Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:20:19.081Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward the European administrative space: the role of e-government policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

Francesco Amoretti  and
Fortunato Musella
Francesco Amoretti*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology and Political Science, Università degli Studi Salerno, Via Ponte don Mellillo – Fisciano, Salerno, Italy
Fortunato Musella*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Vico Monte di Pietà I, Naples, Italy
*
* E-mail: amoretti@unisa.it, fortunato.musella@unina.it
* E-mail: amoretti@unisa.it, fortunato.musella@unina.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ‘challenge of convergence’ has become a core element of the European policy-making agenda. Many programs have been initiated by European institutions with a view to ensure uniformity in administrative actions and structures. In this article, we will investigate the formation of a ‘European administrative space’ as a result of a process of convergence toward a common European model, looking, in particular, at the role of communication and information technologies. As numerous policy documents produced by the European Commission indicate, new technologies have the potential to create administrative systems that are integrated across the European context in terms of their semantic, organizational, and technical content. We will pay close attention to the role of technological standardization in promoting economic development and competitiveness, as well as considering security policy as an example of ‘homogenization through technology’.

Keywords

European administrative spacee-government policyinteroperabilitytechnological standardizationsecurity
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , 25 February 2011 , pp. 35 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © European Consortium for Political Research 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alabau, A. (2004), The European Union and Its eGovernment Development Policy. Following the Lisbon Strategy Objectives, Valencia: University of Valencia.Google Scholar
Amoretti, F. (2006), ‘E-Government at Supranational Level in the European Union’, in A. Anttiroiko and M. Malkia (eds), Encyclopedia of Digital Government, Hershey, New York: Information Science Reference.Google Scholar
Amoretti, F.Musella, F. (2008), ‘Institutional Isomorphism and New Technologies’, in M. Khosrow-Pour (ed.), Encyclopedia of Digital Government, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc, pp. 2066–2071.Google Scholar
Baldersheim, H. (2006), ‘The future of the periphery in information society. Or: Stein Rokkan meets Manuel Castells’. Paper presented at the Conference on Towards a New Nordic Regionalism?, Sogn og Fjordane University College, Balestrand.Google Scholar
Baptista, M. (2005), ‘e-Government and state reform: policy dilemmas for Europe’, Electronic Journal of e-Government 3(4): 167–174.Google Scholar
Börzel, T., Risse, T. (2000), ‘When Europe hits home. Europeanization and domestic change’. European Integration Online Papers.Google Scholar
Bulmer, S. (2007), ‘Theorizing Europeanization’, in P. Graziano and M.P. Vink (eds), Europeanization: New Research Agendas, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Burgelman, J.C.Clements, B. (2003), ‘A new paradigm for eGovernment services’, IPTS Report Issue, October.Google Scholar
Capgemini (2009), ‘Benchmark measurement of European eGovernment services’. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
Caporaso, J.A.Cowles, M.G. (2001), Transforming Europe: Europeanization and Domestic Change, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cassese, S. (2004), ‘Shrimps, turtles and procedure: global standards for national administrations’. IILJ Working Paper, Global Administrative Law Series 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassese, S. (2006a), ‘Four features of the European administrative space’. Paper presented at the Connex Thematic Conference towards a European Administrative Space, Birbeck College, London.Google Scholar
Cassese, S. (2006b), Oltre lo Stato, Roma-Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Cassese, S. (2008), ‘Is there a global administrative law’. Retrieved 26 January 2010 from http://www.irpa.euGoogle Scholar
Centeno, C., van Bavel, R.Burgelman, J.C. (2005), ‘A prospective view of e-Government in the European Union’, The Electronic Journal of e-Government 3(2): 59–66.Google Scholar
Coene, Y., Gasser, R. (2007), ‘Joint operability workshop report “Towards a single information space for environment in Europe” ’, Frascati.Google Scholar
