-
电子时代的官僚主义
2008-02-19
[2008.02.14]The electronic bureaucrat 电子时代的官僚主义
TECHNOLOGY AND GOVERNMENT
The electronic bureaucrat 电子时代的官僚主义
Feb 14th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Putting their services online should allow governments to serve their citizens much more effectively. But despite heavy spending, progress has been patchy, says Edward Lucas (interviewed here)
将公共服务放在网上使得政府可以更高效的为公民服务。但是除去高额开支，进展也并不顺利，Edward Lucas这样说。
Illustration by Allan Sanders
AT 6.15AM on a December morning the streets of central London are cold, dark and offer little for the omnipresent CCTV cameras to record. But outside the Indian High Commission 109 people are sleepily waiting for the visa section to open. David Robb and his friend are first in line, huddled in sleeping bags behind a windbreak since 3am, to ensure visas for a planned holiday in Goa. Nearly all his fellow-sufferers in the queue have booked their air tickets and sometimes their entire holiday on the internet, paying with a credit card. Those electronic signals move information almost at the speed of light—billions of times faster than the shuffling, shivering humans in the visa queue. “In this day and age? Bleeding disgusting,” is Mr Robb's pithy comment on the Indian visa system.
12月一天的清早，6点15分，伦敦市中心的大街上清冷幽暗，并没有什么东西可供无处不在的摄像头录像的。但是在印度高级使节团门外，109个人忍着困意等待签证部门开始办公。大卫罗伯和他的朋友在 队伍的最前面，在凌晨三点的时候便蜷缩在风墙后面的睡袋里，以保证自己能够获取赴果阿地区旅行的签证，行程早已计划好了。他后面队伍里的所有人几乎都在网 上用信用卡支付预定好了机票和整个假期行程。那些电子信号用接近光速的速度传输信息——要比那些缓慢，冻得发抖的签证队列中的人们前行的速度快千万倍。 “是这个时代的东西吗？超级恶心。”罗伯先生这样概括印度的签证系统。
It is not just that the passport and its owner must be physically present. The £30 ($60) fee must be in cash; the visa form must be filled in by hand and authenticated with a signature and a photograph (a hard copy, not a digital file). The procedure has scarcely changed in 60 years. The 500 people waiting at 8.30am, when the visa office opens, should get their visas by noon, though on busy days stragglers may be told to collect it the next day. Applying by post is possible, but may take weeks.
并不仅仅是护照和本人必须出现在现场。30英镑的费用必须用现金缴纳，签证表格必须手写并签字，还要有一张照片，注意，是要纸质照片而不是数码文件。这套手续60年来几乎没有任何变化。这500个人都在等待上午八点半签证办公室开门，那样，他们可以在中午拿到签证，尽管在比较忙的日子里，有人需要被推迟到第二天。通过邮局也是可以的，但是，那要耗费好几周的时间。
Compare that with another queue forming in Grosvenor Square, a brisk 20-minute walk across London. Procedures at America's fortress-like embassy are even more stringent, requiring all visa applicants to present themselves in person, with no postal option. But here the procedure is backed up by intelligent use of electrons. Applications must be submitted online, accompanied by a non-refundable $131, paid electronically. In return, the applicant receives a confirmation e-mail, which includes a barcode with the information from the completed form. Printed out, it is also the entry ticket to the embassy, controlling outsiders' access to one of the main terrorist targets in London.
看看另一条在格罗夫纳广场的队伍吧。大约快步行进20分钟的路程。在堡垒一般的美国大使馆，这个流程更加的严格：要求所有的签证申请者亲临现场，而不允许通过邮寄的方式。但是这里的流程支持电子技术的使用。申请必须在网上提交，同时网上支付概不退回的131美金的费用。然后，申请者会获得一封包含条形码和来自完整表格的信息的确认信。将它打印出来，同时这也是大使馆的入场券，而这将那些不受欢迎者拒之门外，毕竟这里是伦敦最主要的恐怖袭击目标之一。
Inside, the barcode is scanned, putting the data onto the visa officer's computer. Fingerprints are digitally recorded. The visa itself, collected shortly afterwards, has banknote-style security features, plus a scanned picture of the applicant.
在里面，扫描完条形码之后，数据进入签证官的计算机。指纹采集也是电子方式，而随后的签证本身，拥有着钞票般的防伪特征，另外还有着申请人的扫描照片。
In some ways the differences are smaller than they seem. Under both systems, absurd questions are asked but the answers are never verified. India wants to know if you have relatives in Pakistan; America wants to know whether you were ever arrested for anything anywhere, and if so, why (your correspondent, detained several times by communist-era secret police, brazenly fibbed).
