BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Gulsecen Sevinc (Istanbul University, Turkey), Sati Zumrut Ecevit (Istanbul University, Turkey)
Evaluation of E-government Interoperability Issues from the Perspective of ICT Infrastructures: The Case of Turkey
Scientific Publications / University of Economics in Katowice. Economics and Business Communication Challenges : International Week, 2014, s. 119-137, rys., tab., bibliogr. 70 poz.
Słowa kluczowe
e-administracja, Technologie informacyjne i telekomunikacyjne
e-government, Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
Each government focuses oil achieving high effectiveness in its provision of services to its citizens and also exchange information between its departments and institutions in short time and in an easy way. ICT is being used in a larger way by big business, and companies that seek profit, to keep in touch with their clients and customers on one hand, and other business associates in the other one, giving huge enhancements in terms of convenience and services. Now, the main point for the government is to get the best results out of ICT in the public sector, while keeping all the potential pitfalls away from happening. The e-government paradigm is aimed to sustain internal networking and assist external partnership. It is fundamental for e-government policy makers to appraise the demand of citizens for e-government services, because this will serve as an indicator which can direct deployment and implementation of electronic services. As a result this situation is expected to have an indirect effect on the acceptance and diffusion of those information systems. To establish and implement a workable e-government, all possible and relevant stakeholders' systems need to be interconnected in such a way that the hardware, software and data are interoperable. Thus, interoperability is the key to information exchange and sharing among the heterogeneous systems. In this study, e-government studies in Turkey have been observed and analyzed from interoperability and ICT perspectives. To move e-government application for overall Turkey, there might be some problems to use and integrate current applications of public institutions. (original abstract)
Dostępne w
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
  1. Archmann S. and Kudlacek I. (2003), Interoperability and the Exchange of Good Practice Cases Recommendations, European Institute of Public Administration.
  2. Arms W. Y., Hillmann D., Lagoze C., Krafft D., Marisa R., and Saylor J. (2002), Spectrum of Interoperability: The Site for Science Prototype for the NSDL, "D-Lib Magazine", 8 (1).
  3. Bertucci G. (2007), Managing Knowledge to Build Trust in Government, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations Publication, New York.
  4. Capgemini (2007a), The User Challenge, Benchmarking the Supply of Online Public Seryices, 7th measurement, September eeurope/i2010/ docs/benchmarking/egov_benchmarkJ2007.pdf.
  5. Capgemini (2007b), Mutual Learning: Benchmarking eGovernment Service Delivery in Turkey and Europe. Web Based Survey on Electronic Public Services, October
  6. Çayhan B. E. (2008), Implementing E-Government in Turkey: A Comparison of Public Service Delivery in Turkey and The European Union, "The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries", EJISDC, 35, 8, pp. 1-114.
  7. Chaari S., Biennier F., Favrel J., and Benamar C. (2007), Towards a Service-oriented Enterprise Based on Business Components Identification, [in:] R. J. Goncalves, J. P. Muller, K. Mertins, M. Zelm (eds.), Enterprise Interoperability II, New Challenges and Approaches, Springer Verlag, London, pp. 495-506.
  8. Chen D., Vallespir B., and Daclin N. (2008), An Approach for Enterprise Interoperability Measurement, Paper read at MoDISE-EUS 2008, France.
  9. Chen J., Yen D. C., and Chen K. (2009), The Acceptance and Diffusion of the Innovative Smart Phone Use: A Case Study of a Delivery Service Company in Logistics, "Information and Management", Vol. 46, pp. 241-248.
  10. Cresswell A. M., Pardo T. A., and Shahidul H. (2007), Assessing Capability for Justice Information Sharing, Proceedings of the 8th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Bridging Disciplines & Domains, Vol. 228, pp. 122-130.
  11. Dawes S. (1996), Interagency Information Sharing: Expected Benefits, Manageable Risks, "Journal of Policy Analysis and Management", Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 377-394.
  12. Delfina S. and Amaral L. (2011), Information Systems Interoperability in Public Administration: Identifying the Major Acting Forces through a Delphi Study, "Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research" Electronic Version Vol. 6, Iss. 1, pp. 61-94.
  13. Denmark (2007), Denmark Electronic Government Interoperability Framework, http: // standarder. oio. dk/English/.
  14. DGSNA (2005), North America.
  15. Elmir B., Alrajeh N., and Bounabat B. (2011), Interoperability Monitoring for eGovernment Service Delivery Based on Enterprise Architecture Proceedings of ICIME Conferences, The 2nd International Conference on Information Management and Evaluation held at Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University, Toronto, on 27-28 April, 2011.
