Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

Paula Kotzé1,2 and Ronell Alberts1 1CSIR Meraka Institute, Pretoria, South Africa 2Department of Informatics, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Keywords: e-Government, e-GIF, Interoperability.

Abstract: In September 2016, the South African Government published a White Paper on the National Integrated ICT Policy highlighting some principles for e-Government and the development of a detailed integrated national e-Government strategy and roadmap. This paper focuses on one of the elements of such a strategy, namely the delivery infrastructure principles identified, and addresses the identified need for centralised coordination to ensure interoperability. The paper proposes a baseline conceptual model for an e- Government interoperability framework (e-GIF) for South Africa. The development of the model considered best practices and lessons learnt from previous national and international attempts to design and develop national and regional e-GIFs, with cognisance of the South African legislation and technical, social and political environments. The conceptual model is an enterprise model on an abstraction level suitable for strategic planning.

1 INTRODUCTION (Lallana, 2008: p.1) and is becoming an increasingly crucial issue, also for developing countries (United Implementing a citizen-centric approach, digitising Nations Development Programme, 2007). Many processes and making organisational changes to governments have finalised the design of national e- delivering government services are widely posited as Government strategies and are implementing priority a way to enhance services, save money and improve programmes. However, many of these interventions citizens’ quality of life (Corydon et al., 2016). The have not led to more effective public e-services, term electronic government (e-Government) is simply because they have ended up reinforcing the commonly used to represent the use of digital tools old barriers that made public access cumbersome. and systems, combined with organisational change The e-Government promise of more efficient and and new skills, to provide better public services to effective government are not being met mainly due citizens and business, better democratic processes to the ad hoc deployment of information and and to strengthen support to public policies communication technology (ICT) systems. (European Commission, 2017). To gain full benefit Governments should rather strive towards of digitisation and data, governments need to deliver interoperable deployments that share and exchange on four key imperatives: gaining the confidence and data and aggregate public services into a single buy-in of citizens, business and public leaders; service window, allowing for seamless flow of conducting a skills and competencies revolution; information across government and between redesign the way in which government operate; and government and citizens (United Nations deploy enabling technologies that ensure Development Programme, 2007). interoperability and the ability to handle massive Interoperability in the context of e-Government data flows (Tadjeddine and Lundqvist, 2016). addresses the need for cooperation; exchanging Although all of these aspects are important and information and reusing information among public should be addressed, this paper primarily focuses on administrations, in order to improve public service the interoperability aspect. delivery to citizen and businesses at a lower cost, e-Government interoperability is broadly defined improve decision making and enable better as “the ability of constituencies to work together” governance (European Union, 2011, Lallana, 2008).

493

Kotzé, P. and Alberts, R. Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa. DOI: 10.5220/0006384304930506 In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2017) - Volume 3, pages 493-506 ISBN: 978-989-758-249-3 Copyright © 2017 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

On a technical level, interoperability refers to the World Bank (IDABC, 2004, European Union, two or more ICT systems, or components, to transfer 2011, European Commission, 2010b, European and exchange information in a uniform and efficient Commission, 2010a, United Nations Development manner across multiple organisations, and to use the Programme, 2007, Lallana, 2008, The World Bank, information exchanged (IDABC, 2004, Department 2012). of Finance and Administration, 2006, Lallana, In September 2016, the South African 2008). The European Union defines interoperability Government published a White Paper on the in the context of public service delivery as “the National Integrated ICT Policy for the country ability of disparate and diverse organisations to (Department of Telecommunications and Postal interact towards mutually beneficial and agreed Services, 2016). Amongst others, the White Paper common goals, involving the sharing of information highlights some principles for e-Government. A and knowledge between organisations, through the Digital Transformation Committee will oversee the business processes they support, by means of the development of a detailed integrated national e- exchange of data between their respective ICT Government strategy and roadmap. systems” (European Union, 2011: p.2). To address part of the delivery infrastructure Interoperability therefore refers to more than just the principles identified in the White Paper, this paper technical or the ICT system level, and affects an addresses one of the elements of such a strategy, by extended enterprise across diverse organisations. proposing a baseline conceptual model for an e-GIF Enterprise modelling aims to offer different, but for South Africa. We argue that best practices and complementing, views on an enterprise to encourage lessons learnt from previous attempts to the design dialogues between various stakeholders (Frank, and development national and regional e-GIFs and 2009). Enterprise models can include abstractions interoperable systems, combined with South African suitable for strategic planning, organisational design legislation and past initiatives, could form a solid or redesign, and software engineering. Enterprise grounding for the design of such a model. models can be regarded as the conceptual Section 2 of this paper provides background by infrastructure to support a high level of integration describing the South African context in relation to of various software or enterprise components, and the use of ICT in government, and examples of reuse of models, concepts, or code. existing interoperability frameworks (national and An e-Government interoperability framework (e- international) that can be used as guidance. Section 3 GIF) is a document (or set of documents) that presents the proposed baseline conceptual model specifies a set of common elements for an extended derived for an e-Government interoperability enterprise of authorities, agencies or organisations framework, including aims, principles, levels of that wish to work together towards the joint delivery interoperability, a proposed conceptual framework of public services (Lisboa and Soares, 2014, for e-GIF implementation and interoperability European Commission, 2010b). As such, an e-GIF is governance. Section 4 concludes. regarded a special kind of enterprise model aimed at providing conceptual guidance towards developing an e-Government eco-system of enterprises. 2 BACKGROUND Common elements of an e-GIF include policies, guidelines, principles, standards, vocabularies, concepts, recommendations and practices (European 2.1 The South African Context Union, 2011, European Commission, 2010b). A 2014 study to determine the number of The Public Administration and Management Act of countries with e-GIFs, identified at least 46 national 2014 (Republic of South Africa, 2014) provides for e-GIFs (Lisboa and Soares, 2014). The United the use of ICTs in the public administration, Kingdom (UK) e-GIF of 2000 is generally regarded including the requirement to ensure interoperability the first e-GIF published. The current Version 6.1 of information systems across government. The (e-Government Unit, 2006) covers the exchange of Electronic Communications Transactions Act of information between the UK Government and 2002 (Republic of South Africa, 2002a) sets out citizens, government organisations, intermediaries, provisions to enable and facilitate electronic businesses (worldwide), etc. Even though e-GIFs are communications and transactions in the public considered important instruments to facilitate interest. The Act stipulates that the Department of interoperability of public systems, many national e- Telecommunications and Postal Services should GIFs was developed due to political pressures from finalise an e-strategy. As a step in the process to the European Commission, the United Nations and develop such a strategy, the South African Government published a White Paper on the

