This chapter explores the coherence of public services in Argentina and the contribution that digital technologies play in this respect. It stresses the value of key enablers and standards as foundations for a more integrated service delivery in the Country. It also discusses the value of services that focus on the citizens and the contribution that citizen engagement plays for this purpose. The chapter assesses how digital platforms play a key role in the access to public services while highlighting the value of digital inclusion.
Digital Government Review of Argentina
Accelerating the Digitalisation of the Public Sector
OECD Digital Government Studies
Chapter 5. Public service design and delivery in Argentina
Abstract
Introduction
Public services and formalities mainly define the level and channels of interaction between government and citizens. As such, the quality, timeliness and access to public services exert a strong influence on citizens’ perception of the government’s capacity to deliver results and its reliability and responsiveness to adapt to change (for instance, in light of evolving social, economic and technological contexts). As a result, the level of citizens’ satisfaction with public services influences the public’s trust in government, thus placing public service design and delivery at the core of the government’s efforts that should centre on the people.
OECD governments are increasingly acknowledging that technology is only a tool for better public services. On the one hand, digital technologies can improve how public services are designed, delivered and accessed. Inclusive, multi-channel, proactive, seamless, agile and data-driven public services, conceived with a focus on users, can help to deliver public value and real-world benefits to citizens (Figure 5.1). Yet, the needs of citizens are often assumed by public officials, leaving citizens’ contributions out of the creative and value co-creation process.
On the other hand, in the current digital age innovative private sector business models have habituated citizens to services that are accessible, user-friendly and tailored to their specific needs. Governments are therefore facing the challenge of continuously self-adapting to this new context in order to stay relevant.
The public service life cycle includes a whole spectrum of different iterative stages, from prototyping to design, delivery, access, feedback and redesign. Public services are built on foundational layers that ensure the integration and streamlining of processes, the sharing of data, and the seamless interaction between organisations. This underpins the possibility of developing shared services that use common tools, follow guidelines and standards, and decrease silos resulting from legacy systems.
Figure 5.1. The six dimensions of a digital government and their application to public services
Source: Original content developed by author for the review.
Building a paperless government, improving digital public service delivery and streamlining the government-citizen relationship have been priorities for the central government in Argentina since 2015. Most of these initiatives have been built in no time and from the ground up, at least at the central level.
Yet, while policy achievements are clear, Argentina will face the challenge of ensuring the sustainability of these efforts in the long term, making clear that foundational initiatives supporting the digitisation of processes would eventually leave more room for the digitalisation and transformation of the public sector in the broader sense, and proving the real value and benefits brought to the final users.
Building a paperless government
The Electronic Document Management Platform (Plataforma de Gestión Documental Electrónica, GDE) (Box 5.1) did not exist prior to 2015 at the central level and has undoubtedly generated efficiencies and positive benefits and value for the public sector.
The GDE is a project of national scope; it is being adopted by some provinces and municipalities in order to enable the exchange documents and files with and among subnational administrations.
By March 2018, 100% of organisational procedures within central ministries and decentralised organisations had been digitised and as of March 2019, the GDE was being used by 191 public sector organisations; 13 provincial governments had signed a collaboration agreement with the central government for its implementation; 7 provinces were in the process of adopting and implementing the platform; and 22 cities were already using it.
These achievements result from a combination of clear policy goals, political strong focus on implementation provide a platform to further advance interoperability and modernisation efforts in the public sector (OECD, 2018c).
Box 5.1. The Electronic Document Management Platform
The Electronic Document Management Platform (Plataforma de Gestión Documental Electrónica, GDE) promotes the digitisation of government processes in order to foster a “zero paper public administration”. The GDE is accessible through desktop and mobile-based platforms.
It allows for 100% of the documents, procedures and government records to be generated, processed and administered in electronic form, and for the citizen to perform formalities from a remote location. These formalities are secure from a legal and technological point of view.
The GDE intends to increase efficiency, simplify government processes, and improve transparency and accountability. It is an integrated platform comprised of different working modules, which have their respective functions and levels of interaction:
1. Unique desktop: provides public sector organisations with direct access to all of the GSE’s modules. This gives public sector organisations a better overview of the different procedures they are working on in order to then better manage and monitor them.
2. Official communications (Comunicaciones Oficiales, CCOO): enables the digital generation, numbering, signing, communication and archiving of all interactions between public sector organisations in a more secure, controlled and automatic manner.
3. Electronic generator of official documents (Generador Eléctrónico de Documentos Oficiales, GEDO): allows the digital generation, registration and archiving of official documents.
4. Electronic file: contains all the digital documents that were generated either though the official communications module or the electronic generator of official documents module.
5. Signature holder (Portafirma): allows users to stamp and sign large volumes of documents in an easier and faster fashion.
6. Documentary interoperability: allows the exchange of documentary and e-record files among different GDE hubs. It also allows the signature of a document between users of the different GDE modules.
7. Real Estate E-register (Registro de la Propiedad Inmueble): registration and management of real estate records.
8. Staff single e-file (Legajo Único Electrónico, LUE): digitises files and professional records of public officials.
9. Work and services contracts (Locación de Obras y Servicios, LOyS): generates and processes public procurement contracts and issues invoices. The LOyS is integrated with the Financial Administration System (eSIDIF).
10. Multipurpose file register (Registro Legajo Multipropósito, RLM): electronic management and control of different public registers.
Source: Secretaría de Modernización Administrativa (n.d.), Gestión Documental Electrónica, (accessed on 22 February 2019). https://www.argentina.gob.ar/modernizacion/administrativa/gde
The GDE, which is based on experience in the city of Buenos Aires, used a problem-solving approach with the objective of developing a document management layer for the central government. It followed an enterprise resource planning (ERP) principle, thus aiming to develop a system that could not only lead to the dematerialisation of processes and procedures but that could also be used by public sector organisations to communicate, produce official documents and manage document files, among other others, thus improving the overall interactions among organisations. (seeFigure 5.2).
