What African countries can learn from the continent’s top performers in e-government

Summary

Executive Summary

Successful e-government implementation promises a range of well-recognized benefits, including improved public efficiency, more accessible services, greater citizen engagement and reduced administrative burden for private firms, which in turn leads to investment and job creation. Most African countries have embarked on a digitalization journey and started offering public services on online platforms. However, progress has been slow and uneven.

The dominant narrative on barriers to e-governance in Africa lists a daunting series of factors, most of which require significant time and funds to address: infrastructure, interoperability, the digital divide, skills and the regulatory framework. There is also corruption, long considered the true opponent of digitalization.

To learn from what is working well, this paper reviewed the experiences of Africa’s top performers in e-government, based on secondary research, interviews and the analysis of data from global e-governance indices. Four African countries score above the global average in the United Nations E-Government Development Index (EGDI): Mauritius, South Africa, Seychelles and Tunisia. Notably, Mauritius and Seychelles score extremely high on the human capital and telecommunications infrastructure dimensions of the index, as they boast a high volume of Internet users and, especially, mobile cellular subscriptions. For its part, South Africa leads the four countries on overall EGDI scoring but not in specific sub-indices within it, suggesting a balanced performance. Although Tunisia lags slightly behind the other three countries, it earns its place due to a robust institutional framework and high level of skills.

The authors deconstruct the data from the EGDI and two other global indices to consider specific functions and levels of e-government and identify sub-indicators related to the operational performance of e-government systems. The focus is intentionally narrow, on government-to-business and government-to-citizen transactions and the minimum conditions necessary to support these.

The paper’s operational focus is in contrast to much of the literature, which argues the merits of a whole-of-government approach and the need for long-term investments in foundational conditions (i.e., skills, infrastructure and the regulatory framework). While these elements are necessary, the authors argue that offering a better user experience for government administrative transactions is feasible and affordable in the short term, and can help build credibility and raise funds for more ambitious undertakings.

African policymakers that want to maximize the benefits from investments in e-government can follow the “Levels of e-government” decision-making framework presented in this paper. Levels include interfaces (front- and back-office), data security and exchange, and infrastructure. The simple definitions and examples demystify the technologies involved, and the modular structure is meant to allow governments to negotiate with tech suppliers for more options with less resources, focus on user experience and assess the costs and benefits of public-facing improvements.

At the end of the day, what determines African countries’ success in e-governance may be less related to whether public agencies can move together in lockstep, or how they choose to share data with each other, than simply whether they are asking the question, “What is it that citizen and business users need, and how can it be offered in a simple, low-cost way?”

Introduction

Africa’s digital transformation assets include a youthful, digitally savvy population, a relatively well-developed fintech sector and high-level commitments to trade integration.^1,2,3 Recognizing the opportunity, the African Union’s recently published Digital Transformation Strategy includes the goal of a digital single market in Africa by 2030.⁴ A subset of the global digital transformation, the digitalization of government services, is widely accepted in both developed and developing countries as a pillar of economic growth.⁵

Successful e-government implementation promises a range of well-recognized benefits, including improved public efficiency, more accessible services, greater citizen engagement and reduced administrative burden for private firms, which in turn leads to investment and job creation. Most African countries have embarked on a digitalization journey and started offering public services on online platforms. However, progress has been slow and uneven.⁶

The dominant narrative on barriers to e-governance in Africa lists a daunting series of factors, most of which require significant time and funds to address: infrastructure, interoperability, the digital divide, skills and the regulatory framework.⁷ There is also corruption, long considered the true opponent of digitalization.⁸ Certainly, these factors are real – for example, intermittent power in rural regions makes it unrealistic to expect broadband Internet services to work even when they exist.

However, creative uses of technology can help address many of the challenges. Interoperability, for example, can be overcome by using web services. Mobile apps that work offline and other last-mile innovations can be used to support rural government agencies in providing digital services. In addition, recent funding trends along with new commitments indicate that the African Union’s Strategy for Digital Transformation in Africa will be receiving support on a major scale.^9,10

This paper reviews the experiences of Africa’s top performers in e-government: Mauritius, South Africa, Seychelles and Tunisia. The research analyzed data from three global e-governance indices: the United Nations’ E-Government Development Index (EGDI), the World Bank'’s GovTech Maturity Index (GTMI) and Estonia’s National Cybersecurity Index (NCSI). We reviewed secondary literature to develop four case studies and conducted key informant interviews with experts in the field.

