《聯合國經社部：2022年聯合國電子政務調查報告-數字政府的未來（英文版）（311頁）.pdf》由會員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關《聯合國經社部：2022年聯合國電子政務調查報告-數字政府的未來（英文版）（311頁）.pdf（311頁珍藏版）》請在三個皮匠報告上搜索。

1、AE-Government Survey 2022The Future of Digital GovernmentiUNITED NATIONSE-GOVERNMENTSURVEY 2022Department of Economic and Social AffairsThe FuTure oF DigiTal governmenTUNITED NATIONSNew York,2022https:/publicadministration.un.org/en/publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvE

2、yiiiiiDISclAIMERSUnited Nations Department of Economic and Social AffairsThe Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat is a vital interface between global policies in the economic,social and environmental spheres and national action.The Department works in three mai

3、n interlinked areas:(i)it compiles,generates and analyses a wide range of economic,social and environmental data and information on which States Members of the United Nations draw to review common problems and to take stock of policy options;(ii)it facilitates the negotiations of Member States in ma

4、ny intergovernmental bodies on joint course of action to address ongoing or emerging global challenges;and(iii)it advises interested Governments on the ways and means of translating policy frameworks developed in United Nations conferences and summits into programmes at the country level and,through

5、 technical assistance,helps build national capacities.DisclaimersThe designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country,te

6、rritory,city or area,or of its authorities,or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.The designations“developed”and“developing”economics are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily imply a judgment about the state reached by a particular country or area in the

7、 development process.The term“country”as used in the text of this publication also refers,as appropriate,to territories or areas.The term“dollar”normally refers to the United States dollar($).The views expressed are those of the individual authors and do not imply any expression of opinion on the pa

8、rt of the United Nations.copyright United Nations,2022All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced,stored in retrieval system or transmitted,in any form or by any means,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording or otherwise,without prior permission.ST/ESA/PAD/SER.E/216 Sales

9、no.:E.22.II.H.2ISBN:978-92-1-123213-4eISBN:978-92-1-001944-6Print ISSN:2411-8257 eISSN:2411-829XUnited Nations E-Government Surveys:2022 The Future of Digital Government2020 Digital Government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development2018 Gearing E-Government to support transformation towa

10、rds sustainable and resilient societies 2016 E-Government for Sustainable Development2014 E-Government for the Future We Want2012 E-Government for the People2010 leveraging E-Government at a Time of Financial and Economic crisis2008 From E-Government to connected Governance2005 From E-Government to

11、E-Inclusion2004 Towards Access for Opportunity2003 World Public Sector Report:E-Government at the crossroads2001 Benchmarking E-Government:A Global PerspectiveWebsite:https:/publicadministration.un.org/en/publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/layout:clung Wicha Press co.,ltd.,Thailandcover Design

12、:United Nations Department of Global communications,New YorkPhoto credit:Printed at the United Nations,New York2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyivPrefaceThe release of this 12th edition of the UN E-Government Survey in 2022 occurs at a critical moment,with only 8 years left to achieve the Sustainable Deve

13、lopment Goals(SDGs)-the shared blueprint for every country to jointly build a better and sustainable future for all.In the meantime,the international community is facing interlinked and cascading crises with dangerous implications for peace and security,social stability,public health,climate,and our

14、 fragile ecosystems.Against this backdrop,the 2022 Survey highlights the increasing contributions of digital transformation and digital government in accelerating the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and in making sure that no one is left behind and offline in the digital a

15、ge.The Survey demonstrates that digital technologies,among other things,have allowed governments to play a key role in addressing the challenges surrounding the global health crisis and in ensuring effective delivery of essential public services during a period of growing isolation,uncertainty and v

16、ulnerability.The 2022 Survey highlights the important role that digital government tools have played the ongoing fight against the cOVID-19 pandemic.Over the past two years 90 per cent of Member States have established dedicated portals,or created space in their national portals,to address issues an

17、d public services related to the pandemic.These digital government tools have proven essential.Going forward,digital government can undoubtedly help us tackle other global crises,including climate change,and prepare us to work through future shocks and risks.The survey results in this edition also p

18、oint to a remarkable improvement in telecommunications infrastructure and human capacity development and an encouraging improvement in service provision,with the global E-Government Development Index(EGDI)average having increased overall.Nonetheless,EGDI values tend to be higher for higher-income co

19、untries than for lower-income ones,and the EGDI average for least developed countries(lDcs),particularly those in Africa,is still far below the global average,underscoring gaps in e-government development and the persistence of the digital divide.The 12th edition also marks the first study to incorp

20、orate an assessment of e-government in the most populous city in each of the 193 United Nations Member States.Despite a general digital performance gap between city portals and their national counterparts,most cities-especially more populous cities-have improved their local Online Service Index scor

21、es by virtue of greater access to critical resources such as a highly skilled workforce,a broad knowledge and skill base,and a dedicated public budget.vlooking forward,I wish to call upon e-government leaders from all over the world to redouble their efforts including by investing more in national d

22、igital transformation,and timely adoption of a comprehensive and innovative digital government framework,so that advances in e-government are integrated with broader sustainable development initiatives,ultimately serving the wider goal of supporting the achievement of the SDGs and leaving no one beh

23、ind,offline.The 2022 UN E-Government Survey is published at a challenging time,but we find hope and inspiration in progress in digital development.Managed well,digital transformation and digital government,through inclusive application of digital technology and multistakeholder partnerships,will con

24、tinue to be a powerful driver for advancing a sustainable future for all.lI JunhuaUnder-Secretary-General for Economic and Social AffairsUnited NationsPREFAcE2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyviAcknowledgements The 2022 United Nations E-Government Survey was prepared by the Department of Economic and Socia

25、l Affairs of the United Nations(UN DESA),through its Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government(DPIDG).The report was prepared under the responsibility of Juwang Zhu(Director,DPIDG),by a team of United Nations staff led by Vincenzo Aquaro.The team members were Yusuf Ekrem Eren,Arpine Ko

26、rekyan,Wai Min Kwok,Saae Kwon,Madeleine losch,Rachael Purcell,and Deniz Susar.The lead authors for the chapters were:Arpine Korekyan with co-author Vincenzo Aquaro(chapters 1 and 2);Deniz Susar(chapter 3);Wai Min Kwok(chapter 4);and,Vincenzo Aquaro,with co-author Mark Minevich(chapter 5).The Data Ma

27、nagement Team was overseen by Vincenzo Aquaro.This report was subject to external peer review to ensure quality and objectivity.External peer reviewers were:Julia Glidden,Rony Medaglia and Gianluca Misuraca(chapters 1 and 2);Judy Backhouse(chapter 3);David le Blanc and David Souter(chapter 4);Delfin

28、a Soares and Zheng lei(chapter 5).chapter 3 benefited from the United Nations University,Operating Unit on Policy-Driven Electronic Governance(UNU-EGOV),specifically by Ms.Delfina Soares,Head,and by Mr.Dimitrios Sarantis,Postdoctoral fellow.This report also benefited from insights shared by external

29、 experts at an online Expert Group Meeting,on 29-31 March April 2021 “Expert Group Meeting in Preparation for the UN E-Government Survey 2022”.The expert participants included:Alexandre Barbosa,cheow Hoe chan,Anir chowdhury,Jos clastornik,Jane coffin,Birku Reta Entele,Sunil Geness,Julia Glidden,Sali

30、m Hasham,Ellen Helsper,Marjin Jansenn,Enzo le Fevre,Mixia liu,Francisco lupiez Villanueva,Rony Medaglia,Samia Melhem,Jessica Musila,Minerva Novero,Aroon P.Manoharan,Theresa Pardo,Fadi Salem,Davoud Taghawi-Nejad,Jane Treadwell and lei Zheng.The meeting also involved resource persons:Ayman Alarabiat,R

31、ehema Baguma,Mariana lameiras,Morten Meyerhoff,Gianluca Misuraca,Dimitrios Sarantis and Delfina Soares.ContributionsThe complex Network Analysis for the UN DESA Pilot Study was provided by Professor Roberto Bellotti with substantive contribution of Dr.loredana Bellantuono from University of Bari,Ita

32、ly.DPIDG interns provided general research support:cailan Ashcroft,Nato Balavadze,Yunying Bao,Jieying cai,Si chen,landra Grizot,Kalin Grose,Guillaume Hemmert,Xiangyi Huang,Mallorie le clech,Edward lee,Qianqian li,Xiaofan liu,Andrea lo Sasso,Muyao lyu,Martina Manzari,Jonas Meuleman,Zeynep Sude Nerima

33、n,Victoria Palacin Silva,Raffaella Savoy,Sinan Tang,Muyu Xie,Yi Xie,Xinyi Yang,Huinan Yu,Eric Zhang and Angelica Zundel.Data management and statistics support was provided by Enkel Daljani,Diren Kocakusak and Tommi Salminen.Support in the production of the maps used in this report was provided by th

34、e United Nations Geospatial Information Section(New York).viiThe chapters of the publication were edited by Terri lore.United Nations Volunteers provided research support for work related to the assessment of the Online Services Index and the local Online Services Index(a complete list of these cont

35、ributors is available in the annex A of the Survey).Contributing Member States and organizations:In preparation for this publication,a series of consultation sessions were held in May 2021 with stakeholders to gather feedback and suggestions on the Surveys substance and methodology.These open sessio

36、ns were held online,across various regions and time zones,and were attended by representatives of governments and other sectors.A consolidated report on the outcomes from these consultations,as well as recordings of each session,are available on the DPIDG website under the event pages for the Asia P

37、acific session,the Americas session,and the Europe,Middle East and Africa session.Special thanks is extended to the following of the following partners,who will translate this report into languages other than English:the Telecommunication Regulatory Authority,United Arab Emirates(Arabic),the china N

38、ational Academy of Governance(chinese),Al Akhawayn University,Morocco(French),the Ministry of Development of Information Technologies and communications of the Republic of Uzbekistan(Russian),and the Agency of Electronic Government and Society for the Information and Knowledge of Uruguay(Spanish).Ac

39、KNOWlEDGEMENTS2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyviiiAcronyms3D three-dimensional4G fourth-generation wireless technology for digital cellular networks5G fifth generation wireless technology for digital cellular networksAI artificial intelligenceAIM Account+Identity=MobilityAPI application programming inter

40、faceASEAN Association of Southeast Asian NationscDTO chief digital(and)technology officercEO chief executive officercIO chief information officercOVID-19 coronavirus Disease 2019cP content provision(OSI subindex)DTT digital terrestrial televisionEGDI E-Government Development Index EMUI Encrypted Mob

