Annex I: Agenda of the workshop - Universidad Politécnica de ...

walkingceilInternet and Web Development

Oct 22, 2013 (3 years and 9 months ago)

74 views


-

1

-


E
G
OVERNMENT
I
NTEROPERABILITY
W
ORKSHOP

B
RUSSELS
18
TH

M
ARCH
2003




eGovernment interoperability in the
2005
-
2010 horizon

Addressing the future IST RTD





WORKING DOCUMENT

Workshop report




Information Society Technologies

eGovernment




8/4/2003



-

2

-

Table

of contents


Objectives

________________________________
_____________________________

3

Executive summary

________________________________
___________________

3

Conclusions

________________________________
____________________________

5

Problem statement

________________________________
_______________________________

5

Major initiatives worldwide

________________________________
________________________

6

Key points emerging from the workshop

________________________________
______________

7

Future research areas to be undertaken by e
-
government IST

_____________________________

10

Annex I: Agenda of the workshop

________________________________
___________

12

Annex II: summar
y of the presentations

________________________________
______

14

State of play and Future directions: eGovernment and eBusiness interoperability initiatives.

____

14

eGovernment IST: Key RTD directions. The research for 2005
-
2010. New directi
ons and building
on current work.

________________________________
________________________________

14

Annex III: List of participants

________________________________
______________

18






Dr. Luis Guijarro, Rapporteur


-

3

-

Objectives

RTD on interoperability applied to eGovernment plays a central role to move
awa
y from eGovernment islands towards
Networked Governments

which will
enable the virtual integration of the different layers of public administrations
(local, regional, national, EU and worldwide) as well as citizens, business and
civil society.

The objectiv
e of the workshop was to start brainstorming about future research
activities on eGovernment Interoperability which could be undertaken in the
Information Society Technologies (IST) priority during the 2005
-
2010 period and
which could be included as resear
ch areas in future IST Workprogrammes.

Forthcoming workshops will further explore, focus and detail the most important
research topics to be addressed.

Executive summary

In order to fulfil the objectives mentioned above, a first workshop on e
-
Government I
nteroperability was organised by the European Commission (e
-
Government and e
-
Business IST Units) in co
-
operation with the e
-
Forum
project. The Agenda is attached in Annex I.

The participants are listed on the Annex III, and they represent major solution
pr
oviders, public agencies and administrations, research institutions and
standardization bodies which are relevant for e
-
Government in Europe.

The workshop was structured in two sessions. The first session was titled
“State of play and future directions: e
Government and eBusiness
interoperability initiatives” and was focused on the analysis of current
interoperability initiatives in Public Administrations (UK, France, European
Commission and USA) and the Standard Bodies (W3C). This analysis provided
the cur
rent state of the art in the e
-
Government
-
related research areas.

The second session, which was titled

eGovernment IST: Key RTD directions.
The research for 2005
-
2010. New directions and building on current work

, was
aimed at discussing in a brainstorm
the situation envisioned for e
-
Government
deployment at the mid
-
term (2005) and the research and technological
development that will speed the e
-
Government deployment at long
-
term (2010).

The framework of the Workshop was provided by Dr. Luis Guijarro, whi
ch acted
also as the Rapporteur of the Workshop. This framework placed the e
-
Government initiatives both at the implementation level and at the research
level in one of two stages:

1.

The first stage in e
-
Government interoperability deals with the enabling of

the information exchange between distributed applications in and between
Administrations, which may be achieved through different technologies, such
as web, web services, metadata, ontologies, security and so on.

2.

The second stage, however, deals with non
-
technical issues, since the main
focus is placed upon process reengineering and enterprise architecture
construction, so that mainly engineering methodologies rather than

-

4

-

technologies are the key: enterprise modelling languages, enterprise
architecture fr
ameworks, model
-
based software engineering, and so on.

Different issues were tackled within the above framework, and finally there was
an agreement on the following key issues which will drive successfully the e
-
government deployment:

1.

First of all, all par
ticipants regarded that no
-
technical issues, such as those
identified within the enterprise architecture issue, but also cultural and legal
issues, are envisioned as higher barriers to e
-
government deployment than
pure technical issues.

2.

Secondly, semantic
s interoperability was identified as the challenge for
researchers, standards bodies and public administrations.

3.

Thirdly, applications interoperability was regarded as an important but
feasible goal at mid
-
term.


-

5

-

Conclusions

Problem statement

During late 9
0s, most Administrations in OECD countries have released their e
-
government strategies. Each e
-
government strategy is supported by its own framework
policies. One of such policies is the interoperability framework.

The interoperability framework aims at pr
oviding the basic standards that all the
agencies which are relevant for the e
-
government strategy implementation should adopt.
This interoperability framework would allow, at least, the interoperability between
information systems from different agencies
in order to provide services to the citizen
and to the business in an integrated way.

In the following section, according to the analysis presented by the Rapporteur of the
workshop, the major initiatives in interoperability frameworks development are
pres
ented. The initiatives are managed by the Office of the e
-
Envoy in the UK, the
former ATICA in France, the IDA Program in the European Commission and the
Federal CIO Council in the USA. Based on his analysis, the above framework for
discussion at the works
hop was provided.

The interoperability in e
-
government is regarded as a major issue to be addressed by all
e
-
government agencies. In the first stage of this awareness, interoperability is regarded
as an issue at the application level, that is, interoperabi
lity is agreed to be understood as
the “ability to exchange functionality and interpretable data between to software
entities” (Mowbray, 1995,
The essential CORBA
). If so, the approaches of each one of
the four e
-
gov agencies agree on mandating a full set
of standards, which address those
areas that are relevant to the interoperability, according to the definition above. Such
areas are, for instance, interconnection, data integration, content management metadata,
telecommunication network access, workflow m
anagement, group working, security,
document archiving, and so on.

In our opinion, this first stage is essential for e
-
government implementation success, and
it will enable the seamless information flow between institutions. However, it will not
be enough
for enabling the sort of interoperability required for a true seamless service
delivery to citizens and business, which is the vision of the e
-
government strategies.

There is a need, therefore, for a second stage in interoperability which deals with the
bu
ilding of an enterprise architecture. Enterprise architecture refers to a comprehensive
description of all the key elements and relationships that make up an organization.
There are many different approaches to describing the elements of an enterprise
arc
hitecture. One approach that has grown in popularity in the past few years is based
on a framework developed by John Zachman in 1987. Enterprise architecture aims to
align the business processes and goals of an enterprise and the applications and systems
t
hat build up its technical infrastructure. Not all the agencies under study have addressed
this second stage, and when having done it, its achievement degree is not homogeneous.
Some agencies have only identified that business requirement are an issue to a
ddress,
whereas others have already succeed in providing the models and tools for the
description of the enterprise, and in founding the technical architecture in this
description.


-

6

-

Major initiatives worldwide

These are four of the major initiatives being c
arried out by e
-
government agencies in the
interoperability arena.

The Office of the e
-
Envoy in the UK have based its technical guidance in the e
-
Government Interoperability Framework (e
-
GIF), which was issued in 2000, and
published its version 5.0draft in

February 2003. e
-
GIF mandates sets of specifications
and policies for joined
-
up and web enabled government. e
-
GIF is one of the framework
policies and has been included in the e
-
Services Development Framework (e
-
SDF). The
e
-
SDF is a framework for guiding
and supporting the development process of e
-
services
in e
-
government. Requirements, design and implementation are the three phases of the
development process, and the e
-
SDF provides sets of reusable elements (patterns,
components, and resources) for improv
ing the consistency and reducing costs in the
development at the different phases, and a High Level Architecture, which provides a
single set of top
-
level specifications and standards to be used for developing
government e
-
Services. The High Level Architec
ture is composed of:



The Government Common Information Model (GCIM), which is a high level
model of business activities. Its focus is explicitly on the specification of
interoperability requirements.



The Government Data Standards Catalogue (GDSC), which de
scribes the data
elements and data types which are referred to in both GCIM and CMRM.



The Government Message Reference Model (GMRM), which is a high
-
level
reference model of information that is exchanged between applications.



And the e
-
GIF, which provides
the supporting guidelines and technical
specifications for implementation

The High Level Architecture is actually an Enterprise Architecture Framework.

The French ADAE (Agence pour le Développement de l'Administration Électronique),
formerly known as ATICA
, have recently published its second version of Le Cadre
Commun d’Intéroperabilité (CCRv2draft, February 2003). CCR comprises the
recommendations for strengthening public electronic systems coherence and for
enabling multi
-
agency electronic service deliver
y. CCR is still focused on the
specification of sets of standards for guiding the implementation of interoperable
applications for the provision of e
-
gov services, but it has not provided yet a framework
for enterprise architecture description.

