Introduction

Today the Internet - a term that was not even in the public lexicon a decade ago – captures the attention of the media, governments, and the public. It is easy to forget how new the Internet really is. However, in a short period of time this technology has changed the way we use and receive information and communicate with each other.

Technology is acknowledged as a critical force in shaping our societies. We are, or so we are told, at a turning point. The future, some argue, is in direct digital democracy. Will the Internet influence a shift towards direct democracy and away from representative democracy? Obviously, the controversies around this technology are influenced by different views on democracy. In addition many see electronic government as a fundamental transformation of government and governance not witnessed since the beginning of the industrial era. Taking this as a starting point the future in Norway is still far away.

In Norway, local government and autonomy represent a long-standing tradition. Municipal authorities are formally independent institutions governed by democratic elected councils. At the same time local governments are subject to centralized regulation and financial control. In the big welfare state in Norway, local governments provide core welfare services like education, health care and social services. Hence, local authorities are an integral part of the welfare state.

Currently, the local level comprises two levels of democratic governance, including 434 municipalities and 19 county council districts. The average size of the Norwegian municipality is about 9 000 inhabitants, half of all municipalities have less than 5 000 inhabitants.

The size of our public sector naturally makes it vital for us to focus on how technology can be used to produce more efficient and better services. We need to change the way we govern, and some steps in this direction have been taken in our e-Norway plan. The primary goal in this plan is to influence and accelerate the development of a knowledge society. By the use of ICT, we hope to adapt more cost-effective services that include all sectors and administrative levels. The public administration systems needs to become more available to the public. We also want to stimulate an active and vital democracy by using the technology to provide increased insight into the work of the public-administration system.

E-Government and citizen services

The Internet will be an important way for governments to interact with citizens, businesses and other branches of government. Our aim is to make the Norwegian administrative system and many citizen services available on the Internet 24 hours a day. By using ICT we want to provide the citizens with better access to governmental services, and to improve service efficiency, accessibility, integration, and customisation.

In doing this, we face not only new opportunities but are also confronted with technological challenges. Data and networks are not always standardized to operate across a large community of users, and it si a challenge to create internet solutions to make this possible. It is also a challenge to create an Intranet that allows web technologies to link employees across departments.

The ambitions are clear, we want to enable citizens to select from and transact business – for instance apply for kindergarten, health related services, education, participate in online courses, and so on - in one convenient place without having to unnecessarily navigate numerous departmental web sites. Today application forms for different types of services are available on 47 percent of the local government web sites. This development will be speeded up.

I will give two examples from my govermental area on how to promote modernization in local public administration by the use of information technology.

First, the handling of applications for building permits.

Nearly two years ago the Ministry initiated a project of cooperation between central and local building authorities and the building industry, aiming to enable the local authorities to offer on-line services concerning building permits. The goal is, through electronic handling and communication, to achieve:
- faster handling of applications and better use of resources in the municipalities and in the building sector
- higher degree of predictability in the handling and decision process
- increased quality of plans, projects and information exchange
- better access of information and participation for the public

Close to 200 of the 434 municipalities are participating directly in the project by testing pre-prototypes of an electronic system for application and information and by presenting local planning and building information on their home pages. My hope is that we in a year or so, are able to offer the municipalities and the building industry a complete electronic system where:
- everybody has free access to required information from the local authority, independently of place and opening hours
- applications may be sent, and permits received, over the Internet
- data will be processed only once, and paper forms will in time become superfluous
- status, and progress, in the handling of the application may be checked over the Internet
- standardized electronic solutions ensure consistent handling and predictability across municipal borders.

The handling of electronic applications will require investments as well as organizational changes in the municipalities. I anticipate therefore a gradual change to an electronic system. In this process it will be of great importance to encourage the ”beacons” to really stand out; they will be the driving force in achieving a better system in each municipality, along with a strong public demand.

Second, the introduction of a coordinated electronic based system on reporting data from local authorities to the central government (KOSTRA: Local Government Data Registration Scheme).

The objective by introducing this system is to better the information given about the municipalities - to the central and local governments and the general public - and to make it possible to compare different municipalities, to make benchmarking possible as a part of the management process.

The system makes the reporting more efficient. The same data should only be collected once, even if it is used for many purposes. Developing an electronic chain of reporting, with both electronic data reporting and publishing on the Internet is a part of the project. To establish more efficient reporting, we have created a structured electronic based chain of reporting.

The system contains basically three kinds of information:
- Resource allocation: Which means data on accounts and use of personnel.
- Services and users: How much is produced, and how many users are served.
- Requirements: This is mainly information about the population. How many young and how many old inhabitants inform us about the need for schools and for care services
- Improved dissemination is one result of the project. The publishing is 100% electronic.

The extent of the publishing has increased. It includes a number of fixed indicators on the municipalities' priorities, productivity and coverage of needs. It is structured to enable comparisons of one municipality with the average for the comparable group, the region or the country. The publishing also includes a programme that enables the users to construct their own indicators.