41、ile User IdentityEPI e-participation(OSI subindex)EPI E-Participation IndexFDI foreign direct investmentGB Gigabyte(s)Gcc cooperation council for the Arab States of the Gulf GDP gross domestic productGDPR General Data Protection Regulation(European Union)GII Gender Inequality IndexGIS geographic inf

42、ormation systemGNI gross national incomeGPII Global Public Inclusive InfrastructureGPS Global Positioning SystemHcI Human capital IndexHTTPS Hypertext Transfer Protocol SecureixHV high-very high(rating class or quartile subgroup)IcT information and communications technologyID Identification/identity

43、IDc International Data corporationIF institutional framework(OSI subindex)IFc International Finance corporationIoT Internet of ThingsIP Internet ProtocolIT information technologyITU International Telecommunication UnionlDc least developed countrylEO low Earth orbit lGQ local Government Questionnaire

44、llDc landlocked developing countrylM low-middle(rating class or quartile subgroup)lNOB leaving no one behindlOSI local Online Services IndexM2M machine-to-machineMEl monitoring,evaluation and learningMFS mobile financial servicesMH middle-high(rating class or quartile subgroup)MSQ Member States Ques

45、tionnaireNGO non-governmental organizationNlP natural language processingOEcD Organization for Economic cooperation and DevelopmentOGD open government dataOSI Online Services Indexpdf Portable Document FormatQR Quick Response(code)AcRONYMS2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxSDG Sustainable Development GoalS

46、IDS small island developing State(s)SMS Short Message ServiceSP services provision(OSI subindex)STI Forum Multi-Stakeholder Forum on Science,Technology and Innovation for the SDGsTEc technology(OSI subindex)TII Telecommunications Infrastructure IndexUAE United Arab EmiratesUK United Kingdom of Great

47、 Britain and Northern IrelandUN United Nations UN DESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social AffairsUNDP United Nations Development Programme UN-HABITAT United Nations Human Settlements ProgrammeUNcRD United Nations centre for Regional DevelopmentUNEScO United Nations Educational,Scientif

48、ic and cultural OrganizationUNIcEF EcARO United Nations childrens Fund Europe and central Asia Regional Office UNU-EGOV United Nations University Operating Unit on Policy-Driven Electronic GovernanceUS or USA United States of AmericaVAT Value Added TaxVH very high(rating class or quartile subgroup)W

49、cAG Web content Accessibility GuidelinesWDI World Development IndicatorWHO World Health OrganizationXMl Extensible Markup languagexiContentsPreface ivAcknowledgements viAcronyms viiiAbout the Survey xixExecutive Summary xxiii1.Global Trends in E-Government 11.1 Introduction 11.2 E-government ranking

50、s in 2022 21.3 E-government development at a glance 31.3.1 Overall EGDI results 31.3.2 country EGDI levels and quartile classifications 51.3.3 Movement between EGDI groups 71.4 The countries leading in e-government development 81.5 OSI,TII and HcI performance for each EGDI group 111.6 National incom

51、e and e-government development 131.7 complex network analysis:a different perspective on e-government development 161.8 Online Services Index 181.8.1 country groupings by OSI and EGDI levels 191.8.2 country OSI levels by income group 241.8.3 Services provision subindex:progress in online services de

52、livery 251.8.4 Technology subindex 371.8.5 Institutional framework subindex 381.8.6 content provision subindex:sharing public information 391.8.7 E-participation subindex 401.9 E-government during cOVID-19:ad hoc services 441.10 Summary and conclusion 462.Regional E-Government Development and the Pe

53、rformance of Country Groupings 532.1 Introduction 532.2 Regional EGDI rankings 532.2.1 Regional performance in online services provision 572.2.2 Online services for people in vulnerable situations 592.2.3 cOVID-19 measures 612.2.4 Africa:country grouping analysis 622.2.5 The Americas:country groupin

54、g analysis 652.2.6 Asia:country grouping analysis 682.2.7 Europe:country grouping analysis 712.2.8 Oceania:country grouping analysis 742.3 countries in special situations 762.3.1 least developed countries 782022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxii2.3.2 landlocked developing countries 802.3.3 Small island deve

55、loping States 822.4 Summary and conclusion 853.Local E-Government Development 873.1 Introduction 873.2 current status of local online services 883.2.1 Methodology 883.2.2 current status of local e-government 883.3 local Government Questionnaire 1003.3.1 Institutional framework 1013.3.2 legal framewo

56、rk 1013.3.3 Strategy and implementation 1023.3.4 Usage of online services 1043.3.5 User satisfaction 1053.3.6 Social media 1063.3.7 cOVID-19 measures 1063.3.8 Smart city and new technologies 1073.4 Partnerships and application of lOSI methodology in countries 1093.5 conclusion 1104.Leaving no one be

57、hind in the hybrid digital society 1134.1 Introduction 1134.1.1 leaving no one behind is one of the 11 principles of effective governance for sustainable development 1134.1.2 The new face of inequality is digital 1144.1.3 The double-edged sword of e-government in leaving no one behind 1154.2 Identif

58、ying those being left behind in e-government 1174.2.1 Those living near or below the poverty line 1174.2.2 Women and girls 1184.2.3 Older persons 1204.2.4 Persons with disabilities 1214.2.5 Youth 1224.2.6 Migrants and refugees 1234.2.7 Other vulnerable populations 1244.3 Barriers relating to access,

59、affordability and ability(3As)1244.3.1 The dynamic shifts and multiplying effects of digital exclusion 1244.3.2 Access 1264.3.3 Affordability 1304.3.4 Ability 1334.4 The role data,design and delivery can play in ensuring no one is left behind 1364.4.1 Data 1384.4.2 Design 1414.4.3 Delivery 149xiii4.

60、5 Policy messages 1524.5.1 Recognizing that the new face of inequality is digital 1524.5.2 Identifying barriers linked to access,affordability and ability 1524.5.3 The integrated roles of data,design and delivery in shaping inclusive e-government 1534.5.4“leaving no one behind”as the guiding princip

61、le for e-government development 1544.5.5 leaving no country behind in e-government 1554.6 conclusion 1565.The Future of Digital Government:Trends,Insights and Conclusions 1655.1 Megatrends at the global and regional levels 1665.2 The impact of the cOVID-19 pandemic on digital government 1705.3 The i

62、mportance of engaging the private sector 1735.4 The future of digital transformation in the public sector 1755.4.1 Open Government Data 1765.4.2 cloud computing technology 1775.4.3 cybersecurity,privacy data protection issues 1795.4.4 Evolving technologies and new approaches in digital government 18

63、05.5 Digital government at the local level 1825.6 leaving no one behind in the digital society 1835.7 conclusions 184AnnExEs 189Annex A:survey Methodology 189A.1 E-Government Development Index:An Overview 189A.2 Online Service Index(OSI)191A.3 Telecommunication Infrastructure Index(TII)196A.4 Human

64、capital Index(HcI)197A.5 E-Participation Index(EPI)199A.6 Member State Questionnaire(MSQ)201A.7 local Online Service Index(lOSI)202A.8 country classifications and Nomenclature in the Survey 207A.9 Portal Assessment Phase for Online Service Index and local Online Service Index 207A.10 Open Government

65、 Data Index(Pilot Study)210Annex B:277B.1 complex Network Analysis(Pilot Study)2772022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxivBoxesBox 1.1 Rwanda,India and Ecuador 21Box 2.1 Mauritius,Rwanda,Seychelles and South Africa 64Box 2.2 Peru,Guyana and Belize 67Box 2.3 United Arab Emirates and Kazakhstan 70Box 2.4 Serbia

66、:focusing on digital skills and services delivery 73Box 2.5 Fiji:expanding the provision of digital services to improve accessibility 75Box 2.6 cambodia 78Box 2.7 Armenia:aligning public administration priorities with SDGs 81Box 2.8 Grenada 84Box 4.1 leaving no one behind is one of the 11 principles

67、 of effective governance for sustainable development,endorsed by the United Nations Economic and Social council 114Box 4.2 Financial inclusion in Bangladesh:Making Digital Financial Services Work for the Poor 118Box 4.3 Digital identify and social support for refugees in Poland 141Box 4.4 Social pro

68、tection disbursements in Togo-through AI enabled by mobile data and satellite imagery 145Box 4.5 United Kingdom:Increasing Accessibility by Implementing Standards 148Box 5.1 cloud Technology for Disaster Response in Ukraine 178Box A.1 E-Participation Framework 200TablesTable 1.1 leading countries in

69、 e-government development,2022 8Table 1.2 Average EGDI and subindex values,by income group,2022 14Table 1.3 convergence and divergence of OSI levels relative to EGDI levels,2022 20Table 1.4 TII and HcI subcomponent convergence and divergence for the very high OSI group,2022 20Table 1.5 TII and HcI s

70、ubcomponent convergence and divergence for the high OSI group,2022 22Table 1.6 TII and HcI subcomponent convergence and divergence for the middle OSI group,2022 23Table 1.7 TII and HcI subcomponent convergence and divergence for the low OSI group,2022 23Table 1.8 Trends in the provision of online tr

71、ansactional services and breakdown by OSI level,2020-2022(Number of countries and percentage change)27Table 1.9 Percentage of the population using the Internet and fixed(wired)broadband,active mobile broadband,and mobile cellular telephone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants,by region,2022 36Table 1.1

72、0 countries ranked highest in the 2022 E-Participation Index 41Table 2.1 countries in Africa with the highest EGDI values 63Table 2.2 countries in the Americas with the highest EGDI values 66Table 2.3 countries in Asia with the highest EGDI values 69Table 2.4 E-government development in the member c

73、ountries of the cooperation council for the Arab States of the Gulf(Gcc)70Table 2.5 countries in Europe with the highest EGDI values 72Table 2.6 countries in Oceania listed in descending order by EGDI value 74Table 2.7 least developed countries with the highest EGDI value 79Table 2.8 landlocked deve

74、loping countries with the highest EGDI values 81Table 2.9 Small island developing States with the highest EGDI values 83Table 3.1 cities in the very high lOSI category 89xvFiguresFigure ES.1 Global and regional EGDI averages,country groupings by EGDI levels,and online services provision in selected

75、sectors,2020 and 2022 xxivFigure ES.2 comparison of city portals and nations portals performance xxviFigure ES.3 An integrated framework for e-government:strengthening data,design and delivery(enablers)to address barriers relating to access,affordability and ability xxviiiFigure ES.4 Population livi

