DİJİTAL DÖNÜŞÜM VE GOVTECH: ARIMA MODELLEME TAHMİN ANALİZİNDEN ÇIKARIMLAR

Abstract

Bu makale, dijital dönüşüm ve Devlet Teknolojisi (GovTech)'in kamu sektöründe verimlilik, şeffaflık ve vatandaş katılımının artırılmasındaki rolünü incelemektedir. Sistematik bir literatür taraması ve 2008-2024 yılları arasında 155 ülkenin Birleşmiş Milletler e-Devlet Endeksi (EGI) verilerinin nicel analizine dayanan çalışma, önümüzdeki beş yıldaki dijital dönüşüm eğilimlerini tahmin etmek için ARIMA(1,1,1) modelini kullanmaktadır. Bulgular, dijital dönüşümün hizmet sunumu ve katılımcı yönetişimi önemli ölçüde iyileştirdiğini, GovTech'in ise yapay zekâ, büyük veri ve blockchain gibi teknolojilerle kilit bir etken olduğunu göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, altyapı eksiklikleri, dijital okuryazarlık açığı ve veri güvenliği endişeleri gibi zorluklar özellikle gelişmekte olan ülkelerde devam etmektedir. Analiz, küresel EGI değerlerinde istikrarlı bir artış öngörmekte ve süregelen bir dijital uçuruma işaret etmektedir. Bu çalışma, nitel bulguları tahmine dayalı modelleme ile birleştirerek literatüre katkı sağlamakta ve belirlenen engelleri aşmaya yönelik politika önerileri sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Dijital Dönüşüm
• GovTech
• e-Devlet Endeksi
• Kamu Sektörü

DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION AND GOVTECH: INSIGHTS FROM ARIMA MODELLING AND FORECAST ANALYSIS

Abstract

This article examines the role of digital transformation and Government Technology (GovTech) in enhancing public sector efficiency, transparency, and citizen engagement. Drawing on a systematic literature review and quantitative analysis of the United Nations e-Government Index (EGI) data for 155 countries from 2008 to 2024, the study employs an ARIMA(1,1,1) model to forecast future trends in digital transformation over the next five years. The findings reveal that digital transformation significantly improves service delivery and participatory governance, with GovTech acting as a pivotal enabler through technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data, and blockchain. However, challenges including infrastructure deficits, digital literacy gaps, and data security concerns persist, particularly in developing nations. The analysis forecasts a steady rise in global EGI scores, underscoring a persistent digital divide. This study contributes to the literature by integrating qualitative insights with predictive modeling and, offering policy recommendations to address identified barriers and enhance digital governance.

Keywords

• Digital Transformation
• GovTech
• e-Government Index
• Public Sector

References

1. Balaji, K. (2025). E-Government and E-Governance: Driving Digital Transformation in Public Administration. Public Governance Practices in the Age of AI, 23-44. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9286-7.ch002.
2. Bates, J. (2012). This is what modern deregulation looks like: Co-optation and contestation in the shaping of the UK’s Open Government Data Initiative. The Journal of Community Informatics, 8(2), 1–20.
3. Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00183.x.
4. Cordella, A., & Tempini, N. (2015). E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT in public sector reform. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.002.
5. Drèze, J., & Khera, R. (2017, August 10). The Aadhaar debate. The Indian Express. Retrieved from https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/the-aadhaar-debate-john-dreze-reetika-khera-4805424 on 08.03.2025.
6. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., ... & Williams, M. D. (2020). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 102199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102199.
7. EU GDPR. (2018). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). European Commission.
8. Friederici, N., Ojanperä, S., & Graham, M. (2020). Digital entrepreneurship and the global south: Who benefits? Information Technologies & International Development, 16, 1–19.

