Por Vitaliy Baev
A certain incompatibility of the administrative paradigm of the
state of the development of society is also characteristic for economies
in transition. The acceleration of information exchange between
participants of communication relations, lack of time for developing
effective administrative decisions, the emergence of non-standard
system problems are signs of the contemporary state administration
in Ukraine. Thus, the pressing issue of today is respective search
for new approaches.
The article reviews the new electronic
governance paradigm, which appeared within the framework of post-industrial
concepts of society through:
1. Explaining the essence and principle approaches to the formation
of post-industrial concepts in modern society.
2. Carrying out a world outlook-methodological analysis of e-government
as a principle and functioning mechanism of the post-industrial
3. Examining electronic governance as a new paradigm and model for
the functioning of an information society in the context of philosophical
Post-Industrial Concepts: Essence and Principle Approaches
to Its Formation
It has been generally recognized that society functions
and develops with the assistance of certain administrative mechanism,
the formation of which according to Stefanov (1976) is mediated
by means of production. Thus, a certain type of administration always
corresponds to a concrete period in history with different political
and legal content. Herein the level of the organization of administrative
mechanisms determines the level of the development of society itself.
The historic reinterpretation of
governance paradigm preceded the appearance of new conditions for
performing public administration. With the complication of the social
structure of society, the bureaucratized forms of public administration,
which were predominate during a considerable period of time, began
to loose their effectiveness and to transform respectively.
The present development of human
civilization, based on achievements of scientific technical progress,
had already reached such a critical stage, which prompts humanity
to more often resort to the search for qualitatively new, intensive
forms and methods of human interaction, which would mark the beginning
of a new (intensive) stage of globalization, the basis of which
would be made up of the intellectualization of the economy and exchange
of information between its immediate subjects - people (Privy Council
Naturally, other qualitatively new
paradigms and technology of global social administration are already
required today. Many of them have prototypes in present-day practice
(strategic analytics, social and information monitoring, e-government
concepts, situation analysis centers, and others) (Slyadneva, 2002).
Changes, characteristic for the
new society and which condition the development of new public administration
paradigm are under the consideration of many contemporary philosophers.
It is namely such changes (and today not only and not so much within
the framework of national borders) are urging government toward
reforms and the introduction of new principles of their activity
and organization, and therefore to the development of practical
introduction of a new public administration paradigm.
The study of changes in western
countries resulted in the development of a concept on post-industrial
development of society. In describing modern socium, the majority
of supporters of the post industrial theory are focusing attention
to processes, which preceded its emergence, reforms in the production
spheres, changes of the nature of human activity, improvement of
basic social relations and appearance of new political and social
The idea of technical mutations,
which have a multi-aspect impact on social progress, has received
recognition in modern philosophy and sociology. In the 1960s, David
Bell, the American sociologist, propounded the theory of post-industrial
society. He attributed to factors of the new society theoretical
knowledge as the organizational source and cybernetic revolution,
which conditions technological progress. David Bell determined five
initial specific changes and components of his prognostic model
as follows: 1) transfer from production of goods to the production
of services in the sphere of economy; 2) advantage of the class
of professional specialists and technicians in the employment sphere;
3) determinative role of theoretical knowledge as a source of innovation
and regulatory policy in society; 4) control over technology and
technological assessment of activity; 5) transformation of new intellectual
technology into an instrument of systems analysis and decision making
theory. According to David Bell, intellectual technology envisages
the use of algorithms as rules for solving problems in contradiction
to intuitive assertions. Examples of this are the theory of games
and systems analysis (Bell, 1986).
A. Toffler (2002) proposes in his
futuristic concept a somewhat different approach to the search for
new era contours. The author puts forward the notion that humanity
is proceeding to a new technological revolution. A new wave, which
leads to the appearance of a super industrial civilization, will
replace the first (agrarian civilization) and second (industrial
civilization). Large scale and intensive transformations affect
the economy, policy, culture, and the practice of education and
thinking become different. According to Toffler the contemporary
third wave is an information society. A prominent role in this society
should be assumed by the services sphere, science and education.
