation, which we can efficiently superimposed here as the components of E-GovSSRA

toolkit. To evaluate the readiness of Government official web portals for E-Participation

services, their possible readiness performance measures are also exactly mapped with the 4-

stages of E-PartM model as shown in Table 11 below. Most of the readiness performance

measures listed below are also acknowledged in E-readiness reports and articles (e.g. in [15,

78, 104, 105, 121, 122]). The readiness performance measures adapted against each stage are

also classified on the current trends of tools and technologies ideally mapped with CSCW

matrix. It may change or advances depending on the future trends of technologies available in

governments’ capacities.

A precise decision can be made easily on the basis of such assessments of web portals of

governments for controlling corruption, transparency, and openness. Consequently, this

assessment Toolkit shall endorse as a prototype implementation of E-GovSSRA framework

that reflects the E-Participation servicing tools and techniques in the structure, operations and

policy-making value chain of participatory governance and public administration.

Table 11 Stage wise mapping of E-PartM model with Readiness performance measures of E-GovSSRA Toolkit and

supporting Web tools and technologies against each stage

Stages Supporting Web Tools &

Technologies

Readiness Performance Measures

1. E-Informing

(G2C)

Wall displays, Digital

Whiteboards, Room ware, Shared

tables, Meeting rooms, etc.

- The Government of state has an official web presence

- ‘Contact us’ feature

- Search/Advanced search feature

- Sitemap or index

- ‘Help’ feature or ‘Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)’ section

- Information about how government works

- Information about Departments/Ministries with their web links

- Downloadable forms of the services offered

- Access to the web portal through its mobile version

2. E-Consulting

(G2C, C2G)

Team rooms, Post-it note,

Bulletin boards/Digital boards,

Podcasts, Videocasts, Shared

diaries/ Calendars, Project

management tools, Workflows,

Feedback forms, etc.

- A comprehensive Dashboard providing all functionaries of the

departments/Ministries

- Publications/Online newsletters/Annual Reports/Survey Reports

- Updated Announcements/Alerts/News/videos and photos

- User registration/digital mailbox feature

- Feedback/E-Participation feature

- Accessibility feature for disabled people (Vision, hearing, alternate

navigational/ pointing devices)

- On-site language translation facility if other than English

- Policies and standards about the use of Open Govt. Data (OGD)

- Publish statistics of last Local/General Elections/Voting ratios and E-

Reforms

- Information about job opportunities/advertisement

- Events calendar available online

3. E-

Collaborating

(G2C, C2G,

C2C)

Read-write concurrency web,

Web meeting, telephoning/call

centers, Web conferencing, RSS

feeds, Mashups, Instant

Messaging/Online chats/Virtual

meetings, online virtual

- List of departmental services providing online requires internal

backend automation (Vertical Integration of departments)

- Workflow and guidelines for online services citizens expect from the

Department

- Statistics of users availing Online Services

- RSS feed feature to continuously update media/press/citizens

of 102

communities, Online shared

screen Interactive Whiteboards,

Shared Screen Workspaces

(WYSIWIS), Shared

apps/artifacts, Multi-user editing

tools, Online management tools,

online surveys, smart decision

rooms, etc.

- Complaint feature or Online complaint through a call system

- Online tracking system to check the status of citizens’ complaint

- Acknowledgment of received e-opinion/e-complaint explicitly.

- Information about citizens legal rights held by the state

- Privacy policy/Act

- Cyber Security policy/Digital Signature feature

- User satisfaction: calculated by asking the user to rate the service

- Corruption reporting facility/guidelines available online

4. E-

Empowering

(G2C, C2G,

C2C, G2G)

Email, SMS, MMS,

Asynchronous conferencing

(text, image, voice, video),

Authoring platforms,

Wikis/Semantic-Wikis, Version

control, Asynchronous virtual

communities/social

networks/social media, Social

bookmarking, Tagging, Like

buttons, Blogs/Semantic-Blogs,

Forums/Semantic-Forums, e-

polling, e-voting, e-petitions, e-

referenda, e-panels, e-juries, etc.

- One single point of contact for all online services w/o going to office

(Horizontal Integration of all departments’ Information systems)

- E-petition feature.

- Committed to include the results of e-participation/e-petition in

decision making

- Social networks integration (Tweeter tweets, Facebook likes,

LinkedIn, etc.)

- Web blogs/forums/polls on govt.’s laws and policies

- Alerts/Responses sent through e-mails/SMS/MMS/Mobile apps

- Social Security Services (family allowances, pensions,

unemployment allowance, medical reimbursement/health insurance,

a shelter for homeless)

- Display growth rate of E-participation services (increase in e-

services/ performance)

- Publish statistics of past e-petitions/e-polls/e-voting/e-juries & their

results

- Display pending number of decisions on e-petitions/e-polls/e-

voting/e-juries

- Display status of any running e-petition/e-poll/e-voting/e-jury with

Expiry date/Applicable region/Purpose

of 102

A structural snapshot of the toolkit is shown in Fig. 27 below.

Figure 27 Snapshot of E-GovSSRA Toolkit

The implementation details and measuring-scale of this toolkit can be seen in chapter 6.

of 102

5.7.2 Functional Vision of Government official Web Portal

Some significant functional components/sub-components of Government official Web Portal

is illustrated as an example in Fig. 28 below:

Figure 28 Functional Vision of Government official Web Portal

Management Support System

Departments Database & Archives

Alerts & Notification Center

Back-office Workflow Management System

Decision Support System

Complaint Management System

Operations Support System

System Administration

Services Control & Transactions Processing

System

Enterprise Collaboration System

E-Participation Processes Complaince & Readiness

Public Portal

User Profiles

Services Dashboard

Data & Services Enquiry/E-polls/E-petitions

Online Complaint/

Feedback

Online Social Networks

RSS/News, Alerts, Links

Government Official Web Portal

of 102

CHAPTER 6

Experiment Design

Data Collection and Analyses using E-GovSSRA Toolkit of Case-

study-2 for Prototype Implementation of the Framework

For a survey based experimental design, we have considered here case study-2 as our test bed

model so as to analyze the readiness of Government official web portals for E-Participation

services. It is an appropriate case study to evaluate the impact of E-Governance services

offered in the context of CSCW and supporting W3C technologies. The readiness

performance measures, discussed in Table 11 of E-GovSSRA toolkit of case study-2, are

ideally classified and mapped with the 4-stages of our proposed E-PartM model and

supporting tools and technologies of CSCW respectively. By using this toolkit (predictor) a

systematic investigation of an E-Participation problem is possible which requires reliable and

valid answers through the efficient use of supporting web services. A precise set of E-

GovSSRA scores (outcomes) of countries have been generated in this way as our proposed

and developed E-Participation Index. As a result, the set of outcomes obtained as E-GovSSRA

scores might be a better choice to replace the existing E-Participation index, say UN’s EPI.

6.1 Mechanism for Data Collection

As our design of the experiment is inquiry-based-survey like a survey questionnaire, we can

effectively use our proposed E-GovSSRA toolkit here as a primary data collection tool. We

have considered official web portals for the sample of countries as the primary data sources

for this experiment. As this is the only primary source of data available publically, country-

wised and independent of donor agencies. Links of web portals for the sample of countries are

available in Appendix B for viewers. The sources for official web portals of the countries are

found using Wikipedia database search engine. Here some countries may contain more than

one official web portals, for such cases, we have analyzed all of them.

of 102

6.2 Selecting a Sample

For selecting a sample, we preferably used purposive sampling technique. We tried to include

all those countries that have a higher difference (say greater than 25 points for filtering out a

sample of 50 countries) in between EPI-16 and CPI-16 scores so as to include those set of

countries that are showing major deviations when finding a correlation between EPI-16 and

CPI-16. It does not influence the result but highlight the worst cases of EPI-16 when

comparing them with CPI-16 scores in order to show the difference prominently when

comparing those set of countries with our proposed E-GovSSRA scores.

This criterion is adopted only for selecting a sample of countries, whereas for their data

analyses we perform our experiment total blindly so as to avoid any comparison biasedness

with existing scores of their CPI and/or EPI. The sample size considered here is 50 units,

enough as compared to the target population size (=166 units) covered by CPI-16. That is

covering 30% of the population size, sufficiently enough for concluding this research study.

We shall generate a complete E-GovSSRA Index of all available countries as our future work.

6.3 Measuring-Scale for E-GovSSRA Toolkit

The survey questionnaire, which is in the form of a set of readiness performance measures of

E-GovSSRA toolkit, shall be measured on some prescribed scale. Because of the limited

recourses available, we could not grade each performance measure with a hard-quoted set of

scaling points. Thus we have evaluated it with a set of Boolean values say Yes/No=y/n (=1/0).

Hence, it is measured on the basis of compliance or non-compliance with the performance

measures that are in question during each component analysis of the toolkit. The components

(or stages) and their respective sets of readiness performance measures are same and fixed for

evaluating each country’s web portal.

On compliance, the score shall be assigned depending on the importance of performance

measure being evaluated of a respective stage or component. It should have 0.5, 1, or 2

weights. Normally, the assigned weight of each performance measure is 1, exceptions are

highlighted. The score points are summed up at each component of the toolkit. The final score

of a component is obtained by multiplying total score points with a proportion of assigned

weight (highlighted green for un-equal wt.) calculated for each unit of performance measure

of the component, depending on the weight assigned to the respective component discussed in

section 6.4. A grand total of a country’s score is obtained by aggregating all 4 components’

scores, highlighted with brown (Un-equal wt.) and blue (Equal wt.).

of 102

As the weights are un-equally assigned up to the level of each performance measure, there

is no major role of an equal number of counts of performance measures for each component.

Similarly, the order of performance measures has no critical importance in each component.

6.4 Weighing Scheme for the Stages of E-PartM Model

As we know that equal weights are not suitable for the stages of a maturity model, we

preferred to consider Un-equal weighting scheme here. Though, the scores with Equal weights

are also displayed for comparison with EPI scores.

It appears that stage-wise EPI scores of UN have started being published from 2014

onwards. The EPI scores are supposed to be equally weighted (with no disclosure of stage-

wise weighting scheme), such that they are predominantly biased on the basis of data

appeared against e-information-stage. Hence major dependency of a Total score of EPI is on

e-information stage because most of the countries are matured enough at this stage.

However, in our work, we consider and test the data of E-GovSSRA toolkit on various

weighting schemes for the stages of E-PartM model (including equal weights), but found that

strong correlation with CPI appears when more weights are given to the stages having active

participation of citizens that provide much greater autonomy from government authorities to

citizens.

Therefore, we assigned weights to each stage of E-PartM model with respect to its

importance in the context of CSCW as depicted in Table 12, which is started by providing

passive information and ended at active collaboration of citizens in policy making, e-voting,

e-petitioning, etc. Hence, the weights for first two stages are 5:15 respectively, dedicated for

passive information consumers, while 30:50 are allotted to last two stages respectively,

dedicated for active collaboration of citizens where corruption is instantaneously exposed and

reacted. Thus un-equal weights are assigned to each stage with the ratio of 5:15:30:50

respectively, making a total of 100%.

Table 12 Weighing Scheme for the stages of E-PartM model

Stages of E-

PartM model

Relationship with

CSCW matrix

Weights

assigned Reasons

E-Informing Passive Citizens Area 5% Initial implementation of OGD

E-Consulting Passive Citizens Area 15% Updates & feedbacks are also available

E-Collaborating Active Citizens Area 30% Total online collaborations are available

E-Empowering Active Citizens Area 50% Empowering citizens through e-voting,

e-petitioning, e-juries, policy making, etc

This ratio is experimentally applied in a participatory governance model to promote a more

open and transparent collaborative systems, thus approaching a corruption free society.

of 102

6.5 Snapshot of a Sample Record

Figure 29 Snapshot of a sample record

of 102

CHAPTER 7

Results and Major Findings

Because of the quantitative nature of our data type, it has effectively been analyzed and

interpreted statistically by using the same method of correlation evaluations that are used in

Gap Analyses section of chapter 3. The results are generated in the following section.

7.1 Results of E-GovSSRA Index

The Table 13 shows the generated set of outcomes called E-GovSSRA Scores for a sample of

50 countries along with their existing data of EPI16 and CPI16, by performing an

experimental design on E-GovSSRA toolkit as a predictor. Country-wise generated data of

about 10 countries, as a sample, with Total score and Component-wise scores obtained by

using E-GovSSRA toolkit are available in Appendix C for viewers.

Table 13 Sample of 50 outcomes is generated through E-GovSSRA Toolkit

of 102

By analyzing above table, it is demonstrated that E-GovSSRA scores (with UnEq WT) of

almost all countries are more closed to the scores of CPI-16 as compared to EPI-16.

Interestingly, this is also true with Equal weights as well. However, we have a strong point of

view that a participatory governance model is a problem of unequal weights. Hence, this

proofs the power of CSCW on E-GovSSRA framework.

The graphical presentations and their correlation evaluations between CPI-16 & EPI-16,

CPI-16 & E-GovSSRA (UnEq WT), and CPI-16 & E-GovSSRA (Eq WT), for the selected

sample are displayed in the following hypothesis test-5 section.