9. Goldfinch, S., Yamamoto, K., & Aoyagi, S. (2023). Does process matter more for predicting trust in government? Participation, performance, and process, in local government in Japan. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(3), 842-863. https://doi.org/10.1177/002085232210993.
10. Gong, Y., & Yang, X. (2024). Understanding strategies for digital government transformation: A strategic action fields perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 76, 102766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2024.102766.
11. Huang, J., & Karduck, A. (2017). A methodology for digital government transformation. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 5(6), 246-254. https://doi.org/10.18178/joebm.2017.5.6.521.
12. Idzi, F. M., & Gomes, R. C. (2022). Digital governance: government strategies that impact public services. Global Public Policy and Governance, 2(4), 427-452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00055-w.
13. Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001.
14. Janssen, M., Konopnicki, D., Snowdon, J. L., & Ojo, A. (2020). Driving public sector innovation using big and open linked data (BOLD). Information Systems Frontiers, 22(2), 341–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09933-9.
15. Kalvet, T. (2012). Innovation: A factor explaining e-government success in Estonia. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 9(2), 142–157. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2012.046271.
16. Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.003.
17. Liva, G., Codagnone, C., Misuraca, G., Gineikyte, V., & Barcevicius, E. (2020, September). Exploring digital government transformation: a literature review. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 502-509). https://doi.org/10.1145/3428502.34285.
18. Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2013). The second wave of digital-era governance: A quasi-paradigm for government on the web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 371(1987), 20120382. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2012.0382.
19. Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002.
20. Mergel, I., Porumbescu, G., & Hong, S. (2019). GovTech: Transforming public services through technology. Public Administration Review, 79(4), 638–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13049.
21. Meyerhoff Nielsen, M., & Jordanoski, Z. (2020, June). Digital transformation, governance and coordination models: A comparative study of Australia, Denmark and the Republic of Korea. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 285-293). https://doi.org/10.1145/3396956.3396987.
22. Meyerhoff Nielsen, M. (2019, June). Governance lessons from Denmark's digital transformation. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 456-461). https://doi.org/10.1145/3325112.3329881.
23. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2021). Eğitim Bilişim Ağı (EBA). Retrieved from https://www.eba.gov.tr on 09.03.2025.
24. OECD. (2020). Digital Government Index: 2019 Results. OECD Publishing.
25. OECD. (2021). AI in the public sector: Improving service delivery and policy. OECD Publishing.
26. OECD. (2023). Digital Government Index 2023. OECD Publishing.
27. Pedersen, K. (2018). E-government transformations: challenges and strategies. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 12(1), 84-109. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-06-2017-0028.
28. Sampaio, R. C., Barros, T., & Santos, M. (2018). Digital participation in Brazil: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 15(4), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2018.1526934.
29. Sarker, M. N. I., Wu, M., & Hossin, M. A. (2018, May). Smart governance through bigdata: Digital transformation of public agencies. In 2018 international conference on artificial intelligence and big data (ICAIBD) (pp. 62-70). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAIBD.2018.8396168.
30. Sun, T. Q., & Medaglia, R. (2019). Mapping the challenges of artificial intelligence in the public sector: Evidence from public healthcare. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 368–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.12.005.
31. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Dijital Dönüşüm Ofisi. (2020). MEBİS Projesi. Retrieved from https://www.cbddo.gov.tr on 01.03.2025.
32. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Dijital Dönüşüm Ofisi. (2021a). e-Devlet Kapısı İstatistikleri. Retrieved from https://www.turkiye.gov.tr on 02.03.2025.
33. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Dijital Dönüşüm Ofisi. (2021b). Dijital Türkiye Platformu. Retrieved from https://www.dijitalturkiye.gov.tr on 02.03.2025.
34. T.C. Ulaştırma ve Altyapı Bakanlığı. (2021). Ulusal Siber Güvenlik Stratejisi. Retrieved from https://www.uab.gov.tr on 01.03.2025.
35. Tan, S. Y., Taeihagh, A., & Tripathi, A. (2017). Tensions and paradoxes of electronic participation: Through the lens of Singapore’s policy-making. Government Information Quarterly, 34(4), 553–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.11.006.
36. United Nations (2022). E-Government Survey: The Future of Digital Government. UN DESA.
37. UNPAN (2025). Retrieved from https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Data-Center on 16.03.2025.
38. Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., & Ferraris, P. (2014). The digital advantage: How digital leaders outperform their peers in every industry. MIT Sloan Management Review and Capgemini Consulting.
39. Wirtz, B. W., & Müller, W. M. (2019). An integrated artificial intelligence framework for public management. Public Administration Review, 79(6), 853–865. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13091.
40. World Bank. (2022). GovTech Maturity Index 2022: The future of digital public services. The World Bank.