To learn from what is working well and pinpoint where problems still exist, we deconstructed data from each index, aiming to isolate performance-related information according to specific functions and levels of e-government. Most indices cover “foundational” conditions (e.g., skills, the existence of laws) as well as performance variables (e.g., how many services are currently online). The discussion of foundational issues is limited to the case studies, while a comparative analysis aims to address the practical “here-and-now” necessities of e-government. From the indices, the authors identify sub-indicators that relate to the operational performance of e-government. The focus is intentionally narrow, on government-to-business and government-to-citizen transactions and the minimum conditions necessary to support these.

Methodology

Governments are complex, technology is complex, and e-government is exponentially complex. For this reason, in an intentional effort to “demystify” the technical aspects of e-government, this article uses a “Levels of e-government” framework that clearly defines all the necessary operational functions enabling the delivery of online services. Services from one agency to another are known as government-to-government (G2G), while services delivered to outside constituents are government-to-citizen (G2C) or government-to-business (G2B). This article focuses primarily on services to outside constituents or customers (G2C and G2B, respectively).

Today, the globally accepted norm is to seek to integrate government agencies so that they can communicate with one another, i.e., horizontal integration.¹¹ The emphasis on integration flows from the “whole of government approach” introduced in the early 2000s in Anglo-Saxon countries like the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. The idea is “to offer citizens seamless rather than fragmented access to services.”¹² In practice, one would expect this approach to prioritize the delivery of public sector services in ways that ensure that business or citizen needs come first instead of a line ministry mandate. For example, if a person’s goal is to start a small company, then he/she can get everything done within one customer journey (incorporate, register as a taxpayer, activity licensing, etc.). Currently, however, despite significant investments in agency-to-agency integration, this result has been elusive.¹³

Today’s technological solutions (such as web services and especially microservices) mean that it is not always necessary to have achieved full inter-agency coordination in the back-office in order to provide a seamless experience in the front-office. Why should the Ministry of Industry and the Ministry of Environment in Tunisia need to walk in lockstep, as long as businesses seeking approvals can easily submit their documentation to each (at the click of one button) and know the status of their application?

In the Levels of e-government framework, functions are treated as modules, where each one stands alone, but all can work together. No assumptions are made about what needs to happen first. In a context where public investment decisions may be made by policymakers with varying levels of expertise, the framework is specifically designed to support technical and operational decision-making by non-experts. It can help government leaders address precisely those questions that technology service providers will have strong opinions about but should not make alone (e.g., Make or buy a system? Upgrade legacy systems or start from scratch? Prioritize horizontal or vertical integration? Align data exchange and security protocols with which standards?) Used successfully, the framework allows government technology teams to prioritize urgent public-facing challenges and solve them efficiently and cost-effectively, without giving up ownership of the long-term vision for the overall system.

Figure 1 shows the three e-government levels: interface, data exchange and infrastructure. For each, there are one or more functions, shown in the left-hand column. Functions are briefly defined in the middle column and with additional detail in the bullet points below. In e-government, functions are enabled by technical solutions such as software, hardware and/or infrastructure. Finally, the right-hand column titled “Data sources” identifies the sources of performance indicators.

Figure 1.

Levels of e-government framework

To provide an apples-to-apples comparison across the case studies, we reviewed the content of the major e-government indices and then selected sub-indicators that relate directly to each of the six levels of the framework above. The authors then combined indicators from three different indices into a composite index, composed of 6 sub-indices. The sub-indices correspond directly to the functions shown in the Levels of e-government framework. The global indices from which the six sub-indices and their individual indicators were drawn are:

Annex 1 details the individual indicators drawn from these indices and the classification of each by function in the Levels of e-government framework.

Once we had selected the appropriate indicators from the global indices and organized the data from these for all four countries, we proceeded to build a model which would be able to show each country’s score for each level of the index. To make data from different indices comparable and eliminate the influence of varying scales and magnitudes of data, we employed the min-max scaling method. This normalization technique involved scaling the data to a common range. By doing so, we ensured that the values across different indices were on a similar scale, allowing for meaningful comparisons and analysis. All sub-indices were equally weighted to avoid giving disproportionate importance to any specific area. By assigning equal weights, a balanced representation of each sub-index in the overall index calculation was ensured. This approach prevented any single component from dominating the final results.