7.2 Hypothesis Test–5

H5o: The proposed E-GovSSRA framework using E-GovSSRA index is likely to

produce a strong positive correlation with CPI.


Exploratory Data Analyses of Test–5:

It is already explained that for a perceived governance index we have chosen CPI of

Transparency International as a standard model; likewise, for an E-Participation index, the

only available index is UN’s EPI. Therefore we consider CPI-16 and EPI-16 latest so far for

analyses, in all over the study. This is illustrated for a sample of 50 countries as follows:

Figure 30 The correlation between CPI-16 and EPI-16 scores for a sample of 50 countries is found to be r = 0.315

which is showing weak positive correlation.

of 102

Figure 31 The correlation between CPI-16 and E-GovSSRA (with Unequal weights) scores for a sample of 50

countries is found to be r = 0.829 which is showing strong positive correlation.

Figure 32 The correlation between CPI-16 and E-GovSSRA (with Equal weights) scores for a sample of 50

countries is found to be r = 0.745 which is also showing strong positive correlation.


The result of Fig. 30 has shown that there is a weaker relationship (r =0.315) between

CPI-16 & EPI-16 scores of the sample.

Fig. 31 has shown that there is a strong positive correlation (r =0.829) between CPI-16

& and E-GovSSRA (with Unequal weights) scores of the sample. A dramatic

improvement can be seen when comparing it with an r value of Fig. 30.

Fig. 32 has also shown comparatively same improvement of r =0.745 between CPI-16

and E-GovSSRA (with Equal-weight) scores of the sample when comparing it with an

r value of Fig. 30, however this is a problem of Unequal weights but this improvement

shows explicitly that performance of E-Participation services shall be classified as per

of 102

the integration of citizen sourcing concepts of CSCW and its supporting socio-

technical tools and technologies.

Thus we accept H5o that our proposed E-GovSSRA framework using E-GovSSRA

index is likely to produce a strong positive correlation with CPI whether considering it

with Un-equal or Equal weights.

Hence E-GovSSRA is found to be a formal and yet another framework which also

hints towards a perceived governance model but from HCI’s major CSCW theory and

computing domain.

Now we can call our sixth hypothesis here successively as follows:

7.3 Hypothesis Test–6

H6o: E-Participation services in the socio-technical environment can be most

efficiently modeled using the context of CSCW and its supporting socio-

technical tools and technologies

H6A: There is no impact of CSCW and its supporting socio-technical tools and

technologies on E-Participation services.

Exploratory Data Analyses of Test–6:

1) The impact of CSCW matrix on E-GovSSRA framework can be measured through its

supporting socio-technical tools and technologies that are grouped against each

quadrant of the time-space groupware matrix. For validation purpose, the performance

measures of the designated toolkit shall be classified and well calibrated with the

supporting socio-technical tools and technologies used in each quadrant of CSCW

matrix. We consider E-GovSSRA toolkit as an example for validation purpose in

Table 14:

Table 14 Calibration of PMs with Supporting Tools & Technologies

Stages Performance measures (PMs) Calibration of PMs

with Supporting tools Supporting tools &

technologies E-Informing

(G2C) • The Government of state has an official

web presence • ‘Contact us’ feature • Search/Advanced search feature • Sitemap or index • ‘Help’ feature or ‘Frequently Asked

Questions (FAQs)’ section • Information about how government works • Information about Departments/Ministries

with their web links • Downloadable forms of the services

offered • Access to the web portal through its

mobile version

• Related tools are

available to support limited one-way

Communications • That is, only G2C

communication is possible

• citizens play only

passive roles here

Wall displays, Digital

Whiteboards, Room ware,

Shared tables, Meeting rooms,

etc. (related to Same-time &

Same-place)

of 102

E-Consulting

(G2C, C2G) • A comprehensive Dashboard providing all

functionaries of the departments/Ministries • Publications/Online newsletters/Annual

Reports/Survey Reports • Updated

Announcements/Alerts/News/videos and

photos • User registration/digital mailbox feature • Feedback/E-Participation feature • Accessibility feature for disabled people

(Vision, hearing, alternate navigational/ pointing devices)

• On-site language translation facility if

other than English • Policies and standards about the use of

Open Govt. Data (OGD) • Publish statistics of last Local/General

Elections/Voting ratios and E-Reforms • Information about job

opportunities/advertisement • Events calendar available online


available to support all

one-way Communications

• That is G2C & C2G

communications are

possible without online interactions

• citizens again play only

passive roles here

Team rooms, Post-it note,

Bulletin boards/Digital

boards, Podcasts, Video casts,

Shared diaries/ Calendars,

Project management tools, Workflows, Feedback forms,

etc. (related to Diff-time &

Same-place)

E-

Collaborating (G2C, C2G,

C2C)

• List of departmental services providing

online requires internal backend

automation (Vertical Integration of

departments) • Workflow and guidelines for online

services citizens expect from the

Department • Statistics of users availing Online Services • RSS feed feature to continuously update

media/press/citizens • Complaint feature or Online complaint

through a call system • Online tracking system to check the status

of citizens’ complaint • Acknowledgment of received e-opinion/e-

complaint explicitly. • Information about citizens legal rights held

by the state • Privacy policy/Act • Cyber Security policy/Digital Signature

feature • User satisfaction: calculated by asking the

user to rate the service • Corruption reporting facility/guidelines

available online


available to support two-

way Communications • That is G2C, C2G &

C2C (citizen-sourced) Coms. are possible

• Depts. are vertically

integrated for supporting

online services • Citizens can play active

roles here

Read-write concurrency web,

Web meeting,

telephoning/call centers, Web conferencing, RSS feeds,

Mashups, Instant

Messaging/Online chats/Virtual meetings, online

virtual communities, Online

shared screen Interactive Whiteboards, Shared Screen

Workspaces (WYSIWIS),

Shared apps/artifacts, Multi-user editing tools, Online

management tools, online

surveys, smart decision rooms, etc.

(related to Same-time &

Diff-place)

E-Empowering (G2C, C2G,

C2C, G2G)

• One single point of contact for all online

services w/o going to office (Horizontal Integration of all departments’ Information

systems) • E-petition feature. • Committed to include the results of e-

participation/e-petition in decision making • Social networks integration (Tweeter

tweets, Facebook likes, LinkedIn, etc.) • Web blogs/forums/polls on govt.’s laws

and policies • Alerts/Responses sent through e-

mails/SMS/MMS/Mobile apps • Social Security Services (family

allowances, pensions, unemployment

allowance, medical reimbursement/health

insurance, a shelter for homeless) • Display growth rate of E-participation

services (increase in e-services/ performance)

• Publish statistics of past e-petitions/e-

polls/e-voting/e-juries & their results • Display pending number of decisions on e-

petitions/e-polls/e-voting/e-juries • Display status of any running e-petition/e-

poll/e-voting/e-jury with Expiry

date/Applicable region/Purpose


available to support advanced two-way

Communications • That is G2C, C2G C2C

& G2G Coms. are

possible • All distinct information

& service systems are horizontally integrated

and interoperable-G2G • Citizens play more

active roles here • Final decisions are in the

control of citizens’

hands • various services: e-

juries, e-petitioning, e-voting, e-polling are

enabled/assisted as

delegated decisions

Email, SMS, MMS, Asynchronous conferencing

(text, image, voice, video),

Authoring platforms, Wikis/Semantic-Wikis,

Version control,

Asynchronous virtual communities/social

networks/social media, Social

bookmarking, Tagging, Like buttons, Blogs/Semantic-

Blogs, Forums/Semantic-

Forums, e-polling, e-voting, e-petitions, e-referenda, e-

panels, e-juries, etc. (related to Diff-time & Diff-

place)

of 102

2) For standardizing our scores with UN’s EPI-16 scores, we also consider the result of

Fig-32 of Equal weights, which is showing strong positive correlation (r=0.745)

between CPI-16 and E-GovSSRA scores. This also highlights and proves the core

impact of CSCW matrix on E-GovSSRA framework


Above two analyses validate that the performance of E-Participation services cannot

be optimized in a socio-technical environment of an E-Governance model without the

support of socio-technical tools and technologies that are available in the context of

CSCW.

Hence, we accept H6o that E-Participation services can be most efficiently modeled

using the context of CSCW with its supporting socio-technical tools and technologies.

7.4 Summary of Major Findings and their Solutions

Table 15 shows the summary of the results concluded from our six analytically discovered

hypotheses against the problems and their remedies of the study:

Table 15 Summary of the results of our hypotheses

Discovered

Hypotheses

Ho HA

(2-tailed)

Conclusion Problems &

Solutions

Res

earc

h S

tud

y

Test-1 It is assumed that higher

EGDI of countries is

producing higher CPI of

those countries

There is no strong

correlation between

the two indexes

H1o is

rejected

Issue is

highlighted

Test-2 we can also suppose that

lower EGDI of countries

means lower CPI of those

countries

There is no strong

correlation between

the two indexes

H2o is

rejected

Issue is

highlighted

Test-3 There shall be a strong

positive correlation between

CPI and existing EPI

provided by UN

There is no strong

correlation between

the two indexes

H3o is

rejected

Issue is

highlighted

Test-4 It is all presumed that E-

Governance without E-

Participation services is

incomplete

There is no impact

of E-Participation

services on E-

Governance

H4o is

accepted

Issue is

Acknowledged

Rem

edy o

f th

e is

sues

Test-5 The proposed E-GovSSRA

framework using E-

GovSSRA index is likely to

produce a strong positive

correlation with CPI

There is no strong

correlation between

the two indexes

H5o is

accepted

Issue is

Successfully

resolved

Test-6 E-Participation services in

the socio-technical

environment can be most

efficiently modeled using the

context of CSCW and its

supporting socio-technical

tools and technologies

There is no impact

of CSCW and its

supporting socio-

technical tools and

technologies on E-

Participation

services

H6o is

accepted

Issue is

Successfully

resolved

of 102

1) A formal E-Governance readiness assessment model explicitly using the approach of

socio-technical and human aspects of participatory governance is hard to witness that

could be considered as a perceived governance index. Whereas, E-Government models

help to understand the status of E-Readiness on various dimensions. But none of them

could be used as the single source for the recommendations on E-Governance

priorities and indicators alone.

2) However, as a whole, it is believed that E-Governance increases with the increase in

E-Government. Therefore, we preferably consider the data of EGDI to check any of its

association with a perceived governance index, because the indicators of UN’s EGDI

are the most pertinent, ICT-based and nearer to the key performance measures of E-

Governance readiness assessment model.

3) Most of the researchers are agreed that corruption is the mother of all root causes of

bad governance whether considering a democratic or a non-democratic nation. The

most commonly used index for measuring the perceived levels of public sector

corruption is known as Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index

(CPI). The CPI includes only those sources that measure perceptions of corruption in

the public sectors for a set of countries/territories specializing in governance and

business climate analyses [69]. Hence, we considered here CPI-2016 index [69], latest

so far, as measuring stick yard, for comparing a perceived levels of governance at

countries level with other such indexes.

4) The results of Hypothesis Tests–1 & 2 of Table 15 are providing sufficient evidence

that the existing measuring indicators of EGDI are not strong enough for suggesting as

measuring indicators of an E-Governance model.

5) From research study (e.g. in [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15]) and from the result of

Hypothesis Test–4 of Table 15, it is revealed that E-Participation has been found to be

a defining pillar in providing public voice, openness and increasing transparency in

public sector agencies thereby reducing corruption in the human-centered and socio-

technical environment of E-Governance system. The data analysis provided in section

4.3.1 is ended with a conclusion that E-Participation services up to the last maturity

stage are essential for a total readiness of E-Governance service system. It is also

discussed in various articles (e.g. in [16, 30, 78, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103,

104, 105, 106]) that E-Governance increases with the increase in the maturity stages of

of 102

E-Participation. Hence, if our main purpose is to reduce corruption from public sector

agencies through participatory governance then E-Participation is the best tool to be

inducted as collective intelligence in an E-Governance system.

6) The only available E-Participation Index (EPI) is provided by UN. The stage-wise EPI

scores have started being published from 2014 onwards. Therefore we have considered

here the data of EPI-2014 and EPI-2016, latest so far, for analyses. Conversely, the

result of Hypothesis Test–3 of Table 15, acknowledged our research problem that the

existing E-Participation index of United Nations that is 2014 and 2016 indices seem to

be more insignificant in correlation with a perceived governance index.

7) This proves that UN’s EPI is not supporting CPI for corruption control as a perceived

governance index, or in other words, UN’s EPI is not supposed to be a good measuring

indicator for an E-Governance model.

8) The result of Hypothesis Test–3, also certify our recommendations that existing

indicators of E-Participation maturity model presented by United Nations shall be

improved and proper weights to each stage shall be assigned to increase its correlation

with a perceived governance index.

9) For this purpose, we designed and presented, in section 4.1, an enhanced and redefined

E-PartM model in collaborative workspaces of CSCW and thus a human-centered and

a socio-technical design of E-GovSSRA framework has been developed.