76、ng in countries with EGDI values above and below the world average(Thousands)xxixFigure 1.1 Geographical distribution of the four EGDI groups,2022 3Figure 1.2 Number and proportion of countries within each EGDI grouping,2020 and 2022 4Table 3.2 lOSI and OSI levels for 2022:convergence and divergence

77、(number and percentage of cities)91Table 3.3 leading cities assessed according to each lOSI 2022 criterion 93Table 4.1 Inadequacy of online access to unemployment benefits and social protection programmes 118Table 4.2 Availability of online information relating to long-term care for older persons 12

78、1Table 4.3 Online options for reporting discrimination and making declarations to the police 124Table 4.4 Number of countries providing free public Internet access points,2018,2020 and 2022 132Table 4.5 countries that have specific measures or mechanisms in place to help vulnerable groups acquire di

79、gital skills and achieve digital literacy 134Table 4.6 countries with national portals that have content available in more than one official language,2020 and 2022 135Table 4.7 countries that have e-participation measures or mechanisms in place for women and other vulnerable groups 142Table 4.8 Numb

80、er of national portals integrating responsive web design,2018,2020 and 2022 147Table 4.9 Number of countries providing AI-enabled chatbot functionality in their national portals,2018,2020 and 2022 148Table 4.10 Number of countries with multichannel payment options for public utilities and other serv

81、ices,2018,2020 and 2022 150Table 5.1 Regional distribution of the population in countries with EGDI values above and below the average global EGDI value,2022 169Table A.1 Telecommunication infrastructure index(TII)and changes of its components(2001-2022)197Table A.2 Human capital Index(HcI)and chang

82、es of its components(2001-2022)199Table A.3 E-Government Development Index 213Table A.4 Regional and Economic Groupings for E-Government Development Index(EGDI)and E-Participation(EPI)221Table A.5 E-Government Development Index(EGDI)of least Developed countries(lDcs)222Table A.6 E-Government Develop

83、ment Index(EGDI)of landlocked Developing countries(llDcs)224Table A.7 E-Government Development Index(EGDI)of Small Island Developing States(SIDS)226Table A.8 Online Service Index(OSI)and its components 228Table A.9 Telecommunications Infrastructure Index(TII)and its components 236Table A.10 Human ca

84、pital Index(HcI)and its components 244Table A.11 E-Participation Index(EPI)and its components 252Table A.12 local Online Service Index(lOSI)and its components 259Table A.13 Open Government Data Index(OGDI)267Table A.14 country ISO codes 272Table B.1 The list of countries grouped by development clust

85、ers according to the pilot study 2792022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxviFigure 1.3 Average values for the EGDI and its component indices,2020 and 2022 4Figure 1.4 Global and regional EGDI averages,2022 5Figure 1.5 Movement between EGDI groups from 2020 to 2022 7Figure 1.6 Member States Questionnaires:key

86、findings for the top EGDI performers*(number of countries responding positively to the questions)10Figure 1.7 OSI,TII and HcI subindex values for each EGDI group,2022 12Figure 1.8 OSI,TII and HcI subindex values for each EGDI level,by income group,2022 13Figure 1.9 Percentage change in average EGDI

87、and subindex values between 2020 and 2022,by income group 14Figure 1.10 Average EGDI values for 2020 and 2022,by income group 15Figure 1.11 Distribution of countries by cluster based on complex network analysis pilot study findings and EGDI values,2022 17Figure 1.12 Snapshot distribution of OSI and

88、EGDI levels for United Nations Member States,2022 19Figure 1.13 OSI averages by income group,2022 24Figure 1.14 Numbers of Member States offering specified numbers of online transactional services,2022 25Figure 1.15 Trends in the provision of online transactional services,2020-2022(Number of countri

89、es and percentage change)26Figure 1.16 Percentage of countries offering each type of online transactional service,by OSI level,2022 28Figure 1.17 Numbers of countries offering selected services that can be completed partially or fully online,2022 29Figure 1.18 Number of countries with e-procurement

90、platforms and digital invoicing capabilities,by region,2022 29Figure 1.19 Percentage of countries with e-procurement platforms and digital invoicing,by income level,2022 30Figure 1.20 Number of countries that offer services integrating or supported by GIS or other geospatial technologies,by OSI leve

91、l and region,2022 31Figure 1.21 Numbers of countries offering services for people in vulnerable situations that can be completed partially or fully online,2020 and 2022(Percentage change)32Figure 1.22 Number of countries providing newly assessed online services for people living in vulnerable situat

92、ions,and number and percentage of countries in which such services can be fully completed online,2022 33Figure 1.23 Percentage of countries providing newly assessed online services to people in vulnerable situations,by region,2022d number and percentage of countries in which such services can be ful

93、ly completed online,2022 33Figure 1.24 Number of countries using SMS and/or mobile applications for public information updates and services provision,by sector,2020 and 2022 34Figure 1.25 Percentage of countries offering sector-specific mobile services,by region,2022 35Figure 1.26 Share of the popul

94、ation using the Internet(2022)and percentage change in fixed(wired)broadband,active mobile broadband and mobile cellular subscriptions per 100 inhabitants(2020-2022),by region 35Figure 1.27 The cost of active mobile broadband subscriptions as a percentage of gross national income per capita,by regio

95、n,2022 36Figure 1.28 Number of Member States with the assessed portal features,2022 37Figure 1.29 Number of countries with links to sectoral ministries and policies on their national portals,2022 38Figure 1.30 legislative framework for e-government development,2022 39Figure 1.31 content provision on

96、 national portals,2022(Number of countries)39Figure 1.32 Distribution of 193 Member States based on EGDI and EPI values,2022 41xviiFigure 1.33 Percentage of countries offering e-participation tools for leaving feedback,reporting public corruption,and filing a complaint,2018,2020 and 2022 42Figure 1.

97、34 Number of countries with portals that integrate calendar announcements,consultation mechanisms and social networking tools,2020 and 2022 43Figure 1.35 Percentage of countries with evidence of at least one e-consultation held within the past 12 months,by region,2020 and 2022 43Figure 1.36 Number o

98、f countries that have implemented assessed cOVID-19 response measures,2022 45Figure 1.37 The implementation of cOVID-19 response measures,by region,2022 (Percentage of countries)46Figure 2.1 Regional average EGDI values,2022 54Figure 2.2 Regional distribution of EGDI levels and of OSI,HcI and TII su

99、bcomponent levels,2022 54Figure 2.3 Regional snapshot of countries by EGDI level,2022 55Figure 2.4 Number of countries in each EGDI group,by region,2018,2020 and 2022 56Figure 2.5 Percentage of countries in each EGDI group,by region,2018,2020 and 2022 56Figure 2.6 Number of countries offering specif

100、ied online services,by region,2022 58Figure 2.7 Average number of services offered in each region,2022 58Figure 2.8 Number of online public services offered in different countries,by region,2022 59Figure 2.9 Number of countries offering online services for vulnerable groups,2018,2020 and 2022 60Figu

101、re 2.10 Percentage of countries providing online services for vulnerable groups in each region,2022 60Figure 2.11 Number of countries offering online information and services in response to the cOVID-19 pandemic,by region,2022 61Figure 2.12 Percentage of countries offering online information and ser

102、vices in response to the cOVID-19 pandemic,by region,2022 62Figure 2.13 countries in special situations in Africa,2022 64Figure 2.14 countries in special situations in the Americas,2022 68Figure 2.15 countries in special situations in Asia,2022 71Figure 2.16 countries in special situations in Europe

103、,2022 73Figure 2.17 countries in special situations in Oceania,2022 75Figure 2.18 Average EGDI values for countries in special situations,2020 and 2022 76Figure 2.19 EGDI and subindex values for countries in special situations,2022 77Figure 2.20 The distribution of countries in special situations am

104、ong EGDI levels,2022 78Figure 2.21 EDGI and subindex performance for the least developed countries,2022 80Figure 2.22 EDGI and subindex performance for landlocked developing countries,2022 82Figure 2.23 EDGI and subindex performance for small island developing States,2022 84Figure 3.1 comparison of

105、lOSI levels for 83 cities,2020 and 2022(Number of cities per category)90Figure 3.2 lOSI 2022 levels for the 146 cities assessed 90Figure 3.3 Average lOSI 2022 values by population size 91Figure 3.4 Implementation of lOSI indicators in city e-government portals 92Figure 3.5 Implementation of institut

106、ional framework indicators in city portals(percentage of cities)94Figure 3.6 Implementation of content provision indicators in city portals:sectoral information(percentage of cities)95Figure 3.7 Implementation of content provision indicators in city portals:addressing everyday needs(percentage of ci

107、ties)96Figure 3.8 Procurement information on city portals(percentage of cities)96Figure 3.9 Implementation of services provision indicators in city portals(percentage of cities)972022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxviiiFigure 3.10 Implementation of participation and engagement indicators in city portals (pe

108、rcentage of cities)99Figure 3.11 Implementation of technology indicators in city portals(percentage of cities)100Figure 3.12 lacking/absent correlation between 2022 lOSI values and OEcD cities GDP per capita 103Figure 4.1 Positive correlation between the leave no one behind indices,E-Government Deve

109、lopment Index and E-Participation Index 116Figure 4.2 An integrated framework for e-government:strengthening data,design and delivery(enablers)to address barriers relating to access,affordability and ability 116Figure 4.3 Inverse relationship between E-Government Development Index and Gender Inequal

110、ity Index 119Figure 4.4 Proportion of countries collecting gender-disaggregated user data,by region 119Figure 4.5 Gender disparities at the top level of leadership in e-government(chief information officer or the equivalent)120Figure 4.6 The intersectionality of barriers:of access,affordability and

111、ability in determining digital exclusion 126Figure 4.7 Proportion of the population with access to electricity,selected country groupings,2010 and 2019(Percentage)127Figure 4.8 Mobile broadband coverage by type of network,2021(Percentage of the population)128Figure 4.9 Provision of e-information,e-s

112、ervices,e-consultation mechanisms,and e-decision-making opportunities for vulnerable groups 130Figure 4.10 Availability of user feedback mechanisms in e-government portals 130Figure 4.11 Basket prices for fixed broadband and data-only mobile broadband as a percentage of GNI per capita,2020 131Figure

113、 4.12 Primary official language in which content was assessed for each of the national portals 136Figure 4.13 Integrated data-design-delivery framework for e-government 137Figure 4.14 Number of countries with laws or regulations pertaining to digital identity 140Figure 4.15 low numbers of countries

114、engaged in the co-design,co-creation and co-production of e-services in six sectors 143Figure 4.16 Progress made in the provision of specific information and/or e-services for vulnerable groups,by region,2018-2022 145Figure 4.17 Regional compliance with W3c standards versus WcAG 2.0 guidelines 147Fi

