Gordon Monday Bubou
National Centre for Technology Management (NACETEM), Nigeria
E-mail: gbubou@gmail.com
Richard Bunakiye Japheth
Niger Delta University, Nigeria
E-mail: jbunakiye@yahoo.com
Seigha Gumus
Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, Nigeria
E-mail: seighagumus@gmail.com
Submission: 20/07/2017
Accept: 06/03/2018
ABSTRACT
Globally,
public sector innovation has become a big issue as citizens demand for greater
accountability, effectiveness and efficiency in service delivery, and the liberalization
of the governance system. Debate on e-government evolved in the last decade in
parallel with a broader discussion on e-governance, where the concept and
practice of e-governance further encompasses the e-government phenomenon.
Because of the complexities of governance and e-governance, this chapter
presents e-governance as a close, large integrated, open and sociotechnical
(CLIOS) framework to meet present and emerging challenges of the e-world, as
well as enhance good governance for sustainability. Novel descriptions of e-governance,
governance, CLIOS, complex adaptive systems, sociotechnical systems were provided
from literature. From a socio-technical perspective, the design consideration
for the adoption and implementation of e-governance architecture for a State in
an emerging economy like Nigeria was provided. The contextual aspects that
needed to be considered for the adoption of e-governance were discussed and
citizens interface with governance through e-governance platforms were
highlighted. Examples of countries implementing e-governance, benefits and
challenges regarding the Bayelsa case were discussed.
Keywords: sociotechnical system; e-governance;
complex and adaptive systems; good governance; public sector innovation;
Bayelsa State; Nigeria
1. INTRODUCTION
Globally,
advancements in technology, especially information communications technologies
(ICTs) have led to an overwhelming growth in connectivity and interdependence
among economic and social (as well as political) systems (Williams, 2014). Additionally, the
dynamics of globalization and the rise, first of the information society,
regarded as the third wave of economic transformation (HUANG; YEO; TRAUT, 2006)
and later, the knowledge-based (KBE) economy, have important implications for
latecomer emerging economies like Nigeria.
There
are multiple drivers of the aforementioned phenomenon – one of them being the
way in which society is becoming more complex and unpredictable in both
positive and challenging ways (Misuraca,
2007).
The
complexities are increasingly felt in the business, political, scientific,
technological, health, environmental and sociocultural arenas. Similarly, the
role of government in the society is undergoing fast and continuous change
which appears to have accelerated in the last two decades largely due to
widespread adoption of ICTs on one hand, and the growing processes of state
liberalization and economic globalization on the other (Misuraca, 2012).
The
emerging ICT for development approach towards public sector transformation is
creating new perceptions about government and governance (GEBBA; ZAKARIA,
2012). It therefore requires governments to foster innovation by reforming
their public-sector innovation systems (ROBACK, 2006).
Davidrajuh (2003)
supported that one objective of any government to utilize ICTs is basically to
develop the economy and improve the quality of life and provide to all the
citizens. Indeed, ICTs have influenced socioeconomic growth and catalyzed
entire workplace cultural shifts both in the developing and developed worlds.
Consequently, governments have derived maximal benefits from adopting ICT into
governance structures, resulting to governance efficiency, effectiveness of
service delivery and the provision of wider information access to the governed.
However, the management of technological change, that will benefit the society
requires cooperation among different actor groups (ROBACK, 2006).
Misuraca (2007)
said, the complexities of today’s world stems from its networked nature and the
growing phenomenon of the involvement of non-state or non-governmental actors
into policy-making arena. The author
added that such involvements assume consultative bases or by way of
participatory approaches enabled by ICTs. Incidentally, governments all over
the globe are adopting multifaceted approaches towards the realization of the
above objectives. But here, a complex, large-scale, interconnected, open,
sociotechnical (CLIOS) framework of the e-governance architecture is presented.
Within the CLIOS framework, we adopt a sociotechnical systems (STS) approach to
e-governance considering people and technology, two highly interconnected
components of a single system as it is applicable to the study of the
relationships and interactivities between the social and technical structures
of e-government and e-governance. It is noteworthy that, the systems analysis
approach has been used to study several civilian problems such as housing,
health care, education, poverty and transportation (LARACY, 2007).
At
the core of the CLIOS are the concepts of complex adaptive systems (CAS) and
STS. CAS thinking has applications in several disciplines including physics,
biology, economics and political science. Governance itself is said to be a
complex yet universal force existing in every society (Misuraca, 2007). For example, governance as a complex system
consists of other sub-systems like – socio-economic system, political system,
institutional system, and organizational system, each with its inherent
complexities. We thus view governance as a sociotechnical phenomenon where
basic social constructs like citizen, infrastructure, team, and governance
require support from ICT applications. We equally propose here that
policymakers understand the ‘Governance Dynamics’ for effective decision
making.
