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

involvement in e-government therefore very much depends on three things: 1) their own personal
interest in the subject; 2) the relevance it has to their portfolios; and 3) the extent to which their
permanent secretary makes it a priority issue for discussion.
Although the absence of collective responsibility may pose some risk of uneven ministerial
commitment to e-government, there is no evidence that introducing a collective responsibility (which
would require constitutional change) would alter or improve the e-government results Denmark is
achieving. Similarly, there is no evidence to suggest that establishing a ministerial portfolio for
e-government would have any useful impact on e-government results. Indeed, given the deliberate
positioning of e-government in a wider context, allocation of responsibility to a powerful minister
could have a negative impact on e-government. Certainly, interviews conducted for this review did not
suggest that current arrangements for ministerial involvement in e-government are ineffective.
Instead of relying on collective ministerial responsibility, leadership of e-government is built
around collegiality at the level of the Joint Board of e-Government. Participation in e-government is
generally not mandatory for government organisations. Instead, Denmark has positioned e-government
as almost a moral responsibility for each organisation, which they should embrace in support of
delivering Danes a high-quality and efficient public sector. Interviews showed that, while this shared
commitment has been developing since 2001, it has really become established since the revision of the
e-government strategy in 2004. Organisations are now better able to understand and commit to what
they need to do as part of the overall e-government programme, due to a combination of clearer
e-government goals and measures and an improved way of framing and making decisions at the level
of the Joint Board.
Additionally, some ministers currently play another e-government leadership role through
participation in the E-government Dialogue Forum. Established in 2001, this forum meets twice a year
to enable an exchange of information and views between ministers, the chairs of the county and
municipal government associations, labour and industry associations, and ICT industry groups such as
ITEK. This forum enables ministers to be involved with e-government outside of the standing
relationship they have with it through officials, and creates the opportunity for stakeholder
engagement in the ongoing development of e-government. It is notable, however, that there is no
participation in this forum by any groups directly representing citizens’ interests in government
Overall, the e-government results that Denmark is achieving, coupled with the favourable
impressions of the role that ministers play in leading e-government, indicate that no change to the
current arrangement of political responsibilities is necessary – at least in terms of gaining the
commitment of government organisations to the e-government programme.
Administrative leadership
At the whole-of-government level, Denmark is providing strong leadership for e-government, and
officials express high levels of approval and satisfaction with the way e-government responsibilities
are structured and co-ordinated. While Denmark does not have a specific ministerial portfolio for
e-government, it has placed overall responsibility for Danish ICT policy (covering citizens, businesses
and the public sector) with the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. In 2001, following a
review of public sector progress developing e-government, the Ministry of Finance established both
the Joint board of e-Government and the Danish Digital Task Force to increase the focus on overall
e-government leadership, planning and co-ordination. These bodies now work on e-government in
close co-operation with the MVTU.
72