115、gure 4.18 An integrated framework for e-government:strengthening data,design and delivery(enablers)to address barriers relating to access,affordability and ability 154Figure 5.1 EGDI Global and Regional Average Value 167Figure 5.2 Geographical distribution of countries with EGDI values above and bel

116、ow the global average EGDI value 168Figure A.1 The three components of the E-Government Development Index(EGDI)190Figure A.2 The five subindices of Online Services Index 191Figure A.3 Telecommunication Infrastructure Index(TII)and its components 196Figure A.4 Human capital Index(HcI)and its componen

117、ts 198Figure B.1 Scheme representing the workflow of the complex network analysis,and map representing grouping of countries into four development clusters 278xixAbout the SurveyScope and purpose The United Nations E-Government Survey has been published biennially by the United Nations Department of

118、 Economic and Social Affairs(UN DESA)since 2001.The Survey assesses the e-government development status of all United Nations Member States and has,over this time,established a body of in-depth data sets and analysis.The assessment measures the e-government performance of countries relative to one a

119、nother,as opposed to being an absolute measurement.It recognizes that each country should decide upon the level and extent of its e-government initiatives in keeping with its own national development priorities and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs).The Survey serves as a benchmarking

120、 and development tool for countries to learn from each other,identify areas of strength and challenges in e-government and shape their policies and strategies.It is also aimed at facilitating and informing discussions of intergovernmental bodies,including the United Nations General Assembly,the Econ

121、omic and Social council and the High-level Political Forum.The Survey is intended mainly for policy makers,government officials,academia,civil society,private sector and other practitioners and experts in the areas of sustainable development,public administration,digital government and Information a

122、nd communications Technologies(IcTs)for development.Starting in 2018,the Survey also assessed the select city portals of the UN Member States by utilising the same methodology with the introduction of the local Online Service Index(lOSI).After covering 100 cities in 2020,the current edition analyses

123、 the progress of the most populous city in each country.Structure and methodology The Survey measures e-government effectiveness in the delivery of public services.It is composed of analytical chapters and of data on e-government development contained in the annexes of the publication,providing a sn

124、apshot of relative measurement of e-government development of all Member States.The Survey tracks progress of e-government development via the United Nations E-Government Development Index(EGDI).The EGDI,which assesses e-government development at the national level,is a composite index based on the

125、weighted average of three normalized indices.One-third is derived from the Telecommunications Infrastructure Index(TII)based on data provided by the International Telecommunications Union(ITU),one-third from the Human capital Index(HcI)based on data mainly provided by the United Nations Educational,

126、Scientific and cultural Organization(UNEScO),and one-third from the Online Service Index(OSI)based on data collected from an independent online assessment,conducted by UNDESA,which assesses the national online presence of all 193 United Nations Member States,complemented by a Member State Questionna

127、ire(MSQ).The survey questionnaire assesses several features related to online service delivery,including whole-of-government approaches,open government data,e-participation,multi-channel service delivery,mobile services,usage uptake and digital divides,as well as innovative partnerships using IcTs.S

128、imilarly,the local Online Service Index(lOSI)captures the state of the development of e-government service provision for similar features at the city level.This data is collected by a group of researchers under the supervision of UN DESA through a primary research and collection endeavour.ABOUT THE

129、SURVEYThe Survey2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxxThe methodological framework has remained consistent across the Survey periods,but it should be noted that,for each edition of the Survey,the EGDI has been subject to constructive improvements in the methodology to take into account the lessons learned fr

130、om previous editions,the inputs and feedback received from the Member States,the recommendations of external evaluations,the outcomes of expert group meetings,and the advancement of the latest technological and policy developments in digital government.These changes are outlined in each edition of t

131、he Survey in which they are introduced.While the overarching methodological framework has not changed,these improvements may nonetheless impede full-scale comparisons with the previous editions,though for most indicators this remains possible,and historical comparisons are provided where relevant.Th

132、e full changes introduced for the 2022 Survey are elaborated in annex A.The 2022 Surveys data is presented both at the end of the publication and online.This includes data relative to the EGDI by country(in alphabetical order),by region and by countries in special situations,i.e.,small island develo

133、ping States(SIDS),landlocked developing countries(llDcs),least developed countries(lDcs).The publication then presents information about the Online Service Index and its components and subindices;the Telecommunication Infrastructure Index and its components;and the Human capital Index and its compon

134、ents.The data related to lOSI levels are also similarly presented both in this publication and online.Further comprehensive information about the methodology of the 2022 Survey is available in the Annexes.Preparatory process of the 2022 Survey The preparatory process of the 2022 Survey included a nu

135、mber of activities.An Expert Group Meeting(EGM)(held online in March 2021)was organized to allow experts in the field of digital government to exchange views on the Survey methodology.The discussions on the methodology were held in the context of current developments and trends in e-government servi

136、ces,digital technologies more broadly,and with an over-arching imperative of working towards achieving the 2030 Agenda and its SDGs all vis-vis the challenges of the cOVID-19 pandemic.For the Online Service Index(OSI)values for 2022,a total of 227 online United Nations Volunteer(UNV)researchers from

137、 130 countries with coverage of 66 languages assessed each countrys national website in the native language using the Surveys Online Service Questionnaire.In addition,all United Nations Member States were requested(through the Member State Questionnaire)to provide information regarding their website

138、 addresses(URl)for different government ministries and the national portal(s).129 Member States(comprising 66.84%of UN membership)returned the completed questionnaires,and the appropriate submitted sites were then utilized during the verification process.What was changed in the 2022 edition compared

139、 to 2020 To improve the methodology and take into account the lessons learned from the previous editions,the inputs and feedback received by Member States and through open consultations,the outcomes of an EGM and the latest technological and policy development,a limited number of changes were introd

140、uced in the 2022 Survey as summarized below:TheOnlineServicesIndex(OSI)hasbeenrefinedtoallowgovernmentportalstobeassessedon the basis of five criteriainstitutional framework(IF),services provision(SP),content provision(cP),technology(TEc)and e-participation(EPI)with the OSI as a whole calculated bas

141、ed on the normalized values for each subindex(see annex A).This new approach,which was partially utilized in the assessment of lOSI pilots 2018 and 2020,further aligns the OSI with lOSI formula,introduces the concept of a composite Online Service Index(similar to the TII and HcI),and supports a more

142、 nuanced analysis of government advancements xxiin e-government development.The 2022 OSI has been calculated based on 180 questions (up from 148 in 2020).TheE-ParticipationIndex(EPI)methodologyhasbeenimprovedtobetterassessengagement,including assessing:(i)government portals and websites for the inte

143、gration of participatory budgeting or similar mechanisms,(ii)the availability of open government data(OGD)in general and in six key sectors linked closely to SDG implementation(education employment,environment,health,justice and social protection),(iii)evidence of co-creation or co-production mechan

144、isms for collaborative services provision,(iv)evidence that peoples voices are heard in discussions and decision-making processes linked to the formulation and adoption of policies on issues relating to vulnerable populations,and(v)evidence of online consultations(via e-forums,e-polls,e-questionnair

145、es,or other e-participation tools)that are designed to facilitate the engagement of people in vulnerable situations.TheMemberStateQuestionnaire(MSQ)wasexpandedtocoverdigitalinclusionmattersmorefully,and to address issued related to cOVID-19 responses and recovery.Theassessmentofcityportalshasbeenexp

146、andedfrom100citiesin2020to193in2022(i.e.,the most populous city in each of the 193 UN Member States).The corresponding assessment criteria was reviewed and aligned with the 2022 OSI methodology with the addition of a fifth criterion institutional framework(IF).Total number of indicators have increas

147、ed to 86 in current lOSI 2022 edition,compared to 80 indicators assessed in the lOSI 2020 edition.Theannexeshavebeenextendedwithinformationrelatedtopilotstudyinitiativescoveredinthe Survey complex Network Analysis and the Open Government Data Index.ABOUT THE SURVEY2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxxiixxii

148、iEXEcUTIVE SUMMARYsummaryExecutive Summary Digital technology is increasingly blurring the lines between the physical,digital and biological spheres and is rapidly changing the way people live,work and communicate.The public sector is a case in point;in terms of policies,institutions,strategies and

149、tools,there is no longer a clear distinction or separation between government and e-government.1With the evolution of digital government,public administrations and institutions around the globe have been irreversibly transformedboth structurally and in terms of the dynamic between Governments and th

150、e people they serve.These observations draw from two decades of analytical research and the monitoring of trends within the framework of the United Nations E-Government Survey.While nearly every country is engaged in the process of digitalization,not all have achieved the same level of development,a

151、nd while institutions at all levels are committed to modernization and digital transformation,approaches and outcomes vary greatly.Not all countries are able to achieve the same sustainable development gains through e-government development,and the benefits to communities and vulnerable segments of

152、the population have been disproportionate and uneven.The cOVID-19 pandemic has further exposed e-government divides between and within countries at the regional,national and local levels.The United Nations E-Government Survey,a biennial publication of the United Nations Department of Economic and So

153、cial Affairs(UN DESA),was conceived and continues to be recognized as a valuable measurement and development tool,serving as both a monitoring mechanism and a guiding framework for public sector digitalization.The twelfth edition of the Survey offers further evidence of the ongoing shift from the tr

154、aditional technocratic e-government approach of the early 2000s to a digital development agenda that is policy oriented,data-centric and politically driven,and it further illustrates how e-government has expanded and evolved from siloed approaches in a handful of high-income countries to whole-of-go

155、vernment and whole-of-society approaches in virtually all countries around the globe.In a very real sense,digitalization is redefining and transforming the way Governments operate.The cOVID-19 pandemic has constituted a litmus test of sorts for Governments around the world.It has forced Governments

156、to rethink the role of the State and has compelled them to develop digital solutions to ensure the continuity of public services and societal stabilityoften taking them outside the scope of existing policies and regulations.It has tested the responsiveness,agility and digital resilience of Governmen

157、ts,providing opportunities to strengthen multilevel governance across regional and local jurisdictions and to extend the provision of information and services to all segments of society,including micro,small and medium-sized enterprises and vulnerable populations,to ensure that no one is left behind

158、 in the hybrid digital society.There have been successes and setbacks,and the pace of progress has varied from one country to another,but overall e-government development trends remain positive and encouraging.The first three chapters of the present Survey explore global,regional and local e-governm

159、ent trends,with development assessments based on the tested and accepted e-government development index(EGDI)methodology.The fourth chapter focuses on leaving no one behind in the hybrid digital society,highlighting the importance of e-participation and open government data.The final chapter examine

