Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
E-Government Strategy and Policy in Developing Countries Ibrahim OTIENO1, Elijah OMWENGA2, Timothy WAEMA3 1, 2, 3 University of Nairobi, P.O. BOX 30197- 00100, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254-20-3318262, Fax: + 254-20-3318262 1 [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract The development of e-government is viewed as a way of improving access to information and services to citizens through the use of ICT to enhance transparency, responsiveness, accountability, efficiency and effectiveness of public service. In spite of the fact that e-government has great potential this opportunity has not been fully exploited particularly in developing countries. This is attributable to the fact that these countries face various barriers including the availability of an effective e-government strategy together with associated policy and legislative framework to support its implementation. Developed countries have more robust e-government infrastructure, strategy, supportive policy and legislative framework. Consequently, developed countries have continued to advance in e-government as evidenced by their dominance in e-government benchmarking rankings and high levels of maturity in the e-government maturity models continuum. This study reviews the extant e-government strategies, policy and legislative framework in the U.S.A. and several developing countries in Asia and Africa including: China, India, South Africa, Kenya, Tanzania and Botswana. It is apparent from the study that most governments in the developing countries have developed respective e-government strategies. However, the legislative environment in most of these countries is not yet mature to fully support e-government and the developing countries have a long way to go in creating conducive environment for e-government. This study makes recommendations out of the review to inform future strategy and policy particularly in the context of developing countries. This study also takes cognisance of the fact that the operating environment in developing and developed countries vary in terms of historical, political, social, economic and cultural context that affect the growth, implementation and impact of e-government on the target population. Keywords: E-government, Strategy, Policy, Legislation, Governance, Public Administration 1. Introduction The main goal of e-government is to promote the concept of informatization by facilitating access and use of government information and services by citizens through the use of ICT to enhance transparency, accountability, efficiency and effectiveness of public service (Shan et al., 2004; Njuru, 2011; Gulati et al., 2012; Jadi & Jie, 2014). Lowery (2001) alludes to the fact that e-government has successfully brought about innovation and tremendous reforms in public administration as we advance in the Digital Age. These reforms in the public sector have brought about significant changes not only in government but also in the way government interacts with its citizens leading to pervasiveness of service, responsiveness, transparency and accountability in government. However, it is also evident that the potential of e-government has not been fully exploited (Löfstedt, 2005). Consequently, the expected reforms and impact that would come along with it have not been fully realized particularly in developing countries (Chen et al, 2006; Cloete, 2012). In order to reap the full benefit of e-government, it is imperative to re-engineer government processes and upscale services to the transaction level in the e-government models maturity continuum (Castelnovo, 2010). Hachigian (2002) also portends that success in the implementation of e-government requires re-engineering of government processes; active partnerships with citizens and private sector; and a participatory approach. Vuksic et al.(2010) and Jadi & Jie, (2014) contend that significant change in business processes and infrastructure as a result of the implementation of e-government, which sometimes involves multiple organizations, cannot be realized without change in policy, legislation and organizational structures. Institutionalization of these changes and practices is important for e1 government to be successful. However, it is also important to note that employees in public service have a high tendency for resistance to change, are less innovative when it comes to change and would therefore not engage in projects that require business process changes (Vuksic et al., 2010). It is therefore important to institute change management strategies in public service as e-government projects are implemented to minimize resistance and manage the change process (Mulder, 2004). This will include creating awareness about the available systems and user involvement at all stages, It has been observed that some of the challenges facing public sector organizations include: competing and not complimentary objectives of public sector organizations; lack of suitable criteria to measure achievement of goals and some public managers have conflict of interest (Vuksic et al., 2010) leading to failure of e-government projects. For successful implementation of e-government, institutions must have an enterprise-wide approach to e-government with strategy, policies and a legislative framework that govern all facets of the organization. It is also important to develop an effective framework for integrating e-government strategy and policy from the top to the lower levels of e-government administration. It has also been established that e-government in developing countries face a number of barriers including poor ICT infrastructure, low government funding, digital divide, poor project management; low literacy levels, low ICT skills and inadequate policy and regulatory framework (Jadi & Jie, 2014; Otieno & Omwenga, 2015). Consequently, in spite of the successful implementation of some of the e-government projects, previous studies present many cases of egovernment project failure. It is apparent that the rate of failure of e-government projects even in developed countries is high. It is estimated that 20-25% projects are never implemented or abandoned immediately after implementation and a further 33% fail partially (Chen et al., 2006; Heeks, 2003). The rate of failure is alarming and even higher in developing countries compared to developed