Annexes to COM(2004)108 - EEurope 2005 Mid-term Review - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2004)108 - EEurope 2005 Mid-term Review. |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2004)108  |
| date | February 18, 2004 |
Issues to be considered in the review are:
* Achieving wider market acceptance of e-signatures by promoting at European level the use of interoperable standards and promoting all forms of electronic signatures regardless of the technology used.
* The role of standards and certification in creating trust in the information society.
* Identifying priorities for co-operation at the EU level in the field of network and information security, in particular in the framework of ENISA (development of public private partnership at the EU level, inventory of activities and organisations in the Member States, best practices in the field of awareness raising and risk assessment).
3.3. e-inclusion:
ICT developments do not diffuse uniformly across all regions and socio-demographic groups, thus "e-inclusion" or the "digital divide" is a horizontal concern for all areas of eEurope 2005. The consultation showed broad awareness of these issues and a consensus on the need for further action.
In particular, a greater focus is needed on the future potential of new platforms to increase accessibility and to encourage a wider range of people on line, this would include looking at local area and wide area wireless solutions and the switchover to Digital TV.
For the review of the Action Plan attention is needed on:
* Data to assess the extent of regional imbalances, perhaps alongside the review of the policy orientations for the structural funds.
* EU level e-accessibility standards, including e-procurement, on implementation of Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guidelines and common labelling for accessible web pages.
* Improved accessibility for excluded groups and disadvantaged regions by further promoting multi-platform ICT access (PC, digital TV, 3rd Generation Mobile, etc)
* Uptake and use of ICTs by groups at risk of exclusion to be stimulated by awareness and digital literacy actions and provision of appropriate content and services
4. Implementation
4.1. Benchmarking:
Following the guidelines set in the Council Resolution on eEurope [10], the benchmarking exercise is largely based on official statistics Surveys of households and enterprises were organised by Eurostat and carried out by National Statistical Institutes (NSI). These surveys supply 26 of the 37 indicators. By January 2004, results had been made available for 12 enterprise surveys and 11 household surveys.
[10] 2003/C 48/02
To ensure regular and comparable data provision in Member States and to enable greater use of official statistics on the information society, in August 2003 the Commission proposed a European Parliament and Council Regulation concerning statistics in the Information Society.
The Council Resolution on eEurope requested pilot work on the e-business and e-health indicators. The methodological analysis for an e-business readiness indicator was undertaken by Commission services and proposals will be presented when data for 2003 is available. This indicator could be included in the benchmarking exercise from 2004. Results from the pilot work on e-health should be available in spring 2004.
Both the mid-term review survey responses and discussions in statistical working groups have stressed the need to review the indicators. For the review of the Action Plan the issues were:
* The current indicators focus too much on readiness and not enough on intensity and impact [11].
[11] The categories of readiness, intensity and impact were defined by the OECD in 'Defining and Measuring e-Commerce: A Status Report' OECD-DSTI 08/10/1999.
* Indicators do not show to what extent the targets of eEurope have been achieved.
* There is a need to provide comparative figures for third countries; eEurope should be benchmarked against the best in the world.
* It is too early to provide an assessment of the eEurope 2005 benchmarking exercise. A benchmarking report with all available data for 2003 will be presented in June 2004. Initiatives additional to the current benchmarking exercise could be taken immediately as part of the mid-term review outcome to address the need for more analysis and a more policy relevant and comprehensive set of indicators.
4.2. Exchange of good practice:
The exchange of good practices is complementary to the efforts on benchmarking and is an underlying principle of the Open Method of Co-ordination. A wide range of instruments are available to support good practice. These include forums and conferences, such as the second e-government conference in 2003, organised with the Italian Presidency, and the e-health conference during the Greek Presidency; competitions and quality awards; support networks to promote mutual learning such as the e-Business Support Network (eBSN) and European Schoolnet [12]; the codification of lessons into guidelines, checklists, roadmaps or technical working documents; adoption of voluntary codes of good practice and open standards based upon codification of practices.
[12] http://community.eun.org/
These instruments are widely deployed in support of eEurope. However, in order to facilitate a more effective exchange of experience more thought is needed on how to target their use to achieve a greater impact than in an ad hoc manner. The need is to balance the mix of these policy instruments in each domain to optimise exchange, depending on the level of consensus, experience and maturity in the field.
5. Conclusions
At mid-term of the eEurope 2005 Action Plan important progress has been made.
The eEurope 2005 targets remain valid, in the context of the enlargement of the EU to 25 members and the consultation revealed that it has acted as a stimulus to many national and regional efforts. Significant developments in the areas of broadband and e-government have been supported by increased political support at the national and EU levels.
Achieving the goals of eEurope 2005 requires strong political leadership and commitment at all levels. There are many areas of success - broadband connectivity is rising, government services are increasingly fully on-line.. However, in many fields progress is still supply driven, concentrating on technology, applications and initiatives. A concerted effort is needed from all sides if we are to achieve the productivity gains and job creation expected from eEurope. This push to maturity means emphasising the delivery of solutions and on scaling up fast from success stories to critical mass.
Specific areas that require greater focus and will be important in the revision of the action plan are:
* Interoperability, standards and multi-platform access emerged in all areas as requiring greater focus. In many cases the key requirement is not technical solutions but the setting up of multi-party or institutional agreements.
* Reinforcement of the pan-European dimension. Most initiatives remain nationally or regionally focused. The possibilities for cross-border learning and exchange are widely recognised but less often acted upon. Difficulties of interoperability persist or are even multiplied by the profusion of efforts. Opportunities to close the gap between leaders and followers through a more effective exchange of practices are missed.
* A move to a demand-driven approach that emphasises service delivery, end-user value for all and functionality. In e-business, e-government, e-health and e-learning it is clear that there are many good initiatives, but so far the ways to bring really effective services on-line or their adequacy to the end-user are not fully understood.
* A prerequisite for further development of broadband is a greater availability of attractive content. This requires attention to the protection of copyrighted content and the implementation of interoperable DRM solutions, whilst respecting the legitimate expectations of users
* Experimentation with new business and service delivery models that get more value out of the shift to e-services. e-Services generally yield more productivity and efficiency gains when embedded in effective re-organisation of processes and service delivery.
* Respond to the need for greater monitoring and quantification of e-inclusion, especially in order to assess the extent of regional imbalances, the potential for and the potential for multiplatform delivery of e-services to widen accessibility.
* Finally, the impact of e-services in terms of efficiency or productivity gains and quality of work and life should be measured, taking into account effects on citizenship and governance. In particular, there is a need for structured analyses of lessons to develop complementary quantitative and qualitative indicators as part of the benchmarking exercise. Common work is required to identify the obstacles to progress and guidance on implementation. Also needed are more evaluations of initiatives so that policy can be guided by evidence.
The Commission recommends the continuation of the existing lines of the 2005 Action Plan. The review found that the existing goals are still valid and that the Acceding Countries are open to accepting them. Furthermore, it is to be expected that the 6th Framework Programme for Research & Development will contribute to the implementation of the eEurope Action Plan mainly through the Information Society Technologies part of the Programme.
A thorough evaluation of the impact of eEurope 2005 will take place to be discussed and agreed with Member States during 2004. The Commission requests the Member States and Acceding Countries should give comments upon the document and play an active role in the process of revising the Action Plan until June 2004.