ICT - Skupnost občin Slovenije · Local e-government is the application of e-Government that focuses on following goals: Transforming services – making them more accessible, more

ICTfor Local Governments

Standards, principles and best practices

This document presents a guidance study based on best practices for es-tablishment of Local e-Government services. It is aimed primarily for the South East Europe region, but can be used for all developing or transi-tional countries. It also contains an extensive list of references and re-sources that would mitigate the transition from basic ICT usage towards connected local e-Governments.

2011

2

3

Author:

VladimirTRAJKOVIK Professorat theFacultyofEngineeringand Infor-mationTechnologies

Editorial Board: KelmendZAJAZI NALASExecutiveDirector

ZoranGLIGOROV NALASITandKnowledgeCentreManager

BernhardKRABINA KDZ-CentreforPublicAdministrationResearch

NALAS IT Network:

AleksandarARSOVSKI AssociationoftheUnitsofLocalSelfGovernmentoftheRepublicofMacedonia

AleksandarMARKOVIC StandingConferenceofTownsandMunicipalities

ConstantinBOTNARI CongressofLocalAuthoritiesfromMoldova

DanMihaiCAZACIUC RomanianFederationofLocalAuthorities

DzavidALICIC AssociationofCitiesandMunicipalitiesoftheFed-erationofBosniaandHerzegovina

EdiKOZELJ AssociationofMunicipalitiesandTownsofSlovenia

FatosHODAJ AssociationofAlbanianMunicipalities

IonBESCHIERU CongressofLocalAuthoritiesfromMoldova

IskenderGUNES UnionofMunicipalitiesofMarmara

NenadMILENKOVIC StandingConferenceofTownsandMunicipalities

OsmanCEHAJIC AssociationofCitiesandMunicipalitiesoftheFed-erationofBosniaandHerzegovina

RefikRRUGEJA AssociationofAlbanianMunicipalities

ICT for Local Government

4

ICTforLocalGovernmentsStandards,principlesandbestpractices

SazanIBRAHIMI AssociationofKosovoMunicipalities

VeliSAYLAM UnionofMunicipalitiesofMarmara

VladimirSESET AssociationofMunicipalities oftheRepublicofCroatia

ZoranALEKSOV AssociationoftheUnitsof LocalSelfGovernmentoftheRepublicofMacedonia

ZoranGLIGOROV NALAS

Contacts:

KelmendZAJAZI ExecutiveDirector

ZoranGLIGOROV ITandKnowledgeCentreManager

NALASSecretariatZenevskabbSkopje1000Macedonia+38923090818info@nalas.eu

VladimirTRAJKOVIK ProfessorattheFacultyofEngineeringandInforma-tionTechnologiesRugjerBoskovicbb,P.O.Box574,Skopje,[email protected]

5

Tables and figures 8

1 Background 11

1.1E-Government 11

1.2Locale-Government 14

1.3Vision 16

1.4Benefits 17

1.5Objectives 19

1.6Commonfallacies 20

1.7CurrentsituationinSEE 20

2 ICT standards 25

2.1Theneedforopenstandards 25

2.1.1TheEuropeanUnion 25

2.1.2UnitedKingdom 26

2.1.3Denmark 26

2.1.4TheNetherlands 27

2.1.5Norway 27

2.1.6Massachusetts,USA 27

2.1.7NewZealand 28

2.1.8Malaysia 28

2.1.9Chile 28

2.1.10India 28

2.1.11Austria 28

2.2Standardsdevelopmentorganizations 29

List of Contents

6


2.3MinimalsetofICTstandards 30

2.3.1Generalprinciples 30

2.3.2Specificprinciples 31

2.3.3InterconnectionStandardsandSpecifications 35

2.3.4DataInteroperabilitystandardsandspecifications 36

2.3.5StandardsforWebServices 37

2.3.6StandardsandSpecificationsforInformationAccess 37

2.3.7StandardsforContentManagementMetadata 39

2.3.8Disasterrecoverystandards 39

2.4Procedurestoachieveandmaintainthestandards 40

2.4.1OrganizationalFramework 40

2.4.2Legislative/regulativeframework 42

2.4.3Fiscalframework.Structureofbudget 43

2.4.4TechnicalModel 44

2.5Benchmarking 47

3 ICT Strategy 51

3.1ICTStrategyofMunicipality 51

3.2ActionPlanforImplementationofICT 52

4 Roadmap 55

4.1LAN,WANandMANdesign 56

4.2Basiclevelofsecurity 56

4.3Disasterrecovery 56

4.4Internetpresence 57

4.5Accessibilityandusabilityofthewebpages 57

4.6Equipmentprocurementandspecification 58

4.7Systemmaintenance 58

4.8Securitychecks 58

5 Risk analysis 59

5.1SimpleFactorRating 63

5.1.1 Factorquestionsrelatedto“Drivers” 63

5.1.2Factorquestionsrelatedto“Strategy” 64

5.1.3Factorquestionsrelatedto“Management” 64

5.1.4Factorquestionsrelatedto“Design” 65

5.1.5Factorquestionsrelatedto“Competencies” 65

5.1.6Factorquestionsrelatedto“Technology” 65

5.1.7 Factorquestionsrelatedtootherissues 66

5.2Design-RealityGapAssessment 67

7

6 References 71

7 Useful links 75

7.1Standards 75

7.1.1Collections 75

7.1.2Organizations 75

7.2Roadmap 76

7.2.1 Publish 76

7.2.2Interact 78

7.2.3Transact 79

7.3Opensource 80

7.3.1 Portals 80

7.3.2Policy 80

7.4Riskanalysis 81

7.4.1 eGov4DevCases 81

7.4.2eGov4DevDesign-RealityGapCases 83

7.4.3Design-RealityGapeGovCaseProposals 84

7.4.4OtherCases-Since2001 84

7.4.5OtherCases-1999-2001 85

7.5Otherresources 89

8


Tables and figures

TablesTable 1: e-Government models 13

Table 2: Standards Development Organizations 29

Table 3: Interconnection standards 35

Table 4: Data interoperability standards 36

Table 5: Standards for web services 37

Table 6: Standards for Information Access 38

Table 7: Additional standards for information access 38

Table 8: Standards for Content Management Metadata 39

Table 9: Disaster recovery guidelines and standards 39

Table 10: ICT strategy documents 52

Table 11: Action plan format 54

Table 12: Main factors that help support success of e-government in developing/transitional countries 60

Table 13: Main factors underlie failure of e-government in developing/transitional countries 61

Table 14: Rating scores 66

Table 15: Rating and outcomes for all seven ITPOSMO dimensions 69

9

FiguresFigure 1: e-Government partnership system [2] 14

Figure 2: e-Government for Local Authorities [3] 15

Figure 3: ICT-enabled Connected Governance [4] 16

Figure 4: Municipality organization with respect to ICT 42

Figure 5: Balanced e-Government Scorecard 47

Figure 6: The five stage maturity model 49

Figure 7: E-Government Deployment Road map 55

Figure 8: Factor Model for eGovernment Success and Failure 59

Figure 9: ITPOSMO dimensions of e-government project

design-reality gaps 68

10

11

1. Background

1. 1 E-Government

Theterm“e-Government”canbebroadlydefinedastheapplicationofinformationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICTs)aimedtoenhancetheperformanceoftraditionalgovernmentfunctionsandservices.Moredefinitionsofthistermcanbefoundintheliterature.Forexample,accordingto[1],e-governmentis“theuseofdigitaltechnolo-giestotransformgovernmentoperationsinordertoimproveeffectiveness,efficiencyandservicedelivery”.

Itshouldbepointedoutthate-governmentisnotasingleeventinashortperiodoftimebut a long-termevolutionaryprocessof transforminggovernment to focusoncitizenservices.Thus,itisnecessarytoestablishahigh-levele-governmentroadmap(top-downdesign)withabottom-updetailedimplementationplan.

The purpose of e-government ismore effective delivery of government services tocitizens.Generally, themore servicesareavailableonlineand themorewidespreadtheuseoftheseservices,thegreatertheimpactofe-government.Thus,e-governmentrequiresacriticalmassofe-citizensande-businessestogenerateexternalsustainableimpactbeyondthegovernment.However,achievingthiscriticalmassisnoteasy.Forexample,aWorldBankstudy[29]abouttheimportanceofmakingmoreonlineservicesaccessibletoe-citizensande-businessesfoundthat:

“Manycountrieswhopioneerede-governmentprograms5-10yearsagosoonrealizedthatthelevelofpublicparticipationinandusageofe-governmentservicesremainedquitelowdespitesubstantialpublicinvestmentonthesupplyside,whichsucceededinmakinggovernmentservicesavailableonline.”

E-Governmentwillonlybesuccessfulifthereisstrongdemandandsupportforitfromthemajorityofthepopulation.Someofthisdemandwillcomefrombetterawarenessoftheopportunitiesofferedbybetterandfastergovernmentservicedelivery.Citizensandbusinessesalsoneedtobemotivatedtousee-governmentservicesthroughtheprovisionofcompelling,relevantandaccessibledigitalcontent.Inparticular,thefollow-ingmustbeimplementedtoincreasedemandandsupportfore-governmentservices:

� Develop amulti-channel, single-window common service delivery infrastruc-ture,including‘physical’citizenservicecentersandotherpublicaccesspointssuchastelecentres,callcentres,Webportalsandmobileportals;

12


� ImplementmeasuresthatwillenhancepublictrustinICT-enabledtransactionsandallotherinteractionsinthedigitalenvironment;

� Encouragethedevelopmentof relevant,compelling,user-friendlyonlineandmobilecontent,includingso-called‘killerapplications’;and

� Implementprogrammesaimedatimprovedaccessibilityandaffordabilityofon-lineandmobilecontentandICT.

Thefollowingfourobjectivescanbeachievedwhene-governmentprojectsareimple-mentedsuccessfully:

1. Onlinegovernmentservice

2. Apaperlessgovernment

3. Aknowledge-basedgovernment

4. Atransparentgovernment

Toachievethesefourobjectives,e-governmentatcentralandlocallevelmustbebuilt.Therearethreemajortasksateachoftheselevelsofgovernment:

a) innovatingcitizenservices(G2C);

b) innovatingbusinessservices(G2B);

c) innovatingthewaygovernmentworks(G2G).

Inadditiontothee-Governmentlevels,differente-Governmentmodelsshouldbeusedinordertoprovidedifferenttypesofservicestotheinterestedstakeholders.Thebasice-Governmentmodelscoupledwiththedescriptionoftheinteractionwithcorrespond-ingstakeholdersisgiveninTable1.

13

Table 1: e-Government models

e-GovernmentModels InteractionbetweenStakeholders

Government-to-Citizen(G2C) One-waydelivery of public services and information by thegovernmenttocitizens.

Citizen-to-Government(C2G) Allows for exchangeof informationand communicationbe-tweencitizensandgovernment.

Government-to-Business(G2B)

Consists of electronic transactions where government pro-videsbusinesseswiththekindsof informationtheyneedtotransactwithgovernment.Anexample isane-procurementsystem.

Business-to-Government(B2G)

Referstomarketingofproductsandservicestogovernmenttohelpgovernmentbecomemoreefficientthroughimprovedbusinessprocesses andelectronic recordsmanagement forexample.Ane-procurementsystemisanapplicationthatfa-cilitatesbothG2BandB2Ginteractions.

Government-to-Employee(G2E)

Consistsof initiativesthatwill facilitatethemanagementofthecivilserviceandinternalcommunicationwithgovernmentemployees.Anexampleisanonlinehumanresourcemanage-mentsystem.

Government-to-Government(G2G)

Allows for online communication and information sharingamong government departments or agencies through inte-grateddatabases.

Government-to-Non-profit(G2N)

Governmentprovidesinformationtonon-profitorganizations,politicalpartiesandsocialorganizations.

Non-profit-to-Government(N2G)

Allows for an exchange of information and communicationbetween government and non-profit organizations, politicalpartiesandsocialorganizations.

Therelationbetweenthee-Governmentlevelsande-GovernmentmodelsisgivenonFigure1.Thelocalgovernmentcannotbetreatedlikeotherlevelsofgovernment.Upto80percentofinteractionsoccuratthelocalgovernmentlevel.Thus,servicedeliv-eryisthemajorissueforthelocalgovernment.Ontheotherhand,thelocalgovern-mentsectordifferswithinitselfdependingontheregion,thelevelofdevelopment,andthepopulationitcovers.

14


1.2 Local e-Government

Local governments, compared with central government, are closer to the citizens.Therefore,InformationSocietydevelopmentshouldbeanissueforlocalgovernmentstoalargeextent.

Local e-government is the application of e-Government that focuses on followinggoals:

Transforming services –making themmore accessible,more convenient,more re-sponsiveandmorecost-effective.Forexample,itcanmakeservicesmoreaccessibletopeoplewithdisabilities.Itcanalsomakeservicestobeeasiertojoin(withincoun-cils,betweencouncils,andbetweencouncilsandotherpublic,voluntaryandprivateagencies).Itcanhelpimprovethecustomer’sexperienceofdealingwithlocalpublicservices.

Renewing local democracy –makingcouncilsmoreopen,accountable,inclusiveandabletoleadtheircommunities.Governmentsshouldhelptheircitizens:theopportuni-tiestodebatewitheachother,engagemewiththeirlocalservicesandcouncils,accesstheirpoliticalrepresentatives.Itcanalsosupportcouncilorsintheirexecutive,scru-tinyandrepresentativeroles.

Figure 1: e-Government partnership system [2]

15

Promoting local economic vitality–amoderncommunicationinfrastructure,askilledworkforceandtheactivepromotionofe-businesscanhelplocalcouncilsandregionspromoteemployment intheirareasand improvetheemployabilityoftheircitizens.Localgovernmentcanusee-governmentservicestoachievethesebenefits,ifthereareservicesthatcaneasepromotionoflocaleconomy.

Unfortunately, these locale-Governmentgoalsarenoteasytoachieve.There isnouniqueapproach toachieve thesegoalsbecausemodelsofe-Governmentdevelop-mentdon’tfitalllevelsofgovernment.

Figure2describes thecommonservices thatmightbeconsidered for implementa-tionatthelocalgovernment leveltogetherwithexampleapplications.Theyincludenotonlyinteractionwiththecitizens(viae-services),butalsofinancialmanagement,humanresourcemanagement,supportofdecision-making (atbothoperationalandpoliticallevel).

Figure 2: e-Government for Local Authorities [3]

Inadditiontothisdiversityinneeds,costisprobablythemostimportantmetricforsuccessful deployment of e-Government services. The local government sectorwillresistinterventionifitisnotfinanciallysupported.Evenifacertainserviceisdeployedinonemunicipality,itcannotbeassumedthatitwilleasilybedeployedregionallyonlywithinterventionfromhigherlevelsofgovernment.

e-Government

16


A co-ordinatedapproach to innovationbrings thiswhole sector forward, because itcanestablish ICTas theenablerofstrategicchangewitha limitedbudget.Figure3statessomeofthecontributionsthatICTcanbringtogovernancebothinternallyandexternally.

1.3 Vision

Toexplainthevisionoflocale-Government,theBilbaoDeclaration[23]willbeused.TheBilbaodeclarationsignedbymayorsandlocalandregionalauthorities’representativesassumestheprinciplesandvalues(“10PrinciplesofBilbao”)thatmustguidelocalac-tionwithregardtothedevelopmentoftheInformationSociety:

I. “Freedomofcommunicationanduniversalaccessto informationandknowl-edgearefundamentalrightsofeachandeverycitizen”:

II. “TheinformationeramustleadtothestrengtheningofallhumanrightsandthedevelopmentofdemocracyinaccordancewiththeprinciplescontainedintheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRights”;

III. “Thepotentialofinformationandcommunicationtechnologiesmustcontrib-ute,abovealltotheachievementoftheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals”;

Figure 3: ICT - enabled Connected Governance [4]

17

IV. “ThedevelopmentoftheInformationSocietymustbenefitallcitizens,withoutexception,andbridgethedigitaldivide,withspecialattentionbeingpaidtothemostdisadvantagedgroups,topersonswithdisabilitiesandtotheinhabitantsofthemostisolatedareas,particularlyruralcommunities”;

V. “Topromoteeffectivedemocraticdecentralizationwithrelevantpowersandsufficientfinancialresources”;

VI. “Respect for cultural and linguistic diversity, dialogue between civilizations,andthediversityofthemedia”;

VII. “Topromotetransparencyinthemanagementoflocalandregionalaffairsandencouragepeopleparticipation”;

VIII. “Tocombatgenderinequalityanddiscriminationthroughtheuseofinforma-tiontechnologies”;

IX. “Topromotecooperationbetween localand regionalauthoritiesaround theworld through exchanging information and knowledge, and developing jointprojectsthatenabletheInformationSocietytoprogress”;

X. “TodevelopNorth-SouthandSouth-Southsolidarityasameansofcombatingsocialandeconomicinequality,contributingintheprocesstothecreationofafairerandmoreequitableInformationSociety”;

1.4 Benefits

Thekeybenefitsprovidedbytheimplementationofe-governmentare:

E-government helps improve efficiency in government. ICTsareanecessaryenablerofreformstothewaysinwhichpublicadministrationswork.Improvinginternaloperat-ingsystems–financialsystems,purchasingandpaymentarrangements,internalcom-municationsandsharingofinformation,programmeprocessinganddeliveryarrange-mentscangenerateoperatingefficienciesandimproveperformance.

Enhanced quality of service has been amajor component of public administrationreformoverthepasttwodecades,andtheuseof ICTstogenerateimprovementsinserviceshasbeenaprimarydriverfore-governmentactivity.Inparticular,theuseoftheInternethasgivenamajorboosttocustomerfocused,seamlessservices,whichaimtotranscendthestructureofpublicadministrations.Onlineservicesareincreasinglyseenaspartofabroaderservicesstrategy,with importantcustomerandefficiencybenefits.Asusersofpublicservicesareoftenobligedtointeractwithgovernment,userdissatisfactionwith thequalityofgovernmentservicescanquicklybecomeamajorpoliticalissue.

18


ICTscansupport more effective outcomes inkeypolicyareassuchashealth,welfareservices,securityandeducation.Ultimately,governmentsandpublicadministrationsexisttodeliverpolicyoutcomes,andICTsareamajorenableracrossallmajorpolicyareas.Theuseofinternettodelivervalueintheseareasisamajorpreoccupationinmembercountries.

