e-government and the transformation of public administrations in eu

Documento de Trabajo 2005-01

Facultad de Ciencias Econoacutemicas y Empresariales

Universidad de Zaragoza

E-government and the transformation of public administrations in EU

countries Beyond NPM or just a second wave of reforms

Lourdes Torres

Vicente Pina

Sonia Royo

Dpt of Accounting and Finance

University of Zaragoza

Zaragoza (Spain)

e-mail vpinaunizares tel +34 976 761798 fax +34 976 761769

Acknowledgements This study has been carried out with the financial support of the Spanish National RampD Plan through research project SEJ2004-0791-ECON

ABSTRACT

The adoption of web-based technologies to deliver government services has become a global trend in public administration E-government inherits the administrative reform policies inspired by New Public Management (NPM) reforms implemented throughout the EU over the past twenty years However e-government aims at going beyond NPM reforms since its goal is to transform the relationships between the public sector and society and to explore new channels of service delivery The construction and management of websites is becoming an essential element of modern public administration but little is known about how these initiatives are being implemented Given the substantial investment in time and other resources in governmental online initiatives it is essential to begin to evaluate governmental Web site initiatives in terms of quality and effectiveness The objective of this paper is to study the development of e-government initiatives at regional and local level in the EU through the opinion of those agents directly involved in the projects

DTECONZ 2005-01LTorres VPina and SRoyo

1

1 Introduction

The adoption of web-based technologies to deliver government services has

become a global trend in public administration In the same way as in the 1990s there

was global pressure for introducing New Public Management (NPM) reforms in the

public sector globalization is creating an offer of interactive initiatives and demands in

national public administrations which are putting public bureaucracies worldwide under

pressure to change and innovate the way in which their bureaucracies relate to citizens

E-government inherits the administrative reform policies inspired by NPM reforms

implemented throughout the EU over the past twenty years which advocated that many

of the techniques of private sector organizations can be applied to governmental bodies

The European Union (EU) defines e-government as ldquothe use of Information and

Communication Technologies (ICTs) in public administrations combined with

organisational change and new skills in order to improve public services and

democratic processes and strengthen support to public policiesrdquo 1

At the beginning of the twenty-first century there is a feeling among the

citizenry that lsquomanagerialismrsquo has widened the distance between government and

citizen instead of bringing them closer together (Noordhoek and Saner 2004) as well as

citizen dissatisfaction or disengagement which is reflected particularly in the Anglo

Saxon countries in a perception that public services are failing and of poor quality

(Oakley 2004) The search for new styles of governance through the engagement of

citizens is viewed as a way to change such feeling and to improve citizen trust in

governments

Unlike traditional structures which are hierarchical and one-way the Internet

delivery systems are non-hierarchical two-way and available 24 hours a day seven

days a week (247) The non-hierarchical character of Internet delivery frees citizens to

seek information at their own convenience not just when a government office is open

(West 2004) Two-way interaction has been deemed a way of improving service

delivery and responsiveness to citizens a way of generating greater public trust in

1 (COM(2003) 567 The Role of eGovernment for Europes Future Brussels 26 September 2003

DTECONZ 2005-01LTorresVPina and SRoyo

2

governments (Markoff 2000 Raney 2000) and of making governance function better

than it currently does The interactivity of the Internet is also expected to improve

government accountability as it makes government more responsive to the needs and

demands of citizens More information delivered in a more timely fashion to citizens is

expected to increase the transparency of government and to empower citizens to

monitor government performance more closely Therefore e-government is viewed as a

positive channel for enhancing trust in governments through government accountability

and by empowering citizens (La Porte de Jong and Demchak Demchak Friis 2000)

According to Thomas (1998) trust could be obtained or restored by repeated

successful individual interaction which is what open websites aim to achieve (Porte

2000)

So the construction and management of websites is becoming an essential

element of modern public administration Yet to date there are very few studies that

benchmark local government websites across the EU The objective of this paper is to

study the development of EU initiatives in this field through the opinion of those agents

directly involved in e-government projects The paper is distributed as follows In the

background section previous works in the field of local government websites are

reviewed In the following section the relationship between e-government and

improvements in governance are analysed The methodology section describes the

statistical and Delphi methods used in the work Finally the analysis of results

discussion and conclusions sections show the main findings of the study which point

out that e-government will not be likely to remodel governance in the short-term since

e-democracy initiatives are not on the present agenda of most EU countries

According to Schedler and Schmidt (2004) there are two kinds of studies those

which have been published by governments or by consultancy firms2 (a large majority

of the publications) and those which have been carried out by academics The former

have interests in the development of e-government so a priori the results shown by the

latter group of studies should be more objective

2 (US Executive Office 2002 UK Cabinet Office 2000 Andersen 2002 Accenture 2002 Cap Gemini Ernst amp Young 2001)


3

2 Background

E-government initiatives have become a developing field of empirical study on

the part of administrative and academic institutions Some research referring to

municipalities has been carried out into the evaluation of e-government efforts which

show a general concern with identifying objective measures

Norris Fletcher and Holden (2001) describe a survey on 2899 US

municipalities which provides information about the percentage of municipalities that

report having a website the percentage that have staff dedicated to e-government the

percentage that outsource e-government functions to external vendors and a variety of

other issues of concern to cities engaged in strategic planning

Chadwick (2001) finds that government websites in the United States Great

Britain and the European Union are predominantly non-interactive and non-

deliberative and concludes that e-government is not likely to reshape governance

Moon (2002) compares programmes and outcomes of e-government in US

municipalities Major findings show that although e-government has been adopted by

almost all municipal governments web sites remain at an early stage far from the

achievement of the expected results

For Tat-Kei Ho (2002) under the e-government paradigm public managers shift

from emphasizing producer concerns such as cost-efficiency to focusing on user

satisfaction and control flexibility in service delivery and network management with

internal and external parties This paradigm stresses innovation organizational learning

and entrepreneurship so that government can continue to reinvent itself For this author

the orientations of city websites provide evidence of how far this paradigm shift is

taking place in city governments 1) If a city maintains the traditional bureaucratic

paradigm its website organization tends to be administratively oriented Information is

organized primarily according to the administrative structure of the government and

does not reflect substantial rethinking of the bureaucratic process 2) Cities that have

shifted from the bureaucratic paradigm to the e-government paradigm design their

websites differently They tend to use two common approaches commonly referred to

as portal designs 2a) The first is the information-oriented approach which applies


4

the concept of the one-stop shopping service by offering a tremendous amount of

content on the home page including the city budget demographics calendar of local

activities main tourist attractions official contacts press releases and employment

opportunities 2b) The second is the user-oriented whose design goes one step further

by categorizing information and services on the Web according to the needs of different

user groups Users are unaware of the organizational boundaries of the providers in the

cyber-world

Torres et al (2004) study the websites of EU local governments with more than

500000 inhabitants They found that in almost all the cities studied e-government

reflects the structure of the government and that the transition to e-government seems to

be following a predictable development process albeit with different speeds between

countries

With regard to the measurement of the degree of development of websites there

seems to be a consensus between institutions consultancy firms and academics about

the different stages of e-government implementation The Australian National Audit

Office (2001) Balutis (2001) The National Audit Office (2002) UNASPA 2003

Santos and Heeks (2003) Wimmer (2003) and West (2004) identify a model of e-

government with from three to five-stages which distinguishes where different

government organizations are on the road to transformation (1) the billboard stage (2)

the partial service delivery stage (3) the portal stage with fully executable and

integrated service delivery (4) the seamless stage with full integration of e-services

across administrative boundaries and (5) the interactive democracy stage The fifth

stage would be a landmark in the transition from e-government to e-governance through

the introduction of e-democracy tools

Many other studies have appeared focused on e-citizenship (Hill and Hughes

1998 Bucy and Gregson 2001 Papacharissi 2002) e-democracy (Coleman 1999

Hague and Loader 1999 Karnarck and Nye 2002) e-legislatures (Coleman et al

1999) cyberpolitics in international relations (Choucri 2000 Hughes 2002) and so on

