<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Can Information Technology Increase Government Effectiveness?</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Peremohy avenu 54/1, Kyiv 02000</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="UA">Ukraine</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>The article deals with government effectiveness in central and eastern European countries. In 1990, eastern European countries began to transition from communism to free market capitalism. After more than twenty years of reform, central and eastern European countries are showing different results in economic development because of widely contrasting levels of government effectiveness. Recently government effectiveness was tied to e-governance services and their growth. The purpose of the article is to analyze how information technology can increase government effectiveness. Firstly, the main ideas of government effectiveness and its indicators were described. Secondly, trends of government effectiveness in selected countries are analyzed using R. Thirdly, impact of e-governance on government effectiveness was analyzed. Fourthly, ideas to improve government effectiveness are proposed. The methodology of research includes both qualitive and empirical methods. The data used was from World Bank sources.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>government bureaucracy</kwd>
        <kwd>electronic governance</kwd>
        <kwd>government bureaucracy effectiveness</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>The activity of government bureaucracy in many countries of Central and Eastern
Europe is considered ineffective. Ineffectiveness has become almost synonymous
with the concept of "government bureaucracy." The current situation is due to several
factors. Firstly, the global economic situation is unstable, and this has a negative
effect on the welfare of many citizens. Secondly, there was a change of political
regimes and economic systems in many countries of central and eastern Europe at the
end of the twentieth century. The population of these countries did not have an
environment of political freedom, so personal involvement in which to give voice to their
political aspirations was hindered. Moreover, public opinion could be easily
manipulated using the methods of earlier days. The present-day expectations of these
populations are, as a result, exaggerated concerning government bureaucratic effectiveness.
Thirdly, the methodology of evaluating the effectiveness of government bureaucracy
is controversial. It raises many questions. For example: What indicators can be used
and for which countries, how to consider the corruption component, and what
methodology can be used for evaluation? It is impossible to investigate all the factors listed
above in one article. Therefore, in this article we will focus only on the effectiveness
of the activities of government bureaucracy regarding the economic condition of the
country.</p>
      <p>
        After the collapse of communism in 1989, all Central and Eastern Europe countries
undertook reforms to transform a politicized and inefficient bureaucracy into modern
professional bureaucracies. Efforts were directed towards making the government
bureaucracy more efficient, effective, transparent and responsive to the needs of
society. Despite this, it became apparent that in the context of political and economic
change, the reform of government bureaucracy was postponed in many of these
postcommunist countries. In this case, for example, Meier, K. J., &amp; O’Toole, L. J. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ],
Meier, K. J. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ] raised the issue that institutional reform was made difficult by the
lack of resources. Legislation to create a professional and depoliticized bureaucracy
was introduced, but the legacy of the past gave rise to a reluctance to change. In
addition, countries such as Hungary and Poland abolished the requirements of impartiality
in their laws, thereby effectively allowing a return to politicization. As a result, it
turned out that the vector of development of state bureaucracy in the countries of
Central and Eastern Europe is different, and the economic results of the development
of those countries are different from each other.
      </p>
      <p>The importance of studying the relationship between the effectiveness of
government bureaucracy and economic well-being can be explained by at least two factors.
First, government bureaucracy is maintained by taxpayer money. A natural desire of
taxpayers is to understand that the money paid by them is used efficiently. An
additional natural desire of the taxpayers is improvement in their own welfare. This means
that if a taxpayer agrees to pay taxes, he/she expects more benefit from the
government. Secondly, government bureaucracy cannot be characterized as being either
absolute evil nor absolute good. Its presence in the modern state is objective.
However, the long-term success of the state’s development depends, among other things, on
how effectively its government bureaucracy manages the economy.</p>
      <p>Starting at the end of the twentieth century, government services in many countries
began moving to a more electronic format. This significantly simplifies the lives of
customers of that services. As a result, it is widely believed that the introduction of
electronic government services contributes to improving the effectiveness of
government bureaucracy. In our opinion, such conclusions need to be confirmed by
empirical results.</p>
      <p>The purpose of the article is information technology can increase government
effectiveness.</p>
      <p>The paper is organized as following:
1. The second part is devoted to a literature review about government effectiveness
in general, and the role of informational technologies (e-governance) at present.