Figure 5.2. Electronic Document Management Platform (GDE): Main modules
Source: Based on MoM (2017), “Gestión documental electrónica: Manual de usuario, gestor de asistencias y transferencias”, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/manual_gat-20170809.pdf (accessed on 19 February 2019).
The GDE enabled the use of electronic and digital signatures within the central government (e.g. through security tokens or using remote digital signature).
As a back-end solution that could be used to better design front-end services, the GDE provides an underlying platform for the development of government-citizen interaction websites such as the Remote Formalities Platform (Trámites a Distancia, TAD) (Box 5.2). Indeed, the TAD shows the willingness of the central government to bridge administrative simplification and modernisation efforts using information and communication technologies, and adds to the broader regulatory simplification efforts of the current central administration.1
However, evidence from other peer reviews being carried out by the OECD Secretariat (see the OECD Review of Regulatory Policy in Argentina) point to the fact that “while there was a clear improvement and simplification of processes in the conversion from physical procedures to paperless systems, Argentina did not actively seek the reengineering of processes” (OECD, 2019b). These findings were confirmed by evidence and insights also collected during the workshops that were organised in Buenos Aires (July 2018), when stakeholders expressed that there was a tendency in the public sector to focus on digitising first and re-engineering later, instead of leveraging the use of digital technologies to reconceive and simplify processes (i.e. digitalisation) before building new digital structures on them.
The result is potentially missing out to the possibility to promote transformational digital change in the long term.
Box 5.2. The Remote Formalities Platform
The Remote Formalities Platform (Trámites a Distancia, TAD) enables public sector organisations to interact with citizens and businesses through a digital platform for some important administrative formalities. Through the platform, citizens and businesses are able to complete important official government formalities as well as obtain official responses. Paperwork that citizens and businesses previously had to fill in by hand and provide to a given public sector organisation can now be submitted on line and provided to different organisations remotely.
The online platform is divided by institution, subject or category, with a search function to allow users to more easily identify the government procedure they need to complete. Users can, for example, apply for postgraduate degree accreditation, or request the financial statements of a government entity.
This digitisation of administrative formalities is intended to centralise different government procedures, quicken them, and simplify citizens’ and businesses’ interaction with government institutions.
Source: Adapted from OECD (2019b), Regulatory Policy in Argentina: Tools and Practices for Regulatory Improvement, https://doi.org/10.1787/d835e540-en.
Yet, a parallel approach, focusing on building a single government digital identity and pursuing the design and delivery of digital services using common tools and shared platforms, is also guiding policy action in the country.
This approach is propelled by the development of the National Public Sector Digital Platform (Plataforma Digital del Sector Público Nacional), its interface design and the consolidation of information about, and access to, digital public services, and in particular through Argentina.gob.ar & Mi Argentina (OECD, 2018c) (see Section 5.6). This scenario shows that e-government (e.g. the GDE and the TAD) and digital government tools (e.g. Mi Argentina) co-exist in Argentina as a result of the challenges the current administration inherited from previous governments (neither tool was available at the central level before 2015).
Even though such co-existence is common in many countries, it is not the most efficient way to to unleash the full potential of technologies and data to transform how the public sector functions and delivers public value (OECD, 2018c). The coexistence can lead to further confusion if reinforced by a perceived lack of clarity in terms of policy messages, which can perpetuate the understanding that e-government (a strong focus on efficiency and modernisation) is synonym to digital government (transformational with a strong focus on public value) (see Chapter 1).
Stronger leadership for digital government could accelerate the evolution to digital government (see Chapter 2). Evidence from the different OECD missions to Buenos Aires point to the fact that so far, e-government and modernisation seem to be overshadowing digital government efforts, which would benefit from being mainstreamed and recognised as fundamental to the conceptual reshaping of public sector modernisation in Argentina and not simply functional to its implementation.
The recognition of the transformative potential of digital government for public value creation may help Argentina avoid missing opportunities to “reboot” the administration when needed to better serve the public. This would indeed imply a shift from a focus on efficiency towards one driven by public value creation.
The absence of a digital government strategy (see Chapter 2) does not help to raise full awareness of this or to overcome this situation in order to advance the digital transformation of the public sector, and the underlying processes that the services are built upon.
Without a formal and strategic articulation of what digital government is, and a clear understanding of how government agencies will work together to achieve it, efforts may continue to target e-government rather than channelling resources towards a true digital transformation (OECD, 2018c). Indeed, key soft policy documents such as the National Office of Information Technologies’ (Oficina Nacional de Tecnologías de la Información, ONTI) Decálogo Tecnológico (see Chapter 3) make a clear distinction between digital government resources (e.g. Mi Argentina) and administrative simplification resources (e.g. the GDE),2 thus providing a precedent in terms of clarity that can be mainstreamed and scaled up across the broader public sector.
Argentina, as many OECD countries, was not born digital and the public sector clearly holds technical and cultural legacy problems that need to be overcome. A phase of coexistence between e-government and digital government is therefore understandable and not unique to the Argentinian context. Yet, the focus should be to target modernisation efforts that support the transition towards a full digital government in the long run. Argentina can learn from other countries’ experiences in this respect in order to leapfrog and avoid creating additional legacy challenges which may result from a persisting coexistence between e-government and digital government efforts, and which may build future barriers for digitalisation.
Enabling government as a platform
Enabling government as a platform can follow a sequence of subsequent, yet related, layers that aim to lever the value of shared resources, tools and knowledge (Box 5.3).
At the technical level, this implies placing the government as a provider of shared solutions and tools that can be reused by public sector organisations to build new services on top of these tools. However, this also implies enabling the government as a habitat for the sharing of knowledge where stakeholders from all sectors can interact and contribute to co-create solutions. In the context of public services, this means bringing the citizen on board in the design of public services so that services are fit for purpose.
The following sections present the efforts the Argentinian government has made to enable a context where the sharing of resources and knowledge can help advance digital government efforts, and the design and delivery of public services that focus on the citizens in the long term.
Box 5.3. Government as a platform: A digital government perspective
Enabling government as a platform can follow different approaches which comprise a series of supporting layers ranging from technical efforts to citizen-driven and collaborative approaches, for instance, to:
Construct ICT, data infrastructure/architecture/governance models that serve to perform streamlined and secure data-sharing practices in the public sector. More seamless data sharing within the public sector can help to implement core digital government principles such as once-only (the right of citizens to provide the same information and data to authorities no more than once) (See Chapter 6).
Define regulations and standards (see Chapter 2), govern and stimulate the development of secured and shared services and common components that can be used by all agencies to improve and facilitate public service delivery (e.g. mailboxes, eID, government-citizen payment systems) (see Section 5.4).
Procure goods and services in a more agile fashion to bring external talent to solve policy challenges in a timely fashion and explore innovative ways of delivering public services (see Chapters 3 and 4).
Contribute to greater stakeholder engagement (e.g. women, citizens, minorities, businesses) by enabling spaces for collaboration and public sector innovation with a problem-solving mindset (e.g. policy and datalabs) in order to improve the design and redesign of user-driven policies and services (e.g. through crowdsourcing ideas and feedback from citizens).
Enable government data as an asset base (or platform) for social and business innovation (see Chapter 6).
Foresee citizens’ needs for public services in advance by using new technologies, such as artificial intelligence, machine-learning and data analytics, in order to build a smart government.
Figure 5.3. Government as a platform: The OECD digital government perspective
Source: Originally published in OECD (2019a), Digital Government Review of Sweden, https://doi.org/10.1787/4daf932b-en, with research from different sources, including Brown, A. et al. (2017), “Appraising the impact and role of platform models and government as a platform (GaaP) in UK government public service reform: Towards a platform assessment framework (PAF)”, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.03.003; Margetts, H. and A. Naumann (2017), “Government as a platform: What can Estonia show the world?”, https://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/materials/publications/16061/government-as-a-platform.pdf; O’Reilly, T. (2011), “Government as a platform”, https://doi.org/10.1162/INOV_a_00056; Ubaldi, B. (2013), “Open government data: Towards empirical analysis of open government data initiatives”, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k46bj4f03s7-en; UK Government Digital Service (2018), Government as Platform blog, https://governmentasaplatform.blog.gov.uk/about-government-as-a-platform (accessed on 6 April 2018).
Key enablers
Results from the survey that was administered for the purpose of this review show that Argentina has made some advancements to consolidate the foundations for a digital government.
In 2008, the Argentinian government published the E-government Interoperability Component (Componente de Interoperabilidad para el Gobierno Electrónico) (Government of Argentina, 2008). Argentina was, together with Brazil’s e-Ping Interoperability framework (2004), one of the few Latin American countries which, at that time, had invested in moving forward interoperability efforts at the central level (Criado, Gascó and Jiménez, 2011). More recently, the 2016 Register Simplification Decree and Resolution 19/2018, which created the interoperability module INTEROPER.AR (see Chapter 6), contributed to advancing interoperability efforts in the public sector.
Some base registries are also available at the central level, including the National Population Register (RENAPER), the National Recidivism Register (Registro Nacional de Reincidencia), the Social Security Register and the Federal Administration of Public Revenues (Administración Federal de Ingresos Públicos, AFIP) (see Chapter 6).
Table 5.1. Enabling frameworks for digital government in Argentina
Source: OECD (2018e). Question 76: Please indicate which of the following enabling frameworks for digital government are in place and which organisations can utilise these. Status as of April 2019.
ONTI (see Chapter 3) is also emerging as a key player in terms of digital innovation in the public sector and the potential development of future foundations for a digital government. For instance, ONTI is actively promoting the use of technologies such as blockchain, the Internet of Things, cloud computing and open source software as a means to explore how these tools can improve how the public sector operates (Box 5.4).
Box 5.4. Exploring the use of digital technologies in the Argentinian public sector
Guidelines
The National Office of Information Technologies (ONTI) has implemented a strategy to develop guidelines for the use and adoption of emerging technologies among public sector organisations in order to improve their digital services and products. The goal is to accelerate digital innovation in the public sector and promote peer-to-peer sharing of best practices and use cases across the broader public sector.
ONTI has also published a Code of Good Practices for the Development of Public Software to promote the sustainable development of public sector software1 and it released guidelines on the Internet of Things in March 2019. Additional guidelines on blockchain, smart contracts and artificial intelligence are expected to be released in the course of 2019.
Blockchain
Blockchain technology is being adopted in Argentina through the Blockchain Federal Argentina (BFA) initiative. The BFA corresponds to an open and participatory multi-service platform which enables actors inside and outside the government to add services and applications on blockchain.
The platform is designed to allow the contributions of different organisations to the public blockchain who can either improve it by adding applications or services, or adapt it to their own specific context and needs, seeing the platform is based on open source.
Cloud computing
ONTI’s research highlights the benefits of using a hybrid model for the use of the cloud in the public sector. Following this rationale, ARSAT (a state-owned company) offers a public solution for cloud services, and ONTI and the National Procurement Office are developing a framework agreement to facilitate the procurement of private cloud solutions by public sector organisations. The framework agreement is expected to be in place by the middle of 2019.
1. For more information see: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/onti/software-publico/buenas-practicas.
Source: Blockchain Federal Argentina (n.d.), “Qué es BFA”, https://bfa.ar/bfa/que-es-bfa (accessed on 25 February 2019).
However, it is important to send the right message and ensure that the focus is not on the adoption of technology, but rather on ensuring that these technologies are used in a coherent fashion and to support a rethinking of processes, transactions and ultimately services. This is necessary to avoid the multiplication and duplication of efforts and support integration and transformation.
Interestingly, ONTI’s initiatives might indicate that Argentina is trying to move faster and keep up with the pace of other countries in the adoption of new technologies. Although important, this may undermine a good understanding among policy makers of the importance to stop and self-assess progress to date to identify the challenges ahead (e.g. ensure integration), and make sure that adoption of disruptive technologies fits with the broader strategic objectives of digital government in Argentina.
Guidelines and standards
The National Direction of Digital Services (NDDS) within the Government Secretariat of Modernisation (Secretaría de Gobierno de Modernización, SGM) assists other agencies with their service processes, prioritising the provision of assistance for the design and delivery of services that are deemed to be a political priority and that respond to citizens’ needs (e.g. healthcare services) (OECD, 2018e).
For instance, the NDDS has established a series of standards for the development of digital public services3 (OECD, 2018a). These instruments, available through GitHub,4 provide a set of standards for the use of application programming interfaces (APIs) and the development of websites (e.g. the Poncho framework)5 (OECD, 2018a) and mobile applications. More importantly, following the example of other countries like the United Kingdom, the NDDS developed a series of principles that guide the development of digital services (Box 5.5).
Box 5.5. Principles for Digital Services
The Principles for Digital Services aim to establish a new public sector culture to foster digital services that are user-driven, using data, iteration and collaborative approaches to meet the changing expectations and needs of citizens and businesses. The principles that are to be adopted when designing and delivering digital services are:
Prioritise user needs: Public sector organisations should engage citizens and observe the context in which they live to successfully pinpoint their needs and subsequently solve them.
Base decisions on data: Public sector organisations should design decisions based on the collection and analysis of data.
Consider multi-channel approaches: Public sector organisations should consider the different channels by which services can be provided, such as through an online platform, by phone or face-to-face.
Build simple services to use: Public sector organisations should consider the user’s experience when delivering services and therefore design and deliver services that are as simple as possible to use, even if they are based on complex processes and systems.
Build accessible services: Public sector organisations should compensate for any personal, geographical or technological difficulties so as to make sure that digital services are accessible for all citizens with the same level of quality.
Build digital services by default: Public sector organisations should design services and procedures that can be accessed and used on line, with any digital device.
Work in an open, transparent and collaborative way: Public sector organisations should collaborate with each other and with external stakeholders to analyse, design and develop digital services.
Operate in a co-ordinated and unified way: Public sector organisations should operate as one single body, joining services whenever possible.
Work in short and progressive cycles: Public sector organisations should constantly aim to improve the services provided, focusing on iteration to correct minor problems or better adapt services to users’ needs.
Source: Github (n.d.), “Principles of Digital Services”, https://github.com/argob/estandares/blob/master/principios.md (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Yet, a hard governance for digital government and greater central control might be required to ensure these guiding frameworks are indeed observed by public sector organisations. Countries where higher maturity levels of digital governments have been achieved are those where policy and delivery efforts have been equally paced and prioritised, thanks to a governance framework that links and aligns them.
The governance (see Chapter 2) and public sector capacity and culture (see Chapter 4) play a key role to enable the right context to advance digital government efforts, but control and enforcement from the centre might be needed to ensure that digital government tools and platforms are adopted in a coherent way and in line with central government guidelines. For instance, ONTI’s certification (Dictamen técnico) is not binding. Other countries that faced similar challenges (like Norway) took action and enforced the implementation of key standards through policy levers and conditional funding (OECD, 2018b) (see Chapter 3).
Given the overall absence of strong policy levers supporting the coherent implementation of the digital government initiatives, individual ministries and local authorities may have the leeway to take decisions and implement actions that may not necessarily be in line with central standards. This may result in the development of a tangled digital and data infrastructures or disperse and incoherent efforts in the near future, as the experience of other OECD countries shows. Managing this risk, e.g. by making the use of some of these policy levers mandatory, is a precondition for advancing the shift towards digital government and learning from more digitally advanced countries in order to avoid repeating the mistakes they have made (OECD, 2018b).
Digital identity
Digital identification tools are one of the core enablers for digital government, hence the availability of a common digital identification mechanism streamlines the interaction between public sector organisations and citizens, and provides a shared tool that can be reused across different sectors and levels of government (OECD, 2017).
In Argentina, two systems are being developed to spur the use of digital identification systems. In July 2018, the SGM launched the Digital Identity System (Sistema de Identidad Digital, SID),6 drawing upon the widespread use of the National Identity Document (Documento Nacional de Identidad), and the data available in RENAPER (OECD, 2018a). The underlying Biometric Identification System is intended to work using biometric facial recognition information that RENAPER has collected for every Argentinian citizen7 (OECD, 2018c).
A round table was established with the participation of the banking and financial sector to support the development, implementation and adoption of this eID system. Information provided by the Argentinian government through the survey that was administered for the purpose of this review (OECD, 2018b) indicates that the system will be capable of identifying any person remotely, hence the interest of other stakeholders such as banks and the Fintech community to participate in this project and use the tool. Yet, the public sector will remain the owner of the system, which may help to avoid vendor lock-in, and ensure government control over the system and the protection of personal data (OECD, 2018a).
In April 2019, the National Direction of Processes, Quality and Management Efficiency was also working on the development of a smart ID service.
The development of the citizens’ wallet within the Mi Argentina web-based and mobile platforms provides an example of the current use of digital identity applications. The Digital Driver’s Licence is already available in the wallet (see Section 5.6), and other credentials, such as the ID card, disability certificate, vaccination certificate and vehicle insurance documents, are expected to be available in the near future.
While the work on the digital signature and eID will help enable digital service delivery, increasing the availability of services for which the eID can be used is a prerequisite to capture its value for citizens and to understand its strategic importance (OECD, 2018c).
The Argentinian government will face two key challenges to the widespread use of one single eID tool. The first is to avoid the proliferation of other digital identification tools in the medium and long term. Indeed, during the OECD workshops organised in July 2018, stakeholders expressed the need for developing a single digital citizen identity tool for the public sector. The second is to ensure the adoption of one single tool by other public sector organisations, particularly those with identification and/or authentication systems already in place (e.g. the fiscal identification number used by the Federal Administration of Public Revenue and other organisations)8 (OECD, 2018a).
The availability, uptake and promotion of the use of one single digital identification tool for the public sector would help to reduce the complexity and streamline government-citizen interactions (Box 5.6), unless of course the whole-of-government solution does not meet the specific business needs of the public sector organisation.
Box 5.6. Norway: The ID-porten digital identification tool
The ID-porten digital identification tool was designed to provide citizens in Norway with a co-ordinated and common login solution to digital public services. Through the use of the available electronic IDs citizens are free to use, the ID-porten digital identification tool offers a secure means to login to different public sector organisations’ platforms to access their digital public services.
The ID-porten is available on several Norwegian public websites, providing access to more than 1 100 services from over 600 government agencies and with more than 90 million logins in 2016.
Sources: Based on OECD (2017), Digital Government Review of Norway: Boosting the Digital Transformation of the Public Sector, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264279742-en; Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (n.d.), “ID-porten”, https://eid.difi.no/en/id-porten (accessed on 25 February 2019).
For instance, in New Zealand, the use of the RealMe login service9 has been mandated by law since 2007 (under its previous name, the Government Logon Service). In April 2007, the Cabinet Office also agreed on prohibiting departments of making investments in additional online identity verification capability outside of the Identity Verification Service. Since 2010, chief executives of public service departments have been directed to use cross-government products and services where available, unless there is a compelling reason not to do so. Any requests for not doing so should be accompanied by a strong case as to why the exemption is requested, particularly why the relevant RealMe service cannot meet the business need.
The RealMe team at New Zealand’s Department of Internal Affairs is responsible for setting the direction, uptake and use of RealMe. This includes working with public and private sector organisations to integrate RealMe into their services, and increasing the uptake and use of RealMe. Regular presentations are given to public and private sector stakeholders, and RealMe products are promoted on line (OECD, 2018e).
Digital signature
The 2001 Digital Signature Law10 set the legal conditions for the use of digital signature in Argentina; however, there was not much development until 2017 when Decree 892/201711 gave birth to the Platform for Remote Digital Signature (Plataforma de Firma Digital Remota) (Box 5.7).
It seems, however, that the uptake of this tool (which allows citizens to sign digital documents in their interactions with public sector organisations) is not widespread across the public sector.
Results from the survey that was administered across public sector organisations in Argentina provide evidence of the lack of knowledge of this instrument among public sector organisations. Only 1 out of 34 organisations acknowledged the use of digital signature in government-citizen interactions (through the TAD platform; see previous section) while 14 public sector organisations acknowledged the use of digital signatures in interactions between public sector organisations (through the GDE system)12 (OECD, 2018a).
Box 5.7. FIRMAR.GOB.AR
The Platform for Remote Digital Signature enables citizens to manage and sign official electronic documents in a secure and reliable way. Citizens are able to sign electronic documents of the government and private entities such as banking operations or foreign trade documents. These signatures, in line with the Digital Signature Law, have the same legal validity as handwritten signatures and offer a secured guarantee regarding the authenticity of the signature.
The Platform for Remote Digital Signature offers a series of benefits to its users. It is intended to certify the integrity of official documents. It should also improve efficiency and speed, guarantee legal security, reduce costs and foster electronic commerce. Citizens can process their digital certificate for free and sign electronic documents from the platform. In addition, different organisations (companies, non-governmental organisations) can integrate their systems to the platform and sign digital documents.
Source: Secretaría de Modernización Administrativa (n.d.), “Firmar”, https://firmar.gob.ar/#about (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Public service design
Results from the surveys administered for the purpose of this review provide a glimpse of public sector organisations’ priorities in regards to the overarching policy principles that guide the design and development of ICT projects and initiatives, including public services (Figure 5.4).
There is, for instance, clear alignment between the policy co-ordinating institution (the SGM), the NDDS (in charge of Mi Argentina) and other public sector organisations on developing services which are digital by design. A relative alignment can also be observed in terms of the relevance of inclusion (see Section 5.6.1.), citizen-driven approaches (e.g. putting the citizen at the centre of public services, see Section 5.5.2), and the interoperability and accessibility services (see green circles in Figure 5.4). However, discrepancies arise, for instance, in relation to the use of mobile (see Section 5.6) and cross-border approaches, citizens’ engagement (see Section 5.5.2), and the implementation of the once-only principle.
Figure 5.4. Overarching principles of digital transformation considered within ICT projects and initiatives
Notes:
1. Scoring adapted for the purpose of visualisation. Original scoring: 1: highly relevant; 7: not relevant.
2. Based on information provided through the survey administered for the purpose of this review. Survey for central co-ordinating institution. Question 70.
3. Based on information provided through the survey administered across public sector organisations for the purpose of this review. Question 50. Not including scoring provided by those bodies part of the SGM.
4. Based on information provided through the survey administered across public sector organisations for the purpose of this review. Question 50.
Source: OECD (2018a), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Survey for Public Sector Organisations”, Question 70; and OECD (2018b), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Survey for the Policy Co ordination Body”, Question 50.
Once-only and service integration
The real-world implementation of the once-only principle (the right of citizens to provide the same information only once to governments) is also debatable. For instance, the NDDS’ ability to move forward a “once-only” approach in public service design is limited, as often, the National Direction of Digital Services does not own these services, which limits the possibility of making the once-only principle a reality. The lack of service integration in the back-end may also represent a key challenge in this regard.
Indeed, during the workshop organised in July by the OECD Secretariat, stakeholders expressed that the strategic publication of APIs (Box 5.8) could help to further integrate processes and services in the public sector, and allow more data exchange with external actors.
Box 5.8. APIs in Brazil
In line with the Efficient Brazil programme of the National Deburaucratization Council, in 2018 the Brazilian government launched the Conecta.gov platform (www.conecta.gov.br) in order to foster greater levels of interoperability throughout the public sector.
The Conecta.gov.br platform refers to an interoperability platform which includes a catalogue of APIs that can be used to integrate public services and exchange information within the government. Public sector organisations can connect their platforms through the use of APIs and release or consume data in a more efficient and effective way.
Source: OECD (2018d), Digital Government Review of Brazil: Towards the Digital Transformation of the Public Sector, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307636-en.
It is also not clear how the interaction between the TAD platform, focused on offering formalities, and Mi Argentina, focused on digital services stricto sensu, works. For instance, while the Argentinian government plans to further integrate both platforms in the course of 2019, it is not clear if those formalities currently accessible through the TAD will be accessible, connected and/or migrated to Argentina.gob.ar/Mi Argentina. This would help to reduce access fragmentation and simplify the users’ experience when contacting or carrying out procedures and/or transactional services with the government.