494

Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

National Integrated ICT Policy for the country The conceptual model for the interoperability (Department of Telecommunications and Postal framework for South Africa proposed in this paper, Services, 2016) in September 2016. ICT is in the main, took guidance from the European considered as a means to facilitate inclusive socio- Interoperability Framework (European Commission, economic transformation for South Africa. The 2010b), the Philippine Electronic Government document highlights the uneven and often poor Interoperability Framework (iGov Philippines, quality of public services, as identified in the 2016b), the Australian Interoperability Frameworks National Development Plan (NDP) (National (Australian Government, 2005, Australian Planning Commission, 2012). The White Paper Government, 2006, Australian Government, 2007), argues that digital transformation of government can and two South African interoperability frameworks, assist in transforming the public sector, increase namely the Minimum Interoperability Standards service delivery and ensure equitable access to all (MIOS) for Government Information Systems public services. Making the most of the potential (Department of Public Services and Administration, role ICT can play in supporting radical 2011) and the National Health Normative Standards transformation, as envisaged in the NDP, will Framework for Interoperability in eHealth (HNSF) require complex coordination and leadership across (National Department of Health, 2014). These government. Digital services is to be provided over frameworks are briefly discussed below. open access networks and a net neutrality regime to protect and uphold open, inhibited access to legal 2.2.1 European Interoperability Framework online content. The White Paper defines e-Government as the The European Commission has set out a common innovative use of ICTs (including mobile devices, coherent approach to interoperability for the EU and websites and other ICT applications and services) to Member States through the European link citizens and the public sector, with the aim to Interoperability Strategy (EIS) and the European facilitate collaborative and efficient governance, Interoperability Framework (EIF) (European improve the efficiency of government processes, Commission, 2010a, European Commission, 2010c, strengthen public service delivery and enhance European Commission, 2010b). participation of citizens in governance. The White The EIF aims to promote and support the Paper also highlights some principles for e- delivery of European public services by fostering Government (see section 3). In addition, it highlights cross-sectoral and cross-border interoperability, the fact that the South African Government currently guide public administrations to provide European has different information management initiatives in public services to businesses and citizens, and tie place, which are not effectively connected to each together and complement national interoperability other and not necessarily interoperable. The need for frameworks at European level. To achieve these centralised coordination to ensure interoperability is aims, the EIF sets out guidelines, including identified. A Digital Transformation Committee is to underlying principles, a conceptual model for public oversee the development of a detailed integrated services, different levels of interoperability, the national e-Government strategy and roadmap. The concept of interoperability agreements, and the roll-out plan is to include government-to-citizen, governance of interoperability (European Union, citizen-to-government, government-to-government 2011). and government-to-business programmes The EIF conceptual model consists of three (Department of Telecommunications and Postal layers: the aggregate services layer, the secure data Services, 2016). exchange layer and the basic public services layer. The practical implementation of the conceptual 2.2 Interoperability Frameworks model for cross border/sectorial services requires considering the political context and four levels of As mentioned in section 1, a substantial number of interoperability, as illustrated in Figure 1: legal, e-GIFs exist internationally. Examples include organisational, semantic and technical Europe (European Commission, 2010b), Australia interoperability (European Union, 2011). (Department of Finance and Administration, 2006), Some of our earlier work (Kotzé and Neaga, United Kingdom (e-Government Unit, 2006), New 2010, Kotzé, 2012) considered an early version of Zealand (E-Government Unit, 2002), Philippines the EIF and identified socio-technical aspects (e.g. (iGov Philippines, 2016b), and Ghana (National human and cultural barriers, management of external Information Technology Agency, 2010). relationships, privacy and security, and external applications and real-world use) that might impact

495

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

Figure 1: Levels of Interoperability (figure adapted from European Commission (2010b)). Figure 2: Socio-technical aspects impacting an interoperability framework (adapted from (European all of the interoperability layers identified in the EIF, Commission, 2010b, Kotzé and Neaga, 2010, Kotzé, as illustrated in Figure 2. 2012)).