Several studies of government presence on the Web have also been undertaken (UK

National Audit Office 1999 2002 West 2000 Accenture 2001 Heeks 2001

Holliday 2002 UNASPA 2002) and municipal activity has been surveyed (Tat-Kei

Ho 2002 Moon 2002)


5

3 E-government as a tool of governance in public sector reforms

E-governance is a set of technology-mediated processes that are changing both

the delivery of public services and the broader interactions between citizens and

government Governance refers to the capacity of governing systems to co-ordinate

policy and to solve public problems in a complex context (Pierre 2000) For OECD

(2001) governance is concerned with how society collectively addresses and solves its

problems and meets its needs In particular the existence of governance indicates that

there are new and stronger networks between government and non-government actors

(Stoker 1998) The concept conveys the idea that public decisions would remain less

within hierarchically organized bureaucracies For Parrado (2002) governance is a

fashionable term that is used by most international organisations which although

providing different lists of principles always give several items in common The

European Commission considers that ldquofive principles underpin good governance

openness participation accountability effectiveness and coherencerdquo For the OECD

the good governance principles are ldquorespect for the rule of law openness transparency

and accountability to democratic institutions fairness and equity in dealings with

citizens including mechanisms for consultation and participation efficient effective

services clear transparent and applicable laws and regulations consistency and

coherence in policy formation and high standards of ethical behaviourrdquo

The advent of e-government has provided new opportunities to enhance

governance which include the improvement of efficiency new services the

enhancement of citizen participation and the strengthening of the global information

infrastructure (Bohman 2001) According to Clift (2003) e-government in governance

seeks improving government decisions increasing citizen trust in government

enhancing government accountability and transparency accommodating the public will

in the information-age and involving stakeholders including NGOs business and

interested citizen in new ways of meeting public challenges All countries except the

UK hardly consider legislative mandates political pressures or the need to increase

revenue as primary factors driving e-government (Deloitte 2000)

E-government may refer to narrower or broader areas The narrow approach is

simply the translation of e-commerce private sector experiences to the public sector A


6

United Nations report on Knowledge Societies defines e-commerce as the use of

documents in electronic form rather than paper for carrying out functions of business or

government (such as finance logistics and procurement) that require interchanges of

information obligations or monetary value between organizations and individuals

(Melistki 2002) As this description indicates e-commerce is not just about business In

the public sector version it is also associated with the one-way delivery of static

information (billboard functions) to citizens and the provision of e-services together

with back office initiatives -e-administration-

- E-services describe the use of electronic delivery for government information

programs strategies and services These are available on-line 247 In many cases it

represents a modernised front office but does not necessarily include a redesigned back

office capacity E-services emphasise an innovative involvement of the citizen as a

customer As we have mentioned above the narrow approach to e-government is

associated with e-services although this should include much more than gathering the

information downloading files or making online transactions

- E-administration refers to back office information systems supporting the

management and administrative functions of public institutions It includes data and

information management electronic records maintenance and the cross-departmental

flow of information Effective usage of ICTs requires a new organisational culture staff

focused on performance services focused on customers and response to citizensrsquo needs

E-administration gives solutions for the adaptation and integration of back-office

processes for the development of new ways of service deliveryThe broader approach of

e-government embraces the whole range of governance and administrative projects

including e-democracy3 e-voting e-justice e-education e-healthcare and so on

Different terms have been coined to name various types of ICT involvement in

government activities The broadest is e-governance which includes e-government plus

key issues of governance such as online engagement of stakeholders in the process of

shaping debating and implementing public policies

3 According to the OECD (2003) e-democracy can be divided into two distinct areas one addressing e-engagement -the use of ICTs in aiding citizensrsquo access to information consultation and participation- and the other addressing e-voting


7

4 Methodology

To carry out our study we drew up a questionnaire (See Annex 1) which was

sent to the regions and biggest cities of EU countries to find out their degree of

involvement in e-government initiatives We obtained responses from forty-seven

regional and local governments Exploratory analysis of data was carried out to identify

the outstanding underlying characteristics and main features of these governments

Multidimensional Scaling techniques (MDS)4 were applied in order to identify

homogeneous groups from among the web sites MDS gives a geometrical description

of the relationship between cases from a set of variables Afterwards from the

information related to the implementation of the e-Europe common list of 20 basic

public services5 -12 to citizens and 8 to businesses- the degree of presence of each

government in the Internet was established6 as the sum of the scores gained by the

online services of each government divided by the total possible maximum score (Cap

Gemini Ernst amp Young CGEampY 2003)

The answers from the questionnaires have been compared with what

governments are actually doing through the analysis of the contents of their Web sites

The goal of this confirmation is to verify to what extent the answers represent facts

expressions of interest plans or trends of local government policies in the field of ICT

(See Table 3)

These analyses allow the identification of the regional and local government

group with a high degree of e-government development This group called lsquopanel of

expertsrsquo in our survey was invited to participate in a Delphi study focused on the

identification and analysis of relevant factors which are driving and could condition the

implementation of e-government initiatives in EU local and regional governments

The Delphi method7 is a systematic means of synthesizing the judgments of

experts It recognizes human judgment as a legitimate and useful input in generating

forecasts The technique comprises a series of questionnaires sent to a pre-selected

4 Kruskal JB (1964) Multidimensional scaling by optimising goodness-of-fit to non-metric hypotheses Psychometrika vol 29 pp115-129 Kruskal J B and Wish M (1984) Multidimensional Scaling London SAGE 5 httpwwweuropaeuint 6 E-Munis 2002 Standards for e-documents e-procedures and e-services Relevant standards for local e-government applications Deliverable 12 Sankt Augustin Denmark 7 It was developed by the Rand Corporation during the forties See Helmer O and Rescher N (1959) On the epistemology of inexact sciences Management Science vol 6(1) 25-52


8

group of experts The application of the method followed these steps 1) selection of the

panel of experts 2) development of the first round of Delphi interviews through a

questionnaire 3) analysis of the first round responses 4) preparation of the second

round of questions for interviewees 5) analysis of the second round responses 6) third

round and 7) the synthesis of the final results These questionnaires are designed to

elicit and develop individual responses to the problems posed and to enable the experts

to refine their views as the grouprsquos work progresses in accordance with the assigned

task The main features of the technique are anonymity and feedback

It is believed that the group will converge toward the ldquobestrdquo response through

this consensus process In each succeeding round of questionnaires the range of

responses by the panellists will presumably decrease and the median will move toward

what is deemed to be the ldquocorrectrdquo answer The value of the Delphi method rests with

the ideas it generates both those that evoke consensus and those that do not The

arguments for the extreme positions also represent a useful product

Because the number of respondents is usually small -Brockhoff (1975) suggests

that under ideal circumstances groups as small as four can perform well- Delphi does

not (and is not intended to) produce statistically significant results So the results

provided by any panel do not predict the response of a larger population or even a

different Delphi panel They represent the synthesis of opinion of the particular group

no more no less Authors such as Helmer (1983) underline the fact that Delphi is a

method suitable to dealing with forecasting problems for which there are no adequate

models and for answering one specific single-dimension question

5 Analisys of results

51 Questionnaire results

The analysis of the first questionnaire aims at identifying those organizations

with a high degree of experience in the development of e-government tools at the

Internet and Intranet level and with a high degree of political and management

involvement The application of the MDS to the questionnaire (annex 1) answers gives


