E-government

E-government (short for electronic government) is the use of technological communications devices, such as computers and the Internet to provide public services to citizens and other persons in a country or region. E-government offers new opportunities for more direct and convenient citizen access to government, and for government provision of services directly to citizens.[1]

"eGov" redirects here. For other uses, see eGov (disambiguation).

Not to be confused with Government by algorithm or Cyberocracy.

The term consists of the digital interactions between a citizen and their government (C2G), between governments and other government agencies (G2G), between government and citizens (G2C), between government and employees (G2E), and between government and businesses/commerces (G2B). E-government delivery models can be broken down into the following categories:[2] This interaction consists of citizens communicating with all levels of government (city, state/province, national, and international), facilitating citizen involvement in governance using information and communication technology (ICT) (such as computers and websites) and business process re-engineering (BPR). Brabham and Guth (2017) interviewed the third party designers of e-government tools in North America about the ideals of user interaction that they build into their technologies, which include progressive values, ubiquitous participation, geolocation, and education of the public.[3]

Other definitions stray from the idea that technology is an object and defines e-government simply as facilitators or instruments and focus on specific changes in Public Administration issues. The internal transformation of a Government is the definition that established the specialist technologist Mauro D. Ríos. In his paper "In search of a definition of Electronic Government", he says: "Digital Government is a new way of organization and management of public affairs, introducing positive transformational processes in management and the structure itself of the organization chart, adding value to the procedures and services provided, all through the introduction and continued appropriation of information and communication technologies as a facilitator of these transformations."[4]

Terminology

E-government is also known as e-gov, electronic government, Internet governance, digital government, online government, connected government. As of 2014 the OECD still uses the term digital government, and distinguishes it from e-government in the recommendation produced there for the Network on E-Government of the Public Governance Committee.[5] Several governments have started to use the term digital government to a wide range of services involving contemporary technology, such as big data, automation or predictive analytics.[6]

Definition

E-gov strategies (or digital government) is defined as "The employment of the Internet and the world-wide-web for delivering government information and services to the citizens." (United Nations, 2006; AOEMA, 2005).[7] Electronic government (or e-government) essentially refers to "utilization of Information Technology (IT), Information and Communication Technologies (ICT s), and other web-based telecommunication technologies to improve and/or enhance on the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery in the public sector.".[2] E-government promotes and improves broad stakeholders contribution to national and community development, as well as deepen the governance process.[8]

In electronic government systems, government operations are supported by web-based services. It involves the use of information technology, specifically the Internet, to facilitate the communication between the government and its citizens.[9]

UN e-Government Development Index

The Division of a Public Administration and Development Management (DPAPM) of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA) conducts a bi-annual e-government survey which includes a section titled e-Government Development Index (EGDI). It is a comparative ranking of 193 countries of the world according to three primary indicators: i) the OSI - Online Service Index that measures the online presence of the government in terms of service delivery; ii) the TII - Telecommunication Infrastructure Index iii) HCI -Human Capital Index. Constructing a model for the measurement of digitized services, the Survey assesses the 193 member states of the UN according to a quantitative composite index of e-government readiness based on website assessment; telecommunication infrastructure and human resource endowment.[10]

A diverse group of 100 researchers online volunteers from across the globe engaged with the United Nations Department of Economic Affairs (UN DESA) to process 386 research surveys carried out across 193 UN Member States for the 2016 UN E-Government Survey.[11] The diversity of nationalities and languages of the online volunteers[12]—more than 65 languages, 15 nationalities, of which half are from developing countries—mirrors perfectly the mission of the survey.

The survey has been criticized not including an index of digital inclusion levels.[13]

Comparison with e-governance

Main article: e-governance

E-government should enable anyone visiting a city website to communicate and interact with city employees via the Internet with graphical user interfaces (GUI), instant-messaging (IM), learn about government issues through audio/video presentations, and in any way more sophisticated than a simple email letter to the address provided at the site"[14]

The essence of e-governance is "The enhanced value for stakeholders through transformation"[15] and "the use of technology to enhance the access to and delivery of government services to benefit citizens, business partners and employees".[16] The focus should be on:

• The use of information and communication technologies, and particularly the Internet, as a tool to achieve better government.[17]
• The use of information and communication technologies in all facets of the operations of a government organization.[18][19]
• The continuous optimization of service delivery, constituency participation, and governance by transforming internal and external relationships through technology, the Internet and new media.[20]

Whilst e-government has traditionally been understood as being centered around the operations of government, e-governance is understood to extend the scope by including citizen engagement and participation in governance. As such, following in line with the OECD definition of e-government, e-governance can be defined as the use of ICTs as a tool to achieve better governance.

Delivery models and activities of e-government

The primary delivery models of e-government can be divided into:

• Government-to-citizen or government-to-consumer (G2C) approaches such as setting up websites where citizens can download forms, government information, etc.
  • In this model, the G2C model applies the strategy of customer relationship management (CRM) with business concept.
  • By managing their "customer" (citizen) relationship, the business (government) can provide the needed products and services fulfill the needs of the customer (citizen).
  • In United States, the NPR (National Partnership for Reinventing Government) has been implemented from 1993.[21]
• Government-to-business (G2B)
• Government-to-government (G2G)
• Government-to-employees (G2E)

Within each of these interaction domains, four kinds of activities take place:[22][23]

• pushing information over the Internet, e.g.: regulatory services, general holidays, public hearing schedules, issue briefs, notifications, etc.
• two-way communications between the agency and the citizen, a business, or another government agency. In this model, users can engage in dialogue with agencies and post problems, comments, or requests to the agency.
• conducting transactions, e.g.: lodging tax returns, applying for services and grants.
• governance, e.g.: To enable the citizen transition from passive information access to active citizen participation by:

1. Informing the citizen
2. Representing the citizen
3. Encouraging the citizen to vote
4. Consulting the citizen
5. Involving the citizen

Non-internet e-government

While e-government is often thought of as "online government" or "Internet-based government," many non-Internet "electronic government" technologies can be used in this context. Some non-Internet forms include telephone, fax, PDA, SMS text messaging, MMS, wireless networks and services, Bluetooth, CCTV, tracking systems, RFID, biometric identification, road traffic management and regulatory enforcement, identity cards, smart cards and other near field communication applications; polling station technology (where non-online e-voting is being considered), TV and radio-based delivery of government services (e.g., CSMW), email, online community facilities, newsgroups and electronic mailing lists, online chat, and instant messaging technologies.

Controversies

Disadvantages

The main disadvantages concerning e-government are the lack of equality in public access to computers and the internet (the "digital divide", a reference to the fact that people who have low incomes, who are homeless and/or who live in remote regions may have little or no access to the Internet), reliability of information on the web, and issues that could influence and bias public opinions. There are many considerations and potential implications of implementing and designing e-government, including disintermediation of the government and its citizens, impacts on economic, social, and political factors, vulnerability to cyber attacks, and disturbances to the status quo in these areas.[24] See also Electronic leviathan.