The
liberalization of Nigeria’s telecommunications sector in 2001 led to phenomenal
diffusion of ICTs in several spheres and regions with diverse applications. It
opened up the space for governments at all levels to adopt e-government.
Bayelsa State is one of the thirty-six states of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria that was created in 1996. Being at the infancy stage of e-government has
begun the adoption of e-government by establishing an E-Governance Bureau but
lacked the ability for efficient diffusion to all parties involved.
The
Bayelsa State government with the transformation agenda of the present state
governor, the state been at the entry stage of ICT into government in
digitalizing the services of the state activities to interact with and amongst
government, government agencies/ministries, citizens and businesses. But
unfortunately, the pace of adoption is very slow and indicates a non-ready
state.
The
E-Governance and Due Process Bureau (EGDB) which was established in 2009 is yet
to fully comprehend the expanse of work expected to achieve for an e-ready
state and for the adoption and implementation of an e-governance. The possible
effect of this is that the government is yet to adhere to the principles of
‘people first’ using ICT technological innovations to improve service delivery
to assist in the administration or management of government, and to provide
services in support of government operations (Visser;
Twinomurinzi, 2008).
The
study examines the capacity of the Bayelsa State government to effectively
harness ICT as an enabler in its efforts to meet present and emerging
challenges of the e-world, as well as enhance good governance for
sustainability. The aim will be to describe the methodology used to implement
the CLIOS framework of the e-government system. Equally, while some studies
have been carried out on e-governance in developing countries (AL ALTHMAY,
2012; AWAN; Amin; Kirkby, 2013;
CHOWDHURY; SATTER, 2013; GEBBA; ZAKARIA, 2012; NKWE, 2012; Misuraca, 2007; SHAHWAN, 2010), studies
looking at e-governance in developing countries from a CLIOS perspectives are
rare. This chapter is intended to fill that gap.
2. REVIEW OF RELATED MATERIALS
The
information revolution has modified the global context in such a manner that it
is so overwhelming to most developing countries who are also lacking in
technological dynamism and the capacities for adapting to changes in the global
socio-economic and political environment. Since the advent of computers, and
more recently the internet, pressure on governments to perform better has
increased, and information and communication technologies (ICTs) have provided
them with the capacity to do so via electronic (e) -government (OECD, 2003).
2.1.
E-Government
and E-Governance
The
concept of e-government is touted to have emerged against the backdrop of the
global transition towards the KBE (HUANG et al., 2006). Nevertheless, Curtin (2007) claims that, while the use of ICT in government
can be traced to the 1950s, its diffusion to developing countries has been slow
not until this 21st century. Luckily, the growing role of ICT in
facilitating and expediting economic, social, cultural and political
development is now being understood by most of developing countries (GEBBA;
ZAKARIA, 2012). African governments in particular have also understood and
appreciated the contribution of e-government to the government agenda (NKWE,
2012).
During
the last decade, ICT has had a major influence on incrementally changing and
shifting traditional and bureaucratic government models into a more accessible
and transparent model, where services are delivered according to citizens’
needs (Al-Shafi; Weerakkody,
2010).
In
this context, many countries have now transformed their traditional government
processes into an e-enabled state where key services are delivered online using
the ICT facilities offered by the internet. Curtin
(2007) claims that, ICTs have enabled governments to operate more
effectively and transparently, providing more and better information and
services to the public, and facilitates the participation of individuals,
businesses and groups throughout society in their own governance.
This
mode of online service delivery is commonly referred to as e-government (Al-Shafi; Weerakkody, 2010; Curtin,
2007). It characterizes efforts to use ICTs for political purposes and the
organization of political activity in a country (GANT, 2008). Thus, e-government refers to the use of ICTs
by government agencies at different levels to redesign and transform relations
between governments and businesses, governments and citizens (G2C), different
government agencies (G2G), and government to employees (G2E) (HUANG et al.,
2006; KUMAR, 2011). Nevertheless, e-government differs from e-governance.
While
e-governance is based on four processes – namely, electronic consultation,
electronic controllership, electronic engagement and networked societal
guidance – conversely, e-government refers to the structure that is responsible
for electronic service delivery, electronic workflow, electronic voting and
electronic productivity (AWAN et al., 2013).