10) For prototype implementation and validation of E-GovSSRA framework, two case

specific toolkits along with the stage-wise set of readiness performance measures with

their designated optimal weights have been developed in chapter 5. One of which is

used for the design of an experiment.

11) By designing an experiment on a selected case study and using a purposely built E-

GovSSRA toolkit, the results of Table 13 and Hypothesis Test-5 of Table 14 showed

remarkable results and validated that the proposed E-GovSSRA framework in

CSCW’s perspective has produced a strong positive correlation between the generated

E-GovSSRA index and a perceived governance index whether considering it with Un-

equal or Equal weights. Hence E-GovSSRA is found to be a formal and yet another

framework which also hints towards a perceived governance model but from HCI’s

major CSCW theory and computing domain, which we claim as our novel

contribution.

12) Further, the analysis for Hypothesis Test-6 validated that the performance of E-

Participation services cannot be optimized in a socio-technical environment of an E-

of 102

Governance model without the support of socio-technical tools and technologies that

are available in the context of CSCW.

13) E-GovSSRA index of all countries of the world can be generated and generalized in

this way for comparison, benchmarking, or prediction purpose and tests of scalability

and usability can be conducted.

7.5 Benefits of E-GovSSRA Framework

We hope that the introduction of CSCW perspective in E-Governance system’s modeling will

extend its relationship with E-Governance and apply in various dimensions. For example:

1) Countries are using their available resources for developing interactive mechanisms to

encourage E-Participation services. The levels of their interactions can be evaluated

and enhanced by the designated tools and technologies of CSCW matrix of our


2) The results of Table 13 and hypothesis test-5 validated that by using the

communication channels of E-GovSSRA framework:

o Stakeholders can participate more effectively in the context of CSCW.

o Productivity and efficiency of public sector agencies can be increased by

increasing transparency and reducing corruption.

o Competitiveness among the agencies can be improved.

3) It will provide rapid business solutions to the governments through data and citizen-

sourcing.

4) It can serve as a measuring tool that what score or rank a country is obtaining in

participatory governance initiatives for comparison, benchmarking, or prediction

purposes?

5) It can serve as an analytical tool for a country’s existing system to improve the quality

of governance and their mismanaged workflows by using the stage-wise workflow of


6) By the advancement, in web technologies, the countries’ official web portals would

also be transforming from Community-web to Semantic-web or Ultra-Intelligent

Symbiotic-web, such that the web portals would become world-wide-databases and

react with fast and precise knowledge, where the accurate decisions would be made

through symbiosis, immersion, and connected knowledge. Thus global transparency

would be delivering by achieving a mass participation. Consequently, E-GovSSRA

of 102

framework would become more shared and more empowered and hence corruption

would be reduced.

7) As a result, countries’ economy through efficient, accountable and transparent

business processes and transactions can also be improved.

Modeling of E-GovSSRA framework in such a way will also offer:

8) The innovation of new interactive and participatory socio-technical tools and

technologies especially of web tools related to community-web, semantic-web,

symbiotic-web and so on,

9) Classification of new and emerging socio-technical tools in accordance with E-PartM

model,

10) Finding of emerging collaborative workspaces in E-Participation perspective, etc.

So that, it will help to focus and drive debate within the research community that how to

best assess the real-life complex problem of E-Governance with its enhanced readiness

assessment indicators and tools that could lead to one of the most vibrant and notable streams

of literature in the field.

of 102

CHAPTER 8

Conclusion and Afterthoughts

In this study, we have reviewed and analyzed literature from the key survey reports and

articles on the theme of E-Governance indexes and its measuring indicators. By analyzing

their parametric tendencies, it emerges that a major defining indicator for E-Governance is

found to be E-Participation in providing public voice, openness, increasing transparency and

governance in public sector agencies thereby reducing corruption through human-centered and

socio-technically dominating environment of E-Governance systems, whereas advancement in

web tools and technologies are also being appeared as its supporting indicators.

Conversely, after testing the data of existing E-readiness and participatory indexes

especially the data of EGDI and EPI provided by United Nations in gap analyses section 3.2,

it has been found that their relevance with CPI, a perceived governance index, does not seem

to be strong enough. Whereas EPI is more insignificant in correlation with corruption control

as compared to other likewise indexes such as EGDI, ITUIDI, ODB, etc. Hence, this

spotlights a need to further improve existing measuring parameters of E-Participation and

their designated weights in order to increase its relevance with perceived governance indexes.

In addition, by summarizing our discussion, following interpretations are highlighted:

1) The analysis of hypothesis test-4 revealed that E-Participation in an E-Governance

model is necessary for a service delivery system which is referred to a group of

humans working in a social context to find innovative solutions collaboratively

with the emerging features of socio-technical tools and technologies.

2) Further, citizens’ participation on government activities is best done when the

government has the capacity to enforce an open, integrated and communication-

driven Decision Support System, where all government departments are connected

vertically and horizontally, termed as Open and Connected Government, as

validated in the results of Table 7.

3) The E-Governance system problem can, therefore, be understood as a complex

large-scale socio-technical cooperative system problem that enables the realization

of collective intelligence and symbiosis.

4) E-Participation and its precursors related to social and technical tools are found to

be further investigated for their sub-indicators and their weight analyses in the light

of 102

of illustrated gap analyses of section 3.2 so as to increase the efficacy of E-

Governance.

5) Hence, a socio-technical and participatory E-GovSSRA framework from HCI’s

CSCW perspective and computing domain, in chapter 4, is proposed in this study

by redefining E-PartM model in the context of CSCW, discussed in section 4.1.

6) By designing an experiment, in chapter 6, on a selected case study and using a

purposely built E-GovSSRA toolkit developed in chapter 5, the results of Table 13

and hypothesis test-5 validated that the proposed E-GovSSRA framework in

CSCW’s perspective has produced a strong positive correlation between the

generated E-GovSSRA index and CPI, a perceived governance index, whether

considering it with Un-equal or Equal weights.

7) The analyses of hypothesis test-6 validated that E-Participation services can be best

performed and classified in a socio-technical context of CSCW with enabling

technologies and standards of W3C.

8) Hence, this verifies our research problem that in order to optimize and classify

participatory design of citizen sourcing in a collaborative workspace of a socio-

technical and human-centered design of E-GovSSRA framework, CSCW

time/space groupware matrix is a useful approach to consider by using its quadrant

wise emerging tools and technologies.

9) All of the above results validate that E-GovSSRA is a formal and yet another

framework which also hints towards a perceived governance model from HCI’s

major CSCW theory and computing domain, which we claim as our novel

contribution.

8.1 Limitations and Risks to Validity

1) Performance of E-Governance is a difficult phenomenon to measure

directly, instead, proxies for E-Governance are used, but they have all come up

with limitations.

2) It is an established fact that, performance of E-Governance is directly proportional

to the maturity level of working democracy exercised in the country.

3) It is also agreed in most of the relevant literature that in countries where

democracy level is mature enough, E-Participation is also approaching towards its

maturity level.

of 102

4) Hence E-Governance implementation is totally dependent on the will of

democracy of governments and their subsidiary agencies.

5) E-GovSSRA framework is likely to be used to reduce corruption in countries

where its score is high enough, because of the impacts of coupled parameters

related to social sciences resting in most of the non-developing countries.

6) Their impacts will not equally effective on the countries with the same scores

again because of the coupled and peripheral areas involved, discussed in chapter 5.

7) It is difficult to assess a country-specific usefulness, cost-effectiveness and value

addition of their services without conducting their nationwide surveys, opinion

polls and online rating systems since citizens’ needs and requirements vary from

one country to another, so as the size and structure of the governments.

8.2 Lessons Learned

1) By the advancement in web technologies, the performance measures of each stage

of the toolkit in CSCW perspective might become more concise, refined and

updated.

2) By the advancement in web technologies, the designated weights of the mature

stages of E-PartM model might also become increasing with the passage of time.

3) Few countries have developed qualitative or quantitative indicators to actually link

the participatory governance initiatives with policy outcomes. Ideally, audited

annual reports should be posted on the websites for both government entities and

the public to review the outcomes of the applied web tools and technologies for E-

Participation services and lessons learned from these implications.

4) The implications of E-Participation initiatives in the context of CSCW make it all

more necessary to compile and highlight the impact on E-Governance service

systems, to make a systematic effort in disseminating good practices that will be of

immense value in driving the future growth of web supporting tools and

technologies of E-Participation and citizen sourcing.

8.3 Future Works

For exhaustive testing of scalability, usability and reliability issues of E-GovSSRA

framework, some more set of readiness assessment toolkits or case-specific tools, consisting

of some appropriate E-Participation servicing tools and techniques, would be helpful besides

of 102

the two specially designed toolkits, discussed in chapter 5. The test data shall be collected

from the designated toolkits to address the:

Scalability issues ranging from demonstration prototypes to real-size applications of

the E-GovSSRA framework.

Usability issues by using usability-evaluation-methods for tracking any structural

problem in the framework.

Reliability issues to find ways to guarantee the correct functioning of the framework.

This will enable to refine the framework, if needed, by reducing or removing the identified

problems and obtain more accurate results thereof.

E-GovSSRA index of all countries of the world can be generated and generalized in this

way for comparison, benchmarking, or prediction purpose and tests of scalability and usability

can be conducted.

Further to simulate E-GovSSRA index with economic stability of the countries, there is a

need for data scientists to take up this study and correlate it with economic indicators and

future IT interventions especially in support of socio-technical tools of CSCW.

IT interventions in mobile and ubiquitous computing and their implementations through

cutting age innovations in survey tools, applications, and data analytics will also effectively

improve the performance of E-GovSSRA index.

Continuous operating crawlers are needed to update any IT intervention pertaining to any

stage of E-PartM that may affect E-GovSSRA index.

To discover new patterns and tendencies, data and social scientists need to correlate E-

GovSSRA index with other indexes of perceived governance possibly for a time lag of several

years.

8.4 Exceptions

We should note that the purpose of this study does not provide an exhaustive review of E-

Participation theories, methods, and possibly its tools and technologies nor it covered the

complete scope of human cognitive analyses of such domain. Indeed, our key contribution is

to suggest a participatory E-Governance service system by using the strength of CSCW

framework that also hints towards a perceived governance index in order to promote the

debate of using socio-technical collaborative workspaces for the development of interactive

applications related to participatory governance in a standardized framework.

of 102

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010

Following are the definitions of Rules and Regulations used in the Procurement Process

Readiness Assessment Toolkit under Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010 [118], derived

from World Bank Procurement guidelines:

R6 (Language):

- English, Sindhi, Urdu.

R7 (Constitution of PC):

- Approved by Head of Departments

- Headed by BS- 18/or higher grade officer

- Comprising odd number of persons

- At least 1/3 members from other agencies

R8 (Functions of PC):

- Prepare bidding documents

- Carry Outbid evaluation

- Prepare BIR (R 45)

- Recommend Contract Award to Competent

Authority

- Perform any other function

R11 & R12 (Activities prior to Procurement

process):

- The conception of development Scheme/Project

- Preparation of PC I/ PC II

- Approval of PC I/ PC II from the competent

authority

- Issuance of Administrative approval

- Technical sanction of detailed estimate

- Placement of funds with executing Agency

- Site possession or land acquisition

R14 (Approval):

All procuring agencies shall provide clear approval

of procurements by competent authorities concerned.

R15 (Type of Bidding): Open Competitive

Bidding

1) International Competitive Bidding (ICB)

- Open to local and international parties

- Default method is for >= US $ 10 M

2) National Competitive Bidding (NCB)

- Open to local but international parties may

participate

- Default method is for < US $ 10 M

R16 (No Advertisement):

<=25000: Petty Purchases-No Quotations

>25000 to <=100,000- 3 Quotations only

- Direct Contracting

- Force Account

- Repeat orders

R17 (Advertisement):

- If >100,000 to <=1,000,000 SPPRA+ P.A website

- If >1,000,000 SPPRA+ P.A website + 3 widely

circulated newspapers (EUS)

R18 (Response Time):

- NCB >= 15 days

- ICB >= 45 days

From 1st publication

R19 (Exceptions to R17 & R18):

- Emergency

- National Security

- Intellectual Property

R20 (Issuance of Bidding Documents):

-Bids to be available from 1st date of publication in

Newspaper or website

-Bids to be issued to all interested parties

-the fee may be charged but not exceeding the cost of

preparation of documents

R21 (Contents of Bidding Documents):

(a) Letter of invitation for bid;

(b) Datasheet containing information about the

assignment;

(c) Instructions for preparing bids;

(d) Amount and manner of payment of bid security

and performance guarantee (where applicable);

(e) Manner and place, date and time for submission

of bidding documents;

(f) Manner, place, date and time of opening of bids;

(g) Method of procurement used;

(h) Detailed and unambiguous evaluation criteria;

(i) Terms and conditions of the contract agreements,

as far as already known by the procuring agency;

(j) Terms of Reference and technical specifications

of goods, works or services to be procured, subject to

Rule 13;

(k) The manner in which tender price is to be

assessed and computed, including information about

tax liability;

(l) Currency in which tender price is to be formulated

and expressed;

(m) Bid validity period;

(n) A copy of integrity pact to be signed by the

parties (where applicable);

(o) Any other information which is specified in

regulations to be issued by the Authority.

