Helen Alexander

IST-Africa 2006 Conference Proceedings Paul Cunningham and Miriam Cunningham (Eds) IIMC International Information Management Corporation, 2006 ISBN:- Keeping up with the Joneses: Questioning the Pace of e-Government in the Developing World Helen ALEXANDER1, Blessing MAUMBE2, Katherine DETOLLY3 Provincial Government of the Western Cape, 142 Long St, Cape Town, 8000, South Africa Tel:-,-, Fax: -, Email: 1-, 3-2 The Information Society Institute (TISI), Cape Peninsula University of Technology, P. 0. Box 652, Cape Town, 8000, South Africa. Tel: -, Fax: -, Email:- 1,3 Abstract: Models of e-government evolution suggest a natural linear progression from basic web publishing through to fully integrated, transactive e-government. These evolutionary models have been used to assess country's e-government readiness, determine benchmarks for e-government success and help guide funding of e-government programmes. This paper argues that rather than being driven by the need to “keep up with the Joneses”, e-government programmes in developing countries (indeed in any country) should be strongly led by the development objectives of that country. E-Government should be regarded as a tool for achieving particular goals, and the appropriateness of any e-government initiative should be assessed according to its ability to help the country achieve the development goals in the specific context of that nation state. Evolutionary models are useful as descriptions of the progression of some egovernment programmes in some developed countries but should not be the guiding force behind e-government programmes for developing nations. Keywords: eGovernment, development models, developing countries 1. Introduction In developed countries e-government implementation has been conceived as a three-phased progression: (1) establish a web-presence, (2) allow for online transactions, (3) integrate your systems for a seamless, modern government [8]. Variations on this simple, three-step formula are offered to governments as recipes to improve service delivery through e-government. For projects like the Cape Gateway project in the Western Cape province of South Africa (www.capegateway.gov.za), where plans are underway to upgrade the existing e-government programme, pressures to follow standard development paths have raised questions in the minds of staff and project partners about the appropriateness of pushing an agenda to get services online (that is, to implement transactive e-government). What percentage of the target population will actually be able to use these online services? Is it proper to use scarce resources to push online transactivity when many basic needs are not being met? Is it consistent with the province's development goals to promote these forms of e-government? Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 1 of 13 2. Objectives This paper represents the thoughts and concerns of some stakeholders, stemming from discussions around the future of the Cape Gateway e-government portal. The paper asks the basic question: Is the evolutionary e-government development model appropriate in the developing country context? It advocates for a shift in thinking about e-government to focus on the underlying development objectives. We hope that the issues raised here will promote critical discussion around the pace and pathway of e-government progression in developing countries. 3. Methodology This paper adopts a critical approach to try and expose the assumptions underlying much of the discourse around e-government. First a selection of definitions on e-government are analysed and a new definition proposed. The paper then explores existing literature on e-government models and highlights assumptions and assertions around the evolution of e-government, which we believe are misleading in the developing country context. The literature review includes a brief summary and assessment of various existing e-government definitions and development models, including models used in commercial and public sector e-government assessments. Together these two sections highlight some of the issues developing countries should consider when devising and implementing their e-government strategies. The paper draws illustrative examples from the South African context, particularly from the Cape Gateway project. 4. e-Government: What is it and What is it for? So much has been said about what constitutes e-government and what the potential benefits are that it seems redundant to redefine and re-examine these fundamental concepts. Yet a brief glance at existing definitions indicates deep conceptual differences in the understanding of e-government. Since a shared understanding of these concepts is key for developing a shared vision of the appropriateness of various e-government initiatives in different contexts, this paper adds to the existing discourse by presenting its own definition of e-government. In defining e-government, especially in the developing world context, we have found it useful to adopt a broad definition that recognises the potential of all ICTs as tools to improve government's citizen-facing and internal services and processes. Such a broad definition stands in contrast to those which see e-government as focussed on the use of the Internet to transform and improve government (see table 1). Table 1: Definitions of e-government Reference Year Definition Focus Bonham, Seifert & Thorson [18] 2001 e-Government involves using information technology, specifically the Internet, to deliver government information, and in some cases, services, to citizens, businesses, and other government agencies. Internet