160、s key trends and innovations that are expected to drive the future of digital government for sustainable development.2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxxiv0.50810.83050.64930.64380.40540.61020.51060.81700.63730.63410.39140.59880.00000.20000.40000.60000.80001.0000OceaniaEuropeAsiaAmericasAfrica193 Member St

161、ates2020 EGDI average value2022 EGDI average valueDigital government has reached a critical point.It is no longer a stand-alone or auxiliary tool,nor does it represent a panacea for government deficiencies or inefficiencies;it should be seen as an integral and thoroughly integrated aspect of the phy

162、sical functioning of public institutions and services delivery.Digital development is inexorable,and inaction or the wrong action can be costly(in terms of missed economic and social development opportunities)and deepen risks(in particular those linked to cybersecurity and privacy issues).With the a

163、cceleration of e-government development and the social and economic recovery efforts being undertaken in the post-cOVID period,this is an opportune time to activate the priorities highlighted by the Secretary-General in the“Roadmap for digital cooperation”and Our Common Agenda,strengthening inclusio

164、n,equity and engagement through the provision of anticipatory/predictive and people-centred services and through enhanced digital cooperation with the private sector and diverse stakeholder groups.It is imperative that digital governmentincluding e-services and e-participationbe set up in a way that

165、 strengthens rather than undermines trust in Governments and public institutions.Global and regional trendsThe global average EGDI value has risen slightly,from 0.5988 in 2020 to in 0.6102 in 2022,largely because of the progress made in strengthening telecommunications infrastructure.Europe remains

166、Figure ES.1 Global and regional EGDI averages,country groupings by EGDI levels,and online services provision in selected sectors,2020 and 2022Source:2022 and 2020 United Nations E-Government Surveys.xxvthe leader in e-government development,with an average EGDI value of 0.8305,followed by Asia(0.649

167、3),the Americas(0.6438),Oceania(0.5081)and Africa(0.4054).For the first time since 2016,the average EDGI value for Oceania has declined,largely owing to the 29 per cent drop in the average Telecommunications Infrastructure Index(TII)value for the region over the past two years.The first two chapters

168、 of the Survey review the progress achieved in global and regional e-government development,highlighting areas of improvement and challenges faced by Member States during the assessment period.Despite the increasingly widespread reliance on digital technologies for services delivery during the cOVID

169、-19 pandemic,comprehensive digital transformation in the public sector has not yet materialized.For most of the world,government priorities in online services provision have centred on health,education and social protection.The most significant increase has been in the number of countries offering s

170、ervices that allow users to apply for social protection programmes and benefits such as maternity care,child subsidies,pensions,and housing and food allowances.A total of 22 online services have been assessed for the 2022 Survey,and in regional terms,Europe has the highest average number of services

171、 offered online(19),followed by Asia(17),the Americas(16),and Oceania and Africa(12 each).Populations traditionally identified as vulnerablepeople living in poverty,persons with disabilities,older individuals,immigrants,women,and youthhave benefited from the progress achieved,though additional effor

172、ts are needed to ensure that no one is left behind in e-government and the broader process of digitalization.A growing number of countries have strengthened their institutional and legal frameworks for e-government development.Most countries have a national electronic or digital government strategy,

173、as well as legislation on cybersecurity,personal data protection,national data policy,open government data,and e-participation.Individuals and businesses are increasingly able to interact with public institutions through online platforms,obtain information on legislation relating to freedom of infor

174、mation,and access public content and data.While digital government development trends indicate steady growth and improvement,with notable progress achieved in a number of areas,there are significant challenges that still require attention.The pandemic has exacerbated digital divides.There are presen

175、tly more than 3 billion people living in countries that have EGDI values below the global average,with most of these countries concentrated in Africa,Asia and Oceania.Only 4 of the 54 countries in Africa have EGDI values above the global average(0.6102);the others have EGDI values that are sometimes

176、 significantly lower.A number of countries in Africa have improved their telecommunications infrastructure,helping them build a solid foundation for accelerating the transition to digital government;however,e-government development efforts are undermined by the fact that the cost of mobile broadband

177、 subscriptions as a percentage of per capita gross national income remains significantly higher in Africa than in other parts of the world.This is but one example of the myriad challenges that make it difficult for countries to narrow gaps in e-government development and bridge digital divides.Witho

178、ut the adoption of targeted and systematic measures to assist low-income and lower-middle-income countries and countries in special situationsincluding least developed countries(lDcs),landlocked developing countries(llDcs)and small island developing States(SIDS)digital divides are likely to persist

179、and may even widen.EXEcUTIVE SUMMARY2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxxviLocal e-government Our Common Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals affirm the key role cities play in driving national and global change and improving peoples lives.Within the present Survey framework,the local Online Service

180、s Index(lOSI)assesses progress made in local e-government development over a two-year period.The first pilot study on local e-government was carried out in 2018,and coverage has been expanded and enriched in successive editions of the Survey.In the 2022 lOSI study,the most populous city in each of t

181、he 193 United Nations Member States has been assessed,and a new criterion(institutional framework)has been introduced to facilitate alignment with the Surveys Online Services Index.chapter 3 offers a detailed analysis of city portals based on 86 lOSI indicators relating to five criteria and on the r

182、esults of the most recent local Government Questionnaire.Key lOSI findings are as follows:TheaverageLOSIvalueincreasedfrom0.43in2020to0.51in2022.In2022,asin2020,cityportalsdonotperformaswellastheirnationalcounterparts (see figure ES.2 below).ThemorepopulouscitiestendtohavehigheroverallLOSIvalues;thi

183、scorrelationmayderive from the greater access such cities generally have to important resources.Among cities with reasonable levels of wealth,there is not necessarily a directcorrespondence between GDP per capita and lOSI values.0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.901.00OSI 20220.000.100.200.300.4

184、00.500.600.700.800.901.00LOSI 2022Figure ES.2 Comparison of city portals and nations portals performancexxviiThe chapter analysis indicates that a well-formulated local e-government strategy can facilitate and strengthen sustainable local administration,the integration of new technologies,the abilit

185、y to address public sector challenges such as those linked to the pandemic,and the realization of the 2030 Agenda.Resource constraints limited the number of cities that could be included in the formal lOSI assessment for the Survey.However,there has been strong interest in the lOSI approach among ot

186、her stakeholders;UN DESA has answered this need by arranging to run lOSI pilots in multiple cities in selected countries,and academics have undertaken independent studies using the lOSI methodology.Governments are encouraged to become part of the lOSI network so that municipal authorities can work t

187、ogether to strengthen e-government at the level closest to the population they serve.Leaving no one behind in the hybrid digital societyWhile important advances have been made in e-government over the past two decades,inclusive design has not received sufficient attention.The groups easiest to reach

188、 have generally benefited most from the notable progress in e-government,while many of the poorest and most vulnerable populations have been left behind.As Governments continue to transition from traditional to digital modes of public services delivery,those e-services that are not designed to facil

189、itate inclusion will likely be underutilized by vulnerable groups,effectively denying them the rights and opportunities enjoyed by more advantaged populations in the hybrid digital society.Even before the cOVID-19 pandemic,widening socioeconomic inequalities were exacerbated by digital gaps;the acce

190、lerated public sector digitalization that has occurred in response to the recent global health crisis has simply magnified this trend.There is still insufficient understanding of how the design and implementation of e-government initiatives affect people of different genders,ages,capabilities and in

191、come levels and what needs to be done to address exclusion and discrimination.A key factor contributing to the uncertainty is that digital divides are not static;vulnerability is a dynamic and shifting state,and a list of risk factors is not always sufficient to identify those who need different way

192、s to access and utilize services.Very few countries show evidence of having engaged in online consultations involving vulnerable groups,and even fewer countries have evidence showing that user input has been considered or incorporated in policy decisions on issues relating to vulnerable groups.Desig

193、ning for inclusion,including e-inclusion,is critical for leaving no one behind.An important precondition is recognizing that exclusion existslargely because perceptions and solutions are driven by biases rather than by objective,data-driven evidence.Proactive efforts are needed to acknowledge and id

194、entify the gaps,to provide vulnerable populations with mechanisms for engagement so that the types and origins of discrimination are better understood,and to then use what has been learned to develop responsive e-government and improve the lives of those who are hardest to reach.Figure ES.3 offers a

195、 graphic representation of an integrated framework for developing inclusive e-government.The first step is to identify barriers to digital inclusion relating to access,affordability and ability.The second step is to develop a targeted implementation strategy for leaving no one behind that is grounde

196、d in data,design and delivery optimization.EXEcUTIVE SUMMARY2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxxviiiFigure ES.3 An integrated framework for e-government:strengthening data,design and delivery(enablers)to address barriers relating to access,affordability and abilitychapter 4 of the Survey explores the chall

197、enges and opportunities associated with efforts to ensure that no one is left behind.It is recommended that“leaving no one behind”become the operational principle guiding policy development and implementation in e-government and the public sector.At the policy and regulatory level,Governments should

198、 adopt“inclusion by design”,“inclusion by default”or“inclusion first”strategies to counter the global trend towards the adoption of digital-by-default,digital-first,invisible-government and one-stop-shop strategies;targeted,localized and contextual approaches are key,as not all excluded groups are c

199、onfronted with the same barriers or are affected to the same extent.The global community can contribute to leaving no country behind in digital government through knowledge exchange,strategic partnerships and collaborative capacity-building.One of the key lessons learned during the cOVID-19 pandemic

200、 is that the future is hybrid and not digital;the primary objective is not digital development but rather recognizing human agency and supporting human development through digitalization.An inclusive,integrated digital/analogue ecosystem is needed to facilitate and sustain inclusive e-government dev

201、elopment so that everyone benefits and no one is left behind.The future of digital governmentchapter 5 focuses on digitalization trends,highlighting the challenges that continue to undermine development efforts and offering observations and forecasts on the future of digital government.The path to d

202、igital inclusion and sustainable development remains fraught with obstacles and uncertainties,especially in Africa and among lDcs and SIDS.For many developing countries and countries in special situations,comprehensive digitalization represents a massive,complex challenge.Source:Authors elaboration,

203、based on Internet Society,“Digital accessibility”,Issue Paper:Asia-Pacific Bureau(May 2017)and other sources.For a more detailed version of this graphic,see figure 4.17 in chapter 4 of the present publication.AccessAffordabilityAbilityDataDesignDeliveryxxixEXEcUTIVE SUMMARYFigure ES.4 Population liv