2. The third part describes the methodology of the research and sources of data.
3. The results of the calculations and their discussions are presented in the fourth
part.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Literature Review</title>
      <p>Effectiveness is a multi-faceted concept, the various elements of which are not always
consistent with each other. The complexity of assessing the effectiveness of
government bureaucracy is due to at least two factors. First is the subjectivity of assessing
the role and necessity of bureaucracy from the point of view of society. Secondly, the
effectiveness of the bureaucracy is closely related to the effectiveness of its
management. The effectiveness of management is associated with the behavioral aspects
wшthin the activities taken by the representatives of the government bureaucracy,
which is difficult to assess using quantitative indicators. Therefore, publications
devoted to problems of the functioning of government bureaucracy and its effectiveness
take several forms.</p>
      <p>
        Some publications are devoted to the historical aspect of bureaucracy development
and its connection with the formation of modern models on the functioning of society
(Monnier F., Thuillier, G. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>
        ]; Ungureanu, D.M. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>
        ]).
      </p>
      <p>
        The turn of the twenty-first century was marked by an exacerbation of the
problems of the effectiveness of bureaucracy. This led to a growing interest in the
institutional approach, in which economists have paid increased attention to the principles of
effective management. This concept is explored in the publications of Kaufmann D.
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ] and Knack S. and Keefer P. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. Researchers have focused on the role of
institutions in ensuring economic development, organizing effective management of
institutions and preventing ineffective increases in their number.
      </p>
      <p>
        Many studies over the past ten years have been devoted to the problems of political
interference in the activities of bureaucracy (Nath, A. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>
        ] and Rogger, D. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>
        ]). Also,
researchers are trying to assess how expensive it is for society to finance the activities
of bureaucracy and how effective it is (Ravishankar, N. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>
        ]). Also interesting are
studies that are devoted to assessing the risks of the dominance of individual interests
of bureaucracy over public ones (Lipsky, M. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ] and Mansuri, G. and Rao, V. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ],
Fafchamps, M., and Labonne, J. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ]). The growing interest in the issues listed above is
due to the increasing desire of large business representatives to engage in politics.
      </p>
      <p>
        Ukrainian researchers are more interested in the role of bureaucracy in politics (O.
Tsapko [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>
        ], O. Batrimenko [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]), the functions of modern bureaucracy and problems
of its development in Ukraine (G. Yakovenko [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>
        ]), and the losses to society as a
result of the low effectiveness of Ukrainian bureaucracy (Paientko and Fedosov [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ]).
      </p>
      <p>
        The politicization of government bureaucracy is not only a problem for the
countries of Eastern and Central Europe. This is evidenced by studies by western
researchers in assessing the performance of government bureaucracy (O’Toole, L. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
        ]), and
assessing the impact of government bureaucracy on economic growth (Evans, P., and
Rauch, J.E. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]). Researchers are also trying to determine the best path for the
development of state bureaucracies in post-communist and developing countries (Goetz,
K.H. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]; Rauch, J.E., and Evans, P.B. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]).
      </p>
      <p>
        Many researchers believe that the introduction of more online government services
for citizens is one of the factors driving government effectiveness. This will reduce
the direct contact with government officials, which means that the risk of corruption
will decrease. As Gronlund, A. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ], points out, since e-government is
citizenoriented, it will provide greater accountability for government operations and, as a
result, will increase the confidence in a government by its citizens. Garson, D.G.
believes that increasing the effectiveness of government bureaucracy as a result of the
introduction of e-government will be due to improved interaction between different
government structures, which will facilitate faster decision-making [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Kamarck, E.C. and Nye, J.S. believe that the spread of electronic government
services contributes to reducing overhead costs, helps to avoid duplication of functions
of various government structures, reduces the cost of providing public services and
provides easy access for citizens to e-Government services. In addition, government
services become accessible anytime and anywhere [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ]. Paientko T. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ] proves that
using GIS in public finance reforms can increase accountability and trust in
government.
      </p>
      <p>
        Currently, there are very few systematic studies that would show how the spread of
electronic government services affects the effectiveness of the government
bureaucracy. Most of the papers are aimed at assessing consumer satisfaction with
egovernment services (Bretschneider, S., Gant, J. and Ahn, M., Chen, Z. and Dubinsky
A.J. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ], AJ, Criado, and Ramilo, M.C. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]), or devoted to an assessment of the
implications of e-government in certain countries (Beynon-Davies, P. and Williams, M.D.
