|
|
Niranjan Sahoo
|
While India has shown marked improvement in adapting new network technologies to enhance the quality of governance and foster all-inclusive development, such efforts are sporadic and limited to select areas. To make ICTs vital tools of transformation, India needs to create new institutions and make necessary corrections in the existing institutions of governance.
Moving away from a command and control mode of governance to governance through multiple stakeholders is an emerging policy paradigm. Phrases such as joined-up government (Bellamy, 1999) have been made famous by Tony Blair (Cabinet Office, 2000)) in the UK, while networked government is used in some areas of the United States. The concept of joining up recognises that no one has all the knowledge and resources, or controls all the levers to bring about sustainable solutions to complex issues. The key to joined up government is to learn about shared purpose, teamwork, partnerships and building relationships. This differs from the organisational model of the past which was build around tasks, units and titles. This change which makes governance more integrated and responsive has come to a large extent in response to and opportunities offered by the emergent Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs).
Integrated governance
Forces shaping integrated governance are diverse. These include globalisation, the changing forms of social organisation and cooperation (resurgent civil society) and rapid growth of knowledge economy fuelled by ICTs (Malkia, 2003). Globalisation has brought forward the truly internationalisation of issues (trade, environment, etc.) which state actors cannot possibly address all alone. Besides, the emergent knowledge economy fuelled by information revolutions is changing the traditional institutions of governance. This has been further complemented by the appearance of bottom-up international civil society networks that have been able to impact policy making in a substantial way. Again, this ongoing process has been furthered by the use of New Public Management strategies to increase state efficiency: privatisation and outsourcing of public services and industries, the introduction of business practices and management in the public sector, and a new role of the state itself from provider of goods and services to a facilitator among the various stakeholder and sectors (IPAA, 2002). In sum, the era of governance without governments (Rhodes, 1996) has emerged on a global scale in the last few years. The following are some of the key drivers for integration:
-
Previous and current models of decision-making and service delivery for individual services based on hierarchical command and control models are not working satisfactorily.
-
There is recognition that there are some problems that have not or cannot be solved regardless of the resources allocated unless there is an integrated approach across government departments e.g. poverty, family and community.
-
Dysfunction, environmental degradation, drug issues, poverty, violence, AIDS and other such issues.
-
There is increasing recognition that the causal factors for many social problems are the same.
-
Communities are becoming increasingly disillusioned by governments apparent inability to manage/solve their problems.
-
The fragmented approach to service delivery results in inefficient and ineffective use of resources.
-
Consumers (citizens) are no longer content with one size fits all solutions (IPAA, 2002).
In other words, integrated governance as a solution to earlier command and control governance (one size fits all) is strongly rooted in public dissatisfaction with government amid rising expectations of the quality and tailored responsiveness of government services, budget stringency and the opportunity offered by ICTs for shift in service delivery.
Integration here is used to mean both integration within government (both inter and intra) and collaboration with other sectors. integrated governance is based on a structure of formal and informal relations to manage affairs through collaborative (joined-up) approaches which may be between government agencies, or across levels of government (local, State and Commonwealth) and/ or the non-government sector (IPAA, 2002). As a term that encompasses rather disparate ways of working, it can include such concepts as informal relationships, cooperative relationships, coordinated relationships, collaborative relationships, and partnerships (i.e. partnerships in joint planning, implementation or evaluation). Key rubrics of integrated governance are pooled budgets, government/voluntary/private sector partnerships, partnership with other levels of government, integrated planning, broad policy frameworks, one stop shop, networks, joint databases and a whole list of joint indicators. Fundamentally, the concept incorporates an acknowledgment of mutuality and a movement away from a silo mentality (IPAA, 2002).
The concept of integration is not restricted to integration of whole of the government. There are different forms and variations as well. These include integration around service delivery (to include integration around partnership agreements), integration around programmes, and whole-of-government integration. While integrated services delivery means one-stop-shops approach of accessing variety of services (provided by government as well as other service providers) from a single source, integration around programmes goes on to ensure partnership and collaboration among regional players (states, provinces) to tackle complex issues. Whereas, the whole of government integration approach is more like joined up government in which integration is built around common issues and connecting all layers of government as well as private and voluntary sectors.
This evolution does not require wholesale systems change for instance there will always be a need for major government departments to concentrate on their areas of specialisation. It will, however, require some systemic change at the levels suggested and a rethink of transparency and accountability in government and governance to include the meaningful inclusion of new players such as consumers and community into systems.