E-democracy

Historically, new technologies have always been heralded as major democratic breakthroughs. Today, the future, so we are told, is in direct digital democracy. Why this debate, and why now? Let me point out two important factors:

First of all, the rapid development of the technology itself has had a direct effect. An increasing numbers of Norwegians are logging onto the Internet, going ‘online’. Perhaps the most popular aspect of the Internet, e-mail, has revolutionized correspondence – both business and personal. Internet use in Norway, as in many other countries, has reached astounding proportions in a remarkable short period of time. According to statistics during the second half of the year 2000, 76 percent of the Norwegian population between 16 and 79 years of age had access to a computer at home, and 65 percent had access to the Internet at home. 822 000 Norwegians had access to the Internet in 1996, today the number is 2.2 million. Even though the Internet is still not very much used in a political context, a recent survey showed that every third Internet user visited their local government web site at least once during the last month. This implies that there is a growing interest in public issues on the Net, as well as an increasing group of potential participants.

Secondly, the debate must be related to the fact that representative democratic institutions in Norway traditionally, as elsewhere, face legitimacy problems. For instance, we witness a decline in both electoral turnout (especially in local elections) and party membership. In addition the electorate itself has become more heterogeneous and unstable over time. Technology could potentially promote government accountability, create a more informed citizenry, and facilitate public debate and participation in the decision-making process in state and civil society.

Voting over the Internet

The debate over voting over the Internet is an example that illustrates this. The government has recently put forward a proposal for a new Election act. Voting over the Internet is one of the issues being dealt with, but we do not recommend any changes in the traditional method of voting by casting paper ballots at the polling station.

It is argued that voting over the Internet will simplify the voting procedure, make it more flexible and less expensive. This may increase the participation in the elections and strengthen the legitimacy of the representative system. Such a step would be a pivotal electoral system change.

Voting over the Internet poses a lot of technical challenges: Voter authentication, vote integrity, voter anonymity, accountability, recountability, and so on, are all involved. Many of these requirements operate at cross-purposes with one another. The standard personal-computer operating systems massive vulnerability represent a very serious concern, in term of hidden viruses, worms, Trojan horses, and further surprises unknowingly downloaded by the user with other packages, and waiting to pounce on election day.

Of course, in any election environment, there are many opportunities for fraud and manipulation – despite ostensible checks and balances. These problems won`t be less with electronic and Internet voting, where the lack of any physical ballots makes such manipulations almost impossible for the election authorities to detect and correct. Tellingly, a government electoral commission, which published its report January 2001, also recommended us to be cautious when it comes to voting over the Internet. Nevertheless: It would surprise me if the technical challenges can’t be solved in the future.

Yet the technical issues aren’t what I find most difficult. The crucial point for me is that certain democratic principles seems impossible to maintain, if the voting procedure no longer shall take place at the polling station.

First there is fraud. It is essential that every voter has the right to cast one, and only one, vote. How can we be sure that no one uses some other voter’s ID (pin card for inst) if nobody supervises who actually cast the votes? Signs of identification could be stolen or even sold and bought. To ensure that no one casts more than one vote, the voter has to show up in person and identify him- or herself.

We also want elections to be secret and free. When voting takes place under the supervision of the authorities, it is possible to prevent the voter from being submitted to undue influence and is free to choose between the different lists. Such guarantees are impossible to offer the voter at home.

Besides, I find something rewarding in walking to the local polling station on election day. I’m afraid that voting over the Internet can turn politics into a spectator sport, and diminish the political debate. Increased particiapation in elections must not be concidered an end in itself.

Nevertheless the government doesn’t want to hinder the technical development. But it must still be a principle that voting must take place under the supervision of the election authorities. There can be no exception for experiments on electronic voting.

The most important advantage of electronic voting is thought to be that the voter doesn’t need to visit the polling station. Since my attitude is that voting must take place under supervision of the authorities, I really don’t believe there is much to achieve by opening for electronic voting.

Under no circumstances can we support the exclusive use of Internet as a mechanism for formal voting. Electronic voting can only be a supplement to traditional voting.

The citizens in touch with their representatives

Focus, so far, in Norway is on service provision rather than genuine participatory interactivity. However, we believe that the fast expansion in Norway of the Internet, combined with the ongoing broadband expansion, imply that the technological platform now exist in order to develop applications which in different ways can strengthen the traditional representative institutions, especially at the local level.

The technology gives us as elected representatives an opportunity to communicate directly with the citizens without interference from the media. Hence, the Internet might make it easier for representatives to justify their policy, with restored confidence as a result. Government web sites can also provide effective mechanisms for providing the public with detailed and comprehensive information about the legislative procedures and activities, allowing public scrutiny of the policy process, and promoting the accountability of elected members to their constituents.

Lets look at some of the basic steps taken locally so far.

The most direct method to look into how local governments are using the Internet is a systematic examination of their Internet products, i.e. their web sites. The ministry is currently financing a research project that aims to give a snapshot of local government web sites. A content analysis of 435 Norwegian local web sites was conducted during November and December in the year of 2001. The study, not yet published, may provide us with the first indication of how the development in the municipalities is going.

