e-GOVERNMENT IN FINLAND - ePractice.eu

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Technical issues have been recognised as important, but secondary challenge Additional ICT penetration is less a matter of access and cost than of perceived value from computer usage and Internet services. Technological barriers Technological progress has created opportunities to improve administrative efficiency and advance e-government initiatives Technical issues regarding privacy and security, the need to account for rapid technological change, the lack of standards and internal integration have all been recognised as important challenges for ministries and agencies, but as a secondary challenge relative to the need to develop e-government capacities in the public service. Technical solution should follow rather than anticipate demand for services. For example, the government introduced the Finnish electronic citizen identity card without adequately analysing market demand or developing the advanced services that would use such a card. As a result, it has created a secure solution and a national authentication infrastructure, but has not met usage targets or stimulated new services. In particular, ministries and agencies have been reluctant or unable to make use of this common system. If the government believes that “e-enablers” are needed, it should show how it plans to promote accompanying services. The digital divide Finland is doing well in terms of providing access to ICT and in particular the Internet, although generations, family types and regions still differ markedly with respect to access to and possession of information technology. Rural connectivity projects have strengthened collaboration among municipalities and fostered partnerships between public and private actors. As in other countries with high ICT penetration, closing the digital divide in Finland now seems to depend increasingly on citizens’ own choices. In addition to improving access and cost, computer and Internet use will depend on citizens’ perceptions of the valueadded of electronic services, thereby further raising the stakes for improving e-government. IMPLEMENT<strong>IN</strong>G E-<strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> This report analyses Finland’s implementation progress along six variables: 1) its vision for e-government and plans to achieve it; front-office actions to 2) deliver services, 3) encourage eengagement and 4) establish portals; back-office efforts to 5) foster organisational change, develop leadership and skills; and 6) the performance of monitoring and evaluation. 12
Finland’s national egovernment vision results from a successful collaboration among top decision makers. However, the government has been less successful in mobilising government employees around its central vision. The lack of explicit targets within agencies and ministries has decreased accountability and makes it more difficult to establish internal milestones by which agencies and ministries can judge their own progress. Rather than focusing on the overall number of online services available, Finland has focused on service quality, relevance and access in its e-government programme Vision and planning Finland’s national e-government vision, initially formulated in the 1990s, is well-integrated with its administrative reform and Information Society agenda and results from a successful collaboration among top decision-makers in the public and private sectors and civil society. However, the government has been less succsuccessful in effectively informing and mobilising government employees around its central vision. The lack of wide ownership of the e-government vision has resulted in confusion at the agency level over their role and the actions required to move forward the overall government agenda. In addition, the government has not set clear responsibilities for e-government implementation. As a result, some agencies have failed to translate the broad vision into concrete objectives and action plans. Ministries and agencies also experience confusion because broad national e-government goals have rarely been accompanied by precise and monitorable targets. The government has been reluctant to provide quantifiable national targets to achieve its e-government goals and objectives. This shows some foresight given the difficulty other OECD countries have experienced in meeting what are sometime arbitrary national targets. The lack of explicit targets within agencies and ministries, however, has decreased accountability and makes it more difficult to establish internal milestones by which agencies and ministries can judge their own progress. This report demonstrates that the existence of a plan influences the degree and level of implementation of electronic services within the Finnish central administration. E-government planning has been promoted as a way to increase the taking of responsibility and encouraging organisations’ commitment to the e-government vision. However, planning for e-government at the organisational level was not required until 2001, nor were any guidelines available for agencies who wished to do so. The level of success of the new planning requirements will depend on technical assistance to get the plans right and the level of oversight, accountability and feedback. This is the responsibility of the Ministry of Finance and is a key component for the continued success of e-government in Finland. Electronic services Nearly all Finnish ministries and agencies responding to an OECD survey reported providing information (Stage 1 services) as part of their online e-government services. More than half offer interactive information (Stage 2 services), while almost a third propose transactions (Stage 3 services) and relatively few engage in data sharing with other agencies (Stage 4 services). Provision of online information (Stage 1 & 2 services) is an initial effort to better inform 13