The political nature of public sector forms are also cited as disadvantages to e-government systems.[25]

Trust

Trust in e-governance is very highly dependent on its performance and execution, which can be measured through the effectiveness of current actions. This is much riskier and prone to fluctuation than a system of trust that is based on reputation because performance does not consider past actions.[26]

Development

Because E-government is in the early stages of development in many countries and jurisdictions, it is hard to be applied to forms of government that have been institutionalized. Age-old bureaucratic practices being delivered in new mediums or using new technologies can lead to problems of miscommunication[27]

Hyper-surveillance

Increased electronic contact and data exchange between government and its citizens goes both ways. Once e-government technologies become more sophisticated, citizens will be likely be encouraged to interact electronically with the government for more transactions, as e-services are much less costly than bricks and mortar service offices (physical buildings) staffed by civil servants. This could potentially lead to a decrease in privacy for civilians as the government obtains more and more information about their activities. Without safeguards, government agencies might share information on citizens. In a worst-case scenario, with so much information being passed electronically between government and civilians, a totalitarian-like system could develop. When the government has easy access to countless information on its citizens, personal privacy is lost.[28][29]

Cost

Although "a prodigious amount of money has been spent"[30] on the development and implementation of e-government, some say it has yielded only a mediocre result. The outcomes and effects of trial Internet-based government services are often difficult to gauge or users seem them unsatisfactory.[31] According to Gartner, Worldwide IT spending is estimated to total $3.6 trillion in 2011 which is 5.1% increase from the year 2010 ($3.4 trillion).[32]

Inaccessibility

Main article: Digital divide

An e-government website that provides government services often does not offer the "potential to reach many users including those who live in remote areas [without Internet access], are homebound, have low literacy levels, exist on poverty line incomes."[33] Homeless people, people in poverty and elderly people may not have access.

False sense of transparency and accountability

Opponents of e-government argue that online governmental transparency is dubious because it is maintained by the governments themselves. Information can be added or removed from the public eye. To this day, very few organizations monitor and provide accountability for these modifications. Those that do so, like the United States’ OMBWatch[34] and Government Accountability Project, are often nonprofit volunteers. Even the governments themselves do not always keep track of the information they insert and delete.[35]

Advantages

The ultimate goal of the e-government is to be able to offer an increased portfolio of public services to citizens in an efficient and cost-effective manner. E-government allows for government transparency. Government transparency is important because it allows the public to be informed about what the government is working on as well as the policies they are trying to implement. Simple tasks may be easier to perform through electronic government access. Many changes, such as marital status or address changes can be a long process and take a lot of paperwork for citizens. E-government allows these tasks to be performed efficiently with more convenience to individuals. E-government is an easy way for the public to be more involved in political campaigns. It could increase voter awareness, which could lead to an increase in citizen participation in elections. It is convenient and cost-effective for businesses, and the public benefits by getting easy access to the most current information available without having to spend time, energy and money to get it.

E-government helps simplify processes and makes government information more easily accessible for public sector agencies and citizens. For example, the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles simplified the process of certifying driver records to be admitted in county court proceedings.[36] Indiana became the first state to allow government records to be digitally signed, legally certified and delivered electronically by using Electronic Postmark technology. In addition to its simplicity, e-democracy services can reduce costs. Alabama Department of Conservation & Natural Resources, Wal-Mart and NIC[37] developed an online hunting and fishing license service utilizing an existing computer to automate the licensing process. More than 140,000 licenses were purchased at Wal-Mart stores during the first hunting season and the agency estimates it will save $200,000 annually from service.[38]

The anticipated benefits of e-government include efficiency, improved services, better accessibility of public services, sustainable community development and more transparency and accountability.[24]

Democratization

Main article: E-democracy

One goal of some e-government initiatives is greater citizen participation. Through the Internet's Web 2.0 interactive features, people from all over the country can provide input to politicians or public servants and make their voices heard. Blogging and interactive surveys allow politicians or public servants to see the views of the people on any issue. Chat rooms can place citizens in real-time contact with elected officials or their office staff or provide them with the means to interact directly with public servants, allowing voters to have a direct impact and influence in their government. These technologies can create a more transparent government, allowing voters to immediately see how and why their representatives in the capital are voting the way they are. This helps voters decide whom to vote for in the future or how to help the public servants become more productive.

A government could theoretically move more towards a true democracy with the proper application of e-government. Government transparency will give insight to the public on how decisions are made and hold elected officials or public servants accountable for their actions. The public could become a direct and prominent influence in government legislature to some degree.[39][40][41][42]

Environmental bonuses

Main article: Paperless office

Proponents of e-government argue that online government services would lessen the need for hard copy paper forms.[43] Due to recent pressures from environmentalist groups, the media, and the public, some governments and organizations have turned to the Internet to reduce paper use. The United States government utilizes the website http://www.forms.gov to provide "internal government forms for federal employees" and thus "produce significant savings in paper.[44] As well, if citizens can apply for government services or permits online, they may not need to drive into a government office, which could lead to less air pollution from gas and diesel-fuelled vehicles.

Speed, efficiency, and convenience

E-government allows citizens to interact with computers to achieve objectives at any time and any location and eliminates the necessity for physical travel to government agents sitting behind desks and windows. Many e-government services are available to citizens with computers and Internet access 24 hours a day and seven days a week, in contrast to bricks and mortar government offices, which tend to be only open during business hours (notable exceptions are police stations and hospitals, which are usually open 24 hours a day so that staff can deal with emergencies).

Improved accounting and record keeping can be noted through computerization, and information and forms can be easily accessed by citizens with computers and Internet access, which may enable quicker processing time for applications and find information. On the administrative side, access to help find or retrieve files and linked information can now be stored in electronic databases versus hard copies (paper copies) stored in various locations. Individuals with disabilities or conditions that affect their mobility no longer have to be mobile to be active in government and can access public services in the comfort of their own homes[45][46] (as long as they have a computer and Internet and any accessibility equipment they may need).

Public approval

Main article: e-participation

Recent trials of e-government have been met with acceptance and eagerness from the public.[47][48] Citizens participate in online discussions of political issues with increasing frequency, and young people, who traditionally display minimal interest in government affairs, are drawn to electronic voting procedures.

Although Internet-based governmental programs have been criticized for lack of reliable privacy policies, studies have shown that people value prosecution of offenders over personal confidentiality. Ninety percent of United States adults approve of Internet tracking systems of criminals, and 57% are willing to forgo some of their personal internet privacy if it leads to the prosecution of criminals or terrorists.[49]

Technology-specific e-government

There are also some technology-specific sub-categories of e-government, such as m-government (mobile government), ubiquitous government), and g-government (GIS/GPS applications for e-government).

The previous concern about developments in E-government concerning technology are due to the limited use of online platforms for political reasons by citizens in local political participations.[50]

The primary delivery models of e-government are classified depending on who benefits. In the development of the public sector or private sector portals and platforms, a system is created that benefits all constituents. Citizens needing to renew their vehicle registration have a convenient way to accomplish it while already engaged in meeting the regulatory inspection requirement. On behalf of a government partner, the business provides what has traditionally, and solely, managed by the government and can use this service to generate profit or attract new customers. Government agencies are relieved of the cost and complexity of having to process the transactions.[51]

To develop these public sector portals or platforms, governments have the choice to internally develop and manage, outsource, or sign a self-funding contract. The self-funding model creates portals that pay for themselves through convenience fees for certain e-government transactions, known as self-funding portals.

Social networking services and websites are an emerging area for e-democracy. The social networking entry point is within the citizens’ environment and the engagement is on the citizens’ terms. Proponents of e-government perceive the government's use of social networking as a medium to help the government act more like the public it serves. Examples can be found at almost every state government portal through Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube widgets.

Government and its agents also have the opportunity to follow citizens to monitor satisfaction with services they receive. Through ListServs, RSS feeds, mobile messaging, micro-blogging services and blogs, government and its agencies can share information to citizens who share common interests and concerns. Government is also beginning to Twitter. In the state of Rhode Island, Treasurer Frank T. Caprio is offering daily tweets of the state's cash flow.[52] For a full list of state agencies with Twitter feeds, visit NIC.[53] For more information, visit transparent-gov.com.[54]

Government 2.0

Government 2.0 or Gov 2.0 refers to government policies that aim to harness collaborative technologies and interactive Internet tools to create an open-source computing platform in which government, citizens, and innovative companies can improve transparency and efficiency.[55] Put simply, Gov 2.0 is about "putting government in the hands of citizens".[56] Gov 2.0 combines interactive Web 2.0 fundamentals with e-government and increases citizen participation by using open-source platforms, which allow development of innovative apps, websites, and widgets. The government's role is to provide open data, web services, and platforms as an infrastructure.[57]

Transformational Government

Transformational Government is the use of computer-based information and communications technologies (ICT) to change the way governments work. The term is commonly used to describe a government reform strategy which attempts to radically change the way people understand government, especially those working within government. For example, it is often associated with a 'whole-of-government' viewpoint, which tries to foster cross-department collaboration and provide 'one-stop-shop' convenience in the delivery of services to citizens.

The term Transformational Government is usually used aspirationally, as denoting the 'highest' level of what e-government can achieve:

1. presence, where ICT, and usually websites, are used to provide information;
2. interaction, where government interacts with citizens, and departments interact with each other, online especially by email;
3. transaction, where such things as paying taxes or licenses are carried out online;
4. transformation, which involves a reinvention of government functions and how they operate.[58] In relation to developing countries, it is often associated with hopes of reducing corruption, and in relation to developed countries, with attempts to increase the involvement of the private and voluntary sectors in government activity.

History of Transformational Government

During the last two decades, governments around the world have invested in ICT with the aim of increasing the quality and decreasing the cost of public services. But over that time, as even the least developed countries have moved to websites, e-services and e-Government strategies, it has become increasingly clear that e-Government has not delivered all the benefits that were hoped for it.[59] One study found that 35% of e-government projects in developing countries resulted in total failures; and that 50% were partial failures.[60]

In reaction to these poor outcomes, there has been a shift of perspective to 'Transformational Government', aiming beyond purely technical aspects of better enabling e-government processes towards addressing the cultural and organisational barriers which have hindered public service benefits realisation. Researchers have defined the rationale for Transformational Government as “the exploitation of e-government such that benefits can be realized”.[61]

In 2010 the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) published a report[62] which identified a wide range of common pitfalls which have hampered many governments in achieving significant impacts through their technology investments. However, OASIS also noted that:

“… an increasing number [of governments] are now getting to grips with the much broader and complex set of cultural and organizational changes which are needed for ICT to deliver significant benefits to the public sector. This new approach is generally referred to as Transformational Government.”

OASIS cites [62] the UK and Australia as two of the leaders in this area:

“Transformational Government…. encompasses a new "virtual" business layer within government which allows an integrated, government-wide, citizen-focused service to be presented to citizens across all channels, but at no extra cost and without having to restructure government to do so. Two very good examples of this new approach are South Australia’s “Ask Just Once” portal and the UK Government’s DirectGov portal, and the approach is explained in very good detail in the CS Transform’s white paper entitled "Citizen Service Transformation – a manifesto for change in the delivery of public services”.

Countries with Transformational Government initiatives

Within the last decade, this new emphasis on a Transformational Government approach can be seen from a number of countries:

Country	Initiative(s)	Details
Canada	Government On-Line (GOL)	Report of the Auditor General of Canada: Chapter 1 Information Technology: Government On-Line 2003 [63] “One of the key principles of Government On-Line is that programs and services will be transformed to reflect the needs and expectations of clients and citizens. From the government’s perspective, the overall objective of the GOL initiative is full service transformation – to fundamentally change the way the government operates and to deliver better services to Canadians.”
UK	gov.uk	Transformational Government: Enabled by Technology, 2005 [64] “The future of public services has to use technology to give citizens choice, with personalised services designed around their needs not the needs of the provider”
USA	PIF, 18F, USDS	Presidential Innovation Fellows program where "teams of government experts and private-sector doers take a user-centric approach to issues at the intersection of people, processes, products, and policy to achieve lasting impact"[65] launched in 2012.[66] 18F a new digital government delivery service, was formed in early 2014[67] and United States Digital Service (USDS) was launched later in 2014.[68]
Korea	Government 3.0	Announced in 2013 with "an ambitious plan to allow wider public access to government data to improve the transparency of state affairs.",[69] this initiative includes: citizen-centered government innovation, core values of openness, sharing, communication, collaboration for all areas of governing, customized services to individual citizens, which will create jobs and support creative economy[70]

International initiatives

The early pioneering work by some governments is now being picked up and championed by a range of global organizations which offer support to governments in moving to a Transformational Government approach. For example:

• The World Bank has set up an eTransform Initiative (ETI) with support from global IT partners such as Gemalto, IBM, L-1 Identity Solutions, Microsoft and Pfizer. "The eTransform Initiative is about tapping information technology, expertise and experiences”, said Mohsen Khalil, Director of the World Bank Group’s Global Information and Communication Technologies Department. “Government transformation is about change management facilitated by technology. This initiative will facilitate the exchange of lessons and experiences among various governments and industry players, to maximize impact and lower risks of ICT-enabled government transformation.”
• A number of private sector organizations working in this area have published white papers which pull together global best practices on Government Transformation.[71][72]
• OASIS launched (September 2010) a new Technical Committee tasked with producing a new global best practice standard for a Transformational Government Framework. The Framework is expressed as a number of "Pattern Languages", each providing a detailed set of guidance notes and conformance clauses on how to deliver the required changes in practice.

By country

Africa

Kenya

Following the transition from the longstanding Kenya African National Union government to the National Rainbow Coalition government in December 2002, in January 2004 a Directorate of e-government was established after an executive (cabinet) session. The newly created department had the duty to draw the plan of action for future ICT implementations.[73]

Like many other African nations, Kenya has embraced the high mobile penetration rate within its population. Even people living in remote areas that did not have access to traditional telecommunications' networks can now communicate with ease. The fact of the same has, and continues to have, a great impact on the governments' strategies in reaching out to its citizens.[74] Given that about 70% of the population owns mobile phones, leading mobile network operators like Safaricom have taken a great step in offering services that meet citizens' demands. Such services include Kipokezi (which allows subscribers to do online chatting and also exchange electronic mails via standard mobile phones), and M-Pesa (which allows the subscribers to send and receive electronic cash). Such services have even appealed to the majority of Kenyans, as they support the branchless members of the society too, in undertaking normal and secure businesses via M-Pesa. The recent IMF report reveals that MPESA transactions in Kenya exceeded those carried out by the Western Union worldwide.[75]

Website: Open Kenya | Transparent Africa

Asia, Middle East, Eurasia

Bangladesh

The eGovernment web portal has been developed to provide more convenient access to various government services and information through one window. Services can now be delivered to people at their convenience, and more importantly, now have a lot more weight on transparency and accountability of public services.[76]

India

The E-Governance initiatives and programs in India are undertaken by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY www.meity.gov.in ). The current umbrella program for e-governance of Government of India is known by the title "DIGITAL INDIA" (www.digitalindia.gov.in)

Indian government has launched many e-governance initiatives, including a portal for public grievance,[77] MCA21 Mission Mode Project,[78] e-Filing of income tax,[79] e-gazette,[80] Project Nemmadi,[81] and their overall digital India policy.[82]

