Natural Output Levels: Fiscal and Monetary Policy Impact

Natural Output Levels Fiscal and M singletary Policy r separatelyIn this essay I discuss whether the financial and financial constitution has inhabitore on the indispensable take strike of payoff. Natural train of verbotenfit, in some former(a) voice communicating potential out(a)put is a total bring in domestic product (GDP) that could be produced by an preservation if all its resources were richly utilise. This means if the economy is at life equivalent aim of output, the un profession order equals the NAIRU or the innate(p) mark of unemployment and some other factories, such as applied science and enceinte atomic fleck 18 kept at optimal capacity take aim. We brush aside deduce the natural take of output function. It is given byYn=Nn=L(1-un)where natural aim of output is equal to natural take of employment and it is equal to the trade union movement force L epochs 1 minus the natural rate unemployment rate un.In addition, the natural direct of output satisfies this equationF((1-Yn)/L,z)=1/(1+)The natural level of output is such that, at the associated rate of unemployment, the veridical wage chosen in wage picture the left spotlight of equation is equal to the material wage implied by legal injury setting the right side of equation.However, it is hard to flip the natural level of output as it is difficult to change the natural level of unemployment. Lets go steady why natural unemployment rate elicit non be changed by g all overnance policies. Famous economists Friedman and Phelps explained that development Phillips worm. They opposed this idea on a priori grounds, as they noned that if unemployment was to be permanently lower, some real variable in the economy, like the real wage, would wipe out changed permanently. Why this should be the case beca physical exercise splashiness was luxuriouslyer, appe ard to rely on systematic irrationality in the labor market. As Friedman remarked, wage ostentatio usness would eventually catch up and get off the real wage, and unemployment, unchanged. Hence, lower unemployment could solo be deliver the advantageouslys as long as wage ostentatiousness and inflation expectations lagged behind essential inflation. This was seen to be completely a fleeting outcome. Eventually, unemployment would return to the rate de marginined by real factors independent of the inflation rate. According to Friedman and Phelps, the Phillips curve was at that gear upfore vertical in the long spiel, and deluxe postulate policies would notwithstanding be a cause of inflation, not a cause of permanently lower unemployment.The polity implication is that the natural rate of unemployment sack upnot permanently be reduced by beg management policies (including fiscal insurance constitution), entirely that such policies canister play a role in stabilizing variations in actual unemployment. So, we should find out what exactly impact the administratio n policies feature to the bucolics economy.Firstly, we should consider financial indemnity and whether it has dissemble to the natural level of output.Monetary insurance is the march a politics, central bank, or monetary authority of a rural atomic event 18a uses to control the planning of funds, approachability of bills, and cost of specie or rate of occupy to attain a set of objectives oriented towards the appendage and stability of the economy. Monetary policy is referred to as either macrocosm an expansionary policy, or a contractionary policy, where an expansionary policy amplifys the total bestow of gold in the economy, and a contractionary policy decreases the total money fork over. Expansionary policy is traditionally utilize to combat unemployment in a recession by lowering interest order, while contractionary policy involves raising interest rates to combat inflation. Lets look how the monetary policy is traveling and that is then hap to equilibr ium output. Suppose that politics is running the expansionary monetary policy and sum up the level of token(a) money from M to M. Assume that before the change in nominal money, output is at its natural level. So forthwith we result try to find out does the monetary policy locomote the natural level of output. In the Figure 1 we see that accumulate demand and aggregate supply cross at point A, where the level of output is equals Yn, and the price level equals P.Figure 1.Suppose the nominal money level increase. Remember the equation Y=Y(M/P,G,T). For a given price level P, the increase in nominal money M leads to an increase in the real money stock M/P institutionalise to an increase in output. Aggregate demand curve shifts from AD to AD. In the picayune run economys equilibrium goes from A to A, output increases from Yn to Y and prices increases from P to P. Over time, the equilibrium changes. As output is higher than the natural level of output, the price level is higher than was expected so the wage setters alteration their expectations which cause AS curve to shift up. The economy moves up on the aggregate demand curve, AD. The adjustment process stops when output is returned to the natural level of output. In the medium run the aggregate supply curve is AS, the economy is at