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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Inputs The Denmark study is primarily qualitative in nature, presenting a combination of observations, analysis and judgements gleaned from reports and official documents, survey responses and interviews. The study has four main inputs: • Reports and official documents. • The OECD e-government survey. • Interviews with government officials. • Peer review meeting with OECD members. Reports and official documents The study brought together a wide range of government documents across sectors and functions, which provided insights into the way that various public management and e-government polices, strategies and initiatives are planned, co-ordinated and implemented in Denmark. Information was also drawn from recent relevant OECD reports and reviews of Denmark (e.g. “Diffusion of ICT to Business”, December 2004). The study also drew on academic research and journal articles on public management reform, e-government and the information society in Denmark. This approach was based on the notion that e-government cannot be addressed in isolation, but should be observed from a wider public management perspective. OECD survey of e-government in Denmark The OECD survey on e-government was originally developed in 2002 and revised in 2003 based on the experience of the Finland review. A revised version of the survey was presented to the OECD Steering Group on the Complementary Areas of Work on E-Government at a meeting in Paris in December 2003. Comments from the Steering Group were incorporated into the final version of the survey. The survey has been adapted to reflect the Danish institutional and administrative framework. In October 2004, the OECD conducted the survey with Danish State and local government organisations. The survey was targeted at officials with responsibilities relevant to e-government, who were asked to present their organisations’ responses to the survey, rather than respond in their capacity as individuals. The survey sample was jointly selected by the OECD and the Danish Government (through the Danish Digital Task Force with the involvement of Statistics Denmark). Table 1. Responses to the OECD survey Total OECD sample Responses Valid responses State government ministries (including subordinate departments, agencies, etc.) 123 106 66 66 62 Counties 14 14 10 10 71 Response rate % Municipalities 275 101 40 40 40 183
The survey asked State and local government organisations for their opinions regarding e-government challenges, barriers and priorities, and allowed them to self-evaluate the progress of their e-government initiatives. It should be kept in mind that the data results are qualitative and subjective, implying no possibility of performing tests of significance from which definitive conclusions can be drawn. Interviews with government officials The review team conducted two sets of interviews with Danish government officials and other commentators from relevant interest bodies, industry associations and the Danish ICT industry. All interviews were scheduled by the Danish Digital Task Force within the Ministry of Finance, with joint approval from the OECD. The mix of organisations and interviewees was selected to show a broad and representative insight into the main issues and problems regarding e-government in Denmark. The first set of interviews, which took place in November 2004, involved exploratory discussions designed to help the OECD understand the key elements of e-government in Denmark. The OECD team met with 22 people from 11 organisations. These exploratory interviews were not meant to be comprehensive, but to assist the OECD in developing an understanding of areas that merited further research. The second set of interviews took place in December 2004. These in-depth interviews were carried out by three members of the OECD Secretariat and three peer reviewers from OECD member governments: Peter Reichstädter (Austria), Gustaf Johnssén (Sweden), and Kees Keuzenkamp (the Netherlands). The interview team undertook a total of 22 interviews with 35 participants. In addition, two focus group sessions, involving several participants from county and municipal government organisations, were held. All interviews, which were strictly confidential, followed a structured set of questions, covering each of the main themes of the report. The interviews focused on the more informal issues that could not be captured with the written survey. Peer Review Meeting In the assessment phase of an OECD Peer Review, the main findings of the review are discussed in a plenary meeting of the body responsible for the review. The examiners lead the discussion, but the whole body is encouraged to participate extensively. Following discussions, and in some case negotiations, among the members of the body, including the reviewed country, the final report is adopted, or just noted by the whole body. Generally, approval of the final report is by consensus, unless the procedures of the particular peer review specify otherwise (“Peer Review: An OECD Tool for Co-operation and Change”, OECD 2003). The preliminary findings of the OECD Peer Review of E-Government in Denmark were presented to, and discussed by, government officials at the meeting of the OECD’s Network of Senior E-government Officials held in Paris in March 2005. Countries took this opportunity to use their own expertise in e-government to provide insightful commentary on the review. This discussion provided an important input for the finalisation of the report. The report was submitted to the Danish Digital Task Force in September 2005 and presented at the meeting of the Danish e-Government Board on 30 September 2005. 184