Indonesia

E-government in Indonesia is developing, especially in central and regional/local government offices. E-government was officially introduced to public administration by Presidential Directive No 6/2001 on Telematics, which states that the government of Indonesia has to use telematics technology to support good governance. Furthermore, e-government should have been introduced for different purposes in government offices. As one of the ISO member countries, Indonesia gives more attention to facilitating the activities of standardization. Among of the facilities provided are building the National information system of standardization (SISTANAS) and Indonesia Standardization Information Network (INSTANET).[83] As of 2017, ministries, institutions and local governments of Indonesia used to run separate e-government systems, which is now integrated into a centrally based system.[84] In 2017, the government has also undertaken programs for digitization of SMEs and the informal sector.[85] Many of the cities across Indonesia including Jakarta, Bandung, Surabaya,and Makassar are implementing the concept of Smart City, consisting of e-government, e-health, e-education, e-logistics and e-procurement as priority areas.[86]

Iran

In 2002, Iran published a detailed report named TAKFA (Barnameye Tose-e va Karborde Fanavaie Etela’at) in which it was predicted that most of the government bodies would try to virtualize their services as soon as possible. However, based on the reports by UN bodies, Iran has failed in recent years to meet the average standards of e-government. In 2008, the Supreme Council of Information released a report which criticized the government for its poor advancement in employing new communication technologies for administration purposes.[87]

In 2016, Iran launched the National Information Network and improved the quality and speed of internet access. In 2017 Iran introduced phase one of e-government including E-Tax, E-Customs, E-Visa,[88] E-Government Portal,[89] and a mobile application to modernize Iran's government services.[90]

The Iranian government plans to introduce other phases of E-gov soon.

Iraq

The Iraqi E-government citizen program was established to "eliminate bribery and favoritism and end the citizens' suffering in going back repeatedly to directories", the interface lets the citizen send requests and complaints, it can also be used for issuing identity cards, driving licenses and passports.[91]

Malaysia

In Malaysia, the e-government efforts are undertaken by the Malaysian government, under the umbrella of Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) and e-government flagships, which was launched in mid-1996, by Dr Mahathir Mohamad (1981-2003), by the then Prime Minister of Malaysia (Jeong & Nor Fadzlina, 2007).[92][93]

Electronic government is an initiative aimed at reinventing how the government works. It seeks to improve how the government operates, as well as how it delivers services to the people (Ibrahim Ariff & Goh Chen Chuan, 2000).

Myanmar

Yangon

The Yangon City Development Committee (Burmese- ရန်ကုန်မြို့တော်စည်ပင်သာယာရေးကော်မတီ) (YCDC) is the administrative body of Yangon, and Yangon is the largest city and former capital of Myanmar (Burma). The Yangon City Development Committee consists of 20 departments. Its headquarters was on the Yangon City Hall. The committee's chairman is also the city's mayor.

In 2003, YCDC was organized to provide e-Government for Yangon City. The main purposes of the city's e-Government program are to provide easy access between the government and the city's citizens via the Internet, to reduce paper usage, to reduce the city budget, to build the city's fiber ring, to provide timely public information, to store public data and to develop and expand G2G, G2C, G2B, and G2E programs.

In January 2013 responsibility for e-Government was divided between the e-Government Administration Committee and the e-Government Processing Committee. The e-Government Administration Committee includes the Mayor of Yangon City as Chief, the General Secretary of Yangon City as Sub-Chief, and the other 20 head of department officers as chairmen. The e-Government Processing Committee includes the Head of Public Relation and Information Department as Chief and the other 20 deputy head of department officers as chairmen.

The official web-portal is www.ycdc.gov.mm.

Mandalay

Mandalay is the second-largest city and the last royal capital of Myanmar (Burma). In 2014, Mandalay Region Government developed www.mdyregion.gov.mm to know about regional government and their activities to people.

Mandalay Region Government organized the e-Government Steering Committee on 23 June 2016. That committee chairman was U Sai Kyaw Zaw, Minister, Ministry of Ethnic Affairs.

On 21 July 2017 www.emandalay.gov.mm web portal was opened by Dr. Zaw Myint Maung, Prime Minister of Mandalay Region Government. That portal includes 2 e-services, 199 topics from 70 agencies. The committee develops a Regional Data Center too. That Datacenter will be opened in 2018.

Nepal

The e-Government planning and conceptual framework has been presented to Nepal in extensive support from the Government of Korea (KIPA).[94] E-government Vision is ‘The Value Networking Nepal’ through:

• Citizen-centered service
• Transparent service
• Networked government
• Knowledge-based society

Nepal's E-government mission statement[94] is "Improve the quality of people’s lives without any discrimination, transcending regional and racial differences, and realize socio-economic development by building a transparent government and providing value-added quality services through ICT."

The e-Government practice has been slow both in adoption and practice in Nepal.[95] However, local government bodies now have dedicated team of ICT Volunteers working towards implementing e-Government in the country through an extensive ICT for Local Bodies initiatives.[96]

Pakistan

In 2014, the Government of Pakistan created the National Information Technology Board under the Ministry of Information Technology & Telecom to enable a digital eco-system for Government services to the citizens of Pakistan. NITB was formed as a result of a merger between Pakistan Computer Bureau (PCB) and Electronic Government Directorate (EGD).
The key functions identified by the NITB are:[97]

• Provide technical guidance for the introduction of e-Governance in the Federal Govt.
• Suggest the efficient and cost-effective implementation of e-government programs in the Federal Ministries/Divisions.
• To carry out a training needs assessment and design and implement the identified IT capacity building programs for the employees of Federal Ministries/Divisions.
• Review the status of e-government readiness regularly to ensure sustainable, accelerated digitization and relevant human resource development.
• Identify the areas where IT interventions can be helpful and to suggest measures for the automation of these areas through Business Process Re-engineering (BPR).

NITB rolled out an e-Office Suite across various ministries in the Government of Pakistan. While it clearly pursued efficiency gains and improved transparency, it also hoped to deliver "efficient and cost-effective public services to citizens of Pakistan." The suite primarily included five modules or applications across all the ministries. Description of each module listed are:

• Internal Communication Module
• HR Management Module
• Inventory & Procurement Management Module
• Project Management Module
• Finance Budget Module

NITB released a high-level diagram that describes the process of transforming Federal Government agencies and ministries to e-Office environments.[98]

Criticism: NITB's rollout of the e-Office suite across almost all federal agencies is not only overly ambitious but also likely to fail. It seems to put together a lot of lofty organizational efficiency goals with a set of delivery or citizen-facing targets. In fact, most of the services NITB has provided have been largely conceptual and not sufficient concrete. The process outlined in the adoption process diagram seems devoid of any user-centric design or value proposition formulation. Instead of creating lots of MVPs (Minimum Viable Products) and taking advantage of an iterative and validated learning the process, the e-Office Suite seems to incorporate all the features and functions that various ministries and divisions may need or use. It seems to focus more on the needs of the bureaucrats and government agencies rather than the needs of the end-user (citizens of Pakistan) and what services would they need that a ministry or division can provide.

Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka have taken some initiative actions to provide the benefits of e-government to the citizens.[99][100]

Thailand

To implement the principles of e-government, the Ministry of Information and Telecommunication Technologies of Thailand developed a plan for creating a modern e-services system during 2009-2014.[101]

The next stage was the five-year project of the digital government, which began in 2016 and will be completed in 2021. This project assumes that within five years, more than 80% of Thai government agencies will use electronic documents for identification.[102][103]

There is the Unified State Portal of e-Government of Thailand,[104] developed by the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications Technology in 2008.

