Evaluating the progress of e-government development: A critical analysis

Information Polity

Volumn 9, Issue 3-4, 2004, Pages 131-148

  Kunstelj, Mateja ^a   Vintar, Mirko ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

benchmarking; e government; integrated services; life events; monitoring

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249740729     PISSN: 15701255     EISSN: 18758754     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/ip-2004-0055     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. A. Dexter and V. Parr, Government Online: An International Perspective, Global Summary, TNS, 2003.
2. A. Leben, M. Kunstelj and M. Bohanec, Evaluation of life-event portals: Trends in developing e-Services based on life-events, in: Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on e-Government 'Towards Innovative Transformation in the Public Sector'-ECEG 2004, D. Remenyi, ed., Department of the Taoiseach of the Republic of Ireland, Dublin, 17-18 Jun. 2004, pp. 469-480.
3. A.G. Smith, Applying evaluation criteria to New Zealand government websites, International Journal of Information Management 21 (2001), 137-149. (Pubitemid 32380816)
4. A.M. Canavate and C.C. Navarro, The World Wide Web as an Information System in Spain's Regional Administrations (1997-2000), Government Information Quarterly 21(2) 199-218.
5. Accenture, eGovernment Leadership: Engaging the Customer, Accenture, 2003.
6. Accenture, eGovernment Leadership: High Performance, Maximum Value, Accenture, 2004.
7. Bartelsmann Foundation, Balanced E-Government: E-Government-Connecting Efficient Administration and Responsive Democracy, Bartelsmann Foundation, 2001, http://www.begix.de.
8. BISER, Benchmarking the Information Society: e-Europe Indicators for European Regions, BISER Project, 2002, http://www.biser-eu.com.
9. Booz Allen Hamilton, International e-Economy Benchmarking: TheWorld's Most Effective Policies for the e-Economy, Booz Allen Hamilton, 2002, http://www.boozallen.com.
10. BuyIT, Delivering e-Enabled Public Services Reform: The Framework for e-Government, ITWorld Limited, 2004, http://www.buyitnet.org.
11. C. Kaylor, R. Deshazo and D. Van Eck, Gauging e-government: A report on implementing services among American cities, Government Information Quarterly 18 (2001), 293-307. (Pubitemid 33625954)
12. C.C. Demchak, C. Friis and T.M. La Porte, Webbing Governance: National Differences in Constructing the Face of Public Organisations, in: Handbook of Public Information Systems, D. Garson, ed., Marcel Dekker Publishers, New York, 2000.
13. CapGemini Ernst and Young, Online Availability of Public Services: How is Europe Progressing? (Web-based Survey on Electronic Public Services: Report of the Fourth Measurement, October 2003), European Commission DG Information Society, 2004.
14. Commission of the European Communities, The Role of eGovernment for eEurope's Future SEC(2003) 1038, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2003.
15. COMNET-IT, Global Survey on e-Governance: Final Report, UNESCO, Paris, 2000.
16. D. Birch, Local e-Government: A Survey of Local Authorities, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London, 2003, http://www.odpm.gov.uk.
17. D.M. West, Global E-Government 2003, Centre for Public Policy, Brown University, Providence, 2003, http://www.InsidePolitics.org.
18. D.M. West, State and Federal E-Government in the United States, Brown University, Providence, 2003, http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt01us.html.
19. D.M. West, Urban E-Government: An Assessment of City Government Websites, Brown University, Providence, 2003, http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt01city. html.
20. Deloitte Research, At the Dawn of e-Government: The Citizen as Customer, Deloitte Consulting and Deloitte & Touche, New York, 2000.
21. eEurope 2005: An Information Society for all, European Commission, 2002.
22. eEurope 2005: Benchmarking indicators, European Commission DG Information Society, 2002.
23. eEurope2002: An Information Society for all, European Commission, 2000.
24. eEurope2002: eEurope Benchmarking Report (COM(2002) 62 final), Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 2002.
25. EOS Gallup Europe, Flash EuroBarometer 125 'Internet and the Public at Large', European Commission DG Information Society, 2002.