e-Government involves the automation or computerization of existing paper-based procedures that will prompt new styles of leadership, new ways of debating and deciding strategies, new ways of transacting business, new ways of listening to citizens and communities and new ways of organizing and delivering information Ultimately e- Transformation Access Service delivery Basu [19] 2004 Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Information and Service delivery Page 2 of 13 Reference Year Definition Focus government aims to enhance access to and delivery of government services to benefit citizens. Deloitte & Touche [4] 2002 The use of technology to enhance the access to and delivery of government services to benefit citizens, business partners and employees. Access Service delivery Ndou [20] 2004 The use of ICT tools to reinvent the public sector by transforming its internal and external way of doing things and its interrelationships with customers and the business community. Transformation Stolzfus [14] 2004 A program that utilizes Internet communication technology (ICT) to improve communication, service and transactional processes with stakeholders. Internet Communication and service delivery Heeks [7] 2003 The use of information and communications technologies (ICTs) to improve the activities of public sector organisations. Improvement World Bank [21] nd e-Government refers to the use by government agencies of information technologies … that have the ability to transform relations with citizens, businesses, and other arms of government. Transformation OECD [22] 2003 The use of ICTs, and particularly the Internet, as a tool to achieve better government. Internet As the purpose of our definition is to focus attention not only on what e-government is, but also on what it is for, we have adopted the following phrasing: e-Government is the use of any information and communications technology (ICT) tools to improve government's citizen-facing and internal services and processes. This definition highlights e-government as a tool for improved service delivery and deemphasises its role as a tool for transformation – many existing definitions (such as the World Bank definition included in the table above) place great emphasis on the transformational aspect of e-government without explaining why such transformation is desirable. In our view, transformation of government is a consequence of the introduction of new measures to improve service delivery and should not be the driver. Indeed change is needed to improve government services, but the change is not the end in itself. Emphasis should rather be focused on the improvements that are desired, which will necessarily entail transformation. For example, in the South African context the introduction of an edemocracy programme that would introduce transformation may be seen as appropriate. However, from a service delivery perspective, such a programme which is unlikely to significantly improve public participation because of limited access to technology, would likely be considered inappropriate. The definition also focuses on the range of technologies that can be used. Many definitions place particular emphasis on the Internet and, as is illustrated above (for example in the OECD definition), web presence and online transactions are often used to determine a country's e-readiness and e-government maturity. The definition of egovernment offered here is sufficiently broad to incorporate all forms of information and communication technology, including mobile technology. This is useful for countries like South Africa where Internet penetration is low but other ICTs are relatively prevalent: 1 AMPS 2005 data indicates that 41% of adult South Africans have personal access to a cellphone, while only 6% have accessed the Internet in the last four weeks. In these Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 3 of 13 scenarios, use of alternative channels of e-government may be a more appropriate and effective implementation of e-government. Our chosen definition specifically focuses attention on the ultimate objectives of egovernment, namely improved services and processes. This focus is often lost in discussions, which highlight the mechanisms of e-government (for example, online transactions) rather than their impacts (reduced costs and faster service). In the developing country environment, e-government initiatives need to ensure that they actively promote and achieve greater government efficiency and effectiveness, as well as improved transparency and accountability. These initiatives also need to take into account the nation's overall development objectives and the ways in which e-government programmes can help achieve these. 5. What can be gained, what can be lost There is enormous potential for e-government to help developing countries improve the quality of life of their citizens. Traditionally, the benefits of e-government have been seen to be greater and easier access to government information and services, increased participation in government, improved government accountability and transparency and decreased costs [10]. These opportunities are widely known and well understood. The great promise that e-government holds for countries partly explains why so many governments have been so eager to engage in e-government programmes. However, e-government also contains many risks (particularly in developing countries). The potential costs of e-government are neither as well-known, nor as clearly understood as the potential benefits, and it would appear that few governments truly take these risks into account