e-Government in Switzerland

Despite ranking one position above the UK in the e-readiness rankings (12th.,) due to Switzerland’s high connectivity (comparable with Scandinavian countries) its e-government thrust has been relatively meager with no e-government legislation and compliance to standards being largely up to the Cantons.

At the federal level it has been an up hill battle to engage local government within Switzerland’s distinctive federal system of direct democracy through largely autonomous Cantons and municipalities despite the opportunities such a structure offers for innovative local e-services.

The e-government program commenced in 2002 with the publication of the country’s first e-government strategy – one year later a study showed little development of e-services and a lack of clear objectives and similar studies have revealed that citizens remain largely unaware and the current e-service offerings fail to meet expectation and are under used.

As one might expect from such a political structure e-voting has been an early and popular development and possibly one of Switzerland’s more significant e-government developments.

E-voting is seen as a way in which Switzerland’s tradition of direct democracy can be kept abreast of modern developments.

Although e-government strategy is the responsibility of the Federal government’s FSUIT - implementation is the responsibility of the numerous cantons and municipalities. Whilst the Federal government understands the need to set standards there is no effective way to ensure compliance.

The Swiss Federal government, has perforce, taken a different path to e-government in that customer centricity (putting the customer at the heart of the service provision) or G2C is given far less priority than G2B and G2G and the main emphasis of FSUIT has been largely technical advice and guidance, e.g. checklists, etc., and policy guidelines (methods and instruments) that are largely concerned with the technical infrastructure. Switzerland was an early adopters of open source software, TOGAF,SOA. The new FSUIT e-government strategy of 2007 (whilst hardly a detailed strategy) continues the trend towards consensus at the Cantonal level and efforts to impose connected governance at the Federal level through greater harmonization of data registries, updated technical guidelines, topic catalogues, identity and access management models. This continuing trend probably reflects the relatively limited power of the Federal government rather than any desire to exclude the citizenry.

The Swiss approach remains largely theoretical (derived from numerous ‘think tanks’ and forums ) which, without the cooperation of the many local government bodies, remains largely esoteric and only of practical importance to Federal Government services, e.g. cross border data exchange with its EU neighbors.

Although such initiatives, e.g. Sedex, will help to provide more joined-up, efficient and effective whole-of-government working in the future the issue of implementation at the local level remains a major issue.

To this end the FSUIT has developed a framework agreement or memorandum of understanding and a catalogue of prioritized projects (similar to the UK’s Priority Outcomes).

However, the fragmented nature of accountability and the need for local compliance has proved problematic in the past and will probably continue to stall the federal government’s efforts in the future.

Analysis

Switzerland’s distinctive federal system of direct democracy presents opportunity and challenge. There is a clear opportunity for e-participation at a local level and the challenge of marshalling support and consensus for unification, e.g. the national portal, and standardizing key aspects of the Swiss e-gov. program in an environment that is overburdened by input (numerous academic bodies) and where accountability (often given to academic bodies) and governance reflects the patchwork political landscape.

A further challenge is the close proximity and influence of the EU on Switzerland – making harmonization a key ingredient of any future Swiss e-government program.

The dichotomy that pulls Switzerland towards greater harmonization with Europe and greater individualism at home will continue to pull the Federal authorities (responsible for e-government strategy) in different directions for a number of years to come.

However, as e-participation in Europe becomes more of a priority Switzerland may well become an exemplar for local e-government as it has for government in the past.

Strengths

Switzerland’s greatest asset is its long tradition of direct government (federalism).

If this individualistic localized engagement with its citizenry can be converted to cost-effective e-government services, e-participation and e-democracy at the local level - the Swiss could become a global leader in the e-government movement.

An additional strength is the high level of efficiency of its paper based processes and the effectiveness of many of its current government services.

This pre-existing strength should make it easier for government at all levels to automate and e-enable their services effectively.

Switzerland’s relatively small size is also an advantage and the remoteness of many communities (given Switzerland’s excellent networked infrastructure) should reduce the cost of access to government services for those communities.Switzerland’s neutrality (making it the headquarters of numerous international bodies), strong well balanced economy and its close juxtaposition to the EU makes imperative that Switzerland moves with the times and ensures that they will be positively influenced by events and organizations around them. As a result harmonization with the rest of the world is likely to become the driving force for regional government in Switzerland.

Weaknesses

Unfortunately, most of Switzerland’s strengths are also its weaknesses.

The closeness of its government structures to the people can only be capitalized on if local and regional government can exercise its individuality and local innovation within a framework of cooperation, sharing, a level of standardization and a common mind set.

In the past this has been difficult achieve and has led to costly waste, duplication, poor management of e-government projects through a lack of coordination.

A further disadvantage is the tri-lingual nature of the country, although neither a lack of cooperation or language barriers has proven to be a significant barrier to progress when the country is united behind a common cause.

The ability of Switzerland to unite behind this particular cause has polarized the federal government, academia and business on the one hand from local politically driven service providers on the other. The former looking to provide both the theoretical and physical framework for connected governance; the latter largely clinging to tradition. Whilst bridging the gap between the often conflicting objectives of centralization and decentralization has been difficult for many countries, e.g. the UK, central government usually has the means (often funding) to ensure its will is translated, albeit not always enthusiastically, at the local level. This is not the case in Switzerland.

The relative quantity and sophistication of e-services in the country remains low.

Opportunities

The opportunity for Switzerland is the translation of direct federalism into Gov 2.0.

The e-participatory Web 2.0 tools may enable (encourage) local government to assume the lead (thereby reversing the normal top-down approach) providing some much needed momentum to the e-government program in Switzerland.

Switzerland has a late-starter opportunity to use its natural Gov 2.0 attributes, small size, and pre-eminent position as the base for world change agents coupled with current trends in technology, e.g. Web 2.0 and a strong network infrastructure to leverage its economic standing in the world still further.

Switzerland has many creditable academic organizations engaged with development of standards and projects at the federal level – there is the opportunity to engage closer to the point of service delivery, i.e. the regions and cantons in which they operate.

Threats

The greatest threat to Switzerland’s e-government program is the lack coordination.

Switzerland needs a more detailed strategy focused on sharing, cooperation, adoption and change at the local level (a simple MOU is unlikely to prove effective). Switzerland will need a unique strategy that efficiently and effectively establishes a paradigm shift in thinking across local government and initiates a coordinated and cost effective bottom-up e-government program.

Switzerland’s e-government program also needs to find a better approach to translating its praxis oriented (theory driven) approach to real application at the local level rather than only being at a federal level, where the plethora of largely good theoretical advice and accountability (too many cooks spoil the broth) has no effective means of being put into practice or being effectively monitored.

Have Your Say!

If you are in anyway involved with e-service programs. Whether it is BIG e-government, e-health, e-cities, etc., or SMALL e-service strategies for SMEs and Ma & Pa Online Businesses or even a MIX of the two, e.g. National e-Commerce Programs for SMEs. ....

e-service-expert.com wants to hear from you.

So do the world a favor! Share your knowledge with others. You can really help...so have your say now!