OECD Peer Review of E-Government in Denmark - ePractice.eu

7. As a means of combating the “sow/harvest” problem that is seen to lead to sub-optimal levels of
multi-organisation e-government initiatives, the Government should thoroughly assess the existence and nature of
this problem, and consider development of a commonly applicable model for financing e-government initiatives.
Such a model should cover the financing of all aspects of initiatives, including: specification, tendering,
contracting, system or application development, implementation and maintenance. It should also include
mechanisms for proportional assessment and allocation of costs and benefits between participating organisations
and/or levels of government.
8. The digital divide is not a primary challenge or barrier to e-government in Denmark. However, the
Government could consider whether, in the longer-term, wider e-government policy options and improved
e-government costs, benefits and achievements would result from replacing the current approach towards the
closing the digital divide in Denmark with a more active one.
4. Planning and Leadership
The e-government vision and strategy
Denmark has been successful in developing a common vision for e-government, and in
translating it into a well-defined strategy that is known across government and provides an important
driver for e-government implementation. Three key features of the strategy are: 1) its relationship to
wider government policies; 2) the involvement of all tiers of government in the governance,
development, and implementation of the strategy; and 3) support of the strategy by a partnership
between two strong ministries with complementary roles and expertise.
The e-government strategy was introduced in 2002, revised in 2004, and will run to the end of
2006. In 2003 a review of the strategy identified a number of challenges and obstacles faced by
e-government. Addressing these has involved a shift from “soft” to “strong” co-ordination as the
overall approach to implementation of the strategy. This shift has led to: 1) more pressure being placed
on organisations to align themselves with the strategy; 2) more robust evaluation of proposals for
e-government projects; 3) State ministries being required to develop ICT strategies encompassing all
their departments, agencies and other sub-bodies; and 4) contemplation of increased centralisation of
some aspects of e-government. Overall, implementation of the strategy has moved away from
exhortation and example towards being more action- and results-oriented. Of note is the fact that a
more active co-ordinating and centralising role is being played by organisations at the centre of
government represents something of a departure from traditions and current conventions of Danish
public management, which rely upon decentralisation and consensus.
The vision of the Government’s current e-government strategy is that “Digitalisation must
contribute to the creation of an efficient and coherent public sector with a high quality of service, with
citizens and businesses at the centre”. To do this, the strategy defines five e-government goals to be
achieved by the end of 2006, and sets out measures of their achievement. Of particular note is the goal
of 75% of e-government initiatives releasing resources for other uses.
Government organisations are generally happy with the way the e-government strategy has been
developed and the goals it establishes, and have responded well to it. The strategy contains
well-defined goals that have been developed with the wide involvement of organisations from all
levels of government. These have acted as an important guide for the e-government efforts of
individual organisations. However, they can find it difficult to evaluate whether their achievements are
satisfactory. The majority of the measures set out in the strategy rely upon survey data collected by
Statistics Denmark. This reliance on organisations’ self-reported progress against the goals of the
strategy does not appear adequate for forming a robust and independently validated view of whether
they are being adequately achieved.
13