The Government 2.0 Taskforce report of 2009, Engage: Getting on with Government 2.0, has been the most significant development within the Australian political space in regard to eDemocracy. While most strongly focused upon aspects of eGovernment, the report is a valuable appraisal of the internal characteristics of government and the public sector. It highlights, at length, the critical barriers obstructing greater exploitation of technology to augment transparency, increase state-citizen interaction, foster a culture of innovation, and revitalise democracy. The source of many of these obstructions, the report affirms, is the very nature of embedded policy and entrenched practice. A global Frost and Sullivan survey in 2009 found that of all major industries, government was the sector with the poorest utilisation of online communication and collaboration technologies. Meanwhile, a KPMG survey demonstrated (p. xiii) that the Australian public service performed poorly, relative to the public services of other developed nations, in the online delivery of information and services, platforms for inter-departmental collaboration, and online methods of integrating citizens into the policy-formulating and decision-making processes. The Government 2.0 Taskforce report acknowledges the difficulty of challenging entrenched culture and practice, yet contends that the democratic, economic, and innovative benefits of adopting eDemocratic principles necessitates a whole-of-government transformation.
A central vision underpinning the internal government aspects of eDemocracy is the creation of a “post-Fordist public sector workforce, empowered by information sharing across departmental boundaries, using sophisticated knowledge management techniques.”Further, it is through infusing the state with “the values of devolved, decentralised, networked governance, and cooperative team-working to solve common policy problems” that government increases its capacity to inform, empower and engage citizens (pp. 15-16). The reforms necessary to achieve this can be divided into three broad categories: policy and practice; culture and tradition; and smart work practices.
Policy and Practice
The traditional role of the public sector has been to function as the primary intermediary between state and citizen. This role remains as relevant, if not more so, than at any other point, yet the manner in which this role is executed must change. A general goal of the public service – though not in all circumstances – has been to apply policy and deliver services “to every single citizen in precisely the same way, so that the basic principle of equality in front of the law and the state is enforced.” (p. 270) Similarity, however, is not necessarily synonymous with equality; in fact, uniformity of policy and service delivery, in many cases, may in fact undermine equality. Acknowledgement of this potentiality appears to underpin Simon Crean’s - Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development, and Local Government - recent adoption of the concept of ‘new regionalism’ in the debate over regional development. While the theory is predominantly grounded in economics, it also draws heavily upon localised policy and services derived from decentralised authority and an informed, empowered citizenry directly involved in the decision-making processes. This is most evident in the area of the Regional Development Australia Fund. Similar approaches have also been adopted on a more local level by the Adelaide City Council and the City of Sydney, with varying levels of online engagement.
Yet to make such reforms effective and enduring, more fundamental changes need to occur. Embracement of eDemocracy initiatives must be just one aspect of a greater movement toward reconstituting the very way in which government and the public sector operate. Public officials and representatives must become more visible and accountable, involving the public in both long-term projects and more routinised activities. Engagement and interaction online should be encouraged – in some circumstances, required – with public servants in particular bestowed with more flexibility in the ways in which they work, as well as greater room to experiment without being over-burdened by rules and hierarchy. This is particularly important in the area of social media and blogs, areas where Australian public officials have been largely absent or present but sporadically and ineffectively so.
Two charts, from the Government 2.0 Taskforce (p. 36) and Young Foundation (p. 3) reports, respectively, establish a framework to discern the separation between official and private social media participation, and the role that social media should play within government.
Culture
Technology-enabled change is difficult to propagate within any organisation or industry, but the formal, conservative culture and strict hierarchy of the public sector contribute additional levels of complexity [1]. The slow adoption of new technology and work practices, as well as lack of online interaction between government and citizens, can be attributed to a range of factors. The current culture and hierarchy, however, only exacerbate many of these issues, in addition to functioning as significant barriers in their own right. That is not to say all public servants are averse to greater use of technology or engagement with citizens. It is the widespread perpetuation – with senior officials most responsible – of embedded and outdated cultures that must cease if a new culture of innovation, empowerment and serendipitous discovery is to flourish.
A new approach must be permitted to manifest that acknowledges the value of dramatically expanding access to information and raw data, embraces and respects the role of citizens in policy-formulation and agenda-setting, and realises that relinquishing authority will be beneficial to both the public sector and the citizenry. In particular, overly-sensitive concerns in regards to ‘security’ and ‘confidentiality’ in the field of online democracy have been found to be regularly misplaced and deleterious. Moreover, while the role of government should be to foster greater citizen-state interaction, emphasis must also be given to citizen-citizen, agency-agency, third sector-citizen, and third sector-government-citizen interactions.
Smart Work
The capacity for government to foster a more digital, connected society and adopt aspects of eDemocracy is reliant upon internally embracing technologically-driven new methods of work. In practical terms, this must begin with establishing more flexible technological and software procurement procedures, which would permit easier adoption of new technology, simpler contracting, and a more diverse range of platforms and solutions from which to choose. More efficient and prudent selection of technology and software would provide significant cost reductions, and could foster greater communication and collaboration between public servants, between government agencies, and between citizens and government.
In order for this to occur, a movement towards open source software is essential; many government agencies have allowed misplaced concerns for security and finances, or embedded cultural aversion to new practice, manifest as serious obstructions to necessary reform. Leading open source technology has consistently been found to be just as secure, if not more so, than proprietary alternatives, and much less expensive. The vastly greater security, functionality, and cost-effectiveness of the Google Chrome internet browser relative to Internet Explorer is a minor, but fundamental, example. Furthermore, open source itself is evidence in favour collaborative design and voluntarism, which has resulted in “not only technically better software, but also socially and politically progressive technologies that are more flexible, transparent and cost-effective to maintain.” (p. 17) Open source software thus enshrines democratic principles and its adoption, wherever feasible, would increase the capacity and legitimacy of any government endeavour to expand and revitalise democracy via online and technological means. Yet open source must not only be the solution in terms of software procurement, but also in the design and implementation of any online or technology-driven government initiatives; a closed, technocratic process must be avoided. Similarly, cloud computing is another area that potentially holds great benefits for government, delivering significant cost reductions and increasing the simplicity efficiency of project collaboration and interpersonal communication. For more information on cloud computing, please refer to the project blog post, “Hey, you, get off of my cloud.”
As significant as they are, reform must also touch on more fundamental aspects of government than day-to-day activities. For example, a number of governments overseas, particularly the Netherlands and South Korea, are implementing ‘smart work’ practices led by the establishment of ‘smart work centres’. These centres leverage the internet and innovative software to allow government agencies to be decentralised outside of traditional inner-city clusters. This policy bequeaths much more than more innovative use of technology: it increases the presence of government in regional and suburban areas; decentralises public sector employment, allowing for shorter commutes, which in turn reduces traffic congestion and possesses positive corollary effects for the environment; has the potential to heighten productivity and workforce participation; and increases work-life balance.
[1] Jones, S., Hackney, R. and Irani, Z., 'Towards e-Government Transformation: Conceptualising Citizen Engagement',Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, vol. 1, no. 2, 2007, pp. 145-52.