e government towards a pa approach

8/19/2019 E Government Towards a PA Approach

1/25

ASIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION VOL 25.N O 2 (DECEMBER 2003 ) 159-183

E G overnment: Towards a

Public Administration Approach

Stavros Zouridis and Marcel Thaens

In public administration science and practice, the debate on e-government

concentrates on service delivery, information and technology. This article argues

that we need a broad public administration approach towards e-government that

surpasses this technocratic emphasis. Public administration theory helps us to

escape from the conceptual prison of the information management ideology that

currently dominates e-go vernment. B oth the locus of e-government (the parts of

public ad ministration that are being touched by it) and its focus (its approac h

towards governance) can be used to broaden the concept. If we do not enrich e-

government, many of its possibilities will remain unexploited. Also, if we stick to

the information management approach, e-government will endanger the very

foundations of the legitimacy of public administration.

Introduction

Having discovered the potential of information and com munications

technologies (ICT), both public managers and public administration

scholars dreamt of a radically new government. Stimulated by the IT

industry, e-government became

a

key word in many policy prop osals.

Processes of change and renewal were based on e-government to

improve the organisation, effectiveness and efficiency of public

administration. E-government seems to have further stimulated

processes of administrative reform and new public management

worldwide. Together with schools and universities (e-learning) and

the private sector (e-commerce and e-business), governments also

had to prepare for the new millennium. The advocates of e-governm ent

argued that only governments onlin e would survive.

Although the e-government trend has been widely studied, the

research primarily concentrates on the pace of change. The most

important question seem s to be which government w ins the gold medal

159


2/25

Asian Journal of Public Administration

for being the most e-government in a particular year. Conferences

and books are replete with case studies that tell us how a specific

national or local government has been transformed into an e-

government. While this research is valuable, we need a better

theoretical understanding of e-government. We know what e-

government means from an IT perspective, but what does it mean

from the perspective of public administration the ory? O ne of the most

important public administration trends seems to be h ardly no ticed by

the scientific public administration community.

As such, e-government seems to imply that governance and

governments as we know them become electronic or online. In the

past we had just governmen t and governance, while the future w ill be

characterised by e-government and e-governance. Although the IT

cow bo ys prom ise that these changes will only make governmen t

and governance more effective and efficient, the vast literature on

technological change tells another story. Several decades ago, early

research demonstra ted that informat ion and communicat ions

technology does not only make society more efficient and effective,

but it also fundamentally affects our world views and the social,

organisational and political foundations on which society is built (eg,

Mumford 1934; Ellul 1964; McLuhan 1964; Winner 1977). Therefore,

it is important to search for the transformations that are being caused

by the current trend towards e-government. Predominantly, this is en

empirical issue. We deal with it by looking in two ways at the

worldw ide trend towards e-government. First, we describe this trend

and some leading practices and initiatives. We then analyse these

initiatives by look ing at the objects of e-governm ent. W here are the

e-governm ent initiatives located in public adm inistration? W hich parts

of government become e-government? Then, we analyse how the

current initiatives define governance and public adm inistration. H ow

do these initiatives approach governm ent and governan ce?

The em pirical issue of the transformations cau sed by e-governm ent

as such may be interesting, but it does not tell us how to evaluate

what has been happening. Saying that ICT changes publ ic

administration does not mean anything if we cannot assess the nature

and the impact of these changes. Therefore, we explore how these

changes can be evaluated from a public administration science

160


3/25

E-Government: Tow ards a Public Administration Approach

persp ective. We also use the public adm inistration perspective to look

for some clues and leads for the future of e-government.

E Government: Exploring the Phenomenon

E-Government as Global Phenomenon

The transformation of government into e-government turns out to be

a global phenom enon. Many countries have formulated their dreams,

visions and plans for introducing at least some form of electronic

government. Consequently, many governments are also working hard

on realising their visions and plans. A global e-government survey,

carried out by the UN-ASPA in 2002, concludes that change is the

only constant (UN-ASPA 2002: 4). In the process of change, a lot of

barrier s have to be overcom e. Especially, organisational and financial

barriers hinder the development towards e-government (see Forrester

2000:

5;

Giarte Research 2001; Gartner Group 2000). S urveys indicate

that government institutions are the main bottlenecks. Im plementing

e-government is not technically restricted, but institutionally. While

the sky seems to be the limit from a technical perspective, only some

initiatives are actually being implemented.

According to the Gartner Group survey, the transition from

government to e-government is characterised by four stages. First,

there is the presence of government on the Internet. After the presen ce

stage, government will be able to interact with its citizens via the

Internet. The interaction stage will be succeeded by a transaction stag e.

In this stage, the communication between go vernment and its citizens

via the Internet is connected with public service delivery. Finally,

because of electronic service delivery, government will transform its

organisations and institutions. The first three stages focus on improving

the form of government and establishing much of the basic e-

infrastructure. The fourth stage focuses on designing a new form of

government (Gartner Group 2000: 5).