Bettergovernancearrangementsinthemselveswillpromote economic policy objec-tives.MorespecificeffectsmayrangefromimpactsonICTproduction,e-commercediffusionandbusinessproductivitytoindirecteffectssuchasreducedfiscalrequire-mentsowing tomoreeffectiveprogrammesandefficienciesflowing through to thebroadereconomy.

E-governmentcanhelpforward the reform agenda.Whenalignedwithmodernizationgoals, implementinge-government canhelpadministrations focuson theadditionalchangesneededtomeetservicedeliveryandgoodgovernanceconcerns.Atthesametime,itprovidessomevaluablereformtoolsandbuildssupportfromhigh-levelleadersandgovernmentemployeesforachievingthoseobjectives.

Throughcitizenengagement,governmentcan improvetheoverall trustrelationshipbetweengovernment andpublic administrations. E-government, by improving infor-mationflowsandencouragingactiveparticipationbycitizensisincreasinglyseenasavaluabletool forbuildingtrustbetweengovernmentsandcitizens.Thecitizenen-gagementcanbetratedasaformofeParticipation.Thiskindofengagementisactivebottom-upparticipationdrivenbycitizensandcommunities,ratherthanonlyone-wayinformationandtop-downconsultationprovidedbylocalgovernmentinformationwebsites.eParticipationisbroadeninginscopeandconcepttoembracewiderempower-mentandengagementingovernanceusingICT,aswellasgreaterpro-activeinvolve-mentineServicedesign.Itisclearthat,althoughmostcitizensarenotmuchinterestedinthemechanicsof(e)participation,manyremainveryinterestedinpublicissuesandpolicieswhichaffectthemortheircommunitiesdirectly.

Theseobjectivesmayinvolvetrade-offsbetweenefficiencyandeffectiveness,efficien-cyandopenness,accountabilityandcustomerfocus.Whenthisisthecase,prioritieswillneedtobeset,butitshouldnotbeassumedthatsuchtrade-offsareinevitable.Forexample,severalNordiccountrieshaveput inplacespecificoffices(ombudsmen)tohandlecitizencomplaintswithregardtoprivacyandcitizentrust;thissupportsbothprivacyprotectionandefficientuseofdata.

19

1.5 Objectives

Mainobjectivesoflocale-Governmentare:

More ‘joined up’ services –Theseservicescanbeprovidedbylinkingservicesacrossorganizations in the region, through improved communication, shared informationsystems,accesspointsanddeliverymethods.Thisincludesdelivering services jointlywithcentralandlocalgovernmentagenciesanddepartments,thehealthserviceandthevoluntarysectorinparticular;

More accessible services –Serviceshavetobereachablefromhome,libraries,offices,communitycenters- indeedanywherefortheconvenienceofthepublicratherthanfromcouncilofficesattheendofaqueue.Equalaccessforallandsocialinclusivenessarekeyfactorsforasuccessfuldeploymentofthisobjective.Servicesshouldbeavail-ableattimesandinwaysthatsuitthepublic–notconstrainedbynormalofficehoursorspecifictechnologytoaccesstheservice(accesschannels);

Services should be delivered or supported digitally – Digital services are creatingmoreresponsive,bettervalueandfasterservicesandinformationaccess.Forexample,through jointcontactcentersandwebsites,andsimplifyingaccesstoservicessuchaschangingschool,settingupabusiness,ormovinghome.Seamlessdeliveryandtheremovalofunnecessarybureaucracyarekeyaimsofthisobjective;

Open and accountable services – Services should providemore information aboutplans, priorities and performance, encouraging public consultation and supportingcouncilorsinkeepingintouchwiththepeopletheyrepresent;

Services used by ‘e-citizens’ –Citizenswilladapttoelectronicserviceswhereappro-priate,especiallywherethisreducestransactioncostsandallowsfocusonthosewhoneed itmost.Though it ishard toknowwhat thepublicwill expect fromelectronicpublicservicesinthefuture,anditisobviousthatnoteveryonewillwantorbeabletoaccessserviceselectronically;carefuldesignandcontinuingconsultationwillhelpavoidcostlyinvestmentmistakes.

20


1.6 Common fallacies

Therearesomecommonmisunderstandingsamongpoliticalandadministrativelead-ersofmunicipalitiesthatreflectintheinformationsocietydevelopmentoftheregion.

� TheroleoftheICTcomponentisoverrated.Infact,thetechnologicalcompo-nentistheeasiestpartofthedevelopmentandimplementationoftheICTsys-tems,

� ThereisunderstandingthatitispossiblesimplytotransferICTsystemsfromonecountryoreven fromonemunicipality toanother.This is inmostcasesimpossiblebecauseofthecomplexityofproceduralandorganizationalmatters,

� ThereareoftenargumentsthatICTsystemsareveryexpensiveandthat,be-causeofalackofbudget,theICTdevelopmentisnotpossible.ThesystematicapproachinICTbudgetplanningisoftenevenmoreimportantthantheamountofmoney. Ithelpssavemoneyandevenwiththeuseof limitedresourcestoguaranteethesustainabilityofdevelopmentandimplementation,

� Some fear that ICT companies are trying to sell expensive and not suitableproducts.Theauthoritiesshouldinvestinpersonnelabletotranslatethedif-ficulttechnology-relatedlanguagetoanunderstandablelanguagefortop-man-agers.

� There is understanding that top-managershaveno role in this developmentprocess: Everything is legally determined and themain problem is to find acompanythatwillmaketheprogramsaccordingtotheexistinglegislation.TheICTdevelopmentprocessiswidelychangemanagementprocesswherestrongleadershipismostimportant.Therefore,somebasicknowledgeofICTandor-ganizationalsupportofthemanagersofthemunicipalityisneeded.

1.7 Current situation in South East Europe

ThemajorityofmunicipalitiesinSouthEastEuropeworkwithdigitaldata.Numberofevidencesaboutinhabitants,economysubjectsetc.aredoneelectronically.Neverthe-less,theproblemisthatgatheringinformationisnotcoordinated.Asaresult,manyinstitutionshaveseparateevidenceonthesamedata.Itmeansthatregionallocalgov-ernmentshave significant information potential whichisstillnotutilizedinthemostoptimalway[26].

TherearesignificanteffortsinusageofmodernICTinmunicipalitiesinSEE.Insomemunicipalities,big efforts havebeenmadetowardsdevelopmentandconstitutionofinformation systemsand tools in order to improvepublic service. For example,mu-nicipalityIndjija(probablytechnologicallythemostadvancedmunicipalityinSerbia)isofferingcomprehensivee-governmentservicesaccessiblethroughitswebsite,ranging

21

fromissuingbasicregistrydocumentstoprovidinglicensesandpermits.Thismunici-palityalsohasawellfunctioningCitizenAssistantCenterthathasbeensuccessfullyreplicatedindozensofmunicipalityacrossthecountry.

Generally,theexistingmunicipalityprofilefeaturesnostrategyfortheimprovementofICTusage.Nearlyallmunicipaldecision-makershaveheardaboutICTbuttherearenoconcreteactionplansfortheirimplementation.ICTdevelopmentdependson mayor’s priorities.Atthesametime,thereisagrowingunderstandingamongmayorsthattheuseofICTwillbeunavoidableinthefuture.Iflocalleadinggovernmentstructurecon-sistsofpeoplewhounderstandandaccepttheimportanceofICTsinamoderngovern-ment,thenactivitiesinthisfieldwillbeincludedinthesrategicplansofmunicipalitiesandwillbesupported.Biggerdevelopmentprojectsaremainlydependantonforeignaid and executedwith the assistance of foreign ICT companies. Computerization ofgovernmentalandmunicipalofficesisnotsystematic:itisquitecommonthatcomput-ersarenotnetworkedandnotconnectedtointernet,evenifinternetconnectionintheofficeexists.

Therearenomechanisms/fixedproceduresforICTbudgetplanning.ThepercentageofbudgetspentonICTanditsdevelopmentofmunicipalitiesislow.ThelowbudgetisspentonphonecommunicationsandinveryrarecasesontheICT.Veryfewdatabasesandinformationsystemsexistinthemunicipalities.Informationisnotintegratedwiththedatabasesofthebranchesoftheministries.

Aftertheimplementationofthedecentralizationprocess,it isveryimportanttopaygreatattention to theestablishmentand integrationof thedatabasesand improve-ment/developmentof ICTsoftwareinfrastructure.Electronicdocumentmanagementandworkflowshouldbedevelopedtoimprovetheefficiencyofthemunicipalities.

Thereisalackofofferofonlineservices(withexceptionoffewcasesofonewaydown-loadofcertainformsfromthewebsites).Someofthemunicipalwebsitesprovideanopportunityforcitizenstoaskquestions,butthereisalackofinternalproceduresandgeneralregulationsonwhatkindofdatashouldbeaccessibleforthepublic.

Thetelecomliberalizationprocesshasgivenfirstgoodresults(pricesaregoingdown,availabilityofinternetinurbanareasisgrowing)andfirstprojectsofruralbroadbandwill connect better rural remote municipalities. Central government, municipalities,businessandcitizensusemorecomputersandthereisrisingdemandfore-services.

22


Thefollowingrecommendationsareencouraged[32]:

1- All-Stakeholders Consultation: The governmental authorities should launchanationalconsultationtoengagethecitizens,thebusinesscommunity,localgovernments and other stakeholders in formulating objectives and buildingsupportfortheimplementationofane-governmentfordevelopmentprogram.

2- Implementing Strategy:Basedontheresultsoftheall-stakeholdersconsulta-tion,astrategy,ormasterplan,forimplementinge-governmentatcentralandlocallevelsshouldbegenerated.

3- E-government Coordination:Aninterministerialcommitteeundertheleader-ship of the PrimeMinister should assist thework of the committee and beresponsible for directing the implementation of the national strategy for e-government.ThePrimeMinistermaywishtocreateane-GovernmentCoordi-natorand/orCoordinatingOfficetooverseetheimplementationofthenationale-governmentstrategyandcoordinateanannualreporttotheParliament.

4- Policy/Legal/Regulatory Reform:Amongtheearlyactionsby thee-govern-ment interministerial committeewould be to conduct surveys to determinehowthelegal,policyandregulatoryenvironmentshouldbemodifiedinordertosupporte-governmentfordevelopment.Itiscriticalfore-governmentande-commercethatpolicy/legal/regulatorybarriersberemoved.

5- Cross-Ministerial Fund:Considerationshouldbegiventoestablishinganinter-ministerialfundtosupportcross-ministerialactivitiesandprovideincentivesforministriestousetheirownfundstosupporte-government.

6- EU Good Practices: In formulating the national e-government strategy, theinterministerialcommitteeshouldrefertogoodpracticesidentifiedbytheEUandneighbouringcountries.

7- E-Government Training:Ministriesshouldbeencouragedtosponsortrainingingovernment,especiallyprofessionalcoursesandstudytoursformiddleandseniormanagers.

8- Donor Coordination:TheWorldBank,UNDP,andotherinternationaldevelop-mentorganizationsaswellasbilateraldonorcountriesshouldbeencouragedtoassistintheformulationofthestrategyandtosupportspecifice-govern-mentprojects.

9- E-Procurement:Thegovernmentshouldestablishatransparentandefficientnationalweb-basedclearinghouseforbuyersandsellersthatcouldbeusedbybusinessesatcentralandlocalgovernmentlevels,aswellasalegalandregula-toryenvironmentnecessarytostreamlineproceduresandreducedistortionsinthebiddingprocess.

23

10- Security and Standards:

� EstablishastandardsbodytopublishstandardsandbestpracticesforITnet-workingande-governmentincoordinationwiththeprivatesector.

� ReviewlawsonprivacyandpersonaldataprotectiontoensureEUcompliance.

� Ensurethatthedigitalsignaturelawisimplementedtousethebestpracticesine-authentication.

� Harmonizethelegalframeworktopreventcybercrime,includingimplementa-tionoftheCouncilofEuropeCybercrimeConvention.

11- Telecommunications Connectivity and access:

� Deregulationneedstobemanagedandimplementedtopromotetherapidavailabilityofhighqualityandaffordabletelecommunicationscapacity.

12- Information Services: make government information more readily available by:

� Establishinginformationcentersatlocallevelforbusinessdata,marketre-search,employmentdata,andgovernmentinformation.

� Establishingsharingmechanisms,acentralportal,withinthegovernmentfordatabases(datawarehouse)forone-stopshoppingbybusinessandcitizens.

� MaketheonlinecontentoftheOfficialGazettecost-freeandopen.

13- Citizen Participation

� ConsiderestablishingInternetkioskstofacilitatecitizenparticipationine-government,atacost.

� AlternativelyallowprivatesectorownedInternetcafestobidonprovidinge-governmentservicestocitizens(forms,digitalsignatures,etc.).

� Considerusingcomputer/Internetcentersatschoolsandlibrariestoprovidegovernmentinformationandservices.

� ConsiderusingWeb2.0socialsites,suchasFacebook,TwitterandYouTube,toincreasegreatersocialparticipationinthefieldsof:informationdisseminationonofficialgovernmentchannels,educationandtourism.Localgovernmentsshoulddevelopanoverallstrategicplanforallagencylevelstoparticipateinsocialnetworks,anddevelopacoordinatedefforttodevelopandimplementthetools.

� Aimnewe-governmentservicesatthemobilephonemarket.

24


25

2. ICT standards

2.1 The need for open standards

Manygovernmentsallovertheworldhavebeguntorealizethe importanceofopentechnologiesandtechnicalspecifications,andtheabilitytoparticipateinthedevelop-mentofthesetechnologiesandspecifications[5].Inparalleltothis,theyhavetakennoticeofFOSS(FreeandOpenSourceSoftware)andthebenefitsthatitcanbringtoanation.Asaresult, inmanycountries,thegovernmenthascomeoutwithpoliciesand/orinitiativeswhichadvocateandfavoropenstandardsinordertobringaboutin-creasedindependencefromspecificvendorsandtechnologiesandatthesametimetoaccommodatebothFOSSandproprietarysoftware.Thisistrueformoste-governmentprojectsandinitiativesallovertheworld.

EmbracingopenstandardscanalsoassistFOSStoflourishinacountry.IntheIntroduc-tion,itwasmentionedthatopenstandardshelpedtopopularizeFOSStoalargeextent.FOSScaninteroperatewellwithestablishedproprietarysoftwareandtechnologieswiththeaidofopenstandards,therebymakingitsimplementationmorefeasible.Assuch,countriesthatarelookingtoFOSSshouldalsolookatspecifyingopenstandardstoo.

2.1.1 The European Union

TheEuropeanUnion (EU)comprisesmanynationstateswithmanydiverseculturesandlanguagesatvaryingstatesoftechnology/technicaldevelopment.Forittobeabletofunctioneffectively,especiallyintheareaofinformationexchange,theconcernedgovernmentshavetoestablishaproperinteroperabilityframeworkandstandardsondatainterchange.ThedevelopmentoftheEuropeanInteroperabilityFramework(EIF)[6],aframeworkforthee-governmentservicesofthememberstatestofacilitatetheinteroperabilityoftheseservicesatpan-Europeanlevel,istakingplaceundertheEu-ropean Commission’s Interoperable Delivery of European e-Government services topublic Administrations, Business and Citizens (IDABC) Programme. The EIF version1.0 recommends the use of open standards formaximum interoperability amonge-governmentservices.Itdefinestheminimalcharacteristicsforopenstandardsasthefollowing:

1. Thestandardisadoptedandmaintainedbyanon-profitorganization;2. Thedevelopmentofthestandardoccursusinganopendecision-makingpro-

cessanddoesnotexcludeanypartyfromit;3. Thestandardispublishedandisavailableeitherfreeofchargeorforanominal

fee;

26


4. Thepublishedstandardmustbeavailableforalltocopyanddistribute,eitherfreeofchargeorforanominalfee;and

5. Anypatentspresentinthestandardaretobeirrevocablyavailableonaroyal-ty-freebasis.

Theabovedefinitionhasattractedcontroversyeventhoughtheareaofvalidityiscon-finedtopanEuropeanprojectscarriedoutinthecontextoftheIDABCProgramme[21][22].FOSSgroupsandadvocateshavewelcomeditbutothergroups,includingANSI(AmericanNationalStandardsInstitute),BSA(BusinessSoftwareAlliance)andEICTA(European Information & Communications Technology Industry Association), havecriticizedit,particularlywithrespecttothelasttwocriteria.Thesepartiespointoutthattheyare inconsistentwiththeapproachtakenbyotherstandardsdevelopmentorganizationsthatacknowledgetherightofpatentholderstochargereasonableroyal-tiesandtoplacereasonablerestrictionsonthelicensingoftheiressentialtechnologycoveringanopenstandard.

TheEuropeanCommission’sIDAexpertgrouponopendocumentformatshasrecom-mendedthattheEuropeanUnion’spublicsectoruseopenformatsintheirelectronicdocuments[7].Forrevisabledocuments,XML-basedformatsliketheOpenDocumentformatfromOASISandMicrosoft’snewXMLbasedMSOfficeformatsarerecommend-ed.

2.1.2 United Kingdom

TheUnitedKingdom’se-governmentinitiativeplacesalotofemphasisonopentech-nicalstandardstoachieveseamlessinformationflowacrossthepublicsectorandtoprovidecitizensandbusinesswithbetteraccesstogovernmentservices[8].Itse-Gov-ernmentInteroperabilityFramework(e-GIF)definesthetechnicalpoliciesandspecifi-cationsgoverning informationflowsacrossgovernmentand thepublicsector.Com-plyingwithe-GIFatthehighestlevelincludestheuseofopenstandardslikeXMLastheprimarymeansfordataintegrationandtheimplementationofInternetandWWWstandards[9].

2.1.3 Denmark

TheDanishe-GovernmentInteroperabilityFrameworkincludesrecommendationsandstatusassessmentsformorethan450selectedstandards,specificationsandtechnolo-giesusedinitse-governmentsolutions[10].Ingeneral,theFrameworkrecommendstheuseofopenstandardsandcentrallyagreedXMLschemas(whichmaybeprovidedfreeofchargethroughoutthepublicsector)fordatainterchange.

27

AspartoftheInteroperabilityFramework,thepolicyondataanddocumentexchangespecifiesthatdocumentsshouldbepublishedingenerallyavailableformatsforwhichfreereadersexistandtheuseofproprietarywordprocessingformatssuchasMSWordor formats thatdonothavewidelyavailable readersshouldbeavoided forpubliclyavailabledocuments[11].

