A Critical Analysis of e-Government in Zambia

Abstract

This article presents a critical analysis of e-government in Zambia. It reviews the relevant literature and then explains the structure and operation of the Zambian government in the context of e-government. It presents and analyses the results of a small sample study on e-government in Zambia and points to six areas for policy reform, highlighting leadership, stakeholder engagement, prioritisation, increased funding, private sector participation and mobile channels as key elements needed for future success. In this policy, ICTs are presented as the means of e-government, while electronic interactions and transactions are regarded as primary in delivering public services and in promoting e-government. Good governance has been identified as a cross-cutting issue in the fifth and sixth national development plans (Government of Zambia, 2011; Government of Zambia, 2006a). e-Governance has been identified as a powerful enabler of good governance and e-governance programmes are explicitly defined and budgeted for in the two national development plans. e-Government is regarded as a national priority and therefore deserves attention from scholars and policymakers interested in the development of Zambia. However, the reality of e-government progress has fallen far short of its potential and its stated importance in policy documents. There is a limited body of literature on the state of e-government in Zambia. Weerakkody, Dwivedi, Brooks, Williams & Mwange (2007) studied the extent of implementation of e-government in Zambia. Their survey explored the perceptions of government officials with respect to e-government implementation challenges in eight categories (Weerakkody et al, 2007): technological infrastructure; partnership and collaboration; strategy; institutional and environmental issues; human capital development; change management; leadership roles; and legal frameworks. Based on their analysis, they propose a framework for e-government implementation that emphasises the relationship between risk and value (Figure 1).