  16. e-Ping (2006), v2.0, Standards of Interoperability for Electronic Government, Brazilian Government Executive Committee on Electronic Government, [Online], Available: 05_12_06diglish.pdf
  17. (2010), eGovernment Factsheets: eGovernment in Turkey, Edition 9.0, June 2011, retrieved from
  18. European Commission (2007), The User Challenge Benchmarking The Supply Of Online Public Servces, ocs/benclimarking/ egov benchmark_2007.pdf.
  19. European Communities (2008), European Communities, Draft Document as Basis for EIF 2.0, Official Publications of the EuropeanCommunities.
  20. Germany (2003), Standards and Architectures for e-Government Applications, KBSt Publication Series, Vol. 59, Federal Ministry of the Interior, Berlin.
  21. Gil-Garcia J. R., Pardo T. A. (2005), E-government Success Factors: Mapping Practical Tools to Theoretical Foundations, "Government Information Quarterly", 22, pp. 187-216.
  22. Goldkuhl G. (2008), The Challenges of Interoperability in eGovernment: Towards a Conceptual Refinement, Pre-ICIS 2008 SIG eGovernment Workshop, Paris.
  23. Greek Ministry of Interior (2008), Greek e-Government Interoperability Framework, [Online], Available:
  24. Guedria W., Naudet Y., and Chen D. (2008), Interoperability Maturity Models - Survey , and Comparison, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin/Heidelberg Springer, Vol. 5872/2009, pp. 216-225.
  25. Guijarro L. (2005), Policy and Practice in Standards Selection for E-Government Interoperability Frameworks, [in:] Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Electronic Government, Copenhagen, pp. 163-173.
  26. Guijarro L. (2007), Frameworks for Fostering Cross-agency Interoperability in e-Government, Electronic Government: Information, and Transformation, within the Advances in Management Information System (AMIS) series (MESharp).
  27. Gupta K. M., Zang M., Gray A., Aha D. W., and Kriege J. (2007), Enabling the Interoperability of Large-scale Legacy Systems, (Technical Note AIC-07-127), Naval Research Laboratory, Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence, Washington.
  28. Ha S., Stoel L. (2009), Consumer e-shopping Acceptance: Antecedents in a Technology Acceptance Model, "Journal of Business Research", Vol. 62, Iss. 5, pp. 565-571.
  29. Hui-Feng S. and Chang-Tsun L. (2006), Information Security Management in Digital Government, Encyclopedia of Digital Government, Idea Group Publishing, Vol. 3, pp. 1054-1057.
  30. Hung S., Chang C., and Yu H. (2006), Determinants of User Acceptance of the e-Government Services: The Case of Online Tax Filing and Payment System, "Government Information Quarterly", Vol. 23, pp. 97-122.
  31. IDABC (2004), European Interoperability Framework for Pan-European E-govenvnent Services, Official Publications of the European Communities,
  32. IDABC (2006), European Interoperability Framework for pan-European e-Government Services, Version 1.0 [Online], Available:
  33. Jaeger P. T. (2004), Beyond Section 508: The Spectrum of Legal Requirements for Accessible e-government Web Sites in the United States, "Journal of Government Information", 30, pp. 518-533.
  34. Janssen M. and Wagenaar R. (2006), Enterprise Architectures as Knowledge Sharing Instrument: Concepts and Challenges, [in:] R. Traunmulle (ed.), Knowledge Transfer for eGovernment: Seeking Better eGovernment Solutions, Trauner Verlag, Linz, pp. 82-91.
  35. Klischewski R. (2004), Information Integration or Process Integration: How to Achieve Interoperability in Administration, Proceedings EGOV 2004, Springer LNCS 3183, Berlin, pp. 57-65.
  36. Klischewski R. (2011), Architectures for Tinkering? Contextual Strategies towards Interoperability in E-government, "Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research" Electronic Version, Vol. 6, Iss. 1, pp. 26-42, this paper is available online at DOI: 10.4067/S0718-18762011000100004.
  37. Mahadeo J. (2009), Towards an Understanding of the Factors Influencing the Acceptance and Diffusion of e-Government Services, "Electronic Journal of e-Government", Vol. 7, Iss. 4, pp. 391-402, available online
  38. Makedon F., Sudborough C. B., Baiter, Pantziou G., and Conalis-Kontos M. (2003), A Safe Information Sharing Framework for E-Government Communication, IT white paper from Boston University.
  39. Medeni T., Medeni T., and Ozkan A. B. (2009), Suggesting A Framework for Transition Towards More Interoperable E-Government in Turkey: A Nautilus Model of Cross-Cultural Knowledge Creation and Organizational Learning, "International Journal of E-Business and E-Government Studies", Vol. 1, No. 2.
