eCitizenship for All Survey Richard Drewes Porto, November 24 th 2003

Topics TeleCities & Deloitte eCitizenship for all - Survey 2003 Challenges Conclusions

TeleCities Major European network of cities committed to leadership in the Information and Knowledge Society Open to democratically elected city governments as and business and scientific partners Some 120 local authorities from 20 European countries

Win-win relation TeleCities Catalyst of experience and knowledge transfer amongst European cities, knowledge base Deloitte Leading advisor of European cities with intimate knowledge of the public sector TeleCities’ strategic development partner

Survey participants Austria Linz Vienna Belgium Antwerp Brussels Capital Region Croatia Rijeka Czech Republic Hradec Kralové Ostrava Prague Denmark Aalborg Frederikshavn Naestved Estland Vilnius France Cannes Lyon Metz Nice Hungary Budapest Netherlands Amsterdam Eindhoven The Hague Rotterdam Utrecht Poland Gdansk Katowice Portugal Porto Slovenia Koper Spain Barcelona Bilbao Gijón Madrid Reus San Sebastian Terrassa Totana Valencia Viladecans Finland Espoo Helsinki Oulu Tampere Turku Vantaa Germany Bonn Bremen Cologne Hagen Leipzig Munich Greece Amaroussion Italy Bari Bologna Grosseto Livorno Rome Siena Turin Sweden Gothenburg Hudiksvall Linköping Ronneby Tranås Stockholm Uppsala Turkey Yalova United Kingdom Birmingham Camden-London Edinburgh Glasgow Kingston upon Hull Leeds Liverpool Manchester Newcastle

eCitizenship for All - Challenges Re-engineering Local Public Administration Cities will have re-engineered their service-rendering processes in order to improve the cost-benefit ratio and the quality of all services eDemocracy and Community Building All cities will have implemented eDemocracy with all the new forms of citizens' participation and community empowerment eLearning and Digital Inclusion All European citizens will be digital literate and able to benefit from the gains of the Information Society eSecurity All citizens will have the right to eSecurity

Re-engineering Electronic services are #1 on eGovernment agenda Triggers for eServices are cost reduction and responding to legislation Re-engineering projects tend to be inside-out and not outside-in Budget issues and resistance to change are still the main obstacles Two-way communication and transactional services are planned

eDemocracy eDemocracy facilitates democratic renewal and improves citizen participation eDemocracy is one aspect of participation; the context is the wider agenda for democratic renewal and citizenship eVoting is relatively untested eServices have priority over eDemocracy Cost of innovation is still an issue

eLearning Life-long learning is a political issue in 3 out of 4 cities One third of the cities have an eLearning strategy Cities use regional structures for eLearning In 50% of the cities educational programmes are on-line ICT entered the class-rooms, but is not yet an integrated part of the education Awareness of excluded groups is high, strategies and programmes are focused on specific groups

eSecurity eSecurity lags behind the development of eServices In 2 out of 3 cities, citizens have access to eGovernment applications More than 85% of eServices include personal information of citizens 25% of the cities have intrusion detection processes in place Only 37.5% of the cities use anti-virus software

Conclusions Cities have taken up eCitizenship for All eServices is the #1 issue and hence re-engineering Cities have an inside-out approach not outside-in eDemocracy is recognized but scarcely taken up Awareness of eSecurity is far higher than implementing eSecurity eLearning is a political issue; the number of projects is modest, the quality seems to be high