In 2018, Thailand ranks 73rd in the UN e-government ranking.[105]

Jordan

Jordan has established its e-government program since 2002. many governmental services are provisioned online.[106][107]

Saudi Arabia

The e-Government was also established in Saudi Arabia, and it offers online government services and transactions.[108][109]

United Arab Emirates

In the United Arab Emirates, the Emirates eGovernment is designed for e-government operations.[110][111]

Azerbaijan

The "E-Government" framework was established in accordance with the "National Strategy on Information-Communication Technologies in the Development of the Republic of Azerbaijan (2003-2012)" and implemented in the framework of the "E-Azerbaijan" Program. The project is aimed to increase the convenience and efficiency of the activity of state agencies, simplify interactions between population, businesses, and government agencies, contribute to creating new citizen-official relations framework and ensure transparency and free flow of information.[112]

The main components of the e-government infrastructure are integrated network infrastructure for state bodies, E-government portal, E-government gateway, State register of information resources and systems, e-signature, e-document circulation and e-government data center (under preparation).[112]

State portal www.e-gov.az was established to facilitate citizens in benefiting from e-services provided by government agencies on a ‘single window’ principle with the combination of services. Through e-government portal, citizens can use more than 140 e-services of 27 state agencies. Besides, a gateway between government agencies was established to ensure the mutual exchange of information, and most state agencies are connected to this infrastructure. The gateway allows users to efficiently use the existing government information systems and safe contact between them, issuing requests and rendering e-services, liberates citizens from providing same information or documents which are already available in information databases.[113]

On 14 March 2018, it was launched E-government Development Center.[114] It is a public legal entity that is subordinated to State Agency for Public Service and Social Innovations under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The service tries to utilize digital technologies, establish e-government to make state services operate more efficiently, ensure public services availability, and improve the living standards of the citizens of the country. It is government-to-citizen type of the e-governance.

Kazakhstan

The e-government portal egov.kz was launched in 2012 as part of Kazakhstan's effort to modernize how citizens access government services and information.[115] The egov.kz mobile app was recognized as best app in the GovTechioneers competition at the 2017 World Government Summit in Dubai.[116]

Armenia

Armenian e-government was established in 2004. E-government brings together all tools and databases created by Armenian state agencies and provides a user-friendly online environment for users. It includes more than twenty services and tools. Under this initiative, "Interactive Budget"[117] and "State Non-Commercial Organisations' Financing"[118] sections are available for the first time. There are also twenty other tools, including search engines, allowing to find the Government's and the Prime Minister's decisions, the agenda of the next cabinet sitting, information on the state purchases, the electronic tax reporting system, the online application system of the Intellectual Property Agency, the information search system of the Intellectual Property Agency, as well as the Electronic Signature and Electronic Visa (e-visa) sections. It is worth mentioning that the Electronic Signature is used in several other services when a user wants to submit an application or receive information. The Electronic Signature is universal system and is used both by the state officials and by citizens, legal entities.[119]

E-Government encompasses more than twenty tools and databases providing public services.

1) E-License

This system allows companies to submit an application for obtaining or terminating licenses regarding various activities (pharmaceuticals, banking, construction, transport etc.) It also provides other services in respect of already obtained license.[120]

2) System of reports on licensed activities

The Report Acceptance System for licensed persons enables to submit any report (annually, monthly or quarterly) on licensed activities.[121]

3) E-Payments

Electronic Payment System effectively processes online payments. This application is designed specifically for charging the state fees, local fees, the administrative penalties or services provided by state and local governmental bodies. Payments can be made by Visa, Mastercard, PayPal and local Arca or Mobidram systems.[122]

4) E-Cadastre

The system enables to submit an application to the property cadastre and receives information on landowners, the surface of a plot of land, legal status of any property. The state electronic payment system is integrated into this tool. Online applications for registration of rights and restrictions and related documents may be submitted by users who have a digital signature.[123]

5) E-Draft

In 2016 the Ministry of Justice of Armenia developed Legal Drafts' Database. It is designed particularly for publication any draft initiated by the Government or Member of Parliaments. The database can be accessed through a website which provides the possibility of presenting the legal acts’ drafts to the public, organizing online discussions, and as a consequence - the active participation of representatives of civil society in the law-making process. The website enables them to search legal drafts, follow their further progress, and become familiar with the presented suggestions. The registered users can present suggestions, get informed with the "summary paper" of the suggestions to the draft, the adopted suggestions or the reasoning concerning the not adopted ones.[124]

6) E-Register

The system enables registration of legal entities, such as limited liability companies, joint-stock companies, foundations, and self-employed entrepreneurs. On average it takes twenty minutes to register a company depending on the entity's type. State fee can be paid through E-Payments system. The system also allows users to track the submitted applications and search existing companies as well as purchase full information about any company, including information about shareholders.[125]

7) Datalex

This system allows users to find cases, search for laws of Armenia, as well as to follow the schedule of court hearings.[126]

8) E-Announcement

The system is designed for public announcements. The state authorities are obliged to make public announcements under certain circumstances stipulated by law.[127]

10) E-Tax

This tool simplifies the tax declaration process for both taxpayers and tax authorities. Any natural person or legal entity can submit tax declaration verifying it by electronic signature.[128]

11) E-IP

Online submission of patent and trademark applications using electronic signature.[129]

12) E-Visa This application enables the process of obtaining a visa through an electronic application. Visas are issued within two days.[130]

13) E-Signature

The system allows users to verify the identity of the user and protect the submitted application. Any resident of Armenia, either a natural person or legal entity, can obtain an electronic signature and use it while applying E-Government systems.[131]

Russia

On the Federal Law "On providing state and municipal services" (2010), the strategy on development of Information Society in the Russian Federation, approved by the President (2008), the Federal target programme "Electronic Russia" (2002 – 2010 years), approved by the Government (2002), the State Programme "Information Society" (2010), the Procedure on development and approval of administrative regulations execution of public functions (public services), approved by the Government (2005), the concept of administrative reform in the Russian Federation in 2006 - 2010 respectively, approved by the Government (2005), on other orders, resolutions and acts in the Russian Federation was created electronic government (or e-government).

The main target on creating e-government lies in the field of providing equal opportunities for all the Russians in spite of their living place and their incomes and make a more effective system of public administration. So e-government is created for reaching the useful system of public management accommodating the individual interests of every citizen by participation through ICTs in public policy-making.

Nowadays Russian e-government includes such systems as:[132]

1. The United interagency Interacting system using for providing of state and municipal services, exchange of information and data between participants of interagency interacting, quick approval of state and municipal decisions, etc.

2. The United system for authentication and authorization providing evidence of the rights of all participants of e-government.

3. United portal of state and municipal services and functions which are the "single window" for all information and services assured by government and municipals.[133]

The portal of public services is one of the key elements of the project to create an "electronic government" in the country. The portal provides a single point of access to all references on state and municipal services through the Internet and provides citizens and organizations the opportunity to receive these services electronically. Monthly visits by users of the public services portal range between 200,000 and 700,000. For example, citizens are now able to get or exchange a driver's license through this portal.

4. Head system providing utilization of electronic signature.

Other systems located on cloud services.

