E‐Government and E‐Governance: The Future Isn't What It Used To Be
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Public sector organizations in North America and Europe are gradually transforming themselves under the pressure exerted by Internet technologies. Most of these organizations are beyond Web publishing and are passing through the interactive stage, gradually sidling up to the challenges of creating end‐to‐end processes that deliver enhanced value from public administration. In the not‐too‐distant future, these organizations will have to manage increased speed of reflexivity in their relationship with the citizenry. In other words, it is not just a question of e‐government; it is also a question of e‐governance. The future of government as we might have imagined it 10 years ago is not the future of government today. Our paper proposes a two‐dimensional framework for considering the impact of the Internet. On one axis, we propose the dimension of e‐government versus e‐governance. On the other dimension, we contrast the citizen‐centric view of the relationship with the organization‐centric. In each of the resulting four quadrants of the model, we examine the issues and considerations. Finally, we analyze the resource allocation decisions made public by the federal government to identify where the financial commitments have been made in the context of the model. Résumé Les organisations du secteur public de l'Amérique du Nord et de l'Europe se transforment progressivement sous la pression des technologies de l'Internet. La plupart de ces organisations, qui ont déjà dépassé l'étape de la création des pages, passent par une phase interactive, rélevant progressivement les défis de la création des processus de bout en bout qui donne une plus grande valeur à l'administration publique. Dans un futur proche, ces organisations auront à gérer, dans leur relation avec les citoyens, la vitesse croissante de réflexivité. En d'autres termes, il ne s'agit pas seulement d'une question de gouvernement électronique; il s'agit aussi d'une question de gouvernance électronique. L'avenir du gouvernement d'aujourd'hui est différent de celui qu'on aurait imaginé il y a de cela 10 ans. Dans cette étude, nous proposons un cadre bidimensionnel permettant de mesurer l'impact de l'Internet. Sur le premier axe, nous proposons la dimension gouvernement électronique vs gouvernance électronique. Le second axe s'appesantit sur le contraste entre deux conceptions antinomiques de la relation: la conception centrée sur le citoyen et la conception centreé sur l'organisation. Dans chacun des quatre quadrants résultant du modéle, nous examinons les problèmes et les solutions possibles. Pour étudier dans quel cas les engagements financiers ont été pris dans le contexte du modéle, nous clôturons notre étude par l'analyse des décisions d'attribution des ressources rendues publiques par le gouvernement fédéral.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".