26. Erin Research Inc, Citizens First 3, The Institute for Citizen Centred Service in The Institute of Public Administration of Canada, 2003, http://www.iccs-isac.org.
27. G.N.L. Stowers, Becoming Cyberactive: State and Local Governments on theWorldWideWeb, Government Information Quarterly 16(2) 111-127.
28. H. Kubicek, J. Millard and H. Westholm, Methodology for Analysing the Relationship Between the Reorganisation of the Back Office and Better Electronic Public Services, Proceedings of the Second International Conference-EGOV 2003, Prague, Sep. 1-5, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2003, pp. 199-206.
29. H. Van Duivenboden and M. Lips, Taking Citizens seriously: applying hirschman's model to various practices of customer-oriented E-Governance, in: Governing Networks, EGPA Yearbook, A. Salminen, ed., IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 209-226.
30. H. Westholm and G. Aichholzer, Prisma Strategic Guideline 1: eAdministration, PRISMA Project and Information Society Technologies, 2003. http://www.prisma-eu.net.
31. Hart-Teeter, The New e-Government Equation: Ease, Engagement, Privacy and Protection, The Council for Excellence in Government, 2003, http.//www.excelgov.org/egovpoll.
32. IDA eGovernment Observatory: eGovernment FactSheets, European Commission, 2004, http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/ida/.
33. INRA Europe, EuroBarometer 53: Measuring Information Society-Analytical Report, European Commission DG Information Society, 2000.
34. J. Millard, Prisma Strategic Guideline 10: eStrategies for Government, Information Societies Technologies (IST) Programme, 2003, http://www.prisma-eu. net.
35. J. Millard, S.J. Iversen, H. Kubicek, H. Westholm and R. Cimander, Reorganisation of Government Back Offices for Better Electronic Public Services-European Good Practices (Back-office Reorganisation): Final Report to the European Commission, January 2004, Main Report.
36. J.P. Gant and D.B. Gant,Web portal functionality and State government e-service, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences-2002, IEEE Computer Society Press, 2002.
37. JANUS, Moving Towards Knowledge Society: the IST Contribution to eGovernance (Findings and Visions based on Results of Socio-economic Research Performed under the IST Programme), Information Society Technologies Programme, 2003.
38. K. Layne and J. Lee, Developing Fully Functional E-Government: A Four Stage Model, Government Information Quarterly 18 (2001), 122-136. (Pubitemid 33379949)
39. K. Lenk and R. Traunm̈uller, Electronic Government: Where are we heading?, in: Proceedings of the first International Conference EGOV 2002, Aix-en-Provence, R. Traunm̈uller and K. Lenk, eds, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Sep. 2-6, 2002, pp. 1-9.
40. K. Lenk, Electronic service delivery-A driver of public sector modernisation, Information Polity 7 (2002), 87-96.
41. KEeLAN,Web-scanning of local authorities front office on the web: Report on use of internet by local governments and best practices (web-scanning results), Project KEeLAN, 2002, http://www.keelan.org.
42. List of eEurope 2002 benchmarking indicators, European Commission DG Information Society, 2001.
43. M. Hagen and H. Kubicek, One-stop-Government in Europe: Results from 11 national surveys, University of Bremen, Bremen, 2000, http://infosoc2. informatik.uni-bremen.de/egovernment/cost/one-stop-government/main2.html.
44. M. Vintar, M. Decman and M. Kunstelj, Telematics in the service of democracy: the slovenian parliament and other slovenian public institutions on the internet, Parliamentary Affairs 52(3), 451-463.
45. M. Vintar, M. Decman and M. Kunstelj, The Use of ICT in the Public Sector and its Influence on Communication with Citizens in Slovenia, Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Information Systems "Global Co-Operation in the New Millennium", Bled, June 27-29 2001, Association for Information Systems and Faculty of Organisational Sciences, Maribor, pp. 924-934.
46. M. Vintar, M. Decman, M. Kunstelj and A. Leben, The Influence of ICT on the Organisation and Functioning of the Public Sector in Slovenia, in: Governing Networks, EGPA Yearbook, A. Salminen, ed., IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2003, pp. 171-190.
