Measuring Impact of E- Government on Administrative Reform Four cases from India Subhash Bhatnagar Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad

Rationale for the study Significant interest and investments in egovernment by developing countries Need for developing concrete yard stick for defining success. Existing evidence is anecdotal. Evolve a methodology for measuring costs and benefits Lessons: understanding of factors that contribute to long term viability.

Methodology of Evaluation studies Identification of stake holders Design of a survey instrument for key stake holders –Quality of service on different parameters –Perceived benefits and measure of benefits –Awareness and impact on transparency and corruption Random sample survey of ever users and non users Measurement of costs and assessment of benefits Analysis and presentation

Report Card on Gyandoot Declared successful after one year, based on anecdotal evidence. Being expanded with support from Media Lab Asia -CORDECT Survey of 31 users, 41 non users, 28 kiosks Offers 22 services: Mandi prices (30%), grievance (13%), certificates promised in 8 days (25%) A user fee of Rs for services Kiosks offer training, copying, word processing services for bulk of revenue

Doubtful Economic Viability Dwindling attendance at Kiosks (85% males) over 2 years logged in 18 kiosks. Attendance averages to one a day per kiosk Handle very small proportion of any type of transactions Investments of Rs 2.5 million for network. Kiosk needs Rs 75K worth of equipment Solar power will need Rs 75 K of investment Operating expenses of Rs 1200 pm Average revenue from user fee Rs 150 pm/ kiosk

Reasons for Poor Sustainability Back end not reformed-- no computerisation or reengineering. Visits to district and payment of speed money for collection of documents. Inadequate value delivered to clients Survey reports unsolved grievances and price data not updated. Lack of awareness amongst poor. 80% non users have not heard of Gyandoot. Many Kiosks not functioning. Problems of power outage (6-72 hours), connectivity (50%) Change of initial team. Not a part of state wide program.

Interstate Checkposts in Gujarat Project implemented in 9 months at a total cost of Rs 630 million (70% on civil work). Yearly expenses: Rs 20 mln Proportion of trucks checked increased from 2% to 100%, revenue up in 2 years- Rs 930 to Rs million. Growth in mln Rs 310(98),560(99),930(00),1660(01),2370(02) Corruption due to collusion. Not just administrative Penalty reduced from Rs 2000 per Ton to Rs 250 Survey of 142 drivers at 3 check posts Following components do not work –conversion of video image of registration plate –creation of a data base on all trucks –monitoring of images at a central point

Report Card: Gujarat Checkpost Waiting times have reduced by 30 mts It was 1 hr 45 mts. Except weighing no improvement perceived in cash collection, document checking. No impact on transparency-weight not displayed nor printed on receipt. Corruption continues: Rs charged from every driver 33% overloaded trucks let go with no fines. Bribes average Rs 120 and are 10% of fines 77% report no change in overloading Most components not working. Revenue at increased levels but growth not likely. If corruption is plugged revenue can be increased by 60%.

Gujarat Checkpost: Reasons for Poor Sustainability Cost-Benefit --Whose point of view? Changes in political (chief minister, minister transport) and administrative leadership (4 commissioners in 2yrs) Lack of motivation to continue work of predecessor Quick implementation: partial automation, not fully owned by department, use of untested technologies Lack of comfort in contracting with private sector Focus on revenue increase and not on benefits to truckers, society, employees, transporters Technology as the only tool for reform. No other reform.

Land Record Computerization Bhoomi, Karnataka, India 20 million records, 6.7 mln farmers, 9000 villages. VAs issued RTCs and processed mutation in earlier system RTC issue took 3-30 days and a bribe of Rs Mutation can take up to 2 years (30 days)Encroachment of public land 180 centers operational for one year where RTCs are issued on-line for a fee of Rs 15. Mutation request filed on line 5.2 million users, Rs. 80 mln collection goes to dept. Investment of Rs 180 million Operational expenses: Rs 40 million at 5 million users

Report Card on Bhoomi is GOOD Survey: 180 users from 12 kiosks and 60 non users 4 taluks Ease of Use: 78% of users who had used both systems found Bhoomi simpler; 66% used Bhoomi without help vs. 28% in manual Complexity of Procedures: 80% did not have to meet any one other than at kiosk: In manual 19% met one officer and 61% met 2-4 officials Errors in documents: Bhoomi 8% vs manual 64% Rectification of errors: sought correction 93 % vs 49%, timely response 50% vs 4% Cost of service: 84% one visit to Bhoomi center at Taluk HQ Corruption: 66% paid bribes very often vs 3% in Bhoomi Staff behavior: Bhoomi Good (84%) vs manual Average (63%)

Ensuring Sustainabilty in Future Continuity of administrative leadership Do not over project collection of user fee Strenghten existing functionality –Incisive MIS reports for follow up on mutation –Facilities management and hardware training –Improve collection of crop data. Experiment with PDAs and involve 9000 VA Begin a pilot. Expand functionality –Connecting to courts and Banks –Connecting to rural kiosks –Deliver Information from other departments DO Not Expand scope- coverage at Hobli level –Will be difficult to implement and monitor –Survey the farmers to know if expansion is needed

FRIENDS:Payment Centers 13 centers operational for 1-2 years at district HQ which collect a variety of payments on-line for utilities, taxes, license fees and fees for university Back-end in departmnets not computerized Typically a citizen visits 7 depts per month Survey of 1573 users (from 30,000 customers), and 137 officers Monthly collections have varied from Rs 25 million to Rs 67 million. Investment of Rs 2.5 million per center and operational costs of Rs 0.78 mln a year excluding manpower cost

FRIENDS: A Report Card 97.4% prefer FRIENDS over dept counters Time saving of 42 minutes per month 35 % willing to pay a nominal user fee Low awareness-40% have not heard 33% use FRIENDS 26% do not use Awareness source: Newspaper(39% ), neighbors (32% ). 50% do not know of Sunday working and extended timing Increased Female users in FRIENDS (11.3%) vs. Departments(3.1%)

Is FRIENDS Viable? Monetized saving per payee/ month is Rs 20 Used by middle class, rich pay through agents and poor make fewpayments Revenue of Rs is small from telecom User fee can be added but can raise 0.1 mln Cost of departmental centers need to be cut Employees support the idea of more centers Additional services and outsourcing to private operators Expansion to 140 locations on anvil

Learning from Evaluations Success is measured as –Implementation and use sustain over long periods –Measurable benefits delivered to all stakeholders Success can not be measured in first 1-2 years. Projects are still vulnerable. Success needs to be measured through independent evaluation seeking formal feedback from all stake holders Awards instituted by multilateral agencies, Governments, professional bodies to rate egovernment have been dysfunctional: –Not based on systematic evaluation. Provide incentive for over projection of achievements –Premature stamp of success distracts from acknowledging short comings and correcting them

Sustainability Risk Factors Frequent changes in administrative leadership is the strongest risk factor Hurried implementation and/or lack of resources Project scale ambitious in scale and scope narrowly defined. Egovernment not implemented in a context of wider change/ administrative reform Close identification of a project with a single champion Change based on tighter monitoring and supervision without systems being institutionalized Change affected by by-passing employees Partial automation(back-end not computerized) and automation without reengineering.