9

us the distribution of websites shown in Exhibit 18 which places Limousin (France)

Louth and Waterford (Ireland) Petange (Luxembourg) North Carelia (Finland) Styria

(Austria) Rheinland-Pfalz (Germany) and Castilla-La Mancha (Spain) in the high

quarter This exhibit has been made up from the two main dimensions of the MDS

which synthesize the information of responses

(Exhibit 1 about here)

Furthermore the ldquopresencerdquo of governments in the Internet has been measured

following the methodology of CGEampY (2003) The score given to the services included

in Table 1 is related to the degree of development that these services have online ldquo1rdquo is

assigned when the service is implemented at the billboard stage and ldquo4rdquo for the

customer case handling service stage The maximum possible score is 71 since some

services are scored from 1 to 3 Exhibit 2 shows the distribution of websites from

government to citizen services (G2C) and government to business services (G2B)

scores There are only six websites of the eight above-mentioned with scores over 50

in both G2C and G2B services The panel of experts was selected from both analyses


Table 1 shows the public services for citizens and business that the European

Commission has selected as a guideline for benchmarking As can be seen panel of

expertsrsquo web sites make the majority of their information available to citizens and to

business The experts show clearly better percentages than the total sample 60-70

allow users to gather information in interactive ways both in G2C and in G2B and 15-

20 to undertake transactions on-line The higher percentages are in stage 2 in G2C and

in stage 3 in G2B Public libraries and Registration of a new company are those G2C

and G2B services with the highest degree of development

(Table 1 about here)

Table 2 includes the minimum maximum and means of G2C and G2B services

for the total sample (43) and for the panel of experts (8) respectively As can be seen

the scores shown by the panel of experts group are clearly better than those of the total

sample


8 The ldquoKruskalrsquos stressrdquo value is 0119 between ldquogoodrdquo and ldquoacceptablerdquo (Kruskal 1964)


10

Table 3 shows the results of the verification of the answers included in the

questionnaires through the analysis of the actual contents of the Web sites of the

governments studied For this purpose two tests were applied the ldquoPearson correlation

methodrdquo and the ldquotrdquo test both aim at verifying the degree of relationship between the

results of the questionnaire and those obtained from the verification of the actual

developments of Web sites analysed As can be seen in Table 3 the answers of the

questionnaire and the results of the Web sites content analysis show a very high degree

of relationship in the G2C services since only declarations to the police and changes of

address show in both tests discrepancies between the two sources of information In the

case of G2B services there are five services whose degree of development has been

considered higher than there is in fact This discrepancy in the degree of development of

some services with regard to government answers represent the will of governments to

tend to these levels of online services through the ongoing active policies in which they

are involved The results also show that governments are giving priority and more

attention to G2C than G2B services and hence to policies focused on bringing citizens

closer to governments and the enhancement of citizen participation


52 Delphi study

1) In mid-2004 we interviewed the group of eight regional and local

governments -lsquopanel of expertsrsquo- identified from the previous analyses on the first

questionnaire

The panel of experts identified the most relevant features for the successful

implementation of e-government and its foreseeable evolution It was suggested that

they give relevant features in ten areas of interest top drivers to e-government

development top barriers to e-government development top priorities in creating

benefits for the citizens top benefits for the administration top benefits for the

government top fears among citizens top fears within administrations top fears among

governments information facilities to be provided on government websites and

facilities which could enhance the ease of use on government web sites


11

2) The preparation of the first round of interviews was carried out based on the

list of Annex 2 The interviewees were asked to score each issue from 1 to 4 (4 very

important 3 important 2 marginally important and 1 unimportant) according to its

relevance in the successful development of e-government Column A of Annex 2 shows

the results of the first round of interviews in which experts give a value to each issue in

function of their importance for the successful implementation of e-government If the

mean value of answers was between 1 and 2 or between 3 and 4 the opinion of the

experts had reached a consensus about the importance or non-importance of each issue

Otherwise the answers to the first round with a mean value between 2 and 3 in which a

consensus had not been reached were sent to the interviewees to be considered again

3) The issues involved in the second round (column B of Annex 2) could be

interpreted as those whose importance and contribution to the success of e-government

implementation is not clear for the experts interviewed

4) The synthesis of the final results of the Delphi analysis carried out is as

follows

- Top drivers of e-government development Some of the most outstanding

drivers identified by experts in this section (strong leadership from government

dedicated budgets appropriate legal framework free internet access cross-department

co-operation knowledge sharing inside the country and incentives for innovation) are

concerned with the political and management issues The opinion of the experts shows

the crucial role of political and managerial will in the development of e-government

projects Strong leadership and dedicated budgets are the expression of the interest of

governments in these projects Furthermore the cooperation between tiers of public

administration and departments in order to share knowledge and one-stop shops are also

relevant factors for enhancing e-government projects In the second round incentives

for innovation are added Although it is an important issue in all kinds of organizations

the conditions surrounding public sector activity are not the same as in the private

sector

- Top barriers to e-government development Concerns about security and

confidentiality the lack of co-operation between administrations resistance to change

within the administration and the lack of political will and drive are the barriers on

which experts coincide in the first round All of these are connected with the mentioned


12

relevance of political and managerial involvement Other factors such as risk fraud the

lack of facilities citizensrsquo skills and unresponsiveness are not considered barriers to the

introduction of e-government services

- Top priorities in creating benefits for citizens The items proposed in this

section are concerned with governance concepts The enhancement of accessibility

transparency participation in democracy and quality are the most important benefits for

citizens All of these are issues related to bringing public administrations closer to

citizens and restoring trust in governments Furthermore there is agreement about

almost all the items proposed So the underlying assumption of the experts is that e-

government can make an outstanding contribution to improving public administration

governance even though they are not at present running projects focused on this issue

- Top benefits for the administration From the panel of expertsrsquo answers the

identification of e-government benefits for the administration is not straightforward

When the panel of experts was required to propose factors of e-government benefits for

the administration the number of issues proposed was lower than in the other sections

In the first and second rounds there was only agreement on lsquobetter customer

satisfactionrsquo and lsquomore flexibilityrsquo as benefits for the administration The experts

dismiss other benefits related to employees such as new career opportunities and better

salaries

- Top benefits for the government The reduction of cost giving the country a

competitive advantage and the rationalisation of procedures are some benefits

highlighted by the experts They are related to the organization of governments even

though at present e-government cannot replace person to person front office services -

since the problems of the digital divide are not solved- as in the private sector Other

benefits concerning the relationship of governments with society such as citizensrsquo well

being government image or European integration are connected with governance

policies In this group there has also been a high degree of agreement about almost all

the items proposed

- Top fears in e-government implementation Outstanding citizensrsquo fears are the

loss of confidentiality and increased control by government and reflect citizensrsquo concern

about the security of the Internet The development of laws for personal and confidential

data protection and authentication systems are initiatives which must be stressed in


13

order to increase citizensrsquo trust in electronic transactions Fears within the

administration are about the adaptation of staff to this new way of providing services

The pressure from userscustomers increased control on individual performance and job

cuts are the main fears For public employees e-government means an innovation

which could involve changes for them in most cases without any kind of reward

Absence of real change is the most relevant fear of governments along with the digital

divide Both are key elements for the engagement of citizens in government affairs In

general the fears of citizens administration and government pointed out by the panel of

experts do not seem sufficiently important to cause delays in the development of e-

government initiatives

Some of the benefits promised by e-government can only bear fruit if the content

of websites is accurate timely citizen-centric and designed specifically for the Internet