R22 (Bid Submission Extension Time):

- If Fewer than 3 bids received, in such case, the bids

submitted shall be returned to the Bidders un-opened

- If extraordinary circumstances occurred

R23 (Clarification and Modification of BDs):

- Clarification in response to a query by any bidder

shall be communicated to all parties who have

obtained bidding documents

- Procuring Agency shall re-issue the Notice Inviting

Tenders if it is convinced that there is a material

infirmity or ambiguity in the bidding documents

R25 (Cancellation of Bidding Process):

- Any time prior to acceptance of Bid/proposal

- shall not result in any liability to PA

- Bidders promptly informed and bid security

returned

R26 (Re-issuance of Tenders):

- In case bidding process is canceled

- Infirmity of material nature in bidding documents is

surfaced

- Mis-procurement under rule 56 has been declared

R27 (Cases for prequalification):

- Large & Complex contracts with high bid

preparation costs

- Turnkey design & build or management contracts

- Expensive and Technically complex equipment and

works where adequate capabilities, competence, and

resources of contractors/suppliers are required

R28 (Process of Pre-qualification):

- NIP shall be advertised & notified as per rules 17 &

18

- provide Pre-qualification documents

- Shortlisted applicants found eligible in pre-

qualification criteria shall be invited to submit a bid

- Verification of information provided by shortlisted

applicants should be made

- provide reasons to unsuccessful applicants for not

prequalifying them

- Rules 73 & 74 shall apply for prequalification of

consultants

R29 (Bidders Eligibility):

- Not from a prohibited country

- Not a blacklisted party

- Fulfill meeting criteria

- Enlistment/ Registration

R30 (Disqualification):

-On false or materially incomplete information

-On corrupt and fraudulent practices

R 31(2) Complaint Redressal Committee (CRC):

- Headed by Head of PA or officer one rank above

the officer heading PC

- AG/DAO representative as a member of

Provincial/District level

- Independent professional nominated by the head of

PA

R 31 (3) Complaint Lodging:

A complaint can be lodged to CRC at any time

during the bidding process by:

• SPPRA

• Aggrieved Bidder

• Sue Moto Notice by CRC

R 31 (4) Decision:

• Stop PC from acting further

• The annual decision of PC

• Reverse/Substitute PC decision

• Do Nothing- Proceed with the Award of Contract

R 31 (5) Decision Timelines:

- CRC Decision within 07 days

- Decision Communicated in 3 days to SPPRA and

Aggrieved Bidder (AB)

R 31 (8) If not satisfied with Decision:

- The bidder can appeal to CS through SPPRA

R 31 (9-10) Conditions for Appeal:

• The bidder has exhausted the forum of CRC

• The bidder has not withdrawn Bid Security

• The bidder has deposited Complaint Registration

Fee to SPPRA

R 31 (11-13) Review Panel Recommendations:

• 1st meeting to be convened within 5 days

• The decision to be made within 30 days and

communicated to the Authority

R 31 (15) CS Decision is final:

- The decision shall be hosted on Authority's website

within 3 days

R37 (Bid Security):

- 1% to 5% of the bid price

- Valid for 28 days after bid validity date

- Released to unsuccessful bidders on the signing of

contract or expiry of the validity period

R38 (Bid Validity):

- 90 days NCB & 120 days ICB

of 102

- may be extended by PA to 1/3rd but refused by

bidders

-allowed only if not extended will result in

cancellation of the bidding process

- If extended, it will automatically extend Bid

Security validity

- Will not change the price or other conditions of the

bid

R39 (Performance Security):

- <= 10% of Contract value/price in form of pay

order/demand draft

- shall remain valid for 90 days after contract

completion date

R41 (Bid opening):

- Within one hour of submission

- Bidders to sign the attendance sheet

- PC members to sign bids

- Bids not opened due to any procedural flaw or

submitting late shall be returned unopened

- PC shall issue minutes

R42 (Bid Evaluation):

- In accordance with evaluation criteria provided

with bidding documents

- Bids in foreign currency to be converted into local

currency

- applied only those rules/regulations/policies that are

in force at the time of issuance of notice for the

invitation of bids

R43 (Clarification):

- No bid alteration allowed after bid opening

- Clarification may be sought both ways

R44 (No Discrimination):

- No conditions in bidding documents discriminating

among bidders

R45 (BER):

- BER shall be in a standard format

- BER shall contain reasons for acceptance or

rejection of bids

- BER shall contain BQR

- BER to be hosted on SPPRA and PA websites and

issued to bidders before 7 days of contract award

R46 (Bidding Procedures) and R47 (Conditions):

- Single Stage- One Envelop

- One envelop for Technical +Financial proposals

- The standard for goods/works/services of routine

nature

- Single Stage- Two Envelops

- Where price is taken into account after technical

evaluation

- Bid security inside Financial proposal envelop

- Evaluate only Technical proposal for shortlisting

- Open Financial proposals publicly of only

technically qualified bidders

- Select Lowest or Best Evaluated bid

- Two Stages

- Large and complex contracts, where technically

unequal proposals are likely to be encountered

-1st Stage: Public Discussion allowed in 1st

submission (Tech. only). Revision allowed for re-

adjustments to meet the requirement

- 2nd Stage: same as Single Stage- two Envelops

R48 (Single bid):

- One bid is also valid if submitted in accordance

with rules

- Prices can be comparable to last awarded contract

or the market price

R49 (Award of contract):

- To the bidder with the lowest evaluated cost, but

not necessarily the lowest submitted price

R50 (Publication of Award of Contract):

- Within 7 days of award, PA shall publish on

SPPRA and its own website, the following:

- Letter of the award of a contract

- Contract Evaluation Report (CER)

- Bill of Quantities (BOQ) or Schedule of

Requirement

R52 (No Negotiations):

- No Negotiations with the lowest evaluated bidder

or with any other bidder

R53 (Confidentiality):

- PA to keep all information confidential until

publication of BER

R55 (Contract in Force):

- On the date of signing of contract agreement by the

PA and the successful bidder

R56 (Mis-Procurement):

- If the contract is not awarded

- Bidding process annulled & started afresh

- Anti Corruption Case against officers/ officials

responsible

- If the contract is awarded

- Anti Corruption Case against officers/ officials

responsible

- Compensation (cost of bid preparation +

complaint registration fee) paid to the aggrieved

bidder by the officers/official responsible

R57 (Closing of Contract):

- Contract shall be deemed closed on the issue of

overall delivery certificate, certificate of completion

of deliverables, or taking over certificate by the PA;

which shall be issued within 30 days of final taking

over of goods or receiving the deliverables or

completion of works enabling the supplier or

contractor to submit final bill and the procuring

agency/ auditors to carry out an inspection/audit of

goods/works/services related thereto as per

agreement

- In case of defect liability/maintenance periods, a

defect liability certificate shall be issued within 30

days of the expiry of the said period enabling the

supplier or contractor to submit the final bill

R62:

- Consultant with conflict of interest shall not be

hired

R63:

- Government servant with meeting criteria may be

hired:

(1) They are on leave of absence without pay;

(2) They are not being hired by the agency they

were working for, six months prior to going on

leave; and

(3) Their employment would not give rise to any

conflict of interest.

R65:

- Rights and Obligations of PA and Consultants shall

be governed by the agreement/contract signed

R67 (Composition of CSC):

- Headed by BS-19/Highest grade officer/Project

Director/Coordinator or Manager of respective

project/program

- Head+ one Member P&D (BS18)+ one Member FD

(BS18)+ one Member PA (BS18)+ one Technical

Member (BS18)+ Co-opted members (max 2, no

voting rights)

R68 (Quorum):

- Head+ one Member P&D+ one Member FD

R70 (Decision by simple majority):

- All decision of CSC shall be made by simple

majority.

R71 (Functions of CSC):

- Approval of request for proposal before issuance

- Short listing of consultants against a request for

EOI

- Evaluation of proposals mentioned in RFP

- Finalization of recommendation

R72 (Methods of Consultant selection):

- Least cost selection method

- Quality based selection method

- Quality & cost-based selection method

- Direct selection method

- Fixed Budget

- Design Contest

- Consultant's qualifications selection method

- The selection process of individual consultants

R73:

- Advertised as per R17 & R18

- shall contain the following info:

- name & add of PA

- Scope of assignment

- Deadline and place of the submission of NIP

- Criteria for shortlisting

- Any other appropriate information

R74 (Shortlisting Criteria as mentioned in NIP):

- Qualification

- Experience

- Financial capability

- Any other relevant factor

R75 (Contents of RFP):

- Letter of invitation to all shortlisted firms

- Instruction to consultants

- Terms of Reference {It defines the objectives,

goals, and scope of the assignment and list the

deliverables, services and surveys necessary to carry

out the assignment and expected outputs}

- A form of Contract {contains all general and

special conditions of contract}

- Evaluation Criteria

- Types of Contract

- Special Provisions

R75 (2) Open Technical: (For two Envelops

procedures)

• Technical and Financial Proposals in separate

Envelops

• Bid Security inside Financial Proposal Envelop

• Evaluate only Technical Proposal for shortlisting as

per criteria are given in the Request for Proposal

R75 (2) Open Financial: (For two Envelops

procedures)

• Open Financial of only technically qualified

bidders as per criteria are given in the Request for

Proposal

• Select Lowest or Best Evaluated bid.

R76 (Evaluation Criteria of Quality of

Consultants):

- Specialization

- Experience

- Financial Capability

- Understanding of the Assignment

- Methodology Proposed by the consultants

- Availability of Quality Management system at

consultant

R81 (3) Approval:

- The competent authority to approve PPP projects

and related processes shall rest with the Public

Private Partnership Policy Board

R82 (2) Committee:

- The Government shall appoint a committee for each

Public Private Partnership project for evaluating the

project.

- The terms of reference of each such committee

shall be approved by the Government

R82 (5) Bidding Documents also include:

- Minimum design and performance standards and

specifications, land and economic parameters;

- Draft concession or management contract;

- Any other necessary documents

R82 (6) Instructions to bidders also include:

(a) General description and objectives of the project;

(b) bid submission procedures and requirements,

which shall include information on the manner of bid

submission, the number of copies of the bid proposal

to be submitted, where the bids are to be submitted,

the deadline for the submission of bids and

permissible mode of transmission of bid proposals;

(c) Government undertaking such incentives to be

provided, subsidies debt financing, if any, and equity

by the government or other government guarantees;

(d) Bid security and bid validity period;

(e) Milestone bonding;

(f) Method and criteria, including the minimum

amount and form of equity, for the evaluation of the

bids;

of 102

(g) Formulas and indices to be used in the

adjustments of tolls, fees, rentals, royalties and

charges, where applicable;

(h) Requirements of concerned regulatory bodies, if

any;

(i) Monetary rules and regulation governing foreign

exchange remittances;

(j) Revenue sharing arrangements;

(k) Expected commissioning date.

R82 (7) Minimum Design & Performance

Standards:

- shall be clearly defined and shall refer more to the

desired quantity and quality of the outputs of the

facility and shall state that non-conformity with any

of these minimum requirements shall render the bids

as non-responsive.

- Likewise, the following economic and financial

parameters, among others, shall be prescribed:

(a) Discount rate and foreign exchange rate as

prescribed by the government, where applicable;

(b) The maximum period of project construction;

(c) Fixed term or variable term for project operation

and collection of tolls, fees, rentals and charges

authorized or approved by the government;

(d) formula and price indices to be used for

adjustments in tolls, fees, rentals, and charges, in the

case of Build Operate Transfer, Build Operate Own

and other variations thereof authorized or approved

by the government;

(e) Other financial features embedded in the Public

Private Partnership project to enhance Value for

Money.

R84 (Bid Evaluation Criteria):

(1) Lowest bid in terms of user fees if the concession

period is fixed.

(2) Highest return or profit for the government if the

concession period is fixed and the user fees are the

same or lower than another bidder.

(3) Shortest concession period if the user fee is fixed.

(4) Lowest Net Present Value of return to the bidder

if user fee, concession period and subsidy element

are same as those of other bidders if government

equity is not involved.

(5) The lowest amount of subsidy if the other

considerations are almost same.

(6) Any other relevant factor by the procuring

agency.