countries (Cloete, 2012; Otieno & Omwenga, 2015). Rabaiah & Vandijck (2011) define e-government strategy as a plan for e-government systems and related support infrastructure which guides management in achieving its objectives. The implementation of e-government initiatives can be done at micro (organization) level, meso (national) level or macro (international) level (Mulder, 2004). InfoDev/World Bank (2009) and Mulder (2004) portend that the implementation of e-government at meso and macro levels involves different players and therefore require an appropriate strategy and policy for coordination of the activities of the different players at the various levels. This emphasizes the need to develop coherent e-government strategies, strong regulatory and policy frameworks to harmonise operations at those levels and build consensus among the different players. This is important in creating a sound architecture for implementation of e-government. Moreover, sometimes e-government will also require collaboration between public and private sector in the form of Public-Private-Partnerships (PPPs) and hence the need for relevant collaboration framework and policy to support them. In order to reap from e-government, business processes must be reviewed and reengineered and the infrastructure revamped to support new emerging ways of conducting business (Lowery, 2001; Basant et al., 2006). Jadi & Jie (2014) and Lowery (2001) concur that e-government also increases the level of citizen participation and their satisfaction with e-government services. However, Njuru (2011) and Hachigian (2002) argue that e-government is not a panacea to all public administration challenges facing developing countries and therefore it is important to use a multiprong approach to address other governance issues bedevilling developing countries. Cloete (2012) argues that e-government must be given special attention in developing countries not only because of its potential for stronger institutional capacity-building but for its ability to transform public service delivery for both citizens and businesses. 2 This paper begins with a brief background of e-government, the challenges of e-government, the need for appropriate legislative and policy framework and the potential of e-government in improving service delivery in public administration. It then proceeds to underscore the problem statement followed by justification for conducting the study. Subsequently, it highlights the research questions to be addressed by the study and the methodology to be followed in addressing these questions. The paper then gives a detailed review of literature on e-government strategy and policy and concludes with recommendations for improving e-government in developing countries. 2. Problem Statement It is important to note that implementation of e-government does not occur in a vacuum and the government must provide a conducive legislative environment for its implementation to be successful and to realize the intended impact. Alghamdi & Beloff (2014), Shan et al. (2004) and InfoDev/World Bank (2009) contend that that the government must put in place standards and legislative framework to guide the implementation of e-government with respect to management of electronic signatures, electronic documents, electronic transactions, interoperability, privacy, data protection and information security. The inexistence of the required policy and legal instruments to govern these issues will impede the progress of e-government. Therefore, it is imperative to review the existing legislation to ensure that it is not retrogressive but promotes progress of e-government. E-government development and progress in developed countries has been more successful and advanced compared to the progress in developing countries. However, due to the differences in historical, technological, social, political, cultural and economic contexts we cannot apply the same principles that have worked in developed countries to the local context (Jadi & Jie, 2014; Chen et al., 2006). Gulati et al. (2012) also contend that e-government success, development and participation are greater in countries that promote a culture of good corporate governance and enforce the existing policies and regulatory framework. Developed countries perform better in the e-government arena because they have better infrastructure, more mature governance structures and an elaborate ICT regulatory framework that is usually enforced (Chen et al, 2006). Sukhbaatar & Odgerel (2005) contend that the Mongolian government intended to create a favourable policy and regulatory environment through development of appropriate laws on IT, egovernance, electronic signatures and electronic transactions to support e-government. In the case of South Africa, Cloete (2012) argues that one of the reasons that led to the stagnation of the progress of e-government after the development of the first e-government strategy in 2001 was the lack of strong leadership required to coordinate e-government and an impeded policy development process. E-government researchers contend that one of the greatest barriers hampering the progress of e-government and particularly in developing countries is inadequate laws and regulatory framework to support e-government. This together with the resistance by managers to reengineer, innovate and adopt new business processes to support e-government has hindered egovernment progress in many developing countries. It is evident from literature review that government in developed countries have put in place vibrant e-government strategy and policy which are constantly being reviewed to adapt to the changing technological and political environment (Chen et al., 2006). One of the strong recommendations coming out of the study by Cloete (2012) is regular review of the extant e-government strategy and its implementation plan including creating a favourable regulatory environment. A vibrant e-government strategy, policy and supportive legislative framework will promote egovernment adoption, development and implementation (Alghamdi & Beloff, 2014). This will include the implementation of a uniform and common government systems and infrastructure (Shan et al., 2004; InfoDev/World Bank, 2009; Cloete, 2012). InfoDev/World Bank (2009) postulates that some of the policies required to reform the ICT environment and e-government by extension include: 3 