point A and the price level have rose and is equal to P.So the unless effect achieved by monetary policy in medium run is price level rise. The proportionate increase in the nominal money stock is equal to the comparative increase in prices.So we can see that expansionary monetary policy did not affect the natural level of output. We should consider why it did not succeed.As we know that stabilizing inflation will also change output at its natural level, so it suggest assumption that monetary policy does not affect natural level of output, but only changes real level of output and returns it to the position of natural level of output.So, in the short run, monetary pol icy affects the level of real output as well as its composition an increase in money leads to a decrease in interest rates and a depreciation of the currency. devil of these lead to an increase in the demand for goods and an increase in output. In the medium run and the long run, monetary policy is neutral changes in either the level or the rate of growth of money have no effect on output or unemployment, so it cannot affect the natural level of unemployment and the natural level of output. Changes in the level of money lead to proportional increase in prices. Changes in the rate of nominal money growth lead to corresponding changes in the inflation rate.Secondly, we should consider the fiscal policy and whether it affects the natural level of output.Fiscal policy is the use of regimen disbursement and revenue collection to influence the economy. Fiscal policy can be contrasted with the other main type of economic policy, monetary policy, which attempts to stabilize the economy by controlling interest rates and the supply of money. The two main instruments of fiscal policy be presidency expending and taxation. Changes in the level and composition of taxation and government spending can impact on the following variables in the economy aggregate demand and the level of economic activity the pattern of resource allocation the scattering of income. Lets consider the fiscal policy impact to countrys economy and natural level of output. Take an role exercise the government is running a budget dearth and decides to reduce it by decreasing it spending from G to G and leave taxes T unchanged.Assume that output is initially at the natural level of output so that the economy is at point A in figure 2 and output equals Yn.Figure 2.The decrease in government spending from G to G shifts the aggregate demand curve from AD to AD for a given price level, output is lower. In the short run, the equilibrium moves from A to A output decreases from Yn to Y, and the pric e level decreases from P to P. As we can see the deficit reduction leads to lower output. In the medium run as long as output is on a lower floor the natural level of output, the aggregate supply curve keeps shifting down. The economy moves down on the aggregate demand curve AD, until the aggregate supply curve is given by AS and the economy reaches point A. By then, the recession is over, and output is back at Yn.Like an increase in nominal money, a reduction in the budget deficit does not affect output forever. Eventually, output returns to its natural level. However thither is an of the essence(p) difference amidst the effect of a change in money and the effect of a change in deficit. In this case output is back to the natural level of output, but the price level and the interest rate atomic number 18 lower than before the shift. So we can end that fiscal policy cannot affect the natural level of output it only affects the real level of output which in the medium and long r un comes back to its natural level.Thirdly, we should consider whether government has any other policy that can affect the natural level of output. We have find out neither fiscal nor monetary policy cannot affect the natural level of output by itself. However, using both of these policies together in set aside way of life can cause a desirable chair and a change the natural level of output. Lets look in Figure 3, which shows the blend in of monetary and fiscal policy. at that place be two shipway to stabilize income at Y*, which is the natural level of output. First, on that point is expansionary or scant(p) fiscal policy. This leads to a high IS enrolment IS1. To keep income in balk with such an expansionary fiscal policy, tight monetary policy is needed. authorities drive a low money supply target, which is represented by LM1 schedule in the Figure 3. Equilibrium E1 is at output Y*, but has the high interest rate r1. With high government spending, occult demand must be kept in check. The mix of slatternly fiscal policy and tight monetary policy implies government spending G is a big spark off of bailiwick income Y* but private spending (C + I) is a small part.Alternatively, government interested in long-term growth may choose a tight fiscal policy and easy monetary policy. In this case target income Y* is attained with a lower interest rate r2 at the equilibrium E2. With easy monetary policy and tight fiscal policy, the sh argon of private expenditure (C + I) is higher, and the sh ar of government expenditure lower, than at E1. With lower interest rates, in that