Various international research companies closely monitor the e-

government efforts in many countries. A recent example is a study

carried out as part of a programme that assesses the progress of the e-

Europe initiative launched by the European Com mission to bring the

161


4/25


benefits of the information society to all Europeans. The particular

benchmark focuses on the availability of the public services on the

Internet (Cap Gemini Ernst & Young 2003).

Accenture produces a well-known and much-used benchmark

study annually. In their third annual survey (Accenture 2002), they

concentrate on how governments in 23 countries are realising their

vision for online government. One of the objectives of the survey

was to find out which countries were making the greatest progress

and what factors explain progress. The benc hmark also highlights the

emerging e-government trends (Accenture 200 2:

6).

The study shows

that there are three innov ative leaders (Canada, Singapo re and the

USA), followed by a big group of vision ary challeng ers (eg,

Australia, the Netherlands, Germany, Hong Kong and France). The

third group is a smaller group of em erging performe rs (New

Zealand, Spain, Belgium and Japan) followed by a group of platform

builders (Brazil, Italy and South Africa, am ong others). The study

concludes that the visionary challengers have made the greatest

progress in 2001. It also concludes that the imprecise, ambitious vision

statements of governments are being replaced by a broader approach

that focuses on how benefits can be delivered. One of the e-government

trends is the growing tendency to treat citizens and businesses as

customers and to introduce the techniques of customer relationship

management (CRM) to government service delivery.

Another global benchmark study aims at assessing the progress

of the 190 UN member states. This study developed an e-government

index to rank the countries (UN-ASPA

2002: 1).

A major conclusion

of the study is that national e-government programme development

among the UN member states advanced substantially in 2001. The

sophistication with which countries use the Internet to deliver quality

information v aries. In 2001, 89 percent of the UN mem ber states used

the Internet to deliver information and services; 30 percent offered

interactive online services; and 9 percent offered the capacity to

conduct transactions online.

The e-government index shows that Nor th Am erica, Europe , South

America and the Middle East score above average, while Asia, the

Carribean, Central America and Africa remain below average. The

score is based on a country's official online presence, an evaluation

162


5/25

E-Govemment: Towards a Public Administration Approach

of its telecommunications infrastructure, and an assessment of its

human development capacity. Almost every public administration

worldw ide has taken at least some initiative to realise a certain deg ree

of electronic government.

Shaping the Conditions for E-Govern ment

In order to transform into e-government, a government has to meet

certain conditions. These conditions refer to ways for realising

applications to actually improve the relation between government and

citizens/companies. Som e of the initiatives taken by gove rnments in

shaping the conditions for realising e-government have been as

follows.

First, the provision of access to laws and regulations. Databanks

containing legal texts have been made accessible on the Internet to

citizens and companies. For example, in the USA the Library of

Congress provides legislative information online at

www thomas loc gov

Second, the streamlining of basic data. Some gov ernments connect

the personal data of their citizens and use this information for basic

services. They are currently developing unique registrations to warrant

or guarantee the quality of the information (eg, is the information

correct and up-to-date?). These registrations contain personal data of

citizens. By connecting them, the same data do not have to be

registered in different information systems.

Third, the securing of confidential transactions. In order to increase

the security of ICT usage, governments are launching programmes to

develop electronic signatures, electronic identity cards, and a public

key infrastructure (PKI). Singapore took the lead in 1998 as one of

the first countries to enact an Electronic Transaction Act (ETA) to

provide legal recognition of electronic signatures through the use of

digital certificates. At present, some governments (eg, the Dutch

government), are piloting projects regarding the incorporation of

biometric cha racteristics in travel documents or identity cards in order

to improve their security. Experiments with iris scans and face

recognition have been carried out in the United States and many

Western European countries.

Fourth, the creation of ICT awareness and the development of

163

http://www.thomas.loc.gov/http://www.thomas.loc.gov/


6/25


7/25

E-Government: Towards a Public Administration Approach

management of wealth and income tax was initiated by the Spanish

Tax Agency

(www.aeat.es)

in 1999. This project covers the entire tax

process (information, electronic tax return filling and payment,

certifications, etc) for all types of taxpayers. Tax declarations are

submitted online and tax payments can be transferred through online

banking facilities. With a digital certificate from the Spanish Federal

Reserve citizens can apply for a tax return. Companies can handle

their corpora te tax and VAT via AEAT's website (Cap Gemini E rnst &

Young

2003:

30).

An illustrative example of e-learning is the EdNA online service

from Education Netw ork Australia

( www.edna.edu.au).

EdNA online

is an information service that provides two key functions. First, it

offers a directory that contains all educational and training program mes

in Australia and a database of web-based reso urces useful for teaching

and learning. Second, it serves as a communications service aiming

to promote collaboration and cooperation throughout the A ustralian

education and training sector. Other practices in the education field

are aimed at the completion of applications: for examp le, for financial

aid (www.fafsa.ed.gov) or for adm ission to the first ye ar of

undergraduate courses

(www.cao.ie ).

In several countries, the police, courts and prisons explore the

possibilities of the Internet to transform and redesign the traditional

methods and procedures. Three leading justice and public safety sites

were identified by Accenture's research: one relating to the online

fil ing of court applications (the Federal Court of Australia:

www.fedcourt.gov.au), another to the online payment of fines (the

Belgian M inistry of Justice: www.just.fgov.be), and a third to the filing

of c la ims on l ine ( the Subord ina te Cour t s o f S ingapore :

ww w. sma llcla ims. goc.sg).

