Possible pathways or trajectories to a European dimension to eGovernment are the following;<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

•          Unilateral (making <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Member State public services accessible to citizens from other Member States, e.g. the provision of content in other languages)

•          Bilateral, multilateral (intergovernmental cooperation between Member States, in certain service domains)

•          European level

•          Parallel European public space (need-based, in principle accessible to all but in practice used by mobile citizens and businesses)

•          Good practice diffusion (leading to European convergence of practices)

It was established that the incentives for public authorities to go beyond national boundaries are very low as the total constituency for cross border services is small and the complexity and risk are potentially high. Nevertheless a number of actors were identified that would have a higher propensity to develop such services or to seek collaboration with similar services across borders. These are:

•          Large metropolitan areas (servicing and integrating many different nationalities as driver)

•          Small countries with open economies (economic opportunity and tradition/custom as driver)

•          Euregions (dealing with cross border mobility as driver)

•          The Commission  itself (mandate as a driver)

•          Organisations with specific sectoral interest

 

Thusm certain categories of public and semi-public authorities would be most likely to engage in cross border service provision, and/or to open up their services to 3^rd country (EU) nationals. Below are some examples listed of existing cross-border eGovernment by different actors and in different areas.

Regions as actor:

–        VoicE http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2649

Big Cities as actors:

–        http://www.eurocities.org/main.php

Potential for PE up-scaling (through GP diffusion):

–        FAST http://www.epractice.eu/cases/1856

–        Kadaster-on-line http://www.epractice.eu/cases/1805

–        HELP http://www.help.gv.at/

Central EU:

–        Eulisses http://www.epractice.eu/document/218

–        IMI http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2378

–        Eureauweb http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2573

–        EULIS http://www.epractice.eu/document/319

–        SOLVIT  http://ec.europa.eu/solvit/site/index_en.htm

 Several MS as actor

–        JWeb http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2323

–        Procure http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2617

–        RISER http://www.epractice.eu/cases/307

–        SELIS http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2566

–        NES http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2310

–        eBox RAPID http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2292

 One MS as actor:

–        LIMOSA http://www.epractice.eu/cases/1011

–        e-Tendering http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2351

–        EWD-P http://www.epractice.eu/cases/1784

NGOs as actor:

–        Telecentre.Europe http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2443

Specific target group:

–        Sysper2 http://www.epractice.eu/cases/2410