Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Successful policy mixes to tackle the impact of rising inequality on children - an EU-wide comparison - András Gábos TÁRKI Social Research Institute Changing.
Advertisements

1 Owner-Occupied Housing Summary of the pilot Item 5 of the Agenda D4 – Price Statistics HICP Working Group Luxembourg October 2007.
Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member States András Gábos TARKI Social Research.
Working Group on Environmental Expenditure Statistics Luxembourg, March 2015 EGSS data production and dissemination (point 3.1 of the agenda) Eurostat.
Session 1: Child poverty outcomes and main factors behind International benchmarking and key challenges for Member States András Gábos TARKI Social Research.
Gender Equality is key towards the eradication of Violence against Women.
EQAVET Secretariat Survey Draft analysis NRPs meeting Oct 2014 NRPs meeting, Brussels October 2014.
Use of e-government in Poland and other EU Member States
Module V Creating awareness on validation of the acquired competences
Insurance Comparison Websites: EIOPA Good Practices
Eurojust cases involving crimes against children
Education and Training Monitor 2016
Weighting issues in EU-LFS
Statistical indicators for the Bologna implementation report
Ag.no. 15 Lessons from the 2015 A65 exercise
Ag.no. 16 Supplement to Eurostat Annual Report, October 2014
2.1. ESS Agreement on Learning Mobility (IVET & Youth)
CEF eID SMO The use of eID in eHealth
LAMAS Working Group January 2016
Ag.no.16 A65 country manuals and country assessments
SBS Compliance report item 3 of the agenda
3C. Update of Summary of WISE electronic delivery
Report on WISE Art.8 and GIS issues
State of play Article 5 reports
Statistical indicators on international student mobility Targets in balanced mobility and inbound mobility Meeting of the BFUG working-group on Mobility.
Education and Training Statistics Working Group
3.6 Regional dimension of the poverty and exclusion indicators
Scoreboard of employment and social problems within the EMU
Strengthening the social dimension of the EMU COM (2013) 690 ESF Informal Technical Working Group Brussels, 5 December 2013 Carola BOUTON DG Employment,
IMPROVING THE REGIONAL DIMENSION OF EU-SILC
LAMAS October 2016 Agenda Item 2.1
Prof. Dr. John Ditch, Academic expert
Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Transposition and Implementation
Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Status of reporting
Document reference, if any
Reporting – Art 17 of HD and Art 12 of BD
Item 8.1 Implementation of the 2016 Adult Education Survey
2b. Status of WFD reporting
Programme adoptions Cohesion Policy:
Ag.no. 15 Lessons from the 2016 A65 exercise
Item 8 – Learning mobility data in UOE
ETS Working Group meeting 24-25/9/2007 Agenda point 7 CVTS3 brief update /09/ 2007 ETS working group.
Proposal for granting access to HOUSEHOLD BUDGET SURVEYS (HBS)
Item 4.1 – Overview of 2014 UOE data collection
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Agenda item 1 – Transposition and implementation of WFD
3.6. Impact of population and housing census results on population stocks and on LFS and SILC–follow-up DSS Meeting September 2012.
2015 Update of Union Lists of Sites of Community Interest
Comparison of methodologies for defining Good Ecological Potential
Update on legal issues Strategic Co-ordination Group 7-8 May 2009
Legal and implementation issues update
Meeting of Water Directors State of transposition and implementation
Income distribution: flash estimates 2016 (FE) Item 3.6 of the agenda
FISIM State of play Agenda Item 3.
European Statistical Training Programme (ESTP)
Update on legal issues Strategic Coordination Group 23 February 2010
Doc.A6465/14/05 Ag.17 A65 annual review 2013
LAMAS October 2018 Agenda Item 4.1 LMI Review – main scenarios
Update on status of reporting and validation process
Doc.A6465/16/03 Ag.no.16 A65 country manuals
LAMAS Working Group 7-8 December 2016
LAMAS Working Group 5-6 October 2016
Transposition and implementation of WFD
LAMAS Working Group June 2015
The “Once Only Principle” and reuse of data in Luxembourg
Connectivity to secure networks
Use of Internet Use of Internet Services by Citizens in the EU
European waters - assessment of status and pressures 2018
Human capital: Digital Inclusion and Skills
DG Environment, Unit C.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Presentation transcript:

Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014 eGovernment Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014

eGovernment use in EU28 has been flat In 2013 eGovernment services have been used by 41% of the EU28 population, down from 44% in 2012 and almost at the same level as in 2011. Currently only 9 out of 28 countries are above the 2015 target, namely DK, NL, SE, FI, FR, LU, AT, SI, BE (although DE and EE are also close to it) and only 7 countries have seen usage increasing in 2013. In five countries (RO, IT, BG, PL and HR) online public services are used by less than a quarter of the population with generally little progress in term of catching-up (and even some big drops like in RO and PL). Our target Half the population using eGovernment by 2015 Current performance 41% in 2013 Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014 - eGovernment

Internet-savvy citizens often use the Internet to contact public administrations, but less so to conclude more complex interactions. Almost three quarters (73.3%) of Internet users (in the last 12 months) who needed to contact a public authority (or to use a public service) did so online in 2013. A quarter of these used exclusively the Internet, while the others used also other channels of interaction. 26.7% of the internet users contacted their public administrations without using the Internet at all. The preferred offline channels of interaction were personal visits (54%), telephone (50%), email (25%) and other methods (e.g. SMS, post, 20%). Source: Commission calculations based on EUROSTAT data However, when more advanced interaction is required, Internet users are less likely to carry this out online. In 2013, among Internet users who needed to submit official forms to public authorities, only 52%* did so via Internet, down from 53% in the previous year Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014 - eGovernment Source: Commission calculations based on EUROSTAT data *The EU28 aggregate in 2013 does not include IT, LV and PL for which no data on need to submit forms was available

Users of eGovernment services are in general satisfied, while the main reason for non-use is a lack of trust Once citizens start to use online public services, they generally find the experience highly satisfying (75%), with only a minority feeling very disappointed (8%). The most appreciated feature is the usefulness of information (87% mainly satisfied), followed by the ease of finding information (84%), the ease of using online services (79%) and the transparency/follow-up (75%). Source: EUROSTAT Lack of trust seems to be the main source of non-use. It comes in several forms: a preference for personal contact (41%), higher trust for paper submissions (30%), concern about personal data (19%), and a lack of immediate feedback (16%). Other main factors of non-use are a lack of skills and an incomplete digitalization of government services. The Commission, via the ISA programme, has taken up actions to help Member States strengthen interoperability between public services. Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014 - eGovernment Source: Commission calculations based on EUROSTAT data

The measurement of eGovernment supply, some methodological notes The supply side of eGovernment is measured through a user journey approach. This is undertaken by researchers acting as mystery shoppers, that is, by posing as ordinary users of eGovernment services. The mystery shoppers simulate an event in the life of the citizen/entrepreneur requiring administrative action from the government (e.g. a marriage) and then go through public authorities websites in order to fulfil the related administrative requirements through the online channel when possible. Seven of these life events are analysed in the course of two years (the first complete measurement is from 2012-2013) in different government domains: losing/finding a job enrolling to university moving starting a small claim procedure buying/owning a car starting a business regular business operations Different aspects of service provision are examined in this new methodology, but the two examined here are the following : User-centric eGovernment and Transparent eGovernment. The User-Centric eGovernment indicator measures the availability of eGovernment services, their connectedness and their user-friendliness. The Transparent eGovernment indicator measures the online transparency of governments on the different aspects of online service delivery, treatment of citizens' personal data and activities of the public administrations. Both indicators range from 0 (complete absence of required features) to 100 (all features included). The source for the eGovernment supply data is the eGovernment Benchmark Report (see https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/16475) Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014

On the supply side signs are more encouraging but important steps still need to be taken to improve transparency and win citizens’ trust The results for EU28 show that for many countries the provision of user-friendly services is already a reality in most government domains, although on average there is still distance from the digital by default approach (a score of 100). Some countries still score 50 or less, displaying a rather analogue approach to public service delivery (SK, RO, HU, EL). Source: eGovernment Benchmark Report Transparency is an important element for increasing the take-up of online public services, since it helps building trust of citizens in public administrations. The data show that this important feature is still not sufficiently at the center of eGovernment strategies for many governments, with few exceptions. Source: eGovernment Benchmark Report Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2014 - eGovernment