Although using the Internet to promote participation and

democratic processes is relatively under-explored, there are some

examples in which some national governments reach out to citizens

in this manner. The British Parliament webcasts its parliamentary

debates

(www.parliamentlive.tv).

An Internet pilot for military and

overseas civilian voters was implemented during the 200 0 presidential

election in the United States. The pilot concerned a very small

population (84 voters who actually voted over the internet), but it

165

http://www.aeat.es/http://www.aeat.es/http://www.edna.edu.au/http://www.edna.edu.au/http://www.fafsa.ed.gov/http://www.fafsa.ed.gov/http://www.cao.ie/http://www.cao.ie/http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/http://www.just.fgov.be/http://www.just.fgov.be/http://www.parliamentlive.tv/http://www.parliamentlive.tv/http://www.parliamentlive.tv/http://www.just.fgov.be/http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/http://www.cao.ie/http://www.fafsa.ed.gov/http://www.edna.edu.au/http://www.aeat.es/


8/25


illustrates that governments are seriously exploring the potential of

online voting in national elections. Another example is the initiative

by Finland's Otakantaa

(www.otakantaa.fi/kaynnissa.cfin)

which

provides an interactive service for public discussio ns (including online

debates) on highly topical issues. One ministry hosts and facilitates

this service each month.

In the field of social security benefits, an interesting practice is

realised in France (www.ameli.fr ) concerning the reimbursement of

medical costs by medical insurance funds. On a local level, the

insurance funds are responsible for the registration of the insurants

and the day-to-day management. They have created a service with

which citizens can consult their files and reimbursem ent sta tus from a

single access point (Cap Gemini Ernst & Y oung

2003:

32).

When it comes to the social contribution for employees, an

interesting practice is in Belgium. The website of the social security

administration there

(www.sociale-zekerheid.be)

is a good example

of the com bination of back-office integration and an e-portal solution.

This w ebsite is a front-office result of a long-term effort th at the

Belgian governm ent has made over the last few years to link different

databases. The portal site has been designed in such a way that each

citizen or employer can easily find answers to questions concerning

the Belgian social security system. Employers can handle several

transactions online (such as social contributions for employees) by

means of electronic forms. The website is being extended to enable

electronic transactions for citizens as well (Cap Gemini Ernst & Y oung

2003:

42).

The Locus of E Government

Basic Aims and Advantages

Although the pace between countries may differ, the developments

described above point in the same direction. Little by little gov ernmen t

agencies connect their operations with the online world of the Internet.

The advantages seem obvious. First, e-government aims to be more

customer-oriented. Governments can get rid of a lot of red tape by

using com puters. Instead of going to a tax office or a municipal bu reau,

166

http://www.otakantaa.fi/kaynnissa.cfinhttp://www.otakantaa.fi/kaynnissa.cfinhttp://www.ameli.fr/http://www.ameli.fr/http://www.sociale-zekerheid.be/http://www.sociale-zekerheid.be/http://www.sociale-zekerheid.be/http://www.ameli.fr/http://www.otakantaa.fi/kaynnissa.cfin


9/25


citizens can download the necessary brochures and forms immediately,

24-hours and 7 days a week directly from the Internet. Second, with

e-government, public administration becomes more efficient. Both

people and paper can be saved when public administration connects

to the Internet. Procedures and routines are automated in order to

save on expensive civil servants. Third, e-governmen t makes public

administration more m odern. This is one of the major attrac tions of e-

governmen t. Which public administration does not want to be mo dern?

After all, the opposite (old-fashioned) cannot be seriously regarded

as an alternative. Because society increasingly becom es an information

society (eg, Castells 1996/1998), governments should adapt and

become e-governm ents. The trend towards e-government is then seen

as part of a broader process of worldwide public sector reform (eg,

Heeks 1999).

While these advantages of information and communications

technology may be valid for the private sector, this line of reasoning

seem s too simple to account for its adoption in public adm inistration.

Can we simply compare selling books or insurances via the Internet

with electronic government? If not, how should we understand e-

government? To get a grip on the trend towards e-government, two

analytical dimensions can be explored. First, what is the locus of e-

government? Which parts of organisations are being replaced by

information technology? Which phases of the policy process are being

carried out by means of computers? How do political actors use

computers? Which relationships between government and citizens

become digitalised? Second, what is the focus of e-government?

Which processes, procedures, routines and departments become

electronic?

Organisations

Public organisations are multiple entities par excellence (eg, Morgan

1986).

Although the structure of an organisation m ay not tell us much

about organisational realities, looking at structure is a common way

of approaching (public) organisations. To find out where e-government

is located in public organisations, it is relevant to use Mintzberg's

(1983) conceptual map of an organisation. He distinguishes between

167


10/25

Asian Journal of P ublic Adm inistration

five parts: the operating core, the strategic top, the executives, the

techno-structure, and the support staff. In the case of e-government, a

large amount of attention is given to supporting the implementation

of services. T his is a spearhead in every country. Alm ost every leading-

edge practice is focused on service delivery. E-governm ent primarily

concerns the operating core. Also, the techno-structure is being

touched by e-government. The techno-structure has to create the

conditions for e-government (eg, PKI and the electronic signature).

The e-governm ent su pport organisation belon gs to the techno -structure

of public administration. None of the identified activities of e-

government are focused yet on targets and strategy and thus on a

strategic level w ithin gov ernment organisations.

Policy

Policy is a key concept of public adm inistration science. As with the

study of organisations, there are numerous ways of approaching pub lic

policy. Although all analytical tools in the policy sciences seem to be

essentially contested, a rather common analytical tool is the policy

process based upon systems theory (Easton 1953). From a systems

approach, the policy process analytically consists of the following

phases: problem acknowledgement and agenda-se t t ing, pol icy

development and decision-making, and policy implementation and

managerial control. The evaluation phase loops imp lementation w ith

new processes of agend a-setting. This process approach may not tell

us how policies are developed in practice, but it is an adequate

analytical tool to find the locus of e-governm ent.

An analysis of e-government initiatives worldw ide demo nstrates

that e-government pr imari ly concerns the implementa t ion of

formulated policy. The principal issue is to improve citizen-focused

services and to get government authorities online and thus involved

in digital transactions. A trustworthy and secure infrastructure is part

of this principal issue. Many of the initiatives co ncern the improvem ent

of managerial control over policies that are being implemented.

Examples include the provision of access to laws and regulations, the

streamlining of basic data, and the development of the electronic

signature and biometry. Few, if any, of the identified initiatives are

geared towards problem acknowledgement and agenda-setting or the

168


11/25


formulation of public policies and decision-making. One of the few

exceptions perhaps is the above-noted interactive service for public

discussions in Otakantaa in Finland.

Politics

Politics is directly connected with public administration. It is one of

the reasons why e-government cannot be compared with e-business.

Public administration is not just another branch of industry, but a

different type of institution. Citizens are not just shareholders who

want

to

make

a

profit, but con stituents of

a

polity that is democ ratically

organised. Therefore, po litics is part and parcel of public administration

and e-government.

A look at representative bo dies in Western d emocracies indicates

that politics co mprises four key activities. The first is rep resentation:

the choice of a representative body that can make decision s on b ehalf

of the people (Manin 1997; Pitkin 1967). Second, politicians select

and define social problems that qualify for policy-making (idea-

generation and consideration). Decision-making and deliberation in

Parliament is a third political activity. According to the principle of

checks and balances, democratic supervision is the fourth type of

political activity. Although the design may depend on the specific

state system, representative bodies supervise governments.

The e-governm ent initiatives taken so far seem particularly aimed

at supporting democratic supervision. An example is online public

access to laws and regulations. Access to governm ent information

aims to increase the transparency of public administration for citizens

and interest groups. Therefore, it enables them to assess and criticize

the actions and policies of governments. For the time being, e-

govern men t has little bearing on other political activities. An exception

is the above-noted pilot e-voting system in the USA which mainly

focuses on representation. In terms of shaping the conditions for

stretching e-government to the collective decision-m aking p rocesses,

the developments concerning PKI are interesting because this

infrastructure could support direct democracy in the long-term. On

an ad hoc basis, many government authorities in various countries

use the Internet for chatting and discussion platforms.

169


12/25

Asian Journal of Public A dministration

Citizens

In Western democracies, citizens and public administration are

connected in several ways . A defining characteristic o f a republic is

that citizens are both rulers and ruled (eg, Van Gunsteren 1998).

Citizens rule in at least two ways. First, representative democracy

allows citizens as voters to choose their representatives. Second,

citizens are connected with everyday practices of policy-ma king and

decision-making. Sometimes governments consult citizens to hear

wh at they think about a specific policy prop osal, but generally citizens

make up the building blocks of civil society. As people being ruled,

citizens are addressed by public administration by being subjected to

the authority of government. Penal law is an example of this

relationship between citizens and public administration. But citizens

are increasingly being defined as consumers of the products and

services that are being supplied by government.

At present, the majority of e-government initiatives concern

citizens as consum ers. This is because there is a keen interest in the

developmen t of customer services and relationships. The streamlining

of basic data also falls in this category. A gove rnm ent's interest in the

citizen as a subject is less predominant, although there are initiatives

such as securing confidential transactions and biometry. Initiatives

concerning citizens in their civil society capacity are still scarce. The

e-voting initiative in the USA is an example of the perspective in

which the citizen is seen as a voter.

The Focus of E Government

A Limited Focus

Bec ause of e -go vern me nt ' s ra the r na r row locus in publ i c

administration, e-services (or i-services) w ould be a better nam e for

the current trend towards e-government. But this trend is not only

limited in its locus. It is also limited in its approach towards public

administration as the focus.

Superficially, the issue at stake does not seem to be very important.

After

all,

e-government only appears to improve government services.