Page 1 and 2:
OECD PEER REVIEW OF E-GOVERNMENT IN
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ASSESSMEN
Page 5 and 6:
ANNEX A: OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL AND
Page 7 and 8:
OECD PEER REVIEW OF E-GOVERNMENT IN
Page 9 and 10:
While it is vital that the Governme
Page 11 and 12:
Finance and the MVTU following thes
Page 13 and 14:
this challenge was frequently menti
Page 15 and 16:
Alongside the problem of the reliab
Page 17 and 18:
In terms of its impact on organisat
Page 19 and 20:
and businesses. While it is not cer
Page 21 and 22:
considerable strategic importance t
Page 23 and 24:
government organisations are aware
Page 25 and 26:
8. Monitoring and evaluation Denmar
Page 27 and 28:
Abstract There is a favourable envi
Page 29 and 30:
E-government context Government pol
Page 31 and 32:
The Structural Reform Between 2005
Page 33 and 34:
administrative procedures. The find
Page 35 and 36:
Figure 1.2 E-government structure a
Page 37 and 38:
II. THE CASE FOR E-GOVERNMENT Denma
Page 39 and 40:
• Creation of a competitive marke
Page 41 and 42:
Abstract Government organisations c
Page 43 and 44:
Source: OECD E-Government Survey: D
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 3.2 Legislative and regulato
Page 47 and 48:
modernisation process, especially i
Page 49 and 50:
and the generally high level of tru
Page 51 and 52:
fund it has created providing a tot
Page 53 and 54:
outright barriers. The clearest evi
Page 55 and 56:
Figure 3.5 Use of public digital se
Page 57 and 58:
• Employment status: students and
Page 59 and 60:
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER 3: INFORMATION
Page 61 and 62:
Figure 3.A.4 ICT usage among Danish
Page 63 and 64:
Figure 3.A.8 Internet access among
Page 65 and 66:
IV. PLANNING AND LEADERSHIP The e-g
Page 67 and 68:
The strategy notes that Denmark is
Page 69 and 70:
exchanged electronically. This is e
Page 71 and 72:
with even lower rankings for driver
Page 73 and 74:
involvement in e-government therefo
Page 75 and 76:
In addition to support for the Join
Page 77 and 78:
Figure 4.5 Responsibility for desig
Page 79 and 80:
V. ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE This chapt
Page 81 and 82:
Structural Reform and e-government
Page 83 and 84:
The Task Force has initiated a proj
Page 85 and 86:
Figure 5.2 Share of documents recei
Page 87 and 88:
Box 5.1 Improving middle management
Page 89 and 90:
Abstract Collaboration is relativel
Page 91 and 92:
Co-ordination of e-government polic
Page 93 and 94:
Box 6.1 Key e-government co-ordinat
Page 95 and 96:
The CRS encompasses a number of reg
Page 97 and 98:
Digital signatures are now being wi
Page 99 and 100:
Denmark - something that could be a
Page 101 and 102:
Staffed by employees from the Digit
Page 103 and 104:
The additional workload is connecte
Page 105 and 106:
such a framework be designed; and 3
Page 107 and 108:
schemas used in different areas of
Page 109 and 110:
• Changing conditions in the publ
Page 111 and 112:
municipalities, which might otherwi
Page 113 and 114:
The current situation has evolved o
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 6.6 Impacts of partnerships
Page 117 and 118:
Source: OECD E-government Survey: D
Page 119 and 120:
Abstract The Danish vision for e-go
Page 121 and 122:
Figure 7.1 Drivers of e-government
Page 123 and 124:
• To ensure internal knowledge of
Page 125 and 126:
• The lack of information and the
Page 127 and 128:
Figure 7.2 Source and type of e-gov
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 7.4 Constraints on demand fo
Page 131 and 132:
When asked about the level of impor
Page 133 and 134: eing for one group or another (e.g.
Page 135 and 136: Figure 7.8 Use of electronic delive
Page 137 and 138: The national portal www.denmark.dk
Page 139 and 140: identification of the relationship
Page 141 and 142: Abstract At the all-of-government l
Page 143 and 144: • At least 60 percent of all publ
Page 145 and 146: External audit Another important el
Page 147 and 148: can have impacts: 1) “service cha
Page 149 and 150: Figure 8.4 Responsibilities for mon
Page 151 and 152: CASE STUDY 1: STANDARDS-BASED E-GOV
Page 153 and 154: pharmacies (e.g. referrals and disc
Page 155 and 156: Danish approach of flexible decentr
Page 157 and 158: CASE STUDY 2: ACHIEVING E-GOVERNMEN
Page 159 and 160: Estimation of benefits for both eDa
Page 161 and 162: ANNEX A: OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL AND
Page 163 and 164: ANNEX B: INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT AND
Page 165 and 166: Administrative environment Organisa
Page 167 and 168: Other State government responsibili
Page 169 and 170: − Models to support inter-organis
Page 171 and 172: ICT usage As discussed in Chapter 3
Page 173 and 174: Promotion of IT Research and Educat
Page 175 and 176: other reforms. The plan identified
Page 177 and 178: Overall, these action plans were su
Page 179 and 180: E-mail addresses for everyone Anoth
Page 181 and 182: had developed extensive practical k
Page 183: ANNEX E: METHODOLOGY Definition of
Page 187 and 188: ANNEX F: GLOSSARY This glossary was
Page 189 and 190: BIBLIOGRAPHY Agency for Governmenta
Page 191 and 192: Ministry of Science, Technology and
Page 193: Statistics Denmark (2004b), Nyt fra
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?