skip to main content
10.1145/3614321.3614350acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

e-Governance education for sustainable development: prioritising sustainable development goals and building capabilities to drive progress

Published:20 November 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Education in e-government needs to be better aligned with Sustainable Development Agenda. To clearly understand the potential adjustments of an e-government education programme, an initial assessment of the programme's impact on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) should be made as well as appropriate capabilities for sustainable development selected. Following the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method, the research has identified the list of SDGs that an e-Governance study programme influences most. They include SDG 9 (Industry, innovation and infrastructure), SDG 17 (Partnerships for the goals), SDG 11 (Sustainable cities and communities), SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth), SDG 16 (Peace, justice and strong institutions). In the future the programme is expected to have bigger impact on SDG 17 (Partnerships for the goals), SDG 16 (Peace, justice and strong institutions), SDG 10 (Reduced inequalities), SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth), SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production). The research also shows a big difference between the programme's actual and desired impact on SDG 7 (Affordable and clean energy), SDG 10 (Reduced inequalities), SDG 12 (Responsible consumption), SDG 13 (Climate action). Researchers identified twelve capabilities as essential for an e-Governance specialist toward the achievement of the SDGs.

References

  1. United Nations. 2016. United Nations E-Government Development Index 2016. United Nations, New York, NY. Retrieved from: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2016-Survey/E-Government%20Survey%202016.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Tomasz Janowski. 2016. Implementing Sustainable Development Goals with Digital Government – Aspiration-capacity gap. Government Information Quarterly 33, 4 (October 2016), 603-613. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.12.001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Elsa Estevez, Tomasz Janowski. 2013. Electronic Governance for Sustainable Development — Conceptual framework and state of research. Government Information Quarterly 30, 1 (January 2013), 94-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.11.001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Ignacio Marcovecchio, Mamello Thinyane, Elsa Estevez, Tomasz Janowski. 2019. Digital Government as Implementation Means for Sustainable Development Goals. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age 6, 3. DOI: 10.4018/IJPADA.2019070101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Rony Medaglia, Gianluca Misuraca, Vincenzo Aquaro. 2021. Digital Government and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals: Towards an Analytical Framework. 2021. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Digital Innovations for Public Values: Inclusive Collaboration and Community, DGO 2021. University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, United States. 473-478Matthew Van Gundy, Davide Balzarotti, and Giovanni Vigna. 2007. Catch me, if you can: Evading network signatures with web-based polymorphic worms. In Proceedings of the first USENIX workshop on Offensive Technologies (WOOT ’07) . USENIX Association, Berkley, CA, Article 7, 9 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. EY. 2019. How governments can plan for a future-fit digital workforce. EY. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.ey.com/en_gl/government-digital-innovation/how-governments-can-plan-for-a-future-fit-digital-workforce.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. United Nations. 2015. The 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals: An opportunity for Latin America and the Caribbean (LC/G. 2681-P/Rev.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. United Nations. 2020. United Nations e-government survey. 2020 : digital government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development : with addendum on COVID-19 Response. United Nations, New York, NY. Retrieved from: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3884686?ln=en.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Gervas E. Assey. 2020. The Role of Science, Technology and Innovation in Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals. The Cradle of Knowledge: African Journal of Educational and Social Science Research 8, 1 (2020). 2304-2885.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Ademola A. Adenle, Marian R. Chertow, Ellen H.M. Moors, David J. Pannell. 2020. What Can Science, Technology, and Innovation Offer in the Achievement of Sustainable Development Goals? Science, Technology, and Innovation for Sustainable Development Goals: Insights from Agriculture, Health, Environment, and Energy, edited by Ademola A. Adenle , Oxford University Press, 2020, pp. 3-20. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190949501.003.0001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Ricardo Vinuesa, Hossein Azizpour, Isabel Leite, 2020. The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat Commun 11, 233 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-14108-y.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Francesca Mazzi, Mariarosaria Taddeo, and Luciano Floridi. 2023. AI in Support of the SDGs: Six Recurring Challenges and Related Opportunities Identified Through Use Cases. In The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence for the Sustainable Development Goals, F. Mazzi and L. Floridi, Eds. Cham: Springer, 2023, vol. 152, pp. 13-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21147-8_2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Måns Nilsson, David Griggs, and Martin Visbeck. 2016. Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals. Nature 534, 320-322 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1038/534320a.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. David Le Blanc. 2015. Towards Integration at Last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a Network of Targets. Sust. Dev. 23, 176–187 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1582.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Therese Bennich, Nina Weitz, and Henrik Carlsen. 2020. Deciphering the scientific literature on SDG interactions: A review and reading guide. Science of The Total Environment 728 (2020), 138405, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138405.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Zsuzsanna Katalin Szabo, Zsombor Szádoczki, Sándor Bozóki, Gabriela C. Stănciulescu, and Dalma Szabo. 2021. An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach for Prioritisation of Strategic Objectives of Sustainable Development. Sustainability 13, 2254 (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042254.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Philip McGowan, Gavin Stewart, Graham Long, and Matthew Grainger. 2019. An imperfect vision of indivisibility in the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability 2 (2019), 43-45, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0190-1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. OECD. Civil service capacities in the SDG era: An assessment framework, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 47, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1787/a20bad7c-en.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Oana Forestier and Rakhyun Kim. 2020. Cherry-picking the Sustainable Development Goals: Goal Prioritization by National Governments and Implications for Global Governance. Sustainable Development 28, 1269–1278 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2082.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Atie Asadikia, Abbas Rajabifard, and Mohsen Kalantari. 2021. Systematic prioritisation of SDGs: Machine learning approach. World Development 140 (2021), 105269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105269.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Cameron Allen, Graciela Metternicht, and Thomas Wiedmann. 2019. Prioritising SDG targets: assessing baselines, gaps and interlinkages. Sustainability Science 14, 145-162 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0596-8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Wolfgang Toth, Harald Vacik, Helga Pülzl, and Henrik Carlsen. 2021. Deepening our understanding of which policy advice to expect from prioritizing SDG targets: introducing the Analytic Network Process in a multi-method setting. Sustainability Science 16 (2021), 1-16, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-01009-7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. OECD. 2017. Core Skills for Public Sector Innovation. (April 2017). Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/media/oecdorg/satellitesites/opsi/contents/files/OECD_OPSI-core_skills_for_public_sector_innovation-201704.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. UK Government. Digital Data and Technology Profession Capability Framework. 2021. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/digital-data-and-technology-profession-capability-framework.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Agenzia per l'Italia Digitale. n.d. Competenze di e-leadership. Retrieved from 2. Principi e strategie per la mappatura e la valorizzazione (lg-competenzedigitali.readthedocs.io).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Public Administration School of Catalonia. 2020. Competency framework for innovative professionals in public administrations. Public Administration School of Catalonia. (July 1, 2020). Retrieved from Comptetency framework for innovative professionals in public administrations (gencat.cat)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Alena Labanava, Richard Dreyling, Marzia Mortati, Innar Liiv, and Ingrid Pappel. 2022. Capacity Building in Government: Towards Developing a Standard for a Functional Specialist in AI for Public Services. In Future Data and Security Engineering. Big Data, Security and Privacy, Smart City and Industry 4.0 Applications (pp. 503-516). Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-8069-5_34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. ITU and UNESCO. 2022. Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transformation Competencies for Civil Servants. Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from https://www.broadbandcommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Artificial-Intelligence-and-Digital-Transformation-Competencies-for-Civil-Servants.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Arnim Wiek, Lauren Keeler, and Charles Redman. 2011. Key Competencies in Sustainability: a Reference Framework for Academic Program Development. Sustainability Science 6, 203–218 (2011), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0132-6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Marco Rieckmann, Lisa Mindt, and Senan Gardiner. 2017. Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Catherine Cote. 2019. 8 sustainability skills for working professionals. Harvard Business School Online. Retrieved from https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/sustainability-skills.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Guia Bianchi, Ulrike Pisiotis, and Marcelino Cabrera Giraldez. 2022. GreenComp The European sustainability competence framework, edited by Yves Punie and Margherita Bacigalupo. EUR 30955 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2022, ISBN 978-92-76-53201-9, doi:10.2760/821058, JRC128040. Retrieved from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC128040.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. EuroTech Universities. (n.d.). EuroTech Universities. Retrieved May 6, 2023, from https://euroteq.eurotech-universities.eu/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2021. Developing capacities for effective governance for the sustainable development goals. Capacity development workshops and pilot testing of the Curriculum on Governance for the SDGs toolkits. 2020-2021 Report. Retrieved from: https://unpan.un.org/sites/unpan.un.org/files/Report%20on%20Piloting%20trainings%20of%20the%20Curriculum-min_0.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. n.d. Competency framework for public servants to realize the sustainable development goals. Retrieved from: https://unpan.un.org/sites/unpan.un.org/files/UN%20DESA%20Competency%20framework_Final.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. GovStack. (n.d.). Home. Retrieved May 7, 2023, from https://www.govstack.global/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Thomas L. Saaty. 1984. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Decision Making in Complex Environments. In Quantitative Assessment in Arms Control, R. Avenhaus and R.K. Huber, Eds. Boston, MA: Springer, 1984, pp. 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-2805-6_12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Innar Liiv, Erkki Karo, and Ralf-Martin Soe. 2023. Computer-Aided Corporate Sense-Making and Prioritization for SDGs. In The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence for the Sustainable Development Goals, F. Mazzi and L. Floridi, Eds. Cham: Springer, 2023, vol. 152, pp. 295-310. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21147-8_20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Randall Dunham. 1998. Nominal Group Technique: A User's Guide. University of Wisconsin. Retrieved May 7, 2023, from https://sswm.info/sites/default/files/reference_attachments/DUNHAM%201998%20Nominal%20Group%20Technique%20-%20A%20Users'%20Guide.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Morris Gallagher, Tim Hares, John Spencer, Colin Bradshaw, and Ian Webb. 1993. The nominal group technique: a research tool for general practice? Fam Pract, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 76-81, Mar. 1993. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/10.1.76. PMID: 8477899.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. (n.d.). Estonia. SDG Index and Dashboards. Retrieved May 7, 2023, from https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/profiles/estonia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. e-Governance education for sustainable development: prioritising sustainable development goals and building capabilities to drive progress

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          ICEGOV '23: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
          September 2023
          509 pages
          ISBN:9798400707421
          DOI:10.1145/3614321

          Copyright © 2023 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 20 November 2023

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate350of865submissions,40%
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)28
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format