A Comparative Study of Digital Government Policies, Focusing on E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Digital Government Policy Status of Korea and the United States
2.1. Korea’s Digital Government Policies by Administration
2.1.1. Kim Dae-Jung Administration (1998–2003)
2.1.2. Roh Moo-Hyun Administration (2003–2008)
2.1.3. Lee Myung-Bak Administration (2008–2013)
2.1.4. Park Geun-Hye Administration (2013–2017)
2.1.5. Moon Jae-In Administration (2017–Present)
2.2. The United States’ Digital Government Policies by Administration
2.2.1. Digital Government Strategy of the Bush Administration (2001–2008)
2.2.2. Open Government Strategy of the Obama Administration (2009–2016)
2.2.3. Digital Strategy of the Trump Administration (2017–Present)
3. Legislation Process and Contents of the E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States
3.1. Korean E-Government Act Enactment Process
3.2. Main Content of the E-Government Act in Korea
3.2.1. Democratic Aspect of Administration
- 1.
- Digitizing public services and improving citizens’ convenience;
- 2.
- Innovating administrative affairs and improving their productivity and efficiency;
- 3.
- Ensuring the security and reliability of information systems;
- 4.
- Protecting personal information and privacy;
- 5.
- Expanding disclosure and sharing of administrative information;
- 6.
- Preventing duplicative investment and improving interoperability.
3.2.2. Business Transparency Aspects
3.2.3. E-Government Productivity
3.3. US E-Government Act Legislation Process
3.4. Main Content of the E-Government Act in the United States
3.4.1. Title I—Office of Management and Budget E-Government Services
- ①
- To advise the Director on the resources required to develop and effectively administer electronic Government initiatives;
- ②
- To recommend to the Director changes relating to Governmentwide strategies and priorities for electronic government;
- ③
- To provide overall leadership and direction to the executive branch on electronic government;
- ④
- To promote innovative uses of information technology by agencies, particularly initiatives involving multiagency collaboration, through support of pilot projects, research, experimentation, and the use of innovative technologies;
- ⑤
- To oversee the distribution of funds from, and ensure appropriate administration and coordination of, the E-Government Fund established under Section 3604;
- ⑥
- To coordinate with the Administrator of General Services regarding programs undertaken by the General Services Administration to promote electronic government and the efficient use of information technologies by agencies;
- ⑦
- To lead the activities of the Chief Information Officers Council established under Section 3603 on behalf of the Deputy Director for Management, who shall chair the council;
- ⑧
- To assist the Director in establishing policies which shall set the framework for information technology standards for the Federal Government developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology;
- ⑨
- To sponsor ongoing dialogue that— ‘‘(A) shall be conducted among Federal, State, local, and tribal government leaders on electronic government in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, as well as leaders in the private and nonprofit sectors;
- ⑩
- To sponsor activities to engage the general public in the development and implementation of policies and programs, particularly activities aimed at fulfilling the goal of using the most effective citizen-centered strategies. (Rest of the list omitted.)
- ①
- To develop recommendations for the Director on Government information resources management policies and requirements;
- ②
- To share experiences, ideas, best practices, and innovative approaches related to information resources management;
- ③
- To assist the Administrator in the identification, development, and coordination of multiagency projects and other innovative initiatives to improve Government performance through the use of information technology;
- ④
- To promote the development and use of common performance measures for agency information resources management under this chapter and title II of the E-Government Act of 2002;
- ⑤
- To work as appropriate with the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Administrator to develop recommendations on information technology standards developed under section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act;
- ⑥
- To work with the Office of Personnel Management to assess and address the hiring, training, classification, and professional development needs of the Government related to information resources management;
- ⑦
- To work with the Archivist of the United States to assess how the Federal Records Act can be addressed effectively by Federal information resources management activities.