But
the concept of e-governance which co-evolved with e-government was initially
considered the technological component of Public Administration Reform later
emerged as a greater societal challenge as well as a mechanism for more than
just improvement of administrative services or user satisfaction, but as
something that promotes deeper forms of democracy (Misuraca, 2012).
E-governance
fundamentally differs from e-government in that, it is a wider concept going
beyond the simple provision of services through the use electronic mean by
building an external interaction with diverse stakeholders in the external
environment (Al Athmay,
2012).
It
encompasses the utilization of ICTs to interact with and provide services to
businesses, citizens and other governments with the intent to improve
transparency, increase public service efficiency and deepen democracy (AWAN et
al. 2013), thereby bringing about changes in the way citizens relate to
governments and to each other.
Kaye
(2011) cited a 2000 work of Black as broadly describing governance as the
intentional activity of attempting to control, order or influence the behavior
of others. Kaye therefore concluded that governance covers cover multiple
actors, activities that can be enacted or carried out through a number of
different mechanisms. She distinguished it from regulation that is narrower in
scope and applies just to the formal structures of law and legally constituted
regulatory bodies.
Misuraca
(2007) provided an African perspective of e-governance that was captured within
the framework of the e-Africa Initiative for Good Governance: Building
e-governance capacity in African countries – it defines e-governance as: “the
use of ICTs, and especially the Internet, to adopt a new conception and
attitude of governing and managing where participation and efficiency are
required of all the partners linked in a network: e-governance is therefore a
new way of coordinating, planning, formulating and implementing decisions and
operations related to governance problems. Government can utilize e-governance
to re-invent themselves, get closer to the citizenry and forge closer alliances
and partnerships with diverse communities of interest, practice, expertise,
conviction and inter-dependence within the context of national and
international development agendas”. (2007:29)
The
overall process of e-governance is said to be much more complex and requires
multiple factors to be taken into account (AWAN et al. 2013).
2.2.
ICTs,
Technological Change, Complex Adaptive Systems, and Sociotechnical Systems
ICT
consists of all technical means used to handle information and aid
communication, ranging from computers (desktop, PC, tablets, blogs, social
media, cell phones, etc.). Information technology (IT) as part of general ICT
family is credited with enormous improvements in personal productivity,
efficiency in communication, elimination of tedium in workplace, introduction
of an element of democracy in
communication across levels of hierarchy as well as creation of new modes of
interaction among employees (Korukonda,
2012).
Likewise,
by innovating the public sector with the adoption ICTs, government agencies
transform relations with citizens, business and other arms of government in the
delivery of services thereby supporting good governance (Chowdury; Satter, 2013).
The
most fruitful lesson gained by recent research is that technological change
should be explored within the social fabric in which the innovative activities
are actually developed and used (Archibugi;
Michie, 1997:122). It requires an understanding of the interactions
between technology and the social, ecological, economic, cultural, political
and governance systems within society (Marinova,
2009).
Technological
innovations are complex processes, involving a multitude of technological and
social factors (SUURS, 2009). Technological systems (like ICT systems) consist
of dynamic knowledge and competence networks (SUURS, 2009) and seem to be
narrowed down to social systems.
As
the society, particularly the public sector continues to innovate, pushing
towards increased integration leveraging on the advances in ICT, it bridges the
communication barriers and empowers citizens to participate more actively in
the governance of their countries. However, Porter (2013) claims – innovation
and imagination are the stuff of great scientific, sociological, and economic
breakthroughs, which is also true for governments and militaries. E-governance
adoption is a part of the broader ICT innovation systems.
Therefore,
like technological innovation systems, they are STS focused on the development,
diffusion and use of a particular technology, in this case, ICTs, and are
typically defined by their constituting structural elements (Hillman; Nilsson; Rickne; Magnusson.
2009).
STS
include a social system, the institutional setting and the technology (BUBOU; Ejim-Eze; Okrigwe, 2012). STS is a
complex system in which social and technical sub-systems influence one another
through feedback loops (Hollnagel,
2002 in Maio, 2014), producing
emergent system behavior, and where the relationship between social and
technical components are constantly redefined and evolve adaptively and
dynamically.
It
typically recognizes the interaction between people and technology, while in
computer science and engineering is an approach to develop functional jointly
optimized whole systems (Maio,
2014). The resulting sociotechnical transition is the connection between
governance arrangements and the functionality of the innovation system, i.e.
how well the functions are served (Hillman
et al., 2011).
Holland
(1992) opined that most of the social, ecological, and biological systems that
contain a large number of interacting autonomous agents can be considered as
CAS as the actors or entities have adaptive capacities to the changing
environment.