在某些方面，二者之间的区别并没有看上去那么大。这两个系统都会问一些荒谬的问题，但从没有人去核实答案。印度人想知道你是不是有亲戚在巴基斯坦，美国人想知道你有没有在什么地方曾经被拘留过，如果有，那为什么。
But in a few nutshells, visa services also illustrate some of the big issues about technology and government. First, processing power and good software can make government more user-friendly and sometimes also more efficient, but technology on its own cannot compensate for the mistakes of bureaucrats and politicians. Second, the state has to balance convenience against effectiveness, the outsider's time versus the taxpayer's money and the bureaucrat's effort. Technology may sharpen these problems or ease them, but it cannot eliminate them altogether.
但简单地说，签证服务同样反应了科技和政府方面的一些大问 题。首先，处理能力和好的软件能够使得政府能够更加用户界面友好并在有些时候更加高效，但是技术本身并不能减少官僚主义和政客们的错误。其次，政府需要在 方便舒适和快捷高效之间取得一个平衡，在外等待的时间与纳税人的钱财和官僚的努力。科技可以增强也能削弱这些问题，但是不能同时将这些问题解决。
Believers in technology's potential in public administration often speak of e-government, or of “transformation”. The practicalities are sometimes vague, but the big picture is clear: government not only puts its services online, but in doing so changes the way it works.
相信科技在公共管理中具有巨大潜能的人们常说电子政府，或者改革。实用性有时候显得模糊，但是远景目标却很明晰：政府把服务放到网上是不够的，同样要改变自己工作的方式。
Most countries have got at least somewhere on this, chiefly in what might be called i-government: the provision of information. India's downloadable visa application form represents that stage. Progress is also being made on using the internet's potential for interaction. America's visa system goes some of the way by getting the applicant to key in the data.
许多国家在这方面至少有了一些进展，主要在被称为信息政府（i-government）的信息提供方面。印度的可下载签证申请表便是处于这个阶段。在应用互联网潜在的交流能力方面也有进展。美国的签证系统通过申请者键入数据，显示其在这方面的进展。
The internet is also being used inside government to share data among departments. That is easier to do with non-citizens than with voters, who may be touchy about their privacy being invaded. The next stage will be to provide the whole service online. For visas, that would mean something printed out by the applicant, downloaded onto a smart card or even stored in a mobile phone (an example of “m-government”—same service, different delivery). At the same time, technology should also make it easier for politicians to connect with their voters (“e-democracy”).
政府内部也已经开始使用互联网以便在部门间分享数据。相对选民而言，这更易于在非公民中使用，因为选民对自己的隐私被侵犯十分敏感。下一步便将是在网上提供所有的服务。对于签证而言，那将意味着申请者打印出东西，并下载到智能卡或者保存在一部手机中（移动政府“m-government”的样板，相同的服务，不同的投递方式）。同时，科技已经使得政客们更加容易与其选民接触（e时代的民主）。
Illustration by Allan Sanders
George Markellos of PA Consulting, a British-based consultancy, says that government needs to start by making three big changes. First, it needs to personalise what it offers, rather like online shopping services which record customers' preferences, making their next visit easier. Second, it has to provide round-the-clock access. People want to deal with government not only in office hours, but also in the evenings and at weekends. And lastly, public services have to be as easy to use as anything the private sector offers. In the online world, government is competing for users' time and attention with beautifully designed sites that are fun to use. The government's offering, says Mr Markellos, “has to be massively attractive”.
PA资讯师George Markellos说， 政府需要在三个方面开始大的变革。首先，他应该个性化其服务，就像在线商店那样记录顾客的信息参数，使得他们的下一次登录更加容易；第二，应该提供全天候 的服务通道。人民不想仅仅在办公时间能跟政府打交道，他们同样需要在夜间或者周末的时候得到政府的服务。最终，公共服务必须像其他私人部门所能提供的那样 易用。在网络世界，政府是在与那些有着设计精良易于使用的网站竞争用户的时间和注意力。Markellos说政府的服务应该“有大大的吸引力”
Yet comparisons with the private sector get you only so far. Government rarely faces competition and public services seldom come at market prices. More often they are “free” or subsidised, and their use needs to be policed or rationed. The state provides its “customers” with defence, justice and roads, and usually some public services such as health care, education, pensions and transport, plus some support for the poor. But it is also the steward of scarce public resources and the preserver of public goods such as law and order. In keeping track of wrongdoers, actual and potential, being user-friendly is not crucial. New technology makes it easier to collect taxes but it does not make them any more welcome.