2.1.4 The Netherlands

TheNetherlands has created theOSOSS - the programme forOpenStandards andOpenSourceSoftwareingovernment[12].Thisprogrammeencouragestheuseofopenstandardsandprovidesinformationonopen-sourcesoftware.TheDutchICTU,theor-ganization for ICT andgovernment programme, runsOSOSS.While the programmetargetsthepublicsector,itsresultswillbeavailablefortheprivatesectorandindividu-alstoo.Theprogrammeprovidesinformationandadvicetothepublicsectoronopenstandards.Ithassetupacatalogueofrecommendedopenstandards[13]foruseinthepublicsector.

2.1.5 Norway

TheNorwegianGovernmenthasdeclaredthatproprietaryformatswillno longerbeacceptable in communication between citizens and government [14]. As part of its“eNorge2009-thedigitalleap”masterplanforIT-allpublicsectorbodiesinNorwayaretohaveinplaceaplanfortheuseofopensourcesoftwareandopenstandardsbytheendof2006.

2.1.6 Massachusetts, USA

TheCommonwealthofMassachusetts,USA,hasannouncedanITPolicythatemphasiz-estheimportanceofopenstandardscomplianceforITinvestmentsinMassachusetts[15].ThePolicystatesthatallprospectiveITinvestmentswillhavetocomplywithopenstandardsreferenced inthecurrentversionoftheEnterpriseTechnologyReferenceModel (ETRM)oftheCommonwealth. It furthersaysthatexisting ITsystemswillbereviewedforopenstandardscompatibilityandwillbeenhancedtoachieveopenstan-dards compatibilitywhereappropriate. In addition, open standards solutionswill beselectedwhenexistingsystemsareretiredofforneedmajorenhancements.

28


2.1.7 New Zealand

Aspartofitse-governmentvision,NewZealandhascreated“asupportingInformationSystems(IS)PoliciesandStandards”document.TheguidingprinciplesstatethattheISPoliciesandStandardsaretobebasedonopenstandards,whereverpossible[16].NewZealandalsohasane-GovernmentInteroperabilityFramework(NZe-GIF)[17]thatliststhemandatoryuseofmanyopenstandardsforcompliance.

2.1.8 Malaysia

TheMalaysianGovernment InteroperabilityFramework(MyGIF)[18]definesthemini-mumsetofITstandardsandtechnicalspecificationsforuseingovernmentministries,agenciesanddepartments.Thesecovertheareasofinterconnection,dataintegration,informationaccess,securityandmeta-data.Insteadofcreatingnewstandardsorspeci-fications,MyGIFadoptsinternationallyrecognizedopenanddefactoITstandardsandspecificationsforalltheinteroperabilityareasmentioned.

2.1.9 Chile

In2004,theGovernmentofChileissuedDecree81[19]wherebyallpublicagenciesandservicesarerequiredtoformatdocumentsinXML.Athree-phaseroll-outdeploymentplanisbeingimplementedwiththefinalstagescheduledforcompletionby2009.

2.1.10 India

TheGovernmentofIndiahasstarteditseBizinitiative[20]-aprojecttobuildaframe-workforGovernmenttoBusiness(G2B)serviceswhereservicesfromthefederal,stateandlocalgovernmentagencieswillbemadeavailablethroughasingleportal.TheeBizarchitectureistobebuiltontheprinciplesofinteroperabilityandopenstandards.

2.1.11 Austria

Austria isconsideredtobeashowcaseforelectronicofferingsande-governmentinEurope.Itse-Governmentsystem,supportedwiththeAustriane-GovernmentActsince2004andtheFederalPlatformDigitalAustriasince2005,hasmadeAustriaacham-pionine-GovernmentinEurope.Inanonlinesophisticationstudyin2007[35],Austriawasatthefirstplacewithimpressive99%levelofonlinesophisticationofbaseser-vicesand100%ofonlinecapacity.

29

TheAustrianElectronicFilesystemwasintroducedinordertoreplacepaperbasedfil-ingandarchivinginallAustrianministries.TheprojectwasstartedinSeptember2001andcompletedinJanuary2005.SincethenELAKhasbeenusedbysome8500users.Anelectronicfileiscreatedforeverywrittenrequestrequiringanansweraswellasforeveryinternalworktaskrespondingtotherequest.Inthisway,everyprocedurecanbeeasilyauditedanytimebyviewingthefile.Severalprovincialadministrationsalsointro-ducedsimilarelectronicfilesystemswithabout40,000usersalloverAustria.

In2008,thedevelopede-Governmentsoftwarewascompletelypublishedonanopensourceplatform[36].Thebestpracticesofcooperationbetweenalllevelsofgovernmentadministrationwereputonawiki-typeplatformatwww.verwaltungskooperation.at[37].

Austrianmunicipalitiesarethelinkbetweenthefederalgovernmentandthecitizens.Typicalservicesofthefederalgovernment,likeregistrationofresidents,passporten-quires,votingpapersrequestsetc.areallprovidedatthemunicipalfrontoffices.

2.2 Standards development organizations

Thereareanumberofstandardsdevelopmentorganizations(SDOs)referredtointhisdocument.Thefollowingtableprovidesabriefreference-SDOsmarkedwithanaster-isk(*)indicatethatstandardsarefreelydownloadable:

Table 2: Standards Development Organizations

SDO Description URL

ISO InternationalOrganizationforStandard-ization

http://www.iso.org/

IETF* InternetEngineeringTaskForce http://www.ietf.org/

OASIS* OrganizationfortheAdvancementofStructuredInformationStandards

http://www.oasis-open.org/

W3C* WorldWideWebConsortium http://www.w3c.org/

ITU InternationalTelecommunicationUnion http://www.itu.int/

IEC InternationalElectrotechnicalCommis-sion

http://www.iec.ch/

30


ECMA EcmaInternational-Europeanassocia-tionforstandardizinginformationandcommunicationsystems

http://www.ecma-international.org/

SABS SouthAfricanBureauofStandards http://www.sabs.co.za/

IEEE InstituteofElectricalandElectronicsEngineers

http://www.ieee.org/

ANSI AmericanNationalStandardsInstitute http://www.ansi.org/

OGC* OpenGeospatialConsortium http://www.opengeospatial.org/

FIPS FederalInformationProcessingStan-dards

http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/

ITU-T InternationalTelecommunicationUnionStandardizationSector

http://www.itu.int/

ETSI EuropeantelecommunicationsStandardInstitute

http://www.etsi.org/

2.3 Minimal set of ICT standards

Inthefollowingchapters,somegeneralandspecificprinciplesreferringtotheICTintheGovernmentwillbedefined.Aprincipleisageneralruleorguidelinefordesigningasystemorarchitecture.Byitsnatureaprincipleisarestrictionofdesignfreedom.Principlesarethemeanstoguidethedesignandevolutionofsystems.

2.3.1 General principles

The following general principle statements serve as points of departure for settingtechnicalprinciplesstatementsandstandards:

� ThefundingofgovernmentIS/ICTprojectsandthepurchasingofIS/ICTproductsandsolutionsshoulddependoncompliancewithdefinedandagreedstandards;

� Wheninterconnectivity,datainteroperabilityorinformationaccessisrequired,thecostofnon-complyingwiththestandardsshouldrestwiththenon-com-plyingentity,systemororganization.

� Governmentorganizations’lS/ICTplansshouldbebasedontheagreedsetofstandardsaswellasactsandotherrelevantGovernmentpolicydocuments;

� Theinstitution-andfunctional-basedapproachshouldbereplacedbyaservice-centeredapproach;

31

� Governmentorganizationsthatco-operateinordertoensuretheprovisionofinformationandservicesforcitizensorownofficialsneednotknowevery-thingaboutthesubordinatingsystemorthedivisionofrolestherein;

� Thedevelopmentofinformationsystemsshouldbebasedonaninternet-centeredapproach;

� Accesstopublicservicesshouldpreferablybeensuredviaawebbrowserbydifferentchannelsanddevices;

� XML-basedtechnologiesshouldbeusedfortheintegrationofinformationsystemsandthepresentationofdata;

� Informationsystemsshouldprovideanduseservicesviaadataexchangelayerbasedonmultilateralagreements;and

� Indevelopingopeninformationsystems,open-sourcebasedsolutionsaretobeconsideredbeforeproprietaryones;

2.3.2 Specific principles

2.3.2.1 Principles for Networking

LocalgovernmentorganizationsshouldinterconnectusingIPv4.Adoptionofthenextgenerationofprotocolsshouldbeconsideredinduetime,incooperationwithcentralstategovernments.

2.3.2.2 Principles relating to Security

ProtectivelymarkeddatashouldbehandledandtransmittedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsoftheISO17799.

Non-protectivelymarkeddatashouldbehandledandtransmittedinaccordancewiththePublicServiceInformationSecurityFramework.

2.3.2.3 Principles relating to e-Mail

E-MailproductsshouldsupportinterfacesthatconformtotheSMTP/MIME.

Within government, intrinsic security should be used to ensure e-mail confidentiality.Outsidesecuregovernmentnetworks,S/MIMEV3shouldbeusedforsecuremessaging.

2.3.2.4 Principles relating to Directory

Alocalgovernmentdirectoryschemashouldbedevelopedtosupportarrangementofcommunicationservicesincludingmessagehandling,telephoneandfacsimileservicesaswellasinteractiveaccesstoarangeofotherapplications.Theschemashouldbeinteroperablewithcentralgovernmentdirectoryschemas.

32


2.3.2.5 Principles relating to Domain Naming

ProjectsaretofollowthenationalDomainNamingpolicy.DomainNameServices(DNS)istobeusedforinternet/intranetdomainnametoIPaddressresolution.

2.3.2.6 Principles relating to File Transfer Protocol (FTP)

FTP should beusedwherefile transfer is necessarywithin governmental intranets.RestartandrecoveryfacilitiesofFTParetobeusedwhentransferringverylargefiles.

2.3.2.7 Principles relating to Terminal Emulation

Web-basedtechnologyistobeusedinapplicationsthatpreviouslyusedTerminalEmu-lationwheneverpossible.

2.3.2.8 Principles relating to Data Interoperability

XMLandXMLSchemashouldbeusedforDataInteroperability.

RDF,OWLandRSSshouldbeusedforMetadataframework.Itprovidesinteroperabilitybetweenapplicationsthatexchangemachine-understandableinformationontheWeb.

UMLandXMIshouldbeusedforexchangeofallbusinessinformationandinformationsystemdesignmodeling.

XSLshouldbeusedfordatatransformation.

ItshouldbeensuredthatXMLproductsarewritteninsuchwaythattheycomplywiththe recommendationsof theWorldWideWebConsortium (W3C). (Wherenecessarybase theworkon thedraftW3Cstandardsbutavoid theuseofanyproduct-specif-icXMLextensionsthatarenotbeingconsideredforopenstandardizationwithintheW3C.)

2.3.2.9 Principals relating to Information Access

Governmentalinformationsystemsshouldbedesignedsothatasmuchinformationaspossiblecanbeaccessedandmanipulatedfromcommoncommercialbrowsersthroughutilizationoffunctionalityfreelysupportedandavailablewithinthebrowsercommu-nity.

Governmentalinformationsystemsshouldbedesignedtobeavailable,asappropriate,ontheinternet,eitherdirectlyorviathirdpartyservices.

Governmental information systems should support the standardsand specificationslistedinthebrowserstandardsandspecificationstablesbelowusing,wherenecessary,freelyavailablebrowserpluginsordedicatedviewers.

33

Governmentalinformationsystemsshouldbedesignedtoprovideprotectionagainstsecurityrisksofconnectiontotheinternet,includingtheabilitytoprotectagainstthevulnerabilityofdownloadingexecutablecontentcodethatisnotauthenticated.

Additionalmiddlewareorpluginsshouldbeused,whennecessary,toenhancebrowserfunctionality.

Browser standards adopted for conformance should support those features that abusinessorcitizenmaybeassumedtohaveavailableorcaneasilydownloadwithoutincurringalicensingfee,notwithstandingthepolicyrequirementthatallpublicsectorinformationsystemsbeaccessiblethroughbrowser-basedtechnology,otherinterfac-esarepermittedinadditiontobrowser-basedones.

Governmentinformationaccesssystemsshouldbedesignedtoprovidetheabilitytosupportthecitizeninhisowntimeandathisownpacei.e.forasynchronousoperationaswellassynchronous.

Thepossibilitytoprovidepartialinformation(mainlyfordissiminationpurposes)onadifferentpopularsocialnetworksshouldbeconsideredifthelocalpopulationusessuchsocialnetworks.

2.3.2.10 Principles relating to Content Delivery

Thedesignaimwouldbeforthecontenttobeindependentofthedeliverymechanism;hencethestrategicdirectionistouseXMLandXSL.

Thefullrangeofservicestobedeliveredtothecitizenwilldictatethestandardsre-quired. Content management techniques and personalisation technologies can beusedtosupportvariousdeliverychannelse.g.lowfunctionwebbrowsers,publicki-osks,DigitalTV,WAPphones,etc.

Transcodingservices,asanexampleofpersonalizationtechnologies,candeliverwebcontent toavarietyofdestinationenvironmentswithingreatly reduced timescalesand at significantly reduced cost. The principle is that transcoding can be used todynamicallyfilter,convertandreformatwebcontenttomatchtherequirementsanddisplaycapabilitiesof thedestinationdevice.Transcodingtechnology isserver-sidesoftwarethatmodifieswebpagecontentbasedondataprotocols,markuplanguages,deviceandnetworkparametersanduserpreferences.

Personalizationtechnologiesmayalsobeusedtosupportgroupssuchasdisadvan-tagedcommunitiesorvisuallyimpairedorblindpeople(i.e.byusingtexttranslation,largerfontsandgraphics,audio,etc.viaatranscoder).

SpecialattentionhastobeturnedtosupportingnewbusinessmodelswhichcreateinnovativepartnershipsfacilitatedbyICTbetweengovernmentandlocalactors(from

34


boththeprivateandcivilsectors)throughmultiplechannelswhichincludeintermedi-ariesanddirecthumancontact.

2.3.2.11 Principles relating to Web-Services

Thisisacrucialareafortheinteroperabilityofservicesinwhichvendor-neutralstan-dardsareemerging.

Theimplementationofweb-servicesfortheGovernmentshouldadheretotheexistingandevolvingstandardsdevelopedbyW3CandOASIS.

Wherestandardsarestillemergingfromindustryconsortia,suchasWS-I,theGovern-mentshouldmonitorstandardsdevelopmentinthisareaand,wherenecessary,partici-pateinnationalstandardsdevelopment.

2.3.2.12 Principles relating to Enterprise Architecture

IntermsofthePublicServiceRegulations,GovernmentorganizationsshoulddevelopInformationPlans, InfrastructurePlansandOperationalPlansbasedon theGovern-mentorganizations’businessstrategy.

Governmentorganizationsshoulddevelopplansbasedonaconsistententerprisear-chitecturecontainingbusinessarchitecture,applicationarchitecture,dataarchitectureandtechnologyarchitecture.

Businessarchitecturecontainsafullbusinessdefinition,includingbusinessmotivation,services,businessprocessesimplementingtheseservices,businessunitsandlocationsandhowtheserelatetoeachother.

Application, data and information technology architectures are consistent with thetechnologystandardsprovidedintherestofthisdocument.

35

2.3.3 Interconnection Standards and Specifications

Therecommendedstandardsandspecificationsforinterconnectivityarepresentedinthefollowingtable.

Table 3: Interconnection standards

Component Standard StandardsBody

WebtransportHypertextTransferProtocolHTTPv1.1(RFC2616)

IETF/W3C

EmailtransportSimpleMailTransferProtocolSMTP(RFC2821,RFC2822)

IETF

InternetmessageformatMultipurposeInternetMailExtensionsMIME(RFC2045,RFC2046,RFC2047,RFC2048andRFC2077)

IETF

MailboxaccessInternetMessageAccessProtocolIMAPV4.1(RFC3501)

IETF

EmailSecurity

S/MIMEV3shallbeusedwhereappropriateforpangovernmentmessagingsecurityunlesssecurityrequirementsdictateotherwise.ThisincludesRFC2630toRFC2633.

IETF

Directory

X.500coreschema(ISO/IEC95948).Light-weightDirectoryAccessProtocolLDAPV3(RFC4510)istobeusedforgeneral-purposedirectoryuseraccess.

ITU/IEC/ISOIETF

DomainNameSystemDNS(RFC1032toRFC1035andrelatedup-dates)

IETF

Filetransferprotocols

FTP(RFC959,RFC1579,RFC2428)

Securecopyoverssh(OpenBSDreferenceimplementation)

IETF

LAN/WANinterworking InternetProtocolIPv4(RFC791) IETF

IPsecurity IP-SEC(RFC2402/2404) IETF

IPencapsulationsecurity EncapsulatingSecurityPayloadESP(RFC2406) IETF

Transport

TransportControlProtocolTCPRFC793withextensionsasreferredinRFC4614

UserDatagramProtocolUDP(RFC768)

IETFIETF

Transportsecurity TLS1.1(RFC4346) IETF

36


Encryptionalgorithms

StreamCiphers:RC4,Rabbit,Decim,TSC4(ISO/IEC18033-4)

BlockCiphers:AES(FIPS197),Twofish,RC6,Blowfish,IDEA(ISO/IEC18033-3)

Asymmetric:RSA(ISO/IEC18033-2);EllipticCurveCryptography(ECCSEC1)(ISO/IEC15946)

ISO

ISO

ISO

HashingSHA-256,SHA-512(FIPSPub180-2);

SHA-384;RIPEMD-160;WHIRLPOOL-512(ISO/IEC10118-3)

FIPS

ISO

DigitalSignatures

WithAppendix:RSA(ISO/IEC14888)

WithMessageRecovery:RSA

(ISO/IEC9796-2/3);DSA(FIPSPub186-2),EC-DSA,Rabin,Nyberg-Reuppel(ISO/IEC14888))

KeyManagementDiffie-Hellman(ANSIX9.42-DH-MQV);EIGa-mal,Nyberg-Reuppel,RSA(ISO/IEC11770-2/3))

2.3.4 Data Interoperability standards and specifications

TherecommendedstandardsandspecificationsforDataInteroperabilityandtrans-formationaregiveninthetablebelow.

Table 4: Data interoperability standards

Component Standard StandardBody

Metadata/MetaLanguage XML(ExtensibleMarkupLanguage) W3C

XMLMetaDatadefinition XML-SchemaRelaxNG W3COASIS/ISO

XMLDatatransformation XSL(ExtensibleStylesheetLanguage) W3C

XMLDataquery Xpath W3C

XMLSignature XMLDSIG W3C

XMLSecuritymark-upSAMLv2.0(SecurityAssertionMarkupLanguage)

OASIS

PublicKeyInfrastructure X509v3 ITU-T

Minimuminteroperablechar-acterset

TransformationFormat-8bitUTF-8(RFC3629),individualitemsintheXMLschemamaybefurtherrestrictedincharactersetonacasebycasebasis.

IETF

37

ModelingandDescriptionLanguage

UML(UnifiedModelingLanguage)RDF(ResourceDescriptionFramework)

OMGW3C

Ontology-basedinformationexchange

OWL(WebOntologyLanguageSeman-ticsandAbstractSyntax)

W3C

ModelexchangeXMI(XMLMetadataInterchange),version2.1

OMG

FormRepresentationandData

XformsW3C

Geospatialdata GML(GeospatialMarkupLanguage)OpenGeospatialCon-sortium

2.3.5 Standards for Web Services

Theuseofwebservicesshouldbestronglyencouraged.Thesetofstandardsisgiveninthetablebelow.

Table 5: Standards for web services


Webservicerequestdelivery SimpleObjectAccessProtocolSOAPv1.2 W3C

Webservicerequestregistry UniversalDescription,DiscoveryandInte-grationUDDIv3.0

OASIS

Webservicedescriptionlan-guage

WSDL1.1 W3C

2.3.6 Standards and Specifications for Information Access

TheGovernment standards and specifications for information access, browsers andviewersaredefinedinthetablesbelow.Theservicestobedeliveredtothecitizenwilldictatetheexpectedstandardsrequiredtobesupportedbythebrowser.However,assomebrowsersmayonlysupportthebasicstandards listed intheformertable,thisresultsinonlyalimitedsetofe-Governmentservicesbeingabletobeofferedviasuchbrowsers.

Assuch,theessentialminimallevelofinformationrequiredtobeaccessedandviewedbythecitizenshouldeitherbeconveyedorbecapableofbeingconvertedusingper-sonalizationtechnologies,e.g.transcoders,throughtheuseofthebasicstandards.

38


Table 6: Standards for Information Access


Hypertextinter-changeformats

ThosepartsofHypertextMarkupLanguageHTMLv4.0andXHTMLimplementedincommonbyFirefoxv2.0orlater,andMSInternetExplorerv6orlater,plustheirinteroperableextensions

W3C

Working OfficeDocumentformats(word-processing,spreadsheet,pre-sentation)

UTF-8/ASCIIFormattedText

OpenDocumentFormat(ODF)vl.O(ISO26300)andlaterOasisversions

Comma-SeparatedValues(CSV)RFC4180

IETFOASIS/ISO

IETF

Documentformatsforpresentationview

XHTMLmarkupPDF(version1.6) W3CAdobe1

RelationalData-baseAccess

StructuredQuerylanguageSQL93 ANSI

Charactersetsandalphabets

UNICODEISO/IEC10646-1:2000 ISO/IEC

Graphical/stillim-ageinformationexchange

JointPhotographicExpertsGroup/ISOstandards10918

PortableNetworkGraphics(ISO/IEC15948:2001)

ForimagesthatwillnottolerateinformationlossusetagImageFileFormat(.tif)

ISOISOAdobe

Someservicestobedeliveredtothecitizenswillrequiremoreextensivefunctional-ityinthebrowser.Wheresuchextensivefunctionalityisrequired,theusedstandardsshouldbeselectedfromthoselistedinthetablebelow.

Table 7: Additional standards for information access


Multimediaaudio/visualcontent

MovingPictureExpertsGroup(.mpg)MPEG-1(ISO/IEC11172)MPEG-2(ISO/IEC13818)MPEG-4andogg(http://www.xiph.org)

ISO

Browserscripting JavaScript(ECMA262) ECMA

InternetConfer-encing

H323 ITU-T

SIP(RFC3261) IETF

39

Filearchivalandcompression

tar(POSIX.1-2001) POSIX

gzip(RFC1951andRFC1952) IETF

zip(http://www.pkware.com)

bzip2(http://www.bzip.org/)

2.3.7 Standards for Content Management Metadata

TherecommendedstandardsforContentManagementMetadataare:

Table 8: Standards for Content Management Metadata


Content management metadataelementsandrefinements

DublinCore ISO15836

Metadataharvesting OpenArchivesInitiativeProtocolforMetadataHarvesting2.0(OAI-PMH)formetadatacollection.ProtocolVersion2.0of2002-06-14DocumentVersion2003/02/21TOO:00:OOZHttp://www.openarchives.org/OA/openarchivespro-tocol.html

2.3.8 Disaster recovery standards

Mostimportantdisasterrecoverystandardsandguidelinesarepresentedinthetablebelow.

Table 9: Disaster recovery guidelines and standards


Disaster Recovery Plan-ning

DisasterRecoveryPlanning

BusinessContinuity

BS7799/ISO17799.

DisasterRecovery Guidelinesforinformationandcommu-nicationstechnologydisasterrecoveryservices

ISO/IEC24762:2008

40


2.4 Procedures to achieve and maintain the standards2.4.1 Organizational Framework

Contrary towhat isoften thought, thebiggest challengewhendevelopingan infor-mationsocietydoesnotlieinhowtogettheinformationtechnologytogether,butinshapingtheorganizational,legislativeandfiscalframeworkofthelocalgovernmenttosupportthedevelopmentofe-governance.

The proposed organizational model (see Figure 4) offers the local governments aframeworkinwhichtosituatethedecision-makingprocessesandprojectmanagementactivities,relatedtointroducinge-government.

Asstatedabove,theorganizationalmodelcandifferaccordingtothesizeandtheleveloforganizationofthelocalgovernmentitistobeappliedto.Afurtherdivisionismadebetweentheinternal(applyingtotheback-officeofthelocalgovernment)andtheex-ternalaspects(applyingtotheinteractionwithcentralgovernment)oforganization

2.4.1.1 Internal organization for bigger municipalities

Even if thebasicresponsibilityof ICTdevelopmentremains in thehandsof thecitymayororheadofadministrationof themunicipality, in localmunicipalities thatcanallocatesufficientresources,theresponsibilityconcerningICTprojectsshouldbedel-egatedtoaspecializedICTmanager[26].

TheICTmanager,whichwewillrefertoas“CIO”or“Chief Information Officer”,shouldbeplacedatasufficientlyhighlevelwithinthemunicipality(usuallyatthelevelofheadofdepartment).Heorshewillberesponsiblefor:

� CreatingandimplementinganICTactionplanonthelevelofthemunicipality;

� PlanningandpreparingtheannualICTbudget,inlinewithboththemunicipal-ityandthecentralgovernmentICTactionplans;

� Implementingprojects,includingprocurement,theorganizationofsupervisionandansweringtothemunicipalitiestrainingneeds;

� MaintainingtheICTarchitectureandusersupport;

� ParticipatinginanICTtaskgroupofmunicipalities,tobeleadbytheCentralCoordinationUnitoftheMinistryofLocalGovernments.

Benefitingfromthesupportive,advisoryandpreparatoryactivitiesoftheCIO,acityICT council should be established to assist themayor in overall strategic decision-making.SuchanICTCouncil:

41

� Isheadedbythecitymayororheadofadministration;

� Consistsofthekeypersonsinthemaindepartmentsandsub-unitsofthemunicipality;

� CoordinatestheeffortsofallactorsinvolvedintheICTprojectsandintegratesthechangesintheinternalworkingofthedepartments;

� BenefitsfromthepreparatoryworkoftheCIO;

� HastheauthoritytoapproveallthestrategicinitiativesconcerningthedevelopmentofICTinthemunicipality,includingpropositionstoinitiatenewprojects,theannualICTbudget,intermediatereportsonongoingprojectsandmeasuresneededtoimplementre-engineeredprocesses.

ThetasksoftheICTCouncilcan,dependingonthesizeandspecializationandontheexistingorganizationswithinthemunicipality,betakenupbytheCityCouncilitself.Inbiggermunicipalitiesandmunicipalitieswithamorecomplicateddivisionoftasks,ICTCorrespondents canbeappointed.Preferably, theyhaveabetter knowledgeandun-derstandingof ICT issues.Theysupportthe implementationofnewtechnology inthedepartmentandactascontactpersonsfortheCIO.ITCorrespondentsneedtobeofferedmoreintensivetrainingonICTandcanberewardedfortheirextraeffortsusingfinancialandnon-financialincentives.

WithICTcomestheissueofdataprotection.Whereatfirstbasicphysicalandproceduralsecuritymeasurescanbesufficient,acomprehensivesecuritypolicyhastobedevelopedovertime.Theneedforsuchapolicygrowswiththedevelopmentofdifferentsystemsandtheexchangeofdata,enlargingtheriskofunauthorizeduseofinformation.

TheissueofdataprotectionshouldbetackledbyaData Security Officer,whocanbees-peciallyappointedandtrainedorwhosetaskscanbeobservedbyaseniorofficialwithinthemunicipality.TheDataSecurityOfficerimplementsorganizational,physicalandtech-nicaldataprotectionmeasuresafteranalyzingtherisksconnectedtotheimplementedmechanismsofinformationgatheringandexchange.Ideally,theworkoftheDataSecu-rityOfficerissupportedthroughfeedbackgainedfromregularexternalsecurityaudits.

Partoftheactivities,suchastrainingandsoftwaredevelopment,canbeseparatedfromthemunicipalgovernmentandcangrowintoindependentcompanies.OthertasksandactivitiescanbeperformedincooperationwithICTdepartmentsofothermunicipalities,eitherthroughdirectcooperationorthroughcreationofaspecialized(non-profit)entity,workingprimarilyorexclusivelyforthemunicipalitiesthatcontrolit.

42


Figure 4: Municipality organization with respect to ICT

2.4.1.2 Internal organization for smaller municipalities

ICTmanager in smallmunicipality is not necessarily a full-time job.His/herworkingtimecouldbesharedwithotherinstitutions–school,governmentinstitutionorprivatecompany.TheresponsibilitiesofICTmanagercouldalsobeoutsourcedandboughtfromthecompany/entrepreneur.Themainroleofthepersonistohaveaclearvisionofthefuturedevelopmentsandunderstandingofthemunicipalityneeds–bothintheofficeandbeyond.

Allservicescouldbeoutsourcedaswell.Butthereisdangerousmoment–somebodyfromthemunicipalorganizationshouldbewisesubscriberandcontractorfortheout-sourcingpartner.

2.4.2 Legislative/regulative framework

ICT is the most important development component of modern world and valuablefoundationof informationsociety. Indevelopedcountries itsuseandimplementationisbasedonoptimallyarrangedregulationsand internationalstandardsthatcreateastableandpredictable legislativeenvironmentwith laws thatareclearly formulated,transparent,non-discriminatoryandtechnologicallyneutral.

Privacyprotectionanddatahandling, intellectualproperty rights, contract law,elec-tronicsignaturelaw,electroniccommercelaw,telecommunicationslawandmanyoth-

43

ers,needtobeenactedtoprovideasecure,stableandattractiveenvironment.Ontheotherhand,somemodernandwell-writtenlaws,suchasthoseprovidingforintellectualpropertyprotection,havebeentabledalready,buttheystilllackenforcementmecha-nisms.Thismeansthatchangesoftheexistinglegalsystemarestillnecessaryintheregion.

Keysteps toanewe-legislationareharmonizationwithEU legislation, fulfilling theobligationsfromtheeSEEuropeAgendaandWSISActionplan,amendingexistinglawsandadoptingnewlawsandby-laws.

2.4.3 Fiscal framework. Structure of budget.

ICTbudgetplanning ispartof thegeneralmunicipalbudgetplanning. Fromseveralbestpracticeexamples,itisimportanttofixthestructureandmethodsofICTbudgetplanningbyinternalregulationoftheMunicipality.ItisrecommendedtodescribeICT-relatedexpensesclearlyinthemunicipalbudget.Ideally,halfoftheIT-budgetisusedforrunningandmaintenancecostsandhalffordevelopmentandinvestments.Frominternationalexperience,theshareofICTexpensesfromthegeneralbudgetis1-2%.

Inparallelwithfinancingpossibilitiesfromthemunicipalbudget,internationaldonorsarealsooftensupportingdevelopmentprojects.Thechoiceofpossibledevelopmentprojects depends on the strategic tasks of these organizations. Quite often, this fi-nancingisaimedtosupporttheprojectsrelatedtothedevelopmentofcivilsociety,transparency,e-Democracyandanticorruptionissues.Inthesecasesthemechanismsandrulesoffinancingdependontheregulationsoftheseinternationalorganizations.

Inspiteoftheseexternalpossibilities,theICTbudgetshouldbeoneoftheprioritiesofthemunicipalbudget,regardlessofitsshare.Itisdirectlyconnectedtothesustain-abilityofsystems.

ICTbudgetisoftendividedinto:

� Runningcostsofsystemsandinfrastructure.Thereistheneedtorenewca.20%oftheinfrastructureeveryyear.Thecalculationformulacanbeusedtoevaluatetheneedforthisrenovation:c=a*b*0.2(c=needforinfrastructurerenovationbudget,a=numberofICTworkplacesinmunicipality,b=esti-matedcostofaunitofinfrastructure,usually2-3000EUR).Inadditiontotherenewaloftheinfrastructure,someothercostsshouldbeestimated–costforinternetconnectivityservice,costofsoft-andhardwaremaintenance,costofsoftwarelicenses,costofstaffICTtrainingetc.

� Costofdevelopmentprojects.Thiscostisoftenevaluatedbyusingtheexter-nalexpertmethod.

44


2.4.4 Technical Model

Thetechnologicalmodelformunicipalitiesconsistsoftwobasicparts:

� IT-infrastructure

� Informationsystems

Thebasiccomponentsofbothpartsaresimilar,sincemostofthefunctionsthatmu-nicipalitiesarecalledtoperformarecommonandestablishedbylaw.Therearesomedifferencesbetweencity-typemunicipalitiesandsmallruralmunicipalities,buttheyarerelativelyminorandwillbedealtwithinthetext.

2.4.4.1 ICT infrastructure

TheICTinfrastructureforthemunicipalityisthephysicalpartofthee-modelformu-nicipalities. Theequipmentand the connectivity,whetherwiredorwireless, are thebackboneofinformationexchangebothwithinamunicipalityandbetweenmunicipali-ties.SinceICTequipmentisalsothemostexpensivepartofthee-modelthathastobeimplementedwithveryscarceresources,onehastobeverycarefulintheplanningprocess.Ageneralrecommendationistoaimatharmoniousdevelopmentoftheinfra-structuretoavoidcreationofartificialbottlenecksthatdonotallowefficientuseofresources.

The ICT infrastructure for a typicalmunicipality consists of personal computers, lo-calareanetwork(s),useridentificationandauthorizationsystemsandbasicsoftware.For theuninterruptedflowofdata that isapreconditionofdataexchangebetweenadministrations,oneneedstoaimatdevelopingabroadbandinternetconnection ineverylocalauthority.Sincethisisalsoaneedonbehalfofcentralgovernment,itisad-visabletocreateacentrallylaunchedandfinancedprojecttoreachthataimwherebythecentralgovernmentwillpayfortheinitialsetupofthebroadbandconnectionandmunicipalitieswouldberesponsiblefortherunningcosts.SuchalayoutwillsetabasisforsustainablefunctioninganddevelopmentofmunicipalICTsystems.

Itisstronglyrecommendedthateverypersonwhoneedstohaveaworkstationwouldhaveitconnectedtointernetandequippedwithabasicsetofsoftwaretools.Localgov-ernmentsshouldthemselvesdevelopafixedstandardized listofnecessarysoftwareforanordinaryworkstationoftheirmunicipalityinordertofacilitatetheexchangeofinformationandkeeptrackofproprietaryissuesofthesoftware.

TheintroductionofanICTsystematlocallevelwouldtypicallygothroughthefollowingsteps:

� Systemicanalysisofprocessesandproceduresoflocalself-government

� Feasibilityanalysisoftheinformationsystem

45

� Designofthenetwork

� Installationoftheinformationsystem

� Trainingofusers

� Implementationofamonitoringsystemformodelusage

Inordertohaveafullyfunctioninginformationsystem,thefollowingbasictechnicalpreconditionsshouldbemet:

� Localnetwork-allthecomputersinthelocaladministrationshouldbenet-worked,oratleastonecomputerineachdepartmentorofficeshouldbeinthenetwork

� Centralserver-isrequiredtohostthemodelandsupportingsoftware

� Internetconnection-accordingtotheneedsofthelocalgovernmentnetworkanditsfinancialcapacity.Largemunicipalitiesmightuseadedicatedline,pro-vidingtwenty-fourhourconnectionwithinternet.Smallerlocalgovernmentsmayonlybeabletoaffordamorelimitedconnection

Fortheimplementationofthelocalinformationsystem,thefollowinginfrastructureisneeded:

� Minimuminformaticequipmentofthelocalgovernmentisonecomputerineachdepartmentoroffice.Onehighqualitycomputerwillfunctionasserver.

� KnowledgeofWindowsandinternetbyemployeeswhowillperformtheinter-activeworkwithclients.

� Anappropriatesoftwarepackageincludingusers’manual.

� Ateamofexpertstoconductthebasicsystemicanalysis,installthemodel,andtraintheusers.

Inordertoprovideforabettercomprehensionof theprocessofdevelopmentofe-Governmentandforacompetentdemandforelectronicadministrativeservices,itisnecessary:

� Tocarryoutregularmonitoringoftheperceptionsfortheconsumptionofelectronicadministrativeservices.

� Toorganizeandimplementanawarenessprogrammefortheutilizationbybusinesses,citizensandadministrationofelectronicservices.

� Usingthecapabilitiesofe-governmentthetraditionalchannelsforservicedeliverymustbepreserved,developedandorganizedaccordingtothe“one-stop-shop“conceptinordertoavoidthe“digitaldivide”betweenthedifferenttargetgroups.

� Tocarryoutaperiodicevaluationoftheadvancementintheimplementationofelectronicservices.

46


2.4.4.2 Information systems

Amunicipalityusuallyhasthefollowinginformationsystems:

Document management system (DMS)–documentmanagementprocessesaredeeplyconnectedtothecoredutiesofthemunicipality.Inbigcity-typemunicipalities,docu-mentmanagementwithapproval/digital signaturemechanismsarepartof thecoreinformationsystem.Thedocumentmanagementsystemshould follow thebasicsofstateIT-architecture,documentsemanticsandbeabletocommunicatewithstateICTbasicinfrastructure.