Complex
systems embody some key characteristics critical to understanding the role of
technology in the context of society (Blair;
Nieto-Gomez; Sitterle, 2013) and
governance. Complex networks are referred to as 'adaptive' or 'dynamic,'
because they are self-organizing; constantly changing their interrelationships
based upon the needs of individual agents and environmental impacts (PORTER,
2013). This makes multi-agent approach very effective for tackling the
complexity of e-governance systems (KUMAR, 2011)
Bibikas; Kourtesis; Paraskakis;
Bernardi; Sauermann; Apostolou et al. (2008) tension between the social and
technical infrastructures can be difficult to harmonies, however. The mutual
constitutive role of people and technology in society will lead to continuous
negotiation procedure between these elements. Technical infrastructures affect
societal behavior, while social structures shape technology’s functionality.
2.3.
E-governance
is a CLIOS
According
to Misuraca (2007), based on the
conceptual framework and considering that any complex issue will quite quickly
bring complex issues to deal with. As earlier stated, not only the technology
behind the concept is complex, governance itself is a complex phenomenon.
Complex adaptive systems involving humans are said to be typically linked
across a variety of arenas – diplomatic, infrastructure, and military, economic
(PHISTER, 2011), social, political and cultural. In order to determine whether
e-government was CLIOS or not, SEKER (2004) first of all looked at Pinch’s 1987 definition of a large
technological systems: “they contain messy, complex, problem-solving
components; socially constructed and society shaping; contains: artefacts,
groups, processes, laws, and natural resources; system components are
interactive and interdependent; components are created and developed by ‘system
builders”. Seker asserted further
that e-government is an extremely complex system from the view of a citizen.
From Seker’s conclusion, one can adduce that
e-governance which is considered even more complex than e-governance is a CLIOS
as it possesses all the attributes listed in Pinch’s definitions. For instance,
DOSKEY; MAZZUCHI; SARKANI (2013)
view the United States’ Federal Government as the largest and most complex
entity in the world. They maintain that complex systems and systems engineering
(SE) are inextricably woven and therefore sought to identify patterns present
in systems engineering activity when government organization acquire and build
complex information systems.
E-governance
integrates the human and the human side of technology by integrating people,
processes, information, cultural, and environment in achieving the governance
objectives (Al Athmay, 2012).
Similarly,
SHAHWAN (2010) argues that e-governance should be viewed from a ‘Systems
Theory’ perspective, in which it is an input that is moderated or modified by a
number of variables that constitute the contextual process in the course of
which other variables interact and impact this input to produce the desired
output. In our case, the anticipated outputs are – good governance
(transparency and accountability, inclusive development, governance efficiency
and infrastructural service delivery).
MISURACA
(2012) also stressed the need to
take into account the complex system and self-reflective nature of intervening
variables involved in social systems (Misuraca,
2012). Some such variables were listed technological change and technical
infrastructure, democratic political system, good economy, effective legal
system, open culture, educational system that fosters innovation, and quality
manpower (Shahwan, 2010).
As a
CLIOS, e-governance depends of ICT infrastructure which will in turn depend on
availability of electricity. ICT will have to be integrated with order legacy
infrastructural systems like electricity, which are in themselves complex
systems. Likewise, although, electricity itself depends on certain ICT
applications to functions properly, it equally depends on the energy system,
specifically – availability of gas. A typical e-governance as CLIOS of Bayelsa State
is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: CLIOS
representation of E-governance in Bayelsa State
3. BAYELSA STATE’S E-GOVERNANCE STRATEGY
It is
observed that e-government is the precursor to e-governance. It suggests that
the requisite infrastructure, both human and technological has to be
established alongside the institutional framework supporting it.
Buoyed by the relative success recorded at the
national level, the State attempted her e-government drive. For example,
Nigeria established a National Information Communication Telecommunications
Policy and a National Broad Plan: 2013 – 2018. This was in addition to so many
agencies set up to articulate the whole strategy of e-governance adoption in
the country.
Although, Nigeria still performed poorly, ranked 141
out of the 193 countries in the United Nations E-Government Survey 2014, it is
said to have made a big lift from the previous 169th position. In a bid to
achieve this objective, the Bayelsa State government set up the E-Governance
and Due Process Bureau through the instrumentally of the State Legislature. The
State equally acquired part equity in an indigenous telecommunication company
that wa providing broadband internet services.
The EGDB controls the central data base providing web
servicing to all ministries departments. However, local governments and nearly
all the ministries are yet to have functional websites. The Bureau initiated
the procurement for computers for all offices in the various ministries and
started a phased training program for staff.