when embarking on e-government programmes. Two main sets of risks can be identified for developing countries. First is the potential for e-government programmes to exacerbate existing divides within a country [2]. For example in South Africa, where there is an enormous gap between the wealthy and the poor portions of the population (South Africa's Gini index is 57.8 [24]), e-government can easily end up benefiting only those who are already in privileged positions and so further marginalize the poor. This potential social injustice is a real concern for countries whose scarce resources are being divided between keeping up with global trends and meeting the basic needs of their people. The second set of concerns relates to the failure of e-government programmes. Heeks [7] estimates that 35% of all e-government initiatives in developing countries are total failures and that a further 50% are partial failures. The costs of such failure are high and include direct and indirect financial costs, opportunity costs and political costs, and can create barriers to future e-government initiatives [7]. Although the Cape Gateway project is seen as a success, with over 50,000 visitors to the site each month, international recognition (the project was recognised by the World Summit Awards in 2005), and positive client feedback, there are concerns that rapid expansion of the project (particularly in terms of introducing new online functionality) may result in the project being unable to sustain its current quality and success. For example, the project specifically tries to address concerns about broadening the digital divide by ensuring that all citizens can access the information contained on the portal either directly via the web, or through the Cape Gateway call centre and walk-in centre. However, understaffing and other issues have prevented the various Cape Gateway channels from sharing information optimally. Furthermore, discussions to extend services like the walk-in centre to rural and peri-urban communities have not been actualised at this point limiting the actual reach of the offline service. Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 4 of 13 The success of the project may also be compromised by a number of threats, which are typical of the developing world environment, particularly ongoing problems in securing fast and reliable internet access, as well as other technology-related problems. The Cape Gateway project has gained a great deal, and stands to lose a great deal if the future direction of the project is not carefully and critically considered. Our belief is that egovernment success can only be sustained if the true objectives of the initiative are constantly recalled and reiterated, but even constant recall cannot assist where projects have been inappropriately embarked on in the first place. 6. Motivations for Embarking on e-Government e-Government is complex and multi-faceted; it is not merely a technical exercise but requires difficult changes in government and citizen attitudes and in organisational structures and processes. As already indicated, there are numerous risks and costs associated with e-government programmes and it is clear that these programmes should not be undertaken lightly or without extensive planning and preparation. This paper has already noted that before embarking on e-government programmes stakeholders in developing countries need to reach consensus about what they mean by "egovernment"; they need to be totally clear on why they are embarking on an e-government programme and what the objectives of that programme are; and they need to have a full and realistic understanding of the risks such a programme entails. The motivations for undertaking these initiatives need to be transparently and explicitly stated. Unfortunately, the desire to improve government service or achieve development objectives does not always appear to be one of the main forces motivating governments to develop and implement e-government projects. Stoltzfus [14] found that there are two main drivers of e-government: public pressure and the need for global legitimacy. Both these factors are legitimate motivators (to varying degrees) and e-Government champions need to be consciously aware of these pressures and determine their validity within the context of their own countries, and within the context of the countries’ development programmes. Consider the role of public pressure in a developing country, where only a small portion of the population has access to the Internet. In this context, pressure to implement web-based e-government services is likely to represent the objectives of a small, privileged set of citizens. Such citizen pressures should be given careful consideration, within the confines of the environment. The issue of obtaining (or retaining) global legitimacy is a tricky one. “The act of implementing e-government can in and of itself communicate an empowering image of influence, power and legitimacy to its citizens, and even to the rest of the world” [14]. In order to engage in global politics and economics, all countries need legitimacy and power. Being regarded as a laggard can have far-reaching and serious consequences. It is not suggested that countries should ignore global pressures to implement e-government programmes, rather that they should be conscious of these pressures and weigh them up against the specific needs and objectives of that country and prioritise (or de-prioritise) egovernment programmes accordingly. In the context of the Cape Gateway project, it is interesting to note that the project byline, which is also the project’s