T HE 13 TH WASEDA – IAC
I NTERNATIONAL D IGITALG OVERNMENT R ANKINGS 2017
R EPORT
August 2017, Tokyo, JapanThe Institute of Digital Government at Waseda University, Tokyo in cooperation with
the International Academy of CIO (IAC) has released the results of its 13th
International Digital Government rankings survey for 2017.

Executive Summary
Prof. Dr. Toshio Obi
Director, Institute of Digital Government and President,International Academy of CIO
August 3,2017

The Institute of Digital Government, Waseda University headed by Prof. Dr. Toshio Obi,
has released the results of 2017 Waseda-IAC International Digital Government ranking survey
for the 13th consecutive years. This survey is conducted by the distinguished experts fromWaseda University and 10 world class universities under International Academy of CIO in
the field. Thanks for their contributions to the multi-stages of the survey. One of clear changeof our survey this year is to recognize the transformation from [e-Government] to [Digital
government] as the new definition which covers more comprehensive activities. Both Digital
Innovation and Digital Economy are the key for economic growth and challenges.
The 2017 ranking survey marks Singapore staying at first place, followed by Denmarkin 2nd, USA in 3rd, Japan in 4th, Estonia in 5th, Canada in 6th, New Zealand in 7th, South
Korea in 8th, UK in 9th, and Taiwan ranked 10th.
In the context of continuing ICT development, especially the rising of AI, IoT and Cloud
Computinglast year, the development oftechnologies has someimpact on Digital Government
in 2017. Although there are lots of fluctuations in the usage of AI, it has not yet made much
impact on the activities of the government. Few countries have adopted both AI and IoT to
improve the quality of service, most of which are concentrated in developed countries suchas USA and Denmark.
In the middle of overall ranking, there are four countries which increased their rankcompares to the ranking last year. For example, Macau jumped to the 28th compared to the
32nd. Philippines jumped 5 steps from the 38th place to the 33rd place in the 2017 ranking.
UAE also has a high position (34th) compared to the ranking last year (40th). The 2017 ranking
marked both Turkey and China improved their positions. However, the 2017 ranking also
marked some countries lost the position such as Malaysia and Chile in comparison with lastyear’s.
The process of D-Government ranking in 2017 is evaluating by 10 main indicators and35sub-indicators.Inaddition,wekeepanumberofcountriesforevaluationtargetis65countries,
same as in 2016. The 2017 rankings are summarized based on a combination of Waseda andIAC (International Academy of CIO), during one year survey, and we prepare the relevant
reports from many international conferences and meetings with institutions organized suchii

as APEC, ITU and OECD, as well as receiving the comments from experts of IAC member
universities.
This report contains Chapter II[Ranking by indicators and Sector Analysis] with 10
indicators, ChapterⅢ、
IV and V as rankings by organizations, size of population and GDP andRegions, and Chapter VI [New trends and 5 Highlights], Chapter VII for Methodology. The
last chapter in this report shows a contribution list.
The 2017 rankings also point to major trends in the usage of ICT in government activities.
The report shows that there are some new trends and they continue to grow strongly in the
coming years. An analysis for thirteen years of the Waseda – IAC D-Government Rankings
Survey indicates the following five highlights of the new trends: these are (1) Mobile
Government, (2) AI and IoT for Digital Government, (3) Smart City, (4) Cloud Computing
Technology and Digital Government, (5) ICT for Anti-Corruption.
In addition to the above highlights, there will be five challenges in D-Government tobe solved. There are “Digital Innovation－Cloud, IoT, AI applications”, ”Ageing Society”,“Globalization”, “Digital Divide for global and local communities”, ”Urbanization with Smartcity-harmonization and Cooperation between Central and Local governments”

For the details of a full ranking report on 2017 Rankings with all 65 Country Reports,
please access to the IAC homepage (http://academy-cio.org/) or contact with Institute of
Digital Government, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan.
Email: obi.waseda@gmail.com

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ ii
I.

2017 Overall Ranking .......................................................................................... 1

II.

D-Government Ranking by Indicators-Sector Analysis ................................... 3

1. Network Preparedness/Digital Infrastructure......................................................... 6
2. Management Optimization ..................................................................................... 6
3. Online Services/ Applications ................................................................................ 7
4. National Portal/Homepage ..................................................................................... 8
5. Government Chief Information Officer (GCIO) .................................................... 8
6. D-Government Promotion...................................................................................... 9
7. E-Participation/ Digital Inclusion ........................................................................ 10
8. Open Government Data ....................................................................................... 10
9. Cyber Security.......................................................................................................11
10.
III.

The use of Emerging ICT ..................................................................................11
D-Government Ranking by Organizations ...................................................... 12

1. Ranking of APEC Economies .............................................................................. 12
2. Ranking of OECD Countries ............................................................................... 13IV.

D-Government Ranking by the Size of Population and GDP ........................ 14

1. Ranking in Big Population Countries (bigger than 100 million) ......................... 14
2. Ranking in Small Population Countries (Less than 10 million) .......................... 15
3. D-Government Ranking in Top 10 Countries with Highest GDP in the World ... 16V.

D-Government Ranking by Regions ................................................................ 17
1. Ranking in Asia-Pacific Countries ....................................................................... 17
2. Ranking in Americas Countries ........................................................................... 18
3. Ranking in European Countries ........................................................................... 19
4. Ranking in Africa, Middle East, and CIS Countries ............................................ 20

VI.

New Trends of Digital Government- 5 Highlights in 2017 ............................. 21

1. Mobile Government ............................................................................................. 22
2. AI and IoT for Digital Government ..................................................................... 28
3. Smart City ............................................................................................................ 35iv

4. Cloud Computing Technology and Digital Government ..................................... 43
5. ICT for Anti-corruption ........................................................................................ 51
VII. Methodology ....................................................................................................... 55
1. Formulation .......................................................................................................... 55
2. Process of Evaluation ........................................................................................... 56
VIII. Contributors List................................................................................................ 58
1. List of Global Experts Group ............................................................................... 58
2. List of Professors and Experts at Institute of D-Government, Waseda University
58
3. List of Researchers at Institute of D-Government, Waseda University ............... 58v

List of Tables:
Table 1: Waseda – IAC D-Government Total Ranking 2017 ................................... 1
Table 2: List of scores by indicators of top twenty countries (economies) .............. 2
Table 3: The Main Indicators and Sub-Indicators .................................................... 4
Table 4: Top 10 Countries on 10 Individual Indicators ............................................ 6
Table 5: D-Government Ranking in APEC Economies.......................................... 12
Table 6: D-Government Ranking in OECD Countries ........................................... 13
Table 7: D-Government Ranking in Big Population Countries .............................. 14
Table 8: D-Government Ranking in Small Population Countries .......................... 15
Table 9: D-Government Ranking with Highest GDP Group .................................. 16
Table 10: D-Government Ranking in Asia-Pacific Countries ................................ 17
Table 11: D-Government Ranking in Americas Countries ..................................... 19
Table 12: D-Government Ranking in European Countries .................................... 20
Table 13: D-Government Ranking in Africa, Middle East, and CIS Countries ..... 21
Table 14: List of main Indicators ............................................................................ 56
List of Figures:
Figure 1: Mobile Broadband Subscriptions (Source: ITU) .................................... 23
Figure 2: Fix and mobile broadband prices, PPP (Source: ITU) ............................ 24
Figure 3: Mobile Broadband Services as a percentage of GNI (Source: ITU)....... 24
Figure 4: Internet bandwidth remains unequally distributed across the world(Source: ITU) .................................................................................................. 25
Figure 5: M2M subscriptions per 100 mobile-cellular subscriptions (Source: ITU)........................................................................................................................ 29
Figure 6: Insights-Driven Businesses will steal $1.2 trillion annually by 2020
(Source: Forrester, Economic Intelligence Unit, Morningstar, and PitchBook
Data) ............................................................................................................... 31
Figure 7: The Economic Impact of AI (Source: Accenture and Frontier Economics)........................................................................................................................ 32
Figure 8: AI impacts on National Economic Growth in the US (Source: Accenture)........................................................................................................................ 35vi

Figure 9: Public Cloud Infrastructure as a Service (Source: Statistica 2016) ........ 45
Figure 10: Worldwide Public IT Cloud Service Revenue (Source: Microsoft CloudLandscape Update, 2015, (RHP)) ................................................................... 45
Figure 11: Cloud Growth by Segment (Source: Synergy Research Group) ........... 46
Figure 12: The Kasumigaseki Cloud (Source: MIC Japan 2009) .......................... 48
Figure 13: Anti-Corruption Platform (Source: Author) .......................................... 55
Figure 14: Process Diagram ................................................................................... 57vii

I. 2017 Overall Ranking
The main indicators in the 2017 rankings remain the same as in 2016, with 10 indicatorsand 35 sub-indicators. The methodologyand scores of indicators are still assessed byfollowing
the same approach of 2016. The processes of evaluation are reviewed through 3 steps: web
search, a questionnaire to the government officers and last review by IAC experts.
No

Total Rankings

Score

No

Total Rankings

Score

No

Total Rankings

Score

1

Singapore

91.057

23

Switzerland

63.78845

Kazakhstan

52.4762

Denmark

88.73924

Hong Kong

63.695

46

Saudi Arabia

51.0063

USA

87.11725

Israel

62.94947

Vietnam

50.5404

Japan

81.23626

Portugal

62.721

48

Brazil50.475

5

Estonia

81.19827

Italy62.707

49

South Africa

50.417

6

Canada77.42528

Macau

61.14550Brunei49.791

7

New Zealand

75.04129

Czech Republic

60.99851

Georgia49.592

8South Korea

74.82830

Spain58.80452

Lithuania

46.9569UK

74.21431

Russia58.44953

Argentina

45.776

10

Taiwan73.22432

Indonesia

58.03254Peru45.702

11

Austria70.92933

Philippines

57.34655

Uruguay

44.847

12

Sweden70.23434

UAE

57.29556

Morocco43.787

13

Australia

68.39635

India

57.07157

Colombia

43.09914

Iceland68.077

36

Malaysia

56.38658

Tunisia42.986

15

Germany

67.21237

Poland56.31759

Pakistan

40.621

16

Norway66.861

38

Romania55.94760

Venezuela

38.94617

Netherlands

66.78339

Turkey55.52761

Kenya

38.70518

Finland

66.77240

Chile53.61062

Egypt

37.735

19

France65.91141

Bahrain53.48063

Nigeria37.44320

Ireland65.83442

Mexico53.441

64

Costa Rica

34.20021

Thailand

65.20043

Oman

53.42665

Fiji

33.89722

Belgium

65.18944

China

52.865

Table 1: Waseda – IAC D-Government Total Ranking 2017
The results of the 2017 rankings are shown in Table 1. The results show that
Singapore remains in the first place and a leading country in applying IT into stateadministration and management. The 2017 rankings mark Singapore in the first place.
Singapore has been very successful in applying IT to government operations. In 2017,
Singapore has deployed AI (Artificial Intelligence), the latest trend of IT in public
administration.
In 2017 rankings, Denmark has replaced the USA in the second position. Denmark
has also been a pioneer in the application of new ICT technologies in the state1administration. The USA dropped to the third position in the 2017ranking compared tothe second last year. 2017 marked big political changes in ICT application in the USA.
Rank
2017
1

Country

NIP

MO

OS

NPR

GCIO

EPRO

EPAR

OGD

CYB

EMG

TOTAL

Singapore

6.953

11.20011.640

7.400

8.636

9.677

9.500

9.500

9.800

6.750

91.0572

Denmark

7.960

12.00011.640

7.852

7.273

8.065

8.500

9.250

9.200

7.000

88.739

3

USA

6.870

10.40010.800

7.407

9.091

8.548

9.250

9.250

9.000

6.500

87.117

4

Japan

7.460

12.00010.530

4.800

9.091

9.355

7.500

9.000

8.000

3.500

81.236

5

Estonia

7.053

12.00010.974

5.547

7.727

7.097

9.000

8.500

8.800

4.500

81.198

6

Canada6.040

11.200

9.606

6.800

7.727

6.452

9.000

10.000

7.600

3.000

77.425

7

New Zealand

6.957

11.500

9.954

5.387

7.727

4.516

6.000

10.00010.0003.000

75.041

8South Korea

6.777

9.600

9.606

6.985

6.818

7.742

7.500

9.000

8.800

2.000

74.828

9

UK

7.250

11.200

9.573

5.107

5.000

5.484

8.500

9.000

9.600

3.500

74.214

10

Taiwan

5.376

9.600

9.132

5.620

7.727

7.419

7.750

9.000

7.600

4.000

73.224

11

Austria

6.037

9.600

10.404

6.173

6.364

6.452

7.000

8.500

8.400

2.000

70.92912

Sweden7.617

10.40010.596

5.333

3.636

6.452

8.500

8.000

7.200

2.500

70.234

13

Australia

7.083

6.400

10.920

7.333

7.273

8.387

6.000

4.500

6.000

4.500

68.39614

Iceland

7.620

11.20011.280

7.111

7.273

4.194

5.750

6.250

5.400

2.000

68.077

15

Germany

6.187

11.40010.146

2.667

5.909

3.503

7.000

9.000

6.400

5.000

67.212

16

Norway

7.557

9.600

10.680

6.667

6.364

4.194

4.500

5.500

6.800

5.000

66.861

17

Netherlands

6.777

11.400

9.936

5.840

3.327

2.903

6.000

8.500

7.600

4.500

66.78318

Finland

7.480

10.40010.260

5.680

3.636

4.516

5.000

9.000

6.800

4.000

66.772

19

France

6.690

8.800

10.194

6.533

5.455

4.839

9.000

8.500

4.400

1.500

65.91120

Ireland

6.760

8.800

8.958

5.373

4.091

6.452

6.500

7.500

6.400

5.000

65.834

Table 2: List of scores by indicators of top twenty countries (economies)
In the top 10 of the 2017 rankings, there is not much change compared to 2016. The
positions of Japan, Estonia, and Canada have increased and ranked at 4th, 5th, and 6thplace respectively.
As the aforementioned situation, Japan government has built a sophisticatedpromotion system for D-Government initiatives and precise GCIO regimes into every
rank of government (Central and local government; different government agencies) toassure the implementation and evaluation process of D-Government initiatives. It can bereported on high scores on “Government CIO” and “D-Government Promotion”. Japan
also continues to update its online service system as the objective of initiatives tosimplify administrative procedures and working systems.
Canada has kept its pioneer position among other countries in providing advanced
e-services to citizens, which has a splendid one-stop service system endeavoring toembrace all the information and services that citizens or enterprises need at one unified

2

place. Massive contents have been divided into very plain and concise catalogs andusers can always go to the destination directly through humanized introduction.
In comparison with last year, South Korea downed from the 4th place to 8th place,due to several political, government change in South Korea. However, in someindicators, South Korea is still the leading countries, such as Cyber Security andEmerging ICT.
In the middle of the 2017 rankings, some countries such as Thailand, Belgium,
Switzerland, Spain, and Russia increased some steps, there is not much change inposition compared to last year. Only a few countries have a big change in rankings such
as UAE increased six grades compared to last year, China up 4 steps, Chile down 6
steps, Georgia increased six grades compared to the last year.
Compared with other economies, China has a comparatively slow process of
D-Government development. Except for the indicator of “Management Optimization”,
performance on all the segments of ranking could be considered backward thanadvanced nations. The absence of GCIO not only pares down the scores for evaluation
but more importantly, has influenced the execution of ICT plans in each government
level. However, some megacities in China has promoted advanced e-Service and data
share process to citizens (For example Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou), which continues
to pull ahead of the gap with underdeveloped areas.
Chile has achieved its D-Government success due to three main factors: acontinuous long-term strategy, efficient policy-making and its modern socioeconomic
qualities. Unlike other countries in the region, Chile began designing its long-term
D-Government policy plans by the early 2000s, when its first web page for official
procedures, “Easy Errand,” was created. By 2004, Chile had designed its first Digital
Agenda to start with a continuous process that would lead up to today’s 2013-2020
versions.
There has been very little progress in Georgia regarding the provision of
D-Government services. Most of the D-Government services such as E-tender, Social
Security Services, Civil Registration Services, Consular Services and Labor Related
Services are provided at static websites available. E-payment and e-voting services are
not available yet.

