Administracin electrnica y

servicios pblicos digitales

La reforma de la Administracin Electrnica
Seminario de expertos
Madrid, 22 de junio de 2016

Juan Miguel Mrquez

juanmiguel.marquez@red.es
22 junio de 2016

1. dGov: una poltica pblica?

2. Actuaciones dGov en Espaa y en la Unin
Europea
1. En Espaa
1. La Ley 11/2007
2. La Ley 39/2015 y la Ley 40/2015
3. El Plan de Transformacin Digital de la
AGE y OOPP
2. En Europa
1. El Plan de Accin de eGov 2011-2015
2. El Plan de Accin de eGov 2015-2010
3. Midiendo los resultados
1. Resultados UE en el EDPR
2. Resultados ESPAA en el EDPR
3. Ms all de las medias: buscando datos
para ayudar en el diseo de polticas
pblicas
4. Algunas conclusiones

eGov: una poltica pblica?

Existe un
problema?

Evaluacin y
revisin

A quin afecta?

Requiere
intervencin
pblica?

Implementacin y
seguimiento

Seleccin e
implementacin
mejor alternativa

Anlisis
alternativas

Regulacin y polticas pblicas

Regular
CUNDO?
QU?
PARA QU?

dGov en Espaa

En la relacin con ciudadana

Ley 11/2007 (reconocimiento derecho acceso
electrnico a AAPP -> Obligacin prestacin
servicios electrnicos)
En el funcionamiento interno
Ley 39/2015 y 40/2015 (Digital by default?,
funcionamiento interno digital)
En ambos
Plan de transformacin digital de la AGE y OOPP
(2015) (Incrementar uso dGov + mejora
funcionamiento interno digital + seguridad + open
data)
5

Plan transformacin digital AGE

Incremento productividad y eficacia en el funcionamiento interno de AAPP

Transformar los procesos de gestin internos de las unidades

administrativas en electrnicos
Desarrollar el puesto de trabajo virtual
Canal digital como canal preferido de relacin con AAPP de ciudadanos y empresas

Preveer servicios pblicos digitales adaptados a las nuevas tecnologas

Mejorar la satisfaccin del usuario en el uso de servicios pblicos digitales
Promover la innovacin en la prestacin de servicios
Mayor eficiencia en la prestacin de servicios TIC en el seno de las AAPP

Promover de manera compartida servicios comunes

Gestin corporativa inteligente del conocimiento, la informacin y los datos

Publicar la informacin disponible para ciudadanos y empresas

Disponer de sistemas de anlisis para la toma de decisiones
Estrategia corporativa de seguridad y usabilidad

Garantizar la seguridad de los sistemas de informacin de la AGE y sus

OOPP
6

dGov en la UE

Planes de accin eGov

Plan de accin eGov 2011-2015
Objetivo 2015: 50% ciudadanos usuarios eGov y 80% de las
empresas
4 prioridades polticas: empoderamiento de los usuarios; mercado
interior; mayor eficacia y eficiencia del gobierno; desarrollo de los
habilitadores para eGov
Plan de accin eGov 2016-2020
Tres ejes, 20 acciones
Servicios pblicos ms eficientes y ms eficaces
Servicios pbicos trans-fronterizos
Servicios pblicos ms participativos
Open Data
Nueva Directiva reutilizacin
Ambos incluidos en las estrategias digitales de la UE
Agenda Digital para Europa (2010-2015)
Estrategia para el Mercado nico Digital (2015-2020)
7

Cmo medir dGov en UE?

En el marco de las estrategias digitales de la

Unin
Indicadores Eurostat
Indicadores de estudios especficos de la DGConnect
Forman parte de los indicadores de Economa y Sociedad
Digital (Digital Scoreboard DESI - EDPR)

Fases
Fase I: Indicadores de oferta (servicios on-line, madurez de
servicios)
Fase II: Indicadores de uso (usuarios de eGov; satisfaccin;
razones no uso)
Fase III: Indicadores de calidad de oferta (transparencia,
completitud, proactividad)
8

EDPRServicios Pblicos Digitales

INFORME DE LA COMISIN EUROPEA

EUROPES DIGITAL PROGRESS REPORT 2016

Digital Public Services

Europe's Digital Progress Report 2016

10

For Digital Public Services, Estonia had highest score, followed by Denmark, Finland and the
Netherlands. Bulgaria, Romania and Slovak Republic had the lowest scores.

The Digital Public Services dimension consists of four indicators:

the percentage of internet users who have sent completed forms to
a public administration via the internet (eGovernment users
indicator); the level of sophistication of a countrys eGovernment
services (the pre-filled forms indicator, which measures the extent
to which data that is already known to the public administration is
pre-filled in forms presented to the user); the level of completeness
of a countrys range of eGovernment services (the online service
completion indicator, which measures the extent to which the
various steps in an interaction with the public administration can be
performed completely online), and the governments commitment to
open data (open data indicator).

