Methodological approaches to assessing the digitalisation of public administration and public services
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17308/econ.2024.2/11829Keywords:
digital government, digitalisation of public administration, digitalisation of public services, methods of assessing the digitalisation of public administrationAbstract
Subject. Digitalisation is a global trend in the evolution and transformation of public administration systems. The developed methodological approaches, which allow assessing the effectiveness of this process and determining its impact on the socio-economic dynamics of states, strive to catch up with the rapid development of modern information and communication technologies. What is more, the government often acts as a driving force for the introduction of these technologies. The existing international, national, and regional methods of assessment are based on criteria and indicators which depend on the analytical purposes. Such criteria are developed within different databases and focus on different aspects of the digitalisation of public administration. It is important to analyse and monitor the outcomes and conditions of digital processes in public administration as well as the demand for them. Such analysis and motoring contribute to information management required for the implementation of other state functions.
Objectives. The research is aimed at achieving the following research objectives: to analyse the state of the existing system of assessment of digitalisation in the area of public administration with due account of current assessment trends, to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods, to develop an original approach to their classification, and to search for optimisation opportunities.
Methodology. The dialectical method and the methods of analysis and synthesis were used to achieve these objectives. The study is based on the contemporary achievements in the methods for assessing the digitalisation of public administration described in relevant research papers and regulations.
Conclusions. The peculiarities of existing methods for assessing the digitalisation of public administration are due to both the peculiarities of the analysed object and the needs of the users of the analytical information. In this regard, we propose an original classification of assessment approaches, which consists of the following groups of methods: methods that assess the digitalisation conditions (group 1), the results of digitalisation in terms of available public services (group 2) and in terms of satisfaction of the main stakeholders: the public, businesses, state bodies, government agencies, and their employees (group 3). As a way of optimisation, it was considered whether it would be relevant to include indicators of the use of artificial intelligence technologies in public administration.
Downloads
References
Абрамов, В. И., & Андреев, В. Д. (2023). Анализ стратегии цифровой трансформации регионов России в контексте достижения национальных целей. Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления, (1), 89-119. [Abramov, V. I., & Andreev, V. D. (2023). Analysis of the digital transformation strategy of Russian regions in the context of achieving national goals. Public Administration Issues, (1), 89-119. (In Russian).].
Добролюбова, Е. И., Южаков, В. Н., & Старостина, А. Н. (2021). Цифровая трансформация государственного управления: оценка результативности и эффективности. Москва, Дело. [Dobrolyubova, E. I., Yuzhakov, V. N., & Starostina, A. N. (2021). Digital transformation of public administration: assessment of effectiveness and efficiency. Moscow, Delo Publ. (In Russian).].
Индекс «Цифровая Россия» (2018). Москва, Сколково. [Index “Digital Russia” (2018). Moscow, Skolkovo. (In Russian).]
Кузина, Л. С. (2023). Кто и почему не пользуется Интернетом в России? Цифровая экономика, (274). [Kuzina, L. S. (2023). Who and why does not use the Internet in Russia? Digital Economy, (274). (In Russian).]
Кузнецова, И. В. (2021). Методики оценки эффективности применения цифровых технологий в системе государственного управления. Новые технологии, (2), 93-100. [Kuznetsova, I. V. (2021). Methods for assessing the effectiveness of the use of digital technologies in the public administration system. New Technologies, (2), 93-100. (In Russian).]
Сидоренко, Э. Л., Барциц, И. Н., & Хисамова, З. И. (2019). Эффективность цифрового государственного управления: теоретические и прикладные аспекты. Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления, (2), 93-114. [Sidorenko, E. L., Bartsits, I. N., & Khisamova, Z. I. (2019). The effectiveness of digital public administration: theoretical and applied aspects. Public Administration Issues, (2), 93-114. (In Russian).]
Костина, С. Н., Сивоволов, Д. Л., Банных, Г. А., Резер, Т. М., & Александров, О. Г. (2022). Цифровизация публичного управления. Екатеринбург, Изд-во Уральского федерального ун-та. [Kostina, S. N., Sivovolov, D. L., Bannykh, G. A., Rezer, T. M., & Alexandrov, O. G. (2022). Digitalization of public administration. Yekaterinburg, Ural Federal University Publ. (In Russian).]
Южаков, В. Н., Зыбуновская, Н.В., Покида, А.Н., & Старостина, А.Н. (2023). Цифровизация взаимодействия граждан и государства: оценка гражданами эффектов, рисков и перспектив. Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления, (2), 33-73. [Yuzhakov, V.N., Zybunovskaya, N.V., Pokida, A.N., & Starostina, A.N. (2023). Digitalization of interaction between citizens and the state: citizens’ assessment of effects, risks and prospects. Public Administration Issues, (2), 33-73. (In Russian).]
Abu Shanab, E., & Osmani, M. (2019). E-Government as a Tool for Improving Entrepreneurship. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 15(1), 36-46.
Chu, P., & Sun, Y. (2013). Prospective survey on future e-governance research directions. Proceedings of ECEG 2013, the 13th European Conference on e-Government. U.K. : Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited.
Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) 2022. (2022). Methodological Note. Brussels, EuroComission.
E-Government Survey 2022. The Future of Digital Government. (2022). New York, United Nations.
GovTech Maturity Index -2022. Trends in Public Sector Digital Transformation. (2022). Washington, The World Bank Group.
IMD World Digital Competitiveness: Ranking 2023. (2023). Lausanne, World Competitiveness Center IMD.
Lindquist, E. A. (2022). The digital era and public sector reforms: Transformation or new tools for competing values? Canadian Public Administration, 65(3), 547-568.
Macintosh, A., & Whyte, A. (2008). Towards an Evaluation Framework for eParticipation. Transforming Government People: Process and Policy, 2(1), 16-30.
Meuche T. (2022). Dilemmata und Wege zur Digitalisierung der öffentlichen Verwaltung. Gr Interakt Org, 53, 99–108.
Dutta, S., & Lanvin, B. (2023). Network Readiness Index – 2023. Trust in a Network Society: A crisis of the digital age? Washington DC.
Siskos, E., Askounis, D., & Psarras, J. (2014). Multicriteria Decision Support For Global E-Government Evaluation. Omega, 46, 51–63.
Zhao, F., Wallis, J., Singh, М. (2015). E-government development and the digital economy: a reciprocal relationship. Internet Research, 25(5), 734-766.