The Europea
n Commission Enterprise DG, through the Interchange of Data between
Administration (IDA) Program, has issued its Architecture Guidelines (version 6.1, June
2002), as a supporting tool for the Decision of the European Parliament and the Council
1720/1999/E
C “Interoperability and access to Trans
-
European Networks for the
electronic Interchange of Data between Administrations”. These guidelines provide
concepts and reference for optimum interoperability between European Institutions,
European Agencies, and Ad
ministrations in member States. Apart from issuing sets of
relevant standards for each service profile, IDA regards two dimensions for guiding the
implementation of interoperable e
-
services: the business requirements, involving the
definition of a suitable

implementation approach, and the security management,
involving a security policy that meets the security requirements and a set of security
mechanisms that enforce the policy on the trans
-
European network.


-

7

-

Finally, the Federal Chief Information Officers
(CIO) Council, in the USA, issued the
Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) in September 1999, and published
its second version of the E
-
Gov Enterprise Architecture Guidance in July 2002, for
guiding the E
-
Gov initiatives financed by the Preside
nt’s Office. Following a different
approach from the other initiatives, the CIO Council mandates one target enterprise
architecture for Presidential E
-
Gov initiatives, but selects the applicable standards only
for consideration in those initiatives. The CI
O Council adopts the FEAF 4
-
layer
structure as the framework for E
-
Gov initiatives, which includes:



Business architecture, which identifies the functions, process, organization, and
information flow for accomplishing the mission of the organization, and wh
ich
includes the FEA Business Reference Model, in terms of which every E
-
Gov
initiative should define their Business Architecture



Data architecture, which defines the major types of data needed to support the
business, its meaning, and its form.



Applicatio
n architecture, which defines the applications and supporting
capabilities to effectively manage the data and information needed to support
business objectives.



Technology architecture, which defines the enabling hardware, software, and
their physical loca
tions to support the business applications/data and functions.

Key points emerging from the workshop

Definitions

In order to provide a baseline for discussion, there was an agreement on the different
levels of interoperability, from the more concrete issue
s to the more abstract ones. A
tentative terminology may be, therefore, the following one:



Application interoperability
, which includes the communications issues, both
at the telecommunications network access level and at the network
interconnection level;

and the distributed applications issues, regarding the
remote procedure call/ method invocation mechanisms and the public interface
exportation/binding.



Semantics interoperability
, which includes both the data interpretation, by
means of XML schemas, and

the knowledge representation and exploitation, by
means of ontologies and agents



Enterprise architecture
, which deals with business process modelling inside
the organizations and among partners organizations, and with methodologies
and tools for aligning
the organization goals with the technical architecture
which support the E
-
Gov initiatives

Key issues

These key issues have adopted the format of an enumeration of issues to be addressed in
the 2005
-
2010 horizon, so as to improve the interoperability in th
e e
-
Government arena
and to remove the existing interoperability barriers to an effective e
-
Government
deployment.


-

8

-

The key issues are classified according to the perspective of each one of the
stakeholders that has been identified around the issue of inter
operability. The
stakeholders are:



Public Administrations



Citizens and Business



Researchers



Standards Bodies



Solution Providers

On the other hand, mid
-
term and long
-
term issues have been identified, where mid
-
term
refers to a 2
-
year period, and long
-
term m
eans year 2010.

Public Administrations

Mid
-
term issues



Application interoperability is still to be achieved, and this issue is receiving the
major effort in current e
-
Gov pilots around Europe.



Semantics interoperability is being addressed, and it is regard
ed as one major
issues by the most advanced agencies in charge of e
-
Government
implementation in Europe.

Long
-
term issues



The modelling of the different processes involved in the workflow of the
Administration is being perceived as crucial, since this shou
ld be the first step
prior to the design of e
-
services at the Administration.



Furthermore, cultural, legal, organizational issues are still to be addressed but
perceived as key ones. Actually, the lack of awareness of these issues is
perceived a major bar
rier to the e
-
Government deployment inside the
institutions.

Anyway, each Administration, depending on the level it is fulfilling its commitments,
either at National, Regional or Local levels, have different priorities in e
-
Government
deployment.