vision, represents a clear expression of the project’s development objectives: to provide easy access to government information and services. A recent (unpublished) assessment of the project conducted by research-consultancy Radian has identified this clear articulation of the project’s objectives as one of Cape Gateway’s key strengths and a unifying factor, which has helped build a coherent Cape Gateway team. It appears that the Cape Gateway project was legitimately initiated in the best interests of the citizens of the Western Cape. It is interesting to note how additional pressures have been brought to bear on the project over time. For example, the project is a high profile one Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 5 of 13 supported by a strong and successful marketing campaign. There has thus been a great deal of local and international recognition of the initiative, which has increased the pressure on the project to retain its newly-founded global legitimacy. 7. Evolutionary e-Government Models Pressure on countries to prioritise e-government and speed up its implementation comes from a number of sources. Some of these include the need to apply various e-government models and conduct benchmark assessments. These various models and benchmarks (often in the guise of e-readiness assessments) may be aimed at helping countries identify the e-government path that they would like to follow and provide experience and advice from "best practice" scenarios. Unfortunately, the ways in which the models are phrased and applied often turns e-government into a race along a single path. Most of the models available propose that a systematic progression through various identified stages is “the most effective method for avoiding errors and preparing affected stakeholders … for change” [14]. Although the proliferation of different models suggests the lack of a universally accepted framework for e-government development, there are certain similarities between models. This indicates that e-government development is predominantly seen as a linear process, starting with the electronic provision of rudimentary information and ending with a fully integrated, transactive online service. Some of the various e-government development models are discussed in more detail below and are summarised in Table 2. Table 2: Summary of e-Government Stages of Development, 2005 Reference Year No. of stages Brief Description of stages Focus Lam, W [8] 2000 3 (1) Informational (2) Transactional (3) Advanced maturity Functionality Layne and Lee [17] 2001 4 (1) Cataloguing (2)Transaction (3) Vertical integration (4) Horizontal integration Functionality Sood, R. [13] 2000 4 (1) Presence (2) Interaction & communication (3) Transaction (4) Transformation Functionality Cap Gemini Ernst and Young [8] Reported in Lam (2000) 4 (1) Information (2) One-way interaction (3) Two-way Interaction (4) Full electronic case handling Information flow Moon [23] 2002 5 (1) One-way communication (2) Two-way communication (3) Service and financial transaction (4) Vertical and horizontal integration (5) Political participation Information flow Functionality Political process. Siau K, and Y. Long [24] 2005 5 (1) Web presence (2) Interaction (3) Transaction (4) Transformation (5) E-democracy Citizen centric Democracy Panagopoulus, C [12] 2004 5 (1) Emerging (2) Enhanced (3) Interactive (4)Transactional (5) Seamless Functionality Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 6 of 13 Reference Year No. of stages Brief Description of stages Focus United Nations [15] 2004 5 (1) Emerging presence (2) Enhanced presence (3) Interactive presence (4) Transactional presence (5) Seamless/fully integrated presence Web-based Deloitte and Touche [25] 2001 6 (1) Information dissemination (2) Two way transaction (3) Multi-purpose portals (4) Portal personalization (5) Clustering of common services (6) Full integration & enterprise transaction Citizen centric (i.e. customer oriented) E-service excellence Panagopoulos [12] describes five stages of e-government starting with an “emerging presence” and ending with the “seamless stage”. The author describes the websites of countries in the “emerging presence” as characterised by highly partisan and politically biased (i.e. ruling party) information. The second stage is the “enhanced presence” which goes beyond making basic information available. The third stage is the “interactive presence” and is supposed to be user-focused and portal-based, and represents a serious attempt by government to become citizen-centric in e-service delivery. Integration of government information and services into a single web portal marks the early stages of a mature e-government initiative. The fourth stage is called the “transactional presence” and it involves the ability for citizens and businesses to conduct simple routine tasks or transactions with different government departments. The fifth stage is the “seamless presence” which is seen as being synonymous with e-government excellence: a stage that involves a high degree of political, administrative and managerial interaction and coordination [12]. Layne and Lee [17] identified four stages of e-service delivery namely cataloguing, transaction, vertical integration and horizontal integration. The cataloguing stage involves the provision of information in an online format. The transaction stage incorporates the ability for citizens to complete transactions online. The vertical integration stage involves integration between information systems in different spheres of government (local, provincial/state, national). Finally, the horizontal phase comprises