2.2.2 Philippine Electronic Government • The technical layer (Technical Interoperability Interoperability Framework Framework) comprises technology standards such as transport protocols, messaging The Philippine Electronic Government protocols, security standards, registry and Interoperability Framework (PeGIF) addresses the discovery standards, XML syntax libraries and technical issues in using and operating resources, service and process description languages issues related to the interaction of organisations, the (Australian Government, 2005). means of data exchange, rules and agreements for sharing information and knowledge, and policies 2.2.4 South African Interoperability related to the interaction among government Frameworks agencies, citizens and businesses. The PeGIF addresses three domains (technical, information and 2.2.4.1 Generic Framework - Mios business process) and two crosscutting aspects (security and best practice) (iGov Philippines, The State Information Technology Agency (SITA) 2016b). Act of 1998, amended in 2002 (Republic of South Africa, 2002b), mandated SITA to set standards for 2.2.3 Australian Government interoperability between information systems in Interoperability Framework government and to certify information technology goods and services for compliance against such The Australian Government Interoperability standards. Therefore, prior to the publication of the Framework addresses the information, business White Paper on the National Integrated ICT Policy process and technical dimensions of interoperability for the country (Department of Telecommunications by setting the principles, standards and and Postal Services, 2016), the Minimum methodologies that support the delivery of integrated Interoperability Standards (MIOS) for Government and seamless services, whole-of-government Information Systems document (Department of collaboration and maximise opportunities for Public Services and Administration, 2011), exchange and reuse of information (Australian developed by SITA, prescribed the open system Government, 2008). The Framework consists of standards to be followed to ensure a minimum level three layers, each with their own sub-framework: of interoperability within and between information • The business layer (Business Process systems utilised in government, industry, citizens Interoperability Framework) comprises legal, and the international community in support of the commercial, business and political concerns South African e-Government objectives. (Australian Government, 2007). • The information layer (Information 2.2.4.2 Specialised Framework – HNSF Interoperability Framework) comprises information and process elements that convey The National Health Normative Standards business meaning (Australian Government, Framework for Interoperability in eHealth (HNSF) 2006). (National Department of Health, 2014) was

496

Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

promulgated in 2014 as an extension to the National government and citizen, and government and Health Act of 2004 (Republic of South Africa, businesses. The proposed e-GIF conceptual model is 2004). The HNSF sets the framework for eHealth an enterprise model on an abstraction level suitable interoperability, and specify a standards-based for strategic planning. health information exchange and an enterprise The model is complementary to the MIOS architecture as central to the implementation of (Department of Public Services and Administration, interoperability going forward for the healthcare in 2011) in that it provides for an ‘environment’ or the public sector. It also creates an obligation for the ‘enterprise context’ in which the MIOS can be National Department of Health to create a National applied. The e-GIF could be enhanced with sectoral Health Standards Authority, which would set the e-GIFs (e.g. for health, finance, social services, etc.) different interoperability and content standards for to address specific needs of a sector, but such eHealth in South Africa. The HNSF specifies sectoral e-GIFs should adhere to the baseline implementation guidelines to ensure interoperability provisions and principles of the overarching e-GIF based on Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) accepted. The National Health Normative Standards Profiles (IHE International, 2015). Framework for Interoperability in eHealth (HNSF) (National Department of Health, 2014) is an example of such an sectoral e-GIF, and also address 3 PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL interaction with non-governmental institutions. e-GIF MODEL 3.1 Aims of the Proposed e-GIF Model

In the White Paper on the National Integrated ICT The proposed e-GIF conceptual model is aimed at Policy, the following principles are envisaged for all achieving (iGov Philippines, 2016c, Department of digital government solutions (Department of Public Services and Administration, 2011): Telecommunications and Postal Services, 2016): • Seamless flow of information across • Services: government. Services must be designed for users / citizens, • Increased productivity of government including those with limited digital skills or service delivery operations. access to devices. • Increased efficiency of government Mechanisms for monitoring of delivery of services. services should be incorporated. • Improved decision-making in Online end-to-end public sector services government. should be made available. • Reduced cost and increased savings for Cost-effective solutions for both users and government. government should be explored. • • Digital inclusion. Delivery infrastructure: • Services should be offered in both an online Increased citizen satisfaction in and offline mode. transacting with government. • Digital services should be based on open Enhanced ability to interoperate with standards and accessible on all devices and other countries across national platforms. boundaries. • Personal information should be protected. Better informed and active citizenry. Citizens must all be provided with digital • Improved ecosystem for competition and addresses / identities to allow government to innovation among ICT service providers. engage with them directly. Centralised coordination to ensure 3.2 Principles for e-GIF Development interoperability is required. Based on the South African context, the The following generic principles / drivers are principles envisaged in the White Paper and the proposed to guide the development of the e-GIF existing international and national e-GIFs, we (United Nations Development Programme, 2007, propose a conceptual model that could be considered European Commission, 2010b, European Union, as baseline for the development of a South African 2011, iGov Philippines, 2016b, Lallana, 2008, e- e-GIF. Such an e-GIF should be aimed at data and Government Unit, 2006, Jaeger, 2003, German information exchange between government sectors, Federal Ministry of the Interior, 2008):