EU-28
value

5a1 eGovernment Users

32 %

% individuals (aged 16-74) who used Internet in the last year

(2015)

5a2 Pre-filled Forms

49 %

Score (0 to 100)

(2015)

5a3 Online Service Completion

81 %

Score (0 to 100)

(2015)

5a4 Open Data

351

Score (0 to 700)

(2015)

DESI 2016, Digital Public Services dimension, by country

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
EE DK FI NL ES AT SE PT IE BE MT
Source: European Commission, Digital Agenda Scoreboard

EDPR 2016 Digital Public Services

LT

FR

LV

PL

UK EU28 IT

DE

CY

EL

SI

11

LU

HR

CZ

HU

SK

RO

BG

eGovernment usage has levelled out.

In 2015, interactive eGovernment

services were used by 26 % of the EU28 population, the same level as the
previous year. Usage increased in 15
out of 28 countries, while in NL, SE, LU,
BE, UK, LT, PT, SI, CY, SK, and CZ
usage fell or remained the same in
2015 (although NL and SE are close to
saturation). In three countries (RO, BG,
and CZ) less than a tenth of the
population submit completed forms
online, with generally little progress in
catching up (except for CZ).

Citizens submitting filled forms via the internet in the last 12 months (%
of total population)
100,0%
90,0%
80,0%
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%

EE
DK
FI
NL
IE
SE
FR
LU
BE
UK
AT
LT
ES
LV
PT
EU28
EL
HU
MT
SI
CY
DE
PL
HR
SK
IT
CZ
BG
RO

0,0%
Source: Eurostat. * EE data exhibits break in series, FR data for 2014 is missing
2014

EDPR 2016 Digital Public Services

2015

12

Almost half of the population needing public services chooses the online channel. The main
reason for non-use is recourse to intermediaries.
Of people needing to submit forms to the public administrations*,
48 % chose the online channel in 2015, an increase of 10
percentage points from 2011. This is the result of both a fall in the
percentage of the digitally excluded (from 23 % to 16 % of the total)
and a fall in popularity of offline channels among internet users (by 3
percentage points). However, there is still great untapped potential
(52 %) for use of eGovernment services. While this could be
addressed in part by increasing digital skills (to increase both
internet use and the skills of internet users, see below), some further
policies on the supply side may be needed. The percentage of
citizens needing to submit forms (for which information is lacking)
has been assumed to be analogous to the percentage of internet
users needing to submit a form (for which information is available).

eGovernment usage potential (preferred channel for

submitting forms to public authorities by citizens)

2015

Online channel
Offline channel (internet
users)
Offline channel (digitally
excluded)

2011

0%

Other reasons
Another person did it on behalf of the
individual (e.g. consultant, tax advisor,
Individuals' concerns about protection and
security of personal data
Individuals' lack of skills or knowledge
2015

Source: Eurostat

0%

5%

40%

60%

80%

2014

Personal characteristics are less of a barrier to nonuse of the online channel than in 2014: lack of skills
or knowledge is down from 23 % to 19 % while
concerns about protection and security of personal
data are down from 28 % to 24 %. The main specific
factor is the use of intermediaries (both professionals
and acquaintances), at 27 % of cases (unvaried).
These may be used in some cases for convenience
and in others for lack of skills. Lack of
supply/awareness still accounts for 10 % of cases of
non-use. Other reasons account for 36 % of the
cases.

10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

EDPR 2016 Digital Public Services

100%

Source: EUROSTAT

Reasons for not submitting official forms through the online

channel (% of Internet users needing to submit official forms)

There was no such website service available

20%

* The percentage of citizens needing to submit forms (for which information is

lacking) has been assumed to be analogous to the percentage of internet13
users
needing to submit a form (for which information is available).

The measurement of eGovernment supply, some methodological notes.

The supply side of eGovernment is measured through a user
journey approach. Researchers pose as ordinary users of
eGovernment services in an event that requires some official
action (e.g. a marriage). They go through the steps of meeting
the relevant administrative requirements using public authority
websites and the online channel where possible.