Citizen
s and Business

Mid
-
term issues



Citizens aims at accessing e
-
government services which provide device
independence, which is a challenge for the integration of different user interface
technologies.



Businesses expect that every relevant service delivery to
companies will be
conducted by electronic means

Long
-
term issues



Application and semantics interoperability will enhance the effectiveness of the
B2G
-
related interactions

Researchers

Mid
-
term issues



Application interoperability through Web Services is to b
e solved, although
further research are still to be performed as real systems are implemented for e
-
Government.

Long
-
term issues


-

9

-



Ontologies will allow enhanced interoperability. This issue, however, will
probably face serious challenges when trying to be d
eployed at large scale in the
Web.



When application and semantic interoperability is achieved, research efforts
might be steered towards automating the transition from enterprise models to
interoperable technology specific platforms that provides e
-
Governm
ent
solutions.

Standard Bodies

Mid
-
term issues



Web and Web Services standards are still to be completed. For instance, XML
transformation (XSLT), Web Services choreography (WSCI vs. BPEL4WS) are
still on
-
going work in W3C.



Security is an issue, which is pe
rceived as a barrier when pursuing to achieve
true applications interoperability.



Semantic Web will eventually reach a mature status, which will allow the Web
to benefit from the research on ontology.



Enterprise modelling languages will be unified, and mod
el interchange between
organization may speed the coordination of workflows in different
Administrations.

Long
-
term issues



Standard bodies, mainly the consortia, are expected to provide appropriate
frameworks for assisting the technological progress and fo
r building the
consensus among the different actors involved in technology development.

Solution Providers

Mid
-
term issues



Solution providers are struggling to build truly composable services for e
-
services provision at the different Administrations.

Long
-
term issues



They will assist Public Administrations in building their ontologies, once these
Administrations perceive the benefits of such endeavour.



In the end, e
-
Government pattern development by solution providers will surely
speed the e
-
Gov deployment
at different levels of Public Administration, and
reduce the associated cost of such implementations.


-

10

-

Future research areas to be undertaken by e
-
government IST


Interoperability
Layer

IST Research
Area

IST Research issue

Mid
-
Term

Long
-
term

Application
in
teroperability

Web

W3C XSLT

X


Web Services

Choreography

X


Security

OASIS XML signature

X


Open source
software


X


Semantic
interoperability

Semantic Web

Ontology

W3C OWL

Reconciliation methods


X

Semantic Web
Services

W3C WSDL
-
RDF mapping


X

Metadata

IST eGOV GovML

e
-
Envoy e
-
GMS

Pan
-
European Standardization

X


Knowledge
management



X

Enterprise
Architecture

Process
modelling

BPMI BPML, BPEL4WS, ISO
PSL

Process reengineering

X


Workflow
management



X

Requirements

Pan
-
European Servi
ces


X

Frameworks

FEAF, e
-
Envoy e
-
SDF, system
engineering

X


Development
automation

Model
-
to
-
platforms: OMG MDA


X

Environment

Legislation

Pan
-
European rules


X

Standardization

Standardization process and
actors

X



Notes:

Application interoperabil
ity

Web technologies, mainly XML ones, will reach a mature status, such as

W3C XSL (Extensible Stylesheet Language,
http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/
). Web
Services
-
related research is to address the issue of choreo
graphing business processes
that use different Web services specifications, whereby letting the processes work
together. Security is to be an important issue, and web
-
relevant work is underway in
OASIS XML signature. Finally, open source software is a new
entrant which may alter
the principles of interoperability inside and between administrations.

Semantic interoperability

The W3C Semantic Web initiative (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/) has already produced
the OWL (Web Ontology Language). Moreover, reconcilia
tion methods based on
reference ontologies will allow semantic interoperability between legacy proprietary

-

11

-

enterprise information systems. There are some initiatives in researching on
convergence between Web Services and Semantic Web, such as the planned W
3C
Semantic Web Services interest group, and the mapping of WSDL (WS Description
Language) and RDF (Resource Description Framework). There is also an effort being
developed at standardizing metadata in e
-
government, such as the GovML (e
-
Gov
Markup Language
) produced at the FP5
-
IST eGOV Project, and the e
-
Envoy e
-
GMS (e
-
Gov Metadata Standard). Finally, Pan
-
European Standardization in service delivery is
envisioned as an item for research that will easy the semantic interoperability.
Knowledge management is r
egarded as aiding tool for allowing the semantic
interoperability.