Page 1: OECD e-GOVERNMENT STUDIES e-GOVERNM
Page 4 and 5: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Secretariat wo
Page 6 and 7: 4.2.5 Managing multiple service cha
Page 8 and 9: This report provides a first compre
Page 10 and 11: Finland could reinforce citizen sup
Page 14 and 15: The central government, however, la
Page 16 and 17: E-government has helped improve pla
Page 18 and 19: OVERALL ASSESSMENT The first phase
Page 20 and 21: 6. The constitutional independence
Page 22 and 23: 6. As the first OECD report of its
Page 24 and 25: Box 1.1. E-government co-ordination
Page 26 and 27: x The central administration does n
Page 28 and 29: 2 THE CASE FOR E-GOVERNMENT 25. The
Page 30 and 31: Key Points - 4 x Public administrat
Page 32 and 33: 40. As a result of these earlier go
Page 34 and 35: is illustrative. An online transact
Page 36 and 37: Health care 50 29 21 Unemployment 8
Page 38 and 39: 3 BARRIERS TO E-GOVERNMENT 61. E-go
Page 40 and 41: action unclear. In interviews, IT o
Page 42 and 43: 80. As noted in Chapter 2, the Stat
Page 44 and 45: equired to provide e-government str
Page 46 and 47: most important way to fund e-govern
Page 48 and 49: obtain (38%), followed by funds for
Page 50 and 51: Figure 3.4. E-government technologi
Page 52 and 53: 113. Not surprisingly, the OECD sur
Page 54 and 55: 3.3.2 Types of barriers 119. Respon
Page 56 and 57: x Technology neutrality in legislat
Page 58 and 59: “backbone” of the government ne
Page 60 and 61: egional authorities is decisive, ev
Page 62 and 63:
Box 3.5. The development of mobile
Page 64 and 65:
x Improving the public administrati
Page 66 and 67:
political leaders to impress upon t
Page 68 and 69:
showed that top management commitme
Page 70 and 71:
levels of government. In particular
Page 72 and 73:
home and school, every business and
Page 74 and 75:
E-government Imperative (2003) list
Page 76 and 77:
Key Points - 31 x The proportion of
Page 78 and 79:
Key Points - 32 x Basic online info
Page 80 and 81:
Key Points - 33 x Interactive infor
Page 82 and 83:
of using more efficient electronic
Page 84 and 85:
Key Points - 35 x The proportion of
Page 86 and 87:
233. The Finnish Vehicle Administra
Page 88 and 89:
citizens’ access to information i
Page 90 and 91:
4.3.2 E-engagement at the ministry
Page 92 and 93:
Key Points - 38 x E-engagement init
Page 94 and 95:
255. At the end of 2002, the curren
Page 96 and 97:
Themes portal (e.g. environmental,
Page 98 and 99:
partnerships”). The most signific
Page 100 and 101:
job satisfaction enquiry and models
Page 102 and 103:
Key Points - 42 x Structural impact
Page 104 and 105:
Key Points - 43 x Change management
Page 106 and 107:
Figure 4.17. E-government leadershi
Page 108 and 109:
297. Interviews with ministries and
Page 110 and 111:
x Horizontal co-ordination: lack of
Page 112 and 113:
Figure 4.22. Government-wide leader
Page 114 and 115:
catalyst as well as formal or infor
Page 116 and 117:
operation of the Ministry of Social
Page 118 and 119:
development of Internet service del
Page 120 and 121:
Box 4.7. Adapting E-Procurement for
Page 122 and 123:
strategies but also the ability to
Page 124 and 125:
361. Moreover, the lack of opportun
Page 126 and 127:
372. The OECD report on the Finnish
Page 128 and 129:
x E-government plans are important
Page 130 and 131:
5 NEXT STEPS 385. In May 2003, the
Page 132 and 133:
completely new architecture for gat
Page 134 and 135:
399. Brokers receive revenue from t
Page 136 and 137:
409. In 1998, the government agreed
Page 138 and 139:
Figure 6.3. Finnish electronic citi
Page 140 and 141:
430. For both municipalities and KE
Page 142 and 143:
6.3 Case study 3: The citizen porta
Page 144 and 145:
tourism, immigration and emigration
Page 146 and 147:
Key Points - 60 x The citizen citiz
Page 148 and 149:
7.2 Appendix 2: Reports, strategies
Page 150 and 151:
x Public Management in Finland (200
Page 152 and 153:
ought together government, civil so
Page 154 and 155:
freedom of choice and availability,
Page 156 and 157:
499. The Ministry of the Interior c
Page 158 and 159:
decision requires it to provide net
Page 160 and 161:
522. Contrary to former reports by
Page 162 and 163:
x By comparison, the term Web site
Page 164 and 165:
7.4.2 List of acronyms AFLRA: The A
Page 166 and 167:
7.5 Appendix 5: Methodology 7.5.1 D
Page 168 and 169:
2. Responses are not included in ov
Page 170 and 171:
8 BIBLIOGRAPHY ACCENTURE (2001),
Page 172 and 173:
JUSSILAINEN, M. (2003), “Knowledg
Page 174 and 175:
OECD (1992), “ICCP Reviews of Inf
Page 176 and 177:
“GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION ON HIGH-QU
Page 178:
VISTI, S. (1998), “Electronic Ide
show all

e-GOVERNMENT IN FINLAND - ePractice.eu

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?