The focus on delivery speed followed so far by the central government has not helped to slow down and reassess how, if appropriate, these two platforms could be better integrated. This speed delivery model for digital government is paired with the short, four-year mandates of central political administrations and the co-existence of digital government efforts with a strong e-government approach (see Section 5.2).
Citizen-driven services and engagement
There is also a clear incongruence between balancing citizen-driven approaches as a priority and how such a policy guideline is put into practice in the context of digital services.
For instance, as shown in Figure 5.3, results from the survey show a common agreement in terms of understanding citizens’ needs when designing digital initiatives (citizen-driven by default as shown in Figure 5.3).
Results from the workshops that were organised in the context of this review in July and December 2018 reinforced the above-mentioned findings. “Knowing your stakeholders” was identified as a clear policy guideline that should guide the design and delivery of public services, and there was a common and strong agreement among stakeholders in terms of building a culture that favours the design of user-driven services, understanding the needs of different communities, and focusing on demand to prioritise service design and delivery. Stakeholders also expressed current undergoing challenges such as focusing on policy objectives that do not meet the needs of citizens, underlying the relevance of moving from a “focus on the solution” to a “focus on the problem”, and changing the current mindset from “what should be done” to “what should be done based on user needs”.
The Principles for Digital Services (see Section 5.4.1), developed by the NDDS, include a specific principle on the relevance of understanding citizens’ needs. This body also developed other principles to guide the government-citizen relationship (Principios de Atención al Ciudadano), which highlight the need for empathy with citizens, understanding their context and needs.13
It seems, nonetheless, that the need for delivery and the speed policy model that guided policy action did not favour such an approach, and that policy is not necessarily translated into coherent implementation, at least when it comes to user engagement during the design, testing, delivery and re-engineering policy cycle.
The principles and initiatives developed and implemented by the NDDS put the citizen at the centre in practice. The digital services team runs usability studies and has set up different tools for users to evaluate their products (e.g. Mi Argentina)14 (OECD, 2018a). For example, meetings were held with users during the development of the “Monotributo” digital service in order to collect comments and adapt the development of the tool to user needs prior to its formal launch.
However, in general terms, while understanding citizens’ needs is at the core of the principles guiding the design of digital public services, the focus is more on ensuring the usefulness of the service rather than engaging users from earlier stages. It seems therefore that citizens’ needs are assumed during the discovery stage, and citizen engagement takes place for testing purposes once the service is in the alpha or beta version design stages (see Figure 5.5).
Even more relevant, during the workshop organised in July 2018, stakeholders proposed a series of concrete actions to foster user engagement, for instance:
use tools such as focus groups and random control trials to collect information on user needs
define thematic dialogue spaces for communities
set a core of specific skills which are needed to design and deliver user-oriented services, including a training strategy to build up these skills
provide incentives for the design of user-driven services
encourage the development of digital services which are sustainable, useful and efficient for the citizen based on evidence
group citizens based on their respective needs.
Yet, the challenge lies not so much on how users are engaged (whether through focus groups, working tables or sprints), but when. Therefore, the digital service team may also consider expanding user engagement practices to earlier stages of the public service life cycle whenever feasible and support public sector organisations towards this goal.
For instance, in the United Kingdom, the Service Manual of the UK Government Digital Service highlights how user research practices can help design user-driven services in line with the Digital Service Standard. The manual provides public sector organisations with guidance on how to research user needs and engage them not only during the alpha or beta phases of service design, but also in the discovery phase (“before [you] start planning, designing or building the service”) (GDS, 2016) (Figure 5.5).
Figure 5.5. United Kingdom: User research for government services
Source: Waterworth, J. (2015]), “User research for government services: 8 strategies that worked for us”, https://userresearch.blog.gov.uk/2015/01/21/user-research-for-government-services-8-strategies-that-worked-for-us.
In this respect, as discussed in the joint section published as part of the OECD Open Government Review of Argentina, Argentina could benefit by further connecting open government and digital government initiatives for the benefit of mainstreaming open government approaches for the design of public services across the broader public sector.
Cross-border services
Cross-border approaches appear to be a policy priority, as reported by the SGM, but in terms of policy implementation it is not clear if public sector organisations are taking action to move forward in this respect (for instance, by developing cross-border services for citizens in the region). The SGM reports no plans to develop or implement any cross-border services in the near future15 (OECD, 2018b).
It is worth noting that cross-border interoperability efforts are not new to the region. In 2008, Argentina and Brazil signed an agreement supporting cross-border e-government interoperability in the context of the Technical Co-operation Agreement between the two countries (Criado, Gascó and Jiménez, 2011). More recently, the creation of a Digital Agenda Group in the context of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), which comprises of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay as active members,16 reflects the relevance that cross-border co-operation has in the context of a shared digital agenda for the region (OECD, 2018e). In April 2018, the Digital Agenda Group defined the interoperability of digital public services as one of the potential priority areas of work for the group.17 In June 2018, the MERCOSUR leaders agreed on the development of an action plan for the region18 and it is currently working (April 2019) on identifying public services that could be delivered across borders.
Public service delivery
Platforms for digital services
Decree 87/201719 gave birth to Argentina.gob.ar and Mi Argentina as key elements of the National Public Sector Digital Platform (OECD, 2018e). These platforms are crucial milestones in terms of digital service delivery in Argentina (Box 5.9). The rationale behind these platforms is the front-end integration of previously dispersed government platforms and websites into one single platform that streamlines and facilitates the government-citizen relationship. This is supported by the integration of those services in the back-end. These platforms are the responsibility of the NDDS.
Efforts have been fruitful. For instance, as of October 2018, 1.5 million users were registered on Mi Argentina, the digital public service delivery platform. The platform, launched in April 2016, is accessible on line and through mobile phones through a registration process where users can provide either their Facebook or Google accounts to access basic services, or their national ID or passport to access more complex services.
Figure 5.6. Mi Argentina: A web-based and mobile-based platform
Source: OECD (2018c), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Key findings”, www.oecd.org/innovation/digital-government/digital-government-review-argentina-key-findings-2018.htm.
Services provided include advanced booking (turnos) for document certification (apostillamiento), vaccination appointments and online certifications from the National Administration of Social Services . An early version of a Citizens Folder is also available (Mis Credenciales) for users to access and consult documents such as digital driver’s permits (available since February 2019),20 their National Identity Document and disability certificates in one place. Recent developments include the Digital Driver’s Licence (Box 5.9).
As of October 2018, the SGM reported a total of 900 000 downloads of Mi Argentina’s mobile application, and 310 000 advanced appointments performed through the portal. These results show Mi Argentina’s benefits in terms of social value. It was expected that by the end of 2018, 100% of public sector organisations would be migrated to Argentina.gob.ar, unless exempted from migration by the SGM.
The value of Argentina.gob.ar and Mi Argentina as the integrated platform for digital service delivery was acknowledged by some of those public sector organisations who provided a response to the survey: 15 out of 24 public sector organisations reporting using Argentina.gob.ar or Mi Argentina to provide access to digital services21 (OECD, 2018a).
Box 5.9. The National Digital Driver’s License and Digital Identity System: Integrating public service delivery
Citizens can access a digital version of their driver’s license through the Mi Argentina mobile application. The digital driver’s license has the same legal validity as the hard copy equivalent. This digital license allows for improved controls and reduces the possibility of fraud. Launched in February 2019 by the Government Secretariat of Modernisation and the Ministry of Transport, and approved by the National Agency of Road Safety (Agencia Nacional de Seguridad Vial), the license is at no additional cost and is automatically generated if the citizen already has a valid driver’s license.
The National Digital Driver’s License marks a turning point in the ecosystem of digital services in Argentina and a crucial step in the way the country is moving towards a digital, closer and agile state.
The National Digital Driver’s License is the first public service that uses the Digital Identity System (SID). The SID platform is a joint development of RENAPER and the Government Secretariat of Modernisation to provide remote validation of a citizen’s identity using the biometric data captured for every citizen at the time of enrolment in RENAPER (fingerprints and face photography).
The SID service can be used by private or public sector entities, for different purposes, such as for remote onboarding of new clients or products. These formalities used to require the physical presence of the citizens, with long waiting lines. Currently, 27 entities are using this solution at least in one of the different available modalities, providing service to almost 150 000 people per month.
The SID platform is a fundamental piece in the digital maturity curve of services in Argentina. Besides providing citizens with a more agile experience, it also increases the offer of public and private digital services.
More information is available at: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/miargentina/servicios/licencia-digital.
Digital inclusion
There are clear efforts to increase digital inclusion and connectivity (like the National Plan of Digital Inclusion, the National Connectivity Plan, País Digital and ARSAT’s work on connectivity in rural schools) (OECD, 2018c). Indeed, 22 out of the 30 public sector organisations which provided a response to the survey considered that digital inclusion is a high priority for the central government22 (OECD, 2018a).
In March 2017, the then MoM launched the National Plan on Digital Inclusion (Plan Nacional de Inclusión Digital)23, with the objective of developing the digital literacy and digital skills of the population across the country. The plan is being implemented in 24 provinces and 152 municipalities and responds to the priorities of the National Digital Agenda in terms of digital inclusion24 (OECD, 2018b) (see Chapter 2). By March 2019, the Argentinian government had trained 255 000 people under the plan.
Other initiatives include the Ministry of Education’s “Plan Aprender Conectados”25 and “Núcleos de Aprendizaje”,26 which seeks to build the population’s digital skills over the long term. These plans fit under the umbrella of the 21 projects of the Digital Agenda (see Chapter 4).
These initiatives are a joint effort of the SGM in co-ordination with other ministries, such as the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Social Development, and are in line with OECD best practices in terms of digital inclusion as observed in France’s Digital Society Programme,27 Norway’s Digi-help Programme28 and New Zealand’s Blueprint for Digital Inclusion (OECD, 2018d).29
Argentina’s National Plan on Digital Inclusion adds to other initiatives implemented at the local level, including the Digital Hubs Plan (Plan Punto Digital, PPD).30 The PPD is framed in the context of the Digital Country Programme (País Digital) and aims to provide physical and online training spaces covering a variety of subjects, including cybersecurity and app development.
Other initiatives include, for instance, the “+ Simple”31 programme, implemented by the National Communications Entity (Ente Nacional de Comunicaciones), which aims to increase the elderly population’s access to digital devices such as tablets. The elderly population stands indeed as the second population group in terms of priority among those public sector organisations reporting having implemented any policies and/or initiatives to reduce the digital divide and exclusion, and increase uptake of digital public services among specific user groups (Figure 5.7).
Figure 5.7. Priority groups for digital inclusion
Source: OECD (2018a), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Survey for Public Sector Organisations”, Question 46: Has your institution implemented any policies or initiatives to reduce digital divides and exclusion, and increase uptake of digital public services among specific user groups?
References
Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (n.d.), “ID-porten”, https://eid.difi.no/en/id-porten (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Blockchain Federal Argentina (n.d.), “Qué es BFA”, https://bfa.ar/bfa/que-es-bfa (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Brown, A. et al. (2017), “Appraising the impact and role of platform models and government as a platform (GaaP) in UK government public service reform: Towards a platform assessment framework (PAF)”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 34/2, pp. 167-182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.03.003.
Criado, J., M. Gascó and C. Jiménez (2011), “Interoperabilidad de gobierno electrónico en Iberoamérica: Estudio comparativo y recomendaciones de futuro”, Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, No. 50, pp. 75‑104, www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=357533682003 (accessed on 20 February 2019).
GDS (2016), “User research in discovery”, Service Manual website, https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/user-research/user-research-in-discovery (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Github (n.d.), “Principles of Digital Services”, https://github.com/argob/estandares/blob/master/principios.md (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Government of Argentina (2008), Componente de Interoperabilidad para el Gobierno Electrónico (Resolución 99/2008), http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/145000-149999/149270/norma.htm (accessed on 20 February 2019).
INDEC (2017), “Acceso y uso de tecnologías de la información y la comunicación: EPH”, Informes Técnicos, Vol. 2/92, Ciencia y Tecnología, Vol. 2/1, https://www.indec.gov.ar/uploads/informesdeprensa/mautic_05_18.pdf.
Margetts, H. and A. Naumann (2017), “Government as a platform: What can Estonia show the world?”, working paper funded by the European Social Fund, University of Oxford, https://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/materials/publications/16061/government-as-a-platform.pdf.
MoM (2017), “Gestión documental electrónica: Manual de usuario, gestor de asistencias y transferencias”, Ministry of Modernisation, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/manual_gat-20170809.pdf (accessed on 19 February 2019).
OECD (2019a) Digital Government Review of Sweden, OECD Digital Government Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4daf932b-en.
OECD (2019b), Regulatory Policy in Argentina: Tools and Practices for Regulatory Improvement, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d835e540-en.
OECD (2018a), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Survey for Public Sector Organisations”, OECD, Paris.
OECD (2018b), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Survey for the Policy Co‑ordination Body”, OECD, Paris.
OECD (2018c), “Digital Government Review of Argentina: Key findings”, OECD, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/innovation/digital-government/digital-government-review-argentina-key-findings-2018.htm (accessed on 22 February 2019).
OECD (2018d), Digital Government Review of Brazil: Towards the Digital Transformation of the Public Sector, OECD Digital Government Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264307636-en.
OECD (2018e), “Digital Government Survey 1.0”, OECD, Paris.
OECD (2017), Digital Government Review of Norway: Boosting the Digital Transformation of the Public Sector, OECD Digital Government Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264279742-en.
O’Reilly, T. (2011), “Government as a platform”, Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, Vol. 6/1, pp. 13-40, https://doi.org/10.1162/INOV_a_00056.
Secretaría de Modernización Administrativa (n.d.), “Gestión Documental Electrónica”, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/manual_gat-20170809.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2019).
Secretaría de Modernización Administrativa (n.d.), “Firmar”, https://firmar.gob.ar/#about (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Ubaldi, B. (2013), “Open government data: Towards empirical analysis of open government data initiatives”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 22, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k46bj4f03s7-en.
UK Government Digital Service (2018), Government as Platform blog, https://governmentasaplatform.blog.gov.uk/about-government-as-a-platform (accessed on 6 April 2018).
Waterworth, J. (2015), “User research for government services: 8 strategies that worked for us”, 21 January, https://userresearch.blog.gov.uk/2015/01/21/user-research-for-government-services-8-strategies-that-worked-for-us (accessed on 25 February 2019).
Notes
← 1. The National Executive Branch has an explicit policy for the simplification of regulations. This policy and good practices in terms of simplification are expressed in Decree 891/2017. As a result, the central government modified (and is still modifying) the rules and regulations to simplify the procedures, remove decrees, resolutions and modifying laws. Some results are three new Laws of Administration Simplification, Production Simplification and Infrastructure (Laws 27,444; 27,445 and 27,446).
← 2. See, for instance, the resource section (Recursos) in Principle 5 of the Decálogo Tecnológico: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/onti/decalogo-tecnologico-onti/5-elegi-plataformas-y-soluciones-comunes-de-gobierno.
← 3. Question 62: Are there government-wide guidelines on designing user-oriented digital services?
← 4. For more information see: https://github.com/argob/estandares.
← 5. The Poncho framework provides a series of technical standards and components that public sector organisations may consider when developing front-end services. For more information see: https://argob.github.io/poncho.
← 6. For more information see: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sid-sistema-de-identidad-digital.
← 7. Question 77: Are there any tools for digital identity management in your country?; and Question 77a: If yes, which ones? Explain how these mechanisms interoperate.
← 8. Question 61: Does your institution use tools for digital identity management?
← 9. For more information see: https://www.realme.govt.nz.
← 10. For more information see Law 25.506 available at: http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/70000-74999/70749/norma.htm.
← 11. For more information see: https://www.acraiz.gob.ar/Content/Archivos/Normativa/2017-892-PlataformaFDR.pdf.
← 12. Question 59: Does your [institution/authority] make use of digital signatures in transactions with individuals or businesses?
← 13. For more information see: https://github.com/argob/estandares/blob/master/principios-de-atencion.md.
← 14. Question 50: Which and how deeply are the following overarching principles of digital transformation considered within your ICT projects and initiatives? Citizen-driven by default
← 15. Question 81: Has your country implemented any digital public cross-border services?; and Question 82: Does your government have plans to develop new cross-border services?
← 16. Venezuela’s full MERCOSUR membership has been suspended since August 2017. For more information see: https://betaweb.mercosur.int/documento/decision-sobre-la-suspension-de-venezuela-en-el-mercosur.
← 17. For more information see: https://www.senatics.gov.py/noticias/acuerdan-acciones-principales-de-agenda-digital-mercosur.
← 18. For more information see: www.puntofocal.gov.ar/doc/gmc_02-18.pdf.
← 19. For more information see: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/decreto_publicado_87-2017.pdf.
← 20. For more information see: https://public.digital/2019/02/12/argentina-just-made-driving-licences-digital.
← 21. Question 56: Are the digital services of your institution showcased and/or available on the main national citizens and/or businesses one-stop-shop portal for government services?
← 22. Question 45: How would you classify the level of priority given to digital inclusion in your country’s digital government agenda?
← 23. For more information see: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/modernizacion/inclusiondigital.
← 24. Question 62: How would you classify the level of priority given to digital inclusion in your country’s digital government agenda?
← 25. For more information see: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/educacion/aprender-conectados.
← 26. For more information see: www.abc.gob.ar/educacion-digital.
← 27. For more information see: https://societenumerique.gouv.fr.
← 28. For more information see: www.ks.no/fagomrader/utvikling/digitalisering/digihjelpen.
← 29. Question 5: At the central/federal level, do you have a programme or plan that aims to increase the digital skills of citizens?
← 30. For more information see: http://puntodigital.paisdigital.modernizacion.gob.ar.
← 31. For more information see: https://www.massimple.gob.ar