204、ing in countries with EGDI values above and below the world average(Thousands)Pursuing digital transformation without the appropriate institutional support,funds,regulations,policies and strategies can lead to job losses,increased inequality,and data privacy and security issues.Using the global aver

205、age EGDI value as a proxy for measuring the digital divide,the 2022 Survey indicates that about 45 per cent of the combined population of the United Nations Member States(3.5 billion people)still lag behind.In Africa,50 out of 54 countries(home to 95 per cent of the regions population)have EGDI valu

206、es below the global average,and the same is true for 11 of the 12 SIDS in Oceania.The private sector has been at the forefront of the digital transformation for a number of years,and the cOVID-19 pandemic has greatly accelerated developments in this area,compelling industries and companies to adopt

207、new digital technologies to improve services delivery and increase productivity in an effort to adapt to the changes forced on them by the urgent health crisis.The acceleration of digitalization in the private sector has raised peoples expectations for more effective public services delivery.The pan

208、demic has reinforced the need for the public sector to catch up with the private sector in terms of attracting talent and updating personnel skills.During the past couple of years,Governments have been forced to become more innovative,resourceful,and effective and to contribute more strategically an

209、d proactively to the digital transformation in support of building a sustainable and digitally resilient society.Source:2022 United Nations E-Government Survey;United Nations population data.100.0%55.2%44.8%100.0%7.8%92.2%100.0%5.4%94.6%100.0%89.3%10.7%2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEyxxxThe 2022 Survey r

210、esults indicate that a growing number of countries are moving towards seamless,invisible government in which fully automated and personalized services are made accessible to anyone anytime from anywhere.More Governments are deploying cutting-edge technologies such as cloud computing,artificial intel

211、ligence and blockchain to assess and address the needs of constituents.Some have developed new methods for exploiting data-driven policy modelling tools and have created pilot initiatives and sandboxes to design,validate and scale up innovative solutions.These approaches are allowing Governments to

212、strengthen their analytical and anticipatory capabilities and proactively shape future development scenarios.With the increased focus on cognitive government,agile and adaptive government,and the development of predictive capabilities,Governments are setting themselves up to better anticipate and re

213、spond to the needs of all members of society.These exciting innovations and the broader digital transformation must aim to be truly inclusive.Advances in e-government development can widen digital divides if action is not taken to ensure access for all.In digital government,it is critical that innov

214、ation be focused on human development,carrying people forward rather than leaving them behind.Endnotes1 In this edition of the Survey,as in the previous edition,“e-government”and“digital government”are used interchangeably,as there is still no formal distinction made between the terms among academic

215、s,policymakers and practitioners1Chapter 1Chapter 1 Global trends in e-GovernmentIn this chapter:1.1 Introduction 11.2 E-government rankings in 2022 21.3 E-government development at a glance 31.3.1 Overall EGDI results 31.3.2 country EGDI levels and quartile classifications 51.3.3 Movement between E

216、GDI groups 71.4 The countries leading in e-government development 81.5 OSI,TII and HcI performance for each EGDI group 111.6 National income and e-government development 131.7 complex network analysis:a different perspective on e-government development 161.8 Online Services Index 181.8.1 country gro

217、upings by OSI and EGDI levels 191.8.2 country OSI levels by income group 241.8.3 Services provision subindex:progress in online services delivery 251.8.4 Technology subindex 371.8.5 Institutional framework subindex 381.8.6 content provision subindex:sharing public information 391.8.7 E-participation

218、 subindex 401.9 E-government during cOVID-19:ad hoc services 441.10 Summary and conclusion 46Photo credit:Chapter 11.Global Trends in E-Government1.1 IntroductionDigital technologies played an indispensable role in holding civil society together as the cOVID-19 pandemic emerged,supporting the provis

219、ion of basic public services and fundamental services in the health,education,and safety and security sectors as in-person access to such services grew increasingly limited.The pandemic has amplified the importance of e-government and digital technologies as essential tools for communication and col

220、laboration between policy makers,the private sector and societies across the globe.Digital technologies contribute to national and local development,facilitate the sharing of knowledge and guidance,and enable the provision of online services and solutions in both ordinary and extraordinary circumsta

221、nces,making the transition towards digital transformation inevitable.E-government has become the cornerstone for building effective,accountable,resilient and inclusive institutions at all levels,as called for in Sustainable Development Goal(SDG)16,and for strengthening the implementation of Goal 17.

222、This chapter presents a data-driven analysis of key trends in e-government development in 2022 based on the assessment of the E-Government Development Index(EGDI).It also describes and analyses global trends in electronic and mobile services delivery and sheds light on the distribution of online ser

223、vices based on country income levels and on the provision of services in specific sectors that are particularly important for sustainable development.The chapter begins with a brief presentation of the e-government rankings of 193 United Nations Member States and their placement and relative positio

224、n within four EGDI value groups(very high,high,middle and low).In 2022,for the first time,the Online Services Index component of the EGDI is broken down into five subcategories.This added specificity allows a more detailed and nuanced assessment of online services provision and enables Member States

225、 to better target their efforts to improve overall e-government development.The analysis is further supplemented by the findings of a pilot study UN DESA conducted in 2021 with a complex network analysis methodology(see annex A)that uses more than 500 development indicators,including SDG indicators

226、and EGDI data,to establish digital development patterns and the clustering of countries around similar characteristics.EGDI methodology:continuous improvementThe EGDI is a composite benchmark of e-government development consisting of the weighted average of three independent component indices:the On

227、line Services Index(OSI),the Telecommunications Infrastructure Index(TII),and the Human capital Index(HcI).The 2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEy2Chapter 1methodologies used for data collection and for the computation of the EGDI and its subcomponent values are detailed in annex A of the Survey.The OSI com

228、ponent has been refined to allow government portals to be assessed on the basis of five subindicesinstitutional framework(IF),services provision(SP),content provision(cP),technology(TEc)and e-participation(EPI)with the OSI as a whole calculated based on the normalized values for each subindex(see an

229、nex A).This new approach further aligns the OSI with the lOSI formula,introduces the concept of a composite Online Service Index(similar to the TII and HcI),and supports a more nuanced analysis of advancements in e-government development.For the 2022 edition of the Survey,the OSI has been calculated

230、 based on 180 questions(up from 148 in 2020).1.2 E-government rankings in 2022The first United Nations E-Government Survey was published in 2001.The 2022 Survey is the eleventh edition of a biennial publication dedicated to tracking the global development of e-government in all United Nations Member

231、 States.Recent trends in e-government development are presented based on the assessment of values reflected in the EGDI,a normalized composite index comprising the OSI,TII and HcI.Each of the latter three indices is a composite measure that can be extracted and analysed independently.The composite v

232、alue of each component index is normalized to fall within the range of 0 to 1,and the overall EGDI is derived from taking the arithmetic average of the three component indices.This biennial assessment of e-government development as reflected in the EGDI allows Member States to follow up on the Surve

233、y results and initiate improvements after each measurement.For every edition of the Survey,the EGDI has been subject to constructive improvements in the methodology to take into account the lessons learned from previous editions,the inputs and feedback received from the Member States,the recommendat

234、ions of external evaluations,the outcomes of expert group meetings,and the advancement of the latest technological and policy developments in digital government.The changes introduced for the 2022 Survey are elaborated in annex A.While the overarching methodological framework has not changed,these i

235、mprovements may nonetheless impede full-scale comparisons with the previous editions,though for the majority of indicators this remains possible,and historical comparisons are provided where relevant.This report reviews the recent progress made by Member States in e-government development.A countrys

236、 relative position in the e-government development rankings may fluctuate over time owing to global changes and to changes to the rankings of other countries in the same field.While individual country performance still matters,it might be more useful to interpret the values and rankings based on the

237、 movement of countries between the four EGDI groups and to evaluate a Member States individual performance based upon its rating class(quartile position)within its EGDI group.The sections below present the 2022 Survey findings by EGDI rankings at the global level.Where relevant,additional insights a

238、re provided based on comparisons of data from the 2018 and 2020 Surveys.The analysis focuses on relevant correlations between the EGDI and its components,country income group classifications,advancements in e-services provision,and trends in electronic and mobile services delivery in various sectors

239、,as well as the differences in e-government advancement among vulnerable groups such as older people,women,youth,persons with disabilities and migrants.The analysis is further enriched by the comparison of EGDI groups and respective clusters of countries grouped through complex network analysis(see

240、annex B),drawing on over 500 indicators.Where warranted,the Survey highlights similarities and differences between the EGDI groups and country clusters,as well as within specific EGDI rating class/quartile subgroups.3Chapter 1Chapter 1 Global trends in e-GovernmentJul 2022The boundaries and names sh

241、own and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.Dotted line represents approximately the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir agreed upon by India and Pakistan.The final status of Jammu and Kashmir has not yet been agreed upon by the Pa

242、rties.Final boundary between the Republic of Sudan and the Republic of South Sudan has not yet been determined.A dispute exists between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over the Falkland Islands(Malvinas).UNITED NATIONS

243、GeospatialMap No.4642.1EGDI levelVery highHighMiddleLowNo data1.3 E-government development at a glance1.3.1 Overall EGDI resultsThe 2022 Survey reflects further improvement in global trends in e-government development and the transitioning of many countries from lower to higher EGDI levels.In this e

244、dition,60 countries have very high EGDI values ranging from 0.75 to 1.00,1 in comparison with 57 countries in 2020a 5.3 per cent increase for this group.A total of 73 countries have high EGDI values of 0.50 to 0.75,and 53 countries are part of the middle EGDI group with values between 0.25 and 0.50.