R89 (Integrity Pact):

- If procurement is > Rs. 10 m for goods and works,

and > Rs. 2.5 m for services shall be subject to an

integrity pact

Appendix B: Official Web Portals for a sample of 50 Countries

S.N Country Official Web Portals

1 United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Northern

Ireland

https://www.gov.uk/

2 Australia http://www.australia.gov.au/

3 Japan http://www.japan.go.jp/

http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/eStatTopPortalE.do

4 Republic of Korea http://www.korea.net/index.jsp

http://www.korea.net/Government/Current-Affairs/National-

Affairs/view?affairId=521&subId=581&articleId=142921

5 Spain http://administracion.gob.es/pag_Home/index.html

6 Italy http://www.governo.it/

7 Poland https://www.premier.gov.pl/en.html

http://www.president.pl/en/

8 Mexico http://www.gob.mx/

9 Israel https://www.gov.il/he

10 Montenegro http://www.gov.me/en/homepage

11 Serbia http://www.euprava.gov.rs/en?alphabet=cyr

http://javnerasprave.euprava.gov.rs/zavr%C5%A1ene-javne-rasprave

12 Morocco http://www.maroc.ma/en

http://www.service-public.ma/en/web/guest/home

13 Denmark http://denmark.dk/

14 China http://english.gov.cn/

15 Croatia https://vlada.gov.hr/en

https://pretinac.gov.hr/KorisnickiPretinac/eGradani.html

16 India https://india.gov.in/

17 Colombia https://www.sivirtual.gov.co/

18 Bahrain http://www.bahrain.bh/wps/portal/!ut/p/a1/04_Sj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMA

fGjzOI9_A3MDI0sjLz8g90sDBwtwnzdnSzdjA3cjYEKIoEKDHAARwNC-

sP1o8BKDIx8nQ09TYy8DHx9gfosnIJ8QtycDQwsjAgoAJoBVYDbDQW5E

QaZno6KAIdXbvQ!/dl5/d5/L0lDUmlTUSEhL3dHa0FKRnNBLzRKVXBD

QSEhL2Vu/

19 Russian Federation http://government.ru/en/

20 Ukraine http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/en

21 Brazil http://www.brazilgovnews.gov.br/

http://brasil.gov.br/barra

http://www.servicos.gov.br/

22 Mongolia http://zasag.mn/en/

23 Luxembourg http://www.luxembourg.public.lu/fr/index.html

24 Bulgaria http://www.government.bg/fce/index.shtml?s=001&p=0139

25 Tunisia http://www.alkasbah.tn/

26 Viet Nam http://www.gov.vn/portal/page/portal/English

27 Azerbaijan http://en.president.az/?locale=en

https://www.gov.uk/

http://www.australia.gov.au/

http://www.japan.go.jp/

http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/eStatTopPortalE.do

http://www.korea.net/index.jsp

http://www.korea.net/Government/Current-Affairs/National-Affairs/view?affairId=521&subId=581&articleId=142921

http://www.korea.net/Government/Current-Affairs/National-Affairs/view?affairId=521&subId=581&articleId=142921

http://www.governo.it/

https://www.premier.gov.pl/en.html

http://www.gob.mx/

https://www.gov.il/he

http://www.gov.me/en/homepage

http://www.euprava.gov.rs/en?alphabet=cyr

http://javnerasprave.euprava.gov.rs/zavr%C5%A1ene-javne-rasprave

http://www.maroc.ma/en

http://denmark.dk/

http://english.gov.cn/

https://vlada.gov.hr/en

https://pretinac.gov.hr/KorisnickiPretinac/eGradani.html

https://india.gov.in/

https://www.sivirtual.gov.co/

http://www.bahrain.bh/wps/portal/!ut/p/a1/04_Sj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMAfGjzOI9_A3MDI0sjLz8g90sDBwtwnzdnSzdjA3cjYEKIoEKDHAARwNC-sP1o8BKDIx8nQ09TYy8DHx9gfosnIJ8QtycDQwsjAgoAJoBVYDbDQW5EQaZno6KAIdXbvQ!/dl5/d5/L0lDUmlTUSEhL3dHa0FKRnNBLzRKVXBDQSEhL2Vu/





http://government.ru/en/

http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/en

http://www.brazilgovnews.gov.br/

http://brasil.gov.br/barra

http://www.servicos.gov.br/

http://zasag.mn/en/

http://www.luxembourg.public.lu/fr/index.html

http://www.government.bg/fce/index.shtml?s=001&p=0139

http://www.alkasbah.tn/

http://www.gov.vn/portal/page/portal/English

http://en.president.az/?locale=en

of 102

http://www.cabmin.gov.az/?/az/content/126/

http://www.mlspp.gov.az/en/pages/1

28 Uzbekistan https://www.gov.uz/en

29 Sri Lanka https://www.gov.lk/index.php

30 Republic of Moldova http://www.gov.md/en

http://www.tunisie.gov.tn/

http://www.sicad.gov.tn/Fr/Sondage_43_15#?

31 Belgium http://www.belgium.be/en

32 Argentina https://www.argentina.gob.ar/

33 Guatemala http://www.congreso.gob.gt/index.php

34 Philippines http://ovp.gov.ph/

http://data.gov.ph/catalogue/dataset?tags=Local+Government

35 United Republic of

Tanzania

http://www.tanzania.go.tz/

https://www.dmoz.org/Regional/Africa/Tanzania/Government

36 Kazakhstan http://www.government.kz/index.php/en/

https://dialog.egov.kz/

37 Kyrgyzstan http://www.gov.kg/?lang=ru

https://e.srs.kg/

38 Switzerland https://www.admin.ch/gov/en/start.html

https://www.ch.ch/en/elections2015/

https://www.blog.ch.ch/

39 Ecuador https://aplicaciones.administracionpublica.gob.ec/

http://www.presidencia.gob.ec:80/

http://app.sni.gob.ec/web/menu/

40 Paraguay http://www.gabinetecivil.gov.py/

https://www.paraguay.gov.py

41 Bangladesh http://www.bangladesh.gov.bd/

42 Kenya http://www.mygov.go.ke/

43 Angola http://www.angola.gov.ao/Default.aspx

44 Afghanistan http://www.afghan-web.com/politics/

http://president.gov.af/en/afghanistan/

45 Pakistan http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/

http://www.e-gov.pk/

46 Bhutan http://www.bhutan.gov.bt/

http://www.nab.gov.bt/en/business/acts/

47 Botswana http://www.gov.bw/en/

48 Namibia http://www.gov.na/

49 Lesotho http://www.gov.ls/gov_webportal/home/index.html

50 Gabon http://www.legabon.org/

http://www.cabmin.gov.az/?/az/content/126/

http://www.mlspp.gov.az/en/pages/1

https://www.gov.uz/en

https://www.gov.lk/index.php

http://www.gov.md/en

http://www.sicad.gov.tn/Fr/Sondage_43_15#?

http://www.belgium.be/en

https://www.argentina.gob.ar/

http://www.congreso.gob.gt/index.php

http://ovp.gov.ph/

http://data.gov.ph/catalogue/dataset?tags=Local+Government

http://www.tanzania.go.tz/

https://www.dmoz.org/Regional/Africa/Tanzania/Government

http://www.government.kz/index.php/en/

https://dialog.egov.kz/

http://www.gov.kg/?lang=ru

https://e.srs.kg/

https://www.admin.ch/gov/en/start.html

https://www.ch.ch/en/elections2015/

https://www.blog.ch.ch/

http://www.presidencia.gob.ec/

http://app.sni.gob.ec/web/menu/

http://www.gabinetecivil.gov.py/

https://www.paraguay.gov.py/

http://www.bangladesh.gov.bd/

http://www.mygov.go.ke/

http://www.afghan-web.com/politics/

http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/

http://www.e-gov.pk/

http://www.bhutan.gov.bt/

http://www.gov.bw/en/

http://www.gov.na/

http://www.gov.ls/gov_webportal/home/index.html

http://www.legabon.org/

of 102

Appendix C: Country-wise Sample Data

Following are the Country-wise generated data in Excel-Sheet format of about 10 countries,

as sample, with Total scores and component-wise scores obtained by using E-GovSSRA

toolkit, available in Appendix C for viewers:

S.No Country EPI16 Score CPI16 ScoreE-GovSSRA Score

(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

2 Australia 98.305 79 84.62 92.31

CountryE-GovSSRA

Score

Official Web

PortalsStages Components Readiness Performance Measures (RPM) Status (y/n)

Score

(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.

Percentage

Equal WT

25% each

Score

Unequal

WT

Unequal WT

Score

Australia 84.62 http://www.australia.gov.au/I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%

92.31 (G2C) ‘Contact us’ feature y 1

Search/Advanced search feature y 1

Site map or index y 1

‘Help’ feature or ‘Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)’ section y 1

Information about how government works y 1

Information about Departments/Ministries with their web links y 1

Downloadable forms of the services offered y 1

**Access to the web portal through its mobile version y 2

Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00

II E-Consulting A comprehensive Dashboard providing all functionaries of the departments/Ministriesy 1 15%

(G2C, C2G) Publications/Online newsletters/Annual Reports/Survey Reports y 1

Updated Announcements/Alerts/News/videos and photos y 1

User registration/digital mailbox feature y 1

Feedback/E-Participation feature y 1

Accessibility feature for disabled people (Vision, hearing, alternate navigational/ pointing devices)y 1

*On site language translation facility if other than English y 0.5

Policies and standards about the use of Open Govt. Data (OGD) y 1

Publish statistics of last Local/General Elections/Voting ratios and E-Reforms y 1

Information about job opportunities/advertisement y 1

*Events calendar available online y 0.5

Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 1.50 15.00

III E-Collaborating**List of departmental services providing online requires internal backend automation (Vertical Integration of departments)y 2 30%

(G2C, C2G, C2C)Workflow and guidelines of online services citizens expect from the Departmenty 1

Statistics of users availing Online Services y 1

RSS feed feature to continuously update media/press/citizens y 1

Complaint feature or Online complaint through a call system y 1

Online tracking system to check status of citizen's complaint y 1

Acknowledgement of received e-opinion/e-complaint explicitly y 1

Information about citizens legal rights hold by the state y 1

Privacy policy/Act y 1

Cyber Security policy/Digital Signature feature y 1

User satisfaction: calculated by asking user to rate the service y 1

Corruption reporting facility/guidelines available online y 1

Comp. Total 13 13 100.00 25.00 2.31 30.00

IV E-Empowering **One single point of contact for all online services w/o going to office (Horizontal Integration of all departments’ Information systems)y 2 50%

(G2C, C2G, C2C, G2G)E-petition feature. n 0

Committed to include the results of e-participation/e-petition in decision makingy 1

Social networks integration (Tweeter tweets, Face book likes, LinkedIn, etc) y 1

Web blogs/forums/polls on govt’s laws and policies y 1

Alerts/Responses sent through e-mails/SMS/MMS/Mobile apps y 1

Social Security Services (family allowances, pensions, unemployment allowance, medical reimbursement/health insurance, shelter for homeless)y 1

**Display growth rate of E-participation services (increase in e-services/performance)y 2

Publish statistics of past e-petitions/e-polls/e-voting/e-juries & their results n 0

Display pending number of decisions on e-petitions//e-polls/e-voting/e-juries n 0

Display status of any running e-petition/e-poll/e-voting/e-jury with Expiry date/Applicable region/Purposen 0

Comp. Total 13 9 69.23 17.31 3.85 34.62

Grand Total 92.31 84.62

of 102

4 Republic of Korea 96.61 53 58.50 74.42

Country E-GovSSRA ScoreOfficial Web PortalsStages Components Readiness Performance Measures (RPM) Status (y/n) Score

(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.

PercentageEqual WT 25% each ScoreUnequal WTUnequal WT Score

Republic of Korea 58.50 http://www.korea.net/index.jspI E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%

74.42 http://www.korea.net/Government/Current-Affairs/National-Affairs/view?affairId=521&subId=581&articleId=142921(G2C) ‘Contact us’ feature y 1








Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00

II E-Consulting A comprehensive Dashboard providing all functionaries of the departments/Ministriesn 0 15%











Comp. Total 10 9 90.00 22.50 1.50 13.50

III E-Collaborating**List of departmental services providing online requires internal backend automation (Vertical Integration of departments)n 0 30%

(G2C, C2G, C2C)Workflow and guidelines of online services citizens expect from the Departmentn 0

Statistics of users availing Online Services n 0










Comp. Total 13 9 69.23 17.31 2.31 20.77

IV E-Empowering **One single point of contact for all online services w/o going to office (Horizontal Integration of all departments’ Information systems)n 0 50%

(G2C, C2G, C2C, G2G)E-petition feature. y 1

Committed to include the results of e-participation/e-petition in decision makingn 0




Social Security Services (family allowances, pensions, unemployment allowance, medical reimbursement/health insurance, shelter for homeless)n 0

**Display growth rate of E-participation services (increase in e-services/performance)n 0

Publish statistics of past e-petitions/e-polls/e-voting/e-juries & their results y 1



Comp. Total 13 5 38.46 9.62 3.85 19.23


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

5 Spain 93.22 58 63.08 80.77


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


Spain 63.08 http://administracion.gob.es/pag_Home/index.htmlI E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00












Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 1.50 15.00













Comp. Total 13 12 92.31 23.08 2.31 27.69












Comp. Total 13 4 30.77 7.69 3.85 15.38


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

6 Italy 91.525 47 50.77 69.23


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


Italy 50.77 http://www.governo.it/I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00












Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 1.50 15.00





Complaint feature or Online complaint through a call system n 0

Online tracking system to check status of citizen's complaint n 0

Acknowledgement of received e-opinion/e-complaint explicitly n 0




User satisfaction: calculated by asking user to rate the service n 0


Comp. Total 13 5 38.46 9.62 2.31 11.54










Display pending number of decisions on e-petitions//e-polls/e-voting/e-juries y 1