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ], Criado, J.I., and Ramilo, M.C. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ], Asgarkhani, M. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ])
3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Methodology</title>
      <p>One of the first questions of methodology is to determine which countries indeed
belong to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. There are different opinions.
We adhere to the approach that the United Nations uses, which includes Austria,
Hungary, Germany, Liechtenstein, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, the Czech Republic,
Switzerland, Belarus, Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova, Ukraine, Croatia, and
Serbia. Liechtenstein was excluded from the sample, as all the necessary indicators
for this country are not available.</p>
      <p>
        A difficulty in assessing bureaucracy effectiveness is caused by the lack of a
common approach to define the essence of bureaucratic effectiveness, and therefore the
choice of indicators. Although many researchers consider that it is controversial to
gauge the effectiveness of government bureaucracy quantitatively, we agree with
Groeneveld, S., Tummers, LG, Bronkhorst, B., Ashikali, T., &amp; Van Thiel, S. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ] that
quantitatively assessing the effectiveness of the government bureaucracy is not only
possible but necessary.
      </p>
      <p>A comparative assessment of the effectiveness of government bureaucracy was
carried out using the indicators of Governance and Institutional Quality, which are
published by the World Bank. These indicators are publicly available and allow
crosscountry assessments.</p>
      <p>Since the result of activity of government bureaucracy is the economic situation of
the country, the indexes of economic freedom that characterize freedom from
corruption, the protection of property rights, and the attractiveness of a country for
investment and business are taken as the resulting indicators. This data is also publicly
available and allows cross-comparisons.</p>
      <p>GDP per capita was chosen as the indicator that shows the level of economic
development of the country.</p>
      <p>For evaluation of the impact of e-governance on government effectiveness, the
government online service index was used (available from World Bank report). The
calculations of the index were started from 2012, which is why the number of
observations for this indicator is smaller. Also, Belarus was excluded from further
calculations, because information about the government online service index is not available
for this country.</p>
      <p>The study states several hypotheses.</p>
      <p>Hypothesis 1. Increasing the effectiveness of government bureaucracy has a
positive effect on the dynamics of GDP per capita.</p>
      <p>Hypothesis 2. Government effectiveness depends on control of corruption, political
stability, regulation quality, rule of law and accountability.</p>
      <p>Hypothesis 3. Government effectiveness, control of corruption, political stability,
regulation quality, rule of law and accountability depends on government online
service index.</p>
      <p>The analysis was carried out using R software. Four models were used for the
analysis, specifically: pooling, random, within, and between.
4
4.1</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Results and Discussions</title>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Testing the Impact of Government Effectiveness on GDP Growth</title>
        <p>The study used panel data consisting of indicators for sixteen countries for the years
2002-2017. According to the first hypothesis economic growth (GDP per capita)
depends on government bureaucracy effectiveness. The dependent variable is GDP
growth per capita (GDPGROWTH). The independent variables are:</p>
        <p>CONTROLCORRUPTION – control of corruption;
GOVERNEFF – government effectiveness;
POLISTAB – political stability;
REGQUALITY – quality of regulation;
RULELAW – rule of law;
ACCOUNTABILITY – accountability.</p>
        <p>The results of testing the first hypothesis are presented in Table 1.