与私人部门的比较就到 这里。政府很少面对在竞争，公共服务也很少以市场价格供应。大多数都是免费或者有津贴补助，而他们的使用需要被监管或者定量配给。国家向他的“顾客”提供 国防、公正、道路和一些通常的公共服务例如医保、教育、养老和交通，加上一些对穷人的支持。但是，通过法律和命令，他同时是稀缺公共资源的管家和公共资产 的保护人。相对于明确实际和潜在的破坏者而言，态度良好并不是那么至关紧要。新技术使得收税更加方便，但是这并不能使其更受欢迎。
The state's role as a watchdog is something that the grumbling queues outside embassies have to bear in mind. Tough visa procedures undoubtedly deter businessmen and tourists from visiting, but the visa is the way that the state protects its citizens from undesirable outsiders. Similarly, issuing passports and driving licences is never going to be as easy as getting a loyalty card from a retailer.
看门狗般的国家规定必须记住，就像大使馆外抱怨的队伍。严苛的签证程序无疑会阻挡商人和游人的脚步，但是，签证是国家保护公民阻挡不受欢迎者的手段。相似的，发行护照和驾照也绝不会像得到商家贵宾卡那么简单。
This report will argue that technology can give politicians and officials a better idea of what the public wants and how to provide it, just as it has done in the private sector. But just as the private sector's adoption of new technology involved a number of pitfalls, some e-government ventures have been ill-starred. Citizens are right to be suspicious about technology that can make government all-encompassing, and they should demand a lot more of government as a monopoly provider of public services.
这篇报道将讨论技术可以使得政治家们和官员们有一个更好的关于公众需求和提供方式方面的观点和理念，就像那些私人部门们做到的那样。但是，就像那些私人部门对新技术的采用引发一系列问题，一些电子政府的先驱运气的确不好。
Technology on its own will not bring reform, but it can make changes easier, cheaper and more effective. The learning curve has not been nearly steep enough, but governments are getting better at buying and using computers and software. The benefits are mounting and the costs are coming down.
技术本身不会带来变革，但它可以使得改变更容易、廉价和高效。虽然没有明显进展，但是政府在软件和计算机的采购和使用方面做的更好了。好处不断增加而费用则在不断降低。
The benefits will be biggest in countries where officials and politicians are open to pressure and where the citizens are public-spirited to start with. E-government is no magic bullet, but it gives citizens and lobby groups more power to scrutinise government and highlight waste and dishonesty.
这些益处在那些有着不畏惧压力的官员政治家和有爱国心的公民的国家里才能开始最大化。E政府并不是一颗魔弹，但它使得公民和游说团有更大的能力来挑剔政府并且凸显浪费和欺诈。
It's everywhere
遍地都是
Although hopes have been high and the investment has been huge, so far the results have mostly been disappointing. That reflects a big difficulty in e-government (and in writing about it): it touches on so many other things. What exactly is it that public organisations are trying to maximise, and how can it be measured? Ask the economists. What motivates officials and politicians to make government honest and competent? Bring in the political philosophers. And who decides on the highly contested trade-offs between privacy and security, efficiency and equity?
尽管期望很高、投资也很大，到目前为止，结果还是很令人失望的。这反映了电子政府的一个巨大困难：与此相关的事情太多了。公共组织……问问经济学家。什么促使官员和政客使得政府诚实并且称职？带给政治哲人，在受到高度纷争的私密和安全，效率和公平问题上，谁来做决定？
This report will explain that gloom, fear and optimism are all justified. It will look at the return on investment so far, the hoped-for gains and the neglected drawbacks of e-government. It will show how good leadership, openness and competition can bring spectacular gains, and how bad planning and political interference can make technology in government an expensive disaster. It will look at the dangers of government-run databanks and how to lessen them, and the way in which poor countries such as India may be able to leapfrog rich ones in their use of technology. It concludes by asking if e-democracy makes politics more participatory, or merely noisier. But it starts with an incontestable success: i-government.
这篇报道将解释，沮丧、畏惧、乐观的情绪都是正常的。它将关注到目前为止，关于E政 府的投资所得到的回报，那些所希望的收获和忽视了的缺陷。他将展示好的领导能力，公开公正和有效竞争如何带来巨额回报，坏的计划行政干涉如何使得科技在政 府中的应用成为巨大的浪费。它将关注政府运营的数据库的危险性以及如何减缓这些危险性，以及像印度这样的穷国在使用科技方面走一条怎样的道路以可能跳过富 国。它包括询问来了解电子民主使得政治更加具有参与性还是仅仅更加聒噪。但是它有一个无可置疑的成功开始：信息政府（i-government）。随机文章：
半导体行业：洗牌2 2009-04-11美国土安全：六周年祭 2007-09-14白宫：再见，建筑师 2007-08-21拉美:触底反弹 2007-08-21美国就气候变化的新提议无助于缓和八国峰会前期的口角 2007-06-07
收藏到：Del.icio.us
《The Economist》《经济学人》中文版
Translated From 《The Economist》,By ecocn team http://www.ecocn.org
导航
评论
都想拜你为师了。
都想拜你为师了。