Recreating the existing organizational structure does not contribute to transforming

government and it does not help citizens unfamiliar with the organization to navigate

through the website The following two sections aim at showing to what extent the

experts consider that the contents of websites have to be adapted to Internet

philosophy

- Information facilities to be provided on government websites There is a broad

agreement about the profile of governmental websites and their basic contents Many of

them are utilities focused on the provision of information and forms useful for the

completion of procedures and applications The panel of experts agrees on key contents

such as an archive search facility facilities for downloading forms lsquofrequently asked

questionsrsquo or lsquowhatrsquos new sectionsrsquo all of these focused on making the website user-

friendly No expert has mentioned utilities related to interactivity or full transaction

completion This shows the early stage of development at which most websites are in

the EU

- Facilities which could enhance the lsquoease of usersquo on government web sites In

this section the panel of experts proposes those tools usually considered as indicators of

website quality such as access to the webmaster support search engines the possibility

of increasing the speed by using the page without pictures or graphics together with the

downloading of forms All of these also aim at making the site user-friendly


14

6 Discussion

E-government is a recent initiative worldwide and of course in EU public

administrations Thus the range of Web sites with sufficient experience is relatively

limited as can be seen in the analysis of the first questionnaire Questionnaire and

Delphi study answers show a high degree of convergence between the experts from

different countries about the benefits barriers and fears surrounding the implementation

of e-government projects in the EU

The results of the first questionnaire show that at present most regional and

local governments have opened a website although in most of cases it is little more than

a mere governmental billboard Globalization is creating an offer of interactive

initiatives and demands which are putting public bureaucracies worldwide under

pressure to change and innovate the way in which they relate to citizens Nevertheless

although multilateral reports highlight the benefits of e-government initiatives for

improving service delivery and transforming the relationship between administration

and citizens these benefits are far from being achieved because of the early stages at

which e-government projects are Most e-government projects are centred on the

lsquonarrow concept of e-governmentrsquo which entails a gap between the rhetoric of potential

e-government benefits and those which have actually been brought about To some

extent e-government websites have spread so fast due to the interest of firms in

extending ICT services throughout public administrations and because of governments

are interested in opening websites for giving an image of modernization

Referring to the transformation of the way in which governments relate to

citizens the panel of experts considers the political and managerial determination to be

crucial and the absence of both as an important barrier For the panel of experts the

benefits for the administration are not straightforward and because of this the will of the

managers and politicians does not seem to be so clear Managers and politicians have an

important influence on the development of e-government since they are active in setting

objectives establishing structures processes rules and the extent of the incentives for

members of staff who are actively involved within the framework of e-government

However for public employees e-government means an innovation in most cases

without reward This is coherent with the opinion of the experts about incentives for


15

innovation as a driver of e-government developments and with previous studies such as

Kamarck (2004) who pointed out that rewards from successful innovation in public

administration accrue to the State and not to the individuals involved in the innovation

so people in the public sector have had little incentive to engage in innovation

E-government initiatives have inherited the NPM reforms of the 90s whose

approach advocated that many of the techniques of private-sector organizations can be

applied to governmental bodies E-government is understood in most EU continental

countries as putting information online which translates the e-commerce philosophy to

the public sector even though some postulates of NPM such as the need for customer-

driven organisation have not yet been applied sufficiently in many European

Continental countries9 Underlying many questions and comments of respondents is the

engagement of citizens as a central issue in the development of e-government projects

E-government is often viewed and promoted as a positive channel for enhancing

customer perspective which will bring about the enhancement of accessibility

transparency and citizensrsquo participation in democracy even in the EU countries in

which citizen-centred services is a pending issue For Kraemer and Dedrick (1997) the

existing conditions in administrative organisations are essential elements for a

successful implementation of e-government So one main challenge for EU continental

local governments to overcome the early stages of e-government will be to identify

actual user needs and to design e-government websites according to the identified target

users Enhanced interactivity of the technology is also expected to improve government

accountability provided that it makes government more responsive to the needs and

demands of individual citizens

G2C and G2B initiatives are designed to facilitate citizen interaction with

governments which is what some observers consider to be the primary goal of e-

government The digital divide and the absence of real change represent a great fear and

threat to reaping the full benefits of e-government OECD statistics show that there are

significant differences in access to ICTs and the Internet Interest in G2C initiatives in

the EU is driven by a combination of several factors One is citizen demand especially

by younger citizens and those accustomed to using electronic transactions (Mello

2000) Some observers expect citizen demand for e-government to increase significantly

9 Except for some Scandinavian countries (Torres 2004)


16

over the next ten years as the young who are now growing up with personal computers

and the Internet as a routine presence in their lives become adults10 provided that

governments are able to maintain e-government performance close to citizensrsquo

expectations Citizen demand for e-government services may also be driven by

increased time pressures since citizens may look for ways to reduce time spent on

administrative tasks One way to do this is to be able to complete routine governmental

transactions online

Today governments worldwide recognise ICTs as powerful tools for enhancing

citizen engagement in public policy-making and as a way of enhancing citizen trust in

governments Nevertheless little concern about e-democracy topics can be found in the

panel of expertsrsquo answers Answers from the questionnaire and the Delphi study show

that ICTs are an enabler which requires active political and managerial involvement

dedicated budgets and staff ICTs in public entities often simply improve their technical

efficiency without leading to significant organizational changes (Heintze and

Bretschneider 2000) Instead of changing the nature of organizations ICTs are used to

improve the image of governments as a way of reinforcing the existing tendencies of

organizations The public sector does not have the same incentives for the adoption of

ICTs as the private sector does In the private sector ICTs have brought about increases

in productivity The public sector cannot use ICTs to replace people lest it leave out a

substantial portion of the population since many citizens still do not have access to the

Internet So the provision of additional resources for the development of e-government

and e-governance projects is necessary

7 Conclusions

At present there are various ways to understand what e-government means The

prevalent view is that of e-government as e-commerce focused on customers forgetting

the implementation of e-democracy issues However many authors and national and

multilateral institutions point out that e-government has the potential to alter the

traditional relationship between government and citizens by creating a new virtual

government and citizen interface There is a hope in many countries that information

10 A Survey of Government and the Internet Digital Democracy The Economist 24 June 2000 p 31


17

and communication technologies (ICTs) will increase the degree of interest and

involvement of citizens in politics and thus act as an aid to representative democracy

Notwithstanding many of the benefits expected from e-government have still not come

to fruition Even though e-government has a huge potential to contribute to government

modernisation it is being developed in most cases according to a narrow conception

The findings of this survey show that e-government initiatives are still predominantly

non-interactive and non-deliberative They tend to reflect present service delivery

patterns not to transform them Nevertheless simply moving a service from offline to

online -even at the billboard stage- and making it available on the Internet is a

significant service improvement for many users since information and transactions are

now available 247365 The user benefits are more flexibility and time-saving

The degree to which e-government can improve a governmentrsquos administrative

systems may be difficult to measure reliably How new technological tools are used within

the framework of existing organizational environments depends more on the will of

managers and decision-makers than on countriesrsquo administrative traditions since high

standards of e-government can be found in all EU continental public administration

traditions

It seems that the advent of e-government should bring about new opportunities to

enhance governance Issues of governance such as openness participation accountability

effectiveness and coherence transparency mechanisms for consultation and participation

and efficient services are present throughout the literature of multilateral institutions but

not in the list of items proposed by respondents for the different sections of the

questionnaire E-government projects are focusing more on e-services to meet citizen

demand from governments for similar instant options that they receive from the private

sector than in the use of the Internet for the development of e-democracy tools That is a

narrow view of e-government E-government is not likely to reshape governance in the

short-term since e-democracy initiatives are not on the present agenda of most EU

countries At present it is little more than a promise not included in the budget -and

therefore on the agenda- of those who have the responsibility of implementing e-

government andor e-governance projects


18

References

Accenture (2001) Rhetoric vs Reality Closing the Gap httpwwwaccenturecom [Accessed 1 August 2002]

