E-Governance Policies for Interoperability and Open Standards

被引:7
|
作者
DeNardis, Laura [1 ]
机构
[1] Yale Law Sch, New Haven, CT 06511 USA
来源
POLICY AND INTERNET | 2010年 / 2卷 / 03期
关键词
e-Governance; Internet governance; open government; interoperability; open standards; Internet standards; e-GIFs;
D O I
10.2202/1944-2866.1060
中图分类号
G2 [信息与知识传播];
学科分类号
05 ; 0503 ;
摘要
Information and communication technology standards are increasingly intertwined with functions that are paradigmatic responsibilities of governments. The degree of openness in technical standards can have public policy implications in several areas: a nation's innovation and competition policy; the ability of governments to efficiently and cost effectively perform services such as national security, disaster response, and e-Health administration; and the ways in which standards serve as a form of regulation making decisions such as the extent of user privacy on the Internet. Because of these possible policy implications, governments have a vested interest in promoting open technical standards adhering to principles of transparency, cost efficiency, and interoperability. This paper examines various possibilities for governments to engage with information and communication technology standardization (e.g., development, regulation, funding, adoption) and ultimately recommends that governments, as significant parts of technology markets, can exert market influence, as well as provide efficient e-Governance functions, through procurement policies that promote open standards, often through electronic government interoperability frameworks (e-GIFs) specifying information technology standards for e-Governance infrastructures. These procurement policies are the least interventionist of possible roles for governments in standardization because they do not mandate that private industry adopt particular standards and do not intervene directly in the standards-development process. Drawing from roundtable discussions with government officials at the United Nations Development Programme's Global Meeting on Government Interoperability Frameworks in Brazil, this paper surveys a number of existing government interoperability frameworks (Brazil, the European Union, Japan, and South Africa) and recommends best practices for these emerging e-Governance frameworks.
引用
收藏
页码:129 / 164
页数:36
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] E-governance Readiness: Challenges for India
    Sebastian, M. P.
    Supriya, K. K.
    [J]. IIM KOZHIKODE SOCIETY & MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2013, 2 (01) : 31 - 42
  • [32] Free the Data!: E-Governance for Megaregions
    Curtin, Gregory G.
    [J]. PUBLIC WORKS MANAGEMENT & POLICY, 2010, 14 (03) : 307 - 326
  • [33] Semantic Knowledge Modelling via Open Linked Ontologies - Ontologies in E-Governance
    Virvou, Maria
    [J]. INTELLIGENT DECISION TECHNOLOGIES-NETHERLANDS, 2023, 17 (02): : 273 - 274
  • [34] E-Governance: Silencing Vulnerable Populations
    Hill, Wesley C.
    [J]. HUMANITARIAN TECHNOLOGY: SCIENCE, SYSTEMS AND GLOBAL IMPACT 2015, HUMTECH2015, 2015, 107 : 181 - 185
  • [35] E-governance innovation: Barriers and strategies
    Meijer, Albert
    [J]. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION QUARTERLY, 2015, 32 (02) : 198 - 206
  • [36] Information Security Issues with E-Governance
    Peeran, Mudassir A.
    Shanavas, A. R. Mohamed
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEXT-GENERATION COMPUTING, 2022, 13 (03): : 342 - 351
  • [37] Priming e-Governance for quality of growth
    Balramdas, NVLN
    Lakshmi, G
    [J]. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT, PROCEEDINGS, 2004, 3025 : 309 - 318
  • [38] E-governance and integration in the European union
    Troitino, David Ramiro
    Mazur, Viktoria
    Kerikmae, Tanel
    [J]. INTERNET OF THINGS, 2024, 27
  • [39] International Organizations and Good Governance: E-governance in India
    Chaudhuri, Bidisha
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF 2010 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HUMANITIES, HISTORICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2010, : 695 - 699
  • [40] E-governance in revenue collection and administration
    Nisar, T. M.
    [J]. Internet Society II: Advances in Education, Commerce & Governance, 2006, 36 : 265 - 274