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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 3.6 Technological challenges to e-government implementation Adjustment to rapid technological development Implementation of authentication and/or public key infrastructure Sharing standards and infrastructure among agencies Implementation of information systems and network security Compatibility issues between different technological platforms (UNIX, Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, LINUX, etc.) Difficulty of establishing portals for online services involving several public organisations Technical implementation of privacy measures (privacy architecture, privacy enhancing technologies, PET, etc.) Weak telecommunications infrastructure 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very important challenge Important challenge Somewhat important challenge Not an important challenge Not a challenge (has been mastered) Not a relevant challenge Source: OECD E-Government Survey: Denmark. Digital divide The “digital divide” was ranked lowest among barriers to e-government examined in the OECD survey. While it was perceived as a “very important” challenge by about 4% of respondents, nearly 60% regarded it as being unimportant. In line with the survey results, the digital divide was also the issue least mentioned in interviews. Nearly everyone who met with the OECD during this review either failed to mention the digital divide, or regarded it as presenting very little challenge to e-government. Despite statistical data indicating that Denmark ranks high in terms of individual access to ICT, some differences persist in the basic determinants of access levels. Looking at access to the Internet in particular, some key differences can be observed: • Age: older people have lower levels of access to the Internet. While Internet access remains relatively high under the age of 60 (with less than a 10% difference between ages 16-19 and ages 40-59), it declines considerably over the age of 60. People over the age of 60 have the lowest Internet access rate (54%). • Education: the level of Internet access increases with the level of education. While 96% of university students have Internet access, only 72% of primary and lower secondary school students do. However, Denmark ranks well above the OECD average in terms of the number of pupils per computer used for learning purposes at school (in 2002 there were seven pupils per computer, and nine pupils per computer with Internet access). 55
• Employment status: students and workers have more access to the Internet than those who are outside the labour market. While 96% of students and 83% of workers have access to the Internet, only 52% of people outside the workforce have Internet access. • Type of household: individuals living in larger households or families are more likely to have an Internet connection than people living in smaller households. In 2004, 94% of family households with children and 87% of single-parent households with children had Internet access at home. Comparatively, 78% of family households without children had Internet access at home, and 70% of single households without children had Internet access at home. Statistics also show that Danes are more likely to have Internet access at home than at work (71% and 53%, respectively, in 2003). However, when asked about the most important barriers to home Internet access, 15% of Danish people indicated a lack of need for the Internet, 4% indicated that is too expensive, and 2% that it is difficult to use or that they access the Internet elsewhere. These results seem to indicate that one of the factors shaping Denmark’s digital divide is a lack of understanding of the potential benefits of using ICT and the Internet, rather than problems associated with their actual use. This may indicate a need for better communication of the benefits of connecting to the Internet, and demonstration of the capacity of ICT to provide benefits and services that respond to peoples’ expectations and needs. Experience in many countries has shown that the digital divide is often linked to other social and economic divisions. One aspect of this problem is lack of access to basic ICT education, which can prevent individuals from grasping the benefits of using new technologies. Denmark has taken steps towards strengthening ICT education in schools. The number of people receiving formal ICT education grew 15% between 1999 and 2003. Clearly, the existence of a digital divide in Denmark does not have a significant negative impact on the development of e-government. However, while Denmark is very favourably positioned in regard to the digital divide, it remains important to consider the issue as being necessary to address. In the future, given the emphasis the Government is placing on achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness in the public sector, the ability to deliver as much information and as many services as possible online will be increasingly important. This is especially true to the extent that it enables cost savings from reduced use of other channels for government service delivery (wherever feasible). To date, OECD governments have generally maintained a policy of retaining traditional service delivery channels alongside new ICT-enabled ones, mainly based on equity considerations. In the future, however, as governments strive to realise greater benefits from e-government, the question of how many and which delivery channels are viable to maintain may become an increasingly important policy issue, both in Denmark and elsewhere. Denmark has already shown that it is willing to abandon unnecessary offline means of dealing with government, as demonstrated by the mandatory move in early 2005 to only allowing businesses to present invoices to government organisations electronically. This was possible due to very high levels of business use of the Internet in Denmark, coupled with the provision of an effective alterative option (the “Read In” bureaux) for those businesses not yet online. The move to an entirely electronic system is expected to realise significant annual savings for both government and businesses (see Chapter 6). However, until all Danish citizens and business are able to easily access and use the Internet to deal with government (to the extent that this is physically, technically and practically possible), equity concerns will impede efforts to close off old and inefficient channels, and therefore fundamentally limit the financial benefits that e-government can deliver. Therefore, it would perhaps be sensible for the Government to consider the fiscal, social and economic costs and benefits of supplanting the current approach to the relatively small digital divide 56
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: Figure 3.5 Use of public digital se
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 and 184:
ANNEX E: METHODOLOGY Definition of
Page 185 and 186:
The survey asked State and local go
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?