DIGITAL GOVERNANCE IN MUNICIPALITIES WORLDWIDE

- An Assessment of Municipal Web Sites throughout the World -

2003

Executive Summary

This research evaluated the current practice of digital governance in municipalities worldwide. It focused on the evaluation of current practice from the perspective of the government and the emphasis of this research was on the evaluation of each Web site in terms of digital governance. Simply stated, digital governance includes both digital government (delivery of public service) and digital democracy (citizen participation in governance). Specifically, we analyzed security, usability, and content of websites, the type of online services currently being offered, and citizen response and participation through websites established by city governments.

This research examined cities throughout the world based on their population size, the total number of individuals using the Internet and the percentage of individuals using the Internet. The cities were chosen using the “Internet Indicators” (2002) statistics from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), an organization affiliated with the United Nations (UN). ITU’s Internet indicators report lists the online population for each of 196 countries. Using the ITU data, 98 UN member countries were identified based on an online population greater than 100,000. Our research, therefore, selected 98 countries with the highest percentage of Internet users, and examined the largest city in each of those countries as a surrogate for all cities in the country. For example, in the U.S. and South Korea, New York and Seoul were chosen, respectively. In addition, Hong Kong SAR and Macao SAR were added to the 98 cities selected, since they have been considered as independent countries for many years and have high percentages of Internet users.

This research evaluated the official Web sites of each city in their native languages between June and October of 2003. Sixteen of the 100 cities, however, have not established official city Web sites. As a result, we have evaluated only 84 of the 100 possible cities.

Our instrument for evaluating city and municipal websites consists of five components: 1. Security and Privacy; 2. Usability; 3. Content; 4. Services; and 5. Citizen Participation. For each of those five components, our research applies 14 to 20 measures, and each measure was coded on a scale of four-points (0, 1, 2, 3) or a dichotomy of two-points (0, 3 or 0, 1). Thus, our research instrument goes well beyond previous research, utilizing 92 measures, of which 45 were dichotomous as above. Furthermore, in developing an overall score for each municipality we have equally weighted each of the five categories so as not to skew the research in favor of a particular category (regardless of the number of questions in each category).

To ensure reliability, each municipal Web site was assessed by two evaluators, and in cases where significant variation (+ or – 10%) existed on the raw score between evaluators, websites were analyzed a third time. Furthermore, an example for each measure indicated how to score the variable. Evaluators were also given comprehensive written instructions for assessing websites.

            Based on the evaluation, of 84 cities, Seoul, Hong Kong SAR, Singapore, New York, and Shanghai are the top five cities in the world among UN member countries, followed by Rome, Auckland, Jerusalem, Tokyo, and Toronto.

 [Table 3-1] Overall Results of Evaluation

*: Bratislava (Slovak Republic), Guatemala City (Guatemala), and Prague (Czech Republic) were evaluated but only one of two evaluators in each city completed evaluations. As a result, their results are not listed in this table but their scores were 27.67, 14.48, and 43.84, respectively.

**: Bangkok (Thailand) was evaluated by two evaluators but the significance difference between them existed. As a result, the results of Bangkok are not listed in this table, but the average score of two evaluators was 30.56.

 Table 1 lists the top 20 municipalities in digital governance.

[Table 1] Top 20 Cities in Digital Governance

            In addition, Tables 2 through 6 are the top 10 cities in the category of privacy and security, usability, content, service delivery, and citizen participation.

[Table 2] Top 10 Cities in Privacy and Security

[Table 3] Top 10 Cities in Usability

[Table 4] Top 10 Cities in Content

[Table 5] Top 10 Cities in Service Delivery

[Table 6] Top 10 Cities in Citizen Participation

This is the first research effort to evaluate digital governance in municipalities throughout the world. Even though some researchers have evaluated government Web sites, they have focused primarily on e-government at the Federal, state, and local levels in the United States. Only a few have paid attention to comparative analyses of e-government in national governments throughout the world.