(1.1) (1.1) (2.1) (0.9)
POLISTAB 1.8*** 1.8*** 2.8*** 1.3**
(0.5) (0.5) (0.9) (0.5)
REGQUALITY 2.5** 2.5** -1.7 2.9**
(1.2) (1.2) (2.2) (1.0)
RULELAW -4.7*** -4.7*** -9.6*** -1.8
(1.4) (1.4) (2.5) (1.2)
ACCOUNTABILITY 0.4 0.4 -1.1 -0.6
(0.8) (0.8) (1.9) (0.7)
Constant 3.0*** 3.0*** 3.0***
(0.3) (0.3) (0.3)
Observations 256 256 256 16
R2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9
Adjusted R2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.8
F Statistic 9.26*;*2*4(9d)f = 55.4*** 8.66*;*2*3(4d)f = 12=.4*6*;*9)(df
Note: *p&lt;0.1; **p&lt;0.05; ***p&lt;0.01
Source: calculated by authors, based on World Bank Data</p>
        <p>The models are statistically significant, and the hypothesis was confirmed. This
means that GDP per capita growth depends on the performance indicators of state
bureaucracy. Control of corruption, government effectiveness, political stability, and
the rule of law have the greatest impact on GDP per capita growth.</p>
        <p>A comparison of the performance of the four models follows. R-sq “between”
reflects the quality of the fit regression and is quite high (0.9). This means that a change
in the time averages for each country has a more significant effect on each variable
than the temporal variations of these indicators relative to the average.</p>
        <p>The “within” regression allows the elimination of unobservable individual effects
from the model. R2 is 0.2. It can be concluded that within our model, individual
differences are more pronounced than dynamic ones. This argues in favor of individual
effects being viewed against the end-to-end assessment model.</p>
        <p>Models were tested using the Wald and Hausman tests. The results obtained allow
that in our case a model with fixed individual effects is suitable to be concluded.</p>
        <p>Since both developed and developing countries were included in the sample,
similar calculations were made for these two groups. The models of the developed
countries are statistically significant and reveal that the growth of GDP per capita is most
affected by the effectiveness of the government. However, in the developing
countries, it is political stability and the rule of law that have the greatest impact on the
GDP per capita.</p>
        <p>In most developed countries, democratic traditions are strong enough to allow a
society to be confident in its elected government. Taxpayer confidence in government
is one of the key factors for economic growth. The developing countries that are
included in the sample have long been focused on the creation and/or maintenance of
communist or socialist societies. In these countries, the effectiveness of the
government is much lower due to a higher level of corruption, as well as an ineffective legal
system. Consequently, the test of the second hypothesis is important.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Testing the Impact of Control of Corruption, Political Stability,</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>Regulation Quality, Rule of Law and Accountability on Government</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-4">
        <title>Effectiveness</title>
        <p>The second hypothesize is that government effectiveness depends on control of
corruption, political stability, regulation quality, rule of law and accountability of
government. The dependent variable is government effectiveness (GOVERNEFF). The
independent variables are:</p>
        <p>CONTROLCORRUPTION – control of corruption;
POLISTAB – political stability;
REGQUALITY – quality of regulation;
RULELAW – rule of law;
ACCOUNTABILITY – accountability.</p>
        <p>The results of analysis are presented in Table 2.
CONTROLCORRUPTION
POLISTAB
REGQUALITY
RULELAW
ACCOUNTABILITY
Constant
Observations
R2
Adjusted R2
F Statistic</p>
        <p>Note: *p&lt;0.1; **p&lt;0.05; ***p&lt;0.01
Source: calculated by authors, based on World Bank Data</p>
        <p>The results of the analysis show that the first model is the most significant. As can
be seen from Table 2, the control of corruption, the quality of regulation and the rule
of law have the greatest impacts on the effectiveness of the government. The same
calculations were done for developed and developing countries separately. Developed
and developing countries were identified according to World Bank approach. The
same sample was used.</p>
        <p>The results of the analysis showed that in developed countries, corruption control
has the greatest impact on the effectiveness of the government. In these countries, an
effective system of law has already been created, so for the model, the indicator “Rule
of Law” is actually a constant. Similarly, the impact of accountability on government
effectiveness can be described. Since the accountability system has long been
developed and functions effectively, it can be considered constant throughout the study
period. It can be concluded that it is important for the governments of developed
countries to continue following their democratic traditions, to maintain a high level of
accountability, rule of law, and regulatory effectiveness.</p>
        <p>In developing countries, the greatest influence on the government effectiveness is
exerted by the control of corruption, the effectiveness of regulation, and the rule of
law. There is also the influence of political stability (Table 3).
CONTROLCORRUPTION
POLISTAB
REGQUALITY
RULELAW
ACCOUNTABILITY
Constant
Observations
R2
Adjusted R2
F Statistic</p>
        <p>Note: *p&lt;0.1; **p&lt;0.05; ***p&lt;0.01
Source: calculated by authors, based on World Bank Data</p>
        <p>It should be noted that in developing countries the legal system is in a state of
transformation. Some countries have achieved significant success in ensuring the rule
of law, notably the Czech Republic, and Poland, and some, such as Ukraine, have
provided only a formal framework for the rule of law.</p>
        <p>For many developing countries, the factor of political stability is important.