of integration between information systems across functional areas (for example, between various units providing licensing services). Sood [13] uses a similar classification to Panagopoulus [12]. The author identifies presence, interaction and communication, transaction, and transformation stages. Unlike Panagopoulos [12], it appears that Sood reported in Stowers [13] combines the “enhanced” and “interactive presence” into a single “interactive and communication stage” suggesting evidence of overlap among some of the proposed e-government stages. However, the seamless stage appears to be synonymous with the transformational stage. Using e-government integration as the ultimate measure of a mature level of egovernment, Lam [8] describes the evolution of e-government maturity using three basic stages: informational, (i.e. a website offering static web content and downloadable forms), transactional (i.e. the ability to conduct discrete transactions e.g. tax returns, paying vehicle fines etc.) and “advanced maturity stage” that is associated with higher levels of egovernment integration. Further, Lam [8] reports that a study on Europe identified four levels of e-government maturity: information, one-way interaction, two-way interaction, and full electronic case handling. A common thread across the various stages of e-government service delivery in the literature is the inherent assumption that an initial presence is followed automatically by Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 7 of 13 subsequent stages characterised by increasing online service provision. Although most of the models closely match e-government growth phases in developed countries, their relevance to e-government trajectory for developing countries remains to be empirically verified. A further communality between the models is the tendency to focus on client-facing egovernment programmes and emphasise internet-based initiatives. The models thus tend to neglect the many back-end improvements that could vastly improve government service delivery and reduce costs and also disregard other ICTs, which could be used to improve government services, for example mobile technologies. Both these factors are of particular importance to developing countries. Back-end improvements can bring significant improvements to government in areas where Internet uptake is too low to justify clientfacing e-government initiatives. On the other hand, alternative technologies offer means by which e-government programmes can be made broadly accessible without relying on increased Internet access. As indicated in the introduction of this paper, the Cape Gateway project is currently upgrading its portal channel. Some new features are planned for the next version of the portal but online transactions are not anticipated until the third iteration. This delay in introducing transactive capability is both strategic and practical: the project has not yet answered the difficult questions around cost and access which would determine which services should be made available online, and the backend processes that need to support online service delivery are not currently able to support online transactions. Cape Gateway thus has some time during which to consider these issues and it is anticipated that discussions flowing out of this paper will aid the project in its deliberations regarding whether services should be placed online and if so which services should be prioritised. Although there are numerous e-government models that describe the phases of egovernment development, it is our contention these models are limited in assisting developing countries in determining whether and how they should extend their scope. 8. Application of e-Government Models Many of the e-Government models that have been developed have emerged through observation of existing e-government initiatives, strategies and objectives, usually in developed countries. For example, the four-stage model suggested by Lynne and Lee [17] was developed "primarily on authors' observations of and experience with e-government initiatives in the United States of America" [17]. These models are in essence descriptive and yet there has been little time lost shifting the emphasis to prescription: e-government initiatives in some countries seem to follow a certain path, therefore it is desirable for other countries to replicate that evolution and strive to push as far along that same path as possible – and it is implied that this evolution should take place as quickly as possible. The annual United Nations Online Network in Public Administration and Finance’s (UNPAN) e-readiness reports provide a clear example of this, despite the fact that the reports consistently caution that the e-readiness rankings "do not signify a race to egovernment proliferation. The survey does not suggest that ‘higher’ rankings are necessarily a ‘better’ outcome or even a desirable one." [15]. Rather UNPAN reiterates that "each country has to decide upon the level and extent of e government initiatives in keeping with its indigenous development framework." [15]. Despite these cautions, it is easy to interpret the UNPAN e-readiness assessment as a global ranking exercise rather than an assessment initiative. The 2004 e-readiness survey website (http://www.unpan.org/egovernment4.asp) for example, presents the user with a clear list of the "Top 10 countries" in both e-readiness and e-participation. Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 8 of 13 Figure 1: UNPAN e-readiness report home page In fact, the very nature of the UNPAN study promotes competition between countries. The mere use of a ranking system with a top and bottom indicates a critical comparison between states. Further, the assessment measures change in a country's assessment between years, not in terms of the change in the country's index (determined through an assessment of web-presence, infrastructure and human capital) but in terms of its progression up the ranks. For example, in 2004 South Africa had an index of 0.4902 and was ranked 55th in the world. In 2005, South Africa’s index improved to 0.5075 but was only ranked 58th in the world. 9. Considerations in the Developing Context e-Government is a relatively new concept and each country or government is confronted with unique e-government challenges. Service provision has to respond to societal needs and norms. The e-government trajectory is a function of financial resources and human capital as well user satisfaction. In the case of developed countries, most of which are generally well endowed with resources, the progression to full-scale e-government integration and the appropriateness of such a progression is anticipated and unquestioned. But can the same be said for developing countries where there are competing demands for scarce resources? In these circumstances the development of e-government could easily be affected by factors such as poor service delivery, poverty, HIV/Aids, and concerns around transparency and accountability. The Cape Gateway project has grappled with these issues in trying to ensure that it provides a meaningful, relevant service to all the citizens of the Western Cape. Although a relatively wealthy province in the South African context, the Western Cape still does not enjoy high levels of Internet access. It has thus been essential for the e-government strategy to ensure that citizens who can only access government information and services offline also benefit from e-government programmes. One way in which this has been achieved has been through the multi-channel Cape Gateway approach – citizens can access information via the portal (www.capegateway.gov.za), the call centre or the walk-in centre. The Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 9 of 13 existence of the portal has added immense value to the call centre and walk-in centre as the portal acts as an information backbone for knowledge officers and call centre operators. The Cape Gateway portal has intentionally focussed its energies on information services and even the next version of the portal will not introduce extensive transaction capability, but will rather enhance existing information services and attempt to increase the project's sustainability. Additional efforts are being made to explore alternative means of increasing the distribution of government information, with the possibility of a short message system (SMS) service being implemented at some time in the future. We agree with Basu that developing countries cannot afford not to prioritise spending on e-government development as "the delay in implementation will only cause added cost" [2]. But even where countries understand the potential for ICT to improve government service delivery, there are significant barriers that need to be overcome including developing the country's IT infrastructure and building the skills base needed to create and use e-government services [2]. 10. e-Government as a Tool for Development The lessons learned in the ICT for Development arena are also useful here. Recent literature on this topic has highlighted the high rates of failure in ICT for development projects and has focussed on the techno-determinist attitude underlying many projects as a possible reason for such failures: "An enduring theme … has been the overemphasis on the technology itself, to the exclusion of other parameters" [6]. In many projects, too little emphasis has been placed on the social and contextual elements of the initiatives and too much emphasis has been placed on the technology, leading researchers to conclude that a technological-determinist approach to ICT for development which does not critically examine the various social, political and economic factors may threaten the success of an ICT for development project [16]. Advocates of ICT for development are now strongly emphasising the need to view ICT as a development tool rather than a magic wand. Similarly, in implementing e-government in developing countries, it is important to focus on the overall objectives of the initiating body or programme, rather than emphasising the technology. Although many of the e-government models are no doubt premised on the understanding that, mature e-government is most likely to improve effectiveness, efficiency, transparency and accountability, this assumption is not necessarily wellfounded. A lot depends on the context in which the programme is implemented – expenditure on highly transactive e-government initiatives in an environment where only a small percentage of citizens will be able to access those services is not likely to serve the objectives of service-delivery and citizen focused, accountable government. Essentially, e-government in the developing country context needs to be seen as part of the development process, not a linear simple-to-seamless progression. As such, egovernment needs to be shaped by national and regional development goals, and should work to underpin and support them. To be relevant in developing countries, e-government cannot simply be about e-service delivery and seamlessness; it needs to be seen as an inherently developmental process, or a tool of development. Pure e-government in the traditional sense of looking at e-service delivery and government efficiency and accountability is simply not sufficient or relevant for African and other developing countries. To be appropriate in a developing country context, e-government needs to incorporate issues like skills development, telecoms pricing, infrastructure and access, and ICT sector development. If these issues are not addressed, e-government is far more likely to be an unsustainable import from the developed world. To take root in the developing world, egovernment needs to foster a conducive ‘eco-system’, which both sustains it and contributes to broader socio-economic development. As part of this process, e-government Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 10 of 13 should not only be seen as government’s domain; rather, it should involve partnerships across sectors, including civil society. One of the key issues here is the question of access. Existing e-government models do not incorporate provision of access as part of e-government programmes; rather access to the required technology is taken as a given and is predominantly regarded as the individual’s responsibility. In their discussions on the models some authors emphasise the need for e-government services to be provided through multiple channels to ensure that citizens without access, and those who prefer telephonic or face-to-face contact can access these services [17]. Although absolutely essential in the developing country context, a multi-channel approach is not sufficient in developing countries. In areas where ICT uptake is low, governments implementing e-government programmes have to include as part of these programmes initiatives to provide citizens with real access. This was highlighted in the 2004 UNPAN e-readiness report which in addition to the annual e-readiness assessment also included a section devoted to exploring the access divide to provide guidance to countries on how to improve real access. The need to develop infrastructure, training and policy-reform initiatives in addition to “pure” e-government programmes, increases the costs of e-government enormously and places an even greater burden on developing countries. This has been recognised by the Western Cape government, where the Centre for eInnovation has consciously developed a suite of complementary projects aimed at addressing various aspects needed to build an inclusive information society. The Cape Gateway government information service is developing locally relevant content in local languages for local consumption. The Cape Access project (www.capegateway.gov.za/capeaccess) is providing rural communities with free computer and Internet access through public telecentres focussing on using existing infrastructures and developing human capacity to champion, operate and maintain these facilities. The Cape Skills e-literacy programme will provide basic computer and information literacy. These projects are inter-related and complementary. 11. Conclusion Our assessment of the existing literature and discussions around the evolution of egovernment indicates that developing countries need to be cautious when determining their e-government strategies and programmes. Three key considerations have come to the fore, namely the need to focus on development objectives, the need to assess what is realistically achievable and the need to explore alternative, innovative approaches. It is paramount that e-government programmes are tied to development objectives. These programmes should be seen as tools to meet these objectives rather than ends in and of themselves. The technologies themselves can neither improve government nor the quality of life of citizens; only as part of a holistic development programme can technology and e-government programmes become effective. e-Government initiatives should be context appropriate, taking into account the specific obstacles they face, the high costs of failure and their users access to different information technologies. Developing countries need to resist the pressure to look "cutting edge". Rather than measuring e-government progress through a benchmarking process involving stages of development, we should assess e-government achievements in terms of their context-specificity and their impact on government service delivery. Finally, a broader understanding of e-government may open up opportunities for overcoming challenges and barriers to traditional e-government approaches. The possibilities of using mobile technologies to improve government services are exciting and are already being used innovatively and effectively in developing countries. Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 11 of 13 Some lessons that are emerging from the Cape Gateway experience include the importance of constantly revisiting the project’s fundamental objectives to ensure that any “improvements” or “enhancements” to the product are actually geared towards meeting these objectives. E-government projects in developing countries need to be guided by clear developmental strategies and need to holistically address issues of universal access to and benefit from these programmes. There are relatively few e-government programmes underway in developing countries and knowledge sharing between projects is limited. Many developing countries will experience the same challenges when trying to develop and implement e-government programmes and there is enormous potential to discuss and debate the difficult strategic and practical questions that are being raised. The use of the Cape Gateway example in this paper is intentionally intended to share some of the challenges that the project has faced and the lessons that