ICTs and movement toward integrated governance
As mentioned earlier, ICTs are key drivers toward integrated governance. The most direct impact of the spread of ICTs is that they generate pressures on government to improve service delivery, regardless of location, and highlights the opportunities for this to occur through community governed initiatives. The first pressure relates to fiscal and performance issues, which intersect with technology because increasingly taxpayers and service users know that regional telecommunications infrastructure and government services lag behind private enterprise networks and services in terms of convenience, accessibility and efficiency.
The second pressure comes from what can be described as the rising tide of digital citizens: those with the skills and access necessary to use digital technologies, and who expect to be able to access these technologies regardless of location. New expectations of involvement are constantly created as digital consumers discover what is possible to do online.
The third pressure comes from the fact that the new technologies are collaborative, immediate, involving and empowering. New technologies create new networks. This has demonstrated impact on the way services are provided and polices are framed.
Finally, ICTs have changed public space, by connecting government, the market and civil society closer together and blurring the lines of what were once quite separate spheres. Technology driven global integration of markets accelerates the influence of market forces on national governments. The internet as reduced the role of traditional intermediaries in market transactions and increased the number of citizen to citizen transactions. Besides, ICTs have redefined two distinct yet connected relationships between people and their governments: the relationship between the government and citizen as consumer, and the relationship between government and the citizen as owner and shareholder.
More than effecting changes in the governance paradigm, ICTs can play even greater role in strengthening and sustaining the processes of integrated governance.
First, core to the integrated governance is strategic communications. ICT led digital connections makes it possible to establish strategic connections in government. ICTs can help to connect arms, agencies, levels and data stores of government to strengthen capacity to investigate, develop and implement strategy and policy that guides government processes. Examples of such connections are central-to-local, ministry-to-ministry, executive-to-legislature, and decision maker-to-data-store. Automation and information support this by digitalising existing information channels. The rationale is to reduce the costs and increase the speed of the processes and decision making
and to create more flexible and responsive processes.
Second, the issue of improving service delivery (provided by public and private agencies) is something that has necessitated integration in governance. New networking technologies can eliminate the boundaries between and within government agencies as service delivery is organised around the needs of end-users. The digitalisation of information components of public services makes citizen easily access the data on different services, facilitates interaction (delivering data to citizens and receiving data from citizens), and helps easy transaction of such services. In short, ICTs are creating new methods of public service delivery (Heeks, 2001).
Third, ICTs can contribute to improve productivity and streamlining of internal government administration (procurement, human resources, budgeting, planning, evaluation), by helping to remove paper from the process or by facilitating coordination and consolidation of information. In the process, they help make governance cheaper, faster, innovative apart from reducing corruption and increasing accountability. Needless to say these are core issues surrounding this new movement toward cost-effective joined up governance.
Finally, ICTs promote and sustain networks, partnerships, collaborations that are vital to bring integration in the governance processes. They strengthen institutional relationships in two ways. First, by building government partnerships: strengthening relations between government and other institutions such as NGOs or international organisations. Second, building civil society partnerships: strengthening relations between the institutions of civil society such as between NGOs to generate pressures on public institutions on vital issues. In all these, ICTs help strengthen current information connections and by building new connections between institutions, thereby facilitating more responsive and accountable governance.
Given their potential transformational effects, Richard Heeks; an intelligent observer of e-governance prefers to name them as I-governance integrated governance since it integrates both the processing and the communication technologies; and since it integrates people, processes, information, and technology in the service of achieving governance objectives (Heeks, 2001).
Integrated governance: Scope for India
ICTs are making rapid strides in India. The new technologies are transforming the economic and societal landscape. In fact, the greatest obstacles to rural development large distances and inadequate infrastructure are increasingly obviated by instant access to virtual institutions that provide banking, education, healthcare, neonatal information, agriculture advice, and so forth. Importantly, ICTs are being increasingly used by the governments to deliver its services at the locations convenient to the citizens. Several Government-Citizen (G-C) e-Government projects are underway to adopt these echnologies to improve the reach, enhance the base, minimise the processing costs, increase transparency, and reduce the cycle times (Bhatnagar, 2003). Some of these pilot projects have drawn international attention and have own prestigious awards for their innovative approaches.
While India has shown marked improvement in adapting new network technologies to enhance the quality of governance and foster all-inclusive development, such efforts are sporadic and limited to select areas. To make ICTs as vital tools of transformation, India needs to create new institutions and make necessary corrections in the existing institutions of governance. Integration of governance institutions (public, private and civil society actors) based on mutuality, cooperation, collaborations and partnership is indispensable to make greater use of network technologies for an all inclusive development. Though the country has made noticeable changes at the level of local government (passage of 73rd & 74th amendments have allowed three tiers decentralisation a reality), yet bureaucratic dominance and centralisation remain at the core of governance. While it is true that emergent technologies directly impact he processes of governance thereby improving its quality, reach and benefits, these technologies are very much neutral tools. To use these technologies to positive effect, institutions either need to adjust or change. For instance, integration of service delivery thereby making it one-stop-shop would not be feasible unless there are necessary changes in administrative structures and rules that would encourage cooperation and partnership among disparate units to come to a implement any common program. Besides, the intra-departmental linkages and coordination is poor in India. Again, there is invisible but strong resistance from higher officials and political leadership to the spread and application of ICTs run various programs and reinvent governance. Overall, the country has not shown enough political will to change the political and administrative systems to take advantage of these technologies. Such changes are mostly restricted to economy and business domains. In some cases, cosmetic changes have been made by public institutions in terms of data automation, websites (often for showpiece) email, intranet and telecommunication. But they are far inadequate to improve the quality of governance. What has made India a poor user of ICTs in transforming governance is its poor and pitiful information infrastructure. While impressive growth of telecommunications and IT explosion have made India to earn world reputation, such vital infrastructure is very compared to other countries. For example, the number of telephone mainlines in per 1000 population is 27 in India, compared with 438 in South Korea and 682 in the USA. Besides, the cost of 3-minute local call in India is 50 per cent higher than South Korea and China. While India has 88.62 million telephone network, including mobile phones, this is far from bringing connectivity to everyone. Besides, telephone density varies from 275 in Delhi to 13.2 in Bihar. The infrastructure challenge is much more acute in Internet accessibility. Despite so much of hype on Indias strength in IT, the number of Internet subscribers per 1000 population is around 1.5 per cent, compared with 8 per cent in Brazil and 182 in the USA. Internet users are heavily concentrated in urban areas (Ministry of Information and Communication Report, GOI, 2001). The challenge to bridge the gap between information haves and information have nots requires enormous amount of resources and efforts. Yet, nothing looks impossible, if one looks at the way India has made rapid stride in these technologies in such a short span.
However, a close observation of governance institutions in India suggests that an evolution in breaking down the barriers to integrated outcomes requiring structural, bureaucratic, political and internal changes is slowly occurring as a response to a maturing constituency, globalisation, and the spread of information technology. This evolution does not require wholesale systems change for instance there will always be a need for major government departments to concentrate on their areas of specialisation. It will, however, require some systemic change at various levels of government that would encourage transparency and accountability in government and governance by meaningful inclusion of new players such as consumers and community into systems. However, it is cautionary to note that integrated governance is not appropriate in all situations. Each department/agency/jurisdiction has core business or specialisations that need to continue.
Integration is about addressing those issues and problems that can only be solved in partnership, where there is acknowledgment of a multiplicity of stakeholders. It is about adding value to government responses.
References
Bellamy, C. (1999) Joining-Up Government in the UK: Towards Public Services for an Information Age in Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 53, No.8, National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia, Blackwell Publishers, United Kingdom.
Bhatnagar, S. 2000. Social implications of ICT in developing countries: Lessons from Asian success stories. EJISDC 1(4). http://www.is.cityu.edu.hk/ejisdc/ ejisdc.htm
Cabinet Office (2000) e.gov: Electronic Government Services for the 21st Century, www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/innovation, United Kingdom.
Friedman, Thomas (2005). The World is Flat: A Brief History of Twenty-First Century, Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Heeks Richards, Understanding e-Governance for Developmnt, Institute for Development Poilcy and Management, University of Manchester, UK.
Lal, Bhavya, Gary Gaumer and Salmon Manhica, Information and Communications Technologies for Improved Governance in Africa . Theme Paper for African Development Forum (1999).
Matti Malkia, Ari-Veikko and Reijo Savolainen (2003), eds., e-Transformation in Governance: New Directions in Government and Politics, Hersey, PA, USA: Idea Group Publishing.
Ministry of Information and Communication, Govt. of India, 2001.
Report of Institute of Public Administration, Australia (2002) Working Together Integrated Governance. Australia.
Rhodes, R.A.W. (2000) New Labours Civil Service: Summing-up Joining-up in Political Quarterly, Vol. 71, No.1.
Schorr, L. (1997) Common Purpose: Strengthening Families and Neighborhoods to Rebuild America, Anchor Books, Australia.
UNDP, Human Delopment Report, 2001 World Bank, Knowledge for Development (Washington, D.C., The World Bank, 1998/99).
Author: Niranjan Sahoo is a Fellow, National Governance Initiative, Observer Research Foundation, India.
|