            Based on this research, there appears to be a digital divide in terms of digital governance throughout the world. For example, although the average score for digital governance in municipalities throughout the world is 28.10 out of 100, the average score in OECD countries is higher, 36.34, while the average score in non-OECD countries is lower, only 24.26. Whereas 19 of 28 cities in OECD countries are above the world average, only 16 of 52 cities in non-OECD countries are above that average. Interestingly, 32 of 52 cities in non-OECD countries are below the average score for that group of countries.

In addition, 67% of cities selected in Africa, 13% in Asia, 3% in Europe, and 25% in North America have not established official city Web sites. Every city selected in South America had its own official Web site. Whereas cities in Africa have not paid attention to developing their capabilities in digital governance, most cities in other continents are interested in developing those capabilities.

            Since there is a gap between developed and under-developed countries, it is very important for international organizations such as the UN and cities in advanced countries to attempt to bridge this digital divide. We recommend developing a comprehensive policy for bridging that divide. A comprehensive policy should include capacity building for municipalities, including information infrastructure, content, and applications and access for individuals. Parallel to improving citizens’ access to digital governance, it is important to develop relevant content for citizens and innovative applications in digital governance considered as best practices throughout the world.

            To develop and adopt innovative applications, we recommend keeping in mind that culture and institutions, including formal and informal institutions in each municipality, should be considered. Even though some cities have developed “best practices,” they are not easily adopted by other cities which may have different cultures and institutions. Innovative applications regarded as best practices should be revised and adopted depending on those factors.

Methodology

This research examines cities throughout the world based on their population size, the total number of individuals using the Internet and the percentage of individuals using the Internet. The cities were chosen using the “Internet Indicators” (2002) statistics from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), an organization affiliated with the United Nations (UN). ITU’s Internet indicators report lists the online population for each of 196 countries[1]. Using the ITU data, 98 UN member countries were identified based on an online population greater than 100,000. Our research, therefore, selected 98 countries with the highest percentage of Internet users, and examined the largest city in each of those countries as a surrogate for all cities in the country. For example, in the U.S. and South Korea, New York and Seoul were chosen, respectively. In addition, Hong Kong SAR and Macao SAR were added to 98 cities selected, since they have been considered as independent countries for many years and have high percentages of Internet users.

The rationale for selecting the largest municipalities stems from the e-government literature, which suggests a positive relationship between population and e-government capacity at the local level (Moon, 2002; Moon and deLeon, 2001; Musso, et. al., 2000; Weare, et. al. 1999). Table 2-1 is a list of 100 cities selected.

In this research, the main city homepage is defined as the official Web site where information about city administration and online services are provided by the city. The city Web site includes Web sites about the city council, mayor and executive branch of the city. If there are separate homepages for agencies, departments, or the city council, evaluators examined whether these sites were linked to the menu on the main city homepage. If the Web site was not linked, it was excluded from evaluation.

Based on the concept above, this research evaluated the official Web sites of each city selected. Seventeen of 100 cities, however, do not have official city Web sites: eight in Africa (67%), four in Asia (13.33%), one in Europe (2.94%), and three in North America (25%). As a result, this research evaluated only 84 cities of the 100 cities initially selected.

[Table 2-1] 100 Cities Selected by Continent

*: Official city Web sites unavailable

Our research examines local government services using an e-government model of increasingly sophisticated e-government services. Over the past several years, researchers have used different continua for evaluating e-government services, and Moon (2002) developed a framework for categorizing e-government models based on the following components: information dissemination, two-way communication, services, integration, and political participation. Our methodology for evaluating e-government services includes such components; however, we have added an additional factor, security.

That additional e-government factor was grounded in recent calls for increased security, particularly of our public information infrastructure. Concern over the security of the information systems underlying government applications has led some researchers to the conclusion that e-government must be built on a secure infrastructure that respects the privacy of its users (Kaylor, 2001). 

Our instrument for evaluating city and municipal websites consists of five components: 1. Security and Privacy; 2. Usability; 3. Content; 4. Services; and 5. Citizen Participation. Table 2-2 summarizes the measures used in our research to assess a website’s capabilities in each of those five categories. 