D’Orta, G. (2003), ‘What future for the European Administrative Space’. Opening Report of the Head of Italian Department of Public Function, Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2003a), ‘Linking up Europe: the importance of interoperability for e-government services’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2003b), ‘A secure Europe in a better world’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2004a), ‘European interoperability framework for Pan-European E-government services’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2004b), ‘e-Health – making healthcare better for European citizens: an action plan for a European e-health area’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2005), ‘Working together for growth and jobs. A new start for the Lisbon strategy’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2006a), ‘Green paper in detection technologies in the work of law enforcement, customs and other security authorities’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2006b), ‘Interoperability for Pan-European eGovernment services’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2006c), ‘i2010 – eGovernment action plan: accelerating eGovernment in Europe for the benefit of all’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2007a), ‘i2010 – annual information society report’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2007b), ‘Research for a secure Europe’. Report of the Group of Personalities in the Field of Security Research, Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2007c), ‘Breaking barriers to eGovernment. Overcoming obstacles to improving European Public Services’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2008a), ‘Towards a shared environmental information system (SEIS)’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2008b), ‘Action plan on e-signatures and e-identification to facilitate the provision of crossborder public services in the single market’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2009a), ‘MC-eGov: study on multi-channel delivery strategies and sustainable business models for public services addressing socially disadvantaged groups’. Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission (2009b), ‘i2010 eGovernment action plan progress study’. Summary Report, Brussels.Google Scholar
European Council (2000), ‘Presidency conclusions’. Lisbon.Google Scholar
Featherstone, K. (2003), ‘Introduction: In the name of ‘Europe’, in K. Featherstone and C.M. Radaelli (eds), The Politics of Europeanization, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Featherstone, K.Radaelli, C.M. (2003), The Politics of Europeanization, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Follesdal, A.Hix, S. (2006), ‘Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: a response to Majone and Moravcsik’, Journal of Common Market Studies 44(3): 533–562.Google Scholar
Fortsakis, T. (2005), ‘Principles governing good administration’, European Law Review 2: 207–217.Google Scholar
Fountain, J.E. (2001), Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change, Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Fossum, J.E.Schlesinger, P. (eds) (2007), ‘The European Union and the Public Sphere: A Communicative Space in the Making?’, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Giorgi, L., Crowley, J.Ney, S. (2001), ‘Surveying the European public space. A political and research agenda’, The European Journal of Social Science Research 14(1): 73–83.Google Scholar
Goetz, K. (2001), ‘European integration and national executives: a cause in search of an effect?’, in K. Goetz and S. Hix (eds), Europeanised Politics? European Integration and National Systems, London: Routledge, pp. 211–231.Google Scholar
Guijarro, L. (2005), ‘Policy and practice in standards selection for E-Government interoperability frameworks’, Electronic Government, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Graziano, P.Vink, M.P. (eds) (2006), Europeanization: New Research Agendas, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Harlow, C. (2005), ‘Law and public administration: convergence and symbiosis’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 7(2): 279–294.Google Scholar
Harlow, C. (2006), ‘Global administrative Law’, The European Journal of International Law 17(1): 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, H.C. (2008), ‘Mapping the European Administrative Space’, West European Politics 31(4): 662–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICT task force (2006), ‘Fostering the competiveness of Europe’s ICT industry’. Brussels.Google Scholar
i2010 High Level Group (2006), ‘The challenge of converge’. Brussels.Google Scholar
Idabc (2005a), ‘The impact of eGovernment on competitiveness, growth and jobs’. Brussels.Google Scholar
Idabc (2005b), ‘eGovernment on the member states of the European Union’. Brussels.Google Scholar