Today Russian e-government elements are demanded in the spheres of e-governance, e-services (e-health, e-education, e-library, etc.), e-commerce, e-democracy (web-election, Russian public initiative). By the United Nations E-Government Survey 2012: E-Government for the People Russia became one of the 7 emerging leaders in e-government development, took 9th place in rating of e-government development in largest population countries, took 8th rank in Top e-participation leaders, after Norway, Sweden and Chile, Advancing 32 positions in the world rankings, the Russian Federation became the leader of e-government in Eastern Europe. Evolution of ICT in the Russian Federation provided the raising of Russia in e-government development index to the 27 places.[134]

Europe

e-government shows significant advancement in Europe.

North America

Canada

Main article: Open data in Canada

The current Clerk of the Privy Council – the head of the federal public service has made workplace renewal a pillar of overall public service renewal. The key to workplace renewal is the adoption of collaborative networked tools. An example of such a tool is GCPEDIA – a wiki platform for federal public servants. Other tools include GCconnex, a social networking tool, and GCforums, a discussion board system.

United States

See also: E-Government Act of 2002 and Code for America

The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States became associated with the effective use of Internet technologies during his campaign and in the implementation of his new administration in 2009.[135][136][137] On January 21, 2009, the President signed one of his first memorandums – the Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on Transparency and Open Government.[138] The memo called for an unprecedented level of openness in Government, asking agencies to "ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration."[138] The memo further "directs the Chief Technology Officer, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Administrator of General Services (GSA), to coordinate the development by appropriate executive departments and agencies [and] to take specific actions implementing the principles set forth in the memorandum."[138]

President Obama's memorandum centered around the idea of increasing transparency throughout various different federal departments and agencies. By enabling public websites like recovery.gov and data.gov to distribute more information to the American population, the administration believes that it will gain greater citizen participation.[139]

In 2009 the U.S. federal government launched Data.gov to make more government data available to the public. With data from Data.Gov, the public can build apps, websites, and mashups. Although "Gov 2.0", as a concept and as a term, had been in existence since the mid-2000s, it was the launch of Data.gov that made it "go viral".[56]

In August 2009 the City of San Francisco launched DataSF.org with more than a hundred datasets.[140] Just weeks after the DataSF.org launch, new apps and websites were developed. Using data feeds available on DataSF.org, civic-minded developers built programs to display public transportation arrival and departure times,[141] where to recycle hazardous materials,[142] and crime patterns.[143] Since the launch of DataSF.org there have been more than seventy apps created with San Francisco's data.

In March 2009, former San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom was at Twitter headquarters for a conversation about technology in government.[144] During the town hall, Newsom received a tweet about a pothole.[145] He turned to Twitter co-founders Biz Stone and Evan Williams and said let's find a way for people to tweet their service requests directly to San Francisco's 311 customer service center. Three months later, San Francisco launched the first Twitter 311 service, called @SF311, allowing residents to tweet, text, and send photos of potholes and other requests directly to the city.[146] Working with Twitter and using the open-source platform, CoTweet turned @SF311 into reality. The software procurement process for something like this would normally have taken months, but in this case, it took less than three months.[147] The @SF311 is saving the city money in call center costs.[148]

See also

• AI mayor
• Center for Electronic Governance at UNU-IIST
• Collaborative e-democracy
• Cyberocracy
• Digital era governance
• Digital 5
• Digital Government Society of North America
• E-democracy
• E-Government Unit
• E-participation
• E-procurement
• E-government factsheets
• eGovernment in Europe
• Electronic voting
• eRulemaking
• Government by algorithm
• Information society
• International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
• National Center for Digital Governance
• Online consultation
• Online petition
• Online deliberation
• Online volunteering
• Open-source governance
• Project Cybersyn
• Teleadministration
• Transformational Government