a) introduction and enforcement of competition; b) universal access; c) establishment of strong and independent regulatory authorities; and d) simplification of procedures and licensing requirements. It is also important to note that most countries including the developing ones have realized the importance of formulating an e-government strategy to support e-government implementation and progress (Rabaiah & Vandijck, 2011). These strategies are at different levels of implementation. Some of the developing countries that have established e-government strategies include Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Botswana, Mongolia and India (Monga, 2008; Cloete, 2012; Nkwe, 2012; Karokola, 2012; Sukhbaatar & Odgerel, 2005; Njuru, 2011). Most of the e-government strategies for these countries focus on infrastructure development through Public-Private-Partnerships (PPPs). One of the greatest barriers identified is the formulation of a regulatory framework and enforcement of policies required for successful implementation of e-government (Sukhbaatar & Odgerel, 2005; Nkwe, 2012; Njuru, 2011 ; Dwivedi & Bharti, 2010). It was also observed that some of the challenges hampering the adoption of e-government include: public organization cultures, low citizen participation and pubic-private partnerships (Sukhbaatar & Odgerel, 2005). It is evident from the extant literature that the issues of e-government strategy and policy are important in fast-tracking the development and progress of e-government. E-government in developed countries is more advanced because of the existence of appropriate strategy, policy and a regulatory framework that is regularly reviewed to adapt to changing technological, social, economic and political environment. However, developing countries have dragged behind in this respect and will have to address these barriers to favourably compete with their counterparts in the developed world. In this study, we explore issues pertaining to strategy and policy that are necessary in supporting and enhancing progress of e-government in developing countries. The results of this study will assist in identifying existing gaps and challenges and make recommendations to address them. 3. Justification of Study The role of e-government in introducing the much needed reforms in public administration and enhancement of public service delivery cannot be gainsaid. E-government has potential that has not been fully exploited especially by developing countries. This potential has not been fully exploited and the intended impact realized because of various barriers hampering e-government progress in developing countries (Chen et al., 2006). The key barriers include: lack of ICT infrastructure, inadequate policy and legislative framework, low literacy levels and inadequate ICT skills (Jadi & Jie, 2014; Otieno & Omwenga, 2015). There exists a gap with respect to the issues of formulation and enforcement of policy and legislation particularly in developing countries. This study intends to address the barrier of inadequate or inappropriate e-government strategy, policy and legislative framework. The results of this study will be relevant to scholars, e-government policy makers and implementers. Scholars will gain from the new knowledge generated and the policy makers and implementers will be informed on the matters to address when developing e-government strategy and policy required in supporting effective implementation and management of e-government initiatives. This will help in improving the success rate, adoption and progress of e-government projects particularly in developing countries. 4 4. Research Questions The main question for this research is: “what are the barriers to the effective implementation of e-government in respect to strategy, policy and legislative framework in the context of developing countries and how can we overcome them?” The specific research questions arising from the overall research question for this study are: a) What is the level of development and progress in implementation of e-government strategies in developing countries? b) What are some of the barriers in the development and implementation of e-government strategy and policy in the context of developing countries? c) How can we overcome these barriers and enhance the progress of e-government in developing countries? 5. Methodology This study conducted a desk review of the outcome of e-government based on the grounded theory. The study performed a comparative analysis of outcome of e-government strategy for one of the top world e-government implementers and those of selected six developing countries. In order to be included for the study, the country was to be in Africa or Asia; be implementing an e-government strategy; and be experiencing challenges in implementation of e-government. The study went ahead to make recommendations based on the findings, taking into consideration the operating context of developing countries. The study collected mostly qualitative data for analysis and the unit of analysis was country. The study went ahead to discuss policy and legislative issues that e-government strategies for these countries have addressed and barriers that hamper e-government implementation in these countries compared to their counterparts in developed countries. The study concluded by making recommendation on how to overcome the barriers identified. The study was guided by the conceptual framework for e-government implementation process of e-government strategies developed by Chen et al (2006). The framework identifies three major factors (egovernment infrastructure, cultural and societal factors) as having an effect on the egovernment implementation process and outcomes. 