e-governance and citizen information - Universitat Oberta de ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

E-governance and Citizen Information 28 Theoretical Framework. The Network AdministrationIn this sense, Dunleavy and Hood (1994) status that NPM was materialised in two major directionsof change: a) Rapprochement with the private sector: This took place with the replacementof bureaucratic hierarchies by fragmented and decentralised structures, thechange of public ethics to a private operation style and the replacement of the concern forcomplying with the formal rules with the concern for results and, b) the reduction of the rigidityin the operation of the public sector, materialised in the new concern for the agility andefficacy in the attainment of the objectives set.However, NPM also started to receive criticism. For example, Dreschler (2005) has alsostated that there is no empirical evidence that implementation of these policies increasesproductivity or welfare; that states have not lost their dominating role, but rather that theirrole is vital for the economic development, even indicating a positive correlation between theWeberian bureaucracy and economic growth. Likewise, Goodin and Klingemann (1996) indicatethat this theory poses a series of contradictions because, on the one hand, public administratorsare asked to become more autonomous and use an entrepreneurial approach,but they are also asked to be more sensitive to their political heads; or they are pushed tobecome decentralised and delegate authority with a more strict financial control.Some empirical studies have even questioned whether New Public Management has hadthe desired effects at all. Dunleavy and for example, Margetts (2000), states that during thelast twenty years of NPM there has been a dominating trend in Anglo-Saxon countries, withtwo remarkable effects: On the one hand, the reduction of citizens' competencies, i.e. theircapacity to resolve and intervene autonomously in their problems or social issues; and onthe other hand, an increase in administrative complexity and the resulting decrease in theefficacy in administrative systems. According to these authors, the results seem to show thatNPM has simply aggravated the problems it was aiming to solve.The principles of NPM are also linked to many of the objectives pursued by electronic government.Nevertheless, during the 1980s and at the early 1990s, most of the studies dealingwith the Public Administration and technology developed autonomous analysis approaches.Some authors observed a convergence of the postulates of New Public Management andthe possibilities opened up by ICTs for organisational change. Basically, technology wasviewed as an agent that could break the rules of the bureaucratic Administration, increasingthe efficiency in its management (Hughes, 1998). For example, we expected the commoninformation systems to decentralise the management of the different agencies that werestrongly connected but not structured in a hierarchy and thus reduce the management costs(while using the same systems) and improve the management practices, since the administrativeprocesses would be reduced and simplified.http://www.uoc.edu/in3/pic
E-governance and Citizen Information 29 Theoretical Framework. The Network AdministrationThe links between the two proposals were prominent in the centrality given to citizens ascustomers of the public sector and the focus on results. The differentiating elements aremainly based on the fact that technology has not played a major role for NPM, while this isone of the pillars of the electronic government. Likewise, NPM does not view the presentobjectives or guidelines related to the most political aspects of the relation between citizensand the Administration as a key factor. Even when the introduction of citizens' opinions andassessments is conceived as an innovative factor in the provision of services, as regardsthe political decision processes and, in general, the participation of citizens as political subjects,no new mechanisms or strategies are envisaged (López and Leal, 2002).To clarify the similarities and differences between the two concepts, we will now analyseelectronic government.2.2.3. Electronic GovernmentWithin the framework of electronic government we find projects and objectives with very differentapproaches: from the creation of informative websites to the construction of inter-administrativeportals where users can carry out their procedures or formalities online, as wellas the creation of blogs by government representatives or the interconnection of databases.Closely linked is the proliferation of initiatives, where we can detect a strong pressure in publicadministrations to adopt the intensive use of ICTs, which become the motor for diffusionand the promotion of the information society. This can be observed in the strength withwhich companies and private corporations in the ICTs sector (from hardware and softwaremanufacturers to consultancies) contact the administrations for the joint development ofelectronic government projects (Fountain, 2001). Also, we must not forget that the publicsector represents one of the key sectors in terms of expense and it is still a terrain with enormousbusiness prospects (Layne and Lee, 2001).The electronic provision of services in electronic government is not solely reduced to theintroduction of a new channel of distribution for services: The Internet. In most cases,determined changes are also detected in the organisation of the distribution, access andmanagement of services. According to many authors, the first transformation took placeduring the change of focus of service provision. In electronic government, the Administrationusually adopts the perspective of the citizen, i.e. the customer or user of the services.The focus moves from supply (Administration) to demand (users). The focus is onthe citizen and not self-addressed to the Administration itself (Milner, 1999).http://www.uoc.edu/in3/pic
Page 1: PROJECT INTERNET CATALONIA (PIC)E-G
Page 4 and 5: Edition:Internet PublicationsCommun
Page 7: E-governance and Citizen Informatio
Page 11: Chapter 11 Introduction
Page 14 and 15: E-governance and Citizen Informatio
Page 67: Chapter 55 Structure and Organisati
Page 78 and 79:
E-governance and Citizen Informatio
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125:
Chapter 88 Catalonia in the Interna
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 139:
Chapter 99 Conclusions
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167:
Page 171 and 172:
show all

e-governance and citizen information - Universitat Oberta de ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?