The public institutions and technology of administration in existence
today should be fundamentally reconstructed. The fall of the old
style of administration is also being accelerated in business and
everyday practice. Traditional means of influence are ineffective.
The structure of power is taking on a mosaic nature, creating a
more flexible system with centers of power, which is constantly
changing (Toffler, 2003). Attributed by Toffler to the contours
of the new civilization are: 1) information (flexible) technologies,
which qualitatively transform the infrastructure of society and
life of people; 2) a demassificated society, in which classes loose
their significance, and thousands of minorities, which have a temporary
nature of existence, create different transitional forms; 3) anticipatory
democracy, which guarantees the participation of individuals in
the formation of models of their own future; 4) transnational institutions,
which solve global issues: departure from national-state seclusion
of universal markets with free displacement of goods, people, ideas
Researchers, in concentrating attention
on the transformation of human values in the information society,
single out that in contrast to an industrial society, a characteristic
value for which was the consumption of goods, the new society forwards
time as such a value. Radical organizational progress, from industrial
type corporation to so-called “adaptive corporations,”
which in the maximization of profits see not only economic achievements
but also social benefits, is taking place in the system of human
activity. Herein they promote innovation and form creative style
The increase in the scope of information,
differentiation and specialization of knowledge make the process
for the establishment of an information society of the respective
new governance objective and regular. The establishment of public
administrative paradigm of information society is aimed at adapting
administration to the further increasing flow of information: accelerating
the process of decision making and optimizing herein the expenditure
of resources, and making the mechanism for decision making self-regulating.
Processes of active reformation
of public administration, which were characterized as a change of
the role of the state in relations with citizens, were observed
in the countries of Europe and North America in the last decade
of the XX century. Bureaucratic principles of traditional administration
were criticized and reinterpreted during the development of new
models of public administration.
Thus, for example, the gradual departure
from bureaucratic paradigm of governance resulted in the emergence
of a movement in the United States of America at the turn of the
1970s of theoreticians and practitioners in the sphere of public
administration, which proclaimed the ideas of social equality, taking
into account of the thoughts of the minorities and their respective
participation in representative bodies, increase in the participation
of citizens in the adoption process of government decisions and
new forms of organization (Kernaghan, Siegel, 1991). The movement
for new public administration emphasized the important roles of
street-level bureaucrats, orientated at the needs of the client.
The very term “street-level bureaucrats” appeared thanks
to the gradual transfer of power from state authorities to quasi-government
organizations. Street-level bureaucrats are teachers, police officers,
social welfare workers who regulate access to government programs.
Contrary to civil servants they function according to less formal
procedures, but essentially influence the formation of government
policy. It is possible to realize that a government program is the
product of sooner the lowest quasi-level of the power hierarchy
than the highest. Herein the street-level bureaucrats function in
such a complicated manner that it is impossible to regulate the
rules of their behaviour (Blau, Marshal, 1987).
The principles of administration
within the framework of bureaucratic paradigm were brought in question
in the trends of those times: “managerialism,” “new
public management,” “market oriented public administration”
and “entrepreneurial governance. The main goal of these models
was to attempt to create a more flexible and effective market oriented
system of public administration, directed toward the client- individual.
The formation of new principles
of administration further increased the spread of information networks
in society. The sense of the new public-administrative paradigm
emerged from attempts to overcome the very dichotomy of relations
at the state-individual level.
Different states, depending on their
existing level of scientific and technological development, focus
attention on the solution of different aspects of public administration
adaptation to the new conditions or factors, which give certain
signs of their existence and further development (and because of
this have to be taken into account ahead of time). Thus society
develops its own public-administrative paradigm. Herein the indicative
reasons and goals for the introduction of new principles of governance
remain similar for many societies.