6. Literature Review Gulati et al. (2012) argues that most of the studies in e-government have ignored the impact of strategy and policy on e-government progress that in turn enhance adoption and participation by citizens. Lowery (2001) emphasizes that e-government strategy is important in steering the development and implementation of e-government. E-government strategy gives an overall vision; identifies specific goals and objectives to be realized; creates a policy framework necessary to support e-government; and defines an appropriate business model and implementation plan including sustainability (Lowery, 2001; Sukhbaatar & Odgerel, 2005; Vuksic et al, 2010). It is imperative to note that e-government project goals and objectives must be in line with government policy. Rabaiah & Vandijck (2011) define a generic e-government strategic framework based on best practices and recommend that e-government strategies must be kept concise. When developing an e-government strategy, it is important to incorporate an appropriate marketing and communication plan as a part of the strategy to facilitate citizen awareness and adoption of e-government. Many e-government initiatives have not realized the intended impact because of inadequate marketing and awareness campaigns targeting citizens. E-government involves marketing and processing of commercial transactions that may give rise to legal issues 5 that are important to consider when rolling out e-government. Privacy and security concerns that are important in building citizens’ trust in e-government must also be addressed by the strategy as they pose a great risk to the implementation of e-government (Lowery, 2001). Lowery (2001) also contents that e-government is meant to provide access to information and services to all citizens equitably including citizens with disabilities, the marginalized and vulnerable groups. This is important in reducing the digital divide and encouraging citizen participation in the governance process (Njuru, 2011). An excellent strategy must address this concern and beyond. There are many possible services that can be provided to citizens using egovernment, but because of funding and other constraints, it is important to prioritize them in terms of importance; chances of success or citizens’ demand. It is recommended that as they develop strategy, governments should conduct citizen surveys to establish their demand and preferences for e-government services. This will assist in prioritization of important services from the citizens’ perspective and also increase the chances of success of e-government projects. The current trend of e-government is to focus on the demand-side (citizen-centric) rather than the supply-side bringing to fore the paradigm shift of “from efficiency to effectiveness” (Otieno & Omwenga, 2015; Hachigian, 2002). Hachigian (2002) enumerated ten questions that e-government leaders in the developing countries must ask themselves when implementing e-government. It is evident from the article that having a clear e-government vision and identifying key priority areas at the onset and at the national level is very important. The vision should be citizen-centred, shared by all, involve all key stakeholders and be communicated across the government and the public. Hachigian (ibid) also explains the importance of developing a conducive business climate to support e-government including legal framework, information security and establishing protections and legal reforms to ensure privacy, security and legal recognition of electronic transactions and electronic signatures. It is also important to develop a detailed business model and work plan showing how key priority areas of e-government will be implemented. Monitoring and evaluation of the impact and progress of implementation of the e-government strategy is also important. Hachigian (2002) and Monga (2008) also contend that the private sector should be seen as a partner and play a significant role in implementation of the strategy. Chen et al. (2006) contends that most if not all e-government strategies, policies and implementation plans of developing countries have been based on experiences of developed countries and follow pressure from the citizens to implement e-government. However, because of the differences in technological, political, social and economic operating environment of developed countries, their strategies will not necessarily work in the developing countries. Most of the strategies for top e-government implementers are market-driven, focus on citizencenteredness and result-orientation in e-government implementation (Sukhbaatar & Odgerel, 2005; Chen et al., 2006). For example, the e-government implementation strategy for the U.S.A. is market based and focuses on supporting citizens’ requirements which is assessed by specific and clearly defined results. 7. Conceptual Framework Chen et al. (2006) alludes to the fact that most if not all e-government strategies of developing countries are based on theories and experiences of developed countries. However, the context of developing counties is quite different from that of the developed countries and therefore these strategies may not necessarily be applicable in the context developing countries. Chen et al. (ibid) adapted four main factors that differentiate between developed and developing countries in terms of implementing e-government. These factors are referred to as the National E-Government Infrastructure (NeI) factors. 6 This study was guided by a conceptual framework for implementation process of egovernment strategies as proposed by Chen et al. (2006). Figure 1 below shows the proposed conceptual framework: National E-Government Infrastructure (NeI) Factors Network Access Network Learning Network Economy Network Policy Culture Factors Society Factors National Culture Organizational culture Social Norms (Resistance to Change) History Citizen Governance Organizational Structure Politics and Information Availability Implementation Process of E-government Strategies Implementation Outcome of E-government Strategies Figure 1: E-government Implementation Conceptual framework: Adopted from Chen et al. (2006) Chen et al. (2006) identified three main factors as having an effect on the implementation process of e-government strategies: National E-government Infrastructure (NeI), Cultural and Societal factors. Chen et al. (2006) also identified four National e-Government Infrastructure (NeI) factors that describe differences between developed and developing countries: i) network access; ii) network learning; iii) network economy; and iv) network policy. Network policy is the extent to which the policy environment determines the effective use and adoption of ICT and includes legislation, laws, policies and strategies. Cultural factors include national and organizational factors and society factors include history, governance and politics. Bwalya (2009) in his study on adoption factors in developing countries also concluded that there are several factors that affect the adoption of e-government and these vary across countries depending on the local context. Bwalya (ibid) therefore concluded that adoption factors in developing countries will be different from those developed countries. Bwalya (2009) extended Kumar et al. (2007) adoption model by identifying culture awareness and ICT infrastructure (NeI factors) as additional factors to be considered in models for adoption of egovernment. Verdegem et al. (2010) also identified contextual variables or e-readiness (NeI factors) as having an effect on the impact of e-government. This is in line with Chen et al. (2006) conceptual model which we consider generally broad and appropriate to our study as it incorporates context when evaluating the implementation outcome of e-government strategy. 