Political stability ensures the constancy of the political and economic development of the
country. This allows society to see more realistic results of the work of the
government bureaucracy. For developing countries, an important indicator of government
performance is the quality of regulation. The quality of regulation provides positive
conditions for economic development, which is a very important fact for developing
countries, since they have yet to overcome the gap in economic development with the
developed countries. As can be seen from the Table 4, control of corruption depends
on rule of law and accountability.</p>
        <p>Dependent variable:
CONTROLCORRUPTION</p>
        <p>Pooling
RULELAW 1.2***
(0.04)
ACCOUNTABILITY -0.3***
(0.05)
Constant -0.03*
(0.02)
Observations 256
R2 0.9
Adjusted R2 0.9
F Statistic 1,504.0*** (df = 2; 253)</p>
        <p>Note: *p&lt;0.1; **p&lt;0.05; ***p&lt;0.01
Source: calculated by authors, based on World Bank Data</p>
        <p>Therefore, for developing countries in which corruption is one of the obstacles to
business development and the emergence of democracy, it is important to ensure that
rule of law and government accountability are foundational, guarded, and encouraged
by the developed countries.</p>
        <p>It should be noted that most countries with low GDP per capita, including Ukraine,
Belarus, and Bulgaria, need large amounts of investment for the development of the
economy, especially for business infrastructure. Most countries cannot cover the need
for investment through domestic resources, so they expect to attract funds from
foreign investors. In this regard, the question arises of how difficult it is to attract
investments in countries with a high level of corruption, a lack of rule of law, and low
effectiveness of regulation. It is obvious that investors will more willingly invest in
countries where the effectiveness of the government is higher, and the rights of the
investor will be guaranteed due to a low level of corruption and a functioning judicial
system. This fact partly explains the fact that some post-socialist countries have
achieved greater success in economic development in comparison to those countries
where the effectiveness of the government remains low.
4.3</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-5">
        <title>Testing the Impact of Informational Technology (E-Governance)</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-6">
        <title>Implementations on Government Effectiveness</title>
        <p>The third hypothesis is that government effectiveness, control of corruption, political
stability, regulation quality, rule of law and accountability depend on government
online service index (GOVONLINESER). Some research states that e-governance
helps to reduce corruption, especially in developing countries. When citizens
communicate with government officials, the risk of corruption is higher. E-governance
decreases the need for direct communication and, therefore, decreases risk of
corruption. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 5.
Observations 90 15
R2 0.2 1
Adjusted R2 0.1 0.9
F Statistic 152.7*** 3.4**7(1d)f = 4; 48.34*;*1*0()df =
Note: *p&lt;0.1; **p&lt;0.05; ***p&lt;0.01
Source: calculated by authors, based on World Bank Data</p>
        <p>The obtained dependencies are statistically significant, and the determination
coefficient shows that the first three models describe the studied dependence well. As can
be seen from the results of the calculations, the government online service index does
not affect corruption control.</p>
        <p>In the next stages of the study, we tested how the government online service index
affects accountability, rule of law, regulatory quality, and government effectiveness in
general. For these indicators, except for accountability, the government online service
index has no affect. The results of calculations on the degree of influence of the
government online service index on accountability are given in Table 6.</p>
        <p>Note: *p&lt;0.1; **p&lt;0.05; ***p&lt;0.01
Source: calculated by authors, based on World Bank Data</p>
        <p>As can be seen from the calculations, the impact of the introduction of
egovernment services on accountability is negative. The result can be explained by two
main reasons. First, when a study is conducted over a short period of time, the
calculations should be repeated after a certain time, that is, when the government online
service index will have at least seven points. The second is the calculations were
made without considering time lag, which should be addressed in further research.</p>
        <p>Although the third hypothesis has not been confirmed on the investigated period of
time, this does not mean that the introduction of e-government will not have a positive
effect on the effectiveness of government bureaucracy. However, such an estimate
could be made when the indicators are studied for a longer period of time.