II. D-Government Ranking by Indicators-Sector Analysis
The Waseda – IAC D-Government Ranking relies on comprehensive benchmarking
indicators in order to obtain an accurate and precise assessment of the latest
developments of D-Government in the ICT section of 65 countries. Ten main indicators
are currently used to carry out the Waseda - IAC D-Government Ranking survey. The
table below shows all 10 indicators and their 35 sub-indicators.
3

Indicators

Sub-indicators

1. Network Preparedness/Infrastructure (NIP)

1-1 Internet Users
1-2 Broadband Subscribers
1-3 Mobile Cellular Subscribers

2. Management Optimization/ Efficiency (MO)2-1 Optimization Awareness
2-2 Integrated Enterprise Architecture
2-3 Administrative and Budgetary Systems

3. Online Services / Functioning Applications(OS)

3-1 E-Procurement
3-2 E-Tax Systems
3-3 E-Custom Systems
3-4 E-Health System
3-5 One-stop service

4. National Portal/Homepage (NPR)

4-1 Navigation
4-2 Interactivity
4-3 Interface
4-4 Technical Aspects

5. Government CIO (GCIO)

5-1 GCIO Presence
5-2 GCIO Mandate
5-3 CIO Organizations
5-4 CIO Development Programs

6. D-Government Promotion (EPRO)

6-1 Legal Mechanism
6-2 Enabling Mechanism
6-3 Support Mechanism
6-4 Assessment Mechanism

7. E-Participation/Digital Inclusion (EPAR)

7-1 E-Information Mechanisms
7-2 Consultation
7-3 Decision-Making

8. Open Government (OGD)

8-1 Legal Framework
8-2 Society
8-3 Organization

9. Cyber Security (CYB)

9-1 Legal Framework
9-2 Cyber Crime Countermeasure
9-3 Internet Security Organization

10. The use of Emerging ICT (EMG)

10-1 The use of Cloud Computing
10-2 The use of Internet of Things
10-3 The use of Big Data

Table 3: The Main Indicators and Sub-Indicators

Network Preparedness

Management Optimization

Online Services

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1

Denmark

7.960

1

Denmark

12.00

1

Denmark

11.64

2

Iceland

7.620

1

Japan

12.00

1

Singapore

11.64

3

Sweden7.617

1

Estonia

12.00

3Israel11.40

4

Norway7.557

4

Switzerland

11.50

4

Iceland11.28

5

Finland

7.480

4

New Zealand

11.50

5

Estonia10.974

6

Japan

7.460

6

Netherlands

11.40

6

Australia

10.920

4

7

UK

7.250

6

Germany

11.40

7

USA

10.8008

Hong Kong

7.272

8

UK

11.20

8

Norway10.6809Australia

7.083

8

Iceland

11.20

9

Sweden10.596

10

Estonia

7.053

8

Oman

11.20

10

Japan

10.530National Portal

Government CIO

D-Government Promotion

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1

Denmark

7.852

1

USA

9.091

1

Singapore

9.677

2

Israel

7.407

1

Japan

9.091

2

Japan

9.355

2

USA

7.407

3

Singapore

8.636

3

USA

8.548

2

Lithuania

7.407

4

Canada7.727

4Australia

8.387

5

Singapore

7.400

4

Taiwan7.727

5Denmark

8.065

6Australia

7.333

4

Estonia

7.727

6South Korea

7.742

7

Iceland

7.111

4

New Zealand

7.727

7

Taiwan7.419

8South Korea

6.985

8

Denmark

7.273

7Estonia

7.097

9Belgium

6.815

8Australia

7.273

9

UAE

6.774

10

Canada6.800

8Iceland7.273

9Poland6.774

E-Participation

Open Government

Cyber Security

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1Singapore

9.500

1

Canada10.00

1

New Zealand

10.00

1

Denmark

9.500

1

New Zealand

10.00

2

Singapore

9.800

3

USA

9.250

3

Singapore

9.500

3

UK

9.600

4

Estonia

9.000

3Indonesia

9.500

4

Denmark

9.200

4Canada

9.000

5

India

9.250

4

Switzerland

9.200

4

France

9.000

5

Spain

9.250

4

Israel

9.200

7

UAE

8.750

5

USA

9.250

7

USA

9.000

8

Italy

8.500

8

Denmark

9.250

8South Korea

8.800

8

Sweden

8.500

9

Italy

9.000

8

Estonia

8.800

8

UK

8.500

9

UK

9.000

10

Austria

8.400

The use of Emerging ICT
NoCountry

Score

1

Denmark

7.000

2Singapore

6.750

3

USA

6.500

4

Norway5.000

4Germany

5.000

4Ireland

5.000

7Estonia

4.500

5

7

Netherlands

4.500

7

Belgium

4.500

7Australia

4.500

Table 4: Top 10 Countries on 10 Individual Indicators
1.

Network Preparedness/Digital Infrastructure

According to the Waseda D-Government ranking, network preparedness (or digital
infrastructure) is a basic indicator for evaluating D-Government development in one
country. In this ranking, digital infrastructure is measured by the development of ICT
such as the number of Internet users, mobile subscribers or the percentage of broadband
connections. Network preparedness also refers to the integration between central
government and local government through network backbone system and its capabilityof connecting all bureaus and departments together via the core Government Backbone
Network.
Iceland with steady development and implementation of ICT services andinfrastructure is No.2 in the world after Denmark. It has been ranked fourth in the world
for ICT Development by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) for the past
three years. With a usage rate of 96.5%, Icelandic citizens are more likely to use theInternet than the citizens of any other country. 35.1% of citizens had wired broadband
subscriptions in 2013, and 74.7% had wireless broadband access, placing the country
within the top five for this metric.
As one of the world’s best-connected countries, Sweden as No.3 of this sector has
100% cell phone subscriptions with data, 90% Internet users, 87% households withpersonal computers, and 32% broadband subscribers. All of these conditions combinewith an early interest from decision-makers on IT, have turned Sweden into a prominent
ICT nation with good infrastructure and advanced services. In fact, Sweden is one of theinternational leaders with regards to D-Government. The Swedish government has
formulated strong policies in this progress.
2.

Management Optimization

This indicator reflects the utilization of ICT for improving government businessprocesses and internal processes (back office in each organization). Management
optimization is a very important indicator of D-Government development because it
related to the optimization awareness, enterprise architecture (EA) and also theadministrative management system.
Japan as No.1 rank is one of the earliest countries to push the integrated
government systems and has made lots of progress such as the GPKI (Government
Public Key Infrastructure) and “Kasumigaseki WAN” system. As of 2017, most of the
87-optimization target areas are in the implementation phase. Prime Minister’s IT
6Headquarter started “The most advanced IT Nation” Strategy to implement
D-Government as the priority area productivity and efficiency since 2013.
Estonia as No.1 rank in this indicator has launched the Digital Agenda 2020. The
ultimate goal of this agenda is not merely an ICT use in daily life and business. The
current plan emphasizes the improving economic competitiveness, the well-being ofpeople and the efficiency of public administration. Some priorities have been set on theagenda such as completing the next generation broadband network, generating greater
control over personal data, and utilizing data analytics in public sectors.
Switzerland government uses Business Process Model Notation (BPMN) for
illustrating government business process. This practice will enable to identify
redundancy or critical process that could be eliminating or adding more control over it.
Digital Government Strategy Switzerland was created through a collaboration between
central and local government. The strategy has set the role and responsibilities of eachagency. There are measurable target and objectives on the D-Government Strategy.
Furthermore, the strategic plan has been cascaded into a more detailed action plan.
3.

Online Services/ Applications

Online service is one of five important indicators. It was evaluated in the firstranking survey in 2005 and referred to the interactions between service providers andcustomers. Online service or electronic service (e-Service) refers to the integration ofbusiness process, policies, procedures, tools, technologies, and human efforts tofacilitate both assisted and unassisted customer services provided over the Internet andother networks. E-Services are the main indicator in the development of D-Government.
The outcome of D-Government is e-Services or products/services that the government
introduces to citizens, making e-Service as the interface of D-Government. Over twelve
years of ranking, there has been no significant change in this indicator or its associatedsub-indicators. We found that e-Services have been implemented and expanded in many
governments around the world and have become primary solutions in D-Government
development.
To enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications
infrastructure of the United States as No.7 rank, a new Cybersecurity Act was issued in2012 and it focused on protecting ICT critical infrastructure, Information sharing,
governmental and private networks. The current statutes for required interfaces will beenhanced and revised. The “Electronic Transactions and Information Law” which wasenacted in the U.S. regulates all matters pertaining to information and transactions in allelectronic forms. The Law regulates cyber activity in the U.S. It provides a generaloutline, and requires further elaboration through government regulations.

74.

National Portal/Homepage

National portal (one-stop service) is defined as a place where the government
integrates all e-services and makes them accessible via one gateway. It is also a basic
interface for stakeholders to access government in an electronic way. Through thenational portal, governments offer many benefits to users of public services—fromcitizens and businesses to the public administrators themselves—including faster,cheaper and superior services. In the public sector, one-stop service is one of the mostpromising concepts of service delivery in public administration. Its implementation is
included in the D-Government strategies in most countries.
National Portal of Singapore contains proper information for local citizens andforeigners. The portal has provided latest national news, useful guidelines for every
aspect of Singapore life (divided by topics such as Finance, Education, Immigration,
Taxes, Health, etc.) Besides, the portal has the introduction of country information,
visions for the nation, to present the country to users closely and deeply. There are also
contacts information of government agencies and their announcement individually.
Though online translation supports users to search government terms into Chinese,
Malay, and Tamil, it would be better if the portal equips multiple language versions of
all the information.
5.

Government Chief Information Officer (GCIO)

Since 2005, in the first Waseda D-Government ranking, the GCIO plays animportant role in D-Government implementation. It is also one of five indicators forevaluating D-Government. The CIO is expected to align management strategies withICT investment in order to achieve a balance among business strategy, organizational
reform, and management reform; hence, the Government CIO is considered by many
governments to be one of the key factors in the success of D-Government
implementation. CIOs are now expected to achieve quantum-leaps in efficiency, offer
previously unheard-of capabilities, create actionable information out of disparate data
sets, provides citizen services that are so fast, accurate, and user-friendly that the
public’s trust in government achievement record heights.
The CIO position of United States as No.1 rank was established within the WhiteHouse’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to provide leadership and oversightfor IT spending throughout the Federal Government. In addition, each Federal agency
has its own CIO, as established by the Clinger-Cohen Act.
In Japan, each central ministry has a CIO who is appointed to senior staff within theministry (mainly Director General of administration) and an assistant CIO who is anexpert recruited externally. Federal CIO Council composed of Ministry CIOs has theauthority to decide many rules on in-house ICT installation and online services. The
percentage of CIO appointments at the prefecture level is 95% and 90% is at the city8

level in 2017. The government established a Government CIO post as a core of all
Ministry CIOs who leads to ranking in 2017.
Government Chief Information Office Wing has been set up at Gov Tech which
serves as the government CIO for Singapore. There are also clearly appointments about
CIOs at every government agency, responsible for specific objectives on Infocomm
technologies, infrastructure, and services. Government CIO issues are valued at
Singapore, but there are still needs to establish assorted educational programs related to
GCIO.
6.

D-Government Promotion

This indicator measures a government’s activities toward the promotion of
D-Government and distribution of e-Services to citizens, businesses, and otherstakeholders. It includes activities involved in supporting the implementation of
D-Government such as legal frameworks and mechanisms (laws, legislations, plans,
policies, and strategies). In other words, the government carries out these activities inorder to support the development of e-Services as well as D-Government as a whole.
This indicator is one of the main indicators in Waseda-IAC D-Government ranking
because it shows the main legal framework in each country.
The high-tech and informational society is one of the vital national strategies in
Singapore, therefore government never has stopped the evolution of D-Government.
Not only the continuous plans but also relevant legal framework has a renewal in thepast years. Academic support including seminars and research centers on
D-Government and ICT utilization are active in Singapore. It ranked the first in thisindicator among evaluated countries.
The digital interactions among the U.S. government, citizens, businesses,
employees and other governments improved from a couple of years ago. This clearly
results from the efforts to develop and promote Digital Government services andprocesses by the establishment of an Administrator Office of Digital Government within
the Office of Management and Budget. The promotion of the use of the Internet andother information technologies to increase opportunities for citizens to participate with
the U.S. Government and promoting interagency collaboration providing digital
Government services, where these collaborations would improve the services provided
to citizens by integrating related functions and the use of internal digital Government
processes.
To provide effective leadership of the Federal Government, there have been efforts
to develop and promote digital Government services and processes by establishing an
Administrator Office of Digital Government within the Office of Management andBudget. D-Government promotion has reduced the cost and burden for businesses andgovernment entities.
97. E-Participation/ Digital Inclusion
E-participation refers to ICT-supported participation in government and governanceprocesses. Processes may be concerned administration, service delivery,
decision-making, and policy-making.
In Canada as No.4 rank in this indicator, e-services or online services, online
information and online citizen engagement are organized by category and not on a
department-by department basis, which makes it user-friendly and responsive to citizen
demands. In order to gauge the efficacy of their services, the government uses a unique
Canadian outcomes analysis approach called “Citizens First” in the case of individuals
and families, and “Taking Care of Business” in the case of companies. So it enables
everyone to use an electronic form of services very easily. The Government of Canada
offers a variety of applications, accounts, tools, and services to allow citizens tocomplete tasks online.
The UAE D-Government believes in the importance of e-Participation and enablingits customers to take part in the decision-making process. The government portal clearlyencourages citizens and customers to participate in government decision making processincluding policies and initiatives. The “Contact Government” section in the portal isdedicated by providing many important tools, including web 2.0 tools and online directcommunication with the customer. The UAE Government has launched its new federal
portal, redesigned to offer many e-Participation channels, include advanced practices
such as Open Data, and be a better-unified gateway to access many online services
provided by the UAE Government.
8. Open Government Data
This indicator evaluates the openness and transparency of governments. The
top-ranking countries on this indicator have provided citizens with anapplication-programming interface (API) that could help developers and researchers
create innovative citizens-centric applications. There are a number of small-scaleutilization cases and applications for smartphones and tablets.
In 1982, New Zealand as No.1 rank has launched Official Information Act toparticipate in the “Freedom of Information Act” movement around the world. To
strengthen the implementation of this act, New Zealand has established Open Data
Portal (https://data.govt.nz) to provide public with government information. To keep theinformation update, New Zealand government uses Data one.govt (Open Network
Environment) as a platform for data submission.
Indonesia has established Open Data Portal (http://data.go.id/) to provide publicwith government information. Jakarta City also developed Open Data at
http://data.jakarta.go.id. To keep the information up-to-date, Indonesian government
10

involves the community in the area of Open Data to standardize and reformat allinteresting data available on the government website to be displayed on the Open Data
Portal. In developing countries, Open Government Data is the key for transparency andhelping business most creative.
9.