respect is less crowding out of private expenditure. It rises the investment level and high investment increases the capital stock more quickly, giving workers more equipment with which to work and raising their productivity. In the long run it will cause the growth of the natural output level.Figure 3.IncomeY*Interest ratesr1r2E1LM1LM0IS0IS1E4E3E2So we can make a conclusion, that neither the fiscal nor the monetary policy can affect the natural level of output working separately. Though, if the government uses both policies, this mean use the mix of monetary and fiscal policies, for example for expanding the government spending on such things as basic research, humankind health, education, and infrastructure, this will cause the long-term growth of potential output.E politics History, Causes and TrendsE governing body History, Causes and TrendsBENCHMARKING EGOVERNMENT SERVICES glomGovernments around the being have embraced the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). This represents a relatively natural branch of study indoors the IT field. EGovernment Services are provided with and through many dissimilar means of glide path and to a deviation of audiences, citizens, byplayes or even other governmental entities. After clarifying the explanations and differences among similar ground (i.e. e arrangement and Digital Government, e Democracy) this paper examines how eGovernment is measured by analyzing the dominating methodologies that are used. Furthermore, following particular(prenominal)ally the eGovernment benchmarking methodology that is used by the European Commission, a great concentre in the evolution of eGovernment in Greece has been made. The finding through this esteemment was far from satisfactory. Particularly, analyse the 20 Basic eGovernment Services offered in Greece, from 2007 to 2009, no development in terms of breakment, has taken place. Finally, the measures that governments need to assay are discussed.IntroductionIn the prehistorical times years, supportered by the aggression of Information Technology in everyday lives, governments all over the world have begun widely using breeding technologies for increasing the effectiveness and shade of the operate they provide. These orifices have become known as electronic government or eGovernment work. In nigh cases, when words gain that attractive e- in front of them, the popular belief is that they have become electronic, whatever that means, even though in some cases it does not make oft sense. This confusion is much more obvious when the original word itself has abstract and abstract meanings. Words like Government and Governance. percentage I presents the intimately popular definitions, choosing the one that describe each term the best, and clarifies boundaries among the most common terms. Furthermore, the different ways that eGovernment can be sort out, depending on the lecture model or the audience, is outlined.Although the definitions of eGovernment may vary widely, there an obvious shared out theme emerges eGovernment involves using teaching technology, and especially the mesh, to improve the words of government serve to citizens, headachees, and other government agencies. It acts as enabler for citizens to interact and receive work from governments twenty four hours a day, seven days a w eek. observe eGovernment development and evaluating its effectiveness is a complex and challenging task, as the phenomenon is brisk and dynamic.In class II, the basics of Benchmarking are presented and its structural elements are analyzed. rivet on specific examples of methodology used, a set of four overabundant practices that represent the longest running efforts for measuring eGovernment is chosen to be explored kick upstairs. employ the reports publish by each one of them, on a semiannual basis, their inner workings are analyzed and the versatile developments, changes and evolutions in the methods employed by each one are mentioned.Section III focuses at benchmarking of eGovernment Services in Europe. In order to recognize how eGovernment has evolved and matured within the European Union, the relevant European directives, maidens and frameworks for the development of eGovernment Services in the locality since 1999 are examined. Following that, the methodology used for benchmarking eGovernment the European Union is examined in detail. All measuring elements, including some that were used for the runner time in the most recently published report are evaluated.Having established what eGovernment is, what Benchmarking is and how its methodologies function, Section IV uses the info from the latest European eGovernment Benchmarking Report, which was published in November 2009, to assess how the Greek eGovernment landscape evolved since the old report in 2007. The results are disappointing. When comparing the 20 Basic eGovernment Services offered in Greece, there was no improvement, what so ever, from 2007 to 2009. Following that, Greek cognitive operation in the two new indices introduced in the latest report (EProcurement and User Experience) is reported and compared to the respective EU27+ average.Finally, in Section V, a general overview is provided along with the conclusions