Introduction
In the modern world, a significant part of life goes online. That is why it is a typical scenario that people to access appropriate websites to use government services and find the required information. According to Gritsenko and Zherebtsov (2021), governments use web-based resources to provide citizens, businesses, and various agencies with information and services, and this phenomenon is called e-governments. Various nations offer different scopes of data through their online resources. The paper is going to evaluate Russian, Egyptian, and Kuwaiti e-governments according to their information dissemination, accessibility, service delivery capability, citizen participation, and qualitative aspects to identify the most useful resource. Five-point scales will be used to unify the assessment process throughout the paper.
Information Dissemination
Information dissemination is the first area of the present assessment. The United Nations (2008) stipulates that it consists of many elements, including the existence of the website, sources of archived information, news and updates on government policies, and others. This criterion focuses on whether the governments take sufficient measures to ensure that their citizens have access to the required information. The following information will comment on how the selected nations address the issues under analysis.
One can say that the Russian Federation succeeds in the area. It refers to the fact that the e-government website offers a link to archived information, allows visitors to access the news section, and has a separate page that is devoted to the Prime Minister (Russian Government, 2021). Furthermore, the links to the President’s website and other government agencies are present. Simultaneously, the Egyptian website shows more mediocre results in the area. It is so because the links to the archive and government head are not present, while the ministries classification and a news section are available (Egypt’s Government Services Portal, 2015). As for the Kuwaiti resource, government officials and a news section are available, while the website does not have an explicitly displayed link to the archived information (Kuwait Government Online, 2021). One should also admit that all the websites draw attention to developing visitors’ personal accounts to promote dialogue between people and governing bodies. Thus, Figure 1 below presents the websites’ information dissemination assessment.
Accessibility
It is also reasonable to evaluate how convenient it is to find and use the information. That is why this area draws attention to search and contact us features, the presence of video and audio materials, an option to choose a language, security features, and others (UN, 2008). According to West (2006), privacy statements are significant since they denote whether the websites respect and protect the visitors’ information. The information below will comment on the selected websites’ accessibility.
It is impossible to state that the Russian digital government website has the same positive results as in the previous area. It relates to the fact that the contact us feature as well as privacy and security statements are not available. Simultaneously, the website offers video materials that refer to the Prime Minister’s speeches and a search option (Russian Government, 2021). Egypt’s Government Services Portal (2015) it devotes a separate page to privacy issues and offers the contact us feature. However, audio and video materials are not available, and the search option is not active (Egypt’s Government Services Portal, 2015). Kuwait Government Online (2021) has a contact us feature, addresses privacy issues, and offers audio materials, while a search option is not available. Finally, the three e-government websites have versions in multiple languages, and Figure 2 below synthesizes the results in this area.
Service Delivery Capability
This criterion draws attention to what services website visitors can utilize. For example, it relates to the presence of online and printable forms, job opportunities, online transactions, e-mail alerts, and others (UN, 2008). The Russian Government (2021), it has printable forms of laws and acts issued by the Government, and an online form to send a message to public officials. Furthermore, the website has a link to access the Unified Portal for public services, which is necessary for citizens to deal with online transactions, including tax payments and others (Russian Government, 2021). Furthermore, it is possible to subscribe to obtain e-mail alerts, but the given digital government website does not show career opportunities.
As for Egypt, this country’s government website shows poor results in the given domain. It refers to the fact that the digital resource neither discloses job opportunities nor allows visitors to subscribe to e-mail alerts (Egypt’s Government Services Portal, 2015). As for printable materials, people can access general information regarding the government’s performance. Visitors can access online forms and deal with online transactions, including tickets reservation, healthcare services, and others (Egypt’s Government Services Portal, 2015). However, it is worth mentioning that these services are only available in Arabic.
In turn, Kuwait has taken sufficient efforts to have decent results within the area. On the one hand, the digital portal allows visitors to become familiar with available job opportunities and subscribe to obtain regular notifications (Kuwait Government Online, 2021). On the other hand, Kuwait Government Online (2021) is useful for people because they can use it to deal with numerous transactions online. For example, it is possible to use the resource to renew a driver’s ID license, pay for electricity and water bills, work with bank accounts, and others (Kuwait Government Online, 2021). Consequently, the data above seem sufficient to create a quantitative assessment in Figure 3.
Citizen Participation
Since e-government websites are mainly developed for people, it is reasonable to consider their opinions. According to the UN (2008) guidelines, this area relies on citizen feedback and the announcement of upcoming events. As for feedback, the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2020) states that user satisfaction is an essential feature. Thus, Egypt’s Government Services Portal (2015) and Kuwait Government Online (2021) ask their visitors to evaluate the offered e-services and disclose the results. Even though the Russian Government (2021) fails to address this issue, it compensates by devoting a separate section to upcoming events. This information denotes that the three governments do not show excellent performance in the sphere under analysis, and Figure 4 demonstrates it.
Qualitative Aspects
The previous assessment relied on an offered set of criteria, while the given section will draw attention to self-developed qualitative measures. According to the US Department of Health and Human Services and US General Services Administration (2006), the content organization is a useful factor to evaluate websites. Furthermore, the amount of information that is present on the home page is also of significance. According to these measures, Kuwait Government Online (2021) is the best resource because its initial page has grouped and easy-to-read information, making it possible to access almost every page from it. Simultaneously, the home pages of Egypt’s Government Services Portal (2015) and the Russian Government (2021) offer useful information, but its amount is lower compared to the Kuwaiti portal. Figure 5 manifests the analysis of the resources in this domain.
Overall Evaluation
Since the information above has focused on separate criteria, it is reasonable to present the selected websites’ overall evaluation. A suitable strategy will be to find an arithmetical mean value of all the measures in the given situation. This indicator will synthesize the findings and demonstrate which e-government website can be considered more effective. Figure 6 below depicts that the Egyptian website has more issues denoting that its visitors do not benefit from full e-government potential. The Russian and Kuwaiti websites have higher scores, while the Arabic nation shows the best results. It denotes that the Kuwaiti government invests sufficient resources to ensure that its citizens benefit from digital services. Furthermore, it implies that Kuwaiti citizens face greater opportunities when it comes to online government services.
Conclusion
The paper has presented a comprehensive analysis of the Russian, Egyptian, and Kuwaiti e-government websites. The assessment relied on information dissemination, accessibility, service delivery capability, citizen participation, and qualitative aspects. Both self-developed criteria and the measures offered by the United Nations are present among these criteria. The assessment has revealed that none of the three websites is ideal because each of them has some issues and inefficiencies. However, the data allows for creating a rating based on the quantitative data from the charts. Thus, the Egyptian resource is considered the least effective, while the Kuwaiti website has earned the highest number of points. It denotes that the Kuwaiti citizens deal with decent e-government services.
References
Egypt’s Government Services Portal. (2015). Web.
Gritsenko, D., & Zherebtsov, M. (2021). E-government in Russia: Plans, reality, and future outlook. In D. Gritsenko, M. Wijermars, & M. Kopotev (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of digital Russia studies (pp. 33-52). Palgrave Macmillan.
Kuwait Government Online. (2021). Web.
Russian Government. (2021). Web.
United Nations. (2008). Main features reviewed by the United Nations e-government survey [Word document].
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2020). United Nations e-government survey 2020 [PDF document]. Web.
US Department of Health and Human Services & US General Services Administration. (2006). Research-based web design & usability guidelines. US Department of Health and Human Services.
West, D. M. (2006). State and federal e-government in the United States, 2006 [PDF document]. Web.