Irish ways

May 1, 2012

A new report is out from the Irish Government entitled Supporting Public Service Reform eGovernment 2012 – 2015. Particularly welcome are the proposals that :

“Action 13 The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform will develop an electronic channel allowing citizens and businesses to suggest potential new eGovernment services and to track progress of their suggestions.

Action 14 Opportunities for users to provide feedback should be integrated into the design of new electronic systems to facilitate suggestions from those that use the systems with a view to ensuring continuous improvement. This feedback could be through the system itself or through links with social media where appropriate.”

But what about the older applications? Have I missed something? All current channels need feedback to assist improvement, along with measurement of usage. Many services will have existing poor e-channels that may be choking the opportunity for electronic service delivery.

As to Open Data, it’s the usual:

“Action 21 All public bodies will publish appropriate data in machine-readable formats to facilitate re-use. Initially this will include data newly released (in reports, on websites etc.). Over time, public bodies should identify additional data that could be released as open data. This action will enable individuals and businesses to use data in ways most helpful to them including developing applications relevant to their own needs and interests.”

But CSV is a machine-readable format, what about RDF and the like?

Interestingly Annex II contains a definition of e-government, which demonstrates willingness to achieve clarity in what the Irish government is attempting to do, if all nations had established a definition, along with some initial benchmarks a substantial part of the international deficit might have been saved. It’s a good report, and shockingly lacking the gloss and spin that one becomes accustomed to in such documents. It’s also given itself a reasonable three years space to work within, which is very practical.

Leave a Comment » | customer satisfaction, e-government, transformational change | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by greatemancipator

Implementing transparency

April 29, 2012

Hot on the heels of the post by Andrea di Maio comes a UK National Audit Office (NAO) report entitled ‘Implementing Transparency’ (PDF, 44 pages 0.8 Mb). Given the recent OGP meeting in Brasilia mentioned by Andrea and attended by the UK government and the post “What is ‘open government’“, the report makes interesting reading, since the criticisms are largely replicated in the report.

Typically it picks out that only in 7% of cases is the UK data presented using open standards from World Wide Web consortium, to enable linking e.g. rdf, whilst the largest chunk uses CSV. Two important comments are:

“2.14 The Cabinet Office did not engage with the public to establish demand for the standard data releases outlined in the Prime Minister’s letters, but did consult with developers and industry to identify the additional releases announced in the Autumn Statement 20116 (see paragraph 4.1).

2.15 None of the departments reported significant spontaneous public demand for the standard dataset releases.”

But we then get onto cost-benefit analysis, where the report states that:

“2.21 Although the Government has wide-ranging objectives for transparency, few attempts have yet been made to monitor emerging benefits.”

Local government is not ignored either and a part of the report commencing on page 26 covers what the NAO have discovered from their research of council websites, and there appear to be a number of gaps, although work on LG Inform is expected to help fill some of them, although with 750 metrics to be filled in when it’s planned to go live in September 2012, I don’t imagine everyone who has to supply the data will be so delighted.

In conclusion, I think government needs to look seriously at the report and attempt to answer the questions posed. As occurred with e-government we don’t want excessive sums of money and a great deal of effort wasted chasing something that is not going to benefit the public. I know the claim was used for e-government that it provided traction but we apparently no longer have the cash for further indulgences.

4 Comments | e-government, engagement, transformational change | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by greatemancipator

What is ‘open government’?

April 25, 2012

A post from Andrea di Maio entitled ‘Open Government Partnership: The Good, the Bad and The Ugly’ (his capitals) as usual hits the nail right on the head. I’ve discussed ‘open data’ and ‘open government’ in a number of posts including most relevantly this one on ‘open by design’ and we still appear to be lacking clarity over what the outcomes are intended to be.

Andrea, whilst accepting that ‘open government’ is essentially a good thing, picks up a number of matters:

  • In the past, benchmarking has made some countries waste resources by e-enabling the wrong things
  • There is a risk that the debate focuses on the ‘how’ rather than the ‘why’
  • Top ten commitments focus upon increasing transparency – what about service delivery and sustainable efficiency

He then argues that the end goal should be a “grand challenge” supported by “transparency, accountability and engagement”, rather than the other way around. He concludes by suggesting that the session on building a business case examines “how to measure the real impact and success (or lack thereof) of open government”.

Then, Simon Sharwood in The Register  continues the topic in “Open Government Partnership talks tech-led transparency” pointing out that one government absent from the meeting is Australia and that Hilary Clinton had warned that ‘the existence of technology does not translate into openness. “Technology isn’t some kind of magic wand, ” she said. “Ultimately, it is political will that determines whether or not we hold ourselves accountable”‘ Which makes it all sound like e-government over again…, in the immortal words of Cicero “O tempora O mores”.

Leave a Comment » | citizen, e-government, transformational change | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by greatemancipator

Democratic demands

April 22, 2012

In a thoroughly researched paper from the Journal of Communication, April 2012, Vol 2, Issue 62, pages 249 – 265  ”Internet Use and Democratic Demands: A Multinational, Multilevel Model of Internet Use and Citizen Attitudes About Democracy” by Erik C. Nisbet, Elizabeth Stoycheff and Katy E.Pearce, a number of the questions arising from the debate with those advocating the Internet as a tool for democratic change start to be answered. In fact the whole issue of the Journal is dedicated to social media and political change.

The brief Introduction to the edition by Philip N. Howard & Malcolm R. Perks on pages 359-362 notes, among other things that “the contributors [...] make clear, popular and academic punditry about the “Facebook Revolution” overlooks the deeper and ultimately more important processes at work. There is a connection between technology diffusion, the use of digital media, and political change. But it is complex and contingent.” They later confirm that “we should not therefore assume that social media are automatically democratizing or that the political discussion they engender is necessarily in line with idealized conceptions of civic discourse”.

Importantly, the paper by Nisbet et al summarises in the conclusion that the “study demonstrates the relationship between the Internet and citizen attitudes about democracy may be more nuanced than previous research has suggested and somewhat contingent upon the technological and political context in which citizens are embedded”.  So while we watch this bandwagon roll, lets not jump on it without the correct contextual evidence.

Leave a Comment » | citizen, e-government, engagement, Social media | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by greatemancipator

Civic engagement

April 19, 2012

A recent paper from the USA by Karen Mossberger and Yonghong Wi “Civic Engagement and Local E-Government: Social Networking Comes of Age” possibly asks as many questions as it answers, particularly when compared with a paper from 2011 by Haller, Li & Mossberger entitled “Does E-Government Use Contribute to Citizen Engagement with Government and Community?“

In the 2012 paper no change was seen in the use of US local government web sites for citizen participation and whilst there wasn’t much discussion, it was hoped social networks might create opportunities. The paper then asks a number of questions as to what discussions are occurring, their content and the impact upon policy. The final paragraph on page 15 is clear that:”two-way interaction will require time and management by city employees. Citizens expect a response to arguments and ideas they put forward. Some local governments fear issues of censorship regarding incivility online from citizens, as well as possible consequences of casual, unauthorized comments from government employees or elected officials.” In the UK context I think we’ve been through all that and got over it, although the constructive dialogue and need for responses are still a matter to be developed, as I recently discussed in CONsultation.

The 2011 paper, having noted some outcomes stated in the conclusion on page 27 that ” it may be that those who already most interested and informed are most likely to use digital government to support their civic engagement”, which I think was a conclusion from experiences in Canada. There was also a ‘conclusion’ that “the information capacity of e-government may indeed be affecting the possibilities for government interaction with citizens and other forms of citizen engagement” – the italics being mine, as I question whether it is or not?

Leave a Comment » | citizen, customer satisfaction, e-government, engagement | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by greatemancipator

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.