This presentation features a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis of electronic government (e-gov) services.

1. Government-to-consumer
electronic government (e-gov)
services
Prof. Mark Anthony Camilleri, University of Malta
and
Ms. Adriana Camilleri, Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology

2. Introduction
• Government-to-consumer e-gov services
are intended to deliver information and
public services to online (and mobile
users);
• They facilitate communications between
the government and its consumers (Pérez-
Morote, Pontones-Rosa & Núñez-Chicharro,
2020; Twizeyimana & Andersson, 2019; UN,
2020).
• Consumers can access a wide array of e-
gov services in different contexts (e.g.
transport and communications; identity,
citizenship and immigration; taxes and
finance; health and community care, et
cetera).
Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022

3. Strengths of e-gov
For consumers
• Access to government information (Rana, Dwivedi & Williams, 2013) through
electronic and mobile devices, including laptops, tablets or smartphones, from
anywhere, anytime;
• Convenient and responsive automated systems (Jansson & Erlingsson, 2014)
improve the government’s public services, for the benefit of consumers;
• Online users can download certificates or documents. Such services could have required long
queuing hours (and the processing of documents could have necessitated a number of days
to complete in a manual manner).
For the government
• Cost-effective systems (Bertot, Jaeger & Grimes, 2010) as they provide saving
opportunities to the government to store information and to maintain
documents);
• Accountability and transparency of automated systems can reduce corrupt
practices.
Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022

4. Weaknesses of e-gov
For consumers
• Internet access, language and computing skills (digital divide) (Pérez-Morote et al., 2020);
• Browser requirements (and plugins) through desktop and mobile devices may restrict access
to e-gov services (Da Silva Neto & Chiarini, 2021);
• Variety and complexity of online government services (Cordella & Iannacci, 2010).
For the government
• The development and implementation of e-gov infrastructures involves a considerable
investment in terms of time, as well as financial and human resources (Pérez-Morote et al.,
2020);
• Some citizens are still not using e-gov services (Yera, Arbelaitz, Jauregui & Muguerza, 2020).
The government ought to identify the barriers and facilitators that hinder/enable individuals
from utilising e-gov systems.
Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022

5. Opportunities of e-gov
For consumers
• Equitable access to computers and the Internet (Furuholt & Sæbø, 2018) through different
venues (e.g. local councils);
• The provision of ongoing training opportunities to vulnerable citizens who lack computer
knowledge (Lee & Porumbescu, 2019);
• Provision of secure systems: Citizens availing themselves of e-gov systems have to be
reassured that they are secure (as their private data will not be transmitted through the
third parties) (Alharbi, Halikias, Rajarajan & Yamin, 2021).
For the government
• Policy and regulation: Government policies, laws on data protection, computer crime,
intellectual property rights and copyright issues (e.g., through Blockchain technologies)
(Alharbi et al., 2021);
• Investments in infrastructures (Uwizeyimana, 2022) and facilitating conditions (Camilleri,
2019), training and development (of employees and consumers, including businesses) as
well as in informational campaigns to raise awareness about e-gov systems to encourage
consumers to use them;
• Funding can be obtained from European Union (EU) funds, grants and subsidies.
Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022

6. Threats of e-gov
For consumers
• Negative perceptions and attitudes toward online technologies (e.g. on their ease-of-use
and/or usability features), and resistance to change (inertia) (Reissig, Stoinescu & Mack,
2022);
• Anxiety and apprehension about information sharing through the Internet;
• Poor technical design and functionality issues of e-gov systems (Antoni, Syaputra & Nasir,
2019);
• Lack of trust in the security features of e-gov websites/apps.
For the government
• Computer-illiterate citizens (a digitally divided society);
• Lack of awareness among the general public about e-gov services;
• Bureaucratic systems and red tape (Sangki, 2018);
• Lack of coordination among government entities and their stakeholders (Glyptis,
Christofi, Vrontis, Del Giudice, Dimitriou & Michael, 2020).
Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022

7. References
• Alharbi, A. S., Halikias, G., Rajarajan, M., & Yamin, M. (2021). A review of effectiveness of Saudi E-government data security management. International Journal of Information
Technology, 13(2), 573-579.
• Antoni, D., Syaputra, A., & Nasir, M. (2019, October). A literature review of infrastructure capabilities in shared e-Government concept. In 2019 International Conference on Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science (ICECOS) (117-121). IEEE, New York, USA.
• Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies.
Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264-271.
• Camilleri, M.A. (2020). The online users’ perceptions toward electronic government services, Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 18(2), 221-235.
• Cordella, A., & Iannacci, F. (2010). Information systems in the public sector: The e-Government enactment framework. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19(1), 52-66.
• Da Silva Neto, V. J., & Chiarini, T. (2021). Technological progress and political systems: non-institutional digital platforms and political transformation. Technology in Society, 64, 101460.
• Furuholt, B., & Sæbø, Ø. (2018). The role telecentres play in providing e‐government services in rural areas: A longitudinal study of Internet access and e‐government services in
Tanzania. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 84(1), e12006.
• Glyptis, L., Christofi, M., Vrontis, D., Del Giudice, M., Dimitriou, S., & Michael, P. (2020). E-Government implementation challenges in small countries: The project manager's perspective.
Technological Forecasting and social change, 152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119880
• Jansson, G., & Erlingsson, G. Ó. (2014). More e-government, less street-level bureaucracy? On legitimacy and the human side of public administration. Journal of Information
Technology & Politics, 11(3), 291-308.
• Lee, J. B., & Porumbescu, G. A. (2019). Engendering inclusive e-government use through citizen IT training programs. Government Information Quarterly, 36(1), 69-76.
• Pérez-Morote, R., Pontones-Rosa, C., & Núñez-Chicharro, M. (2020). The effects of e-government evaluation, trust and the digital divide in the levels of e-government use in European
countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119973
• Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2013). Analysing challenges, barriers and CSF of egov adoption. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 7(2), 177-198.
• Reissig, L., Stoinescu, A., & Mack, G. (2022). Why farmers perceive the use of e-government services as an administrative burden: A conceptual framework on influencing factors.
Journal of Rural Studies, 89, 387-396.
• Sangki, J. (2018). Vision of future e-government via new e-government maturity model: Based on Korea's e-government practices. Telecommunications Policy, 42(10), 860-871.
• Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of E-Government–A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167-178. UN (2020). E-Government Survey
2020, Digital Government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development (With addendum on COVID-19 Response), United Nations, New York, USA. https://www.un-
ilibrary.org/content/books/9789210051453
• Uwizeyimana, D. E. (2022). Analysing the importance of e-government in times of disruption: The case of public education in Rwanda during Covid-19 lockdown. Evaluation and
Program Planning, 91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102064
Camilleri & Camilleri, 2022

8. Thanks for your attention.
• Please do not hesitate to ask any questions.
Mark.A.Camilleri@um.edu.mt
Adriana.Camilleri@mcast.edu.mt