8. E-Government Strategy and Policy in Developing Countries Chen et al. (2006) emphasizes that the U.S.A. has put in place a complete set of laws to support e-government implementation. These include: the privacy act, the computer security act, the government paperwork elimination act, and the electronic government act. The U.S.A. has also developed a robust e-government strategy to guide the implementation of egovernment. The web portal of the U.S.A. is currently at stage four of the e-government growth models continuum as it integrates internal and external government services to improve on efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery. The U.S.A. has one of the best egovernment infrastructures in the world. Consequently, it doesn’t face any technological challenges but rather is more concerned with policy and behavioral issues. 7 Chen et al. (2006) alludes to the fact that though China is one of the fastest growing economies in the world, there is still a big gap in terms of NeIs between it and the developed economies. Network policy is one of the weakest NeI factors for China. It has established legal systems, laws and regulations gradually over the years but is far from complete maturity to manage a large developing economy. The democratic and policy systems are also far from maturity largely because of the long history of feudal system of government. However, there are numerous e-government legislation and policy that have been formulated and ratified. The ultimate goal of e-government strategy in China is different from that of the U.S.A. as it focuses more on improving transparency; government efficiency and effectiveness; and improving the interaction and cooperation between the government, private sector and citizens. The China government should focus on strengthening its policy and laws on e-government and address governance issues that may be hampering it from progressing in e-government. The government of India approved the National e-Government Plan (NeGP) in May 2006 (Ganapathy & Kumar, 2014). The NeGP addresses critical issues like setting up e-government network infrastructure across India, coordination of government activities, building institutional capacity and relevant legal framework, marketing e-government to the public, building relevant partnerships and developing standards required for e-government. The main goal of NeGP was to make all services available to the public. The main focus of the strategy was on public service delivery (Sachdeva, 2002). The priority areas within the strategy were identified as development of institutional and human capacity; marketing and awareness; infrastructure development and establishment of state-wide area networks (SWAN); use of common service centres; identification and implementation of pilot e-government projects; development of relevant e-government legislation and policy; and monitoring and evaluation. The specific objectives of the plan were to: develop high level commitment and awareness; develop capacities necessary to strategically implement e-government; develop necessary human and data infrastructure and implement pilot e-government projects. The plan also considers use of local languages with provision for translation from English to the local language because of the problem of language barrier. India is doing well among the developing countries; however, it is challenged by infrastructure and cultural issues. Trusler (2003) and Matavire et al. (2010) argue that when discussing issues of egovernment in South Africa, one has to take cognizance of the historical and social context of e-government implementation including a number of harsh realities that South Africa faced. Some of the emerging issues included the need to develop ICT infrastructure particularly in the rural areas and address the inequalities in the society. South Africa has legislation that guides conduct of electronic transactions and e-government. The South African constitution (guided by the Access to Information Act), just like the Kenyan one, obligates the state to grant citizens access to information that should be in the public domain. South Africa has an outdated Electronic Communication Transactions Act (2002) for the prosecution of cybercrime Cloete (2012) contends that South Africa developed its first e-government strategy (DPSA, 2001) in February 2001 which was updated in 2012 (DPSA, 2012). The strategy was developed through a consultative process and the framework for the strategy was based on the following key issues: i) government vision; ii) key priority focus areas; iii) prerequisite NeI factors; iv) recommendations for implementation of the priority areas; and iv) monitoring and evaluation. The strategy focused on three value benefits of: improved service delivery, costeffectiveness and increased productivity as depicted in figure 2 below: 8 Figure 21: Conceptual Framework for South Africa e-government Strategy: Adopted from DPSA (2001) The South African strategy was based on four main priority focus areas: interoperability, security, economies of scale and elimination of duplication. The South African strategy just like the U.S.A. and Mongolian e-government strategy recognizes the need for customer focus and citizen-centric approach and at the same time appreciates the need for internal efficiencies in the operations of government. The strategy also recognizes the importance of new business models including Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). The revised strategy of 2012 was based on principles of Batho Pele1 and good corporate governance guided by the COBIT framework. Apart from the key focus areas of the previous strategy it was based on key strategic areas with 12 strategic outcomes. The priority areas were broadened to include digital inclusion. Trusler (2003), Matavire et al. (2010) and Cloete (2012) confirm that leadership, uncoordinated strategy, project fragmentation and resistance to change are some of the factors that have hindered e-government progress in South Africa. The Kenyan government established its e-government strategy in March 2004 (Government of Kenya, 2004) as a means of realizing its national development goals. The strategy proposed the establishment of the Directorate of e-Government (DeG) to coordinate, implement, monitor and evaluate e-government implementation in the country. The strategy was seen as a means of facilitating better and efficient service delivery; modernization of government; implementation of the much envisioned public service reforms, encouraging citizen participation and empowering the public. It was also viewed as a way of improving transparency, accountability and good governance; making the government more efficient and effective and being citizen-centered. The Kenyan e-government strategy also recognize the importance of human capacity building, standardization, process re-engineering and change management without which the full potential of e-government cannot be realized. The strategy also identifies and documents key priority areas, an implementation framework and underscores the need to provide a conducive regulatory and legal framework that can support e-government. The Kenyan Constitution just like in the South African case obligates the state to grant citizens access to any information that should be in the public domain. The implementation of the strategy and lack of policy and legislative framework has be one of the key challenges for implementation and progress of e-government in Kenya. The United Republic of Tanzania developed its e-government strategy in September 2012 (Government of Tanzania, 2012). The document sets up the vision of the Tanzanian government and identifies the goals with respect to the implementation of e-government. The Tanzania strategy also outlines seven guiding principles that are necessary for the implementation of e-government and highlights certain objectives to be met with specific timelines. The strategy focuses on improved service delivery to the citizens and businesses, 1 South African word meaning putting people first 9 improved integration, accessibility, responsiveness and internal efficiency of government operations, transparency and accountability. The strategy was developed through a participatory, consultative process and a situational analysis done to identify challenges inhibiting the progress of e-government and conceptualizing the envisioned future position. It recognizes the importance of developing a common government infrastructure and human capacity to support e-government implementation. It also identifies the risks involved, key performance indicators (KPI) and critical success factors (CSF) for implementation of egovernment. The strategy defines an effective monitoring and evaluation framework and emphasizes involvement of the private sector through public-private partnerships; however, just like in Kenya, the problem has been implementation. Tanzania has a weak legal, policy and institutional framework for e-government; low level of e-readiness (NeI factors); low private sector and community participation; and attitude and cultural challenges in use of ICTs. The government of Botswana developed its national e-government strategy in 2011 (Government of Botswana, 2011) through a consultative process. The strategy identified five key priority programmes (areas) with specific projects that should be implemented by 2016. The main focus was on improvement of the convenience, quality and efficiency of public service delivery. The strategy recognizes the need to improve internal government efficiency, deliver effective customer services, eliminate duplication and enhance coordination of egovernment services. The need for setting up a common government call centre and Telecentres (kiosks) to provide access to e-government services from a common service point including in remote parts of the country also comes out strongly. In order for the strategy to be successful, the government will be required to reengineer a number of components including the organizational structures and business components, job designs, policies and procedures. Nkwe (2012) alludes to the fact that the government of Botswana appreciates the importance of e-government and is in the right path of developing relevant policy, regulatory framework and creating awareness. It is apparent that Botswana like other developing countries is still grappling with the issue of setting up adequate and appropriate infrastructure to support its egovernment services. The main issues and challenges arising from the comparative analysis can be summarized in Table 1 below: Table 1: Issues and Challenges from Arising from Comparative Analysis of E-government Strategy No Issue Challenge 1. ICT Infrastructure The ICT infrastructure in most developing countries is inadequate and impedes the development and progress of e-government 2. Legislative Environment Majority of the developing countries have non-existent policy and legislative framework and the existing ones hinder the progress of e-government 3. Policy Enforcement The implementation or enforcement of few existing strategies, laws and policy on e-government in the developing countries is low 4. Citizen Awareness Developing countries have not realized the importance sensitizing citizens on the existing e-government services, policy and legislation. 5. Integrated Approach Majority of developing countries have not consolidated their efforts at regional or continental level to derive the benefits of implementing egovernment as a bloc 6. Governance and Cultural Issues The implementation of e-government in most developing counties has been affected by governance and the prevailing contextual social, cultural and political environment they operate under. 