Seven life events are analysed over two years (with data for
three complete measurements in 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and
2014-2015) in different areas of government:
losing/finding a job
enrolling at university
moving
starting a small claims procedure
buying/owning a car
starting a business
regular business operations

This new method looks at different aspects of service provision, but the two examined here are the following: user-centricity and
transparency. The User-Centric eGovernment indicator measures the availability of eGovernment services, their connectedness and
their user-friendliness. The Transparent eGovernment indicator measures the online transparency of government in different aspects
of online service delivery, treatment of citizens personal data and the activities of public administrations. Both indicators range from 0
(complete absence of required features) to 100 (all features included).
The source for the eGovernment supply data is the eGovernment Benchmark Report (see https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/newsredirect/16475)

EDPR 2016 Digital Public Services

14

There is progress in supplying eGovernment, especially by those catching up. Transparency is

increasing for most countries but more is needed to win trust.
User-Centric government (2013-2014 and 2014-2015)
Avg 2013-2014

Avg 2014-2015

MT
AT
EE
PT
FI
DK
NL
ES
IE
SE
LT
FR
LV
IT
SI
BE
DE
PL
EU28
LU
UK
CY
CZ
BG
HR
EL
SK
HU
RO

Five countries in the EU-28 are very close to having a fully

developed digital channel for public services with scores above
90 %: MT, EE, LT, PT and AT. Those at the bottom are catching
up, with all countries now scoring 50 or above, with most
progress made by SK and CZ.

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Source: eGovernment Benchmark Report

Transparency is an important element for increasing the takeup of online public services, since it helps build citizens trust in
public administrations.
Transparency has improved with respect to the previous year in
almost all countries, with average EU-28 progress of 4pp. But
more progress is needed to gain users trust.

MT
EE
LT
PT
AT
FI
ES
DK
FR
NL
BE
LV
SE
DE
EU28
IE
IT
LU
HR
UK
SI
PL
CY
CZ
BG
EL
HU
RO
SK

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Transparent government in the EU (2013-2014 and 2014-2015)

Avg 2013-2014

Source: eGovernment Benchmark Report

EDPR 2016 Digital Public Services

15

Digital Scoreboard 2016:

Spain

Spain's performance in the DESI 2016

Spain ranks 15 among EU countries.
It is part of the group of countries that are catching up.

Digital Scoreboard 2016

17

Digital Public Services: eGovernment users

38% of Spanish internet users have exchanged filled forms with the public administration online,
whereas overall in the EU 32% of internet users have done so.

Source: Eurostat - Community survey on ICT usage in Households and by Individuals

Digital Scoreboard 2016

18

Digital Public Services: eGovernment service sophistication

Spanish online public services score 68 out of 100 in the Pre-filled Forms* indicator
and 91 out of 100 in the Online Service Completion** indicator (EU scores 49 and 81 respectively).

Source: eGovernment Benchmark.

* Pre-filled Forms measures to which extent data known to the public administration is pre-filled in forms presented to the
user. ** Online Service Completion measures to which extent the steps in an interaction with the public administration life
event can be performed completely online.
Digital Scoreboard 2016

19

Digital Public Services: Open Data

Spain scores 550 out of 700 in the European Public Sector Information scoreboard,
against an overall score of 351 out of 700 for the European Union.

Source: The Public Sector Information Scoreboard is a crowdsourced tool to measure the status of Open Data and
PSI re-use throughout the EU.
Digital Scoreboard 2016

20

Indicadores dGov en Eurostat

Actividades
usuarios en
Internet
Interaccin con
AAPP

Problemas

Satisfaccin

Otras formas
de relacin

Por qu no
digital?

Tcnicos

Encontrar
informacin

No website

Representacin
por otra persona

Informacin
insuficiente

Utilidad de la
informacin

E-mail

Cree que es
menos seguro

Falta de soporte

Facilidad uso

Telfono

No sabe cmo
hacerlo

Otro diferente

Seguimiento
trmite

Fsica

No existe
servicio web

Otros diferente

Otras razones

Obtener
informacin

Descargar
formularios

Enviar
formularios

Especficas
Pagar impuestos
Matrcula Universidad
Catlogo bibliotecas
Cambio de domicilio
Beneficios de la
Seguridad Social
Cualquiera de los
anteriores

Cualquier tipo
de problema

21

Resultados en Espaa
Adaptacin de procedimientos de la AGE a la Ley 11/2007 en Espaa

22

Individuos usando eGov/tot pobl.

23

Ms all de las medias: uso eGov

24

Ms all de las medias: uso eGov

25

Ms all de las medias: uso eGov

26

Ms all de las medias: env. form

EL ROTO EL PAIS
8 JUN 2016 - 13:49 CEST

27

Ms all de las medias: env. form

28

Ms all de las medias: env. form

29

Ms all de las medias: env. form

30

Ms all de las medias: env. form

31

Ms all de las medias: env. form

32

Algunas conclusiones

Continuar con las investigaciones

sobre razones de no-uso
Prestar atencin especial a la facilidad
de uso y la adquisicin de habilidades
digitales
Disear polticas especficas para
ayudar a colectivos especficos

Avances limitados en el uso del eGov

en todos los pases
Diferencias demasiado elevadas entre
pases y entre colectivos (existen
colectivos desfavorecidos)

33