As it was mentioned on the scientific
and applied seminar on formation of democratic and efficient public
administration in Ukraine (2002) the problems of public administration,
replacement of its paradigm today cannot be fruitfully discussed
without taking into account the fact that public administration
is a certain function of state bodies or society on the whole. The
certain context, in which it is considered, is a methodological
triangle, the summits of which are man, society and the state. The
development process takes place depending on how relations are being
built within this triangle ... The way out of the critical state
[which emerges under conditions of domination of any of the corners]
is possible only by replacing this principle as the principle of
public administration. Harmony, equality, symmetry of the sides,
which interact, and not the principle of rivalry should function.
The nature of these three elements is also changing. The process
of globalization is beginning in society. Super-state, super-national
structures and such are being developed that national governments
involuntarily become their hostages. But we should understand that
consciousness is also changing. Man wants to become a value in him,
and not an instrument for the realization of strategic goal, regardless
of how attractive it may be. He does not want to put the sense of
his existence today outside the boundary of existence itself, does
not want to turn into abstract human material.
A certain nonconformity of the administrative
paradigm of the state of development of society is also characteristic
for Ukraine. The acceleration of information exchange between participants
of communication relations, lack of time for working out effective
administrative decisions, emergence of non-standard system problems
are signs of contemporary public administration in Ukraine both
on the local as well as national level. Therefore an urgent task
today is the search for new approaches.
E-Government as a Principle
and Functioning Mechanism of Post-Industrial Paradigm
The electronic reorganization of public administration
generates profound interest all over the world. The development
or establishment of e-government is taking place in Canada, Great
Britain, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, as well as Costa Rica, Qatar,
the United Arab Emirate, Latvia, Estonia, Czech Republic and many
The European Union supports interdisciplinary
research and developments in the sphere of information society and
technologies, which will help to transform government institutions
and civil services in Europe, increase openness and effectiveness
in the public sector (European Commission, 2003). Thus, in 2003
a four-year plan of research in the e-government sphere was worked
out in the EU. The list of its topics was developed around two major
problems in the sphere of e-government: 1) improvement of government
services for individuals and business structures; 2) organizational
transformation. Among contemporary priorities are electronic governance
and respective organizational changes in governance principles and
structure of the state. What is electronic governance?
It should be pointed out that there
does not exist a synonymous determination of this term. The sense
of the notion can be varied depending on the position of the author.
Thus in order to study the problem, it is important not only to
acquaint oneself with relevant scientific literature (as testified
to by practice, in the main written in English), but to take into
account the approach, in the framework within which this author
Three major approaches to the understanding
of the main term have been distinguished today in world scientific
literature on electronic governance.
The first approach, within the framework
of which the development of e-government actually began, has electronic
commerce as its source. A large number of practitioners, as, for
example, Mike Hernon, Vice President of the New York E-Government
Program, define e-government as “use of information technology
for direct rendering of public services to consumers all round the
clock and 7 days a week.. The customers can be an individual, business
establishment, or even a government institution. The e-government
renders services in such a way, which is most convenient for the
consumers, and at the same time allows to carry this out at an essentially
smaller price.” The definition of T. Pardo (2000) is similar:
“E-government is a transformation of the rendering of public
services through the use of technologies.”
Representatives of the private sector
share such, the most simplified view on electronic governance, first
and foremost. The understanding of the nature of a state proceeds
from the fact that it has all the signs of a big corporation: it
has a budget, expenditures, revenues, stockholders, and at the same
time, clients - individuals interested in maximally inexpensive
and accessible public services. According to this approach the government,
as a big corporation, should aspire to satisfy the interest of its
taxpayers, and with this aim in mind, to raise its efficiency, and
as a corporation, should increase its capitalization, replacing
the work models by more technological and effective models. The
e-government within the framework of this approach is considered
from the point of view of practical use of information and communication
technologies for improving the process of rendering public services.
This very approach was reflected in the first statements of politicians
for the development and introduction an e-government. Thus in 1993,
US Vice President Albert Gore, in his speech emphasized the introduction
of an e-government namely through the use of information technologies
of financial and other commercial spheres in the public sector (Gore,
1993). In general the appearance of the first school was conditioned
by the western practice of applying successful business administrative
technologies by the public sector with the further adaptation of
these technologies to the specific needs of the state.