Comp. Total 13 5 38.46 9.62 3.85 19.23


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

8 Mexico 88.136 30 58.58 73.27


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


Mexico 58.58 http://www.gob.mx/ I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00






Accessibility feature for disabled people (Vision, hearing, alternate navigational/ pointing devices)n 0

*On site language translation facility if other than English n 0



Information about job opportunities/advertisement n 0

*Events calendar available online n 0

Comp. Total 10 7 70.00 17.50 1.50 10.50













Comp. Total 13 12 92.31 23.08 2.31 27.69









Publish statistics of past e-petitions/e-polls/e-voting/e-juries & their results y 1



Comp. Total 13 4 30.77 7.69 3.85 15.38


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

14 China 81.356 40 42.35 64.81


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


China 42.35 http://english.gov.cn/I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00












Comp. Total 10 9 90.00 22.50 1.50 13.50





Complaint feature or Online complaint through a call system n 0







Corruption reporting facility/guidelines available online n 0

Comp. Total 13 7 53.85 13.46 2.31 16.15





Web blogs/forums/polls on govt’s laws and policies n 0





Display pending number of decisions on e-petitions/e-polls/e-voting/e-juries n 0


Comp. Total 13 2 15.38 3.85 3.85 7.69


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

16 India 76.271 40 58.48 77.60


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


India 58.48 https://india.gov.in/ I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00












Comp. Total 10 9.5 95.00 23.75 1.50 14.25













Comp. Total 13 12 92.31 23.08 2.31 27.69












Comp. Total 13 3 23.08 5.77 3.85 11.54


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

19 Russian Federation 74.576 29 47.71 69.90


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


Russian Federation 47.71 http://government.ru/en/I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00












Comp. Total 10 9.5 95.00 23.75 1.50 14.25








Information about citizens legal rights hold by the state n 0





Comp. Total 13 9 69.23 17.31 2.31 20.77












Comp. Total 13 2 15.38 3.85 3.85 7.69


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

41 Bangladesh 52.542 26 41.65 61.73


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


Bangladesh 41.65 http://www.bangladesh.gov.bd/I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%









Comp. Total 10 10 100.00 25.00 0.50 5.00








Policies and standards about the use of Open Govt. Data (OGD) n 0

Publish statistics of last Local/General Elections/Voting ratios and E-Reforms n 0



Comp. Total 10 7 70.00 17.50 1.50 10.50




RSS feed feature to continuously update media/press/citizens n 0






Cyber Security policy/Digital Signature feature n 0



Comp. Total 13 8 61.54 15.38 2.31 18.46












Comp. Total 13 2 15.38 3.85 3.85 7.69


of 102


(UnEq WT)

E-GovSSRA Score

(Eq WT)

45 Pakistan 37.288 32 28.63 45.29


(y=0.5/1/2, n=0)

Comp.


Pakistan 28.63 http://www.pakistan.gov.pk/I E-Informing The Government of state has an official web presence y 1 5%

45.29 http://www.e-gov.pk/ (G2C) ‘Contact us’ feature y 1


Site map or index n 0





**Access to the web portal through its mobile version n 0

Comp. Total 10 7 70.00 17.50 0.50 3.50








Policies and standards about the use of Open Govt. Data (OGD) n 0

Publish statistics of last Local/General Elections/Voting ratios and E-Reforms n 0



Comp. Total 10 6.5 65.00 16.25 1.50 9.75




RSS feed feature to continuously update media/press/citizens n 0









Comp. Total 13 5 38.46 9.62 2.31 11.54






Alerts/Responses sent through e-mails/SMS/MMS/Mobile apps n 0






Comp. Total 13 1 7.69 1.92 3.85 3.85


of 102

Appendix D: Glossary

Glossary of some important Web tools and Technologies used in E-GovSSRA framework:

Web Tools and

Technologies

Glossaries/Brief Descriptions

Asynchronous

conferencing

It is used to describe technologies where there is a delay in the interaction between participants.

It is useful for online discussions and idea sharing which can be used for learning purpose or for

solving problems over geographically diverse work-field. E.g. Bulletin board, E-mail,

Online forums/polls, Blogs, Wikis, Social networking sites, Shared calendars

Blogs/ Weblogs A blog is a Web site where people can enter their thoughts, ideas, suggestions, and comments in

the form of blog posts. It is a content management Web-based communication tool and is

networked between several users often focus on a common theme. Posts are published

chronologically in blogs. Blogs may be text blogs, photo blogs, video blogs, podcasts, etc. Real-

time blogging is known as live blogging. Blog posts can be tagged with keywords in order to

classify the subjects of the posts. Linking is another important aspect of blogging. It helps to

facilitate retrieval and to reference information on different blogs [123].

Bulletin board/

Noticeboard/ Digital

board

It is a surface intended for the posting of public messages, announcing public events to provide

information to the public or groupware. Online bulletin boards are sometimes referred to as

message boards.

Digital board is a managed digital display of text, animated or video messages (Podcasts/Video-

casts) for advertising, information, entertainment and merchandising to targeted audiences or a

groupware [124].

E-petition/Online

petition

It is a form of petition which is signed online, usually through a form on a website to meet a

goal/cause. Typically, after there are enough signatories, the resulting letter may be delivered to

the subject of the petition, usually via e-mail. The online petition may also deliver an email to

the target of the petition each time the petition is signed.

E-polling/ online polling An online poll is a survey in which participants communicate responses via the Internet,

typically by completing a questionnaire in a web page. Online polls may allow anyone to

participate, or they may be restricted to a sample drawn from a larger panel.

E-voting It refers to voting using electronic means to either aid or takes care of the responsibilities of

casting and counting votes. A worthy e-voting system must perform the tasks associated

with security, accuracy, integrity, swiftness, privacy, accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability

and ecological sustainability. In general, two main types of e-voting can be identified: Electronic

voting machines (EVM) located at polling stations or e-voting via the internet (also called i-

voting) where the voter votes at home or without going to a polling station.

Instant messaging/

virtual meetings/ online

virtual communities

Instant messaging (IM) is a form of online real-time interaction between two or more users. IM

technology allows users to send images, audio, and video files in text messaging. Users can also

combine real-time audio and video conferences/chatting and textual conversations that may

involve hundreds of people at the same time [123]. E.g. Paltalk, Google Talk, Windows Live

Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Skype, Viber, etc.

Like buttons It is a feature of social networking services, Internet forums, news websites, and blogs where the

user can express that they like, enjoy or support certain content [125]. Some websites also

include a dislike button, so the user can either vote in favor, against or neutrally.

Mashups A web mashup is a website that combines information and services from multiple sources on the

web. Users can access aggregated contents of their topic(s) of interest(s) at one place and at a

given moment from a wide range of sources. It is easier and quicker to create mashups than to

code applications from scratch in traditional ways. Mashups are generally created using

application programming interfaces [126]. E.g. YouTube, Amazon, Flickr, SuperGlu, etc.

Google maps and Yahoo! maps are examples of mapping mashups.

Multi-user virtual

environment (MUVE)

MUVE is a computer-based virtual environment that can be accessed by multiple users

simultaneously to represent themselves with avatars, interact with other participants and digital

artifacts for solving problems that have applications in real-world contexts.

Online Shared Screen

Interactive Whiteboards

/Shared Screen

Workspaces

Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) is a large touchscreen display in the form of a whiteboard

connected to one or more computers. It can be a Web-based online collaboration and

conferencing tool designed to interact from a distance to serve shared screen workspaces

(WYSIWIS). E.g. Online board rooms, work groups, classrooms, etc. Online communication

occurs in either a one-to-many, one-to-one, or many-to-many format whether in the form of

whiteboard entries, feedback, chat-line text, or audio or video information. Its common features

include Video link, Audio link, Text chat, Synchronized document editing and sharing, Screen

sharing and recording, etc.

Podcasts Podcasts are digital audio files available at websites to download or listen online (broadcast) E.g.

YouTube, Dailymotion

RSS (Really Simple

Syndication or Rich Site

RSS is a web feed format used for syndicating pushed content like blog updates, news, press

releases, databases, and announcements updates from blogs or web pages. RSS is an XML-based

of 102

Summary) feed content that summarizes information and provides links to the information sources. Using RSS,

users are informed about updates of the blogs or websites which they’re interested in [127]. E.g.

NewsGator, Feedster are popular RSS aggregators.

Semantic Blogs/Forums It provides methods for interconnecting various blogs and forums to each other. It consists of the

ontology, an open-standard machine readable format, for expressing the information contained

both explicitly and implicitly in a number of popular blogging platforms and content

management systems, and of storage and browsing/searching systems for leveraging their data.

Semantic Wiki A semantic wiki is using a knowledge management system, which is typically available in

a formal language, provides the ability to a wiki to retrieve or identify information about the data

within or between pages through semantic queries [128]. E.g. Semantic MediaWiki, DBpedia.

Social bookmarking Social bookmarking services (e.g. Delicious, Furl, CiteULike, Shadows, etc.) allow registered

users to classify and tag their favorite web links/ media files in an online, open environment in

order to add, edit and share resources with others [129]. It allows users to share their own

metadata tags. This makes group collection and aggregation of bookmarks easier with common

interests. It is a great way of capturing contextual knowledge [127]. Some services offer

suggested tags, popular tags with access counts, note tags with owner’s ID, etc.

Social networking/

Social media/ virtual

community

Social networking services are online group-forming applications that connect people through

the shared information of common interests. It is a user-created group of virtual community.

They allow users to search people through mutual friends, build profiles, update address books,

instant messaging to public/private, send group announcements, share, blog, social bookmark,

like/dislike, rate/vote, etc. E.g. MySpace, Facebook, LinkedIn, Meetup, Google News, Digg, etc

Tagging Tags are keywords added to articles in blogs or Web pages. The process of creating tags is

known as tagging. Tagging allowing users to organize their social bookmarks and develop user-

created and shared vocabularies (taxonomies of information) known as ‘Folksonomies’ [127].

Version control It is the management of changes to documents, computer programs, large websites, and other

collections of information. Each revision is associated with a timestamp and the person making

the change. Revisions can be compared and restored to a previous version. Version control is

also embedded in various content management systems, e.g., Wikipedia's page history.

Videocasts Videocasts are digital video files available at websites to download or watch online (broadcast).

E.g. YouTube, Dailymotion.

Virtual world The virtual world is a computer-simulated environment where users can ‘inhabit’ and interact via

avatars (Internet users’ representations of themselves) [123]. E.g. Second Life is an online role-

playing social game in which various players interact with one another in a virtual world.

Web 1.0 Web 1.0 was the first implementation of the web, lasted from 1989 to 2005, introduced by Tim

Berners-Lee. Its role was very passive in nature. Only allowed to search for information and read

only content [130]. Web 1.0 technologies include core web protocols: HTML, HTTP, and URI to

design static web pages only. It targets the content creation of producers only.

Web 2.0/ Community-

Web

Web 2.0 is the second generation of web, defined by Dale Dougherty as a read-write web in

2004 [130]. It supports Bi-directional environment. Web 2.0 technologies manage large global

crowds in social interactions like participatory, collaborative, and distributed practices among

groups of common interests [20]. It allows flexible web design, creative reuse, updates,

collaborative content creation and modification to support collective intelligence. It targets the

content creation of users and producers. Associated technologies are blogs, social networks,

wikis, podcasts, RSS feeds, mashups, tags etc. Some examples are Flickr, YouTube, Adsense,

Wikipedia, Blogger, MySpace, and RSS. Interconnectivity and knowledge sharing between

platforms across community boundaries are still limited [131, 132].

Web 3.0/ Semantic-Web John Mark-off suggested Web 3.0 as third generation of the web in 2006 [29]. Also known as

“executable Web”. It provides automatic tagging; It supports Multi-user virtual environments

(MUVEs). It targets on linked datasets called Web-of-Data through artificial intelligence-based

web leaning. The basic idea is to attach metadata to web content and linked them in order to

provide more effective search, automation, integration, and reuse across various applications

[133]. Web 3.0 is a web where the concept of website disappears, where data is not owned but

shared, where services show different views of the same data or website, and focused on context

and personalization [134]. Web3.0 supports worldwide database and web oriented architecture.

One of the important features of Web 3.0 era is Crowd-sourcing because it uses the framework

of Semantic Web. Semantic Web provides a common framework that allows data to be shared

and reused across applications, enterprises, and community boundaries like Semantic Forums,

Semantic Blogs, Semantic Wikis, etc [20]. Examples are OpenLink, DataSpaces, semiBlog,

Haystack, Semblog, MediaWiki, SemperWiki, DBpedia, Facebook, PeopleAggregator, Google

Maps, My Yahoo!, etc. It enables semantically structured machines to self-understand and

respond to complex human requests based on their meanings [20].

Web 4.0/ Symbiotic-

Web

Web 4.0 is an Ultra-Intelligent E-Agent, Symbiotic web and Ubiquitous web [21]. The idea

behind the symbiotic web was the interaction between humans and machines in symbiosis. It is

as powerful as the human brain. Web 4.0 uses the recent progress in telecommunication,

advancement of nanotechnology and controlled interfaces. Web 4.0 technologies use artificial

intelligence on reading the contents of the web and deciding what to execute first to load the

websites fast with superior quality and performance [25]. Web 4.0 supports read-write

of 102

concurrency web.