E-mail systems.Thereisawidevarietyofcommerciale-mailsystemsonthemarket.Alsoopen-sourcesolutionsareavailable.Itwouldbeadvisabletointegratee-mailsys-temtothedocumentmanagementandresourceplanningsystemofmunicipality.

Finance and personnel management systems.Itwouldbegoodtoreachthesituationwherebasicfinanceandpersonnelmanagement informationsystemsaredevelopedtogether–withunifiedinterfacesinordertosimplifydatatransferstothecentralinsti-tutions,statisticsetc.

Webpages of municipalities and e-democracy tools.Itisreasonablethatbasictoolsfore-democracyaretobedevelopedtogetherunderthe“umbrella”oflocalgovern-mentassociationorothercommoninstitutions.ThereareseveralrecommendationsfortheIT-architecture,whicharedescribingstandardsforwebdevelopment.Severalopen-sourcetoolsareavailabletomanagemunicipality informationontheweb.ThePublicInformationActshouldregulatethelistofinformationforallmunicipalitiesthatshouldbesetupontheirwebsites.

State registers.Mostfunctionsrelatedtotheregistrationofpopulation,realestate,businessesandcarsarecentralizedtothecentrallevelstateregister.Atthesametime,differentmunicipalitieshavedifferentneeds for information. It shouldbediscussedtowhichamountexistingstateregisterdatasetsneedtobeenlargedbycertainmu-nicipalities.TherearepossibleITmechanismsthatallowtheintegrationofdatasetsofstateregisterswithimportantinformationatmunicipallevel.Clearunderstandingshouldexistaboutownershipofdataanditscross-usebycentralgovernmentandmu-nicipalities(useofdataforanalysis,privacy,financialissues).

2.4.4.3 Front office

Theterm“frontoffice”referstogovernmentas itsconstituentssee it,meaningtheinformationandservicesprovidedandtheinteractionbetweengovernmentandbothcitizensandbusiness.The implementationofe-government initiativesconcerns twoareasregardingthefrontoffice:implementationofonlineservicesandengagementofcitizens.

47

2.4.4.4 Back office

Theterm“backoffice”referstotheinternaloperationsofanorganizationthatsup-portcoreprocessesandarenotaccessibleorvisibletothegeneralpublic.Theimple-mentationofe-governmentgoeshand-in-handwithanumberofbackofficereforms.Ontheonehand,e-governmentwillhelpbringingthesereforms,while,ontheother

hand,e-governmentrequiressuchreformsinordertobesuccessful.

2.5 Benchmarking

Forstrategyandactionplanningreasons,itisimportanttoknowwhattheICTsituationofthemunicipalityislike.ProvidinglocaleGovernmentservicesextendssimpleavailabilityofpublicservicesinelectronicform.ThereisnouseindeliveringeGovernmentservicesifthesearenotusedordonotdelivertheexpectedbenefitstousers.Theendresultsmustreflecttheoutcometheydeliverforcitizens,businessesandgovernmentitself.Thisout-comeprovesitselfthroughusage,deliveryofrelevanthighimpactservices,convenience,andtime-efficiencygains.ArecentstudybyT.E.Wohlers[40]showsthatlocale-govern-mentsophisticationincreasesformunicipalitiesgovernedbyprofessionalmanagers,en-dowedwithmoreorganizationalresources,characterizedbyhighersocioeconomiclevels,andincreasingpopulationsize.

Oneexampleofanassessmentthatbalances efficientadministrationswithresponsivede-mocracyistheBEGIX(Balancede-GovernmentIndex)[24]toolfocusedonmeasuring‘bal-ancede-government’bycombiningelectronicandparticipatoryservices.

Theself-evaluationtoolBEGIX(BalancedE-GovernanceIndex)isbasedontheconceptofbalancede-government,accordingtowhicha“correct”e-governmentisabalancedcombi-nationofelectronicservicesandformsofelectronicparticipationthatisdevelopedwithinchangemanagementframework.Theconceptwasdeveloped inthecourseofabench-markingsurveycarriedoutbyBertelsmannFoundationandBoozAllenHamilton.

Thebalanced e-government scorecard servesintherecordingandevaluationofvariousdimensionsofe-democracyande-governmentservices,ascanbeseenfromFigure5.

Figure 5:Balanced e-Govern-ment Scorecard

48


Scorecardsallowuniformcheckingofdifferentobjectiveswithintheframeworkofahigherorderstrategy.Thematrix,whichformsthebasisforthee-governmentscore-card,comprisesadynamicandastaticcomponent–withatotaloffivefields–asfol-lows:

Benefit: Thisfirstscorecardarearelatestothequalityandquantityoftheservicesand,therefore,tothebenefitthatthecitizensderivefromtheserviceoffering,e.g.:

� Therangeofservicesthathavealreadybeenimplemented

� Therealizationofthe“one-stopshop”(accessibilityofallservicesviaonepor-tal)

� User-friendlinessoftheservices

Efficiency: Theextenttowhichactualimprovementsinefficiencyarerealized,e.g.:

� Availabilityofaprocess,application,systemanddatabasearchitecture

� Elaboratedfinanceandresourceplanning(businesscase)

� StateoftheutilizedICTinfrastructureandplatformtechnologies

� Qualityandscopeofthetrainingandqualificationprogramsforstaffandman-agers

Participation: Thispartofthematrixisconcernedwiththequestionofwhethertheser-vicesaredesignedsoastopromotepoliticalcommunicationandenableahigherdegreeofcitizenparticipation:

� Directuseraccesstorelevantcontactpersonsviae-mailortheweb

� Considerationofuserwishes

� Influenceandconsultationofcitizensindecision-makingprocesses

� Possibilitiesfordebatingpublictopics(chatrooms,forumsetc.)

Transparency: Whethere-governmentcontributestotherealizationofthetransparentstateisrecordedhere.Interalia,thefollowingaspectsaremeasured:

� Theamountofinformationonexecutiveandlegislativeprocesses(suchas,forexample,committeemeetings,pressconferences,localmeetings)

� Theextenttowhichtheprocessingofaquerycanbetraced–i.e.realtimeinfor-mationfortheclientsaboutongoingqueriesorapplications

� Thetopicalityofinformation

Change management: Thecourseoftheplanningandimplementationprocessinthee-governmentprogramisdeterminedviathissectionofthescorecard.Forexample:

� Strategydevelopment,e.g.thedegreetowhichregularcomparisonsaremadewithothere-governmentprograms

� Monitoringandcontrolling

� Inclusionandmotivationoftheemployees

49

Theself-assessmentquestionnaireisgivenasannextothisdocumentandcanbefoundonlineatwww.begix.net.

Forstrategy and action planning purposes, itisimportanttoknowwhattheICTsitu-ationofthemunicipalityislike.ThequestionnairesaboutITsituationshouldbefilledinatleastonceayear.ExamplesoftheseformsaregivenintheAppendix4.Therearequestionsaboutinfrastructure(notonlyinternalmunicipalgovernment,butalsoaboutthesituationintheterritoryofmunicipality).Alsodatabases,hardwareandsoftwareofthemunicipalityareanalyzed.

Thereareothermoresimplified,butalsoefficientbenchmarkingprocedures.Forex-ample,accordingtotheConceptualframeworkforbenchmarkingthedigitalEurope,createdbyEuropianUnionCommision[38],thee-Publicservicescanbebenchmarkedusingfollowingthreeindicators:

� E1:Onlineavailabilityandinteractivityofthe20basicpublicservicesforciti-zensandenterprises

� E2:%ofindividualsusingtheinternetforinteractingwithpublicauthoritiesbylevelofsophistication

� E3:%ofenterprisesusingtheinternetforinteractingwithpublicauthoritiesbrokendownbylevelofsophistication

Thebenchmarkingmodelreflectshowbusinessesandcitizenscaninteractwithpublicauthorities.Governments’ servicedeliveryprocessesaredescribedaccording to thefollowingstages:(i)information,(ii)one-wayinteraction,(iii)two-wayinteraction,(iv)transaction,andfinally(v)targetisationasshownonFigure6.

Figure 6: The five stage maturity model

50


Thethirdandthefourthlevelofthebenchmarkingfivestagematuritymodel,two-wayinteractionand transaction,havebecomeastandard formanycountries:electronicformsareavailable formostservices; transactional -alsocalled fullelectroniccasehandling–wheretheuserappliesforandreceivestheserviceonline,withoutanyad-ditionalpaperwork,isincreasinglybecomingmainstream.Thefifthlevel,targetisation,providesan indicationof theextentbywhichfront-andback-officesare integrated,data isreusedandservicesaredeliveredproactively.Thefourthandfifth levelsarejointlyreferredtoas“fullonlineavailability”.

A positive User Experience is a pre-requisite for repeated visits and inclusivenessof eGovernment services. The findings of the European Commision 2009 study on“Smarter, Faster, Better eGoverment 8th benchmark measurement”[39] has beenusedtodefine,measureandreportonvariouscomponentsofUserExperiencethatcanbemeasuredthroughtheweb.Inthatstudy,fiveindicatorshavebeenusedtoas-sessUserExperience:

1. Accessibility:Aweb-crawlerperformedanautomatedassessmentofcompli-ancewithWebContentAccessibilityGuidelines(WCAG1.0standards).Atypicalcriteriasetis“IstheeGovermentportalaccessibletopeoplewithdisabilities?d

2. Usability:Typicalcriteriasetis“Canyouuseachannelofchoice,doestheweb-siteallowforprogresstracking,isthereahelpfunctionalityavailableandareprivacypoliciesdulymentionedandexplained?”

3. UserSatisfactionMonitoring:Typicalcriteriasetis“Dowebsitesallowforuserfeedbackandreportingoncertainissue?”

4. One-stop-shopapproach:Typicalcriteriasetis“Whatproportionofthe20ba-sicgovernmentservicesareavailableontheprincipalportal(s)?

5. User-focusedportaldesign:Typicalcriteriasetis“Whatistheeaseoffindinginformationonthedifferentwebsitesandaretheystructuredbythemeorlife-eventsforinstance?”

51

3. ICT Strategy

3.1 ICT Strategy of Municipality

Intheory,theICTstrategyshouldbedevelopedaccordingtothegeneraldevelopmentstrategyofthemunicipalityandnotviceversa.Biggermunicipalitiesoftenhavesomegeneralstrategypapers,whilesmalleronessometimesdonothaveanystrategicplanatall.Inmostcases,thestrategyisbuiltbycombiningbottom-upplanning(develop-mentneedsproposedbythedifferentunitsofthemunicipalityaccordingtotheirev-erydayneeds)andtop-downplanning(fromsomestrategicconsiderationsofdevelop-ment,includingtaskssetbythenationalInformationSocietyStrategy).Thestrategydevelopment isacollectiveworkofallof themunicipal staffandespecially the ICTdepartment.ThetimehorizonofatypicalICTstrategyisoften4to5yearsandthisisthebaseforoperativeplans–annualactionplans.

ThefollowinggoalsareoftenfoundintheMunicipalityICTstrategy:

� Toincreaseefficiencyinadministration,benefitingboththebusinesssectorandthecitizensofthemunicipalityineverydaylife–theactivitydirectedtotheexternaldimension;

� Toincreaseefficiencyandtransparency(questionsaboutanticorruptionetc.)ofthebusinessofthemunicipalityitself–theactivityfocusedontheinternaldimension,aimedtoimproveback-officeprocessesofthemunicipality;

� Tosupportdemocraticprocessesthroughthetoolsofe-democracy–theac-tivityfocusedontheexternalprocesses;

� Toincreaseaccesstointernetandpublicinformation.Questionsaboute-inclu-sion,broadbandstrategy–theactivityfocusedontheexternalprocesses.

Itisutmostimportantthatthisstrategicdevelopmentismanagedbythetopleadersofthemunicipality.Thereareseveralreasons:

� TheimplementationoftheICTsystemscauseschangesintheorganizationandprocesses.ThesechangescannotbemanagedbyICTmanagers.Thesearegeneraltopmanagementquestions;

� ICTdevelopmentisderivedfromgeneraldevelopmentplansofthemunicipal-ity.Thisistheissueoftopmanagementofthemunicipality;

� EfficientlyfunctioningICTsystemsestablishanenvironmentforeconomicdevelopment,increaseforeigninvestments,transparencyoflocalgovernmentetc.Personalleadershipinthesedevelopmentswillgivepoliticalcredibilityandreliability;

52


� Well-managedandfunctioningICTsystemswillbuildgroundforgrowthofthefinancialstabilityofthemunicipality.Thiswillgiveaclearmessagetothevot-ersofthecommunityaboutpositivechangesandstability.

TheICTstrategyofthemunicipalityshouldbeclearlydocumentedandshouldbebasedonrulesandregulations.ConcerningICT,asetofbasicdocumentshastobecreatedovertime(seeTable10).

Table 10: ICT strategy documents

Document Priority

RulesofuseoftheICTsystem 1

Webcontentmanagementrules 1

Hardwareassetsmanagementrules 1

Softwareassetsmanagementrules 1

ICTactionplan(2-3years) 1

ICTbudget(currentyear+forecastfor2years) 1

ICTstrategicplanformunicipality(for5years) 2

Rulesforstarting,runningandimplementationICTprojects 2

Documentmanagementrules(addingDigitaldocumentmanagementrules) 2

Rulestocreatebackupcopies 2

Dataprotectionpolicy 1

3.2 Action Plan for Implementation of ICT

Annualactionplanscontainmoreconcreteprojectdescriptionswhereseveralmoreconcreteaspectsaredefinedinparallelwiththestrategicaims.Usually,thesearespe-cificaimsof theproject, expected timeframe, responsiblepersonsororganizations,generalmethodstoproceedwiththeproject,predictedbudgetandhumanresourceneedsandmaindeliverables.ActionplansarenormallypreparedbytheCIOandap-provedbytheICTCouncil.Insmallmunicipalities,whereCIOandBoarddonotexist,theplansarepreparedbyanICTadvisorandapprovedbytheheadofmunicipality.ROIandprofitabilityareoneaspectthatisoftenunderdiscussionwhenactionplansareprepared.

Actionplansoftenincludebenchmarkstomeasurethesuccessofdevelopment.Thesebenchmarksalsoincludefinancialissues.Thesupervisionoftheplanningprocessisthedutyofthetopmanagementofthemunicipality.Thisis inmanycasesaccompaniedwithfinancialandICTauditingprocesses.

53

Thegoaloftheactionplanistodefinethepriorityactivitiesineachmunicipalityfortheintroductionandimplementationofe-governanceatlocallevel.

Theactionplanformatisamatrixthatinvolvesallthenecessaryaspectsofe-gover-nanceandcanbeusedbyeachmunicipality.

Thematrixconsistsofthefollowingcomponents:

� Actions–theactivitiesthatshouldbetakenbymunicipalityinordertoachievethedevelopmentofe-governanceatlocallevel.

� Expectedresults–endresult/targetoftheactivity

� Person/department–whoisresponsibleforthefulfillmentofanactivity?

� Requiredresources–whatisneededtocompletetheactivity?

� Fundingsource–fromwherethefundingshould/cancome(municipalitybud-get,donororganizationetc).

� Successcriteria–thepreconditionsthatareneededforimplementation.

� Deadline–whenthetaskshouldbecompleted.

� Status–statusdescriptionaftereach3-6months

� Financialresources–whatisthefinancialmeasurefortheactivity?

Theactivitiesaredividedinto5action lines.Action linesare importantcomponentsforthesuccessfulimplementationofe-governanceinthemunicipalities.Eachactionlinehasseveralsub-activitiesandmunicipalitiescancontinuouslyaddnewnecessaryactivities.

Actionplanscouldhavethefollowingmajoractionlines:

1.Organizationrelated

a)HumanResources

2.ITSystems

a)ITInfrastructure

b)InformationSystems

3.Security

4.E-servicesande-democracy

5.Other

54


Thefollowingactivitiesshouldbeconsideredinordertoensureimplementationoftheactionplans:

1. Eachmunicipalityshouldappointapersonresponsiblefortheimplementationandrevisionoftheactionplan.

2. Theactionplanshouldbeanactivedocumentanditshouldbereviewedandmodifiedbymunicipalitiesatleastaftereach3-6months.

3. Theprogressoftheactionplanshouldbemonitored.Assistanceshouldbepro-videdtothemunicipality-itisgoodtoinvolveexternalexpertisetomeasuretheimplementationoftheactionplans.

4. Anetworkbetweenmunicipalitiesshouldbedeveloped.Regularmeetingsbe-tween themunicipalitiesduringwhich theactionplansare tobediscussed,togetherwithnewideas,shouldbeorganized.

Table 11: Action plan format

Action Expectedresult

Person/depart-mentresponsible

Requiredresources

Fundingresources

Successcriteria

Deadline Status

ActionlineI:Organization-related

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8

Humanresources

3.2.9 3.2.1.0 3.2.11 3.2.12 3.2.13 3.2.14 3.2.15 3.2.16

ActionlineII:ICTsystems

3.2.17 3.2.18 3.2.19 3.2.20 3.2.21 3.2.22 3.2.23 3.2.24

ITinfrastructure

3.2.25 3.2.26 3.2.27 3.2.28 3.2.29 3.2.30 3.2.31 3.2.32

Informationsystems

3.2.33 3.2.34 3.2.35 3.2.36 3.2.37 3.2.38 3.2.39 3.2.40

ActionlineIII:Security

3.2.41 3.2.42 3.2.43 3.2.44 3.2.45 3.2.46 3.2.47 3.2.48

ActionlineIV:E-servicesande-democracy

3.2.49 3.2.50 3.2.51 3.2.52 3.2.53 3.2.54 3.2.55 3.2.56

ActionlineV:Other

3.2.57 3.2.58 3.2.59 3.2.60 3.2.61 3.2.62 3.2.63 3.2.64

55

4. RoadmapE-government is not simply a matter of giving computers to government officials, or auto-mating old practices. Neither the use of computers nor the automation of complex proce-dures can bring about greater effectiveness in government or promote civic participation. Focusing only on technological solutions will not change the mentality of bureaucrats who view the citizen as neither a customer of government nor a participant in decision-making.

Understood correctly, e-government utilizes technology to accomplish reforms by foster-ing transparency, eliminating distance and other divides, and empowering people to par-ticipate in the political processes that affect their lives. Various governments have differ-ent strategies to build e-government. Some have created comprehensive long-term plans. Others have opted to identify just a few key areas as the focus of early projects. In all cases, however, the countries identified as most successful have begun with smaller projects in phases on which to build a structure.

To assist policymakers in devising their own plans and initiatives, e-Government implemen-tation can be divided into three phases [25]. These phases are not dependent on each other, nor need one phase be completed before another can begin, but conceptually they offer three ways to think about the goals of e-government.

Within those phases, the same services should be deployed in a different way, depending on the environment and the technological advancement of the municipality. Figure 7 repre-sents an effort to present a simplified road map of local e-Government services using this approach.

Figure 7: E-Government aRoadmap

56


4.1 LAN, WAN and MAN design

Networkingrepresentsthefoundationofthee-governmentinfrastructure.TheLocalAreaNetwork–LANenablesinterconnectivityofthecomputers,serversandworksta-tions,within thepremisesof the institutions.Standards fornetworkingaregiven in2.3.3,while theprinciplesaredefined in2.3.2.1and2.3.2.5.Theneed forWideAreaNetworkingariseswhentransitioningtowardtheInteractphase.Whenchoosingtech-nology,localgovernmentsshouldfollowthenationalstrategiesforinternetworking,enabling information exchange between different levels of government instances.Standardsforinformationexchangearepresentedin2.3.4and2.3.2.8.Increasingthelevelofe-interaction,especiallyG2B,G2C,G2Gandviceversamayrequiretheestab-lishmentofsecurenetworkingchannelstoprotectsensitiveinformation(mostlyfinan-cial).ThiswillrequireVirtualPrivateNetworking–VPNinstallationstobeenabledovertheWANconnections.

4.2 Basic level of security

Asthelevelofinteractionincreases,sodoesthelevelofsecurityrequiredtoprotectthesensitiveinformation.Basiclevelofsecuritymayincludeaccesscontrol,authen-ticationandauthorization, etc.Somestandardsarementioned in2.3.2.2.Advancedlevelofsecurityusuallyreferstostrongerprotectionofthestoredand/ortransmitteddata.MovingtowardtheTransactphaserequiresestablishmentofadvancedsecuritymechanisms such as PrivateKey Infrastructure, CertificationAuthority, asymmetricencryptionetc.

4.3 Disaster recovery

Supportingthegovernmentactivitieswithlargeamountofdigitaldatarequiresextraprecaution.Specialactivitiesandprocedureshavetobetakentoprotectthesedataandtoenabledisasterrecoverymechanisms.Thesimplestformofdisasterrecoverymeansbackingupallimportantdatatoasafelocation.Thiswillenablerestoringthedatatothelastbackuppointincaseofdamagetotheoperationaldata.Amoread-vancedapproachistostorethebackupstoaremotelocationforphysicalprotection.Ifthedataissensitiveandithastoberestoredwithaslittleaspossibledowntime(timewhenthesystemsarenotoperating),thenremotereplicationshouldbeconsidered.Thistechnologyenablescopiesoftheworkingdatatobestoredinstorageonremotelocation,sowhenincidentsoccur,theworkofthesystemswillberesumedusingthedataatthatremotelocationalmostinstantly.Alistofstandardsandguidelinesispre-sentedin2.3.8.

57

4.4 Internet presence

Oneofthebasicformsofe-Governmentalservicesistheinternetpresence.Dependingonthepositionontheroadmap,itcanvaryfrombasicstaticinternetpages(2.3.3),al-ternativeinformationdeliverychannels(2.3.2.10)inthePublishstage,topersonalizedinformationdeliveryintheInteractstage.Accordingto2.3.2.11,webservicesshouldbeusedextensively,especially inthePublishandInteractstage.Thestandardsforwebservicesaregivenin2.3.5.IntheInteractstage,localgovernmentsshouldfocustowardfullSOAintegrationandtowardofferingfinancialservicestotheircitizens,businessesandotherparticipants.

4.5 Accessibility and usability of the webpages

Toillustratetheissuespertainingtowebpagedesign,oneshouldconsiderthatmanyusersmaybeoperatingincontextsverydifferentfromthetraditionalones[27]:

� Theymaynotbeabletosee,hear,move,ormaynotbeabletoprocesssometypesofinformationeasilyoratall.

� Theymayhavedifficultyreadingorunderstandingtext.

� Theymaynothaveorbeabletouseakeyboardormouse.

� Theymayhaveatext-onlyscreen,asmallscreen,oraslowinternetconnec-tion.

� Theymaynotspeakorunderstandfluentlythelanguageinwhichthedocu-mentiswritten.

� Theymaybeinasituationwheretheireyes,ears,orhandsarebusyorinter-feredwith(e.g.drivingtowork,workinginaloudenvironment,etc.).

� Theymayhaveanearlyversionofabrowser,aentirelydifferentbrowser,avoicebrowser,oradifferentoperatingsystem.

Contentdevelopersmustconsiderthesedifferentsituationsduringpagedesign.Whilethereareseveralsituationstoconsider,eachaccessibledesignchoicegenerallyben-efitsseveraldisabilitygroupsatonceandtheWebcommunityasawhole.Forexample,byusingstylesheetstocontrolfontstylesandeliminatingtheFONTelement,HTMLauthorswillhavemorecontrolovertheirpages,makethosepagesmoreaccessibletopeoplewithlowvision,andbysharingthestylesheets,willoftenshortenpagedown-loadtimesforallusers.

TheWebAccessibilityInitiative–WAI[28]constantlydevelopshandbooksandinstruc-tionsforwebdevelopershelpingthemtoaddresstheaccessibilityissues.

58


4.6 Equipment procurement and specification

Equipmentprocurementandspecificationshouldalwayscomplywiththeprinciplesde-finedin2.3.1.MostimportantisthecompliancewiththeNationalPurchasingPolicies,whichapplytoallgovernmentprocurements.AnexcellentexampleofICTprocurementpoliciesandstatements is theAustraliangovernment ICTprocurementstandardswebsite [30].Theyhavealsoproducedabestpracticesguideavailableat[31],identifyingcomponentsandkeysteps inthe ICTprocurements. Italsocontainsadetaileddescriptionofall theimportantprocesses(offer,evaluation,de-briefing).SinceprocurementstronglydependsontheNationalPolicies,itisstronglyrecommendedthateachcountryshoulddevelopadocumentsimilartotheonementioned.

4.7 System maintenance

Systemmaintenancecanbedefinedasthemodificationofasystemtocorrectfaults,toim-proveperformance,ortoadaptthesystemtoachangedenvironmentorchangedrequire-ments.ThemaintenanceofICTsystemsisofveryhighimportance,withitsimportancegettingevenhigherwhenmovingtowardtheTrasactphaseoftheRoadmap.Dependingonthesizeofthemunicipality,itshouldeitherbedonebyownITmaintenanceteam,orshouldbeoutsourced.Someof themost importantactivitiesregardingsystemmainte-nanceinclude:

� Keepingtheantivirussoftwareup-to-dateforvirusprotection

� Applicationofthelatestfixesandpatchestotheoperatingsystemsandapplica-tionsoftware

� Updatingdevicedriversandothersoftwarecomponents

� Monitoringthecriticalserversforpossiblefaultindicators

� Optimizingcomputersystems(defragmenting,stoppingunnecessaryservices,etc.)

� Malwareprotection

4.8 Security checks

WhenrelyingondailyoperationsofICT,specialmeasureshavetobetakentocheckandenforcesecuritypoliciesandrecommendations.Itisanactivitythatshouldpreferablybedonebyanexternalcompanyspecializedinsuchchecks.Thechecksshouldevaluatetheprocessesandthesupportinginfrastructureofthemunicipality,andshouldproviderecom-mendationsforimprovingthesecurity.Thechecksmayconsistofgatheringinformationthroughworkshopsandinterviews,conductingvulnerabilityassessmentstoidentifyweak-nessesinadministrative(e.g.businessorganisation,businessprocesses,etc.)andtechnicalareas(e.g.softwaresystems,computernetworks,etc.),andshouldproduceadetailedre-porthighlightingthethreatsthatthemunicipalityfaces,thevulnerabilitiesthatcanbeex-ploited,andrecommendationstoprotectit.Theprinciplesforsecurityarelistedin2.3.2.2.

59

5. Risk analysisMoste-governmentprojectshavedifficultiesduringtheimplementation,deploymentorusagephase.Someofthesedifficultiesareveryseriousandcanresultinafailureofser-vice.Therefore,itisimportanttoperformsomekindofriskassessmentontheestablish-mentofe-Governmentserviceproject.Thissectionofferssomebasicguidanceonhowtoassessriskofe-governmentprojectsindeveloping/transitionalcountries[34].TheFactorModelforeGovernmentSuccessandFailureshowninFigure8summarizesthereasonsbehindsuccessandfailureofe-governmentprojects. Left-pointing itemsencouragefailure;right-pointingitemsencouragesuccess.ThefactorsareexplainedinmoredetailintheTables12and13below.

Figure 8:

Factor Model for eGovernment Successand Failure

eGOVERNMENTFAILURE

Lack of Drivers

Lack of vision and strategy

Poor project management

Poor /unrealistic design

Lack of requisite competencies

Inadequate technologicalInfrastructureTechnological incompatibilities

Adequate technologicalinfrastructure

Poor change management

Dominance of politics and self-interest

Effective project managementEffective change management

Effective design

Requisite competencies

Overall vison and strategy

Strategy

Menagment

Design

Competencies

Technology

Constraints Enablers

External Pressure

Internal Political Desire

eGOVERNMENTSUCCESS

Drivers

60


Table 12 lists andexplains someof themain factors that support successof e-gov-ernmentindeveloping/transitionalcountries.Casesinwhichthesefactorshavebeenidentifiedarecitedintheright-handcolumn.

Table 12: Main factors that help support success of e-government in developing/transitional countries

Factor Explanation Examples

External pressure Driveforreformfromoutsidegov-ernment,e.g.fromcivilsociety

BrazileProcurement

DoualaPort

Internal political desire

Drivefromkeygovernmentofficialsforreformandforachievementofe-governmentgoals

TrustAutomation

BrazileProcurement

DoualaPort

MexicoeProcurement

CitizenCentre

Overall vision and strategy

Overallvisionandmasterplanforgoodgovernanceandfore-govern-ment,identifying‘wherewewanttogetto’,seeingITasthemeans,nottheend,andintegratingITwithbroaderreformobjectives

CameroonTax

Effective project management

Includingclearresponsibilities,goodplanningandconsiderationofrisk,goodmonitoringandcontrol,goodorganisationofresources,andwell-managedpartnershipsbetweenpub-licagencies,andpublic-private

PensionsSystem

CitizenCentre

Effective change management

Includingleadershipwithaprojectchampion,useofincentivestocreatecommitmenttoandownershipofe-governmentproject,andstakeholderinvolvementtobuildsupportandminimiseresistance

SupportingDemocracy

BirthRegistration

FRIENDSCentres

PensionsSystem

61

Effective design Anincremental/pilotingapproachwithfeasibleobjectivesandquick,scalableoutcomes;participatoryin-volvementofallstakeholders,leadingtodesignsthatmeetrealuserneedsandmatchrealusercontexts

SocialInvestmentFund

BalochistanMIS

DoualaPort

MexicoeProcurement

BirthRegistration

FRIENDSCentres

PensionsSystem

Requisite competen-cies

Presenceofthenecessaryskillsandknowledge,especiallywithingovern-mentitself;needbothmanagementandITskillsandknowledge

SupportingDemocracy

TrustAutomation

CitizenCentre

Adequate technologi-cal infrastructure

Forexample,encouragedthroughappropriatetelecompolicies

Othercriticalsuccessfactorsidentifiedinclude:luck,perseverance,andadequatefund-ing.

Table13belowlistsandexplainssomeofthemainfactorsthatunderliefailureofe-government indeveloping/transitionalcountries. Cases inwhichthesefactorshavebeenidentifiedarecitedintheright-handcolumn.

Table 13: Main factors underlie failure of e-government in developing/transitional countries

Factor Explanation Examples

Lack of internal drivers Pressure only from IT vendors,withnointernalownership(orun-derstandingofe-government)

Lack of vision and strategy Lackofanylong-termview,lackofguidance,andlackoflinkbetweenends andmeans;may be causedbyever-shifting senior staff and/orever-changingpolicyandpoliti-calenvironment

NationalDatabank

UniversitiesMIS

Poor project management Dispersed responsibilities due tomultipleownershipofproject;ab-senceorweaknessofcontrols;in-effectiveprocurement


62


Poor change management Lackof support from senior offi-cials (causing lackofresourceal-location,andnegativemessagetoothergroups);lackofstakeholderinvolvement(causinglackofown-ership)

WaranaKiosks

NaturalResourceIS

DurbanCouncil

UniversitiesMIS

Dominance of politics and self-interest

Focus of key players on personalneedsandgoals,oftenrelated to‘playing politics’, with symptomslike infighting, resistance whereloss of power is feared, ‘me too’copying of e-government solu-tions for image purposes, obses-sion with electoral impacts andshort-termkudos,andcorruption.


DoualaPort

BeiraCity

CitizenCentre

UgandaVoters

ForeignAffairsMinistry

NationalDatabank

Poor/unrealistic design Caused particularly by a lack ofinputs from key local stakehold-ers, leading to designs that areover-technical, over-ambitious,or mismatched to local environ-ment (culture, values)andneeds;occurs particularlywhere foreigndonors,firmsandconsultantsareinvolved.Otherdesignproblems:lack of piloting, lack of fit to or-ganisationalstructure.

WaranaKiosks

Golaganang

Lack of requisite compe-tencies

Lack of IT knowledge and skillsamong developers, officials andusers/operators; lack of localknowledgeamongdevelopers

DurbanCouncil

Inadequate technological infrastructure

Lack of sufficient computers ornetworks

CameroonTax

ForeignAffairsMinistry

Technological incompat-ibilities

Inabilityofcomputerisedsystemstointerchangedata

AssumingatypicalprojectlifecycleasFeasibility-Analysis-Design-Construction-Imple-mentation,thetypicaltimingforriskassessmentisduringtheFeasibilitystage(inashortandoverallform),andamoredetailedassessmentduringtheAnalysisstage.Theearlierriskisassessed,theharderitistoknowtherisksaccurately.Thelatertheriskisassessed,theharderitistodoanythingabouttherisksidentified.

63

Asmallteamconsistingofamixofdifferentstakeholdersisthebestunittoassessrisk.Iffewerpeopleareinvolved,thechancetomissanimportantriskisincreased.Ifmorepeopleareinvolved,thetimeandcostsoftheriskassessmentareincreased.

TherearemanyriskassessmenttechniquesforICTrelatedproject.Differentcountriescanadoptordeveloptheirownspecifictechniques.AtypicalexamplecanbetheStateofCalifornia,whichusesRiskAssessmentModelexplainedat[33].

However,accordingto[34],thee-Governmentserviceprojectscanbeassessedusingvariationsofoneofthefollowingtwotechniques:SimpleFactorRatingtechniqueorDesign–RealityGapassessmenttechnique.

5.1 Simple Factor Rating

SimpleFactorRatingtechniquetakesaverygeneralandsubjectiveapproach,basedonananalyzedlistofsuccessandfailurefactorsfore-governmentprojects.Thisapproachprovidesaratingforthepresenceandabsenceofthesefactors.

Theassessmentconsistsofquestionsrelatingtoaseriesoffactors,withattachedrat-ingnumbers.Thefactorquestionsareansweredonebyone.Eachanswerisratedwitharatingnumber.Theratingforeachanswercanbeanywhereonascalefromzerototen:thehigherthenumber,thesafertheproject.Itmaybenecessarytoconductfur-thergatheringofdata (interviews,documentanalysis,observations,questionnaires,etc.)inordertoanswerthequestionsadequately.

5.1.1 Factor questions related to “Drivers”

Factor Question 1a.Howstrongisthedriveforchangefromoutsidethepublicagency(e.g.fromcentralgovernment,orfromanaiddonor,orfromcitizens,etc.)?

Answer Rating :from0for‘non-existent’through5for‘moderate’to10for‘intense’.

Factor Question 1b.Howstrong is thedriveforachievementofe-governmentgoalsfromkeyagencyofficials?

Answer Rating :from0for‘non-existent’through5for‘moderate’to10for‘intense’.

64


5.1.2 Factor questions related to “Strategy”

Factor Question 2.Isthereaclear,long-termstrategyfore-governmentthatseesITasameanstoachievingbroaderreformobjectives?

Answer Rating :from0for‘nostrategyatall’through5for‘partialstrategy’and/or‘onlypartlyclear’and/or‘somewhatunstable’and/or‘seesITmoreasanendthanameans’to10for‘strategythatmeetsallthestatedcriteria’.

5.1.3 Factor questions related to “Management”

Factor Question 3a.Howgoodistheprojectmanagementfortheproject?

Theassessmentshouldcoveratleastthefollowingsixsub-pointsasexamplesofgoodpractice:thepresenceofclearprojectresponsibilities;considerationofrisk;goodmon-itoringandcontrol;goodorganisationofresources(includingstaff);goodmanagementofpartnerships(withprivatesuppliersandwithotherpublicagencies);andeffectiveprocurement.

Answer Rating :from0for‘verypoor’through5for‘moderate’to10for‘verygood’.

Factor Question 3b.Howgoodisthechangemanagementfortheproject?

The assessment should cover at least the following four sub-points as examples ofgoodpractice:strongleadershipfromaprojectchampion;supportofseniorofficialsandotherpowerfulstakeholders;useofincentivestocreatecommitmentandowner-shipamongstakeholders(includingoperationalstaff);andstrongstakeholderinvolve-mentthatbuildssupport.

Answer Rating:from0for‘verypoor’through5for‘moderate’to10for‘verygood’.

Factor Question 3c.Howmucharekeyplayersjustfocusingonpersonalself-interestandplayingpolitics?

Signsof this thatcould formachecklist include infighting; resistancewhere lossofpowerisfeared;“metoo”copyingofe-governmentsolutionsforimagepurposes;ob-sessionwithelectoralimpactsandshort-termkudos;andcorruption.

Answer Rating:from0for‘verymuch’through5for‘somewhat’to10for‘verylittle’.

65

5.1.4 Factor questions related to “Design”

Factor Question 4.Howeffectiveandrealisticisthedesignofthee-governmentproj-ect?

The assessment should cover at least the following four sub-points as examples ofgoodpractice:anincremental/pilotingapproach;quickandfeasibleobjectives;strongstakeholderinvolvementensuringdesignmeetsrealneeds;andanunderstandinginthedesignofthe‘humanfactor’,includinglocalcultureandvalues.

Answer Rating:from0for‘veryineffectiveandunrealistic’through5for‘moderatelyeffectiveandrealistic’to10for‘veryeffectiveandrealistic’.

5.1.5 Factor questions related to “Competencies”

Factor Question 5.Aretherequiredcompetenciespresent?

Assessmentofcompetenciesshouldatleastapproximatetoathree-dimensionalma-trixthatcovers:a)thedifferentcategoriesofcompetency(skills,knowledgeandat-titudes);b)thedifferentstakeholdergroups(systemdevelopers,systemmanagers,or-ganisationalmanagers,systemoperators,systemusers,etc.);andc)thedifferentareasofcompetency(strategic,change/projectmanagement,informationsystemsdevelop-mentandmanagement,hands-on,interpersonal,‘intelligentcustomer’(contracts,sup-pliers,procurement),etc.).

Answer Rating:from0for‘completelyabsent’through5for‘somepresence’to10for‘allpresent’.

5.1.6 Factor questions related to “Technology”

Factor Question 6.Isthetechnologicalinfrastructureadequate?

Assessmentwouldcoverthepresenceandresilienceofdatasystems,software,hard-ware,andtelecommunications.Whereappropriate,thiscanincludeassessingwhethersystems(data,software,hardware)supposedto‘talktoeachother’areactuallycom-patible.

Answer Rating:from0for‘whollyinadequate’through5for‘moderate’to10for‘com-pletelyadequate’.

66


5.1.7 Factor questions related to other issues

Factor Question 7.Arethereotherfactorslikelytocausethee-governmentprojecttofail?

Thesemightrelatetomoneyortimescalesaswellasotherissues.

Answer Rating :from0for‘yes’through5for‘perhaps’to10for‘no’.

Onceallthequestionsareanswered,theratingscoresaresummarizedandcanbein-terpretedaccordingtotheTable14.

Table 14: Rating scores

OverallRating LikelyOutcome

0-20 e-governmentprojectwillalmostcertainlyfailunlessactionistaken.

21-40 e-governmentprojectmaywellfailunlessactionistaken.

41-60 e-governmentmightfailtotally,ormightwellbeapartialfailureunlessactionistaken.

61-80 e-governmentprojectmightbeapartialfailureunlessactionistaken.

81-100 e-governmentprojectmaywellsucceed.

Thebasicfactorratingtechniquemakesaquestionableassumption-thatallfactorsareequallyimportanttothesuccessandfailureoftheproject.Amorecomplexvaria-tionwould involve two rounds. In the first round, the risk assessment teamwouldassignaweighttoeachoftheidentifiedfactors-externalpressure,internalpoliticaldesire,overallvision/strategy,projectmanagement,changemanagement,politics/self-interest,design,competencies,technologicalinfrastructure,other.An‘ordinary’factormightbegivenaweightof1;afactorthatwasconsidered‘important’intheparticulare-governmentprojectcouldbegivenaweightof2;andafactorthatwasconsidered‘veryimportant’intheparticularprojectcouldbegivenaweightof3.Theweightingscorewouldbemultipliedbytheratingtogiveanoverallsetofweightedratings.Forexample,ifexternalpressurewasfelttobeveryimportantforthisspecificproject,itcouldbegivenaweightof3.Ifthatpressurewasfoundtobeonlymoderate,itcouldbegivenaratingof5.Theoverallweightedratingforthatfactorwouldbe3x5=15.

Amorecomplexvariationagainwouldinvolvethreerounds.Inthefirstround,theriskassessmentteamwouldassesswhichfactorsarerelevanttothesuccessandfailureoftheparticulare-governmentproject.Itwouldconsidernotonlythosefactorslistedjustabove,butalsootherfactorsaswell. Thesecondroundwouldweightthesefactors.Thethirdroundwouldgivearatingscoretoeachfactor.

67

Thistechniqueissimpleandquicktounderstandandputintopractice.Onthedown-side,atleastinitssimpleform,itassumesthat“onesizefitsall”e-governmentproj-ects,whichweknowisnotreallytrue. Itshouldbealsonotedthatsincethere isasmallnumberofquestions,theyoftencoverquitearangeofdifferentissuesinasinglequestion.

5.2 Design-Reality Gap Assessment

Agapexistsforalle-governmentprojectsbetweenthedesignassumptions/require-mentsandtherealityoftheclientpublicsectororganisation.Centraltoe-governmentsuccessandfailureistheamountofchangebetween‘wherewearenow’and‘wherethee-governmentprojectwantstogetus’.Thelargerthegapbetweendesignandreal-ity,thegreaterthechancethattheprojectwillfail.

‘Wherewearenow’means thecurrent realitiesof thesituation. ‘Where thee-gov-ernmentprojectwantstogetus’meansthemodelorconceptionsandassumptionsbuilt intotheproject’sdesign. E-governmentsuccessandfailurethereforedependsonthesizeofthegapthatexistsbetween‘currentrealities’andthe‘designofthee-governmentproject’.

Thelargerthisdesign-realitygap,thegreatertheriskofe-governmentfailure.Equally,thesmallerthegap,thegreaterthechanceofsuccess.

Theanalysisofe-governmentprojectsindicatesthatsevendimensions-summarisedbytheITPOSMOacronym-arenecessaryandsufficienttoprovideanunderstandingofdesign-realitygaps:

� I nformation

� T echnology

� P rocesses

� O bjectivesandvalues

� S taffingandskills

� M anagementsystemsandstructures

� O therresources:timeandmoney

Puttingthesedimensionstogetherwiththenotionofgapsproducesthemodelforun-derstandingsuccessandfailureofe-governmentthatisshowninFigure9.

68


Figure 9: ITPOSMO dimensions of e-government project design-reality gaps

DesignRealityGapAssessmentconsistsofquestionsrelatingtoaseriesofseven‘IT-POSMO’dimensionswithattachedratingnumbers.

Atfirststep,usingeachofthesevenITPOSMOdimensionsinturn,twothingsshouldbeanalyzed:theorganisationalrealityrelatingtothatdimensionthatexistsrightnowatthetimeofanalysisandtheconceptions/requirementswithinthedesignofthee-governmentapplication.Foreachofthedimensions,anumericalratingtoindicatethesizeofthedesign-realitygaponthatdimensionshouldbegiven.Theratingforeachdimension’sgapcanbeanywhereonascalefromzerototenwhere0ratingwouldindicate‘nochangebetweenthedesignproposalandcurrentreality’,5ratingwouldindicate‘somedegreeofchangebetweenthedesignproposalandcurrentreality’;and10ratingwouldindicate‘completeandradicalchangebetweenthedesignproposalandcurrentreality’.

Forexample,takingthefirstdimension-information-0wouldindicatethattheinfor-mationusedinthee-governmentapplicationwasexactlythesameastheinformation

Current Reality

Information

Gap

Information

Technology Technology

Processes Processes

Objectives and values

Objectives and values

Staffing and skills

Staffing and skills

Managements systemsand structures

Managements systemsand structures

Other resources: time and money

Other resources: time and money

Design Proposal for New e-Gov Project

Reality Design

69

currently really being used in the organisation. 5would indicate that the informa-tionusedinthee-governmentapplicationwassomewhatdifferentfromtheinforma-tioncurrentlyreallybeingused. 10would indicate that the informationused in thee-governmentapplicationwascompletelyandradicallydifferentfromtheinformationcurrentlyreallybeingused.Pleasenotethatalthoughonlymarks0,5and10areillus-trated;allmarksfrom0to10arepossible.

Thesimplest interpretationof the technique is toadduptheratingnumbers forallsevenITPOSMOdimensionsandinterpretthemaccordingtotheTable15.

Table 15: Rating and outcomes for all seven ITPOSMO dimension

OverallRating LikelyOutcome

57-70 E-governmentprojectwillalmostcertainlyfailunlessactionistakentoclosedesign-realitygaps.

43-56 E-government projectmaywell fail unless action is taken to close design-realitygaps.

29-42 E-governmentmightfailtotally,ormightwellbeapartialfailureunlessactionistakentoclosedesign-realitygaps.

15-28 E-governmentprojectmightbeapartialfailureunlessactionistakentoclosedesign-realitygaps.

0-14 E-governmentprojectmaywellsucceed.

Thebasictechniquemakesthequestionableassumptionthatalldimensions/gapsareequallyimportanttothesuccessandfailureoftheproject.Amorecomplexvariationwouldinvolvetworounds.Inthefirstround,theriskassessmentteamwouldassignaweighttoeachofthedimensions.An‘ordinary’dimensionmightbegivenaweightof1;adimensionthatwasconsidered‘important’intheparticulare-governmentprojectcouldbegivenaweightof2;andadimensionthatwasconsidered‘veryimportant’intheparticularprojectcouldbegivenaweightof3.Theweightingscorewouldbemulti-pliedbytheratingtogiveanoverallsetofweightedratings.Forexample,if‘objectivesandvalues’werefelttobeveryimportantforthisspecificproject,thatdimensioncouldbegivenaweightof3.Ifthedesign-realitygaponthatdimensiontobeonlymoderate,itcouldbegivenaratingof5.Theoverallweightedratingforthatdimensionwouldbe3x5=15.

Fromexperience,theobjectivesandvaluesdimensionshouldbegivenahigherweight-ing than other dimensions because they incorporate key elements such as politics,culture,self-interest,motivation,andtheaspirationsthatawholevarietyofdifferentstakeholdergroupsseektoachievethroughthenewe-governmentsystem.

Design-realitygapscanbethoughtofasconstraintsorriskstoimplementationofane-governmentproject:theygiveasenseofwhatmaymaketheprojectfail.Theymay

70


notgiveagoodsenseofwhatmaymaketheprojectsucceed:thedrivers.Thedriverscanbeanalysedaswell,and illustratedalongside thegaps/constraints/risksusingaforce-fielddiagramwithdriversononesideandconstraintsontheother.

Inthebasicandvariantapproachesdescribedabove,twothingscanbeborneinmind:

� Theoutcome:asenseofgapbetweendesignandreality.

� Theprocess:thedeeperunderstanding-ofreality,ofdesign,ofotherstake-holders-thatgapanalysiscreates.

Insomesituations,theprocessmaybemorevaluablethantheoutcome.Itmaythenbeappropriatetotakeamoreiterative,learningapproachtogapanalysis.Here,stake-holdergroupsrevisitgapanalysisatregularintervalsduringtheprojectcycle.Theyreflectonthedimensionsselected,theratingsandtheclosuretechniques.Theyalsoreflectonwhathasbeenlearntabouttheprojectandthee-governmentimplementa-tionprocess.

Thistechniqueisrelativelysimpleandquicktounderstandandputintopractice.Onekeyadvantageisthatitmatchestheuniquesituationofeachindividuale-governmentproject,ratherthanimposinga“onesizefitsall”concept.Onthedownside,ittriestocramalotofissuesintoeachsingledimension(particularlyinto‘objectivesandvalues’and‘staffingandskills’),anditwillnotworkwelliftherearecompetingdesignsorcom-petingideasaboutwhatcountsas‘reality’.

71

6. References

1. MarkForman,e-Government:UsingITtotransformtheeffectivenessandeffi-ciencyofgovernment(2005),4,http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEDE-VELOPMENT/Resources/FormanEgov(6_05).ppt.

2. ZhiyuanFang,“e-Government inDigitalEra:Concept,Practice,andDevelop-ment,”InternationalJournaloftheComputer,theInternetandManagement,Vol.10,No.2(2002):1-22,http://www.journal.au.edu/ijcim/2002/may02/ar-ticle1.pdf

3. Quirk,Barry.(2000).FromManagingChangetoLeadingTransformation.PaperpresentedattheE-GovernmentSummit,December2000,UnitedKingdom.

4. UnitedNationse-GovernmentSurvey2008:Frome-GovernmenttoConnectedGovernance.NewYork:UnitedNations. http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN028607.pdf.

5. FOSSOpenStandards/GovernmentNationalOpenStandardsPoliciesandIni-tiatives, http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Open_Standards/Government_National_Open_Standards_Policies_and_Initiatives

6. EuropeanInteroperabilityFrameworkforpan-EuropeaneGovernmentserviceshttp://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/2319/5644

7. DocumentationonthePromotionofOpenDocumentExchangeFormat http://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/3439/5585

8. “Schemas and Standards” http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/interoperability/sche-masstandards.asp

9. e-GovernmentInteroperabilityFrameworkVersion6.1http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/schemasstandards/egif_document.asp?docnum=949

10. Danish e-Government Interoperability Framework http://standarder.oio.dk/English/

11. TheInteroperabilityFramework:TechnicalStandards:Documentanddataex-change http://standarder.oio.dk/English/Tekniske_standarder/Dokument-_og_dataudveksling/index.html

72


12. Programme for Open Standards and Open Source Software in Governmenthttp://www.ososs.nl/index.jsp?alias=english

13. TheDutchGovernmentOpenStandardsCataloguehttp://www.ososs.nl/ma-trix/matrix.jsp?id=10927

14. http://www.andwest.com/blojsom/blog/tatle/agenda/2005/06/27/Norwe-gian_Minister_Proprietary_Standards_No_Longer_Acceptable_in_Commu-nication_with_Government.html

15. CommonwealthofMassachusetts-EnterpriseOpenStandardsPolicy http://www.mass.gov/Aitd/docs/policies_standards/openstandards.pdf

16. NewZealandGovernmentInformationSystemsPoliciesandStandardshttp://www.e-government.govt.nz/docs/is%2Dpolicies%2Dstandards/

17. New Zealand E-government Interoperability Framework (NZ e-GIF) http://www.e-government.govt.nz/docs/e-gif-v-2-1/index.html

18. Standards, Policies and Guidelines - Malaysian Government InteroperabilityFramework (MyGIF)http://www.mampu.gov.my/mampu/bm/program/ICT/IS-Plan/ispdoc/Interoperability%20Framework.pdf

19. CristianAndresFuenzalidaMiranda,“E-GovernmentinChileandtheadoptionofXMLasstandard:Experiences,ChallengesandPerspectives”http://www.dcc.uchile.cl/~cfuenzal/recursos/chileXML.pdf

20. Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Government of India, “eBiz- a G2B Portal for Govt. of India” http://www.nisg.org/ebiz_docs/poc/Ap-proach%20Paper%20on%20PoC%20-22%20Apr%2004.doc

21. IDABC,“PromotionofOpenDocumentExchangeFormat”http://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/3428/5644

22. IDABC, “TAC approval on conclusions and recommendations on open docu-mentformats”http://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/2592/5588

23. 10principlesofBilbao, http://www.cities-localgovernments.org/uclg/upload/template/templatedocs/10_principes_Bilbao_ENG.pdf

24. BEGIX, http://www.begix.net/

25. THEE-GOVERNMENTHANDBOOKFORDEVELOPINGCOUNTRIES,http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.16.html

73

26. ICTforLocalGovernmentHandbook,http://lgi.osi.hu/publications/2007/375/Annex_4_Handbook_English_final_version.pdf

27. WebContentAccessibilityGuidelines1.0, http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/

28. WebAccessibilityInitiative(WAI),http://www.w3.org/WAI/

29. WorldBank,e-Government forAll –Reviewof InternationalExperiencewithEnhancingPublicAccess,DemandandParticipationine-GovernmentServices:TowardaDigitalInclusionStrategyforKazakhstan,ISGe-GovernmentPracticeTechnicalAdvisoryNote(Draftversion30June2006),11.

30. Australiangovernmentprocurement statementsand standards,http://www.qgcio.qld.gov.au/qgcio/architectureandstandards/informationstandards/current/Pages/ICT%20Procurement.aspx

31. BestPracticeGuideforICTPurchasing,http://www.qgcio.qld.gov.au/SiteCol-lectionDocuments/Architecture%20and%20Standards/Information%20Standards/Current/is13bpg.pdf

32. e-GovernmentforDevelopmentinMacedonia:RecommendationsfromMarch2004 Workshop, http://www.dot-com-alliance.org/resourceptrdb/uploads/partnerfile/upload/142/macedonia%20RECOMMENDATIONS%20OF%20WORKSHOP-sjt.doc

33. RiskAssessmentModel usedby theStateofCalifornia,http://www2.state.id.us/itrmc/pubs&resources/resources/ram_index.htm

34. “IsMyProjectLikelyToFail?”-AssessingRiskineGovernmentProjects,http://www.egov4dev.org/success/techniques/risk_assessment.shtml

35. 2007EuropeanCommissionstudy“TheUserChallenge -Benchmarking theSupplyofOnlinePublicServices“

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/benchmark-ing/egov_benchmark_2007.pdf

36. ThedevelopedAustriane-Governmentsoftwarepublishedasanopensourceplatformsimilartosourceforce http://www.egovlabs.gv.at.