5</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p>The transformation of the public sector after 1989 was aimed at consolidating the
democratic process and accelerating economic development. However, administrative
reforms in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe face serious problems in the
context of economic liberalization, including insufficient opportunities for
modernization and the cultural heritage of the past. Therefore, it is necessary to assess the
impact of reform of government bureaucracy by examining government transparency
and economic growth.</p>
      <p>The results of the empirical analysis show that the effectiveness of the government
in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe is one of the key factors of economic
development. It is a more significant factor for developing countries than for
developed, because developed counties have a high level of government effectiveness. The
threat for government effectiveness in developed countries is the level of control of
corruption.</p>
      <p>Government effectiveness in developing countries is lower according to World
Bank data, and it highly depends on the control of corruption, rule of law, and quality
of regulation. The economic growth in those countries is also slow. Those countries
need to attract external investments. It would be much easier to do so if investors are
confident in government effectiveness. This means a low level of corruption, effective
rule of law, and effective government regulation.</p>
      <p>The results of the empirical research have subsequently confirmed that after the
adoption of civil transformation, public administration becomes more effective in
fighting corruption, as well as ensuring economic growth. Fighting corruption is one
of the weak spots of developing countries. The empirical results showed that the
control of corruption depends on rule of law and government accountability. The
introduction of e-government at the time of the evaluation has had no effect on the
effectiveness of the government seen in its entirety, and on the control of corruption
specifically. Therefore, countries with low government effectiveness should not have great
expectations for e-government, but they should work more on the implementation of
rule of law and increase quality of regulation.</p>
      <p>Consequently, despite delays and difficulties, the transformation of government
bureaucracy is vitally important, and democratic countries can truly expect more
positive results sooner than countries that are slowly moving along the path of
democratization.</p>
      <p>This research has several limitations. Firstly, the sample is limited by Eastern and
Central European countries. Secondly, the time length for e-governance study is
limited to the years 2012-2017, because a government online service index is only
available for this period. Thirdly, there is only one indicator of economic development that
was tested. The research will be continued in the future to eliminate mentioned
limitations.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Asgarkhani</surname>
          </string-name>
          , M.: “E-Governance in Asia Pacific”,
          <source>Proceedings of the International Conference on Governance in Asia, Hong Kong</source>
          . (
          <year>2002</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Batrymenko</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Trends in the Development of the Bureaucracy in the Conditions of Modern Socio-political life</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Bulletin of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>91</volume>
          /93, p.
          <fpage>188</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>191</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
          <article-title>(in Ukrainian)</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bhatnagar</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : Egovernment:
          <article-title>Lessons from Implementation in Developing Countries</article-title>
          .
          <source>Regional Development Dialogue</source>
          ,
          <volume>24</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>164</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>174</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2002</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Beynon-Davies</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Williams</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Evaluating electronic local government in the UK</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Information Technology</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>137</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>149</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dubinsky</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A conceptual model of perceived customer value in ecommerce: A preliminary investigation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Psychology and Marketing</source>
          ,
          <volume>20</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>323</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>347</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Criado</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ramilo</surname>
          </string-name>
          , M.C.:
          <article-title>E-Government in practice: an analysis of website orientation to citizens in Spanish municipalities</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Public Sector Management</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>191</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>218</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2003</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Evans</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rauch</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Bureaucracy and Growth: A Cross-National Analysis of the effects of “Weberian” State Structures on Economic Growth</article-title>
          .
          <source>American Sociological Review</source>
          <volume>64</volume>
          (
          <issue>5</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>748</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>65</lpage>
          . (
          <year>1999</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fafchamps</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Labonne</surname>
          </string-name>
          , J.:
          <article-title>Do politicians relatives get better jobs? Evidence from municipal elections</article-title>
          .
          <source>The Journal of Law</source>
          , Economics, and Organization 33,
          <issue>2</issue>
          (
          <year>2017</year>
          ),
          <fpage>268</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>300</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fedosov</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paientko</surname>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Ukrainian Government Bureaucracy: Benefits and Costs for the Society</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Business and Management Studies</article-title>
          . Vol.
          <volume>3</volume>
          , No.