245、Seven countries(one less than in 2020)have low EGDI values(0.00 to 0.25).The map in figure 1.1 shows the geographical distribution of the four EGDI groups in 2022.Figure 1.1 Geographical distribution of the four EGDI groups,2022Figure 1.2 shows the respective numbers and percentages of countries in

246、different EGDI groups in 2020 and 2022 for comparative purposes.The results for 2022 indicate that Member States with high EGDI values make up the largest share(38 per cent),followed by those with very high EGDI values(31 per cent)and middle EGDI values(27 per cent).The share of countries with low E

247、GDI values remains almost the same as in 2020(4 per cent),though the actual number fell from eight to seven.Source:2022 United Nations E-Government Survey.2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEy4Chapter 1EGDIOSITIIHCIFigure 1.2 Number and proportion of countries within each EGDI grouping,2020 and 2022Figure 1.3

248、 Average values for the EGDI and its component indices,2020 and 2022Very high EGDI;57;29%High EGDI;69;36%Middle EGDI;59;31%Low EGDI;8;4%2020Very high EGDI;60;31%High EGDI;73;38%Middle EGDI;53;27%Low EGDI;7;4%2022Very high EGDIHigh EGDIMiddle EGDILow EGDIVery high EGDIHigh EGDIMiddle EGDILow EGDIBetw

249、een 2020 and 2022,the global average EGDI value rose from 0.5988 to 0.6102 and average HcI and TII values increased by 2 and 5 per cent,respectively,while the OSI average experienced a slight dip,declining from 0.5620 to 0.5554(see figure 1.3).It is important to note that this change in the OSI coul

250、d be attributed to the updated survey methodology.Source:2022 United Nations E-Government Survey.Sources:2020 and 2022 United Nations E-Government Surveys.5Chapter 1Chapter 1 Global trends in e-GovernmentFigure 1.4 Global and regional EGDI averages,2022In regional terms,Europe has the highest averag

251、e EGDI value(0.8305),followed by Asia(0.6493),the Americas(0.6438),Oceania(0.5081),and Africa(0.4054)(see figure 1.4).1.3.2 Country EGDI levels and quartile classificationsThe subsections below focus on the distribution of countries among the very high,high,middle and low EGDI groups and highlight a

252、ny changes in levels or classifications since 2020.To gain better insight into the situation of subgroups of countries with similar levels of performance within their respective EGDI groups,each EGDI group is further divided into four equally defined rating classes,or quartiles.2 The rating class br

253、eakdowns within the respective EGDI groups,in descending order,are as follows:VH,V3,V2 and V1 for the very high group;HV,H3,H2 and H1 for the high group;MH,M3,M2 and M1 for the middle group;and lM,l3,l2 and l1 for the low group.Very high EGDI groupThe number of Member States in the very high EGDI gr

254、oup(with values ranging from 0.75 to 1.00)rose from 57 to 60,representing a 5 per cent increase between 2020 and 2022.These 60 countries are equally distributed between the VH,V3,V2 and V1 rating classes.Malta and the United Arab Emirates moved from the V3 to the VH rating class in the very high EGD

255、I group.Four countries(Georgia,Peru,Serbia and Ukraine)moved from the high to the very high EGDI group,with Serbia jumping two intervals(HV to V2).Source:2022 United Nations E-Government Survey.0.08520.08520.24810.27100.62560.32300.97170.73570.91510.95290.97170.94320.61020.40540.64380.64930.83050.50

256、810.00000.10000.20000.30000.40000.50000.60000.70000.80000.90001.0000193 Member States Africa Americas Asia Europe OceaniaMinimumMaximumEGDI 2022 average2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEy6Chapter 1The 15 countries in the highest(VH)rating class within the very high EGDI group are the leading countries in te

257、rms of the 2022 Survey results,with values ranging between 0.8943 and 0.9717.Ranked from highest to lowest within the subgroup,these countries include Denmark,Finland,Republic of Korea,New Zealand,Sweden,Iceland,Australia,Estonia,Netherlands,United States of America(hereinafter referred to as the Un

258、ited States),United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland(hereinafter referred to as the United Kingdom),Singapore,United Arab Emirates,Japan and Malta.At the regional level,35 of the 60 countries in the very high EGDI group are in Europe,15 are in Asia,8 are in the Americas,and 2 are in Oce

259、ania.High EGDI groupThe total number of countries in the high EGDI group rose from 69 to 73 between 2020 and 2022.Eight countries have joined the high EGDI group for the first time;three are in Africa(cte dIvoire,Rwanda and Zambia),two are in the Americas(Belize and Guyana),and three are in Asia(leb

260、anon,Nepal and Tajikistan).Six of the eight countries in the high EGDI group are in special situations and are classified by the United Nations as least developed countries(lDcs),landlocked developing countries(llDcs)and/or small island developing States(SIDS),signifying the notable progress made in

261、 e-government development in countries with limited resources.The number of countries in special situations in the high and very high EGDI groups rose from 35 to 41(or by 15 per cent)between 2020 and 2022;one of the latter is a low-income country(Rwanda)and twelve are lower-middle-income countries(B

262、angladesh,Belize,Bhutan,Plurinational State of Bolivia,cabo Verde,cambodia,Kyrgyzstan,Mongolia,Nepal,Tajikistan,Uzbekistan and Zambia).Groups of countries in special situations are further analysed in chapter 2.At the regional level,24 of the 73 countries in the high EGDI group are in the Americas,2

263、2 are in Asia,16 are in Africa,8 are in Europe,and 3 are in Oceania.Eighteen of these countries are in the top HV rating class of the high EGDI subgroup,with 39 per cent of the 18 being countries in special situations(llDcs or SIDS).Middle EGDI groupThe number of countries in the middle EGDI group(w

264、ith values ranging from 0.25 to 0.50)decreased from 59 in 2020 to 53 in 2022;this decline is positive,given that eight countries moved up to the high EGDI group and two countries shifted from the low to the middle EGDI group during this period(see figure 1.5).Only one country moved down from the hig

265、h to the middle EGDI group.Africa has the largest share of countries in the middle EGDI group(60 per cent,or a total of 32 countries),followed by Asia(19 per cent,or 10 countries),Oceania(17 per cent,or 9 countries)and the Americas(4 per cent,or 2 countries).The overwhelming majority of countries in

266、 the middle EGDI group43 out of 53,or 81 per centare countries in special situations(lDcs,llDcs and/or SIDS).Among these 53 countries,20(38 per cent)are low-income economies(16 in Africa and 4 in Asia),and another 25(47 per cent)are lower-middle-income economies(14 in Africa,6 in Oceania,4 in Asia a

267、nd 1 in the Americas).Seven countries(2 in Oceania,2 in Africa,2 in Asia and 1 in the Americas)are upper-middle-income economies,and one country,Nauru,is a high-income country in Oceania.Low EGDI groupThe number of countries with low EGDI values(below 0.25)dropped from eight in 2020 to seven in 2022

268、.All of the countries in this group are lDcs and/or llDcs;six are in Africa(central African 7Chapter 1Chapter 1 Global trends in e-GovernmentRepublic,chad,Eritrea,Niger,Somalia and South Sudan)and were also in the low EGDI group in 2020,while one is an lDc in the Americas(Haiti).Guinea-Bissau and th

269、e Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea are the only two countries that moved up from the low to the middle EGDI group in 2022.Regional trends and findings for all EGDI groups are explored in greater detail in chapter 2.1.3.3 Movement between EGDI groupsThe 2022 Survey results affirm the continuation

270、 of the positive global trend towards higher levels of e-government development.Figure 1.5 shows the number of countries that have moved from one EGDI group to another since 2020.Fourteen countries moved to higher EGDI groups(2 from the low to the middle group,8 from the middle to the high group,and

271、 4 from the high to the very high group),and three countries moved to lower EGDI groups(1 from the very high to the high group,1 from the high to the middle group,and 1 from the middle to the low group).While these changes are positive overall,the net number of countries in each EGDI group is compar

272、able to the numbers in 2020.As noted earlier,each EGDI group is also divided into four equally defined quartile subgroups or rating classes.As figure 1.5 illustrates,the upward movement of countries between EGDI groups usually involves a shift from the top rating class of one EGDI group to the lowes

273、t rating class of the next highest group;with downward movement,countries typically move from the lowest rating class of one EGDI group to the highest rating class of the next lower group.This single-interval shift occurred for 15 of the 17 countries that moved to another EGDI group in 2022;Serbia a

274、nd Zambia,however,were able to move up by two rating classes in their advancement to a higher EGDI level.Figure 1.5 Movement between EGDI groups from 2020 to 2022Source:2020 and 2022 United Nations E-Government Surveys.2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEy8Chapter 11.4 The countries leading in e-government de

275、velopmentIn reviewing and analysing the 2022 Survey results,it is important to bear in mind that the EGDI is a normalized relative index,and slight differences in EGDI values between countries do not necessarily imply that a country with a lower EGDI value has underperformed during the specific two-

276、year Survey period.Nor does a higher EGDI value signify better performance,especially among countries within the same subgroup.Hence,analysts and policymakers should be cautioned against misinterpreting slight changes in rankings among countries within the same rating class.Every country should dete

277、rmine the level and extent of its digital government objectives based on its specific national development context,capacity,strategy and programmes rather than on an arbitrary assumption of its future position in the ranking.The EGDI is a benchmarking tool for e-government development to be used as

278、a proxy performance indicator.The 15 countries in the highest(VH)rating class of the very high EGDI group are listed in table 1.1,which also provides the corresponding OSI,TII,HcI and overall EGDI values.Country nameRating classRegionOSIHCITIIEGDI(2022)EGDI(2020)DenmarkVHEurope0.97970.95590.97950.97

279、170.9758FinlandVHEurope0.98330.96400.91270.95330.9452Republic of KoreaVHAsia0.98260.90870.96740.95290.9560New ZealandVHOceania0.95790.98230.88960.94320.9339SwedenVHEurope0.90020.96490.95800.94100.9365IcelandVHEurope0.88670.96570.97050.94100.9101AustraliaVHOceania0.93801.00000.88360.94050.9432Estonia

280、VHEurope1.00000.92310.89490.93930.9473NetherlandsVHEurope0.90260.95060.96200.93840.9228United States of AmericaVHAmericas0.93040.92760.88740.91510.9297United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandVHEurope0.88590.93690.91860.91380.9358SingaporeVHAsia0.96200.90210.87580.91330.9150United Arab Em

281、iratesVHAsia0.90140.87110.93060.90100.8555JapanVHAsia0.90940.87650.91470.90020.8989MaltaVHEurope0.88490.87340.92450.89430.8547Table 1.1 Leading countries in e-government development,2022The group of countries in the highest(VH)rating class of the very high EGDI group is almost identical to the corre

282、sponding group in the previous edition of the Survey;there has been a slight net increase(from 14 to 15 countries),with Malta and the United Arab Emirates joining this group and Norway moving down to the V3 rating class.The top 15 countries are exclusively high-income countries.Denmark has the highe

283、st EGDI value globally for the third consecutive Survey and is one of eight countries in Europe and one of six countries in the European Union that are part of the highest(VH)rating class.Malta is the only country in Southern Europe joining this subgroup in 2022,having improved in all three subindic

284、es(OSI,TII and HcI)by an average of 4.6 per cent since 2020.The most significant increases in subindex values were achieved by Sweden(a 10 per cent increase for the OSI),the Netherlands(a 4.4 per cent increase for the TII),and the United Arab Emirates(a 19 per cent increase for the HcI).Sources:2020