170


13/25


It takes a specific activity of a government agency as a starting point

(eg, social security benefits, the openness of government, finding a

job,

etc ), and then changes it into e-government by putting the pro cess

into computers and connecting it to the Internet. As the advocates of

e-government argue, only the instruments are being replaced. What

used to be done manually is now being carried out by computers.

Through technology, government services merely become more

efficient, more modern and more reliable.

Technology s Ideology

In his book Understanding Media, McLuhan (1964) demonstrates that

such a socially and culturally neutral replacement of technology is

impossib le . Using numerous examples , he argues that new

technologies will never be neutral with regard to their social and

cultural context. The Graeco-Roman alphabet is not just a written

reflection of the spoken word, but a specific form of writing with its

own bias. Because of the fact that our alphabet detaches the symbols

and sounds from their semantic and verbal c onten t, it has proved to be

the most radical technology for

the

homogenisation of diverse cultures.

Hieroglyph, which connects symbols with their semantic content,

wou ld neve r have had such an enorm ous impact on different culture s,

because it serves a specific culture and distinguishes it from other

cultures.

McLuhan demonstrates that we should not only look at the content

of the messag e, but also at the content of the medium . This is expressed

by the famous phrase the medium is the me ssag e . Postman (1993)

argues that a specific ideology is hidden behind every technology.

Every seemingly neutral technical instrument is tied up with (hidden)

ideological bias, with each affecting how one views the world. As

Postman (1993) puts it:

To a man with a pencil everything looks like a list. To a man

with a cam era, everything looks like an image. To a man with

a computer, everything looks like data. And to a man with a

grade sheet, everything looks like a number.

171


14/25


Only by exploring and revealing the (hidden) ideology behind a

technology is one able to get a grip on its social and cultural

implications. Which ideology hides behind the physical things? In

what w ay do these objects or instruments change peop le's w orldview

and their perceptions of reality? The attention should therefore be

shifted from the content of what is processed by computers to the

ideology behind computer processing. Only then will the real

transformations be uncovered that are caused by a specific technology.

Government as Information Managem ent

So what is the ideology behind e-government? A clue can be found in

Postman's examples as quoted above. According to e-government's

ideology, governance is a ma tter of information collection, information

processing, and information dissemination. For e-government,

information is the core of public administration. When we believe in

this e-governm ent ideology, governm ent essentially becomes a matter

of information. Whether this is done manually or by computers, it

will be the same process. Because people are imperfect, so will the

information be when people process it. Therefore, citizens are better

served when the computers process the information, because

computers are more efficient and more reliable.

The ideology behind e-government can thus be characterised as

an information ideology. In its core, public administration is a matter

of information. Brown and Duguid (2000: 20-21) demonstrate the

consequences of this infologic which som etimes seems to replace the

logic of humanity:

Thus you don't need to look far these days to find much that

is familiar in the world redefined as information. Books are

portrayed as information containers, libraries as information

warehouses, universit ies as information providers, and

learning as information adoption. Organizations are depicted

as information coordinators, meetings as information

consolidators, talk as information exchange, markets as

information-driven stimulus and response.

172


15/25


Brown andDuguid (2000) define the dominance of the information

ideology as infoprefixation . This results in a tunnel vision that tends

to be blind to the richness of the institutions that are being transformed

into something informational. Besides being a tunnel, Lash (2002)

has demonstrated that information tends to function as a prison from

which it is difficult to escape. The information ideology is not only a

perspective or a worldview. When it is being applied, it tends to

becom e a social bul ld oze r that t ransforms prac t ices in to

infopractices. When a meeting is defined as an information

consolidator, it will probably be designed as such. Althou gh the social

conseq uences of this design may be disastrous, from a scientific po int

of view it is merely interesting to understand the transformation.

Because public administration is a socially rich institution, the

reductive focus of information should arouse scientific interest from

public administration scholars.

The limited focus of e-government uncovers the bias that this

ideology causes. When information management becomes the

dominant approach, every issue concerning government and public

administration will be defined as an information issue or an issue

relating to the organisation of information. The ideology of e-

government can be labelled as an informational Taylorism. If it is

applied to public administration, it will ignore other meanings of

government. But what exactly will we loose with e-government?

Snellen (2002 ) offers an interesting and useful conc eptual framework

to understand the richness of public administration as a complex of

institutions. He distinguishes four different paradigmatic approaches

toward public administration. These approaches can be empirically

regarded as institutional pillars upon which p ublic adm inistration rests.

Therefore, Snellen speaks of four different rationalities.

First, there is political rationality. Democratic governance always

results from conflict between propo nents and opponents. The d isputes

concerning government policy may be regarded as the essence of

politics. These disputes are settled by deb ate, by voting, and ultimately

by the use of power (sometimes even force). Conflict, power, force

and political decision-making are always conn ected with (democra tic)

public administration. Second, there is legal rationality. Every action

of governm ent needs to be legal, both in its form and in its substance.

173


16/25

Asian Journal of Public A dministration

Usually, government moulds its activities in a legal form. Legal

security, legal equality and the legal obligations underpinning

government decisions are requirements which government's actions

and structures must meet. Third, economic rationality und erlies public

administration. Efficiency is a typical requirement relating to this

rationality. Even when the economy flourishes, government is

confronted with economic scarcity. The means never suffice to meet

society's demands. Economic rationality also requires a rational

organisation of public administration. Fourth, there is professional

rationality. Effective governm ent policy requires a valid policy theory.