Webcasting Webcasting is typically a one-way flow of information dispersed to a large audience via the

Internet, where the audience cannot contribute to the content. E.g. simple audio streams,

recorded video clips, live software demonstrations, etc.

Web conferencing It is typically used for two-way online collaborative services. E.g. web seminars

("webinars"), peer-level web meetings, etc. It allows real-time point-to-point communications to

multicast communications. It offers data streams of text-based messages, voice and video chat to

be shared simultaneously, across geographically dispersed locations.

Wikis A wiki is a web page, offering an authoring platform that allows users to add content and can

easily be edited by anyone who is allowed to access. It supports asynchronous contribution for

the content to evolve, expand, and improve incrementally over time. Unlike blogs, previous

versions of wikis can also be examined by a history function and can be restored by a rollback

function [123, 127]. E.g. Wikipedia, MediaWiki.

of 102

Appendix E: List of Publications and Submissions

1) Waseem, A.A., Shaikh, Z.A., and ur Rehman, A., “E-Governance Service System

Readiness Assessment (E-GovSSRA) Framework from CSCW’s Perspective,”

Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering & Technology (MURJET)

Volume 38, No. 1, pp. 53-68, Jamshoro, Sindh, Pakistan, 2019 [107].

2) Waseem, A.A., Shaikh, Z.A., and ur Rehman, A., “Impact of E-Participation Index on

Perceived Governance Index: A Need for Redefining E-Participation Model,”

Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology (ROMJIST), Volume,

Romania, 2017 (Submitted and under review) [95].

3) Waseem, A.A., Shaikh, Z.A., and ur Rehman, A., "A Toolkit for Prototype

Implementation of E-Governance Service System Readiness Assessment

Framework," in Proceedings of the International Conference on HCI in Business,

Government and Organizations, Springer. pp. 259-270, Toronto, Canada, 2016 [90].

4) Waseem, A.A., Hussain, S.J., and Shaikh, Z.A., "An extended synthesis algorithm for

relational database schema design," in Proceedings of the International Conference on

Information Systems and Design of Communication, ACM. pp. 94-100, Lisbon,

Portugal, 2013 [37].

of 102

REFERENCES

[1] Creighton, J.L., "The public participation handbook: Making better decisions through citizen involvement," John

Wiley & Sons, 2005.

[2] Fischer, F., “Citizen participation and the democratization of policy expertise: From theoretical inquiry to practical

cases,” Policy sciences, Volume 26, No. 3, pp. 165-187, Switzerland, 1993.

[3] Van Dijk, J., “Digital democracy: vision and reality,” Innovation and the Public Sector, Volume 19, pp. 49-62,

IOS Press, Netherlands, 2012.

[4] Holzer, M., and Kim, S.-T., Digital governance in municipalities worldwide (2007): A longitudinal assessment of

municipal websites throughout the world, United Nations, USA, 2007.

[5] UNDESA, World Public Sector Report 2008, People Matter: Civic Engagement in Public Governance, U.N.

Publishing Section, New York, 2008.

[6] UNDESA, United Nations e-government survey 2008, U.N. Publishing Section, New York, 2008.

[7] Chen, Y.C., and Hsieh, J.Y., “Advancing E‐Governance: Comparing Taiwan and the United States,” Public

Administration Review, Volume 69, No. s1, pp. S151-S158, USA, 2009.

[8] UNDESA, United Nations E-government Survey 2010: Leveraging E-government at a Time of Financial and

Economic Crisis, 9211231833, vol. 2, U.N. Publishing Section, New York, 2010.

[9] Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., and Mastruzzi, M., “The worldwide governance indicators: methodology and analytical

issues,” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, Volume 3, No. 02, pp. 220-246, Heidelberg, Germany, 2011.

[10] UNDESA, United Nations E-government Survey 2012: E-government for the People, U.N. Publishing Section,

New York, 2012.

[11] Pérez-Espés, C., Jiménez, J.M.M., and Wimmer, M.A., "Evaluating the Efficacy of E-Participation Experiences,"

in Proceedings of the EGOV/ePart Ongoing Research, . pp. 250-257, 2013.

[12] UNDESA, United Nations E-Government Survey 2014: E-Government for the future we want, U.N. Publishing

Section, New York, 2014.

[13] Davies, T., Sharif, R., and Alonso, J., Open Data Barometer Global Report, 2nd Edn., World Wide Web

Foundation, 2014.

[14] International, T., Corruption Perceptions Index 2015, Transparency International, Germany, 2015.

[15] UNDESA, United Nations E-Government Survey 2016: E-Government in Support of Sustainable

Development, U.N. Publishing Section, New York, 2016.

[16] You, L., Motta, G., Liu, K., and Ma, T., “CITY FEED: A Pilot System of Citizen-Sourcing for City Issue

Management,” ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST), Volume 7, No. 4, pp. 53, New

York, NY, USA, 2016.

[17] Dawes, S.S., “The future of e-government,” Center for Technology in Government, Volume, pp. 2006-1781, 2002.

[18] Fraga, E., "Trends in e-government how to plan, design, secure, and measure e-government," in Proceedings of the

Government Management Information Sciences, GMIS, New Mexico, U.S.A., 2002.

[19] Schneider, B., and Bowen, D.E., "Winning the service game," Handbook of service science, Springer, pp. 31-59,

2010.

[20] Choudhury, N., “World wide web and its journey from web 1.0 to web 4.0,” International Journal of Computer

Science and Information Technologies, Volume 5, No. 6, pp. 8096-8100, 2014.

[21] Patel, K., “Incremental journey for World Wide Web: introduced with Web 1.0 to recent Web 5.0–a survey paper,”

International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, Volume 3, No. 10,

2013.

[22] Torres, L., Pina, V., and Royo, S., “E-government and the transformation of public administrations in EU

countries: Beyond NPM or just a second wave of reforms?,” Online Information Review, Volume 29, No. 5, pp.

531-553, 2005.

[23] King, S., and Cotterill, S., “Transformational government? The role of information technology in delivering

citizen-centric local public services,” Local Government Studies, Volume 33, No. 3, pp. 333-354, 2007.

[24] Bannister, F., “Deep E-Government,” E-government: Information, technology, and transformation, Volume, pp.

33, Armonk, New York, 2010.

[25] Berners-Lee, T., Cailliau, R., Groff, J.-F., and Pollermann, B., “World-wide web: The information universe,”

Internet Research, Volume 20, No. 4, pp. 461-471, 2010.

[26] Chadwick, A., “Web 2.0: New challenges for the study of e-democracy in an era of informational exuberance,”

Isjlp, Volume 5, pp. 9, California, USA, 2008.

[27] Waller, S.N., “Engaging Citizens in State Recreation Planning: Best Practices from Oregon,” Public Manager,

Volume 38, No. 4, pp. 72, USA, 2009.

[28] Vedel, T., “The idea of electronic democracy: Origins, visions and questions,” Parliamentary Affairs, Volume 59,

No. 2, pp. 226-235, Oxford Academic, U.K., 2006.

of 102

[29] Spivack, N., “Web 3.0: The third generation web is coming,” Lifeboat Foundation, Volume, 2013.

[30] Medimorec, D., Parycek, P., and Schossböck, J., Vitalizing democracy through e-participation and open

government: an Austrian and Eastern European perspective, Bertelsmann-stiftung.org Publishing, 2010.

[31] Scherer, S., and Wimmer, M.A., "Reference framework for E-participation projects," in Proceedings of the

International Conference on Electronic Participation, Springer. pp. 145-156, 2011.

[32] Linders, D., “From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of

social media,” Government Information Quarterly, Volume 29, No. 4, pp. 446-454, Netherlands, 2012.

[33] Ellis, C.A., Gibbs, S.J., and Rein, G., “Groupware: some issues and experiences,” Communications of the ACM,

Volume 34, No. 1, pp. 39-58, 1991.

[34] Diasio, S.R., and Agell, N., "The evolution of expertise in decision support technologies: A challenge for

organizations," in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in

Design, 2009. (CSCWD 2009). IEEE. pp. 692-697, 2009.

[35] Power, D.J., and Sharda, R., "Decision support systems," Springer handbook of automation, Springer, pp. 1539-

1548, 2009.

[36] Ludwig, T., Reuter, C., and Pipek, V., “Social haystack: Dynamic quality assessment of citizen-generated content

during emergencies,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), Volume 22, No. 4, pp. 17,

2015.

[37] Waseem, A.A., Hussain, S.J., and Shaikh, Z.A., "An extended synthesis algorithm for relational database schema

design," in Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems and Design of Communication,

ACM. pp. 94-100, Lisbon, Portugal, 2013.

[38] Mumford, E., “A socio-technical approach to systems design,” Requirements Engineering, Volume 5, No. 2, pp.

125-133, 2000.

[39] Omicini, A., and Ossowski, S., “Coordination and collaboration activities in cooperative information systems,”

International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, Volume 13, No. 01, pp. 1-7, 2004.

[40] Nardi, B.A., "Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction," MIT Press, 1996.

[41] Kornrumpf, A., and Baumöl, U., “FROM COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE TO COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE

SYSTEMS: DEFINITIONS AND A SEMI-STRUCTURED MODEL,” International Journal of Cooperative

Information Systems, Volume 22, No. 03, pp. 1340002, 2013.

[42] Sussman, J., Dodder, R., McConnell, J.B., Mostashari, A., and Sgouridis, S., "The CLIOS process: a user’s guide,"

Frameworks and Models in Engineering Systems, , pp. 12, 2007.

[43] Clarke, L.A., Osterweil, L.J., and Avrunin, G.S., "Supporting human-intensive systems," in Proceedings of the

FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research, ACM. pp. 87-92, 2010.

[44] Lacigova, O., Maizite, A., and Cave, B., “eParticipation and social media: A symbiotic relationship,” European

Journal of ePractice, Volume 16, pp. 71-76, Barcelona, 2012.

[45] McGrath, K., Elbanna, A., Hercheui, M., Panagiotopoulos, P., and Saad, E., “Exploring the democratic potential of

online social networking: The scope and limitations of e-participation,” Association for Information Systems,

Volume, USA, 2012.

[46] Soon, C., and Soh, Y.D., “Engagement@ Web 2.0 between the government and citizens in Singapore: Dialogic

communication on Facebook?,” Asian Journal of Communication, Volume 24, No. 1, pp. 42-59, U.K., 2014.

[47] Ludwig, T., Reuter, C., Siebigteroth, T., and Pipek, V., "Crowdmonitor: mobile crowd sensing for assessing

physical and digital activities of citizens during emergencies," in Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM. pp. 4083-4092, 2015.

[48] Nunes, F., Verdezoto, N., Fitzpatrick, G., Kyng, M., Grönvall, E., and Storni, C., “Self-care technologies in HCI:

Trends, tensions, and opportunities,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), Volume 22,

No. 6, pp. 33, New York, NY, USA, 2015.

[49] Fjeld, M., Lauche, K., Bichsel, M., Voorhorst, F., Krueger, H., and Rauterberg, M., “Physical and virtual tools:

Activity theory applied to the design of groupware,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Volume

11, No. 1, pp. 153-180, 2002.

[50] Hewett, T., Baecker, R., Card, S., Carey, T., Gasen, J., Mantei, M., Perlman, G., Strong, G., and Verplank, W.,

"ACM SIGCHI Curricula for Human-Computer Interaction," ACM SIGCHI, 1996.

[51] Mills, K.L., “Introduction to the electronic symposium on computer-supported cooperative work,” ACM

Computing Surveys (CSUR), Volume 31, No. 2es, pp. 1, 1999.

[52] Schmidt, K., and Simonee, C., “Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW systems

design,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Volume 5, No. 2, pp. 155-200, 1996.

[53] Dieng, R., "Designing Cooperative Systems: The Use of Theories and Models " in Proceedings of the 5th

International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems (COOP'2000), IOS Press, 2000.

[54] Kittur, A., Nickerson, J.V., Bernstein, M., Gerber, E., Shaw, A., Zimmerman, J., Lease, M., and Horton, J., "The

future of crowd work," in Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ACM.

pp. 1301-1318, 2013.

of 102

[55] Skopik, F., Schall, D., and Dustdar, S., “Discovering and managing social compositions in collaborative enterprise

crowdsourcing systems,” International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, Volume 21, No. 04, pp. 297-

341, USA, 2012.

[56] Jacko, J.A., "Human computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving technologies, and emerging

applications," CRC press, 2012.

[57] Basharat, A., Arpinar, I.B., Dastgheib, S., Kursuncu, U., Kochut, K., and Dogdu, E., “Semantically enriched task

and workflow automation in crowdsourcing for linked data management,” International Journal of Semantic

Computing, Volume 8, No. 04, pp. 415-439, USA, 2014.

[58] Kittur, A., Chi, E.H., and Suh, B., "Crowdsourcing user studies with Mechanical Turk," in Proceedings of the

SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM. pp. 453-456, 2008.