Cyber Security

The emerging trends in ICT and security are reflected in the ranking system since
top 10 countries in cyber-security have an adequate legislation framework, effective
cyber-crime countermeasure solutions, and powerful security organizations.
In five years, from 2011 to 2017, the UK Government has financed a “National
Cyber Security Program” of £860 million to deliver the 2011 National Cyber Security
Strategy. Some activities included in the program: the launch of “10 Steps to Cyber
Security” in 2015 together with new guidance for businesses: “Common Cyber Attacks:
Reducing the Impact”; “Think Cyber – Think Resilience” seminars for around 700
policy makers and practitioners from local authorities; the Foreign Secretary publicly
confirmed the “Centre for Cyber Assessment (CCA)” to provide assessments of cyberthreats and vulnerabilities to policymakers; provide briefing and training to public
sector staff in the roles of information security.
New Zealand as No.1 rank has established the Government Communication
Security Bureau (GCSB) for providing information assurance and cyber security to the
New Zealand Government and critical infrastructure organizations, foreign intelligence
to government decision-makers, and cooperation and assistance to other New Zealandgovernment agencies. Besides that, an ICT Community New Zealand initiated thefoundation of New Zealand Internet Task Force to improve the cyber security posture of
New Zealand.
10.

The use of Emerging ICTThis indicator refers to the newest technology which governments want to apply for
the Government activities such as using Cloud computing in delivering services,
creating data warehouse (Big data) for sharing among Government agencies, and use
the advantages of IoT for distributing services through many devices.
The Danish government as No.1 rank has been using a domestic standard for
information security called DS 484 for over a decade. Government institutions are
required to abide by Information Security ISO/IEC 27001, an international standard.
The Ministry of Finance’s Agency for Digitization is tasked with enforcing this standard
and “developing tools, templates, seminars, and workshops to support its
implementation and maintenance.”
The German Federal Government is pursuing to boost up the development andintroduction of cloud computing facilities by issuing the new “Cloud Computing Action11

Program”. There is a research project known as THESEUS, aiming to utilize The
Internet of Services and the Internet of Things. With this project, the German Federal
Government is seeking to utilize semantic technologies and the creating new standards
for the Internet of Services.

III.

D-Government Ranking by Organizations

1. Ranking of APEC Economies
APEC Economies
No

Economies

APEC Economies
Score

No

Economies

APEC Economies
Score

No

Economie

Score

s
1

Singapore

91.057

8

Australia

68.396

15

Chile

53.6102

USA87.117

9

Thailand

65.20016

Mexico53.441

3

Japan

81.236

10

HK SAR

63.69517

China

52.865

4

Canada77.425

11

Russia58.44918

Vietnam

50.5405

New Zealand

75.041

12

Indonesia

58.03219

Brunei49.791

6

South Korea

74.828

13

Philippines

57.34620Peru45.7027

Chinese73.224

14

Malaysia

56.386

TaipeiTable 5: D-Government Ranking in APEC Economies
Singapore, USA, and Japan are the leading economies in this group. They are
ranked in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd position respectively. Compared to last year South Korea is
not in the top three, despite the leading country in both Cyber Security and Open
Government Data indicators. In the overall of ranking, South Korea slept down andranked in 6th. Canada and New Zealand followed Japan and ranked for 4th and 5th placerespectively. In the middle of the group Australia, Thailand, Hong Kong, and Russia are
keeping their positions compared to the ranking of last year. Indonesia and Philippines
jumped one and two steps and ranked for 12th and 13th place respectively. In the bottomof the group, there are still five countries compared to last year of ranking Mexico,
China, Vietnam, Brunei, and Peru. China runs two steps and ranked for 17th placecompared with 19th last year. Peru has been still in the bottom of the group due to littlechange in the state administration on digital government.
As a leading nation of D-Government in Asia, Singapore continues to maintain the
momentum of evolvement. The performance on indicators of Management Optimization,
D-Government promotion, and cyber security are showing its strong points andadvancement this year. Especially on the effort for cyber security, Singapore equips thelaw and regulatory framework to assure every safety measure and security upgrade canbe enforced on a legal basis. In respect to policy, National Cyber Security Masterplan
12

2018, as the latest strategy, guides government to enhance nation’s security environmentand create a robust and trusted society for public, private and individuals. Continuous
master plans in each crucial segment are one of the keys to keep Singapore proactive
and possessing execution capacity on D-Government development.
To future direction, Singapore still has potential on the growth of the usage of
emerging technologies. This indicator has been introduced to Waseda D-Government
ranking this year. Due to the fact that many countries are still at the start-up phase,
direction for expanding the new technologies into public service sector needs moreendeavor to be clarified. Singapore could seize the opportunity to formulate policies andstandards, not only guide domestic innovation but also delight international
co-development.
2. Ranking of OECD Countries
OECD Countries

OECD Countries

OECD Countries

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1

Denmark

88.73911

Australia

68.39621

Israel

62.9492

USA

87.117

12

Iceland68.07722

Portugal

62.721

3

Japan

81.236

13

Germany

67.21223

Italy

62.707

4

Estonia

81.19814

Norway66.86124

Czech

60.9985

Canada77.42515

Netherlands

66.78325

Spain

58.804

6

New Zealand

75.04116

Finland

66.772

26

Poland56.317

7South Korea

74.828

17

France65.911

27

Turkey55.5278

UK

74.21418

Ireland65.83428

Chile

53.6109Austria70.92919

Belgium

65.18929

Mexico53.441

10

Sweden70.23420

Switzerland

63.788

Table 6: D-Government Ranking in OECD Countries
Denmark is a leader country in the ranking group; it replaced USA and become
No.1 country for OECD ranking group this year. Followed by USA, Japan, Estonia, andCanada as the top 5. They are ranked 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th place respectively. In the
middle of the group is Nordic countries, these countries are always in the top countriesof both network infrastructure and management optimization. The bottom five countries
are Spain, Poland, Turkey, Chile, and Mexico. They ranked for 25th, 26th, 27th, 28th, and29th place respectively. There are not so much change in the position compared to theranking last year.
Denmark has shown marked development in D-Government projects but there arefew available resources on D-Government related promotions particularly at the local
13

level. From 2011 to 2015, the Danish authorities followed a successful D-Government
strategy, which included a large-scale communication campaign to raise citizens’
awareness of D-Government services. The OIO Committee for Architecture andStandards has the mandate to support the strategy to facilitate the work of
D-Government in the state, regions, and municipalities with particular emphasis on
ensuring interoperability between IT systems across organizational boundaries.
The government released its e-Government strategy 2016 - 2020 in May 2016, andit outlines 33 projects for the government to accomplish in the coming years. The
government is always trying to establish online services that are simpler and more
effective. In order to do this, the government will establish horizontal cooperation
throughout local, regional and central governments. Institutions for education,knowledge or culture can still apply for funds to provide their users with free Internet
access. The funds will be used to prioritize Internet connectivity and use. The
government will also invest 500 million DKK and municipalities will up to 1 billion
DKK tailoring teaching in public schools for future needs.

IV. Digital Government Ranking by the Size of Population andGDP
1. Ranking in Big Population Countries (bigger than 100 million)
Big Population Countries

Big Population Countries

Big Population Countries

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

County

Score

1

USA

87.117

5

Philippines

57.346

9

Brazil50.475

2

Japan

81.236

6

India

57.071

10

Pakistan

40.621

3

Russia58.4497

Mexico53.441

11

Nigeria37.443

4

Indonesia

58.032

8

China52.865

Table 7: D-Government Ranking in Big Population Countries
In the Waseda D-Government ranking, there are 11 countries which have thepopulation with over than 100 million. In the top four of the ranking group, there arestill four countries USA, Japan, Russia, and Indonesia. In the top five, Philippines
replaced India compared to last year. Philippines has the impressive point on
Management Optimization, Open Government Data, and Online Service. With thecomprehensive D-Government Master Plan, Philippines is able to improve those three
indicators. In this group, Philippines is attempting to pursue the connected yet
integrated government under the theme “iGovPhil” Initiative. The effort to achieve theconnectivity and interoperability among government agencies is equipped with theproper equipment on Open Government Data which ensures that all stakeholders cantake the benefit of government data. To engage the citizen and business enterprise for14

using D-Government system, Philippines is continuously enhancing the Online Service.
In the bottom are two countries Pakistan and Nigeria, where they ranked the same placeas the ranking last year.
Though more than 75% of Internet users have visited a U.S. government website,
reports consistently show that public sector websites lag the private sector. Additionally,
the government has failed to meaningfully integrate lessons learned from best practicesof leading online government services into its operations. Because public sector
websites lag the private sector in usability and design, the Federal Web Managers
Council should benchmark the design and usability of government websites against
leading industry best practices. The Office of Management Budget should continually
recommend specific improvements that agencies should make highlight best practices in
its annual D-Government Report to Congress and deploy the D-Government Fund tohelp replicate best practices across the federal government. The U.S. government has
already made some steps in this direction, but more should be done in the coming years.
2. Ranking in Small Population Countries (Less than 10 million)
Small Population Countries

Small Population Countries

Small Population Countries

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1Singapore

91.057

9

Finland

66.772

17

Oman

53.4262

Denmark

88.73910

Ireland65.83418

Brunei49.791

3

Estonia

81.198

11

Switzerland

63.78819

Lithuania

46.9564

New

75.041

12

HK SAR

63.69520

Uruguay

44.847

Zealand
5

Austria70.92913

Israel

62.94921

Costa Rica

34.2006

Norway70.23414

Macau

61.14522Fiji

33.897

7

Iceland68.07715

UAE

57.295

8

Sweden66.86116

Bahrain53.480

Table 8: D-Government Ranking in Small Population Countries
The Waseda ranking covers 22 countries which they have a population less than 10
million. In the top three are Singapore, Denmark and Estonia. The ranking this year
marked Austria replaced Norway in the 5th place. Iceland jumped 2 steps and ranked in
7th place compared to the 9th place of 2016 ranking. Finland ranked in 9th place and withan advanced D-Government development level, the D-Government promotion activities
of Finnish Government are no longer surrounded the matter of citizens’ awareness.
Instead, the target is focusing on how to improve users’ experience with government
digital services due to the increase in citizens’ expectation. More attentions need to be15

paid to the utilizing of emerging technology such as internet of things or big data withingovernment agencies.
The bottom of this group are Oman, Brunei, Lithuania, Uruguay, Costa Rica, andFiji, they ranked 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd place respectively. In Fiji, theD-Government program involves three (3) main streams: Public Contact Center (PCC),
Government Information Infrastructure (GII) and E-Applications. These 3 streams
address the tasks of handling inquiries or complaints from the public, connection of
government offices to the network and managing and developing various government
online applications for the D-Government SharePoint Framework respectively.
The operationalization of X-Road has brought the Management Optimization as thebest indicators for Estonia. X-Road enables secure Internet-based data exchange
between the state’s information systems. Not only state’s information system but alsoprivate sector can take the benefits of X-Road. In addition to that, citizen uses X-Roadseamlessly by using Citizen ID, due to the fact that interaction with government is
considerably simple through Online Participation Portal. As a result, the e-Participation
indicator for Estonia places the second-best performer. The situation is similar to Online
Service indicator that sets the third best performer. Despite the excellent score on thesethree best indicators; Estonia still has weakness on utilizing the emerging ICT.
Emerging ICT is the new indicator in the year 2016 ranking. Also, this new technology;
Cloud Computing, Big Data, and IoT are still the new challenges for government due totheir concerns about security. Since many countries are still attempting to take theoptimum benefit of emerging ICT, there are many rooms for improvement in thisdomain.
3. D-Government Ranking in Top 10 Countries with Highest GDP in the World
Highest GDP Group

Highest GDP GroupNoCountry

Score

No

Country

Score

1

USA

87.117

6

France65.911

2

Japan

81.236

7

Italy62.707

3

Canada77.425

8

Russia58.4494UK

74.214

9

China

52.8655Germany

67.212

10

Brazil50.475

Table 9: D-Government Ranking with Highest GDP GroupIn the group, USA, Japan, Canada, UK, and Germany are ranked for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd,
4th, and 5th place respectively. In the top 5, Germany is a new country compared with thelast year of ranking. In the attempts to promote for publishing government datasets andinformation, early 2015, German Government presented “The General Government’s
16National Action Plan to implement the G8 Open Data Charter”. By doing this thegovernment put into action one of its pledges to maintain the top position in Open
Government ranking indicator. In the bottom of the ranking group, there are still Russia,
China, and Brazil. They ranked in 8th, 9th, and 10th place respectively. Brazil is now still
struggling to improve the efficiency of the public policy and service for societies via
D-Government and tries to improve efficiency and transparency of the management
process through giving an opportunity for its citizens to access government informationand to participate in some political administrative decisions.
As one of the advanced D-Government nations, Japan keeps its leading impetus at theTOP10ofranking.Astheaforementionedsituation,Japan governmenthasbuiltasophisticatedpromotion system for D-Government initiatives and precise GCIO regimes into every rankof government (Central and local government; different government agencies) to assure theimplementation and evaluation process of D-Government initiatives. It can be reported onhigh scores on “Government CIO” and “D-Government Promotion”. Japan also continues
to update its online service system as the objective of initiatives to simplify administrative
procedures and working systems. However, National Portal seems to be the only weak point
for D-Government in Japan. (http://www.japan.go.jp/) Some basic information including
demographic data and introduction to Japan political situation has been provided at the site,
but it still needs much more necessary functions to serve visitor’s needs rather than providing
information only. In consideration of the coming Tokyo Olympic Games that massive visitors
would choose national portal as a reference, it is a chance and challenge at the same time
for Japan government to reconsider that what is the appropriate way to provide informationand deliver e-service to Japanese and non-Japanese through the internet.