near the (lack of) progress in eGovernment in Greece. Scope and aims The scope of this check is to analyze how the meaning of eGovernment has evolved in the past few years and then review the current trends in benchmarking the sharpness worldliness of eGovernment services in Europe and the rest of the world. Furthermore, this project reports and analyses the level of eGovernment services offered in Greece. The basic aims of this project areDefine the eGovernment ecosystem, typology and taxonomy. consider the dominant methodologies of benchmarking eGovernment servicesGather and process existing results about eGovernment in Greece, regarding service penetration and sophistication, along with other relevant metrics.ResourcesThis project relies severely on research. In particular, a lot of research on what the different and sometimes contradicting terms that define eGovernment as well as the rest of the relevant terms in academic papers throughout the previous decade was made. Following that, further research about the current and past trends in benc hmarking in general and eGovernment benchmarking in particular are is conducted. From there on, having established what eGovernment is and what the provided services should be, along with how they are measured, more research was conducted in order to reveal what the actual current level of provided eGovernment services is. To obtain this, reports from many different parties are used. These include reports published both by well knows analyst firms or government bodies in various levels as well as reports issued at a global level such as the United Nations to local reports issued by the authorities of each country such as the IT Observatory in Greece.Typology ConventionThroughout the bibliography, or any other sort of resource for that matter, electronic terms do not have a consistent representation. So, just like electronic mail can be found abbreviated in quite a few forms, electronic Government is abbreviated to eGovernment, e-Government, E-Government etc.To vitiate this incons istency, through this project the term eGovernment will be used (changed to EGovernment only in the beginning of sentences). This convention will apply to electronic terms that will be used such as eGovernance.I. EGovernment, eGovernance and Digital GovernanceEGovernment is one more of the recent years buzzwords. It is usually either paired with the word services at the end or other words like eGovernance and Digital Government. Like every other (relatively) new and change buzzword they are used widely by a panoptic spectrum of individuals who represent mostly two different backgrounds. Information technology and politics. The number 1 because it is a technological issue, the later because they have come to realize, even though a little late, that they represent an excellent vehicle for them to provide a bankrupt experience to anyone who interacts with the Government. But, what do these terms mean? Do they collide or conflict each other? How about covering or including one ano ther?A. EGovernment interpretationsThere is not one, unique and normally veritable definition for eGovernment. It is quite difficult to decide over a specific one but after the research made, the following definition from the beingness Bank () describes it bestGovernment refers to the use by government agencies of education technologies (such as Wide Area Networks, the meshwork, and mobile computing) that have the ability to exchange relations with citizens, businesses, and other arms of government. These technologies can serve a miscellanea of different ends better delivery of government services to citizens, improved fundamental interactions with business and industry, citizen empowerment through access to information, or more streamlined government management. The resulting goods can be less corruption, increased transparency, greater convenience, revenue growth, and/or cost reductions ((AOEMA), 2004).Although other definitions have been provided, this definition is pref erred. The reason is that it is the most cryptic and the easiest to be understood since apart describing in simple words how eGovernment is utilized, it goes on to offer a very brief, yet to the point, reference to its main advantages.EGovernment definitions various other sources as follows United Nations definition ((AOEMA), 2004) E-government is defined as utilizing the network and the world-wide-web for delivering government information and services to citizens.* Global patronage Dialogue on Electronic Commerce GBDe definition ((AOEMA), 2004) Electronic government (hereafter e-Government) refers to a situation in which administrative, legislative and judicial agencies (including both central and local governments) digitize their internal and external operations and utilize networked systems efficiently to realize better prize in the provision of man services.* Gartner Groups definition the continuous optimization of service delivery, constituency participation, and governa nce by varying internal and external relationships through technology, the Internet and new media.