Challenges and opportunities of e‐government in South Africa

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present challenges and opportunities of e‐government implementation in South Africa with special reference to service delivery and implications for libraries.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on an in‐depth literature review from government documents, presidential state of the nation addresses, global and nation reports on e‐government, and reports on service delivery concerns in South Africa.FindingsThe Government of South Africa has put in place enabling policies, poverty alleviation programmes, ICT infrastructures and regulatory frameworks which as yet have not been effectively leveraged to enhance service delivery to its citizens. Furthermore, libraries have yet to make any attempts to benefit from the emergence of e‐government in South Africa.Practical implicationsThere is a need to infuse an e‐government ethos in poverty alleviation programmes in order to enhance service delivery. At the moment there is a lack of synergy between the two in South Africa. Additionally, South African ICT infrastructure is under‐utilised to enhance service delivery. Libraries have the opportunity using e‐government infrastructure to improve the provision of information services to the people.Originality/valueService delivery remains a priority for the post‐apartheid South African government, and the paper reveals that a disconnect exists between the e‐government vision and the poverty alleviation programmes aimed at enhancing the standard of living of the people. Libraries in South Africa have yet to leverage e‐government to provide information services and the paper may assist them in doing so.

E-Government Implementation: A Reflection on South African Municipalities

“…Also, there is insufficient funding to spend on ICT and high operational costs (Ebrahim & Irani, 2005;Heeks, 2002;Tat-Kei Ho, 2002); partnership and collaboration across public, private and non-profit sectors is lacking (Ndou, 2004); a lack of e-readiness necessary for implementing e-Government initiatives. E-Readiness incorporates the necessary technical infrastructure, data systems, policy issues and legal environment, human capital and skills, as well as a supporting strategy and leadership commitment (Heeks, 2002;Ndou, 2004;Mutula & Mostert, 2010; United Nations Secretariat Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2008b).…”

“…Scholars have purported that e-Government projects have seen more failures than successes (Anthopoulos et al, 2016;Guha & Chakrabarti, 2014;Heeks & Molla, 2009;Nurdin, Stockdale, & Scheepers, 2012 Bank, 2011, p. vii) In their paper, Mutula and Mostert (2010) cite some South African examples of e-Government projects that did not meet stakeholder expectations. These include the Golaganang project that was to provide government employees with cost effective ICT resources and address their digital literacy needs however it failed to launch.…”

“…These include the Golaganang project that was to provide government employees with cost effective ICT resources and address their digital literacy needs however it failed to launch. Alternatively a project for the National Welfare Agency which did start with an intention to rollout over three years was found to have only reached 40% of their goals in the sixth year of the project with higher than anticipated costs (Mutula & Mostert, 2010). Heeks (2005) highlights that there are three main types of outcomes for e-Government projects namely: Firstly, a total failure: the initiative was never implemented or was implemented but immediately abandoned.…”

The factors that influence customer e-services adoption

“…It also contributes to the economic growth in South Africa. Given that acceptable ICT is in place, South Africans lean more towards the convenience of using e-services such as e-government [35].…”

Governance of Cybersecurity - The Case of South Africa

“…Like other countries, South Africa adopted a variety of approaches to e-government at national, provincial and municipal levels, purportedly all under the Department of Public Service and Administration (Trusler, 2003;Mutula & Mostert, 2010;Cloete, 2012;DPSA, n.d.;Mawela, 2017), though most recently from DTPS (2017b). Beginning in 1997, there was a slow process of consultation and adoption, aimed at increasing productivity and efficiency for government and improving convenience for citizens.…”