37.Thebestpracticesofcooperationbetweenalllevelsofgovernmentadministra-tioninAustriaonawiki-typeplatformwww.verwaltungskooperation.at

74


38. Banchmarking digital Europe 2011-2015 a Conceptual FrameWork http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/benchmarking/benchmarking_digital_europe_2011-2015.pdf

39. Smarter, Faster,Better eGoverment, benchmark measeurement Results No-vember2009http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/benchmarking/egov_benchmark_2009.pdf

40. T.E.Wohlers, “E-Government:TrendsandSophisticationat theLocalLevelofGovernment”http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/P151EOB.pdf

75

7.1 Standards 7.1.1 Collections

ICT Standards–GeneralICTStandards

http://www.tiresias.org/research/standards/ict.htm

WebContentAccessibilityGuidelines(WCAG1.0standards)

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/

7.1.2 Organizations

ISO-InternationalOrganizationforStandardization

http://www.iso.org/

IETF-InternetEngineeringTaskForce

http://www.ietf.org/

OASIS-OrganizationfortheAdvancementofStructuredInformationStandards

http://www.oasis-open.org/

W3C -WorldWideWebConsortium

http://www.w3c.org/

ITU-InternationalTelecommunicationUnion

http://www.itu.int/

IEC-InternationalElectrotechnicalCommission

http://www.iec.ch/

ECMA-EcmaInternational-Europeanassociationforstandardizinginforma-tionandcommunicationsystems

http://www.ecma-international.org/

7. Useful links

76


IEEE-InstituteofElectricalandElectronicsEngineers

http://www.ieee.org/

ANSI-AmericanNationalStandardsInstitute

http://www.ansi.org/

OGC-OpenGeospatialConsortium

http://www.opengeospatial.org/

FIPS-FederalInformationProcessingStandards

http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/

ITU-T-InternationalTelecommunicationUnionStandardizationSector

http://www.itu.int/

ETSI-EuropeantelecommunicationsStandardInstitute

http://www.etsi.org/

7.2 Roadmap 7.2.1 Publish

Brazil: NationalLegislativePortal.

http://www.redegoverno.gov.br/

Canada: E-GovernmentPortal.Consideredoneofthebestgovernmentportalsintheworld.

http://www.canada.gc.ca/

Dubai: Thenation’se-governmentportalisthefirstofitskindintheGulfregiontooffergovernmentservicesonline.

http://www.dubai.ae/

Ghana: EnvironmentalInformationNetworkProject.Aweb-basedsystemcontainingenvironmentaldataforgovernmentministriesandcitizens.

http://www.epa.gov.gh/

India: JUDIS(JudgmentInformationSystem).Postscourtrecords,caseinformationandjudicialdecisions.

http://judis.nic.in/

Italy: BolognaCityPortal.Encouragescitizenparticipationatmultiplelevels,includ-ingforumsforinteractivediscussionandlinkstocivicgroups.

http://www.comune.bologna.it/

77

Kenya: AfriAfya.Apublic/privateconsortiumusingthewebtosharemedicalinforma-tion.

http://www.afrafya.org

Lebanon: Puttinggovernmentdocumentsandacademicresearchonline.

http://www.sdnp.org.lb/

Macedonia: e-Governmentportalforinformationaboutgovernmentservices.

http://uslugi.gov.mk/

Mexico: E-GovernmentProcurementPortal(Compranet).Puttinggovernmentprocurementproceduresonline.

http://www.compranet.gob.mx/

Pakistan: Anti-CorruptionWebsite,StateofPunjab.Publishingthenamesandcrimesofcorruptofficialsinanefforttostopgraft.

http://pportal.punjab.gov.pk/portal/portal/media-type/html/group/797?page_name=797home&group_type=dept&group_id=797&group_name=Anti%20Corrup-tion%20Establishment&js_pane=P-1004ba76975-10000&pview=true

South Africa: Johannesburge-ServicesWebsite.

http://eservices.joburg.org.za/joburg/eservices/#clkCntrl

South Africa: TheofficialportalfortheSouthAfricangovernment.

http://www.gov.za/

United States: CaliforniaVoter’sGuide.AnNGOsite,publishinginformationaboutelec-tionsandcandidates.

http://www.calvoter.org/

78


7.2.2 Interact

Armenia: OnlineForum.AnonlinecommunitymaintainedbytheArmenianNationalAcademyofSciencesdesignedtofosterpublicawarenessanddialogueonpublicpolicyissues.

http://www.forum.am/

China: NGOspartnerwithministriestoassistinimplementationofChina’se-govern-mentstrategy.

http://www.acca21.org.cn/english/index.html

India: TheCentralVigilanceCommission.Allowscitizenstofileonlinecomplaintsaboutcorruption.

http://www.cvc.nic.in/

Italy: BolognaCityPortal.Encouragescitizenparticipationatmultiplelevelsincludingforumsforinteractivediscussionandlinkstocivicgroups.

http://www.comune.bologna.it/

Macedonia:CityofSkopje,realestatetaxesforcitizens.

http://e-danoci.skopje.gov.mk:8081/login.asp

South Africa: IndependentElectoralCommission.Registeringvotersandaccuratelycapturingelectionresultsandconveyingtheinformationinafast,dependableman-ner.

http://www.elections.org.za/

United Kingdom: TheHansardSociety.NGOwebsitethatmoderatespolicydiscus-sion,theresultsofwhicharesenttoMembersofParliamentforconsideration.

http://www.democracyforum.org.uk/

United Kingdom: LocalGovernmentintheUnitedKingdom.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/

Western Balkans:PortalpromotingICTcooporationopportunitieswithspecialem-phasizestotheeGoverment.

http://www.ict-web-proms.eu/

79

7.2.3 Transact

Brazil: RedeGovereno.OffersATM-stylekiosksthatallowscitizenstoaccessgovern-mentonlineportalsandservices.

http://www.redegoverno.gov.br/

Chile: GovernmentE-ProcurementSystem.

http://www.chilecompra.cl/english/index.html

Costa Rica: SICERE.Providesinstantbillingforemploymentinsuranceandpensionprograms.

http://www.ccss.sa.cr/html/transparencia/estadisticas/d_actuarial/ept/ept2003/eptjn03.html

India:Gyandootcommunity-basedInternetaccess.EntrepreneursfundedbythestateuseportablecomputerswithwirelessInternetconnectionstoprovideruralvil-lagesaccesstogovernmentservices.

http://gyandoot.nic.in/

India: Drishtee.Mobile,kiosk-basede-governmentforruralIndia.

http://www.drishtee.com/

India: TheBhoomiProject.Deliveryoflandtitlesonline.

http://www.revdept-01.kar.nic.in/Bhoomi/Home.htm

Phillipines: PilotE-ProcurementSystem.

http://www.procurementservice.net/Default.Asp

Spain: BarcelonaCityPortal.Aneasy-to-usesiteleadinguserstotoolsthatallowthemtotransactmultiplegovernmentservicesonline.

http://www.bcn.es/

Austria: FederalPlatformdigitalAustria

http://www.digitales.oesterreich.gv.at/site/6497/Default.aspx

80


7.3 Open source 7.3.1 Portals

eGovOS-TheCenterofOpenSourceandGovernment.Manyusefulresourceshere,includingmanypoliciesfromvariousgovernmentdepartmentsandreports.

http://www.egovos.org/

EU-TheEuropeanCommission’sOpenSourceObservatory:

http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/ida/jsps/index.jsp?fuseAction=showChapter&chapterID=452&preChapterID=0

UN-TheUnitedNationsDevelopmentInformationProgramme(UNDP)NetworkingandInformationTechnologyObservatory(NITO)’sOpenSourcesection:

http://www.sdnp.undp.org/perl/news/articles.pl?do=browse&categories=10

UNDP-TheUNDP’sInternationalOpenSourceNetwork:

http://www.iosn.ne/

Austria:OpensourceplatformforE-Governmentsolutionssimilartosourceforce

http:// www.egovlabs.gv.at

7.3.2 Policy

UK-UnitedKingdom’sOpenSourceSoftwarepolicy,asissuedbytheOfficeofGov-ernmentCommerce:

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/embedded_object.asp?docid=2498

Netherlands-ExtensiveFLOSSsurveyconductedbytheInternationalInstituteofInfonomicsattheUniversityofMaastricht,TheNetherlands:

http://www.infonomics.nl/FLOSS/report/

South Africa-SouthAfrica’sOpenSourceSoftwarestrategy:

http://www.oss.gov.za/docs/OSS_Strategy_v3.pdf

USA-OpenStandardspolicyofCommonwealthofMassachusetts,UnitedStatesofAmerica

http://www.state.ma.us/itd/openstandards.htm

USA DoD-ReportofFOSSusageintheUSDepartmentofDefense,prepared byMITRECorporation:

http://www.egovos.org/rawmedia_repository/588347ad_c97c_48b9_a63d_821cb0e8422d?/document.pdf

81

Sweden-FeasibilitystudyconductedbytheSwedishAgencyforPublicManagement:

http://www.statskontoret.se/pdf/200308eng.pdf

Denmark-“Open-sourcesoftwareine-government”reportproducedbytheDanishBoardofTechnology:

http://www.tekno.dk/subpage.php3?article=969&survey=14&language=uk&front=1

7.4 Risk analysis7.4.1 eGov4Dev Cases

India-VillageInformationKiosksfortheWaranaCooperativesinIndia

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/warana.shtml

South Africa-SupportingDemocracywithICTs:SouthAfrica’sIndependentElectoralCommission

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/iec.shtml

East Africa-ProblemsforaNaturalResourceMinistry’sScientific InformationSystem

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/fishsis.shtml

Pakistan-FirstStepsinImplementationofPakistan’sNationalDatabase&Registra-tionAuthority

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/nadra.shtml

South America-UsingInformationSystemstoSupportaSocialInvestmentFundinSouthAmerica

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/sif.shtml

West Africa-AutomatingaSocialSecurityandNationalInsuranceTrustinWestAf-rica

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/ssnit.shtml

Turkey-Turkey’sLocalGovernmentPortal,YerelNet

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/yerelnet.shtml

Pakistan-AManagementInformationSystemandGIStoSupportLocalGovernmentinBalochistan

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/balochistan.shtml

Cameroon-TheCameroonGovernmentWebPortal

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/camportal.shtml

Cameroon-StartingUptheCameroonDepartmentofTax’sWebSite

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/camtax.shtml

82


South Africa-DurbanCouncil’sCommunityInformationLink

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/durbancil.shtml

Brazil-eProcurementbyBrazil’sFederalGovernment

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/brazeproc.shtml

Cameroon-IntegratedInformationSystemforTradeatDoualaAutonomousPort

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/doualatrade.shtml

Mexico-eProcurementbyMexico’sFederalGovernment

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/mexeproc.shtml

India-PlanningWeb-EnabledServicesforCitizensinOrissa

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/orissa.shtml

Bangladesh-ElectronicBirthRegistrationinRajshahi,Bangladesh

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/rajshahi.shtml

India-Front-EndFirst:CitizenPaymentatFRIENDSCentresinKerala

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/friends.shtml

Former USSR-PensionPaymentandContributionCollectionSystemintheFormerUSSR

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/pension.shtml

India-eShringhla:AnInformationKioskSchemeinSouthIndia

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/eshringhla.shtml

Mozambique-ALandLicensingandPlanningSystemforBeiraCity,Mozambique

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/beira.shtml

India-SETU:ACitizenFacilitationCentreinIndia

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/setu.shtml

Uganda-FailedElectronicVoterRegistrationinUganda

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/iecuganda.shtml

West Africa-ProblemsinComputerisingtheMinistryofForeignAffairs

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/mofa.shtml

Bangladesh-TheNationalDataBankProject:AnExpensiveLessonforBangla-desh

83

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/ndb.shtml

Nigeria-ChallengestoManagementInformationSystemsinNigerianUniversi-ties

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/misuniv.shtml

Soth Africa-(Not)ProvidingComputersforallSouthAfricanCivilServants

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/golaganang.shtml

7.4.2 eGov4Dev Design-Reality Gap Cases

South Asia-AutomatingPublicSectorBankTransactionsinSouthAsia

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/bankauto.shtml

Central Asian-ComputerisingaCentralAsianEpidemiologyService

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/epidemiology.shtml

South Africa-ComputerisedIntegrationofTwoPensionFundsinSouthernAfri-ca

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/twinpension.shtml

South Africa-ASinglePersonnelInformationSystemforaSouthernAfricanGovern-ment

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/centralpersis.shtml

Middle East-AnIntegratedInformationSystemforDefenceForceManagementintheMiddleEast

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/defenceiis.shtml

84


7.4.3 Design-Reality Gap eGov Case Proposals

East Asia-ElectronicNetworkingforaMinistryofEducationinEastAsia

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/educnetwork.shtml

West Africa-ComputerisingElectionResultsManagementinWestAfrica

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/electcomput.shtml

East Africa-Campus-WideNetworkingforaPublicUniversityinEastAfrica

http://www.egov4dev.org/success/case/univnetwork.shtml

7.4.4 Other Cases - Since 2001

Colombia-SIMEP...ColombiansInternationalCooperationinRealTime(IICD/in-foDev)

http://www.iconnect-online.org/Stories/Story.import4961

India-ConnectingIndiaVillagebyVillage(IICD/infoDev)


Zambia-TheAgriculturalMarketingInformationCentre(IICD/infoDev)


India-SEVANA-TowardsaHolisticandHuman-CentredApproachtoE-Governance(IICD/infoDev) http://www.iconnect-online.org/Stories/Story.import4932

Kenya-HarnessingICTsforCommunityHealth-TheAfriAfyaInitiative(IICD/in-foDev)


India -SustainableDevelopmentNetworkingProgramme,India-ASuccessStory(IICD/infoDev)


India-ProvidingCitizenServicesonline:E-sevainAndhraPradeshStateofIndia(IICD/infoDev)


Brazil-ControlofTransportFleetandTrips(IICD/infoDev)


Brazil-AcessaSãoPauloProgram-SharingKnowledgeforDevelopment(IICD/in-foDev)


85

Ghana-ImplementationoftheEnvironmentalInformationNetworkProjectinGhana(IICD/infoDev)


Solomon Islands-ICTProjectBringsHopetotheTroubledSolomonIslands(IICD/infoDev)


Panama-INFOPLAZAS-BringingTechnologyandKnowledgetoEveryone(IICD/in-foDev)


Ghana-ICTinNon-TraditionalExportsTradeinGhana(IICD/infoDev)


India-TransitionfromDisastertoDevelopmentthroughICT(IICD/infoDev)


7.4.5 Other Cases - 1999-2001

Ghana-BringingtheInternettoGhana(IICD/infoDev)


Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic-IntegratingHealthandTechnologythroughEngagingLocalCultures:TheStoryofLINCOS/InfoComm(IICD/infoDev)


South Africa-WindowtotheWorld(IICD/infoDev)


Bangladesh-SustainableDevelopmentNetworkingProgrammeofBangladesh(IICD/infoDev)


Ghana-WhathasaFarmertodowithaComputer?(IICD/infoDev)


Brazil-WIDE-WebofInformationforDevelopment(IICD/infoDev)


Zambia-FromZero-RatedonComputerLiteracytoHigherWays:IdeasforICTinNa-tionalEducation(IICD/infoDev)


86


Brazil-ReAACT-ScienceandTechnologySupportandManagementOnline(IICD/infoDev)


Colombia-LocalInformationServices:TechnologytotheAidoftheCommunity(IICD/infoDev)


Colombia-ConnectingColombianSchools:theBilinguistandInformaticNationalProgram(IICD/infoDev)


Southeast Asia-TheTaoProject(TeacherAmeliorationforOptimumWelfare)(IICD/infoDev)


Colombia-UseofICT:AHopeforaNewGenerationofKidsintheCoffeeRegioninColombia(IICD/infoDev)


Honk Kong-ElectronicLibraryProjectintheOpenUniversityofHongKong(IICD/infoDev)


Zimbabwe-ZimSciNet-ITSupportforRuralScienceTeachers(IICD/infoDev)


ZambiaHealthManagementInformationSystem(IICD/infoDev)


India-Land/PropertyRegistrationinAndhraPradesh(WorldBank)

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTINFORMATIONAND-COMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/EXTEGOVERNMENT/0,,contentMDK:20485989~menuPK:1767268~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:702586,00.html

China-Beijing’sBusinessE-Park(WorldBank)


India-Bhoomi:OnlineDeliveryofLandTitlesinKarnataka,India(WorldBank)


87

India-CentralVigilanceCommissionWebsite:ABoldAnticorruptionExperi-ment(WorldBank)

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTINFORMATION-ANDCOMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/EXTEGOVERNMENT/0,,contentMDK:20485999~menuPK:1767268~pagePK:210058~piPK:210062~theSitePK:702586,00.html

Chile-Chile’sGovernmentProcurementE-System(WorldBank)


Chile-ChileanTaxSystemOnline(WorldBank)


Brazil-CitizenServiceCentersinBahia,Brazil(WorldBank)


Colombia-Colombia’sGovernmentPortal(WorldBank)


India-ComputerizedInterstateCheckPostsinGujarat(WorldBank)


Mauritius-ContributionsNetworkinMauritius(WorldBank)


88


Argentina-Cristal:AToolforTransparentGovernmentinArgentina(WorldBank)


India-EmpoweringDairyFarmersinIndiathroughaDairyInformationandServicesKiosk(WorldBank)


India-Gyandoot:Community-OwnedRuralInternetKiosks(WorldBank)


Jamaica-JamaicaCustomsAutomatedServicesOnline(WorldBank)


KothmaleCommunityRadio/InternetProject:ExpandingtheKnowledgeBase(WorldBank)


MandalsOnlineinAndhraPradesh(WorldBank)


Singapore-ModernizingTaxAdministrationinSingapore(WorldBank)


S. Corea-OPEN:Seoul’sAnticorruptionProject(WorldBank)


Philippines-PhilippineCustomsReform(WorldBank)


89

Brasil-SãoPaulo’sCentersforAttendingtotheCitizen(WorldBank)


Thailand-Thailand’sTroubledTaxComputerizationProject(WorldBank)


Vietnam-Vietnam’sTaleofTwoCities(WorldBank)


India-VOICE:OnlineDeliveryofMunicipalServicesinVijaywada,India(WorldBank)


7.5 Other resources

Japan-BestPracticesine-LocalGovernment

http://www.nippon-net.ne.jp/its/bestpractice/english/

Austria–BestPracticesine-Governmentincludinge-LocalGovernment

http://www.verwaltungskooperation.at

90


91

Partner Organisations

Organizations, institutions and companies that have given significant support toNALASanditsMemberAssociationsarerecognizedasNALASPartners.Theirsupportmayinclude,butisnotlimitedtolobbyingforNALASanditsmembers,expertisesup-portandfinancialsupport.Inaddition,NALASprovedtobeavaluedassetformanyofthesepartners,byprovidingregionalexperience,guidelinesorcoordinationofactivi-tiesconductedinthemembercountries

CouncilofEuropeCongressofLocalandRegionalAuthoritiesoftheCouncilofEurope,Stras-bourgTel:+33388413018,Fax:+33388413747/2751Internet: www.coe.int/congress

SwissAgencyforDevelopmentandCooperationInternet: www.sdc.admin.ch

DeutscheGesellschaftfurTechnicheZusammenarbeit(GTZ)GmbHInternet: www.gtz.de

BundesministeriumfürwirtschaftlicheZusammenarbeitundEntwicklung(BMZ) Internet: www.bmz.de

OpenSocietyInstituteInternet:www.osi.hu

fundedby

CIP - Katalogizacija vo publikacijaNacionalna i univerzitetska biblioteka “Sv. Kliment Ohridski”, Skopje

352 : 004.57.7(035)

TrajkovIk, vladimirICT for local governments : standards, principles and best practices /

[author vladimir Trajkovik], - Skopje : Network of association of Local au-thorities of South East Europe - NaLaS, 2010. - 92 str. : ilustr. 21 sm

ISBN 978-9989-2928-5-9

a) Lokalna uprava - Informati~ka tehnologija - Prira~nikCoBISS.Mk-ID 86414602