[59] Alonso, O., Rose, D.E., and Stewart, B., "Crowdsourcing for relevance evaluation," in Proceedings of the ACM

SigIR Forum, ACM. pp. 9-15, 2008.

[60] Erickson, T., "Some thoughts on a framework for crowdsourcing," in Proceedings of the Workshop on

crowdsourcing and human computation. pp. 1-4, 2011.

[61] Schneider, D., Moraes, K., De Souza, J.M., and Esteves, M.G.P., "CSCWD: Five characters in search of crowds,"

in Proceedings of the IEEE 16th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design

(CSCWD), IEEE. pp. 634-641, 2012.

[62] Promoting Inclusive and Accountable Public Services for Sustainable Development, U. N. UN General Assembly,

Standard: A/RES/69/327, 2014.

[63] UNDP, Governance Indicators: A Users' Guide, Second Edition, United Nations Development

Programme, Oslo Governance Centre, Oslo, 2007.

[64] WGI, Worldwide Governance Indicators, World Bank, 2015.

[65] Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., and Mastruzzi, M., “Governance matters VIII: aggregate and individual governance

indicators, 1996-2008,” World bank policy research working paper, Volume, No. 4978, 2009.





[70] Hamilton, A., and Hammer, C., "Can We Measure the Power of the Grabbing Hand? A Comparative Analysis of

Different Indicators of Corruption," The World Bank, 2018.

[71] Lee, G., and Kwak, Y.H., “An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement,”

Government Information Quarterly, Volume 29, No. 4, pp. 492-503, Netherlands, 2012.

[72] Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P.T., and Grimes, J.M., “Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and

social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies,” Government information quarterly, Volume 27,

No. 3, pp. 264-271, Netherlands, 2010.

[73] Ndou, V., “E-government for developing countries: opportunities and challenges,” The electronic journal of

information systems in developing countries, Volume 18, China, 2004.

[74] WWWF, Open Data Barometer Global Report, 3rd Edn., World Wide Web Foundation, 2015.

[75] Davies, T., Open data barometer: 2013 global report, 1st Edn., World Wide Web Foundation, 2013.

[76] Hafeez, S., and Sher, S.W., "UN Global E-government Readiness Report 2005: From E-government to E-

inclusion," United Nations Publications, 2006.

[77] Greengard, S., “Following the crowd,” Communications of the ACM, Volume 54, No. 2, pp. 20-22, New York,

USA, 2011.

[78] Al-Dalou, R., and Abu-Shanab, E., "E-participation levels and technologies," in Proceedings of the 6th

International Conference on Information Technology, ICIT. pp. 8-10, 2013.

[79] Phang, C.W., and Kankanhalli, A., “A framework of ICT exploitation for e-participation initiatives,”

Communications of the ACM, Volume 51, No. 12, pp. 128-132, New York, NY, USA, 2008.

[80] ITU, Measuring the Information Society Report, International Telecommunications Union, 2016.

[81] Hipel, K.W., Jamshidi, M.M., Tien, J.M., and White III, C.C., “The future of systems, man, and cybernetics:

application domains and research methods,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C

(Applications and Reviews), Volume 37, No. 5, pp. 726-743, 2007.

[82] Lopes, A.J., and Pineda, R., “Service systems engineering applications,” Procedia Computer Science, Volume 16,

pp. 678-687, 2013.

[83] Baecker, R.M., "Readings in Human-Computer Interaction: toward the year 2000," Morgan Kaufmann, 2014.

[84] Michaelides, R., Morton, S.C., Michaelides, Z., Lyons, A.C., and Liu, W., “Collaboration networks and

collaboration tools: a match for SMEs?,” International Journal of Production Research, Volume 51, No. 7, pp.

2034-2048, 2013.

of 102

[85] Ackerman, M.S., Dachtera, J., Pipek, V., and Wulf, V., “Sharing knowledge and expertise: The CSCW view of

knowledge management,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Volume 22, No. 4-6, pp. 531-573,

2013.

[86] Katzlinger, E., and Herzog, M.A., “Wiki Based Collaborative Learning in Interuniversity Scenarios,” Electronic

Journal of e-Learning, Volume 12, No. 2, pp. 149-160, 2014.

[87] Sonego, A.H.S., do Amaral, É.M.H., Nunes, F.B., and Voss, G.B., “Use of Moodle as a tool for collaborative

learning: a study focused on wiki,” IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, Volume 9, No.

1, pp. 17-21, 2014.

[88] Stanoevska-Slabeva, K., Blijsma, M., Gareis, K., Vartiainen, M., and Verbug, R., “Collaborative work:

globalization and new collaborative working environments,” European Commission, Volume, pp. 1-150, 2009.

[89] Butler, M., “The business value of collaboration,” Best practice, benefits, costs and risks. Business Value Series,

Volume 3, pp. 1-13, 2009.

[90] Waseem, A.A., Shaikh, Z.A., and ur Rehman, A., "A Toolkit for Prototype Implementation of E-Governance

Service System Readiness Assessment Framework," in Proceedings of the International Conference on HCI in

Business, Government and Organizations, Springer. pp. 259-270, Toronto, Canada, 2016.

[91] Buda, A., and Jarynowski, A., "Life-time of correlations and its applications," Wydawnictwo Niezalezne, pp. 5–

21, 2010.

[92] ITU, E-Government Implementation Toolkit: e-Government Readiness Assessment Framework, ITU, Geneva,

2009.

[93] ITU, Measuring the Information Society Report, International Telecommunications Union, 2015.

[94] ITU, Measuring the Information Society Report, 9261146619, International Telecommunications Union, 2014.

[95] Waseem, A.A., Shaikh, Z.A., and ur Rehman, A., “Impact of E-Participation Index on Perceived Governance

Index: A Need for Redefining E-Participation Model,” Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology

(ROMJIST), Volume, Romania, 2017 (Submitted and under review).

[96] Gramberger, M., "Citizens as partners: OECD handbook on information, consultation and public participation in

policy making," OECD, 2001.

[97] Macintosh, A., "Characterizing e-participation in policy-making," in Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences, 2004, IEEE. pp. 10 pp., 2004.

[98] Ahmed, N., "An overview of e-participation models," in Proceedings of UNDESA workshop on E-participation

and E-government: Understanding the Present and Creating the Future., UN. pp. 27-28, Budapest, Hungary, 2006.

[99] Tambouris, E., Liotas, N., and Tarabanis, K., "A framework for assessing eParticipation projects and tools," in

Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2007). , IEEE. pp.

90-90, 2007.

[100] Wimmer, M.A., "Ontology for an e-participation virtual resource centre," in Proceedings of the 1st international

conference on Theory and practice of electronic governance, ACM. pp. 89-98, 2007.

[101] Lukensmeyer, C.J., and Torres, L.H., "Public deliberation: A manager's guide to citizen engagement," IBM center

for the Business of Government, 2006.

[102] IAP2, "IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum," IAP2, URL:

http://www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/spectrum.pdf, 2007.

[103] Gatautis, R., “CREATING PUBLIC VALUE THROUGH ePARTICIPATION: WAVE PROJECT,” Economics &

Management, Volume, Kaunas, Lithuania, 2010.

[104] Sobaci, Z., “What the Turkish parliamentary web site offers to citizens in terms of e-participation: A content

analysis,” Information Polity, Volume 15, No. 3, pp. 227-241, IOS Press, Netherlands, 2010.

[105] Abu-Shanab, E., and Al-Dalou, R., "E-participation initiatives: A framework for technical tools," in Proceedings of

the International Arab Conference of e-Technology, IACe-T. pp. 57-64, 2012.

[106] Motta, G., You, L., Sacco, D., and Ma, T., "City feed: A crowdsourcing system for city governance," in

Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Service Oriented System Engineering (SOSE), IEEE. pp. 439-

445, 2014.

[107] Waseem, A.A., Shaikh, Z.A., and ur Rehman, A., “E-Governance Service System Readiness Assessment (E-

GovSSRA) Framework from CSCW’s Perspective,” Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering &

Technology (MURJET) Volume 38, No. 1, pp. 53-68, Jamshoro, Sindh, Pakistan, 2019.

[108] Porwol, L., Ojo, A., and Breslin, J., "Structuring e-participation perspectives: mapping and aligning models to core

facets," in Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, ACM. pp.

224-234, 2013.

[109] Shelton, T., "Business Models for the Social Mobile Cloud: Transform Your Business Using Social Media, Mobile

Internet, and Cloud Computing," John Wiley & Sons, 2013.

[110] Brambilla, M., Fraternali, P., and Vaca Ruiz, C.K., "Combining social web and BPM for improving enterprise

performances: the BPM4People approach to social BPM," in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on

World Wide Web, ACM. pp. 223-226, 2012.

http://www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/spectrum.pdf

of 102

[111] Bovaird, T., “Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services,” Public

administration review, Volume 67, No. 5, pp. 846-860, USA, 2007.

[112] Fedotova, O., Teixeira, L., and Alvelos, H., “E-participation in Portugal: evaluation of government electronic

platforms,” Procedia Technology, Volume 5, pp. 152-161, Netherlands, 2012.

[113] Muralidharan, R., “A framework for designing strategy content controls,” International Journal of Productivity

and Performance Management, Volume 53, No. 7, pp. 590-601, 2004.

[114] Carlo Bertot, J., Jaeger, P.T., and Grimes, J.M., “Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social

media, and collaborative e-government,” Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, Volume 6, No.

1, pp. 78-91, 2012.

[115] Baller, S., Dutta, S., and Lanvin, B., "The global information technology report 2016," in Proceedings of the

World Economic Forum, Geneva, WEF. pp. 1-307, 2016.

[116] Coppin, A., "Human Capital and Employee Engagement—Global and National Viewpoints," The Human Capital

Imperative, Springer, pp. 11-22, 2017.

[117] Unit, E.I., “Digital economy rankings 2010,” Economist Intelligence Unit, Volume, 2010.

[118] SPPRA, "Sindh Public Procurement Rules-2010," URL:

http://www.pprasindh.gov.pk/downloads/files/FINALSPPRARULES08022010.pdf, March 2010.

[119] SPPRA, "Procurement Process Flowchart", Available at:

http://www.pprasindh.gov.pk/downloads/files/ProcurementProcessFlowWG.JPG.

[120] SPPRA, "Complaint Redressal Mechanism", Available at:

http://www.pprasindh.gov.pk/downloads/files/ComplaintRedressalFolw.JPG.

[121] Grantham, J., Grantham, E., and Powers, D., "Website accessibility: an Australian view," in Proceedings of the

Thirteenth Australasian User Interface Conference-Volume 126, Australian Computer Society, Inc. pp. 21-28,

2012.

[122] UNESCO, “E-Government Toolkit for Developing Countries,” Asia Pacific Regional Bureau for Communication

and Information, New Delhi, Volume, 2005.

[123] Kamel Boulos, M.N., and Wheeler, S., “The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable

technologies in health and health care education,” Health Information & Libraries Journal, Volume 24, No. 1, pp.

2-23, 2007.

[124] Schaeffler, J., "Digital signage: software, networks, advertising, and displays: a primer for understanding the

business," CRC Press, 2012.

[125] Dedić, N., and Stanier, C., "Towards differentiating business intelligence, big data, data analytics and knowledge

discovery," in International Conference on Enterprise Resource Planning Systems, Springer. pp. 114-122, 2016.

[126] Ritt, A., and Hörtler, P., "Security Aspects in Web 2.0 Mashup Systems," 2009.

[127] Murugesan, S., “Understanding Web 2.0,” IT professional, Volume 9, No. 4, 2007.

[128] Boulos, M.N.K., “Semantic Wikis: A comprehensible introduction with examples from the health sciences,”

Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence, Volume 1, No. 1, pp. 94-96, 2009.

[129] Barsky, E., and Purdon, M., “Introducing Web 2.0: social networking and social bookmarking for health

librarians,” Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association/Journal de l'Association des bibliothèques de la

santé du Canada, Volume 27, No. 3, pp. 65-67, 2006.

[130] Berners-Lee, T., “The World Wide Web: A very short personal history,” Tim Berners-Lee, Volume 7, 1998.

[131] Abel, F., Frank, M., Henze, N., Krause, D., Plappert, D., and Siehndel, P., "GroupMe!-where semantic web meets

web 2.0," The Semantic Web, Springer, pp. 871-878, 2007.

[132] Chan, C.K., Lee, Y.C., and Lin, V., "Harnessing Web 2.0 for Collaborative Learning," in 13th International

Conference on Biomedical Engineering, Springer. pp. 2171-2172, 2009.

[133] Tim, B.-L., Christian, B., Tom, H., and Kingsley, I., "Linked Data on the Web," in 17th International World Wide

Web Conference, 2008.

[134] Hassanzadeh, O., “Introduction to Semantic Web Technologies & Linked Data,” University of Toronto, Volume,

2011.

http://www.pprasindh.gov.pk/downloads/files/FINALSPPRARULES08022010.pdf

http://www.pprasindh.gov.pk/downloads/files/ProcurementProcessFlowWG.JPG

http://www.pprasindh.gov.pk/downloads/files/ComplaintRedressalFolw.JPG