497

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

• User-centricity: Supporting the needs of • Transparency: Citizens and businesses citizens and businesses in a secure and should be able understand and respond to flexible manner. the administrative processes that affect • Administrative simplification: Alleviating them and make suggestions for the burden on businesses and citizens for improvement. compliance to legal obligations by • Effectiveness: Solutions should be aimed providing integrated services. at serving citizens and business and make • Inclusion and accessibility: Equal the best use of taxpayers money. opportunities should be created for access • Forward-looking: The wider- to public services through open and encompassing national e-Government inclusive services, on all devices and strategy or vision, values, principles and platforms, to all citizens without policy directions of government should be discrimination, including persons with a supported. disability and the elderly. • Open standards: Preference should be • Multilingualism: Information systems for given to the use of open international and the public service should support national standards with the broadest multilingualism in support of the National remit. Language Policy Framework as it applies • Technology neutrality: Services should be to all government structures (Department provided through interfaces that are of Arts and Culture, 2003). technology and vendor agnostic. • Interoperability: Guaranteeing a media- consistent flow of information between 3.3 Levels of Interoperability citizens, business and government. • Scalability: Ensuring the adaptability, Interoperability is often thought of in terms of ICT usability and responsiveness of systems exchanging information. e-Government applications and requirements as change interoperability is, however, much more than just and demands fluctuate. smart middleware (enabling interoperability on a • Reusability: Solutions should be technical level) (Scholl, 2005). Political, legal, developed to facilitate sharing and re-use. organisational and social aspects are fundamental to This include defining data structures, e-Government success and therefore requires careful establishing processes and standards for consideration in any e-GIF. Efforts to practice similar procedures for providing services, effective information sharing have to be aware of considering the solutions of exchange intentionally imposed (constitutional and legal) partners, etc. barriers, organisational impediments, technology • Openness: Focus on using open-standards obstacles and a wide variety of stakeholder concerns that are vendor and product neutral and about policies, the processes, the procedures and the based on the principle of shared extent of sharing information between government knowledge. entities and other agencies (Scholl, 2005). To • Market support: Drawing on established support this notion, levels of interoperability standards already widely used and consisting of political, legal, organisational, recognised in industry. semantic, syntactic and technical interoperability, as • Neutrality and adaptability: Specific or proposed by the European Interoperability restricted technology should not be Framework (European Commission, 2010b) and imposed on citizens, businesses or other illustrated in Figure 1, are used and applied to the administrations. South Africa context. • Security: Ensuring a reliable exchange of information conforming to an established 3.3.1 Political Context security policy. • Shared information would allow for better Privacy: Guaranteeing the privacy and coordination of government entity programmes and confidentiality of information related to services, as well as improved accountability (Scholl, citizens, businesses and government 2005), but this may require the buy-in of various organisations and ensuring personal data political entities that do not necessary share the same protection. vision, values or underlying doctrine. Government

498

Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

entities may have entrenched cultures that do not A policy review process has identified the need value openness and cooperation with other entities, for the finalisation of a national framework for and which may make it hard for them to trust and digital verification that will ensure that Government share information. adopts at least one system to ensure integrity and the The federated nature of the South African ease of use of identity verification mechanisms political and legislative context should be taken into (Department of Telecommunications and Postal consideration. Although legislation is often Services, 2016). For e-Government to be successful promulgated at national level, implementation takes and of value to both government and citizens, the place at national, provincial and local government same kind of review process may be required for the level (South African Government, 2016). many other aspects that may impede on political Information about / for citizens is often gathered at interoperability. local government level, which may be governed by a different political party than that of provincial or 3.3.2 Legal Interoperability national government. Specific provincial and local government policies and regulations also exist and As mentioned above, each government may apply. Although many government entities administration, whether national, provincial or local, prefer (or is forced by legislation) to operate contributing to digital government solutions may independently, cooperation between all three spheres work within its own legal framework or jurisdiction. of government is required for successful e- Sometimes incompatibilities between these different Government programmes. Cross-functional spheres of government may make the sharing of collaboration is key to e-Government projects information complex or even impossible. New legal (Corydon et al., 2016). A lack of coordination and initiatives may be required to overcome such a cooperation between different levels of government situation. Public administrations should therefore can have a significant impact on the success of e- carefully consider all the relevant legislation related Government efforts (Kuk, 2003, Jaeger and to data exchange, data protection, privacy, etc. when Thompson, 2003). planning to establish e-Government solutions For example, on national level, the Department (European Commission, 2010b). of Home Affairs (DHA) is the custodian of the Legal interoperability has to do with addressing national identification system, but sharing of the aspects related to defining, achieving and information captured in the system with other maintaining authenticity, integrity, confidentiality, national departments (for example the National accountability, availability, non-repudiation and Department of Health), or provincial or local reliability (iGov Philippines, 2016a). government systems (for example for the issuing of For example, a range of laws and policies have drivers licences), would be required. If this is not already been promulgated to protect South African possible, or is not allowed by DHA or the legal or citizens both online and offline. In the context of the constitutional barriers it is bound by, it may lead to proposed e-GIF model, examples include: the development of parallel identity management • The Protection of Personal Information systems that may be inconsistent, not compatible Act of 2013 (Republic of South Africa, and not interoperable. For example, the Health 2013) that sets out provisions to protect Population Registration Systems (HPRS) is currently personal data and requirements on how under development by the National Department of such data is exchanged, stored and Health (Wolmarans et al., 2015), but is implemented collected. at provincial and local government level. Although • The Electronic Communications the system makes use of the national identity Transactions Act of 2002 (Republic of number for identification, it is not able to link South Africa, 2002a) that sets out directly to the DHA system yet, but will be able to provisions to enable and facilitate do so in future. HPRS generates a unique patient electronic communications and record number that can be used by various electronic transactions in the public interest, and medical record (EMR) systems already also the framework for electronic implemented. HPRS can also record the patient signature verification and the record numbers used by these EMR systems, but accreditation of electronic signature legacy inconsistencies in patient demographics may providers. still be encountered across EMRs. • The Consumer Protection Act of 2008 (Republic of South Africa, 2008),

499

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

especially in the case where payment has As stated in section 3.3.1, a lack of coordination to be made to obtain a document or for and cooperation between different levels of services provided. government, or different government entities on the • The National Cybersecurity Policy same level of government, can have a significant Framework (State Security Agency, impact on the success of e-Government efforts (Kuk, 2015) that is intended to promote and 2003, Jaeger and Thompson, 2003). To overcome / ensure a comprehensive legal framework prevent this problem may require the integration or governing the cyberspace, and aims to alignment of business processes to be able to work implement an all-encompassing approach together efficiently and effectively, or even to define pertaining to all the role players and establish new business processes made possible (government, public, private sector, civil by an interoperable e-Government infrastructure society and special interest groups) in (European Commission, 2010b). It will also require relation to cybersecurity. the clear structuring of relationship between service • The draft Cybercrimes and Cybersecurity providers (government organisations) and service Bill (Department of Justice and consumers (citizens, businesses and other Constitutional Development, 2015) that government organisations) and other stakeholders. aims to put in place measures to The basic principle is that those who can affect or effectively deal with cybercrimes, e.g. will be affected by e-Government initiatives should identity theft and other online crime, and be accounted for (Jaeger, 2003). address aspects relating to cybersecurity In a democratic system of government based on a that may adversely affect individuals, division of power and distributed control, such as businesses and government alike. South Africa, inter-organisational collaboration rests • The Film and Publications Board Act of on the own interest of the parties involved and their 2014 (Film and Publication Boad, 2014) willingness to collaborate, the resources at their setting out provisions for the disposal and the expected benefits / outcomes of e- classification of content and the Government initiatives (Scholl, 2005). Change protection of children. management processes will therefore be critical in Some of this legislation may be contradictory order to ensure continuity of services, reliability and and even prohibit or limit government entities from the buy-in of all parties involved. exchanging information, and consequently restrict interoperability and participation in cooperative 3.3.4 Semantic and Syntactic activities. Such legislation may require alignment. Interoperability

3.3.3 Organisational Interoperability Semantic and syntactic interoperability, also referred to as information interoperability in some existing e- Organisational interoperability (also called business- GIFs, refer to the ability to transfer and use process interoperability in some e-GIFs) is about information in a uniform and efficient manner across addressing the common methods, processes, and multiple government entities and ICT systems shared services for collaboration, including (Australian Government, 2006). Semantic workflow, business transactions and decision- interoperability is about addressing a common making (iGov Philippines, 2016a, Australian methodology, definition and structure of Government, 2005, Australian Government, 2007). information, along with shared services for its In e-Government this aspect has to do with how retrieval (iGov Philippines, 2016a). It addresses the government organisations cooperate amongst meaning of data elements and the relationship themselves and with citizens and civil society to between them. Syntactic interoperability is about achieve mutually agreed goals. Organisational describing the exact format of the information interoperability in the context of e-Government (European Commission, 2010b). Semantic therefore has to do with the coordination and interoperability enables participants in e- alignment of business processes and information Government initiatives to process information from architectures, spanning both intra and inter- other resources in a meaningful manner and ensures government organisational boundaries, with the aim that the precise meaning of exchanged information is to exchange information (United Nations understood and preserved throughout. Sector- Development Programme, 2007). specific and cross-sectoral data structures and data element sets with agreed meaning, commonly

500

Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

referred to as semantic interoperability assets, should developed if no appropriate international be created and shared for use by cooperating standards exist. organisations. • Scalability: The standards should be able Multilingualism should also be addressed at this to satisfy increased demands on capacity, level (European Commission, 2010b). The multi- such as changes in data volumes, number cultural and multi-lingual context in South Africa of transactions or number of users. with its 11 official languages (South African • Have existing market base: The standards Government, 2016), requires a careful consideration selected should be widely supported by at semantic and syntactic interoperability level. the industry, to ensure a reduction in cost and risk for the e-Government systems. 3.3.5 Technical Interoperability Overall it is about best practice: Addressing Technical interoperability is about addressing the aspects related to demonstrating the best uses of linking of ICT systems and services, including standards in the public and private sectors to achieve interfaces, interconnection, data integration, data technical, semantic, syntactic, organisational, legal exchange, security and presentation (iGov and political interoperability (iGov Philippines, Philippines, 2016c, Australian Government, 2005). 2016c, United Nations Development Programme, Technical interoperability requires formalised 2007). standards-based specifications for interfaces, interconnection services, data integration services, 3.4 Conceptual Framework for e-GIF content management and metadata, information Implementation access and presentation, information exchange, security, web-based services, etc. While different Based on the various aims, principles and levels of government organisations might have specific interoperability required, a conceptual framework characteristics at political, legal, organisational and, for the implementation of an e-GIF to support to some extent, semantic level, it is not the case at interoperable e-Government in South Africa is technical level where formalised specifications must proposed. Each of the key components of the be adhered to (European Commission, 2010b, framework, as illustrated in Figure 3, is briefly United Nations Development Programme, 2007). introduced in the sections below. The selection of specific standards to be included should be based on the following principles 3.4.1.1 Basic e-Government Services (Department of Public Services and Administration, 2011, iGov Philippines, 2016b, United Nations The top layer refers to the basic government services Development Programme, 2007): and registries. Delivering services to citizens is at • Standards that enhance data / information the core of what most government entities do, or is exchange: Standards that are relevant to supposed to do, and is critical in shaping trust in and systems’ interconnectivity, data perceptions of the public sector. Tasks like paying integration, presentation and interface, e- taxes, renewing drivers licenses, and applying for services access, and content management social benefits are often the most tangible metadata. interactions citizens have with their government • Promote openness: The use of open (Dudley et al., 2016). Following a citizen-centric standards, as opposed to proprietary approach to services design and delivery is at the standards, and specifications that centre of successful e-Government. This is in contribute to open systems is encouraged. contrast to the development of services based on the This is in line with the ethos of the MIOS government entity’s own requirements and processes (Department of Public Services and (Dudley et al., 2016). Administration, 2011). As a minimum, base registries are required to • Conform to international best practices: uniquely identify individuals and organisations (e.g. Preference should be given to established government departments, businesses, etc.) (National standards with the widest applicability. Department of Health, 2014, European Commission, Widely adopted international standards 2010b). Base registries are under the legal control of localised to fit the South African context public administrations and maintained by them. should be the preferred option. Regional The digital identity registry may, for example, be and national standards should only be owned and controlled by DHA, but shared with other services providers, enabling unique and