The second approach can conditionally
be called “technocratic.” It proceeds from the perception
of e-government as an organization of a certain (high) level of
informatization. An example of such an approach is the definition
given by O. Baranov: “E-government is a government in which
the entire complex of both internal as well as external ties and
processes is supported and guaranteed by relevant information and
communication technologies” (Baranov, 2002). O.Shevchuk and
O. Golobutskiy (2001) define the term in a similar way: “E-government
is a system of local information networks and segments of global
information network, which provides the functioning of certain services
in the real time regime, and makes daily communication of the individual
with official establishments maximally simple and accessible”.
Hap M. Cluff (2002), head of the Department of Information Technology
of the Norfolk Municipal Council points out that prior to introducing
management, directed at the buyer or system of e-government, the
establishment should focus attention on the automation of all internal
processes, and such automation of all internal processes is fundamental,
as this, actually, is electronic governance. Thus, electronic governance
within the framework of the second approach is considered from the
point of view of its technical possibilities, which emerge as a
result of the use of new technologies. Henceforth electronic governance
is technological governance.
The third school, which is becoming
more widespread in western literature with the years and being gradually
recognized in Ukraine, assigns the role of one of the innovative
technologies of governance to the electronic rendering of services,
and information technology - the role of a tool for the transformation
of government (Atkinson, 2003). Electronic governance has the broadest
content within the framework of this approach, insofar as the dissemination
of principles and approaches to electronic governance is accompanied
by the restructuring of the entire system of administrative processes,
overcoming of stereotypes of bureaucratic culture. This should be
promoted by administrative reform, which is aimed at modernizing
the system of public administration, and reformation of the civil
service, which promotes the transition to a new for Ukraine model
of the supremacy of the individual, his needs and expectations in
relations with civil servants.
Thus, electronic governance is examined
as a new administrative paradigm (model) in the knowledge age within
the framework of the third approach. Such a definition is being
upheld by the governments of developing countries in their vision
of respective state policy, for instance the Canadian Privy Council
Office (2002), and international organizations.
Actually, the difference between
the definition of approaches lies in the deep study of the problem.
The third school, which has the broadest context, takes into account
the electronic provision of services, and use of information and
communication technologies for improving the work of the government.
It is necessary to point out that
the notions of electronic governance and e-government in literature
written in English were only differentiated as of late. Due to the
polyvariancy of the English language these terms in many publications
are being used as identical, but according to the context it can
be understood that under “e-government” the author has
in mind not a body of state power or local self-government, but
a new system of governance principles, correlative with new technologies
and digital possibilities.
With the development of the terminological
basis in the sphere of e-government the authors more and more clearly
formulate the difference between electronic governance and e-government.
For instance, Thomas Riley in his works (2001, 2003) proposes to
first define electronic governance, and then later e-government.
In the view of the author electronic governance is related to the
concept, views and issues around the functions of the government,
while e-government is connected with specific practical structures
of the government, which introduce such concepts in practice. E-government
can be the most productive variant of the ordinary government, if
it is well introduced and managed. Electronic governance can be
developed in joint administration, if it is well built and supported
in the proper manner.
On the example of a historic analysis
of American public administration Donald Kettl (2002) also presents
the difference between e-government and electronic governance, taking
into account that the government is an institutional structure,
which society uses for the transformation of political programs
into action programs and legislation, and governance is the result
of the interaction of the government, civil servants and individuals
through the political process, process for the development of state
policy, working out of programs and rendering of services.
Electronic administration is more
than just simple civil services technologically modernized or linked
up to the Internet. The methods to the electronic administration
system are only being developed today, as governments and individuals
throughout the world begin experimenting and learning how to use
new information and technological means. The sphere of electronic
administration includes new methods of management, new ways of discussing
and adopting decisions on issues pertaining to strategy and investment,
new means of obtaining an education and acquaintance with public
opinion, as well as new schemes for organization and provision of
information and services, indicate Martin Ferguson and John Rain
(2003), associates of the Institute of Local Governance Research
at Birmingham University.