285、 and 2022 United Nations E-Government Surveys.9Chapter 1Chapter 1 Global trends in e-GovernmentEurope accounts for 53 per cent of the VH rating class(Denmark,Estonia,Finland,Iceland,Malta,Netherlands,Sweden and United Kingdom),Asia accounts for 27 per cent(Japan,Republic of Korea,Singapore and Unite

286、d Arab Emirates),Oceania accounts for 13 per cent(Australia and New Zealand),and the Americas,with one country(United States),accounts for the remaining 7 per cent.As in the past three editions of the Survey,Australia and New Zealand lead e-government development in Oceania,the United States leads i

287、n the Americas,and the Republic of Korea is the top EGDI performer in Asia,followed by Singapore and Japan.None of the countries in Africa are included in the VH rating class.The remainder of this subsection reviews key findings on e-government development in the leading countries based on their res

288、ponses to the United Nations Member States Questionnaires(MSQs),EGDI disaggregated data analysis,desk research and literature review.With outreach to 193 United Nations Member States and a global response rate of nearly 70 per cent,the MSQ remains one of the most robust measures of self-assessed e-g

289、overnment development worldwide.It focuses on strategic areas of digital policies aimed at developing effective,accountable and inclusive public institutions and collects information on countries institutional,legal and strategic frameworks.All of the leading countries responded to the MSQ(see figur

290、e 1.6),with the exception of the United States,for which additional desk research was undertaken by the Survey data team.The 2022 findings confirm those highlighted in the 2020 Survey,indicating consistency and steady progress in the digital transformation journey and the ability of Governments to d

291、o more than just manage external IcT vendors.These countries have built the capacity to create products and develop platforms;guided by strategic digital policies,they have established a core infrastructure of shared digital systems,technologies,processes and organizational models that have provided

292、 a strong but flexible framework for the development and delivery of data-driven user-centric government services.For these countries,the whole-of-government approach has been strongly institutionalized through a central body such as a department,ministry or agency led by a high-ranking government o

293、fficersuch as a national chief information officer(cIO)or chief digital technology officerthat is in charge of a multi-year digital agenda and reports to the cabinet of the president or the prime minister.This central body contributes to policy formulation and coordinates policy implementation for t

294、he Government and has wide-ranging responsibilities relating to digital services for e-government applications,data science and artificial intelligence,traditional and cloud infrastructure,cybersecurity,the Internet of things,and much more.The leading Governments engage in policy,regulatory and tech

295、nology experimentation and sandboxing to test,develop and adapt cutting-edge technologies for use in e-services provision and smart city development.This group leads the pack in providing specialized portals for e-services,e-participation,open government data and public procurement.The MSQ responses

296、 indicate that the leading countries have specialized legislation or regulations pertaining to digital procurement,digital identity and digital signatures;the legal framework also addresses data sharing,interoperability across public agencies,and access to information such as government expenditures

297、.All of the countries have pending or active strategic initiatives to promote the use of emerging technologies in e-government.2022 UN E-GovErNmENt SUrvEy10Chapter 1Figure 1.6 Member States Questionnaires:key findings for the top EGDI performers*(number of countries responding positively to the ques

298、tions)Are there multiple and/or networked CIOs or equivalent positions across government agencies,departments and ministries?8Does the country have a chief information officer(CIO)or equivalent to manage its national e-government strategies and programmes?140123456789101112131415Institutional framew

299、orkIs there a specific national portal or a dedicated section addressing the COVID-19 pandemic?140123456789101112131415COVID-19 response measuresAre there multiple and/or networked CIOs or equivalent positions across government agencies,departments and ministries?8Does the country have a chief infor

300、mation officer(CIO)or equivalent to manage its national e-government strategies and programmes?140123456789101112131415Institutional frameworkIs there any legislation,law or regulation on the use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence(AI),robotics,blockchain,5G and Internet of Things(Io

301、T)?9Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digitally publishing government expenditure?11=Is there any legislation,law or regulation on data sharing,exchange,or interoperability across government agencies?11Is there any legislation,law or regulation on open government data?11Is there any legi

302、slation,law or regulation on access to information such as Freedom of Information Act?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on cybersecurity?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on e-procurement?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on data privacy and/or protection?14Is there

303、any legislation,law or regulation on digital identity?14Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digital signature?140123456789101112131415Legal framework0123456789101112131415Future of digital government Does the government provide any specific e-participation measures for women and other vuln

304、erable populations?11Is there a national e-participation policy,strategy or similar instrument?12Does the government provide any specific measure to ensure meaningful connectivity or access to e-government services for women and other vulnerable populations?12Does the government provide any specific

305、 e-services for women and other vulnerable populations?12Does the government provide any specific measure to build digital literacy or skills for women and other vulnerable populations?13Does the government publish information on how peoples voices,including those among women and the vulnerable popu

306、lations,are included in policy decision-making?13 Is there a national policy,strategy or similar measure in ensuring digital inclusion and leaving no one behind?14Does the government use any social media platform(s)?140123456789101112131415Measures to leave no one behindDoes the Government have any

307、measure for policy experimentation and/or regulatory sandboxes in using digital technologies?10Does the Government use any foresight tools,such as scenario planning,in visioning the future of digital government?8Is there any legislation,law or regulation on the use of new technologies such as artifi

308、cial intelligence(AI),robotics,blockchain,5G and Internet of Things(IoT)?9Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digitally publishing government expenditure?11=Is there any legislation,law or regulation on data sharing,exchange,or interoperability across government agencies?11Is there any leg

309、islation,law or regulation on open government data?11Is there any legislation,law or regulation on access to information such as Freedom of Information Act?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on cybersecurity?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on e-procurement?13Is there any legis

310、lation,law or regulation on data privacy and/or protection?14Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digital identity?14Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digital signature?140123456789101112131415Legal frameworkDoes the national e-government strategy make specific reference to the

311、use of new technologies(such as AI,robotics,blockchain,5G and Internet of Things)?110123456789101112131415Strategy and implementation Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to or is it aligned with a sub-national or local e-government development strategy?10Is there a nation

312、al e-government strategy or equivalent?14Is the national e-government strategy guided by or aligned with the national development strategy?12Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to e-participation,engagement and digital inclusion?11Does the national e-government strategy m

313、ake specific reference to digital-by-default,digital-by-design,digital-first or similar principles?11Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to national digital identity?11Is the national e-government strategy guided by or aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs)?

314、11Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to data-once-only or similar principles?10Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to a national data governance or similar framework?10Does the Government have any measure for policy experimentation and/or regu

315、latory sandboxes in using digital technologies?10Does the Government use any foresight tools,such as scenario planning,in visioning the future of digital government?8Is there a specific post-COVID-19 digital strategy for recovery and allocation of public resources(for example,for digital transformat

316、ion,digital inclusion)?11Is there any specific budget allocated for new initiative or measure of e-government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and/or in supporting recovery?10Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to the use of new technologies(such as AI,robotics,blockc

317、hain,5G and Internet of Things)?110123456789101112131415Strategy and implementation Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to or is it aligned with a sub-national or local e-government development strategy?10Is there a national e-government strategy or equivalent?14Is the na

318、tional e-government strategy guided by or aligned with the national development strategy?12Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to e-participation,engagement and digital inclusion?11Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to digital-by-default,digit

319、al-by-design,digital-first or similar principles?11Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to national digital identity?11Is the national e-government strategy guided by or aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs)?11Does the national e-government strategy make spe

320、cific reference to data-once-only or similar principles?10Does the national e-government strategy make specific reference to a national data governance or similar framework?1011Chapter 1Chapter 1 Global trends in e-GovernmentFigure 1.6(continued)The MSQ responses reveal considerable variation betwee

321、n regions in the enactment of legislation on open government data,with European countries reporting the highest rate of adoption of such legislation,followed by Asian countries.The 2022 Survey data indicate that all 15 countries in the VH rating class have a national development strategy that incorp

322、orates SDG objectives.These countries have a national policy or strategy to ensure digital inclusion and leaving no one behind.Governments are publishing information about peoples voices being included in policymaking,with specific e-participation measures implemented for vulnerable groups.The count

323、ries in the top rating class either empower their citizens through investment in strengthening digital literacy and competency or stimulate the activation of inclusive practices by setting out standards on how the Government and partners from the public,private and voluntary sectors should maximize

324、accessibility to digital services.1.5 OSI,TII and HCI performance for each EGDI groupAs indicated in table 1.1 and figures 1.3 and 1.7,OSI,TII and HcI subindex values for countries in the very high EGDI group are significantly higher than the corresponding world averages,especially for those in the

325、top two rating classes(VH and V3).For countries in the top(HV)rating class of the high EGDI group,OSI,TII and HcI values are still above,albeit closer to,the world averages.For countries in the H3 and H2 rating classes of the high EGDI group,the subindex values start to decline,and values drop below

326、 the world averages for countries in the H1 rating class.For countries in the middle and low EGDI groups,all three subindices have values below the respective world averages,with rare exceptions;those with HcI values that are well above the world average of 0.700 include cuba(0.8384),Turkmenistan(0.

327、7892),libya(0.7534)and Samoa(0.7470),and the TII value for Myanmar(0.6082)is higher than the global average of 0.5750.Is there a specific national portal or a dedicated section addressing the COVID-19 pandemic?140123456789101112131415COVID-19 response measuresAre there multiple and/or networked CIOs

328、 or equivalent positions across government agencies,departments and ministries?8Does the country have a chief information officer(CIO)or equivalent to manage its national e-government strategies and programmes?140123456789101112131415Institutional frameworkIs there any legislation,law or regulation

329、on the use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence(AI),robotics,blockchain,5G and Internet of Things(IoT)?9Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digitally publishing government expenditure?11=Is there any legislation,law or regulation on data sharing,exchange,or interoperability

330、across government agencies?11Is there any legislation,law or regulation on open government data?11Is there any legislation,law or regulation on access to information such as Freedom of Information Act?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on cybersecurity?13Is there any legislation,law or reg

331、ulation on e-procurement?13Is there any legislation,law or regulation on data privacy and/or protection?14Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digital identity?14Is there any legislation,law or regulation on digital signature?140123456789101112131415Legal framework0123456789101112131415Futu

332、re of digital government Does the government provide any specific e-participation measures for women and other vulnerable populations?11Is there a national e-participation policy,strategy or similar instrument?12Does the government provide any specific measure to ensure meaningful connectivity or ac

333、cess to e-government services for women and other vulnerable populations?12Does the government provide any specific e-services for women and other vulnerable populations?12Does the government provide any specific measure to build digital literacy or skills for women and other vulnerable populations?13Does the government publish information on how peoples voices,including those among women and the