Success and Failure in eGovernment Projects

Success/Failure Case Study No.15

Planning Web-Enabled Services for Citizens in Orissa

Case Study Authors

Dr. A. K. Pujari (akp@ocac.ernet.in)

Application

The Orissa Computer Application Centre (OCAC), based in Bhubaneswar, India, has planned the developed of Web-enabled citizen services, beginning in Kalahandi District. The service will be based on client/server architecture, using Oracle and IIS server, with application software developed by OCAC itself.

Application Description

The system will provide Web-enabled information and services related to government programmes and activities to citizens. G eneral information provided within the system covers details of government administration and health services, commodity prices, district and village maps, tax schedules, and details of land use and road/river networks. This information is provided in both English and Oriya (the local Indic-script language). Online services include the ability to file a grievance petition/complaint and to monitor its status, and the ability to apply for a variety of government certificates (nationality, residence, birth, death). An email server allows email to be sent/received in both English and Oriya.

Application Purpose

The application is being introduced with the following objectives:

Stakeholders

The common citizens who benefit from government services as well as departments and agencies which deal with these services are the stakeholders. Common citizens are often not aware of resources and welfare measures. They face problems in finding out the right departments and sections for getting services. Citizens are often required to fill up a number of application forms which may not be easily available. The working hours of government offices restrict the free availability of services. The departments dealing with a huge amount of data also find it difficult to maintain up-to-date and correct information.

Impact: Costs and Benefits

The needs assessment was undertaken through a professional socio-economic research organisation (drishtee.com) at a cost of US$3,000. This involved two separate and extensive questionnaires for government officials and citizens in Oriya and English. Sixteen volunteers from a local NGO interacted with nearly one thousand people in all thirteen blocks of Kalahandi district and sorted 879 questionnaires for analysis. Steps were taken to build awareness regarding the objectives, operations and intended benefits of the project through press releases published in many leading newspapers. I delivered lectures regarding the project to government officers. In order to understand and learn from similar systems elsewhere in India, officers and common citizens participated in two week-long study tours. A workshop was organised in Kalahandi district headquarters in which 93 people from various walks of life participated. The application package was developed in consultation with district administration officials, and the operations and output have been satisfactorily demonstrated. Many kiosk operators have taken an interest and the project is currently under implementation in Kalahandi.

Evaluation: Failure or Success?

Given that the project is only now being implemented, it is too early to evaluate it. However, it has been able to demonstrate a good level of awareness creation, and both the development methodology and the technology utilised have worked well. Wide participation and good approval ratings from citizens, and continuing operation of kiosks on a self-financing basis in future will be the main criteria of success.

Enablers/Critical Success Factors

  1. Participative understanding of citizen needs . The project has been able to develop a grassroots understanding of citizens' needs.
  2. User-friendly applications . These have used the latest Web technology, and OCAC staff have utilised inputs from India's National Informatics Centre to benefit from knowledge developed on other related projects.
  3. Funding . The project has been well supported financially by funds provided from the Government of India's Dept. of Personnel and Training, with UNDP support.

Constraints/Challenges

  1. Delays . The project faced a couple of particular delays; first, in selection of the organisation to undertake the needs survey; second, in release of funds for procurement of project hardware.
  2. Hesitance of service providers . Some of the public sector service providers were hesitant to include services in which they might be found vulnerable.
  3. Physical distance . The long distance (425 km) between pilot project location in Kalahandi and implementing agency location in Bhubaneswar proved to be a development constraint.

Recommendations

  1. Cut the bureaucracy . The management, administration and implementation of e-government projects should be made free from the bureaucratic red tape, biases, delays and other public sector problems; particularly since the project itself is supposed to solve these problems for the common people.
  2. "Quick, dirty but participative" may beat "slow and clean" . eGovernment projects should not be restricted by general notions of a need for complete information and a need for a complete, structured information systems lifecycle. Instead, they should be allowed to proceed with partial and incomplete solutions, so long as those solutions have been developed, and continue to be developed, with the involvement, awareness and participation of all concerned keeping local factors and human dimensions in view.
  3. Look to the Web . Many of the problems faced in the use of traditional technologies and tools in government can be solved by Web-enabling the applications and use of new technology. These also allow broader use of local language.

Further Information

n/a

Case Details

Author Data Sources/Role : Project Management Role
Outcome : Too Early to Evaluate. Reform : eServices (improving public services). Sector : Social Services (Community Development).
Region : South Asia. Start Date : 2001. Submission Date : August 2002

Last updated on 19 October, 2008.
Please contact richard.heeks@manchester.ac.uk with comments and suggestions.