In the narrative below, we first provide a simple side-by-side comparison of the case study countries’ performance for the three global e-government indices used and briefly describe the salient features of each country’s performance on the EGDI. Then, we review qualitative information about each country’s e-government achievements, organized along the levels of the e-government framework. Last, we calculate the levels of e-government index, draw conclusions from the analysis, and offer recommendations for how African leaders can take a systematic approach to exploit the full potential of the e-government opportunity.

Measures of E-governance

Only four African countries come above the global average in the United Nations E-Government Development Index (EGDI): Mauritius, South Africa, Seychelles and Tunisia. Table 1 shows the four case study countries’ raw scores and their comparative rank for a few of the most well-known e-government indices, namely: the United Nations’ EGDI, the World Bank’s GovTech Maturity Index (GTMI) and the Estonian e-Governance Academy’s National Cyber Security Index (NCSI).

The United Nations EGDI is a composite made of three categories: the Human Capital Index (HII), the Telecommunications Infrastructure Index (TII) and the Online Service Index (OSI). The index is based on an annual survey and is meant to serve as a benchmarking and development tool for countries to learn from each other. The index considers foundational elements, like digital skills and civic participation, as well as operational elements, such as the availability of services. It is to be noted that while we acknowledge these foundational elements to be critical, they are not included in the levels of the e-government framework, which – as explained above–- is meant to inform technical and operational decisions. Investments in digital skills or civic participation, on the other hand, are considered cross-cutting, and need not be thought of as “either-or” in this context.

Table 1.

Comparative table of case study scores on EGDI and other indices

Notably, Mauritius and Seychelles score extremely high on the human capital and telecommunications infrastructure dimensions of the index, as they boast a high volume of Internet users and especially mobile cellular subscriptions. Seychelles performs particularly well in both telecommunications and human capital, with a relatively lower scoring on service provision, whereas Mauritius has a more balanced performance across these dimensions. For its part, South Africa leads amid the four countries on overall EGDI scoring but not in specific sub-indices within it, suggesting a balanced performance. South Africa’s strengths as displayed by its EGDI scoring include a robust institutional framework and content provision in terms of online service provision and in line with Seychelles and Mauritius, a high volume of Internet users and mobile cellular subscriptions as well as educated, digitally savvy populations. Interestingly, Tunisia lags slightly behind the other three countries and stands out for a robust institutional framework driving up its online service delivery scoring, while sharing with the rest, once again, plenty of Internet users, mobile and fixed broadband subscriptions and robust education and digital literacy indicators.

Africa’s Top Performers

While overall EGDI scores and critical enabling factors such as the legal and regulatory environment are acknowledged, the narrative below analyzes each country’s performance with a focus on technical and operational factors, by relating their achievements to the “levels of e-government” framework presented above.

South Africa

South Africa’s enabling factors include a strong regulatory framework (see Figure 2), a critical mass of private sector firms, deep and diversified financial and capital markets, competence in research and development, several internationally recognized universities and wide coverage of mobile broadband.”¹⁴

Under the aegis of the DCDT (Department of Communications and Digital Technologies), South Africa’s front-office delivers a robust set of services:

There are challenges, however. South Africa has a profusion of institutions with overlapping mandates.¹⁹ In addition, other key hurdles impact front-office service provision:

In the back-office, national government functions are overwhelmingly digitalized and enabled by SITA, which remains responsible for their maintenance.²² The back-office technical and informational support to the front-office is a key strength for South Africa and sets the country apart from the other three countries. Yet, the transversal integration of e-government functions remains incomplete. At the provincial levels, there is substantial divergence among central government functions as well as among provinces, with Gauteng and Western Cape as the top performers.²³

In terms of protocols, interoperability remains a crucial challenge.²⁴ For example, the national digital ID system, as robust as it might be, suffers from insufficient coordination as national and local government levels do not always talk to each other (or not enough) and as a result, not all ID authentication processes are end-to-end digitized. A constructive step in this regard is the development of the Minimum Interoperability Standards (MIOS), which enable a minimum level of interoperability within and between ICT systems employed not just by the Government, but also by industry, citizens and the international community in improved policymaking.²⁵

The National e-Government Strategy and Roadmap,²⁶ which drives the country’s e-government policy agenda, recognizes the importance of cloud services. Two regions, Gauteng and Western Cape, are advanced in storing data using cloud solutions. Recent activity includes a market analysis to explore the regional cloud ecosystem conducted for the Community of Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) by the African Development Bank (AfDB) through a special multi-donor fund.²⁷ In terms of data centers, DCDT is reported to be building a High-Performance Computing and Data Processing Center which will facilitate the storage of data captured by the government from users and transactions into its secure server. Currently, evidence points to the direction of agency-specific server systems that talk to each other but are not entirely integrated from end to end.