Electronic Governance in
the Context of Contemporary Approaches
Western researchers are developing a range of issues connected
with new governance paradigm within the framework of the third school
Osborne and Gaebler (1992) proposed
a governance model, which proclaims the principles of government-catalyst
and self-government of the community, according to which politicians
should give the community the opportunity to cope with problems.
This model also views individuals as buyers, which focus main attention
on government services. This impels civil servants to establish
partner ties with groups of individuals and nongovernment organizations
in order to work out administrative decisions and efficiently render
The burden of operating expenditures,
which are levied on civil servants and individuals, is an obstacle
to holding broad consultations with the public. The most widespread
characteristics of the bureaucratic system are: 1) division into
subunits, which is taking place according to functional characteristic;
2) clear hierarchy structure of power; 3) availability of a system
of rules, which determine rights and obligations; 4) existence of
system of standard procedures for execution in possible working
situations; 5) depersonification of relations; 6) dependency of
the staff selection and its advance on technical knowledge (Starling,
1991). The Weberian model for the organization of power and administration
enjoyed dissemination first and foremost thanks to the economic
effect of its introduction. Operating expenditures for communication
and coordination in such a structural scheme are lower thanks to
optimisation and division into departments. The Weberian approach
encourages professional specialization and maximizes effectiveness
and possible economy. More so, thanks to the introduction of rules,
adjustments and hierarchy supervision the bureaucratic model decreases
the possibility of unintentional mistakes and adventurous behaviour
of civil servants, as well as guarantees an impartial approach to
Moreover, under present-day conditions
that have a constant lack of time, the main not renovating resource,
the civil servants see an undesirable burden in the intensive attraction
of individuals to the decision making process. The individuals also
can without particular desire take part in the decision making process.
New information technologies help to essentially reduce time and
other operating expenditures of the parties. As a result principles
for rendering public services are transformed within the framework
of the new paradigm. As pointed out by A. Tat-Kei Ho (2002) administrators
of the public sector concentrated attention within the framework
of the traditional bureaucratic paradigm on the efficiency of internal
productivity, functional rationality and departmentalization, hierarchical
control and administration, based on rules. According to the electronic
governance paradigm public sector administrators are displacing
the accent from production needs (for instance, cost efficiency)
to satisfying users and flexibility in the rendering of services.
The new paradigm stresses innovation, organizational changes and
entrepreneurship. Public service becomes less and less standardized,
public services are rendered according to individual orders, taking
into account personal needs and preferences.
Governance, which was built according
to new principles, received the name electronic at the initial stages
of research. A more narrow term “network governance”
is beginning to be used more often in further researches.
On the example of the economic development
phases of America, Robert Atkinson (2003) demonstrates that every
one of them produced a new organizational paradigm both in the business
sphere, as well as in public administration. The growing industrialization
of the economy in the 1990s brought large-scale reforms of public
administration at central and local levels together with the growing
role of the Federal Government. Mass production, post-war economy
of corporations brought a “New Course” (policy of Theodore
Roosevelt government) and “Big Society (program of President
Lyndon. Johnson), based on the idea of a centralized state and paternal
role of the government. But the very nature of the contemporary
new economy made the hierarchical bureaucracy unable to solve pressing
problems and reply to the call of the times. Day and night the economy,
which is characterized by entrepreneurship, competitiveness, swift
changes, use of networks, new technologies and less hierarchy, correspondingly
must also be a model of governance. The major task of governance
is to assure that the complex networks produce socially desirable
results. This means the need to replace the concept of hierarchical
bureaucratic government with the concept of the government - manager
of state policy network. Herein such networks include all responsible
players, including government agencies of all levels, quasi-government
and other non-profit organization, enterprises and, even, individuals.