[Table 2-2] E-Government Measures

Previous e-government research varies in the use of scales to evaluate government websites. For example, one researcher uses an index consisting of 25 dichotomous (yes or no) measures (West, 2000; West 2001); other assessments use a four-point scale (Kaylor, 2001) for assessing each measure. Our research instrument goes well beyond previous research (West 2001 and Kaylor 2001), utilizing 92 measures, of which 45 were dichotomous. For each of those five components, our research applies 14 to 20 measures, and each measure was coded on a four-point scale (0, 1, 2, 3; see Table 2-3 below). Furthermore, in developing an overall score for each municipality we have equally weighted each of the five categories so as not to skew the research in favor of a particular category (regardless of the number of questions in each category). The remaining 47 measures were scored according to the scale in Table 2-3. The dichotomous measures in the “service” and “citizen participation” categories correspond with values on our four point scale of “0” or “3”; dichotomous measures in “security/ privacy” or “usability” correspond to ratings of “0” or “1” on our four point scale. 

[Table 2-3] E-Government Scale

Thus, our instrument placed a higher value on some dichotomous measures, due to the relative value of the different e-government services being evaluated. For example, evaluators using our instrument in the “service” category were given the option of scoring websites as either a “0” or “3” when assessing whether a site allowed users to access private information online (e.g. educational records, medical records, point total of driving violation, lost property). “No access” equated to a rating of “0.” Allowing residents or employees to access private information online was a higher order task that required more technical competence, and was clearly an online service, or “3,” as defined in Table 2.

On the other hand, when assessing a site as to whether or not it had a privacy statement or policy, evaluators were given the choices of scoring the site as “0” or “1.” The presence or absence of a security policy was clearly a content issue that emphasized placing information online, and corresponded with a value of “1” on the scale outlined in Table 2. The differential values assigned to dichotomous categories were useful in comparing the different components of municipal websites with one another. 

To ensure reliability, each municipal website was assessed by two evaluators, and in cases where significant variation (+ or – 10%) existed on the raw score between evaluators, websites were analyzed a third time. Furthermore, an example for each measure indicated how to score the variable. Evaluators were also given comprehensive written instructions for assessing websites.

This section details the five e-government categories and discusses specific measures that were used to evaluate websites. The discussion of security and privacy examines privacy policies and issues related to authentication. Discussion of the usability category involves traditional web pages, forms and search tools. The content category is addressed in terms of access to contact information, access to public documents and disability access, as well as access to multimedia and time sensitive information. The section on services examines interactive services, services that allow users to purchase or pay for services, and the ability of users to apply or register for municipal events or services online. Finally, the measures for citizen participation involve examining how local governments are engaging citizens and providing mechanisms for citizens to participate in government online. 

The first part of our analysis examined the security and privacy of municipal websites in two key areas, privacy policies and authentication of users. In examining municipal privacy policies, we determined whether such a policy was available on every page that accepted data, and whether or not the word “privacy” was used in the link to such a statement. In addition, we looked for privacy policies on every page that required or accepted data. We were also interested in determining if privacy policies identified the agencies collecting the information, and whether the policy identified exactly what data was being collected on the site.

Our analysis checked to see if the intended use of the data was explicitly stated on the website. The analysis examined whether the privacy policy addressed the use or sale of data collected on the website by outside or third party organizations. Our research also determined if there was an option to decline the disclosure of personal information to third parties[2]. This included other municipal agencies, other state and local government offices, or businesses in the private sector. Furthermore, we examined privacy policies to determine if third party agencies or organizations were governed by the same privacy policies as the municipal website. We also determined whether users had the ability to review personal data records and contest inaccurate or incomplete information. 

In examining factors affecting the security and privacy of local government websites, we addressed managerial measures that limit access of data and assure that it was not used for unauthorized purposes. The use of encryption in the transmission of data, as well as the storage of personal information on secure servers, was also examined. We also determined if websites used digital signatures to authenticate users. In assessing how or whether municipalities used their websites to authenticate users, we examined whether public or private information was accessible through a restricted area that required a password and/or registration. 

