How much can we trust different e-government surveys? the case of Slovenia

Information Polity

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 199-213

  Vintar, Mirko ^a   Nograšek, Janja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

E government benchmarks; e government evaluation; e government in Slovenia; e government maturity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865613180     PISSN: 15701255     EISSN: 18758754     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/IP-2010-0207     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Accenture, Leadership in Customer Service, Building the Trust. Dublin: Accenture, 2006.
2. F. Bannister, The curse of the benchmark: an assessment of the validity and value of egovernment comparisons, International Review of Administrative Sciences 73(2) (2007), 171-188. (Pubitemid 46895106)
3. C. Bavec and M. Vintar, What Matters in the Development of the EGovernment in the EU? M.A. Wimmer, H.J. Scholl and A. Gr̈onlund, eds, EGOV 2007, LNCS 4656, (2007), pp. 424-435.
4. Cap Gemini, Online Availability of Public Services. Webbased Survey on Electronic Public Services. Report of the 4th Measurement. European Commission, Directorate General for the Information Society, 2004.
5. Cap Gemini, Online Availability of Public Services. Webbased Survey on Electronic Public Services. Report of the 5th Measurement. European Commission, Directorate General for The Information Society, 2005.
6. Cap Gemini, Online Availability of Public Services. How is Europe Progressing? Webbased Survey on Electronic Public Services. Report of the 6th Measurement. European Commission, Directorate General for the Information Society, 2006.
7. Cap Gemini, The User Challenge Benchmarking the Supply of Online Public Services. Report of the 7th Measurement. European Commission, Directorate General for the Information Society and Media, 2007.
8. Cap Gemini, Smarter, Faster, Better eGovernment. Report of the 8th Measurement. European Commission, Directorate General for the Information Society and Media, 2009.
9. Dnevnik, Virant: Euprava v Evropski uniji dozivlja izjemen razcvet, 11.2.2008. URL: http://www.dnevnik.si/novice/slovenija/298183, 24.4.2009, 2008.
10. A. Dobnikar, A. Zuzek Nemec, eGovernment in Slovenia, Informatica 31 (2007), 357-365. (Pubitemid 351184081)
11. eUpravaDr zavni portal RS, Uspesen zakljùeek najvèejega dogodka MJU v ̀easu slovenskega predsedstva, 13.2.2008. URL: http://www.eu2008.si/si/News and Documents/Press Releases/February/0213MJU eUprava zakljucek.html, 24. 4.2009, 2008.
12. D. Janssen, S. Rotthier and K. Snijkers, If you measure it, they will score: An assessment of international eGovernment benchmarking, Information Polity 9(3-4) (2004), 121-130.
13. A. Jansen, Assessing Egovernment progress-why and what, B.J. Tessem, G. Iden og G. Christensen, eds, NOKOBIT 2005. ISBN 8280330267, ISSN 15041697. Department of EGovernment Studies, University of Oslo, Norway, 2005.
14. M. Kunstelj, A. Leben and M. Vintar, Egovernment in Slovenia: Does supply meet the demands of the citizens? 14th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Ljubljana, 12-13 May 2006.
15. Moore, D. (2005). The problem ofmeasuring eGovernment progress. IQ Content. 31.8.2005. URL: http://www.iqcontent. com/publications/features/article 58/, 28.4.2008.
16. A. Ojo, T. Janowski and E. Estevez, Determining Progress Towards eGovernment: What are the Core Indicators? in: 5th Conference on eGovernment, D. Remenyi, ed., 16-17 June 2005. Belgium: University of Antwerp, 2005, pp. 313-322.
17. RTV SLO (2007). MJU: Slovenska euprava sodi v vrh: ?Studija obravnavala le angle?ske strani slovenske javne prave, 19.8.2008. URL: "http://www. rtvslo.si/modload.php?&c mod=rnews&op=sections&func =read&c menu=1&c id= 149959, 24.4.2009.
18. Strategija euprave RS za obdobje od leta 2006 do leta 2010-SEP2010: Euprava za boljso javno upravo. Ministrstvo za javno upravo, Ljubljana, 2006.
19. V. Sulcic, Eposlovanje v slovenskih malih in srednje velikih podjetjih, Management 3(4) (2008), 347-361.
20. The Economist, The 2007 ereadiness rankings. Raising the bar. A white paper from the Economist Intelligence Unit, 2007.
21. The Economist, Ereadiness ranking 2009, The usage imperative. A report from the Economist Intelligence Unit, 2009.
22. UN EGovernment Global EGovernment Readiness Report, Towards Access for Opportunity. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development Management. UN, New York, 2004.
23. UN EGovernment Global EGovernment Readiness Report, From Egovernment to Einclusion. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development Management. UN, New York, 2005.
24. UN EGovernment Survey, From EGovernment to Connected Governance. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Public Administration and Development Management. UN, New York, 2008.
25. A.WaksbergGuerrini and E.Aibar, Towards aNetworkGovernment? ACriticalAnalysis ofCurrentAssessmentMethods for EGovernment, EGOV 2007, LNCS 4656, M.A. Wimmer, H.J. Scholl and A. Gr̈onlund, eds, 2007, pp. 330-341.
26. D.M. West, Global egovernment, 2007. Center for Public Policy, Brown University, USA, 2007.
27. D.M. West, Improving Technology Utilization in Electronic Government around the World, 2008. Center for Public Policy, Brown University, US, 2008.