3.4.2. Title II—Federal Management and Promotion of E-Government Services
3.4.3. Title III—Government Information Security Reform
4. Comparative Analysis of the E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States
4.1. E-Government Fund
4.2. ICT Human Resources (CIO-Based System)
4.3. Governance (ICT Control Tower)
5. Discussion
5.1. Lessons Learned: The Need for a Strong Governance Structure
5.2. Policy Recommendations: Implementing a Strong Governance Structure
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Framework Act on National Informatization
(1) The head of a national agency or a local government shall appoint an official responsible for exercising overall control over the efficient formulation and implementation of national informatization policies and coordination, etc. of national informatization projects for the relevant agency (hereinafter referred to as "official responsible for informatization). <Amended by Act No. 13340, Jun. 22, 2015> (2) Any official responsible for informatization shall take charge of the following in respect to the affairs of the relevant agency: <Amended by Act No. 10012, Feb. 4, 2010; Act No. 11764, May 22, 2013; Act No. 13340, Jun. 22, 2015> 1. Overall coordination of, support for, and evaluation of national informatization policies and projects; 2. Integration and coordination of national informatization polices with any other policies, plans, etc. of the agency; 3. Support for administrative work using information technology; 4. Overall coordination in the collection, distribution, use, etc. of information resources, systematic management thereof, and formulation of plans for joint utilization of information; 5. Advancement of information culture and narrowing of digital divide; 5-2 Establishment of sound information communications ethics; 6. Introduction and utilization of an information technology architecture pursuant to subparagraph 12 of Article 2 of the Electronic Government Act (hereinafter referred to as "information technology architecture"); 7. Education on informatization; 8. Other matters prescribed as the duties of an official responsible for informatization in other statutes. (3) Where the head of a national agency or a local government appoints an official responsible for informatization pursuant to paragraph (1), he/she shall notify it to the chairperson of the Consultative Council under Article 12 (3). The same shall apply to the cases where an official responsible for informatization is replaced. <Newly Inserted by Act No. 13340, Jun. 22, 2015> |
(1) A central administrative agency and a local government may organize and operate a Consultative Council of Officials Responsible for Informatization (hereafter referred to as "Consultative Council" in this Article) comprised of officials responsible for informatization appointed under Article 11 for the efficient promotion of informatization, exchange of necessary information, and consultation, etc. over relevant policies. (2) The Consultative Council shall consult on the following: <Amended by Act No. 11764, May 22, 2013; Act No. 13340, Jun. 22, 2015> 1. Matters pertaining to the establishment and implementation of policies on electronic government; 2. Matters pertaining to the common use of administrative information; 3. Matters pertaining to an information technology architecture; 4. Matters pertaining to the systematic management and standardization of information resources; 5. Matters pertaining to the promotion of electronic government projects and community informatization projects, which involve various national agencies, local governments and public institutions (hereinafter referred to as “national agencies, etc.”); 6. Matters pertaining to the advancement of information culture, narrowing of the digital divide, and prevention and elimination of Internet addiction; 7. Matters pertaining to the use of the Internet address resources under subparagraph 2 of Article 2 of the Internet Address Resources Act; 8. Other matters deemed necessary by the chairperson. |
References
- United Nations. United Nations E-Government Survey 2010: Leveraging E-government at a Time of Financial and Economic Crisis; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. United Nations E-Government Survey 2012: E-Government for the People; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. United Nations E-Government Survey 2014: E-Government for the Future We Want; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Electronic Government Act, Act No. 6439; Korea, 2001. Available online: https://elaw.klri.re.kr/kor_service/lawView.do?hseq=45844&lang=ENG (accessed on 9 February 2019).
- E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-347, 116 Stat 2899; USA, 2002. Available online: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-107publ347/pdf/PLAW-107publ347.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2019).