Pivotal
in the e-governance strategy of the State is its new status as been designated
as a “Smart State”. The State in collaboration with the Federal Ministry of
Telecommunication has planned a massive roll-out of ICT center across the nooks
and crannies of the State.
The
long-term of the Smart State initiative is to make Bayelsa State a global ICT
hub. Additionally, a state-wide area network (SWAN) utilizing WCDMA
connectivity of the jointly owned telecoms is also planned to link up all local
government areas, and government offices to a Collectorate (that is where the
SWAN acts as the node) is to be established. In addition to the above SWAN,
four GSM service providers already had setup transmission base stations across
in all the major towns and villages of the state, except for the very remote
rural communities.
3.1.
Design
Considerations
The
design considerations of e-governance are as discussed below. Since the STS
functionality is optimized only when there is synergy and collaboration between
people, technology and the environment, tasks and processes and the whole
system design must be devised taking into account the three and their
interactions (Maio, 2014).
Technology
diffusion is an important determinant of the rate of success e-governance adoptions.
For e-governance adoption to be useful, the contexts within which and the
users’ group that interface with the e-governance architecture need to be
understand. Specifically, wider adoption of ICTs in Bayelsa State or any region
will facilitate quick and faster adoption of e-governance.
SAHU;
GUPTA; SAHOO (2004) argued that e-governance acceptance has become an issue for
consideration. Referred to as the rapid diffusion of the e-governance projects,
which derives actual level of uses by end-users, e-governance acceptance varies
from users’ group to group (and from context to context). Another factor common
with complex systems is interoperability. This is the ease with which the
different systems and subsystems interact with one another. Social requirements are often seen to be
neglected in the process of designing and implementing organizational knowledge
management solutions (Bibikas et
al., 2008). Incidentally, most critical system failures often said to occur for
“non-technical” reasons, despite flawless technical implementations, due to
human (cognitive and behavioral) and socio technical factors (Giese et al. 2009 as cited by Maio, 2014).
3.2.
Benefits
of E-Governance
GUPTA
(2004) explains that e-governance offers opportunities to transform both the
mechanics of government (as in e-government) and the nature of governance
itself. It equally offers new ways for improving government processes,
connecting citizens and building interactions with civil society (Chowdhury; Satter, 2013). E-governance
has become the slice of life for citizens of most countries grappling with
government policies, their implementation and finally the outcomes towards the
betterment of their lives (SAHU et al., 2004).
In
the developing countries, service at doorsteps through ICT is vital not only to
establish a democratic and transparent government, but also to fight against
poverty (Chowdury; Satter, 2013).
It reinforces the potential to better utilize public resources resulting in improved
public service delivery, enable citizens better access services, reach out to
the vulnerable parts of the population and foster open government – without
losing sight of the necessary focus of efficiency and effectiveness (OECD,
2010).
For
instance, in India, e-governance is one application area where IT has made
considerable progress and it offers vast potential to provide good governance
by enhancing transparency and reducing corruption, increasing revenue while
reducing cost (both for citizens and government) (GUPTA, 2004). It is said to
have made relevant improvements in many sectors using about 850 projects
involving government ministries, agencies and the private sector.
The
transformation of the public sector by the instrumentality of e-governance is
said to serve a variety of different ends –
improving interactions with business and industry, and citizen
empowerment through access to information BONHAM et al (in HUANG et al., 2006).
In the particular case of Bayelsa, e-governance has facilitated the procurement
and tax administration processes. Citizens and businesses can quite easily
process their tax documents using online platforms provided. They can also view
their tax records using a unique tax identification number (TIN), using the
same platform. This ease of tax administration has contributed to increase in
internally generated revenues to the State. Equally, contractors and
consultants to the state government can download the specified forms, fill them
and forward same to the relevant ministries or extra ministerial department
through the EGDB.
E-governance
is also bringing improvements to maintenance of security. With the application
of closed-circuit televisions which are monitored real time, activities of
criminals of have been brought under control in certain trouble spots of the
capital city of Yenagoa. Equally, a wider application of e-governance will be
of ecological benefits, reduce the environmental footprint of the State as less
hardcopy (paper) documents will be used. This will also bring in savings to the
State as government spending on printing reduces.
3.3.
Challenges
of E-Governance Adoption and implementation in Bayelsa State
In as
much as countries enjoy benefits of e-governance, it is not without some
glitches. More so, as it is STS, there are challenges of adoption and
implementation of e-governance. For instance, different actors have different
incentives and there is often a lack of agreement on what will give the most
benefit (ROBACK, 2006).