A growing e-government trend at the local level is for municipalities to offer their website users access to public, and in some cases private, information online. Other research has discussed the governance issues associated with sites that choose to charge citizens for access to public information (West, 2001). We add our own concern about the impact of the digital divide if public records are available only through the Internet or if municipalities insist on charging a fee for access to public records. Our analysis specifically addresses online access to public databases, by determining if public information such as property tax assessments or private information like court documents is available to users of municipal websites. In addition, there are concerns that public agencies will use their websites to monitor citizens or create profiles based on the information they access online. For example, many websites use “cookies” or “web beacons”[3] to customize their websites for users, but the technology can also be used to monitor Internet habits and profile visitors to websites. Our analysis examined municipal privacy policies to determine if they addressed the use of cookies or web beacons.

This research also examined the usability of municipal websites. Simply stated, we wanted to know if sites were “user-friendly.” To address usability concerns we adapted several best practices and measures from other public and private sector research (Giga, 2000). Our analysis of usability examined three types of websites: traditional web pages, forms, and search tools.

To evaluate traditional web pages written using hypertext markup language (html), we examined issues such as branding and structure (e.g. consistent color, font, graphics, page length etc.). For example, we looked to see if all pages used consistent color, formatting, “default colors” (e.g. blue links and purple visited links) and underlined text to indicate links. Other items examined included whether system hardware and software requirements were clearly stated on the website.

In addition, our research examined each municipality’s homepage to determine if it was too long (two or more screen lengths) or if alternative versions of long documents, such as .pdf or .doc files, were available. The use of targeted audience links or “channels” to customize the website for specific groups such as citizens, businesses, or other public agencies was also examined. We looked for the consistent use of navigation bars and links to the homepage on every page. The availability of a “sitemap” or hyperlinked outline of the entire website was examined. Our assessment also examined whether duplicated link names connect to the same content.

Our research also examined online forms to determine their usability in submitting data or conducting searches of municipal websites. We examined issues such as whether field labels aligned appropriately with field, whether fields were accessible by keystrokes (e.g. tabs), or whether the cursor was automatically placed in the first field. We also examined whether required fields were noted explicitly, and whether the tab order of fields was logical. For example, after a user filled out their first name and pressed the “tab” key, did the cursor automatically go to the surname field? Or, did the page skip to another field such as zip code, only to return to the surname later?

We also checked to see if form pages provided additional information about how to fix errors if they were submitted. For example, did users have to reenter information if errors were submitted, or did the site flag incomplete or erroneous forms before accepting them? Also, did the site give a confirmation page after a form was submitted, or did it return users to the homepage?

Our analysis also addressed the use of search tools on municipal websites. We examined sites to determine if help was available for searching a municipality’s website, or if the scope of searches could be limited to specific areas of the site. Were users able to search only in “public works” or “the mayor’s office,” or does the search tool always search the entire site? We also looked for advanced search features such as exact phrase searching, the ability to match all/ any words, and Boolean searching capabilities (e.g. the ability to use AND/ OR/ NOT operators).  Our analysis also addressed a site’s ability to sort search results by relevance or other criteria. 

Content is a critical component of any website. No matter how technologically advanced a website’s features, if its content is not current, if it is difficult to navigate, or if the information provided is not correct, then it is not fulfilling its purpose. When examining website content, our research examined five key areas: access to contact information, public documents, disability access, multimedia materials, and time sensitive information. When addressing contact information, we looked for information about each agency represented on the website. 

In addition, we also looked for the availability of office hours or a schedule of when agency offices are open. In assessing the availability of public documents, we looked for the availability of the municipal code or charter online. We also looked for content items, such as agency mission statements and minutes of public meetings. Other content items included access to budget information and publications. Our assessment also examined whether websites provided access to disabled users through either “bobby compliance” (disability access for the blind, http://www.cast.org/bobby) or disability access for deaf users via a TDD phone service.  We also checked to see if sites offered content in more than one language.

