Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain Technologies, and Digital State Services in Georgia General Overview of Georgian E-government Environment

Vladimeri Napetvaridze

Abstract


The paper will describe the general state of e-government in Georgia based on various secondary sources. It will present the official digital services, representing forms of digital government, including G2C (Government to Citizen), G2B - (Government to Business), and G2G (Government to Government). In the framework of the article, the State digital products in Georgia will be discussed in the context of the existing theories about e-government.

Although the paper will be descriptive in nature, where Georgian e-services will be grouped according to fundamental theories about e-government, the article is of great international importance. It is the first English-language paper to reflect the most Georgian state digital services. Existing international researches on e-government are based on assessments of the situation by local and international experts and does not describe the digital services available in the country. This paper will provide the international scientific community with information about public e-services in Georgia and present them in the context of the existing theories of digital governance.


Keywords


E-governance; G2C; G2G; G2B; Digital services; Artificial Intelligence; Blockchain.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Joseph, R. C. (2009), "Government-to-Business (G2B) perspectives in E-government," Northeast Decision Sciences Institute Proceedings, 192-199.

Administration of the Government of Georgia Policy Planning and Coordination Department

ALLESSIE D, SOBOLEWSKI M, VACCARI L, PIGNATELLI F (Editor), Blockchain for digital government, EUR 29677 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-76- 00581-0, doi:10.2760/942739, JRC115049

Carter, L., &Bélanger, F. (2005), "The utilization of e‐government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors," Information systems journal, 15(1), 5-25 https://ogpgeorgia.gov.ge/upload/

IDFI - Institute for Development of Freedom of Information - (2021): “Artificial Intelligence: International Tendencies and Georgia - Legislation and Practice”

Joseph, R. C., & Ezzedeen, S. R. (2009). E-government and e-HRM in the public sector. In Encyclopedia of Human Resources Information Systems: Challenges in e-HRM (pp. 272-277). IGI Global

Kazmi, S. N. A. (2010, July). Factors influencing e-Government implementation: Issues and challenges in Pakistan. In 2010 Fifth International Conference on Digital Information Management (ICDIM) (pp. 326-331). IEEE.

Koneru, I. (2007). E-government : empowering citizens through e-inclusion. The IUP Journal of Government and Public Policy, 2(3), 53-68.

Laskaridis, G., Markellos, K., Markellou, P., & Panayiotaki, A. (2008). E-Government's Barriers and Opportunities in Greece. In Handbook of research on public information technology (pp. 175-191). IGI Global.

Liu, S. M., & Kim, Y. (2018). Special issue on internet plus government: New opportunities to solve public problems?

Liu, S. M., & Kim, Y. (2018). Special issue on internet plus government: New opportunities to solve public problems?

Manoharan, A., & Holzer, M. (2012). E-Government and Civic Engagement: Factors and Determinants of.

Nawafleh, S., Obiedat, R., & Harfoushi, O. (2012). E-government between developed and developing countries. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning (iJAC), 5(1), 8-13.

Paramashivaiah, P. and Suresh, B.K., (2016) ," E-governance: Issues and challenges in India," International Journal of Sustainable Development,9(8),11-16

Public Administration Division (2020): “Self-Assessment Report On the Implementation of Open Government Georgia Action Plan 2018-2019

Thakur, S., Kashyap, S. K., & Nim, D. (2020). E-Governance Dimensions and Performance Measures: Conceptual Framework with Reference to G2B Initiatives. Information and Communications Technology (ICT), 29(03), 5442-5455.

Tolbert, C. J., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of e‐government on trust and confidence in government. Public administration review, 66(3), 354-369.

UN (2004), UN Global E-Government Survey 2003, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/f8a93d8f-en.

UN (2006), Global E-Government Readiness Report 2005: From E-Government to E-Inclusion, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/0bf9f932-en.

UN (2008), United Nations E-Government Survey 2008: From E-Government to Connected Governance, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/047afd3a-en.

UN (2010), United Nations E-Government Survey 2010: Leveraging E-Government at a Time of Financial and Economic Crisis, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/0e749d15-en

UN (2012), United Nations E-Government Survey 2012: E-Government for the People, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/b1052762-en.

UN (2014), United Nations e-government survey 2014: E-Government for the future we want, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/73688f37-en.

UN (2018), United Nations E-Government Survey 2018: Gearing E-Government to Support Transformation Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/d54b9179-en.

UN DESA (2017), United Nations E-Government Survey 2016: E-Government in Support of Sustainable Development, UN, New York, https://doi.org/10.18356/d719b252-en.

Wihlborg, E. (2014, January). Legitimate E-Government--Public E-Services as a Facilitator of Political Legitimacy. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 2148-2157). IEEE.

Wright, S. (2012). Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation. New media & society, 14(2), 244-261.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.