Today, 75 percent of all Norwegian municipalities are represented on the Internet. However, there are wide variations in quality and activity. The most important factor when it comes to the question of whether a municipality should represent itself on the Net or not seems to be the size of the population. The annual volume of transactions associated with the services in sparsely populated municipalities is low. They simply do not find it economically favourable to introduce electronic government.

Some of the findings in the above mentioned study is sorted in two broad categories: citizen information, and interaction between citizens and local government. This includes features like transparency, e-mail availability, and online debate possibilities.

Information

In order to make democracy more participatory, the citizens must get a chance to get into the political issues before decisions are made. Earlier, the access to decision data has been limited. Today, an effective web site may offer extensive and detailed policy relevant information and a chance to study the most obscure and difficult propositions and reports. Information is a determining factor when it comes to the citizens ability to scrutinize those in authority and hold them responsible for their actions, collectively as well as individually. We would like to see local politicians willing to invite the citizens to the political process, by publishing decision data on the Internet before city council and committee meetings take place.

The vast majority of municipal web sites provide the meeting schedules for municipal councils (71 percent) and municipal executive board (71 percent). However, fewer present the issues that will be discussed on the next meeting on the Internet. 48 percent publish the agendas before meetings in the respective institutions. In order to give the citizens a real possibility to get into the issues on the agenda and encourage participation on equal conditions, one has to climb further up on ‘the ladder of information’, by letting them study the background material before decisions are made. Only 17 percent of the municipalities do this before the municipal council meetings.

E-mail

Web sites may also include features that facilitate the interactive connection between government and citizens. The first of these features is e-mail capability. If a person merely can look at information on a government web site, without being able to contact at least one politician, the potential for two-way interaction is thwarted. Under half of the web sites, have this technology available; 42.5 percent had the e-mail address to the chairman of the municipal executive board.

Electronic debates

While e-mail certainly is the easiest method of contact, there are other methods that government web sites can employ to facilitate democratic conversation. These include opportunities for public participation in online polls, regular online discussion forums and chat pages. Many claim that these techniques encourage an active citizenship, stimulate public debate and provide the citizens with new channels in order to make them more influential. Such technologies are nowhere near as prevalent as e-mail at local government web sites: 10 percent of municipal web sites offer discussion forums. In addition the level of activity on these sites is very low. Evidently, the Internet itself does not cause people to suddenly become politically active or even interested.

Access to political parties is surprisingly limited via municipal web sites. The parties and their representatives are seldom given the opportunity to comment on the pursued policy, or to present their own policy, on the local government web sites. Few municipalities facilitate the citizen contacts within the parties by providing links to their own web sites. Even if this, to some extent, has to do with the fact that local parties do not have working web sites, these findings suggest that local governments so far are not trying very hard to use the Internet to promote inter-party competition.

Conclusion

Digital practices diverge significantly among Norwegian municipalities. Some municipalities are pioneers while others are followers and onlookers. At the same time the municipalities are somewhat behind institutions on state level in their adoption of interactive digital technologies. It is much more likely that a government institution on central level have a web site, and that their sites are more likely to have interactive capability. Knowing that local governments provide most of the core welfare services in Norway this is a key challenge.

It can be argued that the municipalities have entered the world of the new technology almost without any predefined, explicit strategies. In many cases, initiatives to adopt the new technology comes from individuals without any prior discussion within the organisation, mainly as a result of other municipalities adoption of web sites as well as the general public rhetoric on the information society. However, there is a certain pressure by the institutional environment to incorporate the modern and legitimate ideas about using new ICT. Thus, organisations, such as municipalities and political parties, are in a dilemma: on the one hand they are not ready for fundamental institutional change; on the other hand they need to adapt to the ideas and techniques that are regarded as modern and that are supposed to give the organisation legitimacy. One way of dealing with this problem is through symbolic adaptation. That is, to claim to have adopted the new technology, but in practice, it is not allowed great importance. This should not come as a surprise. Yet, the amount of political information currently available for free in the Net is astounding.

The politicians own access and knowledge of the Internet is an important area that is not given enough concern. It is rather common that the politicians themselves, and laymen politicians in particular, do not have access to the basic requirement (computer, e-mail and the Internet) that are necessary in order to take an active part in the political activities on the Net. If the technology is to be used to a greater extent in the democratic process, it is necessary that the politicians generally have the technology easily accessible in their political work. This means that the politicians need not only to decide upon communication strategies, but also to decide whether to give themselves hardware and software, as well as the expertise to connect and to use the Internet. Today, few municipalities offer home computers to their politicians. The issue is important since we know that personal use of technology is a precursor to strategic use.

When it comes to democracy we known that issues that affect individuals and that they feel strongly about are issues that facilitate involvement and participation. An organisation, a political party or a municipality seeking active involvement and participation from its members, citizens or employees must find these issues. The consequences of placing the wrong issues on an agenda may be that people loose interest in participating in the democratic process. Hence, technology itself does not create a sudden interest in politics. That said, dialogues via the Net could be important as an advisory step in the decision-making process. Such debates can generate knowledge of the issue and participation in the decision-making process, which in turn can result in well-founded decisions. Therefore, computer-assisted politics will not necessarily be radically different than today’s politics.