Professional rationality requires scientific knowledge with regard to

the effects of government's interventions.

These four rationalities can be used to analyse the e-government

initiatives described above. Primarily, e-government relates to the

economic rationality of public administration. It aims at creating a

rational organisation of public administration. It enhances the economic

rationality of public policy and the efficiency and effectiveness of

government agencies. E-government (un)consciously also contributes

to some other requirements and rationalities. As far as it concerns

professional rationality, it enhances the internal consistency and

harmony of public policy. With regard to legal rationality, only a

specific interpretation of this rationality is enhanced by e-governm ent.

It departs from a formalistic, positivist concep tion of law and serves a

formal ideal of legal security and legal equality in practice. Political

rationality is largely ignored by e-government. Because of its bias,

the implementation of e-government causes at least four transformations.

First, e-government solidifies political relationships and power

relationships by stabilising data-definitions and the informational

architecture of public administration (Zuurm ond

1998).

The existence

of different definitions does not always express the laziness and

sloppiness of public administration, but each definition reflects a

specific interest. A variety of definitions m ay be required by po litical,

professional or legal rationality. By solidifying specific definitions

and thus specific interests, e-government also solidifies a certain

distribution of power. When e-governm ent has actually been realised,

we may expec t fewer conflicts and bureaucratic struggles within public

administration. Although bureaucratic politics flourish during the

174


17/25


18/25


effects from a dem ocratic point of view. Instead of exp ectin g them to

contribute to the public interest, it forces citizens to behave as

consumers. It only asks what your country can do for you. It tends to

forget that public administration is also built on active citizenship

involving what you can do for your country.

Although these transformations may be desirable, they need to be

reflected on. E-government affects the fundamental character of public

adm inistration and the basic structure of its institutions (Zouridis 1998).

Therefore, it may also affect the legitimacy of public administration

and governm ent's societal position. In practice, these issues are seldo m

addressed. Instead, we are hypnotised by the information ideology of

e-government's advocates.

Towa rds a Public Administration Approa ch

The final question appropriately addressed here is whether e-

government can be enriched from a public administration point of

view. Can we imagine a concept of e-government that does justice to

the richness o f public administration institutions? The locu s and focus

dimensions provide some clues.

Enriching the Locus of E-Government

E-governm ent primarily aims at the implementation of public policy,

dem ocratic control, the operational core , and consum ership. The locus

of e-government can be enriched by using IC T in other parts of public

administration and for other activities as well.

First, ICT can be deployed for the development of new policy

proposa ls to mobilise the support and creativity of citizens. At pre sent,

a regular process for new policy proposals is characterised by some

core aspects. Thus, government w orks towards a single and tangible

produc t: a policy paper. Public administration m anages both the policy

proposal and the policy process. Government decides w hat topics w ill

be handled in the policy paper, what the policy ag enda will be , and so

on. Moreover, government agencies decide who w ill participate and

at what m oment. The process is rather restricted and sophisticatedly

managed. Although this way of preparing policy proposals seems

logical, the question can be posed as to whether the use of comp uters

176


19/25


and the Internet opens up some new possibilities. The development

of the Linux operating system offers a famous example of produc t

develop men t on the Internet (eg, Kollock 1999). The Linux story

and the open source movement inspire thought about these

characteristics because they completely differ from the product

development process of a policy proposal.

The L inux process does not require one single and tangible product.

Many versions and modules of Linux exist, and users are able to build

their own system. There is no single final product, but everybody is

able to select and com bine the functions they need. If this principle is

translated to the realm of policy-m aking, the Linux m odel could mean

that government agencies could connect their policies with the

development of a specific policy field and the actors in this field.

Instead of enforcing a policy, it could be co-created w ith the invo lved

actors. Also, the Linux process is not managed by anyone. Nobody

manages what people do with Linux, how they improve the existing

versions, and what new m odules people add to the existing ve rsions.

Neither the content nor the process is centrally managed. Everybody

manages their own version of Linux, but there is no overall

management. This stimulates people to use the system and to add

som ething to it or to adapt it to their own preferen ces. In addition, the

system is entirely open . The Internet facilitates both th e openn ess and

the free dissemination of Linux, as well as the com munity structure

for the development of the system.

As a metaphor, the example of Linux may be interesting for the

way w e think about policy processes. Could policy proposals also be

co-created by communities on the Internet? Could ICT be used to

create platforms and comm unities that are built around specific policy

issues? A Linux model of pol ic y-m akin g may im prove the

effectiveness and the societal support for new policy proposals.

Moreover, it appeals to active republican citizenship.

Second, ICT may be directly deployed for the interventions and

steering attempts of government. Governm ent uses legal reg ulations,

money and communication to influence societal processes. It could

also use ICT for the purpose of influencing these process es. Accordin g

to Kelly (1998), all of our networks for production, distribution and

consumption will become intelligent rather

soon.

Th is means that every

physical thing will be equipped with a chip. Although the capacity of

177


20/25


the chip may be limited, it makes it possible to connect the object

involved with an entire network. All of these pieces of intelligence

are connected to each other, and then the networks and chains for the

production, distribution and consumption as a whole become

intel l igent . I t could be that the technological in tervent ions

governments enforce in these chains by means of ICT are much more

effective than the current steering attempts. Think of the possibilities

of this kind of e-government for the implementation of environm ental

policy or the collection of taxes.

Third, ICT can be used by organisations to support their strategic

processes. For example, without much effort an organisation can

organise a digital debate with stakeholders regarding its own goa ls.

The question can even be asked wh ether a certain policy carried out

by a specific organisation is still necessary, considering relevant

societal developments. An organisation can also use the possibilities

offered by group decision rooms to internally reassess its goals and

strategies or to develop new goals or strategies. Moreover, ICT makes

benchmarking a more feasible option. Due to m odern technology, it

is possible quite easily to com pare the performance of an organisation

to other organisations, whether it be in the same policy field in another

country or in another policy field in the same country. The results of

benchm arking can be used to redirect the chosen strategy.

Fourth, the political domain could also enrich the locus of e-

government. The literature on e-democracy is too extensive to

summarise here (see, eg, Van de Donk, Snellen & Tops 1995; Hague

& Loader 1999). The activities of politics suggest the possibilities of

ICT are numero us. With regard to representation, ICT could b e used

to interactively connect elected representatives with constituencies

and citizens in their voting

roles.

Com munities of voters may g enerate

and deliberate new ideas. These can be connected digitally with

processes of democratic control by parliament. ICT could be used to

support parliament by means of specific parliamentary information

systems. Why not enrich e-government w ith e-democracy?

Enriching the Focus of E-Government

Enriching the focus of e-government requires a look at the bias with

178


21/25


which the current initiatives have been designed. A numb er of design

requirements can be derived from the rationalities that un derlie pub lic

administration.

First, while e-government aims at solidifying and stabilising pub lic

policy, political rationality to some extent requires vagueness and

volatility. For e-governm ent, the requirements m ean that ICT has to

be designe d flexibly. If it is not flexible, its practice will be lim ited to

basic initiatives like the creation of a digital passport. Moreover, if

more complex initiatives are being realised in practice, they will be

rather vulnerable if their design is not flexible. This may explain w hy

in the past large amounts of mon ey have been w asted on IC T pro jects

in public administration. It can be expected that a system for social

security benefits has to be continuously adjusted due to changing

political preferences.

Second, political rationality also requires that a certain amoun t of

bureaucratic poli t ics should be embedded in the design of e-

government. E-government aims at dissolving bureaucratic politics.

Joining up government is its primary goal and a lot of bureaucratic

energy is devoted to creating the conditions und er which govern men t

agencies can be joined

u p.

Joining up government agen cies may bring

the undesirable forms of bureaucratic politics to an end, but it also

throws the bureaucratic baby away with the bathwater. To a certain

extent, bureaucratic politics create the necessary context for second-

loop learning processes.

Third, legal rationality requires some institutional barriers for

joining up government. To prevent government from invading our

freedom, a number of checks and balances are provided. The adage

that every power has to be supplied with a countervailing power is

one of the foundations of the modern state. Taking criminal law as an

example, the organisational ch ain of police organisations, the P ublic

Prosecutions Dep artment, and the judg es has been exp licitly created

as a system of checks and balances. Every succeeding organisation

has to reassess what the preceding organisation has done. When this

chain is joined up through IC T and electronic netwo rks, every link

uses the same information. Then the institutional cleavages may be

threatened. Therefore, e-government should not only be designed from

the perspective of rational organisation, but also from a legal

perspective.

179


22/25


Fourth, government services as legal processes involves legal

decision-making which mixes the general rule with the individual

case.

It may depart from a general rule stated by law, but it always

proceeds from the general rule to the individual case and back again.

E-government transforms these processes into administrative pro cesses

of bringing an individual case under the general rule. Judged by legal

rationality, the design should also allow the technology to move back

and forward. Therefore, e-government requires reflexive technologies

to meet the requirements of legal rationality.

Concluding Remarks

The concept of e-government seems to suggest that it merely adds

electronic devices to government. E-government only touches some

parts of public adm inistration: the operating co re, the implem entation

of public policy, democratic supervision by parliament, and citizens

as consumers. E-government redefines these parts by means of

infologic. It then transforms the relevant processes into informational

processes.

If e-government s t icks to the information approach and

informational Taylorism, it cannot exploit the possibilities of the

concept. It then probably fails, or it will be limited to rather trivial

initiatives. If informational e-government does not fail, the situation

may become even worse. E-government will then transform public

adm inistration into an effective information proces sing machine . This

could endanger the societal foundat ions upon which publ ic

adm inistration rests and the legitimacy of governm ent in the long run.

E-government does not necessarily have to suffer the pitfalls of

the information management approach. If it departs logically and

sensibly from a traditional public administration perspective, it could

avoid a tunnel vision that blinds the real nature o f public administration

in the modern world.