have been learned. To return to the title of the paper, it is unnecessary for developing countries to try and “keep up with the Joneses”. Rather, the unique challenges and opportunities presented by the specific environments in these countries should be explored to determine the best way in which e-government can help the country achieve its development goals. In the South African context, this means that the Cape Gateway project ought to resist pressures to upscale quickly and should instead tailor its product to meet the needs of the citizens in the province by closely aligning its brand with the development objectives of the Western Cape. To accomplish this successfully, Cape Gateway should evaluate its strategic thrust, incorporate citizen demands and avoid cutting and pasting inappropriate traditional egovernment programmes. References [1]. [2]. [3]. [4]. [5]. [6]. [7]. [8]. [9]. [10]. [11]. [12]. [13]. [14]. Aldrich, D., Bertot, J.C. and C.R. McClure. 2002. “E-government: Initiatives, Developments, and Issues,” In Government Information Quarterly, 19, p349-355. Basu, Subhajit. 2004 "e-Government and Developing Countries: An Overview" International Review of Law Computers and Technology Vol 18 No 1 pp 109-132 Buckley, J. 2003. “E-service Quality and Public Sector,” In Managing Service Quality, 13(6). Deloite and Touche. 2002, “The Citizen as a Customer,” CMA Management, 74 (10), p58. Ebrahim, Z., and Irani, Z. 2005. “E-government Adoption: Architecture and Barriers,” In Business Process Management Journal, 11(5), pp. 589-611. Heeks, Richard 2002 "i-Development not e-Development: Special Issue on ICTs and Development" in Journal for International Development 14:1 2002 pp1-11 Heeks, Richard 2003 "Most eGovernment-for-Development Projects Fail: How Can Risks be Reduced?" iGovernment Working Paper Series (Available online at http://idpm.ma.ac.uk/publications/wp/igove/index.shtml) Lam, W. 2005. “Barriers to E-government Integration,” In The Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5), pp.511-530 Moon, M.J. 2002, “The Evolution of E-government Among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality?”, Public Administration Review, 62(4), pp 424-433. Ndou, V. 2004 “e-Government for Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challenges” Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries 18 (1) pp 1 -24 Ondari-Okemwa, E, 2004. Impediments to Promoting Access to Global Knowledge in Sub-Saharan Africa, In Library Management, 25(8/9), pp. 361-375. Panagopoulos, C., 2004. “Consequences of the Cyberstate: The Political Implications of Digital Government in an International Context.” In Digital Government: Principles and Best Practices, Edited by Alexei Pavlichev and G. David Garson, Idea Group Publishing, London, United Kingdom. Stowers, G. 2004 "Issues in E-commerce and E-government service delivery" in Digital government: principles and best practices, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey pp169 - 185 Stoltzfus, K. 2004. “Motivations for Implementing e-Government: An Investigation of the Global Phenonmenon” Proceedings of the 2005 National Conference on Digital Government Research dg.o2005 May 2005, Digital Government Research Center pp 333- 338 Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 12 of 13 [15]. [16]. [17]. [18]. [19]. [20]. [21]. [22]. [23]. [24]. [25]. UNPAN, 2004. “UN Global E-government Readiness Report 2004” Available online http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan019207.pdf (Cited on 15 December 2005) Wilson, M. 2001. "Understanding the International ICT and Development Discourse: Assumptions and Implications" in The Southern African Journal of Information and Communication Issue No 3 [Online] Available at http://link.wits.ac.za/journal/j0301-merridy-fin.pdf [Cited on 13 May 2005] Layne, K & Lee, L 2001."Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model" Government Information Quarterly, 2001 Bonham, G, Seifert, J & Thorson, S. 2001. "The transformational potential of E-government: The role of political leadership" Electronic Governance and Information Policy (Panel 9-1) at the 4th Pan European International Relations Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research. Available online at www.maxwell.syr.edu/maxpages/faculty/gmbonham/Transformative_Potential_of_EGovernment.doc (Cited on 14 March 2006) Basu, S. 2004 "E-government and developing countries: an overview" International Review of Law, Computers & Technology Vol 18 No 1 pp 109-132 Ndou, V. 2004 "E-Government fo Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challenges" EJISDC Vol 18: No 1 pp 1-24 World Bank, nd. "Definition of E-Government" Available online at http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNIC ATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/EXTEGOVERNMENT/0,,contentMDK:-~menuPK:70259 2~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:702586,00.html (Cited on 14 March 2006) OECD, 2003. "The e-Government Imperative" Available online at http://www1.oecd.org/publications/e-book/-E.PDF (Cited on 28 Feb 2006) Moon, M. J. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424-433. United Nations, 2003. The UN Human Development Report: Millennium Development Goals: A compact among nations to end human poverty Available online at http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2003/ (Cited on 30 January 2006) Deloitte and Touche. 2001 The Citizen as Customer Available online at http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/GPS_dawne-governmentUK.pdf (Cited on 14 March 2006) Copyright © 2006 The authors www.IST-Africa.org/Conference2006 Page 13 of 13