In terms of network, South Africa boasts the continent’s most extensive backbone network infrastructure with almost universal mobile broadband coverage.²⁸ This key strength of South Africa is supported by government institutions with well-defined remits and effective policymaking, notably the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA),²⁹ and South Africa Connect (SA Connect),³⁰ both enabling the country’s impressive broadband coverage and closing connectivity gaps in rural areas and underserved municipalities. The focus on universal access to services and connectivity has seen the creation of the Universal Service and Access Agency of South Africa (USAASA),³¹ which manages the Universal Service and Access Fund (USAF), a facility to fund projects and programs promoting universal services and access to ICT. Concerning hard infrastructure, there are five submarine cables connecting the country to global networks, and via private investment, South Africa has successfully transitioned to an open competitive regime in its international connectivity. The country has had a National Broadband Policy since 2013, with an update to this policy pending.

In terms of implementation challenges, fiscal consolidation requirements have resulted in funding bottlenecks that have occasionally impacted the government’s ability to deliver on its e-government targets and commitments. Some observers point to an insufficient reliance on private sector investment, which is mobilized in a rather minimal way, to provide for more efficient, technical and cost-effective implementation, particularly in rolling out some e-government platforms.³²

Mauritius

Mauritius, with an EGDI score of 75 and a GovTech Maturity Category A classification, offers an exemplary case study with valuable lessons for smaller economies, particularly Small Island Developing States (SIDS) unable to seize economies of scale and facing accessibility challenges due to geographical isolation. E-government efforts in Mauritius have benefitted from the élan of successive administrations determined to position the country as an ICT bridge between India and Africa and between the continent’s English and French speaking nations. Enabling factors include ease of doing business, socio-political stability, an educated workforce, the financial, fintech and ICT industries, as well as its Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) industry as a key rising sector amid a diversified and dynamic economy. Mauritius is also the first African country with a specific Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy as well as an AI Council.³³

In terms of the front-office, service delivery according to user needs is a key government priority as per the Digital Government Transformation Strategy (DGTS) 2018-2022. DGTS and the Digital Mauritius 2030 Strategic Plan (with its focus on transforming Mauritius into a full digital economy), were developed after extensive stakeholder consultations. Arguably, few countries have founded their e-government policy frameworks on such a comprehensive feedback-gathering exercise, including the point of view of end users themselves.

Available digital public services include e-justice, e-procurement and e-work permit, to name a few. There is also an e-payment service that enables online payment for a number of transactions, such as police fees, land-leasing fees, driving licenses, business incorporation or parking fines. However, it must be noted that each digital service available to end users is managed by the corresponding public institution in a rather siloed way, and the InfoHighway (discussed below) is not universally used.

In the back-office, the Public Sector Business Transformation Strategy (PSBTS) aims to optimize government processes. In addition, there is a fit-for-purpose governance structure to implement all the government’s digital projects, composed of three committees: a minister-led committee for national scope, a project steering committee at the level of the user ministry or department and a project monitoring committee.

Regarding protocols, intra-government data sharing is enshrined in PSBTS, but data silos are identified as a relevant constraint. What makes Mauritius stand out, as the only country in Africa with fully operational data exchange, is the flagship initiative InfoHighway,³⁴ a unique platform developed by the Ministry of Information Technology, Communication and Innovation (MITCI). InfoHighway enables seamless, full data-sharing between government agencies, enhancing transaction efficiency at the front-office level and being available in real time and 24/7. The process is simple: A public agency named publisher shares the data with another one requesting the data called subscriber, but for that, they both have to first file an application form to the MICTI, who approves the application and enables the sharing of data.

