- From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:59:13 +0100
- To: "eGov IG (Public)" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
MAA good to hear this from a 'yankee' (presuming you are from the USA:-) stakeholder analysis for eGov IG? pdm On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Aisenberg, Michael A. <maisenberg@mitre.org> wrote: > Among a diverse group of very smart people from around the world in my experience there is often a risk of not appreciating how a seemingly trivial, to a U.S. Person, may be an "innovation" whose introduction in a different culture (say, India, or Morocco) is truly transformative, while to a Siberian, a piece of software being adopted by the IRS which has dramatic consequences for all U.S. taxpayers may be of NO consequnce...Many of us it appears aren't sufficiently sensitive to/don't "get" those differences....cultural/experiential... > M.A.A. Sent from handheld > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paola Di Maio [mailto:paola.dimaio@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 09:55 AM > To: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com> > Cc: eGov IG (Public) <public-egov-ig@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Fwd: what do you mean, e-gov? > > Thank you John > for challenging the challenge :-) > > the intended sense of the question was > > 'how do we know if the existing definition is adequate' - ie what > verification/evalidation > mechanisms doe we have in place to evaluate > the quality and usefulness of the work of the IG > > and > > 'how was the definition achieved? how do we ensure it embeds and > reflects the core values its community members uphold in matters of > e-government, such as democracy and human rights? > > ---------------------------------------------note--- > No legal government can operate outside the principles of > democracy and human rights, and the mediation of web technologies is > designed to > ensure, document and track how the governments operate within their > legal/legitimate mandates > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > also > > are the members consulted as to how useful/valid this definition is to them? > > is there any evidence of any such consultation? > > does the IG have a process to ensure > transparency/democracy/participation to the governance of the IG > itself, > > is the IG transformative, in this sense? > (ie, operate to achieve change, by practicing what it preaches) if > not, should it be? > > > > PDM > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM, John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com> wrote: >> This is an amazingly rich and thoughtful discussion --- thanks! >> >> I would like to challenge the assertion that that W3C eGov definition >> <http://www.w3.org/egov/> is inadequate. Like all W3C *G's (including >> WG's and IG's) the W3C eGov IG includes as it's context "The World" >> (which includes many forms of government) and "The Web" (although the >> definition is broadened to include other modes of communication. >> >> As I understand it, the W3C eGov IG is about _doing government better >> by decreasing the friction of citizen-citizen, citizen-government, and >> government-government communications_. It is not a democracy advocacy >> group, a human rights advocacy group, or an advocacy group for >> particular manifestations of technologies and services. But since it >> *is* a W3C group, it is naturally be a projection of the core values >> of the W3C (in process as well as content) and inevitably this will >> ave a democratic tone...but this is not the core purpose. >> >> Most W3C group charters are a balance between constraint (in order to >> get work done) and extensibility (in order to be inclusive of new >> views and rapid changes in technology). I think that the current W3C >> eGov IG brief strikes this balance --- but am willing to be corrected >> ;) >> >> John >> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Mick Phythian <mick.phythian@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I think you've discovered the difficulties I had in finding a working >>> definition of e-gov - hence the one I chose! >>> >>> Along with a definition of e-gov you'll then need a definition of democracy. >>> Many of us are in representative democracies; what aspects of e-government >>> require/lead to is direct democracy - I labelled this one of the 'antinomies >>> of modern government'. True e-government and representative democracy aren't >>> compatible... >>> >>> Mick http://greatemancipator.com >>> >>> On 27 April 2012 11:47, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thank you Tomasz >>>> >>>> >>>> > The W3C definition of EGOV is at the top of http://www.w3.org/egov/: >>>> > "eGovernment is the use of the Web and other information technologies >>>> > by governments to interact with the citizenry, between departments and >>>> > divisions, and with other governments". >>>> >>>> Who wrote this definition? (should the provenance of the working >>>> definition be stated?) >>>> >>>> How do we know that this definition is adequate for our purpose, and >>>> represents the view of the list members? >>>> (certainly it does not represent my view of e-Gov, and others >>>> we have heard so far) :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> It seems to me that such a definition reinforces the structural gap >>>> between >>>> 'governement' and 'citizenry', rather than diminishing it. >>>> >>>> Many of us like to think,for example, that citizens *are* the >>>> government, before they given a blue collar and transformed into fuel >>>> for the bureaucratic, dysfunctional political machinery >>>> >>>> Given appropriate democratic practices and adoption of technologies >>>> that support their participation, there should be no us and them. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > This process could perhaps lead to the revision of the W3C definition. >>>> >>>> >>>> oh yes, please :-) >>>> Thank you >>>> >>>> >>>> PDM >>>> >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Regards, >>>> > >>>> > Tomasz >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >> In the definition below, I am particularly interested in the word >>>> >> *transformation. * >>>> >> * >>>> >> * >>>> >> The question could be formulated as: >>>> >> how do bring transformation of traditional governance (from closed, >>>> >> secretive, self serving, corruption prone self established elites) to >>>> >> e-governance (assuming we establish among the principles of self >>>> >> governance: opennes, transparency, serving the common good, accountable >>>> >> and >>>> >> participative) >>>> > >>>> >> Since you have a Phd on the subject, could it be a good idea if you >>>> >> started >>>> >> an essay on the topic, and get others to chip in? >>>> >> * >>>> >> * >>>> >> *Cheers* >>>> >> * >>>> >> * >>>> >> *PDM >>>> >> * >>>> > >>>> >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Mick Phythian >>>> >> <mick.phythian@gmail.com>wrote: >>>> > >>>> >>> Having done a PhD on the area, the one I settled on was in a Canadian >>>> >>> report by Roy (2006, p.x), he further refines ‘e-government’ as “The >>>> >>> continuous innovation in the delivery of services, citizen >>>> >>> participation, >>>> >>> and governance through the transformation of external and internal >>>> >>> relationships by the use of information technology, especially the >>>> >>> Internet”. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Roy, J. (2006). *E-Government in Canada* (Reprinted 2008 ed.). Ottawa, >>>> >>> Canada: University of Ottawa.com >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Best of a bad bunch! >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Mick http://greatemancipator.com - still lurking >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On 24 April 2012 20:09, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> For those who have been around the last twenty years or any >>>> >>>> subset thereof, the question is not new. We each seem to >>>> >>>> use the same word with different meanings (anyone else laughing >>>> >>>> hysterically at this point?) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I was recently giving a talk and providing my own definition(s), and >>>> >>>> would have liked >>>> >>>> to point to the W3C definition of egov. But I could not remember >>>> >>>> whether >>>> >>>> we agreed on one, and where it can be accessed. Admittedly I have >>>> >>>> been >>>> >>>> away a lot lately. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> For example, for me egovernance applies to both >>>> >>>> the governance of civil society institutions (presumably the >>>> >>>> governance >>>> >>>> democratic institutions that are ruled by first principles, and the >>>> >>>> universal declaration of human rights, although in reality there may >>>> >>>> not be >>>> >>>> many governments that do so), as well as the governance of online >>>> >>>> communities, whereby the information and decisions are mediated by >>>> >>>> online >>>> >>>> technologies, or something like that. But not sure if this has been >>>> >>>> discussed >>>> >>>> I do not remember any such discussions on list. Is it my memory >>>> >>>> failing >>>> >>>> me again? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Any threads/uri's someone could kindly repost if these questions have >>>> >>>> already been asked? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> if not, i would invite the IG Chairs to start off with some proposed >>>> >>>> definitions, either on list or on wiki page possibly one for each >>>> >>>> term in >>>> >>>> our shared vocabulary, (wiki? url......), then members (other than >>>> >>>> pure >>>> >>>> lurkers) could introduce themseles and get their active participation >>>> >>>> in the >>>> >>>> group going by entering their own definitions/variations, with >>>> >>>> possibly a >>>> >>>> link to their profile >>>> >>>> so that we can start getting to know each other meaningfully?:-) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> sincerely >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> PDM >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> -- >>>> >>> Mick Phythian PhD >>>> >>> >>>> >>> http://greatemancipator.com >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mick Phythian PhD >>> >>> http://greatemancipator.com >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> John S. Erickson, Ph.D. >> Director, Web Science Operations >> Tetherless World Constellation (RPI) >> <http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com> >> Twitter & Skype: olyerickson >> >
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 14:59:42 UTC