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Recommendation of the Council on Digital Government Strategies; OECD: Paris, France, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Silcock, R. What is E-government. Parliam. Aff. 2001, 54, 88–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ebrahim, Z.; Irani, Z. E-government Adoption: Architecture and Barriers. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2005, 11, 589–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, J.H. Empowering Citizens’ Voices in the Era of E-government: Implications from South Korean Cases. Theor. Empir. Res. Urban Manag. 2010, 7, 19–31. [Google Scholar]
- Seifert, J.W.; Chung, J. Using E-government to Reinforce Government-Citizen Relationships: Comparing Government Reform in the United States and China. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2009, 27, 3–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eom, S.-J. Institutional Dimensions of E-government Development: Implementing the Business Reference Model in the United States and Korea. Adm. Soc. 2013, 45, 875–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Special Committee for e-Government. Korea’s E-Government: Completion of E-Government Framework; Special Committee for e-Government: Seoul, Korea, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Presidential Committee on Government Innovation and Decentralization. Participatory Government’s Vision and Direction of E-Government; Presidential Committee on Government Innovation and Decentralization: Seoul, Korea, 2003.
- Ministry of Public Administration and Security. Smart Government Plan; Ministry of Public Administration and Security: Seoul, Korea, 2011.
- Chung, C.-S. Lesson of Government 3.0 Project Failure in Korea. J. Adv. Res. Dyn. Control Syst. 2018, 10, 402–414. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry of the Interior and Safety. Master Plan of Intelligent Government; Ministry of the Interior and Safety: Seoul, Korea, 2017.
- Executive Office of the President. E-Government Strategy: Simplified Delivery of Services to Citizens; Office of Management and Budget: Washington, DC, USA, 2002.
- White House. Open Government: A Progress Report to the American People; White House: Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
- Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs. 2000 Work Plan Report; Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs: Seoul, Korea, 2000.
- Accenture. E-Government Leadership: Rhetoric vs Reality–Closing the Gap; Accenture: Arlington, VA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, D.L.; Sabatini-Marques, J.; Da Costa, E.M.; Selig, P.M.; Yigitcanlar, T. Knowledge-based, Smart and Sustainable Cities: A Provocation for a Conceptual Framework. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2018, 4, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eggers, W.D.; Bellman, J. The Journey to Government’s Digital Transformation; Deloitte University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, K.; Choi, S.O.; Kim, J.; Jung, M. A Study on the Factors Affecting Decrease in the Government Corruption and Mediating Effects of the Development of ICT and E-Government—A Cross-Country Analysis. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2018, 4, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Maio, A. Digital Government Is Both Different From E-Government and More of the Same; Gartner: Stamford, CT, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Ministry of the Interior and Safety. 50-Year Footprints of Korean E-Government 1967-2017: The Greatest Leap in Korean History; Ministry of the Interior and Safety: Seoul, Korea, 2017.
- Jun, M. Blockchain Government - A Next Form of Infrastructure for the Twenty-first Century. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2018, 4, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, H.S. Technology Convergence, Open Innovation, and Dynamic Economy. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2017, 3, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- United Nations. United Nations E-Government Survey 2018: Gearing E-Government to Support Transformation towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Agency for Digitisation. A Stronger and More Secure Digital Denmark: The Digital Strategy 2016–2020; Danish Ministry of Finance: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2016.
- Cabinet Office; Government Digital Service; The Rt Hon Ben Gummer. Government Transformation Strategy 2017 to 2020; Cabinet Office: London, UK, 2017.
- Chung, C.-S. Jun-Ja-Jung-Bu-Ron [The Theory of Electronic Government], 5th ed.; Seoul Economy and Business: Seoul, Korea, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Chung, C.-S. ICT Governance Restructure Plan in the Era of 4th Industrial Revolution. J. Platf. Technol. 2017, 5, 33–40. [Google Scholar]
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chung, C.-S.; Kim, S.-B. A Comparative Study of Digital Government Policies, Focusing on E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States. Electronics 2019, 8, 1362. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111362
Chung C-S, Kim S-B. A Comparative Study of Digital Government Policies, Focusing on E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States. Electronics. 2019; 8(11):1362. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111362
Chicago/Turabian StyleChung, Choong-Sik, and Sung-Bou Kim. 2019. "A Comparative Study of Digital Government Policies, Focusing on E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States" Electronics 8, no. 11: 1362. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111362
APA StyleChung, C. -S., & Kim, S. -B. (2019). A Comparative Study of Digital Government Policies, Focusing on E-Government Acts in Korea and the United States. Electronics, 8(11), 1362. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8111362