Accenture (2002) eGovernment Leadership URL httpwwwaccenturecomxdxdaspit=enWebampxd =industries5Cgovernment5Cgo ve_welcomexml

Andersen (2002) A usability analysis of selected federal government websites URL httpwwwandersencomresource2nsfvAttachLUUS_Fedl_Web_Usability_Study$F ileUS_Fedl_Web_Usability_Studypdf

Applegate L M (1994) Managing in an Information Age Transforming the Organization for the 1990s In Transforming Organizations with Information Technology edited by Richard Baskerville Steve Smithson Ojelanki Ngwenyama and Janice I DeGross 15-94 Amsterdam Elsevier Science

Australian National Audit Office(2001) How to decide to use the Internet to deliver government programmes and services Australian National Audit Office April

Balutis (2001) E-government 2001 Part I Understanding the Challenge and Evolving Strategies The Public Manager

Bonham GM Seifert JW and Thorson SJ (2001) The Transformational Potential of e-Government The Role of Political Leadership European Consortium for Political Research which was held at the University of Kent at Canterbury UK on 9 September

Brockhoff K (1975) Evaluation Performance of Forecasting Groups In The Delphi Method Techniques and Applications edited by Harold A Linstone and Murray Turoff 291-321 Addison-Wesley Reading Mass

Bucy EP Gregson KS (2001) Media participation a legitimizing mechanism of mass democracy New Media and Society 3(3) 357-380

Cap Gemini Ernst amp Young CGEampY (2002) Webbasierte Untersuchung des elektronischen Service-Angebots der oumlffentlichen Hand Ernst amp Young URL wwwdecgeycomservletPBshow1005708 eEuropepdf

-------------(2003) Web-based Survey on Electronic Public Services (Results of the third measurement October 2002) Cap Gemini Ernst amp Young

Choucri N (ed) (2000) CyberPolitics in International Relations Special issue of International Political Science Review 21(3)

Coleman S Taylor J Van de Donk W (1999) Parliament in the Age of the Internet Special issue of Parliamentary Affairs 52(3)

Com(2003) 567 The Role of eGovernment for Europes Future Brussels 26 September 2003Dean J (2000) Y2K work changed course of IT Government Executive (32) 8 96-103

Deloitte Research (2000) At the Dawn of e-Government The Citizen as Consumer Deloitte Consulting


19

E-Munis (2002) Standards for e-documents e-procedures and e-services Relevant standards for local e-government applications Deliverable 12 Sankt Augustin Denmark

European Commission (2002) White Paper of European Governance p 10 httpeuropaeuintcommgovernanceindex_enhtm Page visited on 21-11-2002

Fountain Jane (1999) The Virtual State Toward a Theory of Federal Bureaucracy in the 21st Century In Democracycom Governance in a Networked World edited by in Elaine Kamarck and Joseph Nye 133ndash56 Hollis NH Hollis Publishing Company

Hague BN Loader BD (eds) (1999) Digital Democracy Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age Routledge London Hawes

Heeks R (2001) Understanding e-goverance for development Institute for Development Policy and Management University of Manchester iGovernment Working Paper Series 112001 httpidpmmanacukidpmigovl labshtm [Accessed 1 August 2002]

Heintze T and Bretschneider S (2000) Information Technology and Restructuring in Public Organizations Does Adoption of Information Technology Affect Organizational Structures Communications and Decision-Making Journal of Public Administration Theory and Research 10801ndash830

Helmer O and Rescher N (1959) On the epistemology of inexact sciences Management Science vol 6(1) 25-52

Helmer Olaf (1983) Looking Forward A Guide to Futures Research Beverly Hills Sage

Hill KA Hughes JE (1998) Cyberpolitics Citizen Activism in the Age of the Internet Rowman and Littlefield Lanham MI)

Holliday I (2002) Building e-government in East and Southeast Asia regional rhetoric and national (in)action Public Administration and Development 22 323-335

Hughes CR (2002) China and the globalization of ICTs implications for international relations New Media and Society 4(2) 205-224

John P (2001) Local Governance in Western Europe Sage publications London

Kamarck E and Joseph Nye eds (1999) Democracycom Governance in a Networked World Hollis NH Hollis Publishing Company

Kamarck E (2004) Government Innovation Around the World Faculty Research Working Papers Series University of Harvard

Kaylor C Deshazo R and Van Eck D (2001) Gauging e-government A report on implementing services among American cities Government Information Quarterly 18 293ndash307

Kraemer Kenneth and Jason Dedrick (1997) Computing and Public Organizations Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 7 89ndash112

Kruskal JB (1964) Multidimensional scaling by optimising goodness-of-fit to non-metric hypotheses Psychometrika vol 29 pp115-129

Kruskal J B and Wish M (1984) Multidimensional Scaling London SAGE


20

LeitnerC (2003) E-government in Europe The State of Affairs Presented at the e-government Conference Como Italy 7-8 July

Mar-Molinero C and Serrano C (2001) Bank failure a multidimensional scaling approach The European Journal of Finance 7 pp 165-183

Markoff J(2000) A Newer Lonelier Crowd Emerges in Internet Study New York Times February 16 A1

Melistki J (2002) The adoption and implementation of e-government the case of e-government in New Jersey Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School-Newark Rutgers The State University of New Jersey

Mello J (2000) Building a Better Bureaucracy CFOcom 1 October 2000 [httpwwwcfocomarticle146160|1|AD|101200html]

Moon M J (2002) The evolution of E-government among municipalities Rhetoric or reality Public Administration Review vol 62 4

Norris DF Fletcher P D and Holden SH (2001) Is your local government plugged in Highlights of the 2000 electronic government survey Prepared for the International CityCounty Management Association (ICMA) and Public Technology Inc (PTI) (Available htt tinwdcuslinkse (governmenthtml

OECD (2001) Local Partnerships for Better Governance Paris

------------- (2003) The e-government imperative main findings Paris

Papacharissi Z (2002) The virtual sphere the internet as a public sphere New Media and Society 4(1) 9-27

Parrado S (2002) Transition problems to e-administration Institute of Public Administration and European Integration (IPAEI) Bulgarian Association of Information Technologies (BAIT) 29-30 November

Pierre J (2000) Introduction understanding governance in J Pierre (ed) Debating Governance Oxford Oxford University Press

Porte M Jong Chris M and Demchak C (2000) Public Organizations on the World Wide Web Empirical Correlates of Administrative Openness Todd Presented at the National Public Management Research Conference Program Bush School of Government and Public Service Texas A amp M University

Raney Rebecca (2000) Study Finds Internet of Social Benefit to Users New York Times May 11 E7

Santos R and Heeks R (2003) ICTs and Intra-Governmental Structures at Local Regional and Central Levels Updating Conventional Ideas IDPM University of Manchester UK

Schedler K and Schmidt B (2004) Managing the e-government organization International Public Management Review electronic Journal at httpwwwipmrnet Vol 5 (1)

Schiffman JF Reynolds ML and Young FW (1981) Introduction to Multidimensional Scaling Theory Methods and Applications London Academic Press

Stoker G (1998) Governance as theory five propositions International Social Science Journal 50 (1) 17-29


21

Swedish Association of Local Authorities (SALA) and Swedish Federation of County Councils and Regions (2003) E-democracy in practice 2003 Swedish experiences of a new political tool

Tat-Kei Ho A (2002) Reinventing local governments and the E-government initiative Public Administration Review vol 62 4 434-444

Thomas C (1998) Maintaining and restoring public trust in government agencies and their employees Administration amp society 30 166-193