In terms of cloud services, data storage is to an important extent centralized under a “Government Cloud (GOC)”³⁵ hosted by the National Computer Board (NCB). This Government Cloud hosts both physical servers and cloud environments as it manages the web server hosting all government websites and technically supporting them. Specifically, GOC provides the information infrastructure that underpins the help desk set up at the Government Online Center to support the delivery of 66 e-services from various Ministries and Departments. GOC also provides Internet access and other supporting functions to the public sector, notably a Government Email Services (GES) system that has set up email systems for the majority of government employees.

The centralization of data centers under one single infrastructure point sets Mauritius (along with Tunisia) apart from the disparate institutional setting for data centers found in its peers (notably Seychelles, with South Africa somewhere in the middle). The Mauritius GOC serves as the main data center to store and manage government information securely. Likewise, Mauritius stands out in the institutionalization of a Data Protection Office with its remit focused on regulating and enforcing privacy rights. The Mauritian Government has also developed a National Open Data Policy³⁶ and an Open Data Portal.³⁷ The African Union, as part of the African Internet Exchange System (AXIS) project, has built up Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) and provided technical assistance on planning, regulation, cost savings, etc. In this regard, the Mauritius National Internet Exchange Point (NIXP) enables an exchange of local Internet traffic between Internet service providers, working as an informal partnership between NCB, MICT and private-sector Internet service providers.

Mauritius benefits from a network with unique deep-sea cable connectivity, with two existing cables (Lower Indian Ocean Network (LION)/ MElTing pot Indianoceanic Submarine System (METISS)/ South Africa Far East (SAFE) / Mauritius–Rodrigues Submarine (MARS) and a third in the making as part of the “Indian Ocean Xchange Cable System.” Mauritius is doing particularly well in terms of connectivity and access, with 151% mobile penetration rates and 87% broadband penetration rates in 2022.³⁸ Its vibrant and robust ICT sector delivers widespread access and connectivity rates, attributed to the liberalization of the telecommunication industry and intense competition.

To facilitate implementation, Mauritius has developed a governance structure of three committees at different levels (ministerial, project-steering and project-monitoring) to oversee its e-government work, which has proved effective in avoiding troubles such as those faced by other countries (e.g., competing priorities and overlapping mandates).

Seychelles

With an EGDI ranking of 85, Seychelles, like Mauritius, offers valuable lessons to smaller developing nations and Small Island Developing States (SIDS). Its policy and regulatory frameworks contain the key building blocks (i.e., data protection and access to information as per box below).³⁹ As mentioned earlier in the discussion of Seychelles’ performance on the EGDI, there is a high level of digital literacy. Seychelles’ policy and regulatory framework is simple but well-designed, and the country has a strong telecommunications infrastructure. Digital adoption is consistent across governments and there are strong in-house technical capacities within the key institution, namely the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT), supported by a massive amount of fully-digitized government data.⁴⁰

However, one comment that has been repeated by multiple development partners and observers is the need for prioritization so that more resources are not spread too thinly among a large number of projects.⁴¹ The digitization process has been less organized than in Mauritius, leading to a somewhat ad hoc, action-oriented approach to e-government that clearly tilts to supporting intra-government functions rather than outward-looking service delivery to end citizen or business users of public services.

In the front-office, Seychelles’ service provision lags slightly behind that of South Africa, Mauritius or Tunisia. Digitization for many administrative procedures is not full-fledged: The process starts online but, at one point or another, it requires some form of physical trips or paper forms. Priority seems to lie in serving internal government demands rather than offering citizens and businesses high-quality online services. Illustrative national initiatives include:

An interesting milestone for Seychelles has been the development of a facial biometric solution for border control allowing for contactless patrolling in the context of the COVID pandemic.⁴⁴ This is a uniquely pioneering initiative in Africa, leveraging AI and machine learning technologies. Specifically, a modular architecture provides border control through the Visitor Management Platform (VMP). This is a holistic solution that encompasses facial recognition, temperature checks, uploading of travel info (passports, etc.), submission and verification of required health documentation and contactless passenger screening through a biometric corridor.

In terms of the back-office, Seychelles may be an exception. Whereas, in countries like South Africa, there is a specific agency (like SITA) to enable digitalization across government, in Seychelles, each ministry or agency has advanced its digitalization agenda in an inward-looking manner. A key challenge resulting from this is insufficient investment in security.⁴⁵ However, it is to be noted that Seychelles is a pioneer in tying government digitalization to public service delivery and public sector efficiency, as it has put in place a Results-based Management Policy (RBM)⁴⁶ since 2013, geared to increase public expenditure efficiency via a results-based management approach.

Regarding protocols, the multiple digital initiatives of the government have shown little evidence of talking to each other and sharing data. Unlike in Mauritius or South Africa, services are visible on multiple portals, but there is no functionality to connect them, and no entity tasked with ensuring cross-agency interoperability or security. Admittedly, the Seychellois government has an e-Services Gateway to provide a secure single-entry point to any transaction with the government, including a list of available services. Beyond that, however, there is a lack of coordination or common standards across agencies.

In terms of cloud services, reportedly there is a massive amount of government data that is stored using cloud solutions thanks to widespread and effective government-wide digital adoption, but data storage functionalities are isolated and disparate. As one example, SeyID embeds a cloud signature solution that enables users to have their ID stored in an app and thereby digitally sign legally valid documents and undertake other transactions, but it is not wholly connected to the rest of the system or to every public service transaction. Admittedly, the e-Services Gateway takes and stores data from individual and business e-IDs to verify their credentials and activate an account that allows the user to undertake a number of transactions. On the converse side of the mirror, SeyGo Connect centralizes government information in terms of service availability and delivery and stores it, but there is no evidence that both the e-Services Gateway and SeyGo Connect, with their respective remits, are woven together in terms of data sharing and storage to provide a seamless bidirectional flow of information as a transaction is undertaken.

Regarding data centers, as stated above, it appears that each ministry or agency either houses its own data or outsources it to a cloud solution provider. In this way, the rather siloed way of working of each government agency and the lack of digital integration across the public sector mean that each agency has its own secure server system and there is no government-wide centralized hosting.

In terms of network, Seychelles stands out for being Africa’s leader in the Telecommunications Infrastructure Index (TII) that is one of the three subcomponents of the EGDI, chiefly thanks to its top-notch Internet connectivity and volume of mobile-cellular subscriptions. It also has a solid hard infrastructure, reinforced by donor support. The European Investment Bank co-financed with AfDB the Seychelles East Africa Submarine cable project, finished in 2013, which was based on a Public Private Partnership (PPP) establishing the first submarine fiber optic cable for international connections of Seychelles to the African continent.

Regarding implementation challenges, the lack of a service-oriented and user-centric perspective has resulted in low usability as the system is devised to support internal government functions rather than to meet user or citizen needs.⁴⁷ In addition, as Seychelles started to roll out its multiple programs and policies, it became abundantly clear that there was an excess of simultaneous projects with too few resources, as illustrated by a ratio of one person per every two digital projects. Development partners and observers have recommended that Seychelles would do well to scale back its ambition, define priorities and focus on a handful of high-value projects.⁴⁸

Tunisia

Tunisia boasts a highly educated and digitally savvy population, and this is one factor contributing to its high EGDI score. The country has also, in the past eight years, passed a number of laws (cited in Figure 5 below) making it possible for the government to provide digital services. However, Tunisia is a clear case of an economy where the administrative burden is visibly hampering growth and the country’s ability to reach full employment.⁴⁹ Despite significant advances during COVID, supported by joint efforts delivered by the private and public sector⁵⁰ (the ability to pay taxes online, the vaccine platform, e-payment and e-signature), the government has struggled to adopt or implement a clear digitization strategy.

In the front-office, there are a plethora of information platforms, but most are not transactional due to unautomated back-office processing. The platform (E-t@srih) connected to the portal of the Ministry of Finance (E-Jebaya) for the reporting and payment of corporate taxes is one of the most mature, although the rate at which firms switch to paying taxes online has been slower than expected and does not meet the government's objectives. The status of other systems varies widely:

In the back-office, the most developed internal IT team⁵¹ sits in the Ministry of Finance, and of course the Ministry of Interior operates its own systems with its own stricter security standards. Beyond this, the majority of agencies are left to negotiate with development partners on their own, resulting in an inefficient use of funding allocated to multiple competing portals (witness, for example, the Ministry of Industry and the Agency for Renewable Energy which in principle reports to the Ministry, each working separately with different partners on portals that are not designed to communicate, and yet are slated to contain some of the same services).