V. D-Government Ranking by Regions
1. Ranking in Asia-Pacific Countries
Asia-Pacific Countries

Asia-Pacific Countries

Asia-Pacific Countries

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1Singapore

91.057

7

Thailand

65.200

13

Malaysia

56.386

2

Japan

81.236

8

HK SAR

63.695

14

China

52.865

3

New Zealand

75.0419

Macau

61.14515

Vietnam

50.5404South Korea

74.828

10

Indonesia

58.032

16

Brunei49.791

5

Taiwan73.224

11

Philippines

57.346

17

Pakistan

40.621

6

Australia

68.396

12

India

57.07118

Fiji

33.897

Table 10: D-Government Ranking in Asia-Pacific Countries
Singapore, Japan, and South Korea are three leaders of countries in this group.
They also are in the top 10 countries in the overall ranking. Even South Korea ranked in17the 8th in total ranking, but it has a good position in Asia-Pacific countries. Followed the
top three countries are New Zealand, Chinese Taipei, and Australia. They ranked 4th, 5th,
and 6th respectively. Chinese Taipei has great performance on the indicator of “Opengovernment”, showing government’s effort actions to achieve the goals that have beenemphasized in aforementioned national plans. As a matter of fact, Transparency,
Accountability or E-democracy has always remained social focus in the society.
Australia has shown incredible progress over the past few years in developing its
digital government efforts and has quickly become one of the leading innovators in thisarea. The addition of the Digital Transformation Agency this past year was one major
addition in the past year, and it appears to be primed to continue to compete with othertop governments in the coming years. Australia is also a leader in e-Participation, and its
mandatory voting policy provides an impetus for the government to ensure that it issimple and easy for each citizen to participate fully in the democratic process.
In the bottom of this group are China, Vietnam, Brunei, Pakistan, and Fiji. They arein the same places compared with the ranking last year. They ranked in 14th, 15th, 16th,
17th, and 18th place respectively. Vietnam has its highest score on Management
Optimization among them, which reflects the efforts of government in utilizing ICT instate administration bodies’ operations. The Resolution No. 36a / NQ-CP issued by theGovernment on October 2015 identify general visions on D-Government such as
promoting the development of D-Government; improve the quality and efficiency of theactivities of State agencies to serve citizens and businesses better. However, online
service delivery is still very limited, despite a high rate of Internet penetration. Most of
the online services are at interactive level, calling for necessary activities of thegovernment to boost the administrative reform process. Lack of consistent direction in
D-Government implementation, especially in local governments, resulted in the highfragmentation in D-Government initiatives and impedes collaboration and data sharing
among agencies. Cyber security is another weak point of the country as the lack ofnecessary security mechanisms and legal framework made online transactions become
more vulnerable to cyber threats. Although there has been some progress from theVietnamese government on D-Government development, the outcome is still far frommeeting expectations. This implies that the government should pay attention not only totechnology investments but also to other indispensable determinants such as leadershipcommitment, legislative framework, inter-cooperation among government agencies andstrict supervision from independent bodies.
2. Ranking in Americas Countries
Americas Countries

Americas Countries

Americas Countries

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1

USA

87.117

5

Brazil50.475

9

Colombia

43.09918

2

Canada77.425

6

Argentina

45.776

10

Venezuela

38.946

3

Chile

53.6107Peru45.702

11

Costa Rica

34.2004

Mexico53.4418

Uruguay

44.847

Table 11: D-Government Ranking in Americas Countries
Waseda D-Government ranking covers 11 Americas countries, in which both USA
and Canada are ranked in the first and the second place respectively, followed by Chile,
Mexico, and Brazil for the 3rd, 4th, and 5th place. Chile has achieved its D-Government
success due to three main factors: a continuous long-term strategy, efficient
policy-making and its modern socioeconomic qualities. Good D-Government systems inChile have engaged people to a good level of e-participation, but this certainly does notmean that there is a better overall democratic process. Other factors – such as citizen’s
knowledge and understanding of policies that concern them – must be taken into
consideration to find integral solutions. It is necessary to inform citizens and provide
proper education in use of the new tools to see major benefits offered by these newopportunities.
Canada has kept its pioneer position among other countries in providing advanced
e-services to citizens, which has a splendid one-stop service system endeavoring toembrace all the information and services that citizens or enterprises need at one unified
place. Massive contents have been divided into very plain and concise catalogs andusers can always go to the destination directly through humanized introduction. Also,
citizens are easy to interact with government agencies due to straightforward
communication channels. That’s why Canada has extremely good performance on theindicators of both “Online Service” and “E-participation”. As one of the leading nationsin D-Government area, Canada is still expected to get more scores on the latest indicator
for the usage of new technologies, which is to have an efficient model of adopting
emerging technologies such as Cloud Computing or IoT for developing countries tolearn from in the future.
Colombia, Venezuela, and Costa Rica are placed at the bottom of this group.
Compared to the last year of ranking Uruguay escaped from the bottom of the ranking
group. Uruguay is performing well in open government initiatives. However, this survey
suggests that current efforts in e-participation are insufficient. Without any efforts toincrease the citizen awareness on D-Government, the huge investment in developing
D-Government in Uruguay could become meaningless where citizens do not use the
e-Services.
3. Ranking in European Countries
EU Countries
No

Country

EU Countries
Score

No

Country

19

EU Countries
Score

No

CountryScore

1Denmark

88.7398

Norway66.861

15

Portugal

62.721

2

Estonia

81.1989Netherlands

66.78316

Italy

62.7073

UK

74.214

10

Finland

66.77217

Czech

60.998

4

Austria70.929

11

France65.91118

Spain

58.804

5

Sweden70.234

12

Ireland65.83419

Poland56.317

6

Iceland68.077

13

Belgium

65.18920

Romania55.947

7

Germany

67.212

14

Switzerland

63.78821

Lithuania

46.956

Table 12: D-Government Ranking in European Countries
Denmark, Estonia, and the UK are still in the top three countries compared to thelast year of ranking. They ranked in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place respectively. Followed byAustria in the 4th place, Sweden in the 5th, and Iceland in the 6th place. In the middle ofgroup, Norway slept down 2 steps compared to the ranking last year. Finland andFrance are also going down compared to the 2016 ranking. In the bottom of the groupare Czech, Spain, Poland, Romania, and Lithuania. They ranked in 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th,and 21st place respectively.
The UK is remaining one of the best groups on the performance of D-Governmentarea. Most of the indicators are at the very high scores which reflect a well-developed
D-Government situation. The main focus of digital government strategy is on how to
improve users’ experience with online services and reduce the digital divide. Being oneof the countries with a high level of D-Government development, the UK government
actually did not need to put many efforts on broadcasting D-Government initiatives.
Instead, a bunch of policies and guidelines were developed to uniform all
D-Government initiatives such as Guidelines for UK Government Websites, Quality
Framework for UK Government Website Design, D-Government Metadata Standard
Version 3.0, e–Government Interoperability Framework and so on.
The UK government is aiming to enhance public services quality by issuing theDigital by Default Service Standard which mandates all government agencies to follow
when developing new digital services. This standard covering 5 different stages ofservice development: discovery, alpha, beta, live and retirement. As the result, thecountry has reached a very high rank on online service delivery indicator. Having a highlevel of capabilities in technology, infrastructure, and telecommunication, the UK
Government has a great opportunity to reap the benefits from emerging technologies
such as Big Data or Internet of Things to transform the national economy and citizens’life.
4. Ranking in Africa, Middle East, and CIS Countries
Africa, Middle East & CIS

Africa, Middle East & CIS

20

Africa, Middle East & CIS

NoCountry

Score

No

Country

Score

No

Country

Score

1

Israel

62.949

6

Oman

53.426

11

Morocco43.787

2

Russia58.499

7

Kazakhstan

52.476

12

Tunisia42.9863

UAE

57.295

8

Saudi Arabia

51.00613

Kenya

38.705

4

Turkey55.527

9South Africa

50.417

14

Egypt

37.7355Bahrain53.48010

Georgia49.59215

Nigeria37.443

Table 13: D-Government Ranking in Africa, Middle East, and CIS Countries
The 2017 Waseda D-Government ranking covers 6 countries from Africa, 5countries from the Middle East, and 4 countries from CIS. The leading countries in thisgroup are Israel, Russia, and UAE, followed by Turkey and Bahrain in the 4th and 5thplace respectively. Compared to the ranking last year, UAE jumped into the top three. In
the middle of the group, there is no significant change in their position. In the bottom of
the group are still Kenya, Egypt, and Nigeria. They are ranked in 13th, 14th, and 15th
place respectively.
In Israel, all of the governmental and military institutions which address the cyberthreat will be transferred to the city of Beer Sheva. Israel also acceded to the Budapest
Cybercrime Convention in 2013. The government will continue to support othercooperation mechanisms that contribute to harmonizing cyber defense tools. In Israel,
they believe that cyber is not just a threat, but rather an opportunity for creative thought
and economic growth. As the reliance on the Internet and the virtual realm increases, theneed for cyber defense will only grow.
In Russia, the maturity of services provided through the one-stop portal is not yet
uniform among the country regions and is expected to be steadily enhanced. The
government aims at least 70% of services to be available through the portal by 2018.
Other plans include ensuring the services are available irrespective of geographicallocation, provision of several channels for service access including mobile access, theinternet, call centers and on-site service machines. E-Health systems are expected to be
optimized and integrated expanding the services available through one-stop
D-Government portal to include requests for sick-leave certificates, electronicprescriptions, and electronic inquiries.

VI.

New Trends of Digital Government- 5 Highlights in 2017

Highlights of the remarkable trends of Digital Government in 2017 are as five
topics as below. There are well connected each other to support the excellent digital
government activities and interrelated with as a part of the Digital Government ranking
survey. Five highlights mentioned will be the most important for understanding the
2017trends of digital economy and innovation.
21

1. Mobile Government
1.1 Outline
In the context of pervasive digital applications in most areas of our daily life, theeconomy is shifting to a new form namely the digital economy. In the digital economy,
most business transactions are borderless, considerably fast, and secure through theutilization of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Digital Governmentis one of the platforms for the government to actively participate in the digital economy.
Digital Government encompasses the usage of ICT in government institution to deliver
governmental services to government’s stakeholders, i.e., citizens (G2C), businessenterprises (G2B), and other government agencies (G2G). Digital Government is able toimprove the quality of governmental activities. For taking the optimum benefit ofDigital Government, governments have primarily focused on the Internet as a mean ofservice provisioning.
Digital Government has been applied for a long time in most countries around theworld with different level, method, and application among them; from least-developed
countries to developed countries. In the least developed countries, governments havefocused on building telecommunication infrastructure. In the developing countries, theymainly focus on the implementation plans and Digital Government roadmap for eachyear or a certain period, or on upgrading the network system by raising the proportionof Internet users and broadband connections. On another hand, the developed countries
tend to focus on promoting new online services and introducing online services at thehighest level to customers.
Mobile Government sometimes referred an m-Government as the extension of
Digital Government to mobile platforms, as well as the strategic use of government
services and applications which made possible of using cellular/mobile telephones,
laptop computers, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and wireless internet infrastructure.
Mobility is no longer a technological revolution. It is more about how businesses andgovernments can provide a better social infrastructure through mobile applications andservices. Adoption of mobility, therefore, is an indispensable asset for the public sector
in meeting the demands of citizens. While Digital Government is an important steptaken by many governments, the provisions of services through mobile technologies
become compulsory. M-Government emerges as the next big wave in the process of ICT
use in the public sector even if supplemented activities to Digital Government. Mobil
Digital Government is primarily concerned with the study of this major social andtechnological transformation in the public sector.
In recent years, the number of smartphones sold in the market is increasing. They
have gradually replaced the first mobile generation, along with the rapid development oftechnology for improving connectivity and quality (4G, LTE) on a smartphone. We can22assert that the smartphones completely replace the PC in the future. With the gradualshift from Digital Government to M-Government it will bring the highest efficiency forboth suppliers and users. These services can have a major impact include e-education,e-health, transportations, mobile payment services, as well as location based services.
It is found that, with the application of new mobile technologies, Digital
Government services have been raised at a higher level of development. The largest
utility in the application of m-government is the citizens. And, the governments areconstantly connected (online) which makes the deployment of new services by thegovernment is faster and more efficient. The application of m-government also createsmany advantages for the universal service, especially to the remote areas,
M-government also reduces the digital divide in developing countries, increasetransparency in government operations, reduce corruption and always create aconnection government with grassroots, this increases people's trust in government.
In developing countries, the number of mobile-broadband subscriptions continues
to grow, reaching a penetration rate of close to 41%. The total number ofmobile-broadband subscriptions is expected to reach 3.6 billion by end 2016. The figure
below shows the Mobile-broadband subscriptions in over the world.

Figure 1: Mobile Broadband Subscriptions (Source: ITU)

23

Figure 2: Fix and mobile broadband prices, PPP (Source: ITU)

Figure 3: Mobile Broadband Services as a percentage of GNI (Source: ITU)
Mobile broadband have become popular than fixed broadband services. By the endof 2015, average mobile broadband prices corresponded to 5.5% of GNI. The average
price of a basic fixed-broadband plan is more than twice as high as the average price ofa comparable mobile broadband plan. In Least Developed Countries, fixed-broadband
services are on average more than three times as expensive as mobile-broadband
services.
Internet bandwidth remains unequally distributed across the world (Source: ITU).
By early 2016, total international Internet bandwidth had reached 185’000 Gbit/s, up
from 30’000 compared to 2008. Africa has the lowest international connectivity of all
regions: there is twice as much bandwidth per inhabitant available in Asia and thePacific, four times as much in the CIS region, eight times as much in the Americas andmore than twenty times as much in Europe. Lack of international connectivity is a majorbottleneck in the Internet infrastructure of LDCs.

24

Figure 4: Internet bandwidth remains unequally distributed across the world(Source: ITU)
1.2 Typical Example
1.2.1 Singapore
Singapore is one of some developed countries which have been applied ICT
successful in the field of Digital Government and especially the application on asmartphone. In Singapore, mobile penetration is nearly 98 percent. Therefore, thegovernment of Singapore can easily deliver mobile service to all citizens (G2C),
business (G2B), and other stakeholders (G2G).
In Singapore, a Mobile Government (m-Government) has become a part of theeGov2015 master plan which was introduced in June 2011. When issuing
m-Government, the Singapore government wants to increase the reach and richness ofgovernment e-services to our customers by deploying more feature-rich and innovative
mobile services.
Nowadays, Singapore has more than 300 mobile services that enable the citizen to
obtain citizenry services using mobile phones. Stereotype of such services are social
security services such as (1) personal account information, (2) SMS alerts for tax, (3)passport renewals and oversee trips, (4) notification for examination result for students,(5) Checking the latest traffic conditions for motorists, and (6) notification for receiving
business license status.
There have been numerous mobile applications in Singapore. Some of them are
SLA OneMap. This application is an integrated online platform for location-based
services. It provides reliable, timely and accurate information by real-time. The next is
SCDF's Mobile Phone Technology. SCDF is available iPhone and runs in IOS. It covers
25essential emergency and fire safety, for non-iPhone users, they can turn to SCDF Ready
Mobile that presents the emergency advisories in text and animation forms. The third is
NEA, it is an application for providing real-time information on weather and receives
push notification alerts when raining at certain locations in Singapore. The next service
is PUB's SMS Alert. This application helps citizens who want to keep tabs on the waterlevel in a canal or drain at a designated location, and OneService Mobile App. Thisapplication seems a gateway service where members of the public to give their feedback
on municipal issues; this application is one of part for citizen-centric. Over 200
frequently requested statistics spanning across 27 data categories, including Population,
Prices, Labor, Manufacturing, Services and International Trade are available for access
via this mobile app. Users can personalize the order of the data categories according to
your preference and save the changes for future launches.
1.2.2 South Korea
In South Korea, there are over 86% of households are using the broadband internet,
while 84.8% of the citizen use internet (2013), the number of mobile subscribers are
98% of the citizen.
Mobile government vision in Korea is to need the m-Government comprehensive
strategic plan for Smarter, more Developed Government by minimizing trial and error,
maximizing citizen satisfaction and developing government productivity.
In South Korea, the Korean government has strategic plan for m-Government
where they focus on to (1) establish the Wireless Network Infrastructure for the wholecountry, (2) to transform Digital Government to Smartphone-based m-Government
Services (transform the legacy Digital Government services to Integrated, simplified &connected mobile services-Provide the mobile gateway), (3) to find the way to solve themobile issues, (4) to public database & services open to not only public sector but also
to private sector, and (5) to establish the Mobile Service Center Construction.
1.2.3 Estonia
According to Waseda Digital Government ranking, Estonia is a country which thedevelopment of ICT is very fast, not only in Digital Government activities but also themobile application service to citizens. In 2013, Estonia has 80 percent of the population
used the Internet until 2014 83 percent of households have internet capabilities.
Especially, all Estonia schools are connected to the Internet.
In Estonia, the wireless access is cover in more than 1007 public places; some ofthem are free of charge. In 2015, 98 percent of transactions of a bank are conducted byonline. In term of e-Tax, in 2015 Estonia has over 95 percent income tax is declared
through the Internet.

26

In term of mobile services, mobile penetration is quite high in Estonia; the numberof a contract of the mobile phone is more than 139 per 100 people. In Estonia, there has
been a government service that allows the citizens to pay for car parking through amobile phone. This service is one of the numerous mobile services in Estonia.
1.2.4 USAThe U.S. Government’s mobile efforts are led by the Office of Citizen Services andInnovative Technologies (OCSIT), which is a part of the General Services Administration(GSA). OCSIT runs the website digitalgov.gov, and its Mobile Program Management Office(Mobile PMO) provides tips, training, and tools for government agencies to provide morevalue to citizens. One major focus, especially since the beginning of the age of smartphones,
has been to offer a range of mobile applications and services to provide support wherever
people may go.
For example, citizens can download the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s(FEMA) mobile application to receive information, tips, and instant emergency alerts directlyfrom the agency. Users can also use the app to submit their disaster reports and photos using
GPS technology.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently announced testing for amobile app version of theironline employment status verification system e­Verify. This federal
system checks the immigration status of a prospective employee, and it is a required partof the hiring process in some states. The new mobile app offers the ability to use the built­incamera on the mobile device to send a photograph of the documentation for verification,
simplifying the process.
The Department of State, the Department of Agriculture, the Census Bureau, the Internal
Revenue Service, and many more departments and agencies offer applications for both Apple
and Android smartphones. The Department of State’s featured app is called Smart Traveler.
It allows users to view visa requirements, relevant local laws, embassy and hospital locations,and travel warnings regarding various countries in a user­friendly manner. While all of thisprocess for regular travelers and it provides SNS integration.
A recent OCSIT initiative was to establish the U.S. Digital Registry, along with an API(Application Program Interface) for end users. The Digital Registry is an official listing of
all the social network accounts and mobile applications issued by the U.S. Government. This
official listing is important because of a lot of copycat sites and accounts purporting to speak
for the government. The registry will allow each platform to automatically verify theauthenticityofaspecificapporaccount.Theimplicationsforthird­partymobileappdevelopers
are significant. For example, a developer could create an app that consolidates feeds fromvarious government agencies(FEMA,the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA), the National Weather Service (NWS), etc.), and compile that information into auser­friendly and personalized feed.
27

The official Open Data site “Data.gov” continues to showcase third-party mobile
applications that make use of open data sets available on the website. The range of applications
that make use of these data sets include applications to find the cheapest gas stations, to monitor
the effects of climate change, to check the source and nutritional information of food, to findinformation on local schools and universities, and much more. The sheer variety of third-party
apps that make use of these data sets provides a good example of the importance of making
government data open and available to the public.

2. AI and IoT for Digital Government
2.1 Outline
The concept “Internet of Things - IoT” appears recently and becomes a hot topic in
the next ICT development. Since it was born, we should consider changing thedefinition of a PC. A new era of computer is open and shifts from desktop workstations
to mobile phones and, now, to everyday objects, inspiring the term “Internet of Things.”
where any device can be Internet-enabled, linking it to additional computing power andanalytic capabilities that make it “smart.”
Typically, IoT is expected to offer advanced connectivity of devices, systems, andservices that goes beyond machine-to-machine (M2M) communications and covers avariety of protocols, domains, and applications. The interconnection of these embedded
devices (including smart objects), is expected to usher in automation in nearly all fields,
while also enabling advanced applications like a smart grid, and expanding to the areas
such as smart cities.
In term of delivering services, Digital Government has many practical contributions
to citizens, however in many countries, especially for least developed countries anddeveloping countries, the governments are difficult to spread services to all citizens due
to lack of communications, connections, and end-users. With an application of IoT into
Digital Government services, the government can solve this issue. With the ability toconnect multiple devices, through different approaches, the government has the ability
to expand services in order to be connected to make services better and more efficient
government requirements. Applying IoT in the government operations enables thegovernment to respond better and faster in the case of emergency (ex: early warning of
natural disasters system, climate changes), deliver value to citizens, and making security
a priority.
The Internet of Things offers new ways to make citizens smarter, more efficient andmore informed – while, at the same time, delivering cost savings to the government.
Connected infrastructure – from toll roads to parking places to utility meters – delivers
28real-time “actionable” information around costs, condition, usage, and utilization to
citizens and government alike. Citizens can instantaneously find parking or cut back onelectricity usage, while government can allocate the right resources at the right time tocharge fees, deliver services, and manage public infrastructure.
Furthermore, the IoT applications in public sector also reduce the operating costs,
to help the government sharing data and reuse data among government agencies. Basedon these activities, the governments build easily smart solutions to develop ICT as wellas to create new services to citizens.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) application has been increasing in the last five years
with the help of the rise of IoT and Big Data Analytic. These three newly terminologies
in the ICT are enabling the institution to gain insight from any data available in thecloud as well as on premise. Insight-driven business becomes a new trend in researchand ICT application not only for businesses but also for public sectors. AI helps
organizations build smarter infrastructures by reducing investment costs, using analysis
tools to optimize input, create stream information and sharing output data to use shared
database inside organizations. It will provide a basis platform for decision-making
processes and prediction of business results. To build flexibility system reduces the
input load, and revolutionize the way we work with smart devices based on cloudcomputing. Therefore, it is a useful and indispensable tool for every organization.

Figure 5: M2M subscriptions per 100 mobile-cellular subscriptions (Source: ITU)
Based on available data, there were 22 mobile-cellular subscriptions for eachmachine-to-machine (M2M) subscription worldwide at the beginning of 2015. The
29

countries with the highest M2M penetration rates are highly industrialized, advanced
economies, including the Northern European countries such as Sweden, Norway,
Finland and Denmark (Source: ITU).
2.2 AI and IoT
IoT has been referred as a concept where all devices can be connected to theInternet for sharing information among these connected devices thus maximizing thethroughput of information transmission. According to IDC’s research, IoT industry is
projected to generate around $ 6 trillion in 2025. In the public administration, IoT isremarkably effective if applied thoroughly. These include IoT applications in the publicmanagement such as Disaster Management and Emergency Management. In the
Disaster management, sharing and transmission of information are crucial. In this issue,
the government can fully control and prevent damage caused by implementing early
warning systems, such as Tsunami warning, earthquake, or forest fire warning by setting
up a sensory network and connect them to the Internet to control simultaneously
synchronized data sharing among the government agencies.
One of the applications of IoT is to build smart cities. It can be seen as the mosteffective in implementing smart city. IoT applications that leverage ubiquitousconnectivity, big data and analytics are enabling Smart City initiatives all over the world.
These new applications introduce tremendous new capabilities such as the ability toremotely monitor, manage and control devices, and to create new insights andactionable information from massive streams of real-time data. IoT offerings aretransforming cities by improving infrastructure, creating more efficient andcost-effective municipal services, enhancing public transportation, reducing traffic
congestion, and keeping citizens safe and more engaged in the community.
In the application of Digital Government, e-Health is one of the services to be
deployed. The applications and techniques in e-Health are increasing. IoT is one of thetechnologies that are essential in e-Health. The IoT application in healthcare, also is
known as Internet of Medical Things (healthcare IoT). It is the collection of medical
devices and applications that connect to healthcare IT systems through online computer
networks. Medical devices equipped with Wi-Fi allow the machine-to-machinecommunication that is the basis of IoMT. IoMT devices link to cloud platforms on
which captured data can be stored and analyzed. As is the case with the larger Internetof Things (IoT), there is now a possible application of IoMT than before because many
consumer mobile devices are built with Near Field Communication (NFC) radio
frequency identification (RFID) tags that allow the devices to share information with IT
systems. The practice of using IoMT devices for remotely monitoring patients in theirhomes is commonly referred to the telemedicine.

30

By improving IoT in transportation, it helps many cities to have begun smart
transportation initiatives to optimize their public transportation routes, create safer roads,
reduce infrastructure costs, and alleviates traffic congestion as more people move into
cities. For developing countries, IoT helps to solve a congestion of the traffic. Also, IoT
enables rapid dissemination of information regarding the situation of road.

Figure 6: Insights-Driven Businesses will steal $1.2 trillion annually by 2020
(Source: Forrester, Economic Intelligence Unit, Morningstar, and PitchBook Data)
The figure above shows that AI will drive the insights revolution to all other data
points is shown the estimation and prediction for 2017 (Source: Economic Intelligence
Unit, Morningstar, and PitchBook Data). In 2017, these technologies will increasebusinesses’ access to data, broaden the types of data that can be analyzed, and raise thelevel of sophistication of the resulting insight.
Nowadays, the application of ICT in daily activities is increasing significantly. It
requires all organization and individual to understand and have perfect skill on using
ICT application. Therefore, everyone has to strive to change and to improve their skills
to meet the need of the requirement. With the IoT applications deeper in every field, IoT
has created a new environment to promote and enhance the development of humanresources.
One of the most applications of IoT is Web of Things - Government 3.0.
Government 3.0 is a new paradigm for government operation to promote active sharingof public information and removal of barriers existing among government ministries forbetter collaboration. The ultimate goal is to secure the driving force for national
administration and to provide personalized services to individual citizens, and at thesame time, generating more jobs and supporting creative economy.
31

Mobility is no longer a technological revolution. It is more about how businesses
and governments can provide a better social infrastructure through mobile applications
and services. Adoption of mobility, therefore, is an indispensable asset for the public
sector in meeting the demands of citizens. The Web of Things takes advantage ofmobile devices' and sensors' ability to observe and monitor their environments,
increasing the coordination between things in the real world and their counterparts on
the Web. The Web of Things will produce large volumes of data related to the physicalworld, and intelligent solutions are required to enable connectivity, inter-networking,and relevance between the physical world and the corresponding digital world
resources.
Government 3.0 pursues transparency of government. Open government regarding
data and information means the transition from supply-driven transparency (reactive,
responsive disclosure of public information) to demand-driven transparency (proactive
sharing). Government 3.0 is intended to “make information sharing more equitable andtransparent between the central government, local governments, government agencies
and the public.”
For the Digital Government activities, AI application is to improve the efficiency of
online services, which can help developing and least developed countries to catch up
with developed countries, minimize digital divide, and facilitate connectivity. The use of
AI in the public administration helps the state agencies to minimize the investment
process through the use of a common database, increasing the efficiency of state
management, and the transmission of services. For example, in Japan, the country with
the number of aging people is very high; AI not only makes delivering services tocitizens easier and faster but also helps elderly people to control the technology andeasy to access new services. Also, AI is truly effective in managing disaster anddirecting people to a safe life. The figure below shows the economic impact of AI and it
indicates that AI has the potential to double annual economic growth rates (percent)Figure 7: The Economic Impact of AI (Source: Accenture and Frontier Economics)
2.3 Typical Example
32

2.3.1 South Korea
Korea has been a leader on this front. The Korean Government began to channel
resources into laying a Digital Government foundation in the late 1970s. Through theFive National Computer Network project of the early 1980s, the Comprehensive Plan
for Korea Information Infrastructure Establishment project, and the National Basic
Information System project in the late 1980s, the Korean government established ahigh-speed communications network and stored vital government records—resident
registration, real estate, and vehicle records—in a digital format. In the years 2000 and
2001, the use of information technology in the government expanded. The Special
Committee for Digital Government set forth eleven major Digital Government
initiatives within the same year. The term “Government 3.0” has garnered muchattention from the public since the 2012 presidential election in Korea.
In 2013, the Korean government announced Government 3.0 as a new paradigm for
Digital Government integration. The term Government 2.0 indicated the governmental
use of Web 2.0 technologies because it represented the use of second-generation Web
technologies in government. Government 3.0 in Korea takes this a step further. This
new paradigm provides high-quality information and services customized to serve theunique needs of individuals with a wide array of topics including employment
opportunities, weather, traffic, education, welfare, and finance. Government 3.0 evengoes beyond the technological promise of Web 3.0. The Park Administration envisioned
Government 3.0 as a means of ushering in a new age of hope and happiness for all
Koreans. The Korean Government 3.0 initiative seeks to accomplish two high-levelgoals: providing services customized for and tailored to various needs and demands, andcreating new jobs by discovering development engines. All these efforts are supportedby the four core values of openness, sharing, communication, and collaboration.
2.3.2 USA
U.S. Government investment in Internet of Things (IoT) technology reached an
all-time high last year and is expected to continue to grow in the years to come. In thefiscal year 2015, the federal government spent $8.8 billion, an increase of more than $1
billion compared to the previous year, and estimates for the years to show similar
increases. A report from Business Intelligence, it estimates that there will be a total of
22.5 billion IoT devices by 2021, which suggests that the government will have asignificant impetus to utilize this technology for official purposes. The public sector isalready the second-largest adopter of IoT technologies, following private businesses.
Still, many analysts believe that federal, state, and local governments are just beginningto tap into the potential benefits of IoT technologies.
The first and most important priority for IoT in government is to reduce costs andmake governmental processes more efficient. One of the most basic ways to accomplish
33

this is to install IoT-supported smart-building applications in government facilities,
which is the aim of the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Smart-Buildings
initiative. Implemented in 2012, the project has so far installed sensors throughout
nearly 100 energy-intensive government buildings. Simple motion detectors that shut
off lights when no employee is nearby have been in place for years, but moresophisticated IoT-enabled devices are capable of detecting temperatures throughout theentire building and adjusting the climate control in the building accordingly. So far, the
GSA estimates that $15 million dollars is saved each year because of these programs.
Another important application of IoT is as a resource to collect and analyze massive
amounts of user data. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is agovernmental organization at the forefront of IoT Data research. The Administration isusing satellite technology to analyze data cohesively collected from IoT-enabled devices.
This IoT data could also be used to provide up-to-the-second analyses of massive
amounts of data, available remotely via cloud computing. The goal of these newtechnologies is to maintain the United States’ edge in IoT development (the majority of
IoT companies were based in the United States as of 2016, even while it lags behind
Singapore and other Asian and European countries regarding smart cities and otherfactors).
Though the potential benefits of IoT technology are manifold, the technology alsocomes with a great deal of risk. Already, privacy advocates are worried about the
implications of IoT and the massive amounts of data available regarding civil liberties
and personal privacy. The Director of U.S. National Intelligence, James Clapper,
publicly announced that intelligence services might someday use IoT “for identification,
surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or gaining
access to networks or user credentials.” Many citizens and government officials alikefind these new capabilities concerning, and the government has accordingly invested in
making sure American IoT infrastructure stable and secure. These privacy and security
concerns are also responsible for the relatively cautious approach to adoption witnessedin the government sector as compared with the private sector.

34

A strong entrepreneurial business climate andadvanced infrastructure position the United States tobenefit from the economic potential of AI. Accenture
research estimates a significant increase in UnitedStates’ GVA growth, from 2.6 percent to 4.6 percent in
2035. The situation explains an additional US$8.3
trillion GVA in 2035—equivalent to today’s combined
GVA of Japan, Germany, and Sweden.

Figure 8: AI impacts on National Economic Growth in the US (Source: Accenture)
2.3.3 Singapore
AI is the trending tech topic of the year and Singapore’s government. It aims tobring together government agencies, universities and institutes, investors, industry
people, and startups to advance AI research, development, and practical use in
Singapore.
AI.SG brings together six of the country’s most prestigious government-related
players: the National Research Foundation (NRF), the recently founded Smart Nation
and Digital Government Office, the Economic Development Board, the Infocomm andMedia Development Authority, SGInnovate, and healthcare IT firm Integrated Health
Information Systems (IHiS). NRF said it would invest up to US$107 million over the
next five years in the project.
3. Smart City
3.1 Outline
This concept of implementing the ICT for regional development by improving thequality of life in certain areas has raised the attention of government, academia, andbusiness enterprises. The use of new ICT concepts such as Internet-of-Things and Big
Data is mandatory in developing the smart city.
A smart city is a concept associated with IoT, in the context of Digital Government
services, it considers with the concept of e-governance. In the public administration, tobuild smart city projects, the government needs to consider the following key issues: (1)35

Building broadband ICT infrastructure, (2) Using smart devices, (3) Developing
Web-based application and e-Services, and (4) Open Government data.
The purpose of the Smart Cities is to drive economic growth and improve thequality of life of people by enabling local area development and harnessing technology,
especially technology that leads to Smart outcomes. Area- based development willtransform existing areas, including slums, into better-planned ones, thereby improving
the livability of the whole City. New areas (green field) will be developed around cities
in order to accommodate the expanding population in urban areas. Application of Smart
Solutions will enable cities to use technology, information, and data to improve
infrastructure and services. Comprehensive development in this way will improve thequality of life, create employment and enhance incomes for all, especially the poor andthe disadvantaged, leading to inclusive Cities.
To build a smart city and associate it to the Digital Government services, thepolicymakers should consider the characteristics and features of the city. These features
include building healthcare community through the promotion of e-health services,
implementing e-education, developing mobile services for connectivity, accelerating
and improving the efficiency of the use of energy with particular emphasis on green andclean energy sources. Furthermore, building digital communication and giving asolution for ICT innovation.
3.2 Smart City for Digital Government
Smart cities revolve around the use of technology to deliver goods, reduce costs forservice providers, and allow cities to be better managed. With smart cities, e-governanceoffers the opportunity for governments to make their management of cities more timely
and beneficial to citizens mainly through the delivery of information and services.
3.3 Typical Example
3.3.1 China
Over the past years, “Smart City” has become a hot topic spreading around Chinesesociety, from top policy-designing organizations to ambitious private industries. On
August 2014, National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) published theannouncement named “Promoting Healthy Development of Smart City” to central
departments and local government administrations. The announcement has comprised
six sections and categorized into 15 specific sub-goals covering the items such as
general city-planning-making, public services, social management systems, modern
industrial development, intellectual infrastructure and protection, key information
resource utilization and sharing, IOT application, Clouding-Computing, Big Data,
information technologies integration, and cyber security. In the vein of “National
neo-urbanization plan (2014-2020)”, “Promoting Internet+ Action” and “Promoting
information consumption and domestic demand,” the announcement was vital for36leading public and private sectors stepping into Smart City. The basic consensus
regarding necessary fields in that society should double. According to theannouncement, a major group of smart cities should be established by 2020 to serve as aregional center that driving peripheral districts with a competitive advantage. The focusof the first group of center smart cities are mainly in four aspects: (1) Convenient public
services
including
education/culture/healthcare/employment/social
insurance/detection/transportation, etc. (2) Elaboration of city management. (3) Livable
environment, and (4) Intelligent infrastructure, in accordance with the 15 sub-goals.
In the wave of developing the city into more “smart” way, local governments are
enthusiastic to create a joint venture between the city and the private sector. There wasreport drawing the fancy and promising scene in a medium-sized city “Yinchuan” lays
northwest part of the country, where “facial recognition” and “smart rubbish bins” are ina smart use. More commonly, private car drivers are passing in and out of parking lot
without any process via automatic recognition camera scanning car itself, less and fewer
people are carrying wallets, instead one mobile phone equipped with applications(Wechat, etc) to pay all the bills or pass identity authentication in the commercial andadministrative course. New technologies are applied in the real daily life hastily in
China than other nations, which enables citizens to adapt every detailed aspect oftransformation of the smart city.
A progressive collaboration between local governments and the private
corporation as mentioned above could be seen as a motivation for emerging technology
application. Meanwhile, academia has made their moves to participate in thecooperation activities as well. Under the umbrella of top policy-making officials ininstance Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of China (MITC), Ministryof Science and Technology of China (MSTC), Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural
Development (MOHURD). Committee, association, and think-tank regarding smart city
issues are founded rapidly to support industrial development and the governmental
decision by handing deliberative schemes from experienced experts. Smart City
Conference and Exhibition have been held in China as well aiming to build an open
platform for officials, industry, and academia. Also, the exhibition was enhanced thecommunication and strengthened innovative collaborations among various sectors. Even
though it is a not a new thing, however, it has the latest merits attracting massive
attendance internationally. After all, it’s one of the big event —may become the largest
market all over the world in the future—that drives business excited and crazy which itis said that 500 smart cities are under designing and construction.
3.3.2 Indonesia
During the last decades, many cities in Indonesia enthusiastically apply the concept
of Smart City. These cities are willingly transforming from just a city to become a smart
city. Leaders of these cities would like to create the city that listens and understand the37society. They acknowledged that Digital Government alone is not enough for improving
the quality of life of the society. Among these cities that have established the smart city,
the cities are the frequently introduced cities, both Bandung and Surabaya.
Bandung Smart City
Luckily Bandung has a very good leadership in developing the smart city. Mayor ofBandung, Ridwan Kamil, perceives the smart city as the utilization of ICT to enable thecity for connecting, controlling, and monitoring the situation in a city. Using these threecomponents, a city would be able to improve the quality of public service delivery, theconvenience of living in the city, and to improve a competitiveness of a city.
Bandung City has established the Bandung Command Center (BCC). In BCC,
officers in Bandung City are able to monitor every pertinent object of Bandung City
such as the location of operational vehicles, a report from citizens related to theinfrastructure in Bandung City, and progress of project development. There are a lot ofapplications available for Bandung City’s citizens. SOCA, GAMPIL, and Sabilulungan
are some examples of applications that support the development of Bandung Smart City.
Moreover, for improving the safety in Bandung City, there is an app named “Panic
Button.” Using this app, people who witness or experience a threat can push the button.
The application will notify the nearest police station and local security (Satpol PP). The
expectation of this app to reduce criminal acts in Bandung City is high.

Picture 1. Bandung Command Center (Source: Bandung Local Government)
Not only Smart Living, but Bandung City also introduces Smart Branding. Someinitiatives under Smart Branding are the theme parks at every corner in Bandung City.
Park for aging people, park for watching a movie together, and park for those who feel
so lonely are some examples of these theme parks.

38Surabaya Smart City
Similar to Bandung City, Surabaya City has a very strong leadership from its mayor,
Tri Rismaharini. Risma, a calling name of Mayor of Surabaya, started the developmentof Surabaya Smart City since 2002. At that time, she introduces the use of ICT in thecity development. She enforces the ICT system to make the Surabaya City more
responsive to the citizens’ needs. Being responsive government is the foundation forbuilding a smart city.
Surabaya City adopted four stages in its Smart City development. At the first stage,
the project was focused on the technical installation. This stage includes theenhancement of internal government performance; Identification of Performance
Indicator, Deployment of ICT Infrastructure, and Implementation of e-procurement. The
second stage is the strengthening of social capital; citizens change management,
building trust, and defining the solution for city problems. The third stage is the period
of developing citizen-oriented applications such as e-health and e-toko (a small-scale
e-commerce that promotes the products from the villages). The fourth stage is theenhancement of ICT-based that follows the concept of smart city.
Indonesia Smart Nation Award
In 2015, Citiasia Center for Smart Nation (CCSN), conducted an assessment formeasuring the aspects of Smart Region Readiness. Up to now, this assessment is themost comprehensive assessment in Indonesia since it covers 93 cities, 412 districts, and34 provinces.
This assessment uses two indexes; Smart Region Readiness Index (SRRI) andSmart Region Index (SRI). SRRI uses five indicators “Nature, Structure, Infrastructure,
Superstructure, and Culture”. SRI uses six indicators “Smart Governance, Smart
Branding, Smart Economy, Smart Living, Smart Society, and Smart Environment”.
The top five cities in Smart Region Maturity Index are as follows:▪

City level: Surabaya City, Bandung City, Semarang City, Bekasi City, Depok
City▪

District level: Bogor, Sleman, Tangerang, Bantul, Banyuwangi▪

Province level: West Java, East Java, Central Java, DKI Jakarta, Bali

3.3.3 Smart Dubai
Dubai is a city and emirate in the United Arab Emirates. It is located on thesoutheast coast of the Persian Gulf and is the capital of the Emirate of Dubai, one of theseven emirates that make up the nation. Dubai has 4 million residents, but they comefrom 180 countries. Dubai is known for the most ICT application in term of smart cityand Digital Government activities in the Middle East. The Smart Dubai initiative,
39

formally undertaken in March 2014, aims to establish Dubai as the smartest city by
2017, driven by four key strategic pillars and spanning six dimensions classifying
initiatives citywide. It was born out of the visionary approach of Sheikh Mohammed
Bin Rashid to focus the city’s unified effort towards its most valued asset - its people
The Smart Dubai focuses on six smart sectors (1) Mobility Infrastructure, (2) ICT,(3) Environment, (4) Governance, (5) Living, and (6) Economy. For each sector, Dubai
government has some factors to identify and develop. In the smart mobility
infrastructure, they develop health infrastructure, transport infra, piped water, sanitation,
electricity, road infra, and building. In the development of ICT, they build network andaccess, services and platforms, information security and privacy, electromagnetic field.
In the environment, they focus on developing in the fields of water, soil and noise,energy, CO2 emissions, and air quality. For the administration, they build smart
governance by improving openness and public participation, social and gender equality,
income consumption and equality. For a smart living, they have a plan for education,
public safety security, and health. Furthermore, Dubai government is building the smart
economy by improving innovation and knowledge economy.
The vision of the smart Dubai is to make Dubai the happiest city on earth, main
dimensions of this strategy are to build economy, governance, and people. But at the
local government level, they focus on living (exceptional quality of live, accessible
education health care, culturally vibrant lifestyle) mobility (seamless, efficient transportof people and movement of ideas enabled by innovative infrastructure), andenvironment (sustainable technologies for the resource, population and asset
management for sustainability).
One of the most prominent applications in building a smart city is to establish an
open data platform. Dubai Data will stimulate a new data economy for the city,
unlocking opportunities and ultimately enriching the quality of life for all Dubai
stakeholders, including government departments, private organizations, investors,
residents, and visitors. It has been built on collaboration and promoting cooperation andco-creation in both the operations and outcomes of the initiative. An inclusive processfrom inception, city stakeholders were engaged throughout the strategy andimplementation process, with the aim to cultivate a culture of cross-sector sharing.
To build a smart city, the Dubai government created the new digital backbone
platform with four pillars, six dimensions, 100 initiatives and in planning they will have1000 smart services for citizens to 2020.
3.3.4 United Kingdom
The Manchester Smarter City Program has been developed to explore ways ofmaking the city work better through the use of technologies. The program takes things
that the city is already doing around transport, health, environment, and energy40efficiency and aims to encourage further investment, through supporting pilot projects
and working with partners in the universities, business, and the public sector.
Manchester Smarter City uses new technologies and ways of working to understand andoptimize city systems to change how the city functions to improve how people live,
work, play, move, learn and organize.
Manchester Smarter City focuses on six key themes to achieve better outcomes forthe city and its citizens, and profiles those projects and places that are contributing to
the Smart City. (1) Live, (2) Work, (3) Play, (4) Move, (5) Learn, and (6) Organize. To
investigate the smart city in Manchester, in this report we will unveil some importantfactors which lead Manchester is one of the smartest city in the UK.
Open Data Manchester is one of the applications to make Manchester become asmart city. Thanks to this project, the government agencies can share and connect thedata to others. It is very helpful in transportation control, weather information, and also
e-services implementation. Open Data Manchester drives forward an open data
ecosystem. Based on this project, the government is easy to develop city’s innovation
infrastructure and also create a lot of new services by using this platform and data.
SmartImpact is a network of cities. It is funded by the European Commission(http://urbact.eu/smartimpact) and led by Manchester City Council. It helps connect thecity together through a backbone network. This network has now been connected morethan ten cities in the Europe, includes Manchester City. One advantage of this network
is to minimize the risk and barriers to investment in building a smart city. It enables
cities to share the best apps for smart city development.
Centre for Digital Innovation (CDI) has been established as a response to the speedof change, bringing research, business, teaching and commercial activity under one roof.
The CDI enable graduates to have an entrepreneurial approach and providing a space
where SMEs, innovators and other can access the assets of the university, and work withearly career professionals.
Intelligent Lighting: the aim of this project is to replace 56000 luminaries (lightunits) to enable LED street lighting. It uses a centrally operated system using dedicatedwifi, each luminary uses a light array offering a wide spread of light on the “cool white”
spectrum for residential /traffic areas and “neutral white” in the city center. By applying
this project, the Manchester City reduces 60% of current £3.6m revenue costs inaddition to a projected forecast of 4% increase in the cost of electricity and reduction ofcarbon output to 8K tones.
CityVerve: The CityVerve Project brings together the latest Internet of Things (IoT)
technologies, deployed at city scale to deliver transformative benefits: new business andjobs for Manchester; better healthcare, transport, and education; safer streets; and moreengaged and empowered citizens. It was established in July 2016 with a two-year remit41

to demonstrate the capability of IoT applications and address barriers to deploying smart
cities, such as city governance, network security, user trust and adoption,interoperability, scalability and justifying the investment. Combining technology andbusiness model innovations, it will create a real-life blueprint for smart cities
worldwide.
3.3.5 Germany
Berlin is known as the place of effective ICT application and most extensive
compared to other cities. The ICT applications and deployment for smart city in Berlin
is implemented uniformly across at all sectors and government agencies as well as withthe participation of private sectors. To build Berlin become a smart city, the Berlin
government has also implemented a strategic framework at central government level
and also presented a lot of smart solutions such as smart administration and urban
society, smart housing, smart economy, smart mobility, smart infrastructure, and public
safety.
Smart administration and urban safety: In Germany, the structure of government isdivided into three levels: central government, regional government, and local
government. To deploy smart city in each region or city, it requires the governments
need to apply ICT in daily administration. Therefore, in Berlin, the government has aplan to speed up and simplify administrative processes. This process optimization andautomated control in closed systems of administration support human decision-making.
Smart services are, thanks to unified and standardized operating concepts, simple touse, familiar, easy to find, secure and certified. The government applies ICT in many
fields of administration such as the progressive digitalization of business processes bycreating a framework for the development of Digital Government within Berlin’s
administration for the years 2015 – 2017. Furthermore, they introduced Digital
Government law. The law aims to establish basic Digital Government norms which will
be able to help overcome the major obstacles created by the formal requirements ofadministrative law. Besides that, they encourage the online participation of urban
society by creating a new platform (mein.berlin.de) for introducing e-services to citizens.
The Berlin Senate officially approved the “One Stop City Berlin 2016” program which
services thematically, harmonizing business processes and increasing the number ofways to access administrative services. In 2016, the government introduced themodernization program “Service City Berlin 2016” for aiming to achieve the goal of
making Berlin’s administration more business- and citizen-friendly, transparent,
participatory and efficient. Especially, the government introduced “Open data”(www.daten.berlin.de) for free access and getting data. One of the most importantsolutions is they introduced smart leadership and smart staff. It means, they need tochange themselves first, and then apply it to citizens and businesses.
42

Smart housing, smart economy, and smart infrastructure: one of the solutions todevelop the smart city in Berlin is to develop smart infrastructure together with building
smart mobility, and smart economy. This is the indispensable overall element in thesmart city. For building a smart city, we need to have a strong telecommunications
infrastructure at the first place. Next, the ability to expand, such as the deployment ofsustainable systems, recycling management, Sustainable and climate-compatible energy
supply, uncoupling higher performance and higher energy consumption in technology
such as volumes of data, and also the speed and storage capacity of computers.
The innovation of economy is also attached to the development of the smart city in
Berlin. Berlin has also improved the economy to conform to the current requirements,
as well as in building a smart city. The reforms mentioned is the creation of an enabling
environment to promote the social factors involved in the reform processes, such as toimprove skilled workers, create a smart forum, internationalization, to makeinternational cooperation, and political changes.
Public safety: The term public safety in Smart City Berlin includes both protection
against intentionally caused damage and protection against natural disasters. This
concept related to data infrastructure, smart grids, and cyber security. The availability ofan Internet infrastructure in all areas of the city is one of the preconditions of having a
Smart City Berlin. Key security aspects are the integrity and authenticity of data, andthe availability of data even at times of crisis. These aspects have to be considered fromthe perspective of the public, providers, the authorities and also organizations entrustedwith security responsibilities.
4. Cloud Computing Technology and Digital Government
4.1 Outline
As we all know, the benefits of cloud services are undisputed. All applications andplatforms are considered services. It helps the institution reduce costs in the investment
process, creating a consistent system from network, application, software, and to
management tools. Cloud also helps organizations provide data, and sharing themthrough the network environment quickly and conveniently. Support for making data
usage more efficient by sharing across organizations in the same organization,
especially to Digital Government. It facilitates the connection and communication
between the central government and local government is much more effective.
For the services that the government provides, in order to make full use of theefficiency, some benefits that Cloud brings to the government, especially with Digital
Government services such as (1) Share data quickly and conveniently, while helping
government agencies share the database, (2) Reduce investment, maintenance, technicalmaintenance costs, and invest in hardware and software systems in these organizations,43

(3) Cloud also helps to manage the focus easier, (4) Increased security, and (5)Contribute to the development of new technologies such as Green ICT.
Digital Government automatically provides an integrated management with cloudcomputing by solving resolution problems and helps to reduce the budget based on theactual use of the data. The cloud architecture can help the government to reduce
repetitive operations and increase the effective use of resources, in the global arena.
These matters in their turn have an effective aid to create a green government, reduce
pollution and waste management. Currently, companies and small businesses are using
the benefits of cloud based on the pay-as-you-use service model, which is available on awide scale. Effective challenges in Digital Government are classified into three groups
that include social, economic and political barriers. These barriers limit the scope ofpolicymakers’ activity for effective use of new technologies. There are number oftechnical challenges such as data scaling, auditing, and logging, replication andmigration, disaster recovery, management policies, system integration, legacy software,
Obsoleted technologies and migration to new technologies. Cloud computing isappropriate to respond to these challenges. Cloud Database provides on-demand andhigh scalability which holds a large number of records that is the basic need ingovernment. Cloud provides the ability to audit event, login and report information
about the tenant and based on a program which recognizes fraud and corruption ingovernment agencies. Such features can help in creating mechanisms for security
incensement. Reliable and accessible applications can be created. Facilitate proliferationand migration of applications is possible with virtualization technologies in the cloud,which is useful in disaster recovery and reduction of time to establish new software.
Cloud provides tools and technology which simplifies and eases the disaster recovery.
In 2016, spending on public cloud Infrastructure as a Service hardware andsoftware is forecast to reach $38B, growing to $173B in 2026. Both SaaS and PaaS
portions of cloud hardware and infrastructure software spending are projected to reach$12B in 2016, growing to $55B in 2026. The following figure provides an overview
of spending on public cloud infrastructure worldwide from 2015 to 2026.

44

Figure 9: Public Cloud Infrastructure as a Service (Source: Statistica 2016)
Worldwide Public IT Cloud Service Revenue in 2018 is predicted to be $127B.
Managed Services is projected to reach $256B by 2018. Emerging markets are predicted
to be 21% of the Worldwide Public IT Cloud Services market by 2018 (Source:
Statistica 2016)

Figure 10: Worldwide Public IT Cloud Service Revenue (Source: Microsoft CloudLandscape Update, 2015, (RHP))
The worldwide cloud computing market grew 28% to $110B in revenues in 2015.
Synergy Research Group found that public IaaS/PaaS services attained the highest
45

growth rate of 51%, followed by private & hybrid cloud infrastructure services at 45%.
The Figure 12 below compares cloud growth by segment and market leaders.

Figure 11: Cloud Growth by Segment (Source: Synergy Research Group)
4.2 The application of Cloud Computing in Digital Government Activities
The most significant cloud computing opportunities for the public sector may ariseat the multi-agency or all-of-government levels. Around the world, public sector
information management is clearly dominated by a“silo” model that sees most
government organizations operating largely stand-alone information systems. One of themore intractable challenges faced by governments has been effective sharing of
information technology resources. This is true in core Digital Government programs,
and in areas such as public health/education and public safety/security. Governments
have invested enormous effort into tackling this challenge over the past decade. For
example, they have developed coordination mechanisms such as enterprise architecturesand interoperability frameworks. They have also enacted laws, policies, and budgetary
frameworks geared toward shared services and implemented a wide range ofmulti-agency ICT assets. Despite all this effort and cost, however, progress towardshared services has generally been slower and less widespread than many in government
had hoped. As a result, governments pay too much for ICT and realize fewer benefits
than they could—especially in regard to the performance of the public sector as awhole.
Cloud computing will deliver benefits beyond the public sectors of developed
countries. Its advantages may be even more pronounced in developing countries thathave not yet achieved high levels of public sector computerization, have lack of people
with adequate ICT skills, or do not have firm legal or cultural requirements regarding
data security and privacy. On the positive side, developing countries face less of the46

entrenched resistance to new computing paradigms that government agencies indeveloped countries often exhibit. Cloud computing may enable them to leapfrog awhole generation of government computing, bypassing many of the costly anddebilitating challenges.
4.3 Typical Example
4.3.1 USAThe United States government believes the security of computer systems isimportant to the world for two reasons. The increased role of Information Technology(IT) and the growth of the e-Commerce sector, have made cybersecurity essential to theeconomy. Also, cyber-security is vital to the operation of safety-critical systems, such as
emergency response, and to the protection of infrastructure systems, such as the national
power grid. Based on then-DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano’s testimony to the Senate in2012, in 2011 alone, the DHS U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT)
received more than 100,000 incident reports and released more than 5,000 actionablecybersecurity alerts and information products. The Twitter, the Wall Street Journal, NewYork Times, and the Department of Energy and many other prominent companies havereported that their systems had been breached. Furthermore, classified government data
has been leaked to the press and the public in several high-profile cases. Current efforts
are being made to secure sensitive data to prevent future breaches.
www.usa.gov is the U.S. Government’s Web portal for citizens. It presents a wide
range of information resources and online services from various government sources,
accessible from a single point. It is also known as the National Portal of the USA and isa gateway to improving the communication experience between the government and the
public. Moreover, it provides information that helps the public to have a better
understanding of the government structure. The well-organized portal serves as aplatform that assists the public to find desired information. To improve users’ browsing
experience, the portal also allows users to create government accounts that allow eachindividual user to customize the portal as they desire. The website contains accessibility
features, a live chat platform, and the chat hours operation services are conveniently
available every weekday except holidays. The website technology offers the opportunity
for government institution to provide a one-stop-shop for all government informationand services. It comprehensively lists all public services, forms, tools and transactions
that the government provides in a user-friendly manner.
United States first federal Chief Information Officer (CIO) to migrate to the clouds
was selected for the following considerations (1) The cloud computing platform’s
flexibility: the benefit of paying for a baseline capacity for normal traffic periods, but it
can accommodate large traffic when needed and save cost when it’s not being used. (2)Minimal time for migration: because of the provided services sensitivity. It needs the47

minimum time to complete the migration. The actual migration process took 10 days
only, while the test validation occurred in one week. (3) Additional security elements:
all the security requirements for the website administration are met such as multifactor
authentication (MFA) to access the portal, packet flow analysis, 128-bit encryption for
traffic, and resource tracking. Furthermore, according to the Ministry of Defense
standards; a special data center has been built to meet the security specifications of thephysical building.
4.3.2 Japan
Japan has a strategy to develop public services on the cloud computing platformvery early. In 2010, the cloud-based service market will reach $ 4.5 billion, by 2015;
this number will increase more than six times, and is forecast to continue growing in the
coming years. Also in 2015, the Japanese government has developed a strategy topromote the development of intelligent services on the Cloud platform. To develop thisstrategy, the government has focused on developing the Utilization Strategy, Utilization
Strategy, Technology Strategy, and International Strategy. To promote Cloud services in
the Government, the Japanese government introduced “Kasumigaseki Cloud” & “Local
Government Cloud”, which supports all government ICT systems and has played aprominent role in growing Japan’s cloud market. This cloud has enabled public andprivate sector collaboration on processing government documents and included
increased online applications to encourage public use of mobile devices to accessgovernment functions.

Figure 12: The Kasumigaseki Cloud (Source: MIC Japan 2009)48

The Kasumigaseki Cloud will allow for greater information and resource sharing
and promote more standardization and consolidation in the government’s IT resources.
By consolidating all governmental ICT under a single cloud infrastructure, the Japanese
government believes it will see not just reduced costs and operational benefits, but more
“green,” environmentally friendly ICT operations. The Kasumigaseki Cloud is part of
the Digital Japan Creation Project. This represents a governmental effort aimed at using
IT investments (valued at just fewer than 100 trillion yen) to help spur economic
recovery by creating several hundred thousand new ICT jobs in the next few years anddoubling the size of Japan’s ICT market by 2020. The MIC believes that “accelerating
the use of ICT nationwide will require the government to take the initiative in
implementing measures,” and that the national government’s promotion on cloudcomputing will not just help spur ICT development, but to help diminish the digital
divide in that country.
4.3.3 Singapore
As leading country in Digital Government area, Singapore would not pass up thechance to introduce and apply emerging technologies in public sectors. Public projects
within Cloud computing, big data, and IOT utilization are ongoing or planned insophisticated phases. Organizational preparedness such as National Cloud Computing –Advisory Council (NCCAC) is paying attention to the adoption of technologies,
standard industrial construction and fostering collaboration between different sectors.
Great potential in the development of emerging technologies into Digital Governmentarea could be anticipated, but government’ guidance should play the crucial role inleading industry and society.
The Singapore Government acknowledges that each cloud computing model
provides its own level of assurance and benefits. As such, the cloud strategy for
Singapore Government is to leverage the appropriate cloud for the appropriate need byadopting a multi-prong approach to cloud computing as follows (1) Leveragecommercially-available public cloud offerings for appropriate needs1 so as to benefit
from lower cost of computing resources. (2) Implement a private government cloud(G-Cloud) for whole-of-government use where security and governance requirements
cannot be met by public clouds. (3) Enable interoperability between G-Cloud andagency Clouds2 through a set of internal G-Cloud standards.
G-Cloud is the next generation whole-of-government infrastructure. It will provide
efficient, scalable and resilient cloud computing resources and will be designed to meetdifferent levels of security and governance requirements. To further aggregate thewhole-of-government demand to maximize cost savings to the Government, theGovernment will identify and provide Software-as-a-Service offerings, such as businessanalytics, customer relationship management, and web content management. G-Cloud49

enables standardization, and sharing of computing resources and applications at thewhole-of-government level, thereby generating cost savings to the Government.
4.3.4 Thailand
Government Cloud, also known as G-Cloud, is an infrastructure component withshared resources developed by the Electronic Government Agency (Public
Organization) (EGA). The development of Cloud technology will be provided byseveral government agencies, where sources of information will be stored on theInternet. As G-Cloud can run remotely over the network, the size of the program isadjustable depending on users’ specific requirements, with effective resource allocation,high security, and enhanced administration. G-Cloud offers a broad range of benefits tovarious IT-based services, where government personnel can generate greater working
performance to ensure the highest quality of public services for everyone.
G-Cloud provides services based on actual requirements, where resources will bearranged according to different demands of users including virtual servers, operating
systems, memory units, and central processing units. A team of technicians will beavailable for services 24 hours-a-day on a daily basis, whereby people will always beoffered quality public services. The Cloud Computing system is highly secure and isdeveloped for government organizations only, where the Service-Level Agreement(SLA) is not less than 99.5 percent. The system will certainly help reduce redundancy ofinvestments varying in equipment, servers, server devices, and data centers. The system
can be accessed via GIN and the Internet. The system can support all types of Cloud
programs developed by the EGA to facilitate fundamental public services provided by
the central government.
4.3.5 Germany
Cloud computing is one of the main pillars of the ICT strategy of the German
Federal Government. This strategy has been published by the Federal Ministry of
Economics and Technology in 2010 and aims at the digital future in Germany until 2015.
Focusing on cloud computing, the objective is to facilitate and foster the development
and installation of cloud computing services. In particular, both small- andmedium-sized enterprises and the public sector should take advantage of cloudcomputing as fast as possible. The challenges (e.g. data security, quality assurance, easy
integration, open standard, etc.), which need to be addressed for adopting cloudcomputing in Germany, are targeted in the so-called Cloud Computing Action
Programme. These challenges particularly arise when adapting existing IT concepts tothe specific requirements of cloud computing.
The Federal Government is pursuing to boost up the development and introductionof cloud computing facilities by issuing the new Cloud Computing Action Programme.
There is a research project known as THESEUS, aiming to utilize The Internet of50

Services and the Internet of Things. With this project, the German Federal
Government is seeking to utilize semantic technologies and the creating new standards
for the Internet of Services.
4.3.6 Denmark
The Local Government Denmark started discussions on using cloud computing in
the public sector already in early 2009. Moreover, according to KPMG, Denmark is oneof the leading countries regarding the adoption of cloud computing in the public sector.
For instance, in 2011 a Danish municipality planned to use Google Apps Services suchas calendar or e-mail in their school systems. In addition, a Danish procurement
organization of a Danish municipality moved procurement services into the cloudalready in 2011. Although Denmark still struggles with security and privacy issues, theDanish Data Protection Agency e.g. judged the cloud service of Microsoft - Office 365 to be compliant with the EU and Danish legislations. In addition, cloud.dk offers public
cloud services fully compliant with the Danish data legislation.
5. ICT for Anti-corruption
5.1 Outline
Corruption is not a new phenomenon in the world. It has existed since ancient times.
The Roman Empire collapsed because of the massive corruption among Roman officers
in the 5th century. They lived a luxurious lifestyle while the Empire was running out themoney (MacMullen, 1990). Corruption also existed in the long history of Egypt Dynasty.
The Nineteenth Dynasty of Egypt (ca. 1307 – 1196 BCE) is a period in which
corruption became massive and notable (Kamel, 2008). In China during the Qin
Dynasty, most of the imperial officers expected payback and accepted bribery fromcitizens because their remuneration was very poor (Fairbank, 1986). In Japan, during
the Keitai Tenno or the reign of Emperor Keitai, there was a case of bribery involving a
Japanese leader named Otomo-no-Omuraji Kanamura and Kudura from Korean
Peninsula. Kudura expected the Japanese leader to give four districts controlled by
Japanese Court, Yamato (Shiobara, 2013). These examples show that corruption may
hamper the progress of a nation. The type of corruption that was common in the ancientor pre-modern era was mainly bribery, kickbacks, and embezzlement.
A corruption scheme has proven difficult due to its behavior, which is unseen forthe purpose of direct, unbiased, and measurable observation (Andvig, Fjeldstad,
Amundsen, & Soreide, 2001). Corruption activities involve two parties where one party
has a power of resource allocation while another is the potential receiver of such
resource, resulting in the use of public facilities for private gain (Macrae, 1982).
Corruption harms most government institutions due to the fact that government officials
and politicians are self-maximizers. They work together to establish their interests bymaintaining and controlling regulations (Cheung, 2007).
51

Despite the complexity of uncovering the corruption, there are two reputableorganizations consistently measuring the corruption around the globe. They are WorldBank with its World Governance Index (WGI), and Transparency International with its
Corruption Perception Index (CPI). Although the Indexes came from different
institutions, different method, and different measure, these correlations between theseindexes are high.
Taking from these two attempts of measuring corruption, there are two pillars fordesigning and implementing the anti-corruption. These two pillars are transparency
and accountability. Transparency alone is not enough. It should be paired by
Accountability. Both transparency and accountability are termed with the word
“interaction.”
5.2 Digital Government as a Platform for Transparency and Accountability
Transparency in government is commonly acknowledged as the level of how muchinformation of an institution being published to the public without any restriction. The
more transparent the organization, the more open it is to the public. Along with the spiritof the Freedom of Information, Digital Government helps government for improving
the transparency. Accountability, on another side, is the ability of government to answer
public inquiries regarding government’s performance and government’s code of conduct.
Digital Government helps government institutions to gather and to respond public
inquiries and opinion in a quick manner.
Combining the transparency and accountability in the interaction of government
with stakeholders, Digital Government strengthens the monitoring capacity of
government on its activities. Digital Government convers three interactions ofgovernment; interaction with citizens (G2C), with business enterprises (G2B), and withother government agencies (G2G), into a monitoring channel.
Among these three interactions, G2G is the most challenging for the government toimplement. While G2C and G2B tend to grow on the supply and demand basis, G2G ismore complex. G2G connects institutions that have authority, has money, and has
discretion. In G2B, the government may choose a certain company to work with. For
example, in e-procurement, the government allows only companies with tax clearance
to participate in procurement. In e-tax, the government requires a company to register
before using the e-tax. Unlike in G2B, a government institution cannot choose othergovernment institutions to join in G2G. Political-will and institutional strength are more
intense in G2G arrangement than in G2B or G2C. If one institutional has more power
than other institutions, it can push the other to join the G2G. For example, Ministry of
Finance has the authority to approve the annual budget of other ministries. As aconsequence, if Ministry of Finance proposed a G2G application for budgetary
management to all ministries, they have to support and accept such system. However, if
52

an institution has no superior to other institutions, it is more difficult to ask otherinstitution to participate in its G2G. For example, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
would like to control the commodity stock in all provinces and invite all provincial
office to participate in G2G for sharing the relevant information. Unless there is a goodpolitical-will in local government, such G2G will not be successful.
5.3 Typical example of using Digital Government for reducing corruption,
Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, and China
The common Digital Government system for reducing corruption is e-procurementin G2B and e-services in G2C. Most government institutions build e-procurement inorder to support fairness, to reduce asymmetric information, and to eliminate unethicaldiscussion between government and the vendor. Since all information related to thegovernment procurement is announced through one channel, all bidders have the equal
information and are treated without any discrimination. Most countries in Waseda
ranking have implemented e-procurement for various reasons. Although some of them
have a very simple e-procurement system, the ultimate goal of it is to reduce corruption
in government procurement.
The next is G2C. Unlike the e-procurement in G2B, which is considerably uniform
in many countries, the implementation of G2C for reducing corruption is slightly
differed among countries. Culture, regional development prioritization, and national
development plan contribute to the style of G2C implementation in a country. One
example of G2C implementation for reducing corruption is the implementation of
Online Procedure for Enhancing the Public Service (OPEN) System in South Korea.
Korean citizens perceived that the implementation of the OPEN system reduced thefrequency of corruption compared to the period before the implementation of OPEN. In
addition, most scholars agreed that the OPEN System is considered a success story of
Digital Government in combating corruption. However, the system should be enforced
through strong regulations, and strong leadership is necessary as the ultimate
sponsorship for such an initiative. Another example of G2C implementation for
reducing corruption comes from India through BHOOMI System. BHOOMI has
enabled the citizens to access records of land mutation requests online. Having access tosuch information, a citizen can trace the progress of the land mutation process, thus
eliminating the room for the discretion of public officials, which is one of the sources ofcorruption.
Under the track of implementing G2G for reducing corruption, there are two
approaches to promote G2G as a way of reducing corruption. The first approach is G2G
as the integration in which one government institution integrated the internal
government system such as integrating the Human Resource Information System withFinancial Information System. The ultimate goal of this approach is to support fairness
in individual performance measurement, thus, achieving fairness in reward and53

punishment system. Such systems are easy to find in developed countries and somedeveloping countries. The second approach is G2G as the collaboration between one
government institution with other government institutions such between Directorate ofCustoms and Excise and Ministry of Trade. This approach is more challenging than theformer approach. The first approach can be accomplished using either top-down orbottom-up approach while the second approach requires political agreement. Good
examples of G2G implementation are from the cases in Supreme Audit Institution (SAI)in Japan and Indonesia.
Both SAI Indonesia and Japan have utilized ICT for supporting their audit activities
to be more effective and more efficient. In general, the use of ICT in SAI is
predominantly for collecting the financial data electronically from government agencies.
Both SAIs have performed an ICT-based collaborative work with other government
agencies to simplify one part of their business process; collecting data for audit
purposes. SAI Japan uses Certification of the Final Account Computer System(CEFIAN) since 1978 for accepting financial transaction electronically related togovernment revenue and expenditure as required by audit law and for checking theaccuracy of such transaction in term of the transaction amount. The similar scenario
applies to SAI Indonesia on e-Audit system except on the legal aspect. E-Audit hascommenced its formal operationalization in 2011. SAI Japan created CEFIAN due tothe mandatory of government agencies to submit electronic financial information to SAIJapan while SAI Indonesia created e-Audit due to the need of strengthening SAI’s
capability on monitoring government financial transaction. During the period ofinvestigation, CEFIAN has shifted the role in combating corruption, from a corruption
detection tool to a prevention tool. E-Audit, on another side, is still a tool for detecting
corruption. The creation of e-Audit and CEFIAN increases the transparency level
among government agencies to SAI. A certain level of transparency may enhance thetraceability of the transaction. These systems enable one government agencies to findout other government financial transactions. The typical cross-validate across multiple
entities through the G2G increases the cost of corruption.
In addition to the role of Digital Government in combating corruption throughgovernment interaction with stakeholders, there have been acknowledged thate-participation can take an important role in combating corruption. A case of the use of
Weibo for reporting any indications of Chinese government officers’ misconduct has
indicated the rise of the social network as an auxiliary tool for combating corruption.
The figure 14 summarizes the anti-corruption pattern extracted from theanti-corruption strategy in country level.

54

Figure 13: Anti-Corruption Platform (Source: Author)
5.4 Conclusion
Finally, the experience of countries in combating corruption using Digital
Government has uncovered a proper way for developing Digital Government that
addresses corruption in a government institution. Takeaway of this Digital Government
ranking suggests each interaction should come with the following value-

Participatory over Substantial Information in Government-to-Citizen-

Fairness over Trust in Government-to-Business-

Pattern Identification over Information Seeking in Government-to-Government.
These three statements mean that while there is value in the items on the right,
the government should value the items on the left more.

VII. Methodology
1. Formulation
To evaluate D-Government development in a country, this ranking survey is basedon a group of sub-indicators to evaluate the overall D-Government development in acountry, ranging from policy development and e-Services implementation to
management optimization and D-Government promotion. To improve the evaluation of
D-Government development in a country, from 2010, the ranking added an
e-participation indicator. In 2014, Open Government Data and Cyber Security were also
added to the ranking. In the 2017 ranking survey, the research team added “the usage of
emerging ICT technologies”. It makes the total 10 main indicators for evaluation.
55

To increase the quality, the assessment used a questionnaire as a tool to obtain some
information from respondents who reside in the respected countries. The respondents
are government officers who work for a ministry that concerns D-Government and, tosome extent, respondents from academia who are knowledgeable in D-Government. The
questionnaire in the upcoming ranking is mandatory. The score will use the feedback asadditional information to mitigate the sample risk, thus, reducing bias during scoring.
The following diagram shows the due process of creating the ranking.
Waseda-IAC International D-Government ranking is also based on clustering
methods by classifying countries according to the group, which has been demonstrated
by organizations (APEC, OECD), by the size of population and GDP, by regions(Asia-Pacific, Americas, European, Africa, Middle East and CIS countries).
The Raw Score is normalized to the 0-100 scale score using the following formula.

𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 =𝑅𝑎𝑤𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒
×100
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒

RawScore is the Score generated by averaging the Score 0 and Score 1; MaxScoreis the maximum score of the sub-indicators.
This will generate the Normalized Score which ranges 0 – 100. Furthermore, theNormalized Score is recalculated by weighted rate. The result is the released score thatwill be used as the source for arranging the rank.
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Indicators
Network Infrastructure Preparedness (NIP)
Management Optimization (MO)Online Services (OS)National Portal (NPR)
Government Chief Information Officer (GCIO)
D-Government Promotion (EPRO)
E-Participation (EPAR)
Open Government Data (OGD)
Cybersecurity (CYB)
The emerging technology in D-Government
(EMG)

2017
NormScore X 10%
NormScore X 12%
NormScore X 12%
NormScore X 8%
NormScore X 10%
NormScore X 10%
NormScore X 10%
NormScore X 10%
NormScore X 10%
NormScore X 8%

Table 14: List of main Indicators
2. Process of Evaluation
The rankings are prepared by the following process. As annual survey, it takes almost
one year round for preparing both the ranking and country reports with 65 nations.

56

StartPreparation

Commencing the survey

Distributing the questionnaires

Exploratory Research on Indicators
By Country
Analysis/Revision

Government
Officers

Expert Groups

Jul 2016

Cross Verification

Tabulate the score

Meeting with
International
Organizations

Rankings, Evaluation

Country Reports

March/April 2017
May 2017

Final Check

June/July 2017

Press Release

July 2017

Figure 14: Process Diagram

57

VIII. Contributors List (● indicate group leader)
1. List of Global Experts Group

Prof. Dr. Toshio Obi, Director, Institute of D-Government, Waseda University, Japan,
President, International Academy of CIO, Director APEC D-Government ResearchCenter-Prof. Dr. J.P Auffret, Chair, MOT/CIO Program of George Mason University, USA.

-

Prof. Dr. Lim Swee Cheang, Ex. Director, Institute of Systems Science, National Universityof Singapore.

-Prof. Dr. Luca Buccoliero, Marketing Department Bocconi University, Italy.

-

Prof. Dr. Suhono Harso Supangkat, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia.

-

Prof. Dr. Francisco Magno, Director, Institute of Governance De La Salle University,
Philippines.

-

Prof. Fengchun Yang, Dean, Academy of D-Government, Peking University, China.

-

Associate Prof. Dr. Jirapon Sunkpho, Thammasat University, Thailand.

-Prof. Dr. Alexander Ryzhov, School of IT management, Federal Academy of National
Economy, Russia.

-

Prof. Dr. Brabec Zdenek, Czech Technical University in Praha, Czech Republic.

-

Prof. Dr. Tomi Dahlberg, Information System, University of Turku, Finland.

2. List of Professors and Experts at Institute of D-Government, Waseda UniversityProf. Dr. Naoko Iwasaki, Waseda
University-

Prof. Dr. Takashi Kobayashi, Tokai
University-

Prof. Dr. Tatsuyuki Negoro, Waseda
University-

Prof. Dr. Yoshio Tozawa,
University of Industrial andScience-Prof. Dr. Kiyoshi Nakamura, Waseda
University-

Mr. Keiichi Iwata, Manager NTT
Data-

Prof. Kiyohide Higuchi, Waseda
University-

LLC Naoko Mizukoshi, Lawyer-

Prof. Dr. Hiroko Kudo, Chuo
University-

Mr. AkiraWatari, ex-Directorof IT,
Toyota Motors

3. List of Researchers at Institute of D-Government, Waseda University


Dr. Nguyen Manh Hien-

Mr. James Giguere-

Mr. Bandaxay Lovanxay-

Ms. Yang Yao-

Dr. Pingky Dezar Zulkarnain

58