Torres L (2004) Trajectories in the modernisation of public administration in European continental countries Australian Journal of Public Administration vol 63 nordm 3 pp99-112

Torres L Pina V and Acerete B (2004) E-government developments on delivering public services among EU cities Governmental Information Quarterly (forthcoming)

UK Cabinet Office (2000) E-Government - A Strategic Framework for Public Services in the Information Age Modernizing Government Secretariat UK Cabinet Office URL wwwcabinet-officegovukmoderngov

UK Nacional Audit Office (1999) Government on the Web House of Commons 1999-2000 Session HC 87 Stationery Office London

UK National Audit Office (2002) Government on the Web 11 House of Commons 2001-2002 Session HC 764 Stationery Office London

United NationsAmerican Society for Public Administration (UNASPA) 2002 Benchmarking E-government A Global Perspective UN ASPA New York

------------- (2003) World Public Sector Report 2003 E-Government at the Crossroads United Nations Printed in the USA

West D M (2000) Assessing e-government The Internet democracy and service delivery by state and federal governments Providence RI Taubman Center for Public Policy Brown University (Available httpwwwinsidepoliticsorggovtreport00html)

------------- (2004) E-Government and the Transformation of Service Delivery and Citizen Attitudes Public Administration Review Vol 64 (1)

Wigand R Picot A and Reichwald R (1997) Information Organization and Management Chichester UK John Wiley

Wimmer M (2003) E-government services in the future Report on the JANUS Workshop Progressing the Information Society the role of government A workshop on the digital economy held in Brussels on 17 February 2003

Wong W and Welch E (2004) Does E-Government Promote Accountability A Comparative Analysis of Website Openness and Government Accountability Governance An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions Vol 17 No 2pp 275ndash297


22

EXHIBIT 1 MDS Projection from Dimension 1 and Dimension2

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth

WaterfordPetangeLower Austria

Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha

CataluntildeaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23

EXHIBIT 2 Percentage of Presence in the Internet (CGEampY 2003)

000 EX 050 075 100

Services for Business

000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia

Somerset Staffordshire


24

Table 1 Public services online (in percentages)

Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4

transaction SERVICES TO CITIZENS TS PE TS PE TS PE TS PE TS PE 1 Income taxes 535 00 163 125 140 500 47 125 116 250 2 Job search services 209 00 186 00 372 500 209 375 23 125 3 Personal documents 512 00 116 00 279 750 70 125 23 125 4 Car registration 535 00 14 125 186 375 93 375 47 125 5 Application for building permission

372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250

6 Declarations to the police 628 125 116 250 209 500 00 00 47 125 7 Public libraries 326 00 14 125 14 500 186 00 209 375 8 Certificates 465 00 279 375 93 375 116 250 47 00 9 Enrolment in higher education

535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125

10 Changes of address 419 00 233 125 186 625 70 250 93 00 MEAN 454 13 170 138 205 49 98 213 75 150 () Social security benefits -11- and Health-related services -12- are competence of central governments in some countries

Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4

transaction SERVICES TO BUSINESS TS PE TS PE TS PE TS PE TS PE 1 Social contribution for employees 581

00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375

2 Corporation tax declaration notification 674

00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250

3 VAT declaration notification 651

125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375

4 Registration of a new company 558

00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500

5 Submission of data to statistical offices 674

00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00

6 Customs declarations 698 125 140 125 70 250 70 375 23 125 7 Environment-related permits 326

00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00

8 Public procurement 419 00 209 250 233 375 116 375 23 00

MEAN 573 31 137 94 151 313 87 359 52 203 TS Total Sample (43) PE Panel of Experts (8)


25

Table 2 Presence in the Internet CGEampY (2003)

Total Sample Panel of Experts

SCORES Min Max Mean Min Max Mean Total score 141 7746 2794 4930 7746 6514 Services to Citizens (G2C) 250 7500 3140 4500 7500 6344 Services to Business (G2B) 000 8065 2348 3871 8065 6734


26

Table 3 Correlations between e-service questionnaire answers and Web content analysis

SERVICES TO CITIZENS N Pearsons

CorrelationQuestionnaire

mean score Web analysis mean score t

1 Income taxes 41 0427 107 034 3646 2 Job search services 41 0441 168 176 -0408 3 Personal documents 41 0461 100 093 0424 4 Car registration 41 0381 100 063 1921 5 Application for building permission 41 0368 132 127 0806 6 Declarations to the police 41 0149 071 015 3089 7 Public libraries 43 0464 188 229 -1756 8 Certificates 41 0549 102 080 0212 9 Enrolment in higher education 41 0571 102 059 2564 10 Changes of address 41 0363 122 051 3461 SERVICES TO BUSINESS 1 Social contribution for employees 41 0271 083 017 3526 2 Corporation tax declaration notification 41 0312 083 022 2957 3 VAT declaration notification 41 0415 090 024 3205 4 Registration of a new company 41 0552 115 071 2221 5 Submission of data to statistical offices 41 0279 068 010 3576 6 Customs declarations 41 0166 059 010 2905 7 Environment-related permits 41 0168 132 151 -0984 8 Public procurement 42 0216 112 102 0461

Significant at the 1 level

ANNEX 1


27

E-GOVERNMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

ORGANIZATIONAL FEATURES (FIRST SECTION) - Which of these statements best described your organisations existing main Web site

bull The organisation has no Web site (or no significant pages on a wider corporate Web site) Y N bull The organisation has a basic site with some static materials infrequently changed Y N bull The organisation does extensive electronic publishing makes a great deal of its information

available to citizens and provides forms for downloading Y N

bull The organisation regularly publishes information in interactive ways allowing users to tailor or personalise their use of the Web site and allows forms to be submitted on-line

Y N

bull The Web site combines some electronic publishing with the ability for users to complete some scattered dealings or transactions on-line

Y N

bull The Web site allows users to gather information in interactive ways and to undertake most of its substantial useful transactions on-line

Y N

- How would you describe the condition of your Intranet bull We have no Intranet as such only a common desktop and some template files for common

forms etc Y N

bull We have a partial Intranet with a few common facilities and some relatively standard or unchanging information

Y N

bull We have a reasonable modern Intranet with a good range of facilities that is kept well up to date

Y N

bull We have a full Intranet which plays a central role in a sophisticated knowledge management system designed to pool information available inside our organisation as much as possible

Y N

- Has your government developed an e-government strategic plan Y N - Approximately what is the time frame for fully implementing the program (1) Under 12 months (2) 1- 2 years (3) 2- 5 years (4) 5 + years

- Which of these statements comes closest to describing the organisational background for supporting Web and Internet developments and e-government policy-making in your organization

bull No one is responsible for e-government policy in the organization Y N bull Several or many different units play a role in promoting e-government policy and

it is not clear which if any has overall charge Y N

bull E-government is mainly an IT issue and so the IT section has primary responsibility for promoting Web or Internet developments

Y N

bull Web and Intranet developments are coordinated by a dedicated e-government section with involvement from others and a clear overall management line

Y N

- Which of these statements comes closest to describing the arrangements for evaluating Web site and other Internet-based methods in your organisation

bull E-services are not normally considered as relevant in determining the organization main pattern of services provision

Y N

bull E-services are seen as appropriate only to some of the organisations main services provision activities and to meet some needs

Y N

bull E-services are often (but not always) considered as possible alternatives to existing services that are not working well or as alternatives to new conventional forms of provision

Y N

bull E-services are always considered whenever the organization is examining changes to existing services and when possible new service provision is being examined

Y N

bull E-service alternatives are used to survey all the organization current activities and to review systematically what can be done on-line

Y N

- Have any of the following actions been taken by your organization to encourage increased citizen use of the internet for accessing government services

bull financial assistance to units for e-government activities Y N bull government sponsored training programmes for the public Y N bull national public information campaigns Y N bull citizen awareness programs Y N bull public information kiosks Y N bull other Y N

- Are any of the below government special initiatives being instituted to close the ldquodigital divide

bull assistance programmes for the less privilege Y N bull awareness programmes through the media to reach rural areas Y N


28

bull awareness programmes to reach citizen with special needs Y N bull awareness programmes through educational institutions and programmes Y N bull financial assistance to local governments Y N bull other Y N

PUBLIC SERVICES ONLINE (SECOND SECTION) - For citizens

bull Stage 1 Information online info about public services bull Stage 2 Interaction downloading of forms bull Stage 3 Two-way interaction processing of forms incl authentication bull Stage 4 Transaction case handling decision and delivery (payment)

Income taxes declaration notification of assessment 1 2 3 4 Job search services 1 2 3 4 Personal documents (passport and drivers licence) 1 2 3 4 Car registration (new used and imported cars) 1 2 3 4 Application for building permission 1 2 3 4 Declaration to the police (eg in case of theft) 1 2 3 4 Public libraries (availability of catalogues search tools) 1 2 3 4 Certificates (birth and marriage) request and delivery 1 2 3 4 Enrolment in higher education university 1 2 3 4 Announcement of moving (change of address) 1 2 3 4 Health related services (interactive advice on the availability of services in different hospitals appointments for hospitals)

1 2 3 4

- For businesses Social contribution for employees 1 2 3 4 Corporation tax declaration Notification 1 2 3 4 VAT declaration Notification 1 2 3 4 Registration of a new company 1 2 3 4 Submission of data to statistical offices 1 2 3 4 Customs declarations 1 2 3 4 Environment-related permits (incl reporting) 1 2 3 4 Public procurement 1 2 3 4

ANNEX 2


29

1 TOP DRIVERS TO DEVELOPMENT OF E-GOVERNMENT A B Better internet penetration 37 Dedicated budgets 35 Free internet access 34 Cross-departmental co-operation 34 Knowledge sharing inside the country 33 Strong leadership from government 32 Appropriate legal framework 3 Availability of approved standards 3 Incentives for innovation 28 32Long term political goals and objectives 25 3Appropriate skills within the administration 23 28Aggressive national targets 23 25European benchmarking (peer pressure) 21 2Availability of specific software packages 12 Increased co-operation between public and private sectors 1 Knowledge sharing with other countries 1

2 TOP BARRIERS TO E-GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT Resistance to change within administration 36 Concerns about security and confidentiality 35 Lack of co-operation between administrations 32 Lack of political will and drive 31 High technology set-up costs 25 28Lack of skills among citizens 25 3Lack of high level championship 23 16Limited availability of financial resources 21 16Concerns about risk and fraud 18 Lack of skills amongst adm staff 16 Citizen unresponsiveness 16 Lack of good e-Gov examples to learn from 13 Lack of technology trained public sector IT staff 11

3 TOP PRIORITIES IN CREATING BENEFITS FOR THE CITIZENS Access for all citizens 4 Access 247 4 Improved access to administrators and information 38 More transparency 38 Improved efficiency 35 More cost efficiency 35 Participate more in democracy 26 3Improved quality 26 3More accountability 2 23

4 TOP BENEFITS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION Better customer satisfaction 39 More flexibility 34


30

Less tedious tasks 27 29More autonomy 26 21New career opportunities 19 Better salary 12

5 TOP BENEFITS FOR THE GOVERNMENT Reduce cost 37 Give country competitive advantage 33 Rationalise procedures 33 Improve image of administration 31 Asset in European integration 3 Improve citizens well being 28 31Improve local businesses health 28 3Stimulate adoption of new technologies 24 2

6 TOP FEARS IN E-GOVERNMENT IMPLEMENTATION AMONG CITIZENS Not all will have access 4 Loss of confidentiality 36 Increased control by government 3 Inability to use technologies properly 24 28Loss of democracy 2 26Loss of human contact 18 Decrease in operational efficiency 15 Decrease in service quality 14 Access to public services more difficult 11 Decrease in cost effectiveness 1

WITHIN ADMINISTRATIONS Inability to use new technologies properly 35 Increased pressure from userscustomers 32 Inability to cope with increased speed 3 Increased control on individual performance 26 32Job cuts 26 3Loss of individual power 23 27Increase competition among employees 2 13Loss of existing benefits 17 Loss of human contact 13

AMONG GOVERNMENTS Digital divide 36 Absence of real change 31 Failures of e-government projects 27 28High cost of implementation 27 25Attacks and frauds by hackers 24 27Increased accountability 2 18

7 INFORMATION FACILITIES PROVIDED ON GOVERNMENT WEB SITES Archive search facilities 4 Download button for regulations 4


31

Frequently asked questions for regulations 4 Statement of current activities 38 Whatrsquos new section 38 Basic responsibilities 38 Regulations of organisation 33 Future strategy 3 Archive for whatrsquo s news section 28 25Mission Statement 25 3

8 FACILITIES WHICH ENHANCE EASE OF USE ON GOVERNMENT WEB SITES Downloadable forms 4 Link to webmaster 4 Page usable without graphics 39 Special access technology available 33 Search engine or link to engine provided 27 22Forums or chat rooms provided 13


32

Documentos de Trabajo

Facultad de Ciencias Econoacutemicas y Empresariales Universidad de Zaragoza

2002-01 ldquoEvolution of Spanish Urban Structure During the Twentieth Centuryrdquo Luis Lanaspa Fernando Pueyo y Fernando Sanz Department of Economic Analysis University of Zaragoza

2002-02 ldquoUna Nueva Perspectiva en la Medicioacuten del Capital Humanordquo Gregorio Gimeacutenez y Blanca Simoacuten Departamento de Estructura Historia Econoacutemica y Economiacutea Puacuteblica Universidad de Zaragoza

2002-03 ldquoA Practical Evaluation of Employee Productivity Using a Professional Data Baserdquo Raquel Ortega Department of Business University of Zaragoza

2002-04 ldquoLa Informacioacuten Financiera de las Entidades No Lucrativas Una Perspectiva Internacionalrdquo Isabel Brusca y Caridad Martiacute Departamento de Contabilidad y Finanzas Universidad de Zaragoza

2003-01 ldquoLas Opciones Reales y su Influencia en la Valoracioacuten de Empresasrdquo Manuel Espitia y Gema Pastor Departamento de Economiacutea y Direccioacuten de Empresas Universidad de Zaragoza

2003-02 ldquoThe Valuation of Earnings Components by the Capital Markets An International Comparisonrdquo Susana Callao Beatriz Cuellar Joseacute Ignacio Jarne and Joseacute Antonio Laiacutenez Department of Accounting and Finance University of Zaragoza

2003-03 ldquoSelection of the Informative Base in ARMA-GARCH Modelsrdquo Laura Muntildeoz Pilar Olave and Manuel Salvador Department of Statistics Methods University of Zaragoza

2003-04 ldquoStructural Change and Productive Blocks in the Spanish Economy An Imput-Output Analysis for 1980-1994rdquo Julio Saacutenchez Choacuteliz and Rosa Duarte Department of Economic Analysis University of Zaragoza

2003-05 ldquoAutomatic Monitoring and Intervention in Linear Gaussian State-Space Models A Bayesian Approachrdquo Manuel Salvador and Pilar Gargallo Department of Statistics Methods University of Zaragoza

2003-06 ldquoAn Application of the Data Envelopment Analysis Methodology in the Performance Assessment of the Zaragoza University Departmentsrdquo Emilio Martiacuten Department of Accounting and Finance University of Zaragoza