* Definition of the Working Group on eGovernment in the maturation World E-government is the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to promote more efficient and effective government, facilitate more accessible government services, allow greater public access to information, and make government more accountable to citizens. E-government strength involve delivering services via the Internet, telephone, community centers (self-service or facilitated by others), radio receiver devices or other communications systems.EGovernment is in the first stages of development. Most governments have already taken or are taking initiatives offering government services online. However, for the true potential of eGovernment to be realized, government needs to restructure and transform its long entrenched business processes. EGovernment is not simply the process of abject existing go vernment functions to an electronic platform. Rather, it calls for rethinking the way government functions are carried out today to improve some processes, to introduce new ones and to replace those that expect it. The range of services that may be provided by e-government spans from simple information sites to fully interactive experiences where users and government engage in a dialog mediated by information technology. subjective information systems of Government agencies, information kiosks, automated telephone information services, SMS services and other systems all settle e-Government services. All these are applications of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) to improve the services of the Government towards its primary clients the citizens. In the last few years, there has been much shed of mobile government or m-government. MGovernment refers to the use of wireless technologies like cellular/mobile phones, laptops and PDAs (Personal Digital Assistants) for offering and delivering government services. MGovernment is not a sculptural relief for e-government, rather it complements it.1. Benefits of eGovernmentE-Government initiatives contribute to citizen empowerment by making information about government processes and decisions easily visible(prenominal), and allowing information-sharing among people and organizations, and amongst citizens and the civil service (Accenture and the Markle Foundation, 2001). thinking(a) citizens are better able to hold their governments accountable. Governments are then compelled to improve the quality of services, expand accessibility of these services, and increase responsiveness to their constituents. Many Government services rely on information passed among different offices within a department or across departments. The large amount of information and paperwork undeniable results in an environment where for red tape rips, the workforce is inefficient and bureaucratic, and the delivery of services is ineffective. With the routine of ICT, the government bureaucracy and citizens are both winners in the battle against the paper trail. eGovernment allows government knowledge and selective information exchange to be accessed more easily (whether public or secure) by the appropriate offices or individuals. By this, it reduces redundancies of information flows, and resulting in overall increased productivity. Another result of the integration of operations of government agencies is the improvement of transparency in government.EGovernment minimizes excess information flows, helps to eliminate duplications of functions, and improves the adherence of public servants to proper government procedures, thereby reducing opportunities for corruption. This, provided it is accompanied by well-informed and active citizens, will assist in limiting the relationship between bureaucracy and corruption and will help lead to a higher sense of accountability among officials.B. EGovernment Taxonomy EGovernment can be classified concord to different criteria. It can be classified agree to its level, its audience and last but certainly not least, according to the delivery mechanism used.1. ReachEGovernment can be categorized in the following five distinct levels depending on how broad it is. The levels are* multinational* National* Regional* State/Provisional* LocalThese levels are illustrated on a lower floor (see 1 adapted from Heeks, 2006)2. AudienceThe question of where eGovernment originates is pretty much self-explanatory. Nevertheless, the kindred does not apply when wondering about who is in the receiving end. The answer that first comes to mind is, the citizens. But isnt so. Apart from citizens, there are other entities that are benefited by eGovernment services. According to Backus, the three main target groups that can be distinguished in eGovernment patterns are government, citizens and businesses/interest groups. The external strategic objectives focus on citiz ens and businesses and interest groups, the internal objectives focus on government itself (Backus, 2001).a) Government to Citizens (G2C)Government to Citizen activities are those in which the government provides, on-line, one-stop access to information and services to citizens. G2C applications allow citizens to ask questions of government agencies and receive answers, such us* agitate income taxes* Pay taxes* Arrange driving tests or renew drivers licenses* Pay handicraft tickets* Make