In terms of protocols, there are plans to establish a major software platform to ensure interoperability and data exchange. There is currently a debate within the government about whether to invest in an intranet called Réseau National Intégré de l’Administration (RNIA) or to use the Estonian data highway service (X-Road).

In terms of cloud services, the government aspires to have a cloud, but does not yet. Data related to Tunisian citizens is required to be hosted on Tunisian soil, so private international options are not relevant. The Tunisian Ministry of Communication Technologies is currently writing a new digital practices code that will address the regulation of hosting and cloud computing activities. Under this, service providers will be licensed by the government to operate.

For data centers, the government has a secure center that all agencies can use, and it is reliable – more so than even most of the private in-country service providers. This data center is hosted at the Ministry of Communication Technologies’ Centre National de l’informatique (CNI). Due to the investments data centers require, including operating costs related to energy, the Tunisian government is leaning toward having its own government cloud service. Telecom operators based in Tunisia offer hosting on highly secure in-house data centers that are compliant with international standards. Therefore, the private sector hosts and manages its information systems locally. However, the quality of the service offered is not ideal as there may be service interruptions, and the cost of the service is above the international average.

The deployment of a high-speed internet communication network is a major development challenge for Tunisia. The campaign to increase the number of households with access to the Internet is still far from the target of 100% that was set for 2020, and tellingly in the “network” section of the Levels of e-government exercise conducted for this article, Tunisia comes in last among the four countries.⁵² Tunisia relies on telecommunication operators (Orange, Ooredoo, Tunisia Telecom) to invest and develop that infrastructure over time, but given the small size of the market, there is little incentive for these operators to make investments for better service delivery.

Tunisia is a case where the varied nature of the indicators included in the indices (i.e., enabling factors such as level of education and the legal framework) yields a high aggregate score but obfuscates a problem that remains to be solved – fragmentation of approaches and slow progress in operational terms.

Discussion

The Levels of e-government framework utilized in this article allow for an overview comparison of the four countries’ performance across an objective set of critical service functions, stripping away more normative elements. For every level, indicators that measure the operational readiness of the government's systems and technology infrastructure were sourced from existing indices and then normalized (as detailed in the Methodology section and Annex 1).

Informed by the qualitative assessment of the four country case studies, the overview comparison of indicator performance developed at the beginning of this paper has been adjusted to measure performance related to the levels of e-government. Table 2 below presents the modified ranking and scores for the four African leaders. Equal weight is placed on each level (front-office, back-office, data exchange, infrastructure and networks).

As mentioned, cross-cutting dimensions such as digital skills or civic participation are not captured in the framework. An additional cross-cutting dimension worth mentioning is that of political will. All four countries have demonstrated some degree of commitment to undertake e-government reforms and policies, but some are more engaged than others. For example, South Africa’s digitization efforts are a subset of its strong economic fundamentals, whereas Seychelles and particularly Mauritius have purposefully targeted e-government as a key lever for their national development agendas.⁵³ Tunisia lags in terms of demonstrated political will to place e-government at the center of the public policy agenda.

When adapting the data to the Levels of e-government framework, the four countries’ ranks relative to each other change slightly, with Mauritius surpassing South Africa, and Tunisia overtaking Seychelles. The challenges South Africa faces with its overlapping agency mandates and data security accounts for the first shift. In the second case, it is the data exchange and data center functions, more developed in Tunisia, that allow the North African country to overtake Seychelles. Proving the management consulting rule that "strategy is what you don’t do,” and constituting a testament to the vast undertaking that e-government represent: None of the countries have it all. Even in Mauritius, digitalization of personal data lags: Despite being a global financial center, banks are still required to keep paper-based records for certain transactions.

Table 2.

"Levels of e-government" index score for case study countries (out of 100)

Recommendations

African countries that want to maximize benefits from investments in e-government should take a modular approach. For example, national policymakers can select one “Level” of e-government where they are strongest and focus there. They should look not at one model (e.g., the “Rwanda” or “Estonia” model) but at specific solutions designed to achieve functions – and invest according to the priority they place on those functions. While this recommendation may appear to contradict the received wisdom today, which is to take a whole-of-government approach, the truth is that a whole-of-government approach takes years, and citizens and businesses want better services now. The Levels of e-government framework can help identify areas, such as data exchange, which require the participation of all agencies, while allowing local government, line ministries and specialized agencies greater flexibility to choose how they want to approach other functions (such as the front- or back-office interface).