47. M. Vintar, M. Decman, M. Kunstelj, A. Leben and B. Bercic, The development of measurement system of IT usage in the public sector in Slovenia, Internal project report, Faculty of Administration, Ljubljana, 2003.
48. M. Vintar, M. Kunstelj and A. Leben, Benchmarking the Quality of Slovenian Life-Event Portals, in: Improving the Quality of East andWest European Public Services, E. Loffler and M.Vintar, eds, Ashgate, Hampshire, 2004, pp. 208-221.
49. M. Vintar, M. Kunstelj, M. Decman and B. Bercic, Development of e-government in Slovenia, Information Polity 8(3,4), 133-149.
50. M. Vintar, M. Kunstelj, M. Decman, A. Leben and B. Bercic, The development of measurement system of IT usage in the public sector in Slovenia, Internal project report, School of Public Administration, Ljubljana, 2002.
51. M. Wimmer and E. Tambouris, Online One-Stop Government: A Working Framework and Requirements, Proceedings of the IFIP World Computer Congress, Montreal, Aug. 26-30, 2002.
52. Ministerial Declaration of the European eGovernment Conference, Como, 7-8 July, 2003.
53. Momentum, Benchmarking the eGovernment Revolution: Year 2000 Report on Citizen and Business Demand, Momentum Research Group, 2000, http://www. egovernmentreport.com.
54. NACO, E-Government Survey, National Association of Counties (NACO), 2000, http://www.naco.org.
55. NAO, Government on the Web II: Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General HC 764, Apr. 2002, The Stationery Office, London, 2002. http://www.nao.gov.uk.
56. NOIE and DMR, E-Government Benefits Study, Commonwealth of Australia, 2003.
57. NOIE, Government Online: online survey-round 4, NOIE, 2001, http://www.noie.gov.au/publications/NOIE/online survey/r4report.pdf.
58. Nordic Council of Ministers, ICT Usage in the Public Sector-a Nordic Model Questionnaire, Statistics Denmark, 2003.
59. OECD, Examples of Evaluation Practices Used by OECD Member Countries to Assess e-Government-Draft Point 9 by Diane Van Gills, OECD Task Force, Brussels, 2002.
60. OECD, The e-Government Imperative, OECD, Paris, 2003.
61. PLSRAMBOLLand EWORX, Top of theWeb Survey on Quality and Usage of Public e-Services, European Commission DG Information Society, 2003, http://www.topoftheweb.net.
62. PTI and ICMA, Is Your Government Plugged In? Highlights of the PTI/ICMA 2000 Electronic Government Survey, Public Technology Inc. and International City/County Management Association, 2001.
63. R. Cullen and J. Houghton, Democracy Online: An Assessment of New Zealand Government Web Sites, Government Information Quarterly 17(3), 243-267.
64. R. Traunm̈uller and M. Wimmer, E-Government at a Decisive Moment: Sketching a Roadmap to Excellence, in: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Electronic Government-EGOV 2003, Prague, R. Traunm̈uller, ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 1-5 Sep. 2003, pp. 1-14.
65. REGIONAL-IST, E-Government and e-Business Indicators: Selection of Key Indicators in Accordance With eEurope, Project REGIONAL-IST and European Communities, 2003, http://www.regional-ist.org.
66. S. Burgess and J. Houghton, E-government user-friendliness of websites, The Audit Office of New SouthWales, Sydney, 2002, http://www.audit.nsw.gov.au.
67. S. Dutta, B. Lanvin and F. Paua, The Global Information Technology Report 2003-2004: Towards an Equitable Information Society, Oxford University Press, New York, 2004.
68. S. Muylle, R. Moenaert and M. Despontin, The conceptualization and empirical validation web site user satisfaction, Information and Management 41 (2004), 543-560.
69. S. Strover and J. Straubhaar, E-Government Services and Computer and Internet Use in Texas, Telecommunications and Information Policy Institute, University of Texas, 2000, http://www.dir.state.tx.us/egov.
70. SIBIS, SIBIS Pocket Book 2002/03: Measuring Information Society in the EU, the EU Accession Countries, Switzerland and the US, SIBIS project and European Communities, 2003, http://www.sibis-eu.org.
71. SOCITIM, Better Connected 2004, SOCITIM, 2004.
72. The Henley Centre and MORI, E-Government Ready or Not?, BT eGovernment, 2000, http://www.bt.com/egovernment.
73. TietoEnator Trigon AB, Benchmarking of electronic service delivery in the public sector, Executive report, European Commission, IDA Programme, 2001, http://europa.eu.int/ispo/ida.
74. UN, UN Global E-government Survey, UN, 2003, http://www.unpan.org/ egovernment2.asp#survey.