Enterprise architecture

Firstly, process modelling at e
-
government through the use of the appropriate language
is being achieved, such as BPMI BPML (Business Process Modelling Language),
BP
EL4WS (Business Process Execution Language for Web Services), and ISO PSL
(Process Specification Language). Other issues to tackle are: process reengineering at
the administration; workflow management inside and between administration;
requirements enginee
ring in process and service specification; specification of pan
-
European Services; use of frameworks for architecting, such as the current initiatives
USA FEAF (Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework) and e
-
Envoy e
-
SDF (e
-
Services Development Framework
). System engineering and software engineering
practices will contribute significantly to speed e
-
government deployment. Finally, it is
envisioned that in the long
-
term development automation will shorten the model
-
to
-
platforms transitions, such as the cur
rent initiative OMG MDA (Model
-
driven
Architecture, http://www.omg.org/mda)

Environment

Finally, legal and normative aspects should be addressed in order to provide pan
-
European rules for e
-
government service delivery. On the other hand, standardization

pr
ocesses and actors might be redesigned in order to streamline their operation and to
assure the standard adoption by the industry.


-

12

-

Annex I: Agenda of the workshop




EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Information Society Directorate
-
General


Components and subsystems.
Applications

eGovernment



E
G
OVERNMENT
I
NTEROPERABILITY
W
ORKSHOP
1


eGovernment interoperability in the
2005
-
2010 horizon

and eBusiness experiences

Brussels 18 March 2003
at Avenue de Beaulieu, 33 BU33 00/54




9:45 Registration starts

A

10:00
-
10:15


We
lcome and objectives

A. Bradier, Head of Unit
eGovernment IST




State of play and Future directions:

eGovernment and eBusiness interoperability initiatives.


B.1

10:15
-
10:45

World
-
wide initiatives and future
research directions in
eGovernment interopera
bility

L. Guijarro, Professor U. Politecnica
Valencia

B.2

10:45
-
11:15

Interoperability activities and
possible future developments in
the UK. Case study.

M. Cumming, Cabinet Office, Office
of the e
-
Envoy


11:15
-
11:30

Coffee break


B.3

11:30
-
12:
30

The role of Web Services and
future evolution foreseen by W3C

I. Herman, Head of offices W3C

12:30
-
13:45

Lunch break










1

Organised in co
-
operation with eForum and the eBusiness IST unit. The works
hop is unable to cover any travel costs or others


-

13

-



eGovernment IST: Key RTD directions

The research for 2005
-
2010. New directions and building on current work.


C.1

13:45
-
14:0
5

eForum perspective and initiatives

I. Cava, Chair eForum Working
Group, Valencian Government

C.2

14:05
-
14:20

IDA interoperability framework

C. Devillers, IDA, DG Enterprise

C.3

14:20
-
14:45

IDEAS roadmap for eBusiness
Interoperability

A. Zwegers, Baan

C.4

14:45
-
16:30




Future research directions and
relevant experiences to build on
followed by an open discussion



M. Missikoff, Lab for Enterprise
Knowledge and Systems, IASI
-
CNR



J. Millard,
Danish Technological
Institute




T. Tambouris,
Archetypon S.A.






J
-
P. Trieau,
Aquitaine Europe
Communication



A. Pasic,
SchlumbergerSema



Prof. K. Tarabanis,
Informatics &
Telematics Institute Centre of
Research and Technology




D. Werth,
German Research
Center for Artificial Intelligence



16:30
-
16:45

Coffee b
reak


C.5

16:45
-
17:00

Conclusions

L. Guijarro, U. P. V.




-

14

-

Annex II: summary of the presentations

State of play and Future directions: eGovernment and eBusiness
interoperability initiatives.

Interoperability activities and possible future developments in
the UK.
Case study.

M. Cumming, Cabinet Office, Office of the e
-
Envoy

The e
-
GIF (UK e
-
Government Interoperability Framework) has been highly successful,
both in the UK and as a model for interoperability elsewhere. The e
-
GIF is a policy
driven initiative,
with ministerial support and with outcomes based on benefits to
citizens, rather than a technology driven project. From the outset its development has
involved wide consultation with the public and private sectors, and these factors have
contributed grea
tly to its success. Version five is available for public consultation until
31 March 2003, at www.govtalk.gov.uk

The role of Web Services and future evolution foreseen by W3C

I. Herman, Head of offices W3C

W3C's technical work is centred around two main p
rinciples: 1) Web technologies must
be interoperable and 2) the Web is for Everybody. The full palette of W3C core
technologies, including XML Schemas, XSLT, XPath, etc, as well as the various User
Interface (SVG, XHTML, etc) and machine
-
to
-
machine communi
cation technologies
(Web Services, Semantic Web) reflect this vision. Internationalization, Web
Accessibility, or Device Independence concerns also permeate all the work of W3C.


More specifically on Web Services and the Semantic Web: these are not conflic
ting
technologies but rather two sides of the same coin. Whereas web services provide
machine
-
to
-
machine communication through active, functional entities (and based on
Web Technologies), the Semantic Web provide passive, data
-
based information that
other
resources can exploit. The synergy effect of the two technologies is reinforced by
several initiatives at the W3C (participation in the SWAD project, Semantic Web
Services interest group, etc.)


eGovernment IST: Key RTD directions. The research for 2005
-
20
10.
New directions and building on current work.

eForum perspective and initiatives

I. Cava, Chair eForum Working Group, Valencian Government


The E
-
Forum Association (http://www.eu
-
forum.org) is dedicated to defining the future
needs of eGovernment in Eu
rope. It brings the private and public sectors together to
promote excellence. For members, it is a network for exchange of ideas, a gateway to
the latest eGovernment information, and a showcase for the solutions that will shape
eGovernment over the next
ten to fifteen years. Shared Infrastructures Working Group

-

15

-

is chaired by the Regional Government of Valencia (Spain) and its member comes from
different types of organizations both public and private. Besides this, academic
institutions such as the Techn
ical University of Valencia carried out a methodological
work to define a coherent framework for the conclusions.

The member agreed that the result of the study process of the Shared Infrastructure WG
should be provide some useful and long term recommendat
ions to the Public
Administration in order to guarantee the interoperability and availability of the shared
infrastructures that support both government to government (G2G) and government to
citizen or business initiatives (G2C/B).

IDA interoperability fra
mework

C. Devillers, IDA, DG Enterprise

IDA deals with the development of telematic networks in specific policy areas; it
provides as well “horizontal” actions to ensure interoperability and make economy of
scale (e.g. by using generic services and common
tools).

In this context of horizontal actions, the IDA InterOp Framework will complement
existing national Interoperability Frameworks by providing a framework for the
achievement of interoperable pan
-
European government e
-
services. It will consider
nation
al differences in language, legislation, procedures and data structures in addition
to the technical issues. First release of the framework is expected by June 2003.

IDEAS roadmap for eBusiness Interoperability

A. Zwegers, Baan

Dr. Zwegers introduced the I
DEAS project which aims to deliver a roadmap for
eBusiness Interoperability. The project focuses on enterprise modelling, ontology, and
architectures and platforms. Synchronisation between IDEAS and possible subsequent
FP6 projects on the one hand, and eGo
vernment Interoperability initiatives on the other
hand is greatly welcomed.


Round table discussion.


Future research directions and relevant experiences to build on followed
by an open discussion.

M. Missikoff, Lab for Enterprise Knowledge and Systems, I
ASI
-
CNR

The goal of Interoperability in eGovernement (but similarly in eBusiness) is to enhance
the cooperation of organisations by means of ICT solutions.

A definition of Interoperability is: the ability of different systems to have the same
interpretati
on (e.g., expected induced behaviour) of a message, despite their different
systems of symbols (i.e., their information structure and coding). This is true for both
social and technological systems.

At a technological level, the interconnection solutions,
that allow computers (and
software applications) to exchange messages, are already available and satisfactory.
What still missing, and therefore should be addressed by RTD, are the solutions to
interpret the semantics of exchanged messages and the correspo
nding capacity of
organisations to actually cooperate. The former can be achieved with ontology
-
based


-

16

-

solutions, the latter must be addressed on the ground of organisational theory.