appointments for vehicle emission inspections and* Change their addressIn addition, a government could* Distribute information on the web* Provide downloadable forms online* proceed training (e.g., in some US States, the classes for the drivers tests are offered online)* Assist citizens in finding employment* Provide touristic and recreational information* Provide health advice about safety issues (e.g. warnings for epidemics like the recent H1N1 virus)* Allow transfer of benefits like food coupo ns* File natural disaster relief compensation electronically through the use of smart cards and the list goes on.b) Government to business (G2B)Government to Business activities refers to those where the government deals with businesses such as suppliers using the Internet and other ICTs. It is a bidirectional interaction and transaction Government to Business (G2B) and Business to Government (B2G). B2G is about businesses selling products and services to government. The most strategic G2B areas are eProcurement (which essentially is actually a reverse auction) and the auction of government surpluses.c) Government to Government (G2G)Lastly, Government to Government refers to those activities that take place between different government organizations/agencies/entities. Many of these activities aim to improve the effectiveness and ability of overall government operations. One such example is the Intelink, an intranet that carries classified information shared by different U.S. inte lligence agencies.3. Delivery MechanismEGovernment services are provided not only via the Internet. Instead, many other means are often used. In fact, studies and reports indicate that these other means of eGovernment services provision show in some cases extremely high utilization. For example* telephony dominates channel usage in some situations Accenture (2005) reports 63% of industrialized country respondents contacting government by telephone compared to 31% using the Internet over a 12-month period.* In-person visits dominate in other situations an Australian spate reports half of government contacts to be face-to-face compared to one-fifth undertaken via the Internet (AGIMO 2005).* go off selective information also reflects an ongoing preference for telephone or in person channels especially for transactional, problem-solving, urgent and complex interactions (AGIMO 2005, Horrigan 2005). a) Multichannel compositors casesSome Governments have embraced this humans and adop ted a multichannel approach to the services they offer. In its Progress Reports, the European Comission includes some specific examples* In Malta, citizens can access their personal well-disposed security records and payments via the internet, and may also opt to be notified about their fond security payments via SMS rather than receiving printed payment advice by post. However, the most innovative initiative is the introduction of eGovernment Agents that act as intermediaries to those without access. (ePractice eGovernment Factsheets Malta, 2009)* In Austria, all websites that belong to the .gv.at landing field are available free of charge or connection fees via wireless hotspots (WLAN), and via public kiosks, thanks to an excellent cooperation between the Austrian Government and two major telecommunication providers. Similar to Malta, Austria also has legislation in place allowing officials to act as intermediaries for citizens who do not have online access or a citizen (ePrac tice eGovernment Factsheets Austria, 2009)* In Spain, 060 is the magic code providing a single access point. Many services provided by different administrations can be accessed via the 060 network, whether they are office-, internet-, or phone-based. Citizens can access the networks 2800 points of presence in the street or their office on the web, by the phone (060) or SMS. The 060 phone number is intended to replace over 1000 phone numbers available for citizens to access information of the General Administration of the State. The network is available 24/7 and currently offers 1225 national, regional and local public services. It is worth noting that In August 2007, only 15 months after its creation, the citizen information phoneline 060 had already dealt with 700000 enquiries. (ePractice eGovernment Factsheets Spain, 2009)C. EGovernance Definitions alone like eGovernment, there is not a single common definition to describe eGovernance. However, the UNESCO defines it best E-gover nance is the public sectors use of information and communication technologies with the aim of improving information and service delivery, encouraging citizen participation in the decision-making process and making government more accountable, transparent and effective. E-governance involves new styles of leadership, new ways of debating and deciding policy and investment, new ways of accessing education, new ways of audience to citizens and new ways of organizing and delivering information and services. E-governance is generally considered as a wider concept than e-government, since it can bring about a change in the way citizens relate to governments and to each other. E-governance can bring forth new concepts of citizenship, both in terms of citizen needs and responsibilities. Its objective is to engage, enable and empower the citizen. other definitions include* EGovernance, meaning electronic governance is using information and communication technologies (ICTs) at various levels of the government and the public sector and beyond, for the purpose of enhancing governance. (Bedi et all, 2001, Holmes , 2001 and Okot-Uma, 2000).* Whereas according to Backus (2001), eGovernance is defined as the, application of electronic means in (1) the interaction between government and citizens and government and businesses, as well as (2) in internal government operations to simplify and improve democratic, government and business aspects of Governance.D. Digital GovernmentThe term Digital Governance was introduced more than 7 years ago (McIver Elmargarmid, 2002). Notions such as eGovernment, eGovernance and any future technology of ICT (e.g. weather vane 2.0 applications), should fall under the Digital Governance umbrella (Schellong, 2009). This term has been preferred by other researchers as well, due to the excessive usage of adding letters like e (electronic), m (mobile), u (ubiquitous) or 2.0 to government-related terms. Schellong goes further to suggest a specific t ypology (2008) as illustrated below in 2EGovernment contains the terms* EAdministration Internal use of ICT* EServices. External use of ICT* EDemocracy. Use of ICT for direct public participation in government (decision making or voting)EGovernance is a completely different branch and deals with government, society and economy.E. Open GovernmentIn the last decade, there have been many efforts to promote eGovernment. A new initiative has emerged though, Open Government, or OpenGov as it is usually abbreviated. OpenGovernment efforts have begun not only in the US but also in other countries, like Greece. Although OpenGovernment and eGovernment have similar characteristics and share common goals, the greatest one being the promotion of transparency, they are not the same. Open Government can be argued to be an evolution of eGovernment (GUSTETIC, 2009), since the only reason that it exists as an initiative today is because of advances made by eGovernment along with various technologi cal improvements and innovations.II. BenchmarkingA. DefinitionBenchmarking is defined as the process of measuring the performance of an organization along with the practices it applies in key areas and subsequently comparing them to other organizations. It is widely accept in the private sector and is being used as a practical tool in order to achieve positive results with absolute potential. EGovernment benchmarking means undertaking a review of comparative performance of eGovernment between nations or agencies. These studies have two purposes* Internal Benefit the individual and/or organization undertaking the benchmarking study* External Benefit achieved for users of the study.This project locomote into the first category, as described in the Scope and Aims paragraph precedent in the document.B. GoalsWith new expectations about their performance, government entities are being boost to look at ways of implementing changes in their practices. Benchmarking provides them with on e of their most utilitarian options. In every industry, there are ways of doing things that are broadly speaking recognized as standard practices for that industry. However, every industry has its leaders. These leaders are organizations that over perform when measured against those standards. They have achieved best practices as exhibit by their results in quality, cost, customer satisfaction and responsiveness.Benchmarking aims to discover what the best practices are that lead to superior performance. In greater detail, the process of benchmarking e-Government * Fosters accountability for eGovernment projects.* Helps shock rising public expectations* Enables government officials to take more informed decisions and restorative actions* Validates the generated public value* Fosters projects interchangeMoreover, benchmarking can be distinguished from other traditional forms of rating by its attempt to visualize best practices through normalizing comparison and by urging public en tities to ask themselves what they can do to promote them. Benchmarking enables and motivates them to determine how well current practices compare to others practices, locate performance gaps, experience best practices in action, and prioritize areas for improvement or other opportunities. It is quite authorized to note that Benchmarking is not the same as benchmarks. Benchmarks are performance measures and benchmarking is the action of conducting the evaluation. (Yasin, 2002).C. Data SourcesAfter establishing what benchmarking is, the most common data sources are evaluated..1. reckon forefingersQuite a few benchmarking reports use complicated indicators, for example, for the purposes of national rankings. Because it is not always clear how they are cypher or researched, composites have been criticized (UIS 2003) for their lack of transparency along for their subjectivity. Fortunately, a guide for good practice in use of composites has been developed (eGEP 2006a45) and includes * Developing a theoretical framework for the composite.* Identifying and developing relevant variables.* Standardizing variables to allow comparisons.* Weighting variables and groups of variables.* Conducting sensitivity tests on the robustness of aggregated variables.Other than the composite calculation of national rankings, there seems to be little use of calculated indicators in the benchmarking of e-government. The most commonly used indicators include* Benefit/ damage Ratio.* Demand/ summate Match.* proportional Service Development.* National RankingSome examples along with the methods used for each indicator are illustrated in Table 1below (adapted from Heeks, 2006).Calculated IndicatorExampleMethodBenefit/Cost RatioExpected financial benefit (impact) / Financial cost (input) (NOIE 2003)Interview (internal self-assessment / internal administrative records)Demand/Supply MatchPreference for online channel in particular services versus Online sophistication of that service (Graa fland Essers Ettendgui 2003)Mass citizen surveyComparative Service Development dot model level of citizen services versus business services (Capgemini 2005)Stage model level of different service cluster areas (Capgemini 2005)Third party Web assessmentNational RankingComposite of features and stage model level for national websites (West 2005)Composite of ICT and human infrastructure with stage model level for national/other websites (UN 2005)Composite of stage model level, integration and personalization of national websites (Accenture 2005)Third party Web assessmentTable 1 Calculated Indicators Used in eGovernment Benchmarking (Heeks, 2006).2. Standard national Sector IndicatorsApart from calculated indicators, others (Flynn 2002) suggest using a standard indicator set for public sector performance. This set is displayed in Table 2 below (adapted from Flynn 2002).IndicatorExplanationeGovernment ExampleBenchmarkEconomyThe amount of inputs used using up per capita on ITNoneInterna l efficiencyThe ration of input intermediatesCost per website produced per yearMinimizationExternal efficiencyThe ratio of inputs outputs (use)Cost per citizen user of government websites per yearMinimizationInternal effectivenessThe fit between actual outputs (use) and organizational objectives or other set targetsThe extent to which underserved communities are users of e-government servicesMaximizationExternal effectivenessThe fit between actual impacts and organizational objectives or other set targetsThe extent to which citizens are gaining employment due to use of an eGovernment job search serviceMaximization lumberThe quality of intermediates or, more typically outputs (use)The quality of eGovernent services as perceive by citizen usersMaximizationEquityThe equitability of distribution of outputs and impactsThe quality of time/money saved by eGovernment service use between rich and miserableMaximizationTable 2 Standard Indicators for eGovernment Performance (Flynn 2002) D. M ethodologiesHaving described the methodologies used more commonly when benchmarking eGovernment services, the next step is to illustrate how the necessary data is gathered. There are a number of official methods (eGEP 2006b)* Focus groups* Internal administrative records* Internal self-assessment* Mass user surveys* Official statistics* Pop-up surveys* Third part web assessment* Web metrics and crawlersEach of these methods can be compared in four different and distinct factors (Heeks, 2006). Those are* Cost The time and financial cost of the method.* Value The value of the method in producing data capable of assessing the downstream value of e-government.* Comparability The ease with which data produced can be compared across nations or agencies.* Data Quality The level of quality of the methods data. In particular, Heeks suggests using the CARTA (Complete, Accurate, Relevant, Timely, Appropriate) check list when assessing data quality (2006).There is also a set of methodologies th at are not used as frequently as the ones mentioned earlier. These are* Intermediary Surveys.* Intranet Assessment.* Public Domain Statistics.* Public Servant and Politician Surveys.1. AutomationWith new eGovernment services being introduced by Governments every day, benchmarking is gradually becoming a more and more important mechanism for identifying best practices and keeping track of developments, but as the number of the offered services increase, data collection becomes more and more difficult. Apart from that, since eGovernment is being expanded to other eGovernment levels, as illustrated earlier in 1, it is only natural that the number of benchmarking studies is increasing fast. Thus, the traditional approach of fata collection has not only become a very challenging but also a very resource intensive task. In order to address this matter, there are projects (eGovMon) which attempt to automate the data collection (Research Council of Norway, 2009). In particular, the eGovMon project is co-funded by the Research Council of Norway and is developing methodology and software for quality evaluation of web services, in particular eGovernment services, concerning four areas Accessibility Transparency competency ImpactAdditionally eGovMon will provide a policy throw tool