The new technological system proposes tools for creating new governance
system, which correspond to the above-mentioned organizational,
economic and social conditions. Instead of solving state affairs
with the assistance of teams, control over the fulfilment of rules
and introduction of programs, the governments can use information
technology for building a self-governing systems, promoting the
functioning of markets, providing people with information and creating
accounting systems. Atkinson indicates that governance should be
transformed into six main trends: 1) from bureaucratic government,
based on strict rules, to innovative and flexible government; 2)
from bureaucratic programs to jurisdiction of social enterprises;
3) from “top to bottom” control to ascending complex
system, capable of adaptation; 4) from bureaucratic decisions to
decisions on market mechanisms; 5) from information, controlled
by bureaucratic apparatus to information freely accessible to each
and everyone; 6) from conformity of rules to responsibility for
results. Atkinson formulates own six signs of the new governance
paradigm as follows: 1) innovation and flexibility; 2) transfer
of power to the nongovernment sector; 3) strict limitation of the
sphere of state regulation; 4) creation of an administrative system
according to self-regulation principle; 5) free exchange of information;
6) management, directed toward results.
New models of public administration
are oriented at the broad use of delegated powers as to adoption
of administrative decisions and use of budgets, introduction of
teamwork, and network structures of administration. Correspondingly
the new paradigm prompts organizational transformation of government
structures and civil service reforms. Indeed, as indicated by V.
Knyazyev (1990), the new technological method of production should
guarantee not only material conditions, but organizational form
for social-historic development too.
Electronic governance has a practical
significance for state sector institutions. First of all there exists
the impossibility of the traditional government to adequately react
to the dynamic nature of network economy and society. As a result,
national governments are loosing the adequacy of own activity, their
activity threatens new transformed institutions of global socio-economy.
Secondly, the network economy and society bear a change of the nature
of relations. State bodies already occupy the highest step in the
hierarchy of society, they interact with other sectors of society
and separate individuals on the horizontal level.
The analysis carried out in this research allows to make the following
1. It was adduced during the consideration
of the essence and main approaches to the formation of a post-industrial
paradigm that the complication of social organization led to the
development in western countries of a concept on post-industrial
development of society. The idea of technical mutations, which have
a multi-aspect impact on social progress, received recognition in
modern philosophy and sociology. In describing modern society of
the majority of the supporters of the post-industrial theory attention
is focused on processes, which preceded its emergence, reforms in
the production sphere, changes in the nature of human activity,
improvement of basic social relations and the appearance of new
political and social elite. In paying great attention to the transformation
of human values in the information society they indicate that contrary
to industrial society, characteristic value for which was the consumption
of goods, the new society puts forth time as a characteristic value.
A radical organizational advance is taking place within the system
of human activity.
2. In conducting a world outlook
and methodological analysis of the e-government as a principle and
functioning mechanism of post-industrial paradigm it was established
that the increasing scopes of information, differentiation and specialization
of knowledge, makes objective and regular the process for the establishment
of the new governance, which corresponds to the information society.
The new state-governance paradigm is aimed at adapting administration
to new conditions: increasing flow of information, limitation of
time for decision adoption, lack of resources and emergence of new
3. The result of the study of electronic
governance as a new functioning model of information society in
the context of philosophical approaches revealed that singled out
in world scientific literature were three main approach to e-government.
New research on electronic governance models is taking place within
the framework of the third, most widespread school, which views
e-government as a new governance paradigm in the knowledge age.
Public sector administrators concentrated
attention within the traditional bureaucratic paradigm on the efficiency
of internal productivity, functional rationality and departmentalization,
hierarchy control and administration, regulated by hard-and-fast
rules. According to electronic governance paradigm public sector
administrators are moving the stress from production needs (for
instance, expenditure efficiency) to satisfaction of users and flexibility
in rendering services.
The spread of respective philosophical
and methodological principles (innovation, organizational changes
and entrepreneurship etc.) and approaches to governance are accompanied
by the reconstruction of the entire system of governance processes.