  40. Michelson B. (2006), Event-Driven Architecture Overview, Technical Report, Patricia Seybold Group, Boston.
  41. Miller P. (2000), Interoperability, What is it and Why should I want it? Ariadne Iss, 24, [Online], Available:
  42. Missikoff M., Schiappelli F., and D'Antonio F, (2004), State of the Art and State of the Practice Including Initial Possible Research Orientations. Deliverable D8.1. European Commission, INTEROP Network of Excellence.
  43. Moon J. (2002), The Evolution of e-Government Among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality, "Public Administration Review", Vol. 62, Iss. 4, pp. 424-433.
  44. MyGIF (2003), Malaysian Government Interoperability Framework (MyGIF) version 1.0, Standards, Policies and Guidelines, [Online], Available:
  45. Novakouski M. and Lewis G. A. (2012), Interoperability in the e-Government Context, CMU/
  46. NZ e-GIF (2008), New Zealand e-Government Interoperability Framework Version 3.3, State Services Commission, [Online]: Available: http:/// standards/e-gif/e-gif-v-3-3/ OMG: Object Management Group. (2003) MDA Guide Version 1.0.1, Object Management Group/omg/2003-06-01.
  47. Pańkowska M. (2008), National Frameworks' Survey on Standardization of e-Government Documents and Processes for Interoperability, "Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research", Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 64-82.
  48. Pardo T. A. (2006), Collaboration and Information Sharing: Two Critical Capabilities for Government, Center for Technology' in Government, University at Albany Annual Report.
  49. Pardo T. A. and Tayi G. K. (2007), Interorganizational Information Integration: A Key Enabler for Digital Government, "Government Information Quarterly", Vol. 24, pp. 691-715.
  50. Pardo T. A., Cresswell A. M., Dawes S. S., and Burke G. B. (2004), Modeling the Social & Technical Processes of Interorganizational Infonnation Integration, Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, p. 50120.1.
  51. Pardo T. A., Gil-Garcia J. R., and Burke G. B. (2006), Building Response Capacity' through Cross-boundary Information Sharing: The Critical Role of Trust, Paper presented at the E-Challenges Conference, Barcelona.
  52. Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry (2003), E-transformation Turkey Project, Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry Directorate General for Personnel and Principles Circular 2003/12,
  53. Ruokolainen T., Naudet Y., and Latour T. (2007), An Ontology' of Interoperability in InterEnterprise Communities, [in:] R. J. Goncalves, J. P. Muller, K. Mertins, M. Zelm (eds.), Enterprise Interoperability II, New Challenges and Approaches, Springer Verlag, London, pp.159-170.
  54. Saekow A. and Boonmee C. (2009), Towards a Practical Approach for Electronic Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF), Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on IEEE.
  55. Scholl H. J. (2005), Interoperability' in e-Government: More than Just Smart Middleware,
  56. Scholl H. J. and Klischewski R. (2007), E-Government Integration and Interoperability': Framing the Research Agenda, "International Journal of Public Administration", Vol. 30, No. 8, pp. 889-920.
  57. Sprecher M. H. (2000), Racing to e-government: Using the Internet for Citizen Service Delivery, "Government Finance Review", 16(5), p. 22.
  58. State Planning Organization (2003), E-Transformation Turkey Project Short-Term Action Plan 2003-2004,
  59. State Planning Organization (2005), E-Transformation Turkey Project 2005 Action Plan,
  60. State Planning Organization (2006), Information Society' Strategy' - Action Plan (2006- 2010), July 2006, retrieved from /Documents/ActionPlan.pdf.
  61. State Planning Organization (2006a), Information Society Strategy' (2006-2010),
  62. State Planning Organization (2006b), Information Society' Strategy' (2006-2010) Action Plan,
  63. Telli C. (2011), Broadband in Turkey: Compare To What? info Dev/World Bank, Washington, Available at
  64. Thailand (2008), Ministry of Information and Communication Technology/, Thailand e-Government Interoperability Framework Version 1.0.
  65. TOGAF (2002), The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF), Version 8, Enterprise Edition, p. 303.
  66. UK e-GIF, UK Government-Cabinet Office (2005), e-Government Interoperability Framework,Version 6.1, [Online], Available: documents/eGIF%20v6_1(1).pdf.
  67. UN/CEFACT (2008), Recommendation 34 Data Simplification and Standardization for International Trade, Working Draft-Version 6.0.
  68. UNDP: United Nations Development Programme (2007), e-Government Interoperability: A Review of Government Interoperability Frameworks in Selected Countries, [Online], Available: projects/gif.
  69. [WWW 1],
  70. [WWW2],
Cytowane przez
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu