©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

1

Rome, 13th May 2004

Prof. Elio BorgonoviDr. Valentina Mele

“Central-Local government in the Member States of EU in the field of e-Government”

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

2

Rome, 13th May 2004

Why “Central-Local government in the Member States of EU in the field of e-Government”?

•Because E-Gov is organised through functional processes

•Because of orizontal and vertical integration among levels of Government

•Because we should start thinking of pan-European services

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

3

Rome, 13th May 2004

Vision on benchmarking

Benchmarking E-Government policies in Europe does not aim at appointing "champions" or identifying "winners," but at initiating a learning process whereby experiences can be fruitfully exchanged and good practices can be spread, so as to improve policies.

E-Government good-practices has to move beyond copying of styles and discourses, to a thorough understanding of practice, function

and performance.

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

4

Rome, 13th May 2004

Building blocks

Who does what?

How does it work?

Does it work?

Structure (Institutions)

Functioning (Processes)

Critical issues

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

5

Rome, 13th May 2004

Network mapping

•Institutional assets and level of devolution

•Institutional Actors involved in E-gov

•Resources for E-gov

•Responsibilities for E-govmethodology

Research goals I: STRUCTURE

•Desk research

•Questionnaire part A

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

6

Rome, 13th May 2004

1. POLICY AND STRATEGY DEFINITION2. SERVICE DELIVERY3. FINANCING

Network functioning

•Questionnaire part B

•Interviews

Research goals II: FUNCTIONING

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

7

Rome, 13th May 2004

Identifying critical issues and emerging themes of coordination

between central and local government in the field of e-Government

Research goals III: ASSESSMENT

Comparative analysis+ focus group with the members of the E-Government working group

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

8

Rome, 13th May 2004

Organizational structure

IN THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE MEMBER STATESTHERE IS A CENTRAL AGENCY/UNIT/DEPARTMENT

IN CHARGE OF E-GOV

•public sector typical over-reliance on organizational design

•number and heterogeneity of activities

•willingness to signal a high priority to the E-Government objectives

Why?

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

9

Rome, 13th May 2004

National strategy & policy making

In most of the countries the formulation of a

National strategy for E-gov is drafted by the

Central body, and then

showed/discussed/submitted to Local

Administrations or to their Associations Active in all the 15 member states

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

10

Rome, 13th May 2004

Integrated Service Delivery

For on-line service delivery, possible problems of co-ordination seem to be traditional ones, such as the definition of strategies, rules and standards by levels that do not deliver the service directly

In terms of co-ordination for delivering a joint service, most of the countries mainly provide data sharing, access to registries & databases. Some also provide expertise, approval and opinions.

Businesses are included in the online service delivery through outsourcing, PPP, technical intermediation

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

11

Rome, 13th May 2004

Pan-European service delivery

BENEFITs Larger availability of services Easier mobility

PROBLEMs/CONSTRAINTs Disomogeneity of service standards throughout the EU In some member states the services are delivered by

the private sector Missing coherent implementation (authentification, etc) Trade-off between usefulness for final users and difficult

implementation Low take-up

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

12

Rome, 13th May 2004

How do off-line delivered services benefit from Central-Local co-ordination in E-gov?

Data content is better organized and quality-checked

Backoffice applications have been deployed

Better response time & speed-up the process

Reduction in errors Services and procedure simplification Potential for innovative services

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

13

Rome, 13th May 2004

Funding mechanisms

Having ad-hoc funding for E-gov is often considered a fast-tracking mechanism

In few cases there is no specific budget for E-Gov CRUCIAL ROLE OF CO-FINANCING!

Autonomous budget

management

Special purpose funds

Projects/initiatives

submission and selection process

©20

04 B

OC

CO

NI

SC

HO

OL

OF

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

PU

BL

IC A

DM

INIS

TR

AT

ION

DIV

ISIO

N

14

Rome, 13th May 2004

Lessons learned

1. Including Local Administrations in E-Government strategy definition since from the early stage

2. Increasing the attention to co-ordinating mechanisms

3. Fostering vertical through horizontal subsidiarity

4. Supporting standards rather than standardization

5. Ensuring Central/Local accountability of government on-line presence

6. Considering the bigger EU picture