Note

1.

Based on the Accen ture Report (2002: 20-33) unless indicated otherwise .

180


23/25


References

Accenture 2002, E-Government Leadership —

Realizing the

Vmon, Accenture, April.

Beniger, J R 1986,

The Control Revolution. Technological and Economic Origins

of the Information Society,

Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press

Bing, J 1995, Th ree Gene rations for Com puteri sed System s for Public

Adm inistration and Some Implications for Legal Decision Mak ing , in J Bing & O

Torvund (eds),

25 Years Anniversary Anthology in Comp uters and Law,

Oslo:

Tano.

Bovens, M & Zouridis, S 2002 , From Street Level to System Level Bureaucracies:

How ICT is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control ,

Public Administration Review, 62(2).

Brown, J S

Duguid

P 2000, The Social Life of Information, Boston (MA ): Harvard

Business School Press.

Cap Gemini Ernst & Young

2003,

Online Availability of Public Services: How

Does Europe Progress? W eb based survey on electronic public services, CGE& Y.

Castells, M 1996/1998,

The Information Age: Economy , Society and Culture

(three

volumes), London: Blackwell.

Donk, W B H J van de 1997, De arena in Schema, Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande.

, Snellen, I Th M & Tops, P W (eds) 1995, Orwell in Athens. A Perspective on

Informatization and Democracy,

Amsterdam: SD U.

Easton, D 1953, The Political System, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ellul, J 1964,

The Technological Society,

New York: Vintage Books.

Forrester Research 2000, Sizing US E-Government, Cambridge MA: Forester

Research.

Gartner Group 20 00, Western Europe Government

Sector:

IT Solution O pportunities,

Gartner Group.

Giarte Research 2001, Impact Internet op de ICT bij de overheid Giarte Research.

Gunsteren , H van 1998,

A Theory of Citizenship. Organizing Plurality in

Contemporary Societies,

Boulder: Westview.

181


24/25

Asian Journal o f Public Administration

Hague, B N & L oader, B D (eds) 1999, Digital Dem ocracy. Discourse and Decision

making in the Information Age, London: Sage.

Heeks, R 1999,

Reinventing Government in the Information Age. International

Practice in IT-enabled Public Sector Reform, London/New York: Routledge.

Kelly, K

1998, New Rules for

the

New Economy: 10 Ways the Network Economy is

Changing Everything, London: Fourth Estate.

Kollock, P 1999, Th e Economies of Online Cooperation . Gifts and Public Goods

in Cyberspace , in M A Smith & P Kollock (eds),

Communities in Cyberspace,

London/New York: Routledge.

Lash, S 2002, Critique of Information, London/Thousand O aks/New Delhi: Sage.

Lasswell, H D 1971, A Preview of Policy Sciences, New York: Elsevier.

Lips, A M B 1998, Reorganizing Public Service Delivery in an Information Ag e ,

in I Th M Snellen & W B H J van de Donk (eds),

Public Administration in an

Information Age: A Handbook Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Manin, B 1997,

The Principles of Representative Governm ent,

Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

McLuhan, M 1964,

Understanding Media. The Extensions of Man,

London and

New York: Routledge.

Mintzberg, H 1983,

Structure in Fives: Designing Effective Organizations,

Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall International.

Morgan, G 1986, Images of Organization, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Mumford, L 1934,

Technics and Civilization,

San Diego/N ew Y ork/London:

Hartcourt Brace & Company.

Pitkin, H 1967,

The C oncept of Representation,

Berkeley: University of California

Press.

Postman,

N

1993,

Technopoly. The Surrender of Culture to Technology,

New Y ork:

Knopf.

Scott, J C 1998,

Seeing Like a State. How Certain Schemes to Improve the Hu man

Condition have Failed

New Haven: Yale University Press.

182


25/25


Snellen, I Th M 2002,. Conciliation of Rationalities: The Essence of Public

Administration ,

Administrative Theory and Praxis,

24(2).

UN-ASPA 2002,

Benchmarking E-government: A Global Perspective. Assessing

the Progress of the UN Member States, New York: UN D PEPA-ASPA.

Winner, L 1977, Autonomo us Technology. Tech nics Out-of-Control as a Theme in

Political Thought, Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.

Zouridis, S 1998, Information Technology and the Organization Chart of Public

Administration , in I Th M Snellen & W B H J van de Donk (eds), Public

Administration in an Information Age: A Ha ndbook, Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Zuurm ond, A 1998, From Bureaucracy to Infocracy: Are Dem ocratic Institutions

Lagging Behind? , in I Th M Snellen & W B H J van de Donk (eds), Public

Administration in an Information Age: A Handbook, Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Stavros Zouridis is Associate Professor of Public Administration at Tilburg University, The

Netherlands, and Marcel Thaens is a management consultant/partner at Ordina, a Dutch

consultancy

firm,

The Netherlands.

An earlier version of this article wa s presented at the 7th International Research Symposium

on Public Management hosted in Hong Kong by the Department of Politics an d Public

Administration, University o f Hong Kong 2-4 October

2003.

183

e government towards a pa approach

Documents