VISSER;
TWINOMURINZI (2008) argue that the effectiveness of e-government towards
improving service delivery is littered with failure stories and despite the
failures have not stopped most governments from increasingly turning to ICT,
most notably internet based models, as the preferred channel for
citizen-centered and business-centered service delivery.
Nonetheless,
GEBBA; ZAKARIA (2012) claim, that the reliability of an e-government strategy
can be the difference between success and failure of the whole effort. Hence,
approaching e-governance from a CLIOS perspective will go a long way in
addressing the systemic and structural challenges encumbering the adoption of
e-governance in developing regions. Sometimes, failures associated with
ignoring social, political, economic, and institutional elements are
catastrophic (LARACY, 2007). Therefore, in most systems, functional performance
depends on the interaction of people and technologies, whereby the correct
functioning of systems depends largely on interactions with stakeholders (Maio, 2014).
Again,
e-governance is a relatively new concept and its implementations in developing
countries are generally more problematic in comparison to those in the
developed nations (Chowdhury; Satter,
2013; Gebba; Zakaria, 2012).
KUMAR (2011) maintains there are several types of
problems in e-governance like i) interoperability and service integration
within information system; ii) semantics differences related to the scattered,
heterogeneous data; iii) Lack of sharing of existing data; and iv) Lack of
knowledge base system in the middleware.
Also,
NKWE (2012) highlighted the challenges of e-governance in Botswana to include:
low level of internet penetration; telecommunications infrastructure
constraints; Lack of institutional framework supporting e-government; Lack of
allocated budget for e-government deployment; Digital divide; Privacy and
security concerns; Limited IT skills and training; Culture; Lack of citizen
awareness and participation.
The
challenges of e-governance in Bayelsa State are not different from those
experienced by developing regions. They are both physical/technical to social,
ranging from inadequate basic infrastructure to lack of ICT skills, illiteracy,
etc. Of all the challenges, that of broadband connectivity is greatest. It has
less the 20% coverage which is far cry from what is required. Another one is
that of illiteracy, including technology ineptitude.
3.4.
Possible
Solutions to the Challenges of E-Governance Adoption and implementation
AL ATHMAY (2013) enthuses that successful
implementation of e-governance requires the movement from a passive information
society to an active engagement of citizens. This means mass mobilization of
the populace to buy-into government’s initiatives of e-governance.
Again,
for e-governance to be effective, SHAHWAN (2010) maintains, it has to be
integrated within a holistic approach that includes a supportive and democratic
leadership, a viable communication infrastructure, highly qualified personnel
to operate the new technology, an open educational system that encourages innovation
and creativity and a credible legal system to protect the individual against
the invasion of privacy. Civil society is another stakeholder group that is
strategic to the successful implementation of e-governance initiative because
of their wider reach and their grassroots orientations.
3.5.
Future
research
No
doubt, e-governance has become a viable option inclusive for development. It is
become more and popular with development countries and regions. Equally, the
complexity of governance has been established. One phenomenon sweeping across
nations is the preponderance of social media as a veritable platform for
reaching out to the large population.
Governments
and private persons have found it useful to interact through social media. In
fact, the Bayelsa State government has a dedicated social media outfit headed
by Senior Special Assistant reporting directly to the Governor. Besides the
websites of the different ministries and extra-ministerial departments, the
Social Media Team collates government activities and policies and broadcasts
them to the public on a regular basis. Citizens send queries through the media
ad get feedback in turn. We would like to propose here that policymakers
understand the ‘Governance Dynamics’ for effective decision making.
Like STERMAN’S
(2002) reference to ‘business dynamics’ governance dynamics should be concerned
with learning in and about the complex systems of governance. It means,
policymakers embrace system thinking to expand the boundaries of their mental
models and develop ways to understand how the structure of complex systems
creates behavior.
For a
successful e-government adoption and implementation in Bayelsa State, the state
will have to be e-ready and the citizens’ level of technology acceptance with
respect to e-governance has to be high too. Consequently, further research on
e-readiness, technology acceptance levels have to be undertaken to ensure a
hitch-free e-governance adoption.
4. CONCLUSION
E-governance
proven to be a complex large integrated open sociotechnical system. It
therefore requires multi-stakeholder engagements in order to optimize the
overall system. It will mean considering non-technical issues as well as the
technical infrastructure for e-governance implementation to be effective.
E-governance has been adopted by many governments including developing
countries in Africa with attendant benefits.