501

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

consistent identification of individuals across all e- other identifying information for a particular vehicle Government services. The digital identity registry (for example, an interoperable implementation of the may contain identity numbers (or passport numbers), identification register for eNaTiS (2011)). digital addresses, names, surnames and other The data repositories contain the repositories of demographic information related to individuals. The services and data offered by various agencies and same type of information will be required for government departments (National Department of organisations. An example of other possible Health, 2014). These services and data can only be registries is the vehicle registry containing vehicle accessed and updated by accredited consumer register numbers, vehicle identification numbers and applications through the secure data exchange layer.

Figure 3: Conceptual e-GIF implementation framework for South Africa.

Data services may also include services provided by other kinds of information between different external parties, for example payment services systems. This layer also handles specific security provided by financial institutions and connectivity requirements such as electronic signatures, services provided by telecommunication providers. certification, encryption and time stamping. The Designing basic e-Government services, security and audit services cut across all technical however, involves considerably more than merely interoperability layers. The secure data exchange designing the technical / ICT systems to offer the layer should therefore be a secure, managed, services. Each service will have to consider, and harmonised and controlled layer, allowing data take cognisance of, the various political, legal and exchanges between government administrations, organisational aspects that might affect the design citizen and business that are (United Nations and delivery of a service across various government Development Programme, 2007, European entities and within the boundaries of relevant Commission, 2010b, Department of Public Services legislation that applies, as indicated in section 3.3. and Administration, 2011): • Signed and certified: Both the sender and 3.4.1.2 Secure Data Exchange and Security receiver must be identified and Layer authenticated through agreed mechanisms. The secure data exchange layer is central to the e- • Encrypted: The confidentiality of the data Government conceptual model and implementation exchanged must be ensured. framework since all access to e-Government • Logged: All electronic transactions are services passes through it. It allows for a secure logged and archived to ensure a legal exchange of certified messages, records, forms and audit trial.

502

Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

Some of the technical elements incorporated in 3.4.1.4 End-user Devices this layer are (United Nations Development Programme, 2007, European Commission, 2010b, End-user devices refer to the various electronic National Department of Health, 2014, German channels that can be used by citizens, business and Federal Ministry of the Interior, 2008): government employees to access the e-Government • Interoperability facilitators: Providing services or data, or provide data towards the services such as translation of protocols, repositories. The White Paper on the National formats and languages and acting as Integrated ICT Policy, applicable to all digital information brokers. Effective e- government solutions (Department of Government in a multi-lingual society Telecommunications and Postal Services, 2016), requires standardization of spellings, calls for both online and offline access to word use, and support for languages in government services, and access to services desks which citizens are comfortable for human-human interaction should therefore also communicating. be catered for. • Content management services: Pertaining In alignment with citizen’s digital preferences to (open) standards for retrieving and and behaviours, there is currently a worldwide move managing government information. to providing services on mobile platforms and • Data integration services: Containing through the use of smart devices (Corydon et al., (open) standards for the description of 2016, Thomas and Rosewell, 2016). With the data that enable data exchange between proliferation of mobile and smart device use in disparate systems. South Africa, opportunities provided by all-round • Standards based interfaces or mobility and internet of things (IoT) devices / interconnection: Enabling the applications should be seized, but without communication between systems through marginalising citizens that do not have access to consistent interfaces. such technology. • Orchestration: The process that involves the invocation of the appropriate services 3.5 Interoperability Governance and the manipulation of data according to agreed workflows and supporting The final element required in any e-GIF model is organisational (business) processes. governance. The implementation of any e-GIF Consumer applications usually access the data requires proper governance and continuous exchange and security layer through middleware interoperability maintenance to keep the e-GIF up to services, for example replication, distributed date and relevant. Interoperability governance is also transaction management, personalization, about ensuring the e-GIFs proper implementation internationalization, messaging, etc. (German (United Nations Development Programme, 2007), Federal Ministry of the Interior, 2008). and would require the establishment of one or more agencies to specifically deal with certain aspects of 3.4.1.3 Consumer Applications the implementation of the e-GIF across administrative levels. Such an agency should be Consumer applications refer to the various e- (United Nations Development Programme, 2007, Government applications used to access the services Lallana, 2008, European Commission, 2010b, and data through the secure data exchange layer. The National Department of Health, 2014, German key to good e-Government services is understanding Federal Ministry of the Interior, 2008): the user’s perspective. The applications can be • Primarily focus on standardising and unique to a specific government department, or ensuring interoperability on a national, aggregated. Aggregated applications appears to a provincial and/or local government level, user as a single service, but are constructed by as appropriate. grouping a number of public services according to • Separate from the sectoral domains to certain specific business requirements. ensure independence and impartiality. The German SAGA document (German Federal • Ministry of the Interior, 2008), as example, provides Capable of working as a collaboration guidelines for client applications, which make use of partner with the sectors. • a service offered by middleware, barrier-free Seen as experts in the field of presentation, etc. interoperability and government services to engender trust.

503

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

• Capable in the selection of appropriate and coordinate the integration of information standards. required on national (or provincial or local level). • Capable of guiding the development of implementation guidelines based on the selected standards to ensure REFERENCES interoperability. • Pro-active in the proclamation and Australian Government. (2005). Australian Government promotion of standards and their use. Technical Interoperability Framework. Australian • Responsible for monitoring the use of Government Information Management Office. standards and the adherence to standards, Australian Government. (2006). The Australian policies and guidelines. Government Information Interoperability Framework. Australian Government Information Management • Acting as an advisory body in developing Office. strategies and implementing solutions, Australian Government. (2007). The Australian coordinating cross-agency aggregated Government Business Process Interoperability services, and to community of practice in Framework. Australian Government Information setting and publishing standards. Management Office. • Acting as accreditation authority for Australian Government. (2008). Interoperability certifying consumer applications that Frameworks. Department of Finance. Available: access and update the data repositories in http://www.finance.gov.au/archive/policy-guides- order to provide e-Government services. procurement/interoperability-frameworks/ [Accessed 24 January 2016]. The German SAGA document (German Federal Corydon, B., Ganesan, V. & Lundqvist, M. (2016). Ministry of the Interior, 2008), as example, provides Transforming Government Through Digitization. an in-depth overview of how interoperability Public Sector. McKinsey & Company. governance can be approached. Department of Arts and Culture. (2003). National Language Policy Framework. South Africa. Department of Finance and Administration. (2006). Delivering Australian Government Services: Access 4 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE and Distribution Strategy, Canberra, Australian WORK Government. Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. Enterprise modelling, in general, provides a (2015). Cybercrimes and Cybersecurity Bill. South Africa. structured and diagrammatic “framework for Department of Public Services and Administration. depicting the myriad interconnected and changing (2011). Minimum Interoperability Standards (MIOS) components addressed in large scale change” for Government Information Systems Revision 5.0. (Whitman and Gibson, 1996: 64). This paper Pretoria: State Information Technology A and gency: proposed a conceptual model for the development of Standards and Certification Unit Government an e-GIF for South Africa that can serve as guideline Information Technology Officer Council. in drafting enterprise models for enterprises Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services. involved in, and moving towards, e-Government (2016). National Integrated ICT Policy White Paper. activities. The model suggests what enterprise South Africa. Department of Transport. (2011). eNaTiS. Available: models have to deal with to ensure enterprise http://www.enatis.com/ [Accessed 3 February 2017]. interoperability in e-Government. To implement the Dudley, E., Lin, D.-Y., Mancini, M. & Ng, J. (2016). proposed conceptual model, the various components Implementing a Citizen-centric Approach to must be modelled and populated by defining or Delivering Government Services. Public Sector. developing policies, guidelines, principles, McKinsey & Company. standards, vocabularies, concepts, recommendations, E-Government Unit. (2002). A New Zealand etc. To ensure interoperability and consistency, it is e_Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF). also recommended that implementation guidelines The New Zealand Government State Services be developed, similar in nature to the IHE profiles Commission. e-Government Unit. (2006). e-Government (IHE International, 2015) used in e-Health. It is also Interoperability Framework Vesion 6.1, London, recommended that an agency be established to guide Cabinet Office. and govern the implementation of an e-GIF across European Commission. (2010a). Communication from the various regional, provincial and national contexts, Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the

504

Towards a Conceptual Model for an e-Government Interoperability Framework for South Africa

Commttee of the Regions: Towards interoperability Jaeger, P. & Thompson, K. (2003). E-government around for European public services. Brussels. the world: lessons, challenges, and future directions. European Commission. (2010b). European Interoperability Government Information Quaterly, 20, 389 -394. Framework (EIF) for European public services. Kotzé, P. (2012). Keynote Address: Technical and Socio- Communication from the Commission to the European technical Approaches to Health Informatics in Africa. Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and IASTED Health Informatics 2012 Conference. Social Committee and the Commttee of the Regions: Gaborone, Botswana. Towards interoperability for European public services Kotzé, P. & Neaga, I. (2010). Towards an Enterprise - Annex 2. Brussels. Interoperability Framework. In: Ly, L., Thom, L., European Commission. (2010c). European Interoperability Rindele-Ma, S., Gerber, A., Hinkelman, K., Kotzé, P., Strategy (EIS) for European public services. Reimer, U., Van Der Merwe, A., Mansoor, W., Communication from the Commission to the European Elnaffar, S. & Monfort, V. (eds.) Proceedings of the Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and International Joint Workshop on Technologies for Social Committee and the Commttee of the Regions: Context-Aware Business Process Management, Towards interoperability for European public services Advanced Enterprise Architecture and Repositories - Annex 1. Brussels. and Recent Trends in SOA Based Information Systems. European Commission. (2017). eGovernment & Digital Portugal: SciTe Press. Public Services Available: https://ec.europa.eu/digital- Kuk, G. (2003). The digital divide and the quality of single-market/en/public-services-egovernment electronic service delivery in local government in the [Accessed 17 January 2017]. United Kingdom. Government Information Quaterly, European Union. (2011). European Interoperability 20, 353 - 363. Framework (EIF): Towards Interoperability for Lallana, E. (2008). e-Government Interoperability: Guide, European Public Services, Luxembourg, Publications Bangkok, United Nations Development Programme. Office of the European Union. Lisboa, A. & Soares, D. (2014). e-Government Film and Publication Boad. (2014). Classification interoperability frameworks: a worldwide inventory. Guidelines for the Classification of Films, Interactive Procedia Technology, 16 (2014), 638 -648. Computer Games and Certain Publications. South National Department of Health. (2014). National Health Africa. Normative Standards Framework for Interoperability Frank, U. (2009). Enterprise Modelling. Universität in eHealth in South Africa, Version 2.0. Pretoria: Duisburg-Essen - Information Systems and Enterprise CSIR and NDoH. Modelling Available: https://www.wi-inf.uni- National Information Technology Agency. (2010). Ghana due.de/FGFrank/index.php?lang=en&&groupId=1&& e-Government Interoperability Framework. Ghana. contentType=ResearchInterest&&topicId=14 Available: [Accessed 3 March 2017]. http://www.nita.gov.gh/sites/default/files/resources/E German Federal Ministry of the Interior. (2008). SAGA: A%20&%20eGIF%20Main%20Doc/eGovernment%2 Standards and Architectures for eGovernment 0Interoperability%20Framework.pdf [Accessed 19 Applications Version 4.0. December 2016]. IDABC. (2004). Europen Interoperability Framework for National Planning Commission. (2012). National Pan-European eGovernment Services Version 1.0, Development Plan 2030: Our Future - Make it Work. luxemborg, European Commission. Pretoria: The Presidency, Republic of South Africa. iGov Philippines. (2016a). Information Interoperability Available: Framework (PeGIF Part 2). Available: http://www.poa.gov.za/news/Documents/NPC%20Nat http://i.gov.ph/policies/information-interoperability- ional%20Development%20Plan%20Vision%202030% framework/ [Accessed 19 December 2016]. 20-lo-res.pdf [Accessed]. iGov Philippines. (2016b). Philippine eGovernment Republic of South Africa. (2002a). Electronic Interoperability Framework (PeGIF). Available: Communications and Transactions Act. Government http://i.gov.ph/pegif/ [Accessed 19 December 2016]. Gazette Vol. 446, No. 23707, 2 August 2002. iGov Philippines. (2016c). Technical Interoperability Republic of South Africa. (2002b). State Information Framework. Available: Technology Agency Amendment Act, 2002.: http://i.gov.ph/policies/technical-interoperability- Government Gazette Vol. 449, No.24029, 7 November framework/ [Accessed 19 December 2016]. 2002. IHE International. (2015). IHE Profiles. Integrating the Republic of South Africa. (2004). The National Health Healthcare Enterprise. Available: Act, 2004. Government Gazette Vol.469, No. 26595, http://www.ihe.net/profiles/index.cfm [Accessed 25 23 July 2004. May 2016]. Republic of South Africa. (2008). Consumer Protection Jaeger, P. (2003). The endless wire: E-government as Act. Government Gazette Vol. 526, No. 321867, 29 global phenomenon. Government Information April 2009. Quaterly, 20, 323 - 331. Republic of South Africa. (2013). Protection of Personal Information Act. Government Gazette Vol.581, No. 37067, 26 November 2013.

505

AEM 2017 - 1st International Workshop on Advanced Enterprise Modelling

Republic of South Africa. (2014). Public Administration Management Act. Government Gazette Vol. 594, No. 38374, 22 december 2014. Scholl, H. (2005). Interoperability in e-Government: More than Just Smart Middleware. Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2005. IEEE. South African Government. (2016). About SA. Available: http://www.gov.za/about-sa [Accessed 23 January 2017]. State Security Agency. (2015). The National Cybersecurity Policy Framework (NCPF). South Africa. Tadjeddine, K. & Lundqvist, M. (2016). Policy in the Data Age: Data Enablement for the Common Good. Digital McKinsey. McKinsey & Company. The World Bank. (2012). Innovations in Retail Payments Worldwide – A Snapshot. In: Payment Systems and Policy Research (ed.) Financial Infrastructure Series. Thomas, I. & Rosewell, D. (2016). The Four Essential Pillars of Digital Transformation. RunMyProcess. United Nations Development Programme. (2007). e- Government Interoperability: Guide, Bangkok, United Nations Development Programme. Whitman, M. & Gibson, M. (1996). Enterprise modelling for strategic support. Information Systems Management, 13, 64-72. Wolmarans, M., Tanna, G., Dombo, M., Prasons, A., Solomon, W., Chetty, M. & Venter, J. (2015). eHealth Programme reference implementation in primary health care facilities. South African Health Review, 2014/15, 35 - 43.

506