2003-07 ldquoHarmonisation at the European Union a difficult but needed taskrdquo Ana Yetano Saacutenchez Department of Accounting and Finance University of Zaragoza

2003-08 ldquoThe investment activity of spanish firms with tangible and intangible assetsrdquo Manuel Espitia and Gema Pastor Department of Business University of Zaragoza


33

2004-01 ldquoPersistencia en la performance de los fondos de inversioacuten espantildeoles de renta variable nacional (1994-2002)rdquo Luis Ferruz y Mariacutea S Vargas Departamento de Contabilidad y Finanzas Universidad de Zaragoza

2004-02 ldquoCalidad institucional y factores poliacutetico-culturales un panorama inter-nacional por niveles de rentardquo Joseacute Aixalaacute Gema Fabro y Blanca Simoacuten Departamento de Estructura Historia Econoacutemica y Economiacutea Puacuteblica Universidad de Zaragoza

2004-03 ldquoLa utilizacioacuten de las nuevas tecnologiacuteas en la contratacioacuten puacuteblicardquo Joseacute Mordf Gimeno Feliuacute Departamento de Derecho Puacuteblico Universidad de Zaragoza

2004-04 ldquoValoracioacuten econoacutemica y financiera de los trasvases previstos en el Plan Hidroloacutegico Nacional espantildeolrdquo Pedro Arrojo Agudo Departamento de Anaacutelisis Econoacutemico Universidad de Zaragoza Laura Saacutenchez Gallardo Fundacioacuten Nueva Cultura del Agua

2004-05 ldquoImpacto de las tecnologiacuteas de la informacioacuten en la productividad de las empresas espantildeolasrdquo Carmen Galve Gorriz y Ana Gargallo Castel Departamento de Economiacutea y Direccioacuten de Empresas Universidad de Zaragoza

2004-06 ldquoNational and International Income Dispersioacuten and Aggregate Expendituresrdquo Carmen Fillat Department of Applied Economics and Economic History University of Zaragoza Joseph Francois Tinbergen Institute Rotterdam and Center for Economic Policy Resarch-CEPR

2004-07 ldquoTargeted Advertising with Vertically Differentiated Productsrdquo Lola Esteban and Joseacute M Hernaacutendez Department of Economic Analysis University of Zaragoza

2004-08 ldquoReturns to education and to experience within the EU are there differences between wage earners and the self-employedrdquo Inmaculada Garciacutea Mainar Department of Economic Analysis University of Zaragoza Viacutector M Montuenga Goacutemez Department of Business University of La Rioja

2005-01 ldquoE-government and the transformation of public administrations in EU countries Beyond NPM or just a second wave of reformsrdquo Lourdes Torres Vicente Pina and Sonia Royo Department of Accounting and FinanceUniversity of Zaragoza


1

1 Introduction

The adoption of web-based technologies to deliver government services has

become a global trend in public administration In the same way as in the 1990s there

was global pressure for introducing New Public Management (NPM) reforms in the

public sector globalization is creating an offer of interactive initiatives and demands in

national public administrations which are putting public bureaucracies worldwide under

pressure to change and innovate the way in which their bureaucracies relate to citizens

E-government inherits the administrative reform policies inspired by NPM reforms

implemented throughout the EU over the past twenty years which advocated that many

of the techniques of private sector organizations can be applied to governmental bodies

The European Union (EU) defines e-government as ldquothe use of Information and

Communication Technologies (ICTs) in public administrations combined with

organisational change and new skills in order to improve public services and

democratic processes and strengthen support to public policiesrdquo 1

At the beginning of the twenty-first century there is a feeling among the

citizenry that lsquomanagerialismrsquo has widened the distance between government and

citizen instead of bringing them closer together (Noordhoek and Saner 2004) as well as

citizen dissatisfaction or disengagement which is reflected particularly in the Anglo

Saxon countries in a perception that public services are failing and of poor quality

(Oakley 2004) The search for new styles of governance through the engagement of

citizens is viewed as a way to change such feeling and to improve citizen trust in

governments

Unlike traditional structures which are hierarchical and one-way the Internet

delivery systems are non-hierarchical two-way and available 24 hours a day seven

days a week (247) The non-hierarchical character of Internet delivery frees citizens to

seek information at their own convenience not just when a government office is open

(West 2004) Two-way interaction has been deemed a way of improving service

delivery and responsiveness to citizens a way of generating greater public trust in

1 (COM(2003) 567 The Role of eGovernment for Europes Future Brussels 26 September 2003


2











2000)




















3

2 Background































4







cyber-world





countries




















Ho 2002 Moon 2002)


5

































6































7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











2











2000)




















3

2 Background































4







cyber-world





countries




















Ho 2002 Moon 2002)


5

































6































7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











3

2 Background































4







cyber-world





countries




















Ho 2002 Moon 2002)


5

































6































7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











4







cyber-world





countries




















Ho 2002 Moon 2002)


5

































6































7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











5

































6































7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











6































7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











7

4 Methodology


















(See Table 3)











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











8






























9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











9





























sample




10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











10


















52 Delphi study



questionnaire










11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











11















follows













sector






12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











12



















salaries









the items proposed






13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











13

















philosophy









the EU







14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











14

6 Discussion
































15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











15


































16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











16







transactions online
















7 Conclusions









17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











17

















traditions















18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











18

References

















19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











19




















20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











20




















21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











21

















22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











22


-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3Dimension 1

-2

-1

0

1

2

Dim

ensi

on 2

V

VV

V

VV

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

V

V

V V

V

V

V

V

V

V

VV

V

VVV

StyriaLimousin

Rheinland-Pfa

Louth


Vorarlverg

OstravaNicosia

Loire

South Holland

Mayo

Longford

Offaly

KlaipedaWarsaw

KielceSevilla

Galicia

Cheshire Salzburg

Brussels Regi

N Carelia

Westmeath

Kilkenny

Cast_Mancha


Vaumlsterbotten

Bedfordshire

SurreyScotland

Somerset


23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











23


000 EX 050 075 100


000

025

050

075

100

Serv

ices

for

citiz

en

A

A

A

A

A

B BA

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

A

B

B

A

A

A

A

A A A

A

A

A

AA

A

A

A

Styria

Lower Austria

Salzburg

Vorarlverg

Brussels Region

OstravaNicosia

Aarhus

Tallin

N Carelia

Limousin

Loire

Rheinland-Pfalz

South Holland

Utrecht

Vas

Louth

Waterford

Westmeath

Mayo

Kilkenny

LongfordOffaly

Klaipeda

Vilnius

Petange

VarsoviaKielce

Cast_Mancha

Sevilla

Madrid

Cataluntildea

GaliciaLa Rioja

Vaumlsterbotten

Malmo

Bedforshire

Hertfordshire

CheshireSurrey

Escocia



24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











24


Non available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


372 00

16300

349 750

23 00

93 250


535 00

163250

93 00

163 625

47 125


Non Available

Stage 1

information Stage 2

interaction

Stage 3 two-way

interaction Stage 4


00 186

125 140

375 23

125 70

375


00 93

00 47

125 116

625 70

250


125 116

00 23

00 116

500 93

375


00 93

00 140

125 93

375 116

500


00 70

125 163

500 93

375 00

00


00 186

125 395

750 70

125 23

00




25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











25





26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











26







ANNEX 1


27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











27






Y N


Y N


Y N


forms etc Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






Y N


Y N



Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N


Y N






28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











28





1 2 3 4


ANNEX 2


29






30








31




32
















33











29






30








31




32
















33











30








31




32
















33











31




32
















33











32
















33











33










e-government and the transformation of public administrations in eu

Documents