Background
e-Government initiatives in developing countries are constrained by lack of financial resources, low level of skills and capacity within governments, and the absence of incentive structures for rewarding performance. PPPs in e-government can help overcome many of these constraints, while at the same time increasing opportunities for the private sector.
PPPs, however, are complex in both their execution and in the issues they raise, especially because they are in many cases an alternative way to obtain goods, services, expertise and capacity building that might otherwise be acquired through traditional procurement processes. PPPs raise critical issues not only of implementation but of legal frameworks, concordance with procurement rules and anti-corruption efforts, principles of selection (including the relative priority given to local and international partners), and methods for assessing public costs and benefits in both the short and long term. e-Government projects, in short, themselves raise governance issues that must be thoughtfully addressed.
What is most needed for practitioners in developing countries is a starting point for addressing these op-portunities and challenges -- where to begin when it comes to PPPs in e-Government, and what experiences may be most relevant for their particular circumstances and needs. Rather than attempting to redefine these areas, or considering them as two distinct paradigms, this Knowledge Map and its accompanying Handbook represent an effort to bring a certain degree of convergence, and see whether PPPs are, or can be, effective instruments for e-government initiatives in a country. The increasing emphasis on e-government is often directly attributed to the fact that the use and application of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are now commonly accepted as powerful engines for economic growth. As governments embrace ICT as a means to accelerate the development process this also becomes foremost in their reforms agenda to deliver services more effectively.
The extensive experience and knowledge currently available allows us to focus on the various dimensions of e-government and the specificities that invariably need to be taken into account at the national, sub-national, local, and district levels. Similarly, there is also the need to understand the key aspects that play a significant role in the effectiveness and indeed the appropriateness of PPPs in such scenarios. The Knowledge Map and the Handbook help identify such specificities, and highlight the importance of policies, programs, services, and instruments that may facilitate the engagement of the private sector into areas that were hitherto the domain of the government.
PPPs and e-government are complex exercises, which must encompass a variety of issues covering many areas such as infrastructure, applications, institutions, people, and policies. While it is important to understand the nuances of each concept, it might help to recognize the fact that PPPs are often the chosen path when the objectives are to ease the financial constraints on the government while at the same time increase its efficiency and effectiveness. For this reason, PPPs are all the more important in the context of the current financial crisis. However, it should also be noted that optimal benefits can only be derived when good governance, transparency, and political commitment are coupled with the existence of appropriate policy, legal, regulatory, and institutional frameworks, and adequate local capacity (institutional, human, and financial) before such PPP programs and strategies can be translated into action.
This Knowledge Map and Handbook should be used as guides for how the good practices and experiences described therein can be replicated or applied when undertaking a PPP initiative in e-government. The Knowledge Map is designed as a guide on the questions of, Why?, What?, and Where?, while the Handbook answers the question of, How?, to implement PPP projects in e-government.
This project is proudly supported and funded by the European Commission.