10 Table 2 below summarizes some of the key issues emerging from the analysis of the e-government strategy and policy issues in selected developed and developing countries. Table 2: Issues Emerging from E-government Strategy Analysis No Issue Country U.S.A. China 1. Vision Clearly stated 2. Focus Citizen-centered Transparency Result-orientation Efficiency Market-driven Effectiveness 3. - India South Africa Kenya Tanzania Botswana Stated Stated Stated Clearly stated Stated Improved public service delivery Customer focus Citizen-centered Efficient service delivery Improved public service delivery Improved public service delivery Internal efficiencies Public reforms Internal efficiency Citizen participation Transparency & Accountability Uptake and usage of e-government Awareness & Communication Citizen engagement Informal via websites & chat rooms Marketing to public e-Government Communication Strategy Best communication practices Increase egovernment awareness e-Government Communication Strategy 4. Legal framework In place Weak Develop legal infrastructure Develop legislative framework Develop standards and legislative framework Develop institutional and legal framework Develop legislative framework 5. Work Plan Detailed implementation framework Detailed plan of projects Implementation plan for projects Implementation plan with strategic outcomes Implementation framework Implementation framework Implementation framework Monitoring and Evaluation M&E framework Impact assessment Established institutions to monitor progress M&E framework M&E framework M&E framework to be developed Private Sector Participation Incorporated Incorporated Incorporated Public-private partnerships Infrastructural Development Already developed ICT infrastructure development ICT infrastructure development ICT infrastructure development Cultural issues Culture and government developed Long history of Feudal government Caste system and language barrier Long history of apartheid and segregation 6. 7. 8. 9. - 11 Critical Success Factors (CSF) - Public-private partnerships Public-private partnerships ICT infrastructure development ICT infrastructure development ICT infrastructure development High levels of corruption Attitude and cultural challenges in use of ICT - 9. Conclusion and Recommendations It is observed from the literature review and our analysis above that ICT infrastructure is one of the key challenges facing e-government implementation in developing countries. Governments in developing countries must therefore develop their infrastructure in partnership with the private sector through Public-Private-Partnerships (Otieno & Omwenga, 2015) to enhance e-government progress. It is also important for the focus of e-government to shift from internal government efficiency to a citizen-centered approach and the impact of egovernment on citizens. Creating citizen awareness (Njuru, 2011) through aggressive marketing, encouraging citizen participation and fostering partnerships with the private sector (Nkwe, 2012; Monga, 2008) are also very important for the success of e-government. Apart from the infrastructure development, governments in developing countries must also promote the acquisition of relevant ICT skills by its citizens for foster uptake and utilization of services. E-government implementation and progress in developed countries is more advanced than that of developing countries as a result of the creation of a conducive legislative environment. The leading e-government implementers including the U.S.A., Australia and Canada have highly developed infrastructure systems and policy framework that supports e-government. Most of the developing countries are not able to achieve high levels of growth in the egovernment because of weak policy and legislation that support privacy, data security, protection and support of electronic transactions and signatures. The differences in adoption rate of e-government in developed and developing countries has been brought about by a variety of factors including differences in pricing and government preferences – such as privatization, lowering of trade barriers, de-regulation that has led to greater investment in the communication sector and improved access to ICT (Basant et al., 2006). Governments in developing countries must therefore formulate and enforce appropriate policy and legislation to support electronic transactions, coordinate government processes at different levels, encourage public-private partnerships and create a common infrastructure and uniform operating environment that breaks silos and creates a sound architecture for e-government. Developing countries must enhance their operating cultural, governance, historical, political, social and economic environment and develop appropriate e-government strategy and policy that would address their unique peculiarities. One of the reasons why e-government is not successful in the developing countries is resistance to change, lack of a government-wide approach and institutionalization of e-government in the public service. However, in order for governments to realize the full benefit of e-government, it is imperative to re-engineer business processes and manage the change process effectively. This requires development of a comprehensive policy and legislative framework for adoption and institutionalization of the change process and enforcement of the same. The government should also address cultural and language barrier issues that impede the progress of e-government. Moreover, the focus on implementation of e-government strategy should be on key e-government priority areas with immediate and great impact. Creating a work plan indicating the key priority projects and an appropriate monitoring and evaluation framework is essential for the success of e-government. In conclusion, it is also observed that countries such as South Africa, Botswana, Mozambique, Mauritius and Namibia have started putting in place institutional and policy frameworks to integrate e-government at the regional level (Nkwe, 2012). This is similar to what Europe is doing at the European Union (EU) level as guided by the European Commission. The European Commission developed e-Europe 2003, e-Europe 2005 and i2010 action plans for funding and guidance of ICT projects in member countries. It is therefore imperative that Africa should start championing for e-government initiatives, action plans and policy framework at the regional levels and ultimately the African Union (AU) level to compete favourably with the rest of the world. 