References

1. Caves, R. W. (2004). Encyclopedia of the City. Routledge. p. 180.
2. Jeong Chun Hai @Ibrahim. (2007). Fundamental of Development Administration. Selangor: Scholar Press. ISBN 978-967-5-04508-0
3. Brabham, Daren C.; Guth, Kristen L. (1 August 2017). "The Deliberative Politics of the Consultative Layer: Participation Hopes and Communication as Design Values of Civic Tech Founders". Journal of Communication. 67 (4): 445–475. doi:10.1111/jcom.12316. ISSN 1460-2466.
4. "En busca de una definición de Gobierno Electrónico – NovaGob". novagob.org (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 22 March 2018. Retrieved 25 March 2018.
5. Public Governance; Territorial Development Directorate. "Recommendation of the Council on Digital Government Strategies 2014, page 6". OECD. Retrieved 10 April 2016.
6. "Tech and data: can 'digital government' be radically smarter?". Apolitical.co. Retrieved 23 April 2018.
7. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. "United Nations E-Government Survey 2014" (PDF). UN. Retrieved 16 September 2014.
8. Alenezi, Hussain; Tarhini, Ali; Sharma, Sujeet Kumar (2015). "Development of quantitative model to investigate the strategic relationship between information quality and e-government benefits". Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. 9 (3): 324–351. doi:10.1108/TG-01-2015-0004.
9. Jain Palvia, Shailendra. "E-Government and E-Governance: Definitions/Domain" (PDF). csi-sigegov.org. Computer Society of India. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 November 2016. Retrieved 12 December 2016.
11. "2016 UN E-Government Survey".
12. Online Volunteering service, Experiences
13. "Why the UN's e-government survey in India needs to better understand the idea of digital inclusion". South Asia @ LSE. 5 March 2019. Retrieved 27 June 2019.
14. Kaylor, C., Deshazo, R. and Van Eck, D.
15. Kaylor, Charles; Deshazo, Randy; Van Eck, David (2001). "Gauging e-government: A report on implementing services among American cities". Government Information Quarterly. 18 (4): 293–307. doi:10.1016/S0740-624X(01)00089-2.
16. Deloitte Research – Public Sector Institute At the Dawn of e-Government: The Citizen as Customer Archived 2011-07-06 at the Wayback Machine, 2000
17. OECD. The e-government imperative: main findings, Policy Brief, Public Affairs Division, Public Affairs and Communications Directorate, OECD, 2003
18. Grima-Izquierdo, C. (2010). A generic architecture for e-Government and e-Democracy: requirements, design and security risk analysis. Ed. LAP Publishing.
19. Koh, C.E.; Prybutok, V.R. (2003). "The three-ring model and development of an instrument for measuring dimensions of e-government functions". Journal of Computer Information Systems. 33 (3): 34–9.
20. Gartner Group, "Key Issues in E-Government Strategy and Management," Research Notes, Key Issues, 23 May 2000
21. Larsen, B., & Milakovich, M. (January 1, 2005). Citizen Relationship Management and E-Government. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3591, 57–68
22. Mary Maureen Brown. "Electronic Government" Jack Rabin (ed.). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy, Marcel Dekker, 2003, pp. 427–432 ISBN 0824742400.
23. Shailendra C. Jain Palvia; Sushil S. Sharma (2007). "E-Government and E-Governance: Definitions/Domain Framework and Status around the World" (PDF). ICEG. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 September 2008. Retrieved 10 July 2008.
24. Atkinson, Robert D.; Castro, Daniel (2008). Digital Quality of Life (PDF). The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. pp. 137–145.
25. Collodi, Jason. "Challenges for e-government". eldis.org/. Institute of Development Studies. Retrieved 12 December 2016.
26. Manoharan, Aroon (2011). E-Governance and Civic Engagement: Factors and Determinants of E-Democracy. IGI Global. ISBN 978-1613500842.
27. Palvia, Shailendra and Sharma, Sushil. "E-Government and E-Governance: Definitions/Domain Framework and Status around the World" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 March 2018. Retrieved 8 December 2017.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
28. Lyman, Jay (1 February 2006). "AT&T Sued for Role in Aiding US Government Surveillance". TechNewsWorld. Retrieved 28 February 2009.
29. Singel, Ryan (6 August 2007). "Analysis: New Law Gives Government Six Months to Turn Internet and Phone Systems into Permanent Spying Architecture". Wired. Retrieved 28 February 2008.
30. The good, the bad and the inevitable | The Economist http://www.economist.com/node/10638105
31. "The pros and cons of e-government". Economist. 14 February 2008. Retrieved 28 February 2009.
32. "Global IT Spending". Gartner. 11 January 2011. Retrieved 24 February 2011.
33. Becker, Shirley A. "Bridging Literacy, Language, and Cultural Divides to Promote Universal Usability of E-Government Websites" (PDF). Northern Arizona University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 March 2009. Retrieved 3 March 2009.
34. "ombwatch.org". ombwatch.org. Archived from the original on 4 January 2013. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
35. Chiger, Stephen (11 September 2002). "Has Terrorism Curtailed E-Government?". Medill News Service. Archived from the original on 4 September 2008. Retrieved 23 January 2009.
36. Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles. In.gov (2009-06-16). Retrieved on 2012-06-25.
37. "nicusa.com". nicusa.com. Archived from the original on 20 November 2008. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
38. "Picking Up the Tab" (PDF). Government Technology. September 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 August 2008. Retrieved 23 April 2009.
39. Sinrod, Eric J. (30 June 2004). "A look at the pros and cons of e-government". USA Today. Retrieved 1 March 2008.
40. Schrier, Bill (17 October 2008). "How Web 2.0 Will Transform Local Government". Digital Communities. Archived from the original on 23 October 2008. Retrieved 1 March 2008.
41. "Transparency". Center for Democracy & Technology. Archived from the original on 15 March 2009. Retrieved 1 March 2009.
42. Thorpe, Stephen J. (23 June 2008). "Facilitating effective online participation in e-government" (PDF). E-government in New Zealand. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 May 2014. Retrieved 1 March 2009.
43. Dezayas, Heidi (30 January 2008). "So, how much paper does our local government use?". Penn-Trafford Star. Retrieved 1 March 2008.
44. "Report to Congress on the Benefits of the President's E-Government Initiatives ("Business Gateway," p. 50)" (PDF). 2009. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 February 2009. Retrieved 28 February 2009.
45. Satyanarayana, J. E-Government: The Science of the Possible. India: Prentice Hall, 2004.
46. Nixon, Paul G.; Rawal, Rajash. Enabling Democracy? e-Government, Inclusion and Citizenship. The Hague University. pp. 281–290. ISBN 978-1-905305-11-7.
47. "Study Finds Federal Gains in Electronic Government and Citizen Services; Challenges Remain". Bearing Point. 26 April 2007. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 8 March 2009.
48. Urdiales, C.; de Trazegnies, C.; Salceda, J. Vazquez; Sandoval, F. eGovernment and Identity Management: using Biometrics to Reduce the Digital Divide (PDF). University of Malaga, Spain; University of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
49. Roy, Saumya (12 March 2002). "How Much Government Snooping Is Okay?". Medill News Service. Archived from the original on 23 October 2008. Retrieved 23 January 2009.
50. Mossberger, Karen (2009). "CAN E-GOVERNMENT PROMOTE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT?" (PDF). Institute for Policy and Civic Engagement. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 January 2017. Retrieved 26 December 2018.
51. Government Technology’s Public CIO Thought Leadership Profile "Expanding eGovernment, Every Day" Archived 2010-03-26 at the Wayback Machine open-access online paper 2006.
52. RI Treasury (@RITreasury) op Twitter. Twitter.com. Retrieved on 2012-06-25.
53. "Real Life. Live document". Nicusa.com. Archived from the original on 5 January 2011. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
54. "transparent-gov.com". transparent-gov.com. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
55. O'Reilly, Tim. "Gov 2.0: It's All About The Platform". TechCrunch. Retrieved 22 January 2013.
56. Harper, Logan (27 March 2013). "Gov 2.0 Rises to the Next Level: Open Data in Action". Open Source. Retrieved 24 July 2013.
57. Howard, Alex (11 December 2012). "Making Dollars and Sense of the Open Data Economy". O'Reilly Radar. Retrieved 22 January 2013.
58. "Gartner's Four Phases of E-Government Model. Research Note Tutorials". Gartner Group. 2000.
59. ‘The failure of e-government in developing countries: a literature review’. The Electronic Journal on Information System in Developing Countries. Dada, D. (2006)
60. "eGovernment as a Carrier of Context - IGovernment Working Paper No.15, Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester, Manchester, U.K. Higher Education Admission Center (HEAC) Heeks, R. (2004)". Archived from the original on 17 June 2007.
61. Electronic transformation of government in the UK: A research agenda. European Journal of Information Systems 16, 327-335 Irani, Z., Elliman, T. and Jackson, P. (2007)
62. "Library of all approved outputs from the eGov Member Section - OASIS eGov".
63. Canada - Report of the Auditor General of Canada, 2003
64. "UK - Transformational Government: Enabled by Technology 2005" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 May 2009.
65. "Presidential Innovation Fellows". 23 June 2015. Archived from the original on 19 April 2014.
66. "White House Launches Presidential Innovation Fellows Program". 23 August 2012.
67. "Hello, world! We are 18F".
68. "White House launches 'U.S. Digital Service,' with HealthCare.gov fixer at the helm".
69. "Park unveils 'Government 3.0'".
71. "Microsoft in Government: technology solutions for government agencies". Archived from the original on 15 November 2009.
72. "Sharing Front Office Services: The Journey to Citizen-Centric Delivery, Accenture 2009".
73. "Welcome to e-government" Archived 2013-06-06 at the Wayback Machine, Kenya e-Government website, Directorate of e-Government Kenya, Retrieved 14 October 2012.
74. "From E-government to M-government: Facing the Inevitable" Archived 2011-12-16 at the Wayback Machine, Ibrahim Kushchu and M. Halid Kuscu, Mobile Government Lab (mGovLab), May 2004, Retrieved 14 October 2012.
75. "Regional Economic Outlook: Sub-Saharan Africa, Sustaining the Expansion", World Economic and Financial Surveys, International Monetary Fund, October 2011, ISBN 978-1-61635-125-0, Retrieved 14 October 2012.
76. e-Government – Bangladesh Archived 2012-03-31 at the Wayback Machine. Bdgateway.org. Retrieved on 2012-06-25.
77. "Portal For Public Grievance". Department Of Administrative Reforms And Public Grievances, Government Of India. Retrieved 13 September 2014.
78. "MCA21 Mission Mode Project". Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government Of India. Retrieved 13 September 2014.
79. "E-Filing Anywhere Anytime". Income Tax Department, Government Of India. Retrieved 13 September 2014.
80. "E-Gazette". Directorate Of Printing, Department Of Publication, Ministry Of Urban Development, Government Of India. Retrieved 13 September 2014.
81. Bussell, Jennifer (26 March 2012). Corruption and Reform in India: Public Services in the Digital Age. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107019058.
82. "Digital India" (PDF). Department Of Electronics and Information Technology, Government Of India. 11 September 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 August 2015. Retrieved 13 September 2014.
83. "Challenges in e-government implementation". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
84. "Indonesia to launch integrated e-government system". 19 May 2017. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
85. "Can Indonesia be a powerhouse in the digital economy?". The Business Times. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
86. "Smart cities: Digital savviness to resilient living". The Jakarta Post. Retrieved 23 July 2018.
87. Shahghasemi, E.; Tafazzoli, B.; Akhavan, M.; Mirani, G.; Khairkhah, T. (2013). "Electronic Government in Iran: A Case Study". Online Journal of Social Sciences Research. 2 (9): 254–262.
88. "e-Government in Iran Improving Gradually". Financial Tribune.
89. "درگاه ملی خدمات دولت هوشمند - صفحه اصلی". iran.gov.ir (in Persian). Retrieved 7 March 2018.
90. "Iranian E-Gov Website". iran.gov.ir.
91. https://www.moch.gov.iq/CustomPage.aspx?ID=16&language=en
92. "mscmalaysia.my". mscmalaysia.my. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
93. Jeong Chun Hai @Ibrahim, & Nor Fadzlina Nawi. (2007). Principles of Public Administration: An Introduction. Kuala Lumpur: Karisma Publications.
94. "What is e-Government? Some of the Official Definitions of E-Government: UN, EU, OECD & The World Bank". EkendraOnLine.com. Retrieved 20 November 2015.
95. "Practical e-Government scenario – present and future possibilities in context of Nepal • TechSansar.com". TechSansar.com. Retrieved 20 November 2015.
96. "ICT for Local Bodies". www.ict4lb.org.np. Retrieved 20 November 2015.
97. e-Government Pakistan. E-government.gov.pk. Retrieved on 2012-06-25.
98. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 3 October 2016. Retrieved 29 September 2016.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
99. "Government of Sri Lanka Official Web Portal". Gov.lk. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
100. "Government Information Center". Gic.gov.lk. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
101. https://www.egov.go.th/th/profile/808/
102. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/regional/2017/12/31/egovernance-making-progress-in-thailand/
103. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/956189/e-governance-making-progress-in-thailand
104. http://www.egov.go.th
105. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2018-Survey/E-Government%20Survey%202018_FINAL%20for%20web.pdf
106. "Jordan: E-government services fail to catch on with the public". Al Bawaba. 15 December 2016. Retrieved 13 February 2017.
107. "'48% of Jordanians have not used e-gov't services'". Jordan Times. 14 May 2016. Retrieved 13 February 2017.
108. "The Portal of The Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf". gccegov.org. Retrieved 13 February 2017.
109. "Digitisation in the GCC: attracting the next generation through e-commerce". businessreviewmiddleeast.com. Retrieved 13 February 2017.
110. Wam. "Global e-Government Survey: UAE in Top 10... higher than Japan, Italy". Emirates 24|7. Retrieved 13 February 2017.
111. "UAE government departments to use facial recognition and iris scans in two years | The National". Retrieved 13 February 2017.
112. "E-government". Ministry of Communications and High Technologies. Retrieved 2 October 2017.
113. "E-Government Portal". e-gov.az. Retrieved 2 October 2017.
114. "E-Gov Development Center. About us". digital.gov.az.
115. "Egov.kz". Egov.kz.
116. "Kazakh government services app receives award at World Government Summit". The Astana Times.
117. "Interactive budget of Armenia".
118. "SNCO Financing (Armenia)".
119. "E-Government of Armenia".
120. "System of submitting applications for obtaining license".
121. "System of reports on licensed activities".
122. "State electronic payment system of Armenia".
123. "Electronic system of the property cadastre of Armenia".
124. "Unified website of legal drafts of Armenia". Archived from the original on 1 October 2017. Retrieved 3 December 2018.
125. "Electronic system of the State Register of the Legal Entities of the Ministry of Justice of Armenia".
126. "Judicial Information System".
127. "Judicial Information System".
128. "Tax Declaration System".
129. "Tax Declaration System".
130. "Tax Declaration System".
131. "Ekeng Electronic Signature System".
132. Government`s Regulation of the Russian Federation on June 8, 2011, № 451 "On infrastructure, provides information-technology interaction of information systems used for electronic government and municipal services".
133. Gosuslugi.ru e-Government – Russia.
134. "United Nations E-Government Survey 2012: E-Government for the People". Un.org. 15 March 2012. Retrieved 3 July 2013.
135. Gaurav Mishra (January 2009). "The Promise and Myth of Barack Obama's Government 2.0". Archived from the original on 24 February 2009. Retrieved 23 February 2009.
136. Dean Giustini (January 2009). "The Audacity of Government 2.0 – The Obama Era Arrives". The University of British Columbia. Archived from the original on 13 February 2009. Retrieved 23 February 2009.
137. Daniel Lyons; Daniel Stone (November 2008). "President 2.0". Newsweek, Inc. Retrieved 23 February 2009.
138. Transparency and Open Government. Whitehouse.gov. Retrieved on 2012-06-25.
139. "Obama's e-government off to good start". Economictimes.com. 27 April 2009. Retrieved 7 May 2010.
140. Newsom, Gavin (19 August 2009). "San Francisco Opens The City's Data". TechCrunch.
141. "Routesy Bay Area". Routesy. Retrieved 24 July 2013.
142. Newsom, Gavin (15 June 2009). "Recycling in San Francisco Made Easy with the iPhone". Clean Technica.
143. "San Francisco Crimespotting". Archived from the original on 23 July 2013. Retrieved 24 July 2013.
144. "A Conversation with Twitter about the Future of Technology in Government" (video), Gavin Newsom and Evan Williams, Mayor's Press Conference (YouTube), 10 March 2009, 47 minutes.
145. Wagner, Mitch (8 June 2009). "San Francisco Twitters With Citizens To Fix City". InformationWeek.
146. Van Grove, Jennifer (2 June 2009). "San Francisco First City to Instate City-Wide 311 Twitter Program". Mashable.
147. Fretwell, Luke (29 January 2010). "SF Mayor Newsom: Open Source More Reliable". GovFresh.
148. Maeder, Kate (25 June 2012). "#OpenData and Real-Time Information Saves San Francisco Over $1 Million". Reset San Francisco. Archived from the original on 9 August 2014.