Benefits
of e-governance were succinctly captured by GUPTA (2004) to include: having the
potential to provide new scope (wide range of services, participation in policy
making), ‘substance’ (increased content), ‘style’ (interaction) and ‘stance’
(attitude of government, private sector and citizens). Others include
accountability and transparency, cost savings, effective service delivery and
wider information dissemination and strengthening democracy. Nonetheless,
adopting e-governance is not without certain challenges.
Bayelsa
seems to have set the right path for her e-governance strategy. However, its
impacts are yet to be felt state-wide. A lot still needs to be done. The
infrastructure in not right yet. Citizens’ mobilization is far way behind what
can make an effective e-governance program because the role citizens’
participation in governance is crucial when trying to harness the complex
social systems.
We
will conclude with the words of SHAHWAN (2010) regarding the implementing
e-governance, that the Bayelsa State government must reposition itself to
become an engaged and constructive partner in shaping the new governance
patterns that will otherwise render it rudderless. Therefore, government must
produce a new culture in order to harness the enormous potential of digital
government (GUPTA, 2014) for inclusive development.
REFERENCES
Al Athmay, A. A. R. A.
(2012) Assessing the implementation of e-governance in Arab Counties. International Journal of Information
Technology and Business Management, v. 5, n. 1, p. 20-40.
Al Athmay, A. A. R. A.
(2013) E-governance in Arab countries: status and challenges. Global Journal of Business Research, v.
7, n.5, p. 79-98.
Alharbi, N. (2013)
E-government security modelling: Explaining main factors and analysing existing
models. International Journal of
Management Science and Engineering, v. 7, n. 9, p. 674-676.
Al-Shafi, S.; Weerakkody, V.
(2010) Adoption and diffusion of free wireless internet parks in Qatar. International Journal of Value Chain
Management, v. 4, n. 1/2, p. 68-85.
Archibugi, D.; Michie, J.
(1997) Technological globalization or national systems of innovation? Futures, v. 29, n. 2, p.121-137.
Awan, O.; Amin, M.; Kirkby, K.
(2013) Introduction to e-governance. In A. Ming,
N. Somani & O. Awan (Eds.) e-Governance
in Small States. London: The Commonwealth, p. 1-24.
Bernhard, I. (2013). E-government and e-governance – Swedish
case studies with focus on the local level. Thesis (PhD in Urban and
Regional Planning) Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden.
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:663249/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Accessed,
24/06/2017.
Bibikas, D.; Kourtesis, D.; Paraskakis, I.;
Bernardi, A.; Sauermann, L.; Apostolou, D.; Mentzas, G.; Vasoncelos, A. C.
(2008). A sociotechnical approach to knowledge management in the era of
enterprise 2.0: the case of Organik. Scalable
Computing: Practice and Experience, v. 9, n. 4, p. 315-327.
Blair, D.; Nieto-Gomez, R.; Sitterle, V.
(2013) Technology, Society, and the Adaptive Nature of Terrorism: Implications
for Counterterror. H. Cabayan, V.
Sitterle, V.; Yandura, M. (Eds.) Looking
Back, Looking Forward: Perspectives on Terrorism and Responses to It.
Strategic Multi-layer Assessment1 Occasional White Paper, September 2013, p.
31-43.
Bubou, G. M.; Ejim-Eze, E. E.; Okrigwe, F. N.
(2012) The telecoms sectoral system of innovation and the diffusion of mobile
telephony in Nigeria. In: Portland INTERNATONAL CONFERENCE ON MANAGEMENT OF
ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGE. P. 1608-1616, Proceedings, Vancouver (2012).
Chowdhury, M. M. H.; Satter, A.
K. M. (2013). Citizen perspective e-governance model for developing countries: Bangladesh context. American Journal of
Modelling and Optimization, v. 1, n. 3, p. 43-46.
Curtin, G. G. (2007)
E-Government. In: The Encyclopaedia of
Political Communications. Sage Publications.
Davidrajuh, R. (2004)
Planning e-government start-up: A case study on e-Sri Lanka. Electronic Government, an International
Journal, v. 1, n. 1, p. 92-06.
Doskey, S.; Mazzuchi, T.; Sarkani, S.
(2013) Exploring systems engineering patterns in government acquisition of
complex information systems. Information
Knowledge Systems Management, v. 12, p. 97-114.
Gant, J. P. (2008) Electronic Government for Developing
Countries. ITU, Geneva.
Gebba, T. R.; Zakaria, M.
R. (2012) E-government in Egypt: An analysis of practices and challenges. International Journal of Technology and
Management, v. 1, n. 1, p. 11-25.
Gupta, D. N. (2004)
Six sigma for quality in e-governance – A framework. Paper presented at the 2nd
International
Conference on e-Governance, Colombo, 2004.
Hillman, K. M.; Nilsson, M.; Rickne, A.;
Magnusson, T. (2011) Fostering sustainable technologies - a
framework for analyzing the governance of innovation systems. Science and Public Policy, v. 38, n. 5,
p. 403-415.
HOLLAND, J. H. (1992) Adaptation
in Natural and Artificial Systems. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
HUANG, H.; YEO, B.; TRAUT, E. M. (2006) Exploring the situated context
of knowledge management in e-government development. International Journal of Advanced Media and Communication, v. 1, n.
2, p. 148-159.
KAYE, J. (2011) From single biobanks to international networks: Developing e-governance. Human Genetics,
v. 130, p. 377-382.
KORUKONDA, A. R. (2012) Information technology and market efficiency. In
International Conference on Emerging
Trends in Electrical Communication and Information Technologies, v. 1, (pp.
144-148).
KUMAR, T. S. (2011) Sharon - agent based service middleware for
e-governance: A systematic web examination based approach using Christina
ontology. African Journal of Mathematics
and Computer Science Research, v. 4, n. 13, p. 396-400.
LARACY, J. R. (2007) Addressing system boundary issues in complex socio-technical
systems. Systems Research Forum, v.
2, n. 1, p. 19-26.
Maio, P. D. (2014)
Towards a metamodel to support the joint optimization of socio technical
systems. Systems, v. 2, p. 273-296.
Marinova, D. (2009) Global green system of innovation: Technological
wave or policy? Paper presented at the 18th World IMACS / MODSIM Congress,
Cairns, Australia.
Misuraca, G. C. (2007)
E-Governance in Africa, from Theory to Action: A Handbook on ICTs for Local
Governance. Ottawa, Cairo, Montevideo, Nairobi, New Delhi, Singapore: Africa
World Press, Inc./International
Development Research Centre (IDRC).
Misuraca, G. C. (2012)
E-governance: Past, present and future: A theoretical framework for prospective
policy analysis. In M. Finger & F. N. Sultana (Eds.) E-Governance, A Global Journey. Clifton, VA, Amsterdam, Tokyo: IOS
Press, p. 185-199.
NKWE, N. (2012) E-government: Challenges and opportunities in Botswana. International Journal of Humanities and
Social Science, v. 2, n. 1, p. 39-48.
OECD. (2003) The e-Government
Imperative. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2010) Denmark: Efficient
e-Government for Smarter Public Service Delivery. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Phister, P. W. (2011)
Cyberspace: The ultimate complex adaptive system. The International C2 Journal, v. 4, n. 2, p. 2010-2011.
PORTER, W. (2013) ‘Rethinking Counterterrorism: The Need for Systemic
Strategic Planning and a Strategic Campaign to Address Violent Islamist
Extremism that Manifests Itself in Terrorist Acts. In H. Cabayan, V. Sitterle,
V. and Yandura, M. (Eds.) Looking Back,
Looking Forward: Perspectives on Terrorism and Responses to It. Strategic
Multi-layer Assessment1 Occasional White Paper, September 2013, p. 11-20.
ROBACK, K. (2006) Medical device
innovation: The integrated processes of invention, diffusion and
deployment. Dissertations (PhD in Health and Society), University of Linkoping,
Sweden.
SAHU, G. P.; GUPTA, M. P.; SAHOO, T. (2004). Towards a model of
e-governance acceptance. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on
e-Governance, Colombo, 2004.
SEKER, S. E. (2004) Possible
social impacts of e-government: A case study of Turkey. Dissertations (MA
in Social Sciences) Istanbul Technical University, Turkey.
SHAHWAN, U. (2010) E-governance
in developing countries. Available at: http://css.escwa.org.ib/ictd/01018/presentation/day2/8pdf.
Accessed 03/01/2011.
STERMAN, J. D. (2002) All models are wrong: reflections on becoming a
systems scientist. System Dynamics
Review, v. 18, n. 4, p.
501-531.
SUURS, R. A. A. (2009) Motors of
sustainable innovation - towards a theory on the dynamics of technological
innovation systems. Dissertation (PhD in
), University of Utrecht, Nederland.
Visser, W.; Twinomurinzi H.
(2008) E-Government and public service delivery: Enabling ICT to put “people
first” – a case study from South Africa. Journal
of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, v. 6, n. 6, p. 36-41.
Williams, M. D. (2014)
Young world rising - how youth, technology and entrepreneurship are changing
the world from the bottom up. A book review:
The Journal of Community
Informatics, v. 10, n. 1, p. 1-2.