12 References [1] Alghamdi, S., & Beloff, N. (2014). Towards a comprehensive model for e-Government adoption and utilisation analysis: The case of Saudi Arabia. In Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), 2014 Federated Conference on (pp. 1217-1225). IEEE. [2] Basant R., Commander, S., Harrison, R., Menezes-Filho, N. (2006). ICT adoption and productivity in developing countries: New firm level evidence from Brazil and India. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2294, Germany. [3] Bwalya, K.J. (2009). Factors affecting adoption of E-government in Zambia. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries (2009) 38, 4, pp. 1-13 [4] Castelnovo, W. (2010). Is there an eGovernment Paradox? In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference eGovernment (p. 90). Academic Conferences Limited. [5] Chen Y. N., Chen H. M., Huang W., Ching R. K. H. (2006). E-Government Strategies in Developed and Developing Countries: An Implementation Framework and Case Study. Journal of Global Information Management, 14(1), pp 23-46, January-March 2006 [6] Cloete F. (2012). E-government lessons from South Africa 2001–2011: Institutions, state of progress and measurement. African Journal of Information and Communication, Issue No 12, 2012, pp. 128-142 [7] DPSA (2001). e-Government Policy - The Digital Future: A Public Service IT Policy Framework. Department of Public Service Administration (DPSA), Pretoria, South Africa [8] DPSA (2012). Public Service Corporate Governance of Information and Communication Technology Policy Framework. Department of Public Service Administration (DPSA), Pretoria, South Africa [9] Dwivedi S.K., A.K. Bharti (2010). E-Governance in India – Problems and Acceptability. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 17(1), July 2010, pp. 37-38. [10] Ganapathy V.B., Kumar V.K. (2014). Strategies for E-Governance in India. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology (IJIRSET) Vol. 3, Issue 8, August 2014 [11] Government of Botswana (2011). 1Gov, Botswana National e-Government Strategy 2011-2016. Gaborone, Botswana [12] Government of Kenya (2004). E-Government Strategy: The strategic framework, Administrative Structure, Training Requirements and Standardization Framework. Nairobi, Kenya: Republic of Kenya [13] Government of Tanzania (2012). e-Government Strategy. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: United Republic of Tanzania [14] Gulati, G. J., Yates, D. J., & Williams, C. B. (2012). Understanding the impact of political structure, governance and public policy on e-government. In System Science (HICSS), 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 2541-2550). IEEE. [15] Hachigian, N. (2002). Roadmap for E-government in the Developing World [16] infoDev/World Bank (2009). e-Government Primer, Washington, DC; infoDev/World Bank [17] Heeks R., (2003). Achieving Success/Avoiding Failure in e-government Projects. Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM), University of Manchester. Available online: http://www.egov4dev.org/success/sfdefinitions.shtml [18] Jadi, Y., & Jie, L. (2014). GBC implementation strategy of e-government system for emerging countries. In Information Society (i-Society), 2014 International Conference on (pp. 140-145). IEEE. [19] Karokola G., (2012). A Framework for Securing e-Government Services: The Case of Tanzania. PhD Thesis, Stockholm University, Sweden [20] Lovelock, P., & Ure, J. (2002). E-government in China. pre-publication version of the chapter to appear in Zhang Junhua, Martin Woesler, eds. [21] Lowery, L.M. (2001). Developing a Successful E-Government http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan000343.pdf Strategy, Available at: [22] Löfstedt U. (2005). E-Government – Assessment of Current Research and Some Proposals for Future Directions. International Journal of Public Information Systems, Vol. 2005:1, pp. 39-52 [23] Matavire, R., Chigona, W., Roode, D., Sewchurran, E., Davids, Z., Mukudu, A. and Boamah-Abu, C. (2010) Challenges of e-Government Project Implementation in a South African Context. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation Volume 13 Issue 2 2010, (pp153 - 164) [24] Monga A. (2008). E-government in India: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Administration & Governance, Vol. 3. No. 2, 2008 13 [25] Mulder, E. J. (2004). A strategy for E-government in Dutch Municipalities. In Information and Communication Technologies: From Theory to Applications, 2004. Proceedings. 2004 International Conference on (pp. 5-6). IEEE [26] Njuru J.W. (2011). Implications of E-Government on Public Policy and Challenges of Adopting Technology: The case of Kenya. Journal of Global Affairs & Public Policy Volume 1, Number 1, 2011 [27] Nkwe N. (2012). E-Government: Challenges and Opportunities in Botswana. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 17; September 2012 [28] Otieno I., Omwenga, E. (2015). Citizen-Centric Critical Success Factors for the Implementation of E-government: A Case Study of Kenya Huduma Centres: In IST-Africa Conference Proceedings, 2015 (pp. 1-9). IEEE. [29] Rabaiah, A., & Vandijck, E. (2011). A strategic framework of e-government: Generic and best practice. Leading Issues in e-Government Research, Academic Publishing International Ltd, 1-32 [30] Sachdeva, S. (2002). e-Governance strategy in India. White Paper on e-Governance strategy in India [31] Shan, Z., Li, X., Wang, Z., & Ning, J. (2004). Policies and practice of e-government construction in China. In ECommerce Technology for Dynamic E-Business, 2004. IEEE International Conference on (pp. 366-369). IEEE. [32] Sukhbaatar, S. B., & Odgerel, U. (2005). A Study on e-Government Policy in Mongolia. In Information and Telecommunication Technologies, 2005. APSITT 2005 Proceedings. 6th Asia-Pacific Symposium on (pp. 254-259). IEEE. [33] Trusler, J. (2003). South African E-Government Policy and Practices: A Framework to Close the Gap. Electronic Government. Proceedings 2nd International Conference EGOV2003, Prague, September 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2003, pp.504-507 [34] Verdegem, P., Stragier, J. and Verleye, G. (2010). Measuring for Knowledge: A Data-Driven Research Approach for e-Government. Electronic Journal of e-Government Volume 8 Issue 2 2010, (pp227-236), available online at www.ejeg.com [35] Vuksic, V. B., Pozgaj, Z., & Milanovic, L. (2010). E-government policy and implementation in Croatia. In Information Technology Interfaces (ITI), 2010 32nd International Conference on (pp. 423-428). IEEE. 14