How can digital government connect citizens without leaving the disconnected behind?

Just as many businesses use vast marketing resources to research their customer base, we believe that the starting point for any government is to better understand its citizens’ changing needs, behaviors, values and expectations. That is the impetus behind Connected Citizens (see “About the research” for the methodology). 

While we didn’t set out to examine the impact of COVID-19 on people’s lives, the timing influenced citizens’ satisfaction with their quality of life across all the countries surveyed.

People are most concerned about their basic needs being met, such as access to high-quality health care and feeling safe in their community. But, unsurprisingly, in the current environment, the state of the economy and job security feature prominently on their list of worries. Almost half of the respondents are concerned about financial security (ranging from 37% in India to 60% in Malaysia), while 37% cite “having a secure and well-paid job” and “living in a country with a strong economy.”

A more pervasive role for technology

One of the most striking consequences of the pandemic has been the increasing reliance on technology in our daily lives. In the space of just a few months, we’ve seen how it has transformed the way people work, play, shop, learn and socialize. And our survey reveals that, in future, most people expect to make even more use of technology than if the pandemic had not happened. Among citizens surveyed, 64% believe that the COVID-19 pandemic will increase the use of technology in our daily lives, with some of the developing countries showing the most widespread expectation of increased technology use.

People see technology as instrumental in improving many aspects of their lives. But while governments have accelerated the shift toward the digitalization of many public services, they continue to lag behind services provided by the private sector, such as online shopping and banking, in terms of expected improvements in service provision (although health care services are viewed more positively).

These lower expectations may reflect recent experience. Globally, only around half of citizens (53%) think governments and public services have effectively used digital technology to respond to the pandemic. However, perceptions differ markedly across countries: 88% of citizens in Malaysia and 80% of citizens in India said their governments had leveraged technology effectively, compared with just 36% in France and 29% in Japan.

Clearly, governments still have some way to go on their digital journey to meet the expectations of the people they serve.

Broader concerns about the impact of technology

Despite its more pervasive role in people’s lives, our survey revealed complex attitudes toward technology. Most people (about 72% of citizens surveyed globally) believe it makes life better, and that it will be needed to help solve increasingly complex future problems. But there are concerns about its broader impact. These include, for example: 

• Widening social inequality: Often, the most disadvantaged citizens are unable to afford access to new technology and lack the digital literacy skills to use it. The use of algorithmic decision-making, with potential for inherent bias, is another risk. Globally, almost one-third of citizens (32%) think the benefits of technology will not be equally spread across different groups in society. And 34% think technology gives more power to those who are already rich and powerful.
• Loss of human interaction: The increasing reliance on technology as a means of communication is causing concerns about the impact on social cohesion. Globally, 32% of citizens think technology will make people feel less connected to their community. In a more virtual world, some of the most vulnerable groups may become more isolated through the loss of physical support networks. 
• The potential encroachment on personal privacy and digital security: As more people and devices are connected, the volume and variety of data created, and the speed at which it is gathered, will increase. This is creating public anxiety around personal privacy and lack of control over how people’s data is used. More than 4 in 10 citizens are against the sharing of data, both within government and with private sector companies. Almost three-quarters (72%) are opposed to government selling their personal data to a private sector company even if it’s to raise money that can fund better public services or tax cuts.
  

Some of these concerns may stem from a perception that the speed of technological development is simply too fast. While some are excited and empowered by technology, others are overwhelmed and anxious. Is technology being shaped by government and society or is technology shaping government and society? In some cases, it is just too early to understand the benefits and risks of some emerging technologies.

However, governments will need to get ahead of these concerns if they are to harness the potential of data and technology. Low technology adoption rates can weaken countries’ economies, their ability to compete internationally and hence their future prosperity. Data-driven approaches within government are also needed to understand citizens’ needs, target services proactively, evaluate complex public policies and deliver better outcomes for citizens in a more cost-effective way.

Globally, almost one-third of citizens (32%) rank more use of digital technologies in the provision of public services as one of the top three priorities for governments to improve the quality of services. But improving access to and supporting people to become more comfortable and competent with technology will be critical. The survey revealed widespread support among citizens for government skills programs aimed at helping people to use and understand new technologies: 61% of survey respondents said they would be likely to use government training schemes to improve their digital skills, if available. The level of interest varies across countries, from 39% in Japan to 83% in India.

Governments can also do more to clarify the benefits of sharing data and show citizens that it will be used in responsible ways. The survey shows that there is some support for using data when people are clear about the use case and it offers some benefits to themselves or society. This is particularly the case when it relates to public health. For example, using personal data to help track and prevent disease (supported by 52% of citizens globally) or to set priorities for local health services (supported by 48%).

Another challenge for government is the trust deficit with citizens. Although satisfaction with public services is generally good (especially for health, education and local services), trust in national and local governments is significantly lower (33% and 36% respectively). The global figures mask significant differences across countries. Trust in national government ranges from 63% in India and 46% in Australia; 29% in France, 27% in the UK, and 26% in the US; to just 19% in South Africa and 18% in Mexico.

Building trust in government institutions will be vital to the task of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations, and harnessing the efforts of citizens to help design and deliver better services.

Citizens have a strong appetite for more engagement with government 

Clearly, there is a willingness and appetite for citizens to get more involved in public service delivery in the future. More than a third cite better transparency in performance as one of the top priorities for improving the quality of public services, so they can hold governments to account. And 42% would like to have a bigger say in or be more actively involved in, or are already actively involved in, public service delivery in their local area.

The survey results reveal the complexity of attitudes, values, needs and behaviors of citizens across the world. The data has helped uncover seven different citizen personas that governments will need to engage in the future.

Seven Connected Citizens personas

They share many characteristics — but there are also key differences between them. And their presence varies significantly across countries.

One of the most striking differentiators among the personas is their attitudes to technology and digital service delivery. Although our survey respondents represent the online population, they have varying degrees of confidence in using new technology on their own. Seventy percent or more of Generation Z, Millennials and Generation X respondents say they are confident users, compared with 61% of older Baby Boomers. Yet, when we look across the seven segments, the difference is stark. Among Aspirational Technophiles, 87% are confident users, but the equivalent figure for Passive Outsiders and Struggling Providers is just 46% and 40% respectively.

Similarly, there are significant differences across the segments in people’s attitudes toward sharing data. Aspirational Technophiles, Capable Achievers and Diligent Strivers are significantly more comfortable with sharing their data to access a service or perform a transaction online, and with their data being shared across government and with private companies. But there are real concerns among Tech Skeptics and Privacy Defenders about the risks involved.

Why does this matter? Moving from a one-size-fits-all approach to service delivery toward greater personalization is crucial to improving public policy design, delivering more efficient and effective public services, and strengthening the relationship between government and citizens. For example, what happens to the Struggling Providers — who may need the most support — if digital channels are the only way to access some services? Could they miss out on services and opportunities, and see the structural inequality they suffer from get worse?

This is a critical consideration for governments as they move toward “digital by design” and “digital by default” approaches to service delivery. These personas can help governments ensure that digital services and data policies are properly designed for all the different groups.

Governments can take a multipronged approach to addressing people’s needs, with a focus on four areas:

1. Agile and innovative policymaking

Governments could introduce more agile and innovative policies that target the concerns of different groups. For example:

• New social safety net schemes for disadvantaged citizens on low incomes (such as guaranteed minimum income or universal basic income), and social investment approaches that can help governments project ahead the needs of the population and take preventative action before crises occur.
• New policies to tackle income insecurity for those in precarious work, such as the self-employed and gig economy workers, including clearer rules around employment status and rights; and portable benefits plans to maintain coverage as workers move geographically, between employers, or through periods of unemployment or self-employment.
• More agile, and lifelong, education and retraining programs that help workers remain relevant and competitive; skills road maps that help governments understand the skills and jobs that are needed in the future, and personal learning accounts that offer workers the funds to reskill; and active labor market policies (ALMPs) to help unemployed and low-income workers find jobs or retrain.
• Measures to improve the pension system, including encouraging people to take active ownership of their retirement planning; providing simpler and more flexible plans linked to better advice and guidance; and increasing incentives or even passing laws that encourage greater private sector contributions to pension costs.