          <issue>2</issue>
          ,
          <fpage>8</fpage>
          --
          <lpage>19</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2017</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Garson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>(1999) Information Technology</article-title>
          and Computer Applications in Public Administration:
          <article-title>Issues and Trends</article-title>
          . London: Idea Group Publishing.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Goetz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Making Sense of Post-Communist Central Administration Modernisation</article-title>
          ,
          <source>Europeanisation or Latinisation? Journal of European Public Policy</source>
          <volume>8</volume>
          (
          <issue>6</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>1032</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>51</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2001</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Groeneveld</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tummers</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bronkhorst</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ashikali</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Van Thiel</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Quantitative methods in public administration: Their use and development through time</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Public Management Journal</source>
          ,
          <volume>18</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>61</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>86</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2015</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gronlund</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Electronic Government: Design, Applications and Management</article-title>
          . Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing. (
          <year>2002</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kamarck</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nye</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : (
          <year>2002</year>
          )
          <article-title>Governance</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Com: Democracy in the Information Age, Visions of Governance in the 21st Century</article-title>
          . Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kaufmann</surname>
          </string-name>
          , D. Governance matters III. Policy Research Working Paper No.
          <volume>2312</volume>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>World</surname>
            <given-names>Bank.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Knack</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Keefer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Institutions and Economic Performance: Cross Country Test Using Alternative Institutional Measures</article-title>
          , IRIS Working Paper No.
          <volume>109</volume>
          . University of Maryland. (
          <year>1994</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lipsky</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. 30th Anniversary, expanded edition</article-title>
          . New York: Russell Sage Foundation. (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mansuri</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rao</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Localizing development: Does participation work</article-title>
          ? Washington, DC: The World Bank. (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Meier</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>K. J.</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>'Toole</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Bureaucracy in a democratic state: A governance perspective</article-title>
          .
          <source>Baltimore</source>
          , MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Meier</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Governance, structure, and democracy: Luther Gulick and the future of public administration</article-title>
          .
          <source>Public Administration Review</source>
          ,
          <volume>70</volume>
          (
          <issue>Suppl</issue>
          . 1),
          <fpage>284</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>291</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Monnier</surname>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Thuillier</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G. :
          <article-title>Historie de la bureaucratie: veriteset fictions</article-title>
          . Ed. Economica, (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nath</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Political Competition and Elite Capture of Local Public Goods</article-title>
          , Working Paper. (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O</given-names>
            <surname>'Toole</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>L.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Governing Outputs and Outcomes of Governance Networks</article-title>
          , In E. Sorenson and J. Torfing, eds.,
          <source>Theories of Democratic Network Governance (Basingstoke: Palgrave)</source>
          . (
          <year>2007</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paientko</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : Geographic Information Systems: Should They Be Used in Public Finance Reform Development? Available at: http://ceur-ws.
          <source>org/</source>
          Vol-
          <volume>2104</volume>
          /paper_170.
          <string-name>
            <surname>pdf</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2018</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rauch</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Evans</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Bureaucratic Structures and Bureaucratic Performance in Less Developed Countries Journal of Public Economics</article-title>
          . (
          <year>2000</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ravishankar</surname>
          </string-name>
          , N.:
          <article-title>The Cost of Ruling: Anti-Incumbency in Elections</article-title>
          .
          <source>Economic and Political Weekly</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>44</volume>
          , No.
          <volume>10</volume>
          :
          <fpage>92</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>98</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation>
          27.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rogger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The Causes and Consequences of Political Interference in Bureaucratic Decision Making: Evidence from Nigeria</article-title>
          , Working Paper. (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref28">
        <mixed-citation>
          28.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tsapko</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Scientific Theories about the Place of Bureaucracy in Modern Society, Philosophical and methodological problems of law</article-title>
          , Vol.
          <volume>2</volume>
          , pp.
          <fpage>20</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>24</lpage>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
          <article-title>(in Ukrainian)</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref29">
        <mixed-citation>
          29.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ungureanu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Science and social responsibility: the “bureaucratic wars” from public choice theory</article-title>
          ,
          <source>European Journal of Science and Theology, 8 suppl. 1</source>
          ,
          <fpage>235</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>244</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref30">
        <mixed-citation>
          30.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yakovenkо</surname>
          </string-name>
          , H.:
          <article-title>Functions of Modern State Bureaucracy, Theory and practice of public administration</article-title>
          , Vol.
          <volume>3</volume>
          (
          <issue>22</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>51</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>58</lpage>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
          <article-title>(in Ukrainian)</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>