Time sensitive information that was examined included the use of a municipal website for emergency management, and the use of a website as an alert mechanism (e.g. terrorism alert or severe weather alert). We also checked for time sensitive information such as the posting of job vacancies or a calendar of community events. In addressing the use of multimedia, we examined each site to determine if audio or video files of public events, speeches, or meetings were available. 

A critical component of e-government is the provision of municipal services online.  Our analysis examined two different types of services: (1) those that allow citizens to interact with the municipality, and (2) services that allow users to register for municipal events or services online. In many cases, municipalities have developed the capacity to accept payment for municipal services and taxes. The first type of service examined, which implies interactivity, can be as basic as forms that allow users to request information or file complaints. Local governments across the world use advanced interactive services to allow users to report crimes or violations, customize municipal homepages based on their needs (e.g. portal customization), and access private information online such as court records, education records, or medical records.  Our analysis examined municipal websites to determine if such interactive services were available.

The second type of service examined in this research determined if municipalities have the capacity to allow citizens to register for municipal services online. For example, many jurisdictions now allow citizens to apply for permits and licenses online. Online permitting can be used for services that vary from building permits to dog licenses. In addition, some local governments are using the Internet for procurement, allowing potential contractors to access requests for proposals or even bid for municipal contracts online. In other cases, local governments are chronicling the procurement process by listing the total number of bidders for a contract online, and in some cases listing contact information for bidders.

This analysis also examined municipal websites to determine if they developed the capacity to allow users to purchase or pay for municipal services and fees online. Examples of transactional services from across the United States include the payment of public utility bills and parking tickets online. In many jurisdictions, cities and municipalities allow online users to file or pay local taxes, or pay fines such as traffic tickets. In some cases, cities around the world are allowing their users to register or purchase tickets to events in city halls or arenas online. 

Finally, perhaps the most untapped area of e-government, or e-governance in this context, involves using the Internet to engage citizens in democratic processes. Citizen participation in government is a ripe area for e-government, in part because the Internet is a convenient mechanism for citizen-users to engage their government, and also because of the potential to decentralize decision-making. Despite that potential, very few public agencies offer online opportunities for civic engagement. Our analysis looked at several ways public agencies at the local level were involving citizens. For example, do municipal websites allow users to provide online comments or feedback to individual agencies or elected officials? 

Our analysis examined whether local governments offer current information about municipal governance online or through an online newsletter or e-mail listserv. Our analysis also examined the use of internet based polls about specific local issues. In addition, we examined whether communities allow users to participate and view the results of citizen satisfaction surveys online. For example, some municipalities used their websites to measure performance and published the results of performance measurement activities online.  

Still other municipalities used online bulletin boards or other chat capabilities for gathering input on public issues. Most often, online bulletin boards offer citizens the opportunity to post ideas, comments, or opinions without specific discussion topics. However, in some cases agencies attempt to structure online discussions around policy issues or specific agencies. At the national level, EPA recently experimented with allowing citizens to post comments about prospective agency rules online. At the local level, communities such as Long Valley, New Jersey (http://www.longvalleynj.com/mboard.asp?button=8) and Dansville, New York (http://dansville.lib.ny.us/cgi-bin/BBS/bbs_forum.cgi?first_days_old=60&forum=open) allow citizens to discuss community affairs in specific areas such as public works, education, planning and zoning, and local recreation. 

In some cases, state and local governments are beginning to use the Internet to solicit comments on proposed rules and regulations. Such is the case in Virginia’s Regulatory Town Hall (http://townhall.state.va.us/), where the state lists proposed rule changes and allows users to deliberate public policy online. Our research looked for municipal use of the Internet to foster civic engagement and citizen participation in government.

Overall Results of Evaluation

            Table 3-1 indicates overall results of our evaluation. Of 84 cities evaluated, Seoul, Hong Kong SAR, Singapore, New York, and Shanghai are the top five cities in the world, followed by Rome, Auckland, Jerusalem, Tokyo, and Toronto.