Policymakers interested in achieving better user experience for their citizens and businesses can use the Levels of the e-government framework as a guide, starting from the top and going to the bottom. This is also referred to in e-government circles as working “from the outside in,” given that the front-office interface serves as the point of contact between outside constituents and the government.⁵⁴

The final benefit of taking a modular approach to designing e-government systems is that it economizes resources. Whole-of-government approaches are, by definition, expensive. And, as discussed above, foundational investments in e-government require vast sums of money and take years. Meanwhile, if we look at how e-commerce is developing globally, it is possible to envision user-friendly, low-cost technical solutions for delivering easy administrative transactions. That is, if governments want to.

Conclusion

By delving into the global e-government indices and comparing sub-indicator scores across levels and functions of e-government, we were able to isolate e-government performance from e-government foundational conditions. The analysis shows that a significant portion of high performance on the indices can be attributed to “foundational” factors such as infrastructure, skills and the legal and regulatory framework. This is the case for Tunisia and Seychelles, whose scores fall when adjusted to consider only operational performance in providing e-government services. Mauritius rises to first among the four when operational criteria are prioritized. South Africa remains high, showing a balance between foundational and operational factors.

Given the time and resources necessary to advance all of the conditions (foundational and operational), African leaders will want to consider specializing in one or another e-government function. Estonia, for example, exports many e-government services, especially data exchange. The Estonian government originally developed its famous X-road data highway as an attempt to stop agencies from duplicating databases. The country passed a law forbidding agencies to build a new database if the data in question was already contained in another agency’s data storage system, and instead requires them to build a connection.⁵⁵

Not all innovation requires legislation. Morocco was a pioneer in effective G2B services based on two simple things: (a) a standardized method for organizing the requirements for submission of an application, and (b) a common business identifier that allowed agencies to fetch data on companies and compare their status. Fifteen years later, that method for organizing information has been disseminated to more than 24 African countries by the United National Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in the form of the e-Regulations trade portals.⁵⁶

Finally, as stated in the opening paragraph of this article, e-government is part of the overall global digital transformation and contributes directly to growth. Today in developed countries, banks with outdated systems are raising capital to finance their migration to the cloud and the development of global, customer-friendly solutions. Across Africa, banks are working with governments to improve how their employees can view data related to branches in other countries without having to log off and back on. The challenge then, is not only how governments can deliver better e-services, but how they can best partner with private enterprises to innovate.

Realizing the potential of e-government in Africa will require creative strategies. A first, constructive step is to break the vast field of e-government down into smaller, more manageable chunks, and consider specializing in one functional area, type of service or layer of the technological stack in a way that builds on each country’s comparative advantage (including human capital and language). In less developed countries, e-government service delivery strategies can be low-cost, use technologies appropriate for rural areas with low bandwidth and be designed to serve populations with lower digital and functional literacy levels. At the other end of the spectrum, countries like South Africa that are already using advanced technologies in their manufacturing and professional service sectors are well-placed to identify, develop and exploit innovative solutions using artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things.

For countries that have not yet fully digitized, there is a one-time opportunity to bypass heavy, outdated back-office systems by using standard API protocols, plug-ins and secure cloud services. Pressure to keep costs low seems like a disadvantage now but could become an advantage if they drive innovation. At the end of the day, what determines countries’ success in e-governance may be less related to whether public agencies can move in lockstep, or how they choose to share data, than simply whether they are asking the question, “What is it that citizens and business users need, and how can it be offered in a simple, low-cost way?”

Table 3.

Annex 1 "Levels of e-government" indicator list

Lara Goldmark

Lara Goldmark is currently founder and CEO of Just Results, a company that uses data to support inclusive economic growth, Lara is an economist with specialization in regulatory reform and digital solutions for government.

Hamza Denguezli

Hamza Denguezli is a Tunisian research analyst. At Just Result’s startup, ZGov he recently worked in the field with the private sector to mapping administrative procedures and then with government users of the ZForm solution to adapt it to their needs.

Jorge Alarcón Martin

Jorge is a multidisciplinary professional with several years of experience across consulting and research roles. Fluent in Spanish, English and French, he has acquired relevant experience in fields such as sustainable and international development, evaluations, notably impact investing and impact measurement and management.