Included among the trends of transformation of governance is transfer
from a bureaucratic to an innovative and flexible government; from
independent fulfilment of government programs to jurisdiction for
their fulfilment by private social partners; from “top to
bottom” control to ascending information exchange system,
capable of self-development; from control over the provision of
information to free exchange; from evaluation according to samples
to evaluation as to results.
Thus, the analysis, which we carried
out, of the social and philosophical essence of the formation of
new post-industrial paradigm pointed to a significant number of
fundamental developments on this problem, as well as significant
number of problems, allowed to formulate new world view and methodological
foundation for studying such problems in the context of the development
of modern philosophical science. The topic, which was the subject
of this paper, has not been sufficiently studies and thus requires
to be further research in the future.
ATKINSON, R. 2003. Network
Government for the Digital Age. Washington: Progressive Policy
. BARANOV O. 2002. Electronic Government in Ukraine? It will be!
When? Zarkalo Nedeli. 12-18 January.
BELL, D. 1986. Social framework of information society. In: GUREVICH,
P. Ed. New technocratic wave in the West. ?oskow: Progress.
BLAU, P. and MARSHAL, W. 1987. Bureaucracy in Modern Society. New
York: Random House.
CLUFF, H. eGovernance a New Organizational Paradigm. 2002.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2003. Synopses of IST Projects relating
to E-Government. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications
of the European Communities.
FERGUSSON, ?. and REIN, J. 2003. Developments in Electronic
Governance, Kyiv: British Council.
GORE, Al. 1993. Reengineering Through Information Technology.
Accompanying Report of the National Performance Review. Washington:
Office of the Vice President.
INTELLECTUAL CO-OPERATION FOUNDATION “UKRAINE– ??? CENTURY”.
Round table on public administration of transition societies
under globalisation. 2001. Kyiv: Ukrainski propilei.
KERNAGHAN, K. and SIEGEL, D. 1991. Public Administration in
Canada. Scarborough: Nelson Canada.
KETTL, D. 2002. The Transformation of Governance. Baltimore,
MD: John Hopkins.
KNYAZYEV, V. 1990. Man and Technology. Kyiv: Lybid.
OSBORNE, D. and GAEBLER, T. 1992. Reinventing Government. How
the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
PARDO, T. 2002. Realizing the Promise of Digital Government: It’s
more than Building a Web Site. Information Impacts Magazine,
PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE, MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES. 2002. A New Model
of Government and Governance for the Knowledge Age. Exploring the
Profound Nature of the E-Government Transformation. Ottawa:
Privy Council Office.
RILEY T. Electronic Governance: Living and Working in the Wired
World. 2001. [WWW] <http://rileyis.indelta.com/publications/NewDocs/Electronic_Governance.htm>
(7 March 2003)
RILEY T. International Tracking Survey Report. 2003. [WWW] <http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents
/APCITY/UNPAN015443.pdf> (25 April 2004)
SHEVCHUK, ?. and GOLOBUTSKIY, ?. 2001. Information society:
to be or not to be. Kyiv: Atlant UMS.
SLYADNEVA, N. Globalisation of Analytics – One of Priorities
for Social Management Crisis Resolving in Contemporary Epoch. Fact
[Online journal] <http://www.fact.ru/www/arhiv11s9.htm>
(13 June 2002)
STARLING, G. 1991. Managing the Public Sector. Homewood:
STEFANOV, N. 1976. Social sciences and social technology.
TOFFLER, A. 2003. Power Shift. Moskow: AST publishing.
TOFFLER, A. 2002. Third Wave. Moskow: AST publishing.
TAT-KEI HO, A. 2002. Reinventing Local Governments and the E-Government
Initiative. Public Administration Review, 4 (62), pp. 434-444.
25. UKRAINIAN ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION. Scientific and
applied seminar on formation of democratic and efficient public
administration in Ukraine. Kyiv 11-12 March 2002. 2002. ?yiv:
National Academy of Public Administration, Office
of the President of Ukraine,