J. Millard, Danish Technological Institute

Although eGovernment can learn

a lot from eBusiness, it should not copy wholesale
and the learning process should go both ways. For example, government can learn from
business about applying BPR for interoperability in eGovernment, and business can
learn from government about corporate

social responsibility which is relevant for
interoperability in terms of who are the beneficiaries, who is involved and who controls.
Ultimately, government is not the same as business as governments cannot choose their
customers and because the users of
government services take on a variety of roles,
including as voters, tax payers as well as consumers. Thus, a specific Government
-
Process
-
Reengineering approach to interoperability should be sought rather than one
which simply transposes BPR onto governmen
t.

T. Tambouris, Archetypon S.A.

Interoperability is an important and non
-
trivial parameter of e
-
government. Current
research work in e
-
government (e.g. the IST eGOV project) has only achieved to reveal
the importance of interoperability rather than to pro
vide solid solutions. Interoperability
is a multi
-
disciplinary field with technical, organisation, legal, human and societal
aspects. Thus, a holistic approach and a roadmap are needed, which at the same time
will ensure consensus also by standardisation.
Research and Technological development
is required in a number of areas including system and software development
methodologies, data and metadata vocabularies, and interoperable e
-
government
platforms and applications based on open architectures and stand
ards.

J
-
P. Trieau, Aquitaine Europe Communication

For regional decisions
-
makers, elected representatives or civil servants, interoperability
cannot be regarded as mere technical issue, but rather how they see their own data
production and distribution th
roughout secured architecture.

In that context and in the perspective of the coming calls (6th FP), proposers should
gear their projects toward the following type of objectives: Organisation and tools
aiming at reducing the digital gap; Central Public Adm
inistrations: Create the
conditions for the correct migration of existing “old” formats onto up
-
to
-
date meta
-
encapsulated information containers; Local and Regional Authorities: Support projects
encouraging the use Knowledge Management, Natural Language, W
ork Flow and Cross
Organisation Still, transversal actions remain necessary: Work related to ontology and
semantic must be continued;

Social and legal researches must be reinforced in the fields
of ownership, public vs. private data, in accordance with the

European and Members
States regulations.

A. Pasic, SchlumbergerSema

Regarding the integration and the transaction of cross
-
organisational eGovernment
services, it seems that tailor made solutions for applicative co
-
operation follow
different scenarios

in the member states, although some of these countries base their
strategies on (national) standards and architectures for eGovernment applications.

Besides technical interoperability (middleware, common application services...) that can
help in service i
ntegration, but with additional effort requested, there is an opportunity
to transform EGovernment services in a way that the seamless integration (no system
integration effort needed) becomes possible.

The promising research areas for this "dynamic" and s
eamless service compositions,
personalised for each citizen, could be domain independent and langauge neutral
ontologies.


-

17

-

Based on our previous FP5 experiences (Impulse, Smart
-
EC, MkBeem, E
-
Court,
Liquid...) with service composition/decomposition, we belie
ve that these types of
ontologies are extremely complex to build and will not be available for the market until
2010.

Therefore, a stepwise solution and introduction of less ambitious ontology types and
semantic web services is suggested for the short term

RTD. In the area of distributed
process execution, a possible convergence of GRID, Mobile agents and web services
could be investigated.

Prof. K. Tarabanis, Informatics & Telematics Institute Centre of Research and
Technology

[…]


D. Werth, German Researc
h Center for Artificial Intelligence

Interoperability will be the enabler for the future development in eGovernment. Various
new and innovative concepts and realizations require a capable and effective
interoperational infrastructure of European public adm
inistrations (EPAs), including
their customers, namely Citizens and Enterprises. The transition from the current
paradigm of highly fragmented national isolated applications and islands of
functionality, to a situation promoting consolidation to an integra
ted, collaborative and
secure architecture is of substantial matter.

The major demand of EPAs is to operationally establish and use interconnections to
others. Therefore we need a special holistic framework that makes EPA's heterogeneity
manageable and sup
portable as well as that ensures successful realizations within
various public administrations. Only targeting all aspects together reveals the optimal
synergy effects and cohesion between the different components to ensure a seamless
and interlocking coll
aboration. The interoperability solution has to be actively promoted
and widely deployed in order to accomplish a real European impact and to make the
interoperability sustainable.

Interoperability is only the instrument, not the objective. By the use of
interoperability,
we should establish and strengthen Europe as international leader in providing
'operative' integrated public services. This means to improve current public services but
also it is mandatory to enable new, innovative service concepts. To a
ccomplish a
significant leadership, the provision has to be established and expanded all over
European.


-

18

-

Annex III: List of participants


Pasi Ahonen

Kouvola Region Federation of
Municipalities
-

Finland


Antonio Alabau

Universidad Politécnica de Valenci
a
-

Spain

aalabau@dcom.upv.es

David Ankri

Smart IS Marketing / e
-
Europe Smart
Cards
-

France


Edoardo Benelli

FORUS Digital Business Consulting
-

Italy

edbenelli@yahoo.com

Stefano Bondanzi

SOGEI SPA
-

Italy


Anabela Caetano
Pedroso

National Agency for Innovation and
Knowledge
-

Portugal


Inmaculada Cava

Cava

Valencian Regional Government /
eForum
-

Spain


Karl Cox

IBM Europe Middle East Africa

karl_cox@fr.ibm.com

Maewyn Cumming

Cabinet Office
-

office of the e
-
Envoy
-

UK


Stephen R Curwell

Curwell

University of Salford / INTELCITY project
-

UK

s.r.curwell@salford.ac.uk

Robin De
Paepe

Unisys
-

Belgium


Benny Eklund

County Council of Uppsala
-

Sweden


Roberto Gagliardi

Consorzio Pisa Ricerche
-

Italy


Barbara Gatti

CEN/ISSS

Barbara.Gatti@cenorm.be

Walter Gora

Electronic Data System
s (EDS)
-

Germany

walter.gora@eds.com

Dimitris Gouscos

General Secretariat for Public
Administration & Electronic Government /
e
-
Government Laboratory, University of
Athens
-

Greece

d.gouscos@e
-
gov.gr

Luis Guijarro

Universidad Politecnica de Valencia
-

Spain


Willem Hengeveld

Deloitte & Touche
-

The Netherlands

phengeveld@deloitte.nl

Ivan Herman

The World Wide Web Consortium (
W3C)


Rozalia Jehoda
-
Bogo

Hungarica Sprl
-

Hungary


Adam Kaminski

Info Society Development Association /

Eter
-
Net
-

Poland

spl@pf.pl

Ralf Klischewski

University of Hamburg
-

Germany

klischewski@informatik.uni
-
hamburg.de

Raphael Koumeri

Planet Ernst & Young
-

Greece


Herbert Kubicek

University of Bremen
-

Germany


Csaba Lengyel

Kopint
-
Datorg
-

Hungary


Gudrun
Magnusdottir

ESTeam A.B.
-

Sweden

esteam@otenet.gr


-

19

-

Jeremy Millard

Danish Technological Institute
-

Denmark


Michele Missikoff

Lab for Enterprise Knowledge and
Systems, IASI
-
CNR
-

Italy


Aljosa Pasic

SchlumbergerSema
-

Spain


Anders Petersson

ARTI Blomstrand & Pa
rtners
-

Sweden

anders.petersson@blomstrand.se

Despina Polemi

Expertnet SA
-

Greece

despina.polemi@expertnet.net.gr

Henrik Pundik

Kommuneinformatio
n A/S
-

Denmark


Antonis Ramfos

Intrasoft International
-

Luxembourg


Laszlo Rumi

KDBR Consulting
-

Hungary


Elizabeth Scott
-
Wilson

The Stationery Office
-

UK

elizabeth.scott
-
wilson@tso.co.uk

Henri

Snyers

Ministry of Home Affairs
-

Belgium


Mechthild Stoewer

Fraunhofer Institute
-

Germany


Themis Tambouris

Archetypon S.A.
-

Greece


Konstantinos
Tarabanis

Informatics & Telematics Institute Centre
of Research and Technology
-

Greece


Kostas Thiveo
s

Pouliadis Group
-

Brussels Office
-

Greece

k.thiveos@pouliadis.gr


Jean
-
Pierre Trieau

Trieau

Aquitaine Europe Communication
-

France


Michael Tschicholz

Fraunhofer eGovernment Center / Berlin
-

Germany

tschichholz@fokus.fhg.de

Jan van Arkel

eEurope Smart Card Charter

Arkel@cardlife.nl

Tom M. van
Engers

Dutch Tax and Customs Administration
-

The Netherlands


Dirk Werth

In
stitute for Information Systems,
German Research Center for Artificial
Intelligence
-

Germany


Irina Zálišová

BMI


The Czech Republic


Arian Zwegers

Baan
-

The Netherlands