Idabc (2006), ‘eServices. Bringing government closer to the people’, Synergy. The Idabc Quarterly 7.Google Scholar
Idabc (2009), ‘Preliminary study on mutual recognition of eSignatures for eGovernment applications’. Brussels.Google Scholar
International Working Group on Administrative Burdens (2004), ‘The standard cost model: a framework for defining and quantifying administrative burdens for businesses’, Paris: Oecd.Google Scholar
Leitner, C. (2003), ‘eGovernment in Europe: the state of affairs’. Atlanta.Google Scholar
Lessig, L. (1999), Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lowi, T.J. (1992), ‘The political marriage of information technology & bureaucracy’, in L. Hill (ed.), The State of Public Bureaucracy, Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 203–208.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1998), ‘Europe “democratic deficit”: the question of standards’, European Law Journal 4(1): 5–28.Google Scholar
Menz, G. (2008), Varieties of Capitalism and Europeanization. National Response Strategies to the Single European Market, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ministers Responsible for eGovernment Policy of the European Union (2009), ‘Ministerial declaration on eGovernment’. Malmö, Sweden.Google Scholar
Moravcsick, A. (2002), ‘In defence of the democratic deficit: reassessing the legitimacy of the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies 40(4): 603–634.Google Scholar
Moxon-Brown, E. (2004), ‘Administrative capacity in the European Union: how high can we jump?’ In conference “Towards EU together Faculty of Economics”, Skopje.Google Scholar
Nixon, P.Koutrakou, V. (eds) (2007), ‘E-government in Europe: Re-booting the State’, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Olsen, J.P. (2002), ‘Toward an Administrative European Space?’, Journal of Common Market Studies 40(5): 921–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overeem, A., Witters, J.Peristeras, V. (2007), ‘An interoperability framework for Pan-European E-government services (PEGS)’, in Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
Peristeras, V., Loutas, N.Goudos, S.K. (2008), ‘A conceptual analysis of semantic conflicts in pan-European e-government services’, Journal of Information Science 34(6): 877–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piana, D. (2006), ‘Costruire la democrazia. Ai confini dello spazio pubblico Europeo’. Liviana, Novara.Google Scholar
Portuguese Council Presidency (2007), ‘Public security, privacy and technology in Europe: moving forward’. Concept Paper on the European Strategy to Transform Public Security Organizations in a Connected World. Lisbon.Google Scholar
Radaelli, C. (2000), ‘Policy transfer in the European Union: institutional isomorphism as a source of legitimacy’, Governance 13(1): 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Realini, A.F. (2004), ‘G2G E-government: the big challenge for Europe’. Zürich: University of Zürich.Google Scholar
Risse, T. (2003), ‘An emerging European public spheres. Theoretical clarification and empirical indicators’. In Annual Conference of the European Union Studies Association, Nashville.Google Scholar
Roy, J. (2005), ‘Security, sovereignty and continental interoperability’, Social Science Computer Review 23(4): 463–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, C. (2008), ‘U.S. and Europe near agreement on private data’, The New York Times, June 28.Google Scholar
Shapiro, M. (2004), The Institutionalization of European Administrative Space, Berkeley, CA: Center for Culture, Organizations and Politics.Google Scholar
Schneider, V. (2004), ‘The transformation of the state in the digital age’, in S. Puntscher Riekmann, M. Mokre and M. Latzer (eds), The State of Europe. Transformations of Statehood from a European Perspective, Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, pp. 51–72.Google Scholar
Siedentopf, H.Speer, B. (2003), ‘The European administrative space from a German administrative science perspective’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 69(1): 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statewatch Observatory (2008), ‘The shape of things to come – EU Future Group’. London.Google Scholar
van Ark, B., Inklaar, R. (2005), ‘Catching up or getting stuck? Europe’s troubles to exploit ICT’s productivity potential’. Groningen: Groningen Growth and Development Centre.Google Scholar
Wimmer, M.A. (2001), ‘European development toward online one-stop government: the “E-Gov” project’. ICEC2001 Conference, Vienna.Google Scholar
Wimmer, M.A. (2002), ‘A European perspective toward online one-stop government: the eGOV project’, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 1: 92–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar