e-GOVERNMENT IN FINLAND - ePractice.eu

Furthermore, by choosing a “strong solution” for its authentication system, the Finnish government sought
to anticipate future needs by providing the best security for still-to-be-developed services. The decision
was based on a snapshot of what was technically possible at the time and did not take into account the new
technologies or standards that could develop by the time interactive public services were more mature. In
trying to ensure the best technical solution, whether or not it was needed, the government devised an
expensive solution which is intimidating for many agencies that lack the necessary technical expertise.
Many agencies are, instead, keeping an eye on solutions being produced in the widespread e-banking
sector.
Standards
Key Points - 21
x The Finnish electronic citizen ID card still lacks a base of Stage 3 (transactional) services
that require authentication. As a result, it has failed to meet usage targets and to stimulate
the development of new transactional services. The government should avoid playing the
pioneer role in developing technical solutions without a prior analysis of market demands.
129. The Government’s Policy Decision on the Development of Information Management of State
Administration (2000) sets the principles and aims for developing standards for the appropriate
maintenance of information systems, networks and services, the accuracy of data processing, the
interoperability and compatibility of information systems and information security.
130. While standards can be developed in conjunction with individual services or organisation Web
sites, important economies can be gained through a whole-of-government approach, by reducing redundant
systems and lowering the technological barriers to co-operation across organisations. There is no single
solution. A national approach can range from shared systems to common rules and/or standards governing
separate, but connected systems.
131. The case of the Finnish smart card is also illustrative of the pitfalls of closed standards. One of
the reasons behind the introduction of the FINEID card was the fear that competition between competing
standards would delay the construction of an authentication infrastructure. The government hoped to
provide an electronic ID card as a “universal” solution to authentication needs, rather than offering it as a
solution among many. The government has since realised that it cannot operate the authentication function
as a monopoly based on the certification standard in the citizen ID card. Instead of requiring that everyone
use the citizen ID card for their authentication needs, it is now proposing to license the electronic
certificate for use in other smart cards or even in mobile phones. This could include an electronic social
security card, operated by KELA. It is also wooing private-sector partners, including banks and mobile
phone companies, who are looking for secure e-commerce or e-banking solutions.
132. In Finland, interoperability work is carried out through JUHTA, the Advisory Committee on
Information Management in Public Administration. So far, JUHTA has set over 40 IT standards. Common
IT standards have been essential for government-wide e-government projects such as the citizen portal.
There is bound to be frustration, however, as there will always be a lag between the changes in the
technical system, services and technological possibilities and the rules governing them.
133. Establishing common technical standards can also pave the way for improved efficiency as the
government seeks benefits of scale in some common back-office processes such as human resource
management and payroll. The Government’s Information Management Unit, which hosts the citizen portal
and provides a range of technical services to ministries and agencies, is responsible for maintaining the
57