Further reading

• Jane Fountain, Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change (2001)
• Encyclopedia of Digital Government. Edited by Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko and Matti Mälkiä. Idea Group Reference.
• I. Kushchu; M. H. Kuscu (2003). "From e-Government to m-Government: Facing the Inevitable". The 3rd European Conference on e-Government. pp. 253–260. Archived from the original on 22 April 2005.
• Cordella, A (2007), E-government: towards the e-bureaucratic form?, Journal of Information Technology, 22, 265–274.
• Foundations of e-Government. Edited by Ashok Agarwal and V Ventaka Ramana. ICEG'07 5th International Conference on e-Governance
• West, Darrell. State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States. The Brookings Institution. 2008-08-26. Retrieved on 2008-09-16.
• West, Darrell. Improving Technology Utilization in Electronic Government Around the World. The Brookings Institution. 2008-08-26. Retrieved on 2008-09-16.
• von Lucke, Jörn; Reinermann, Heinrich (2000). Speyer Definition of Electronic Government. Forschungsinstitut für öffentliche Verwaltung, Speyer. Retrieved on 2020-07-01.
• Ríos, Mauro D. In search of a definition of e-government (in Spanish). NovaGob. 2014.
• OASIS Transformational Government Framework Technical Committee (September 2010)
• ACT-IAC (October 2010)