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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

increasing government organisations’ awareness and understanding of the purpose and scope of the e-government programme; 3) developing more collaboration over e-government between agencies and across levels of government; and 4) striking the right balance between centralised co-ordination and decentralised implementation of e-government. The overarching e-government challenge currently faced by Denmark is the question of how, during a period of major organisational change and fiscal constraint, it can maintain or even increase progress towards its e-government goals of developing a more efficient and user-focused public sector supporting a more competitive economy, and a vibrant Danish information society. 1. E-government structure and context Denmark is home to 5.3 million people, the vast majority (85%) of whom live in urban areas. The standard of living in Denmark is high. The country ranked 17 th among the 177 countries that made up the United Nations Development Programme Human Development Index (HDI) in 2004. Denmark is a relatively small, open economy with high per capita GDP. Almost three-quarters of the Danish workforce work in the service sector, with 31% being employed in the public sector. There is a favourable environment for development of e-government in Denmark. E-government enjoys good, albeit indirect, political support. Past and present governments have placed strong policy emphasis on making the best possible public and private sector use of ICT in pursuit of both social and economic goals. The Danish institutional environment supports the implementation of e-government. Positive factors include: 1) the fact that effective use of ICT has been a feature of government policy for several decades; 2) the existence of a political and administrative culture of compromise and consensus, supporting involvement of all levels of government in e-government; 3) the positioning of e-government as an enabler of other major government policies; and 4) the fact that local government (which is fully engaged in the national e-government programme) delivers many public services, allowing for close government-citizen relationships. Between 2005 and 2007, sweeping reforms of the structure of the public sector (“the Structural Reform”) will be the dominant factor in the environment for e-government. These reforms will impact on both State and local government, but will have the most effect at the local level, where fewer organisations will deliver an increased share of public functions and services – especially at the municipal level where 271 municipalities will be reduced (through mergers) to 98, and 14 counties will become 5 regions. The Structural Reform goals of making government more coherent, user-focused and efficient are congruent with the goals of the Danish e-government strategy, and the long-term success of the Structural Reform will be influenced by application of e-government at all levels of government. Officials interviewed for this review regarded the Structural Reform process as being both a major opportunity for e-government to contribute to the Government’s wider goals, and a potential challenge for e-government due to the risk of divided attention and resources. There was particular concern that the costs of change to local government ICT systems may have been underestimated in the planning of the Reform. The Government is relying on these costs being funded from savings that it expects will result from the Reform. Any failure to achieve these savings, or to ensure that they are not exceeded by the costs of change, could undermine the success of the Structural Reform and/or limit achievement of e-government objectives. There was also a feeling that, because e-government is not explicitly addressed as part of the Structural Reform, an opportunity to increase achievement of e-government goals within and across the different levels of government may have been lost, or diminished. 7
While it is vital that the Government does not underestimate the costs of changes to ICT systems that will result from the Structural Reform, evidence from a “mini-structural reform” on the island of Bornholm indicates that considerable real savings are achievable. Given this, what becomes most important is that Danish regions and municipalities are able to clearly identify net benefits from investing in an optimal level of e-government development. If they cannot, then some worthwhile e-government initiatives may be slowed or not proceed if they depend on a self-funding policy. Top-level responsibility for e-government resides with the Danish Ministry of Finance, due in part to the explicit connection Denmark has made between e-government and its programme of public sector modernisation. This responsibility is exercised through a unique set of institutional arrangements overseen by the Joint Board of e-Government. The Board is chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance, with membership from State, regional and municipal government. The Board leads the national e-government programme, called Project e-Government, which is currently scheduled to run until the end of 2006. Delivery of the project is the joint responsibility of the Digital Task Force situated in the Ministry of Finance, and the IT-Policy Centre in the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MVTU). Between them, these two organisations provide a balance of public management and ICT expertise to underpin the development and implementation of the e-government strategy. In line with the decentralised nature of Danish government, and the strong autonomy of local government, the Joint Board does not have any formal powers to decide how, where or when government organisations (other than those of its members) will implement e-government. While this is consistent with Danish traditions of public management, many people interviewed for this review felt that more mandatory e-government requirements would help achieve even stronger results – especially in relation to adoption of the Danish “enterprise architecture” and related technical standards. Government-wide adoption of the enterprise architecture and standards for such things as ICT system and data interoperability is now widely acknowledged by OECD countries as being leading-edge e-government practice, supporting objectives such as increased efficiency, collaborative services delivery, and increased competitiveness of ICT industries. To achieve a full measure of these benefits, adoption of architectures and standards must be as widespread as possible. The question of how to respond to this situation is central to the ongoing progress of e-government in Denmark. Proposals for action 1. The Government should note the concerns being expressed over possible underestimation of the costs of change to local government ICT systems that will be required as part of implementation of the Structural Reform. Without altering its policy of funding these costs through realisation of efficiency savings, the Government may wish to closely monitor these costs so that it is better positioned to identify and manage risks to achieving the goals of the Structural Reform and/or the e-government strategy. Beyond risk management benefits, such monitoring could develop useful information and knowledge about the costs of public sector ICT that would be of ongoing benefit – especially in assisting government organisations to identify the costs and benefits of investing in e-government. 2. The Government could respond to widespread calls, from both within and outside government, to make certain aspects of e-government mandatory by assessing: 1) where, when and how moving away from the current approach of voluntarism might improve the results being achieved through e-government; and 2) what risks might arise from such a shift, both for individual organisations and government as a whole. Any such assessment could focus, in particular, on issues and options for change in the area of implementation of the Danish enterprise architecture and related technical standards. 8
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: OECD PEER REVIEW OF E-GOVERNMENT IN
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 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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?