Belarus Government Agencies Online

According to the authors of this 8-page report, while interactivity is key to the value of internet-based government-to-citizen information resources, this feature is one of the most difficult to include in e-government initiatives. Reflective of that observation, the May 2005 analysis of eGovernment in Belarus conducted by e-Belarus.org found that little progress had been indicated in comparison with the previous year. This follow-up study sought to measure the quality of government-to-citizen online communications within the national context, including 3 major areas: access to information, engaging or representing citizens, and e-service functions - on national, regional and district levels. Here are the highlights:

• The 2004 review showed that the majority of governmental agencies' websites gave thematically organised content that duplicated offline information. Only 6% of websites presented some specific information accessible only online; 56% gave only minimal information, but also made it possible to contact government officials via telephone or ordinary mail; and only 3% of websites made governmental bodies more accessible. 4% were providing some online services.
• The 2005 study found that 22% of all websites are not updated. Again, the majority of governmental agencies websites were found to give thematically organised content that duplicates offline information: 45% give only minimal information, making it possible to contact government officials via telephone or ordinary mail. 34% of websites make governmental bodies more accessible (by offering the possibility to apply online, and/or forums, discussions or forms for complaints) and 4% provide some interactive online services.
• Significant improvement of government agencies' accessibility (3% in 2004 vs. 34% in 2005) is explained by: 1) "softer criteria" and a 2) growing portion of district websites.

The analysis shows that internet potential is not yet being used fully to bridge the gap between citizens and governmental institutions. The general trend of e-government official initiatives indicated by the study may be defined as "one way communication with some possibilities of feedback". There are no plans to develop and support financially a large-scale modernisation strategy and action plan to re-engineer the "back-office" in the interest of the "front-office", even in light of the latest technologies and greater openness and a need for new services. Meanwhile, interactivity - a characteristic that the authors identify as central to the success of e-government - "can be accomplished if only the back-office of the government truly reformed and the government wants more transparency and better services for people and businesses."