D
Digital Transformation, Brazil
Thiago F. Dias and Hironobu Sano
Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte –
UFRN, Natal, Brazil
Digital transformation reflects the improve-
ments implemented by governments, in the search
for innovative digital solutions due to social, eco-
nomic, political, and other pressures, in order to
transform their internal and external processes, to
generate higher public value and for the effective-
ness of government actions.
Synonyms
Governance; Public Innovation; Accountability
Systems
Introduction
It is undeniable that a percentage of the cultural,
political, and economic dimensions and other
human activities escalate with the increase in dig-
ital space. Data indicate that three billion people
use the Internet, but 90% of the remainder live in
the developing world (ITU 2014). Smartphone
users also spend 89% of their time interacting
with mobile media applications (Nielsen 2014).
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019
A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3756-1
In order to prevent governments from
neglecting this digital space as a potential ally to
extend the value and delivery of public services,
utilizing the physical and digital worlds, this pro-
posal of interaction between services for public
issues and the use of digital space as a basis for
interaction is called Digital Government (DG).
It is obvious that advances in Information
and Communications Technology (ICT), which
started around the world in the 1980s, and in
Brazil in the 1990s, promoted a transformation
and improvement in the quality of public
services, increasing operational efficiency, a
reduction in costs, productivity gains, and an
improvement in the quality of public services,
allied to increased interaction with society
(Gil-Garcia and Pardo 2005).
However, over time, it was observed that for
ICT to generate improvements in the public sec-
tor, changes must not be limited solely to the
implementation of technological elements in gov-
ernments (hardware and software), but should
also include procedural and cultural changes
in those working in public administration.
Therefore, it is vital that the adoption of ICT
tools also includes routine process, legal and
behavioral modifications, aiming towards greater
efficacy and effectiveness in the public services
provided to citizens.
In the light of public administration adopting
digital government as part of the government
agenda evolving into other aspects in the near
future, digital transformation impacts the modus
2 Digital Transformation, Brazil
operandi of public administration and its relation-
ship with society. While observing that there is no
universal model to implement government digiti-
zation efforts in different national contexts and
sector locations, advances are only achieved
with the adoption of precise locations and diag-
nostic solutions via public governance searches.
Electronic Government, Digital
Democracy, and Innovations Related to
State-Society in Brazil
Facing the greatest ICT appropriation by the gov-
ernment sector, the term “e-government,” or elec-
tronic government, emerges; it is a concept related
to the greatest intensification of ICT use in mod-
ernization actions linked to public administration,
ranging from the computerization of internal
activities to the expansion of communication and
provision of public services to external clients –
citizens, suppliers, companies, or other govern-
ment sectors society – via use of the web, with
the creation of government sites (Pinho 2008;
Agune 2006; Chahin et al. 2004).
Janowski (2015) proposed a model of
evolution for digital government with four
increasingly complex phases in the evolution of
the concept: digitization (technology in govern-
ment), transformation, engagement, and contex-
tualization (policy-oriented public governance).
The evolutionary model is based on three binary
variables: (a) digitization complements inner
workings and government structures; (b) the
transformation is internal and to the government
structure, as well as its relationships with citizens,
businesses and other stakeholders; and (c) if the
transformation depends on a particular application
context, such as a country, location, or sector.
Thus, the phases are systematized as follows
(Janowski 2015): Stage (1) digitization or “tech-
nology in government” does not produce any
internal government transformations, changes
in external relationships or dependence on
the application context; Stage (2) processing or
“electronic government” promotes the internal
transformation of the government but not the
transformation of external relations and,
therefore, does not depend on the application con-
text; Stage (3) Engagement or “e-governance”
promotes both the transformation of internal gov-
ernment and external relationships but does not
depend on the application context; and Stage
(4) Contextualization or “policy-driven gover-
nance” promotes both the transformation of inter-
nal government and external relationships and
depends on the application context.
In Brazil, formalization of including the
topic on the governmental agenda took place
with the creation of the Electronic Government
Executive Committee in 2000 and the Electronic
Government Policy in Brazil was launched the
following year. Through Decree no 5.234 on
July 7, 2004, electronic government was created
to link and coordinate the implementation of elec-
tronic government actions, the provision of public
services via electronic means, and the standardi-
zation of actions and dissemination of electronic
government information to the federal public
administration.
Since then, the implementation of successful
practices has been observed, highlighting the
Federal Inland Revenue annual income tax decla-
ration system; the government purchase system
using an electronic trading system; the election
system, with the use of electronic ballot boxes;
and the federal government’s people management
system (Sigepe), among others.
However, Diniz et al. (2009) state that although
the Electronic Government Program has been
successful, in 2003 the government started to
reduce its importance, mainly due to the transition
in presidential management. According to these
authors, in 2016, the Federal Court of Auditors
(TCU) prepared a report on the Electronic
Government Program under Luiz Inácio Lula da
Silva’s government and observed the difficulty in
coordinating program actions and the lack of
monitoring of electronic government initiatives.
In 2016 a federal government services site was
created (www.servicos.gov.br) through Decree
No 8.936, on December 19, 2016, which aimed
to centralize digital services and facilitate access
and follow-up by citizens. One thousand, eight
hundred and seventeen (1,817) services from
85 institutions and federal public authorities are
Digital Transformation, Brazil
currently available, and 43% of these have fully
digitized steps.
While considering the digital transformations
of its interface with society, expansion tools are
being promoted for state-society interaction, with
the goal of more effective public actions, which
involve various initiatives that represent the term
e-democracy or digital democracy (Dahlberg and
Siapera 2007). Digital democracy can also be
deemed a conceptual innovation, since it pro-
motes a state-society relationship through a new
perspective, transitioning from an offline view,
a model with higher government preponderance,
to an online view in which society is more prom-
inent and has the capacity to influence the public
policy cycle.
However, for conceptual innovations to be
converted into public policy changes and, conse-
quently, to take these transformational changes to
the state-society relationship, specific policies
need to be prepared, and instruments developed
to enable the practice of this new form of interac-
tion. The development of studies and applications
based on ICT to foster the state-society relation-
ship has created a productive area for innovation.
As an example, Sampaio (2013) performed
a survey of digital democracy initiatives by
the three authorities and the three government
spheres in Brazil, having identified 96 experi-
ences, with the majority developed by the Federal
Executive Authority, followed by the state and
municipal legislative branches. As far as popular
participation is concerned, the majority fits
into the e-information framework, followed by
e-consultation and finally, e-decision. Due to the
variety of mechanisms in place, this article will
focus on some of the more widely disseminated
ones, such as the disclosure of data and govern-
ment information. The following discussion is
organized based on the dimensions of participa-
tion, being analyzed in terms of innovation and its
contribution to the strengthening of digital
democracy.
e-Information
When it comes to the dimensions of
e-participation and e-information, progress has
been made in the first stage in the country,
3
especially due to the Law of Fiscal Responsibility
(LRF). This has made mandatory the broad
dissemination of information on the fiscal man-
agement of public entities in electronic format and
public access, much of which is in real time. The
Access of Information Law (LAI) established the
obligation to publish information on the institu-
tion (active transparency), as well as the possibil-
ity of society requesting information (OGP 2011),
which covers the opening-up of government data
as a way to increase transparency and strengthen
social control.
In the federal sphere, Decree 5.482/2005
established the obligation of making financial
information available on the Federal Executive
Authority Transparency site for institutions and
entities with direct and indirect administration.
In addition, each federal institution should have
a shortcut to this site on their internet home page;
however, the visibility given to promoting this is
not the same for federal institutions, and there is
not always sufficient information to allow politi-
cal participation (Marques 2010).
The perspective that government information
should be widely available to the public, although
included in the Federal Constitution since is pro-
mulgation in 1988, was only regulated with the
establishment of the LRF and LAI. The assurance
of access to information by society must be con-
sidered a conceptual innovation, as although
envisaged in the Federal Constitution, it only
became truly effective with the approval of
both laws.
A conceptual innovation will not necessarily
bring innovation to public organizations, as it
requires the concept to be converted into a prod-
uct, service, or tool. By analyzing the compliance
of LAI by states and cities, the Federal Public
Prosecution Service (MPF) created the National
Transparency Ranking and, in 2016, the average
was 5.21 out of 10. These results show that cities
and states face greater difficulties in making infor-
mation available to society.
It is established in these studies that public
institutions, although using the Internet to publish
their documents, the information available is
strongly linked to what is made obligatory by the
LAI and LRF. Consequently, e-information has a
4 Digital Transformation, Brazil

Digital Transformation, Brazil, Table 1 Participative tools for e-democracy in the house of representatives
e-Democracy tool Participation features
Interactive Audiences Submit questions to deputies
WikiLegis Suggest the composition of laws that are sent to rapporteur deputies
Participative Agenda Vote on priority projects; those with the most votes are placed on the agenda
Source: Prepared by the authors based on e-Democracy (https://edemocracia.camara.leg.br/)

greater focus on complying with current legisla- meetings, seminars, forums, and public hearings,
tion, and there are still many flaws in government as demonstrated in Table 1.
communication with society, based on ICT. In Sampaio’s analysis (2013), some topics
discussed in e-Democracy were submitted for
legislative review. As in the case of online public
e-Consultation and e-Decision
consultations, innovations developed by the
The two dimensions that propose a new bidirec-
House of Representatives contain conceptual and
tional communication channel will be analyzed
systemic innovation perspectives, although the
together, since different initiatives developed by
absence of a systematic return on participative
a number of public institutions can be identified in
mechanisms restricts its transformational
both strategies.
potential.
One of the main e-consultation mechanisms
In subnational governments, notably in cities,
is public consultation, which merges aspects of
one of the most common mechanisms for listening
face-to-face and online participation, where both
to the population is participatory budgeting (OP),
allow sending suggestions, proposing alterations,
which has a digital version. Sampaio (2013)
and consulting other actions. The digital version
identified 37 digital participatory budgeting
has already been adopted by 30% of the ministries
(OPD) experiences in 17 Brazilian locations,
and 22% of the regulatory agencies, which indi-
with the most popular being Recife, Belo
cate that it is not related to specific resources
Horizonte, Porto Alegre, and Ipatinga. These
and that its acceptance is growing (Matheus
cities adopt different strategies that surpass the
2009; Sampaio 2013). The Ministry of Health
simple transposition of a face-to-face model to
received 45 public online queries between 2001
the virtual world.
and 2011, although only 13 reports were avail-
In the case of Recife, traditional OP sets the
able, in which “there is no record of comments,
topics that will be taken for an Internet vote or
suggestions or interactions between participants”
electronic ballot, which enabled an increase in the
(Barbosa 2015).
number of voters and, therefore, the result reflects
The digital version of consultation simulta-
the population’s greatest desires. In Ipatinga,
neously represents an innovation in service deliv-
suggestions can be sent electronically and are
ery and makes advances in terms of conceptual
then organized by the city hall, which then for-
and systemic innovation, but it is limited since the
wards those considered feasible for deliberation
reports are not widely available and, principally,
at face-to-face assemblies (Best et al. 2010;
because the destination of the contributions
Possamai 2011; Sampaio 2013). In the Belo
received by this channel is not clear.
Horizonte OPD, voters can vote on specific
In the legislative branch, the House of
options previously selected by the city hall
Representatives created the e-Democracy site,
(Cunha et al. 2014; Sampaio 2009). In Porto
with the aim of expanding popular participation
Alegre, the electronic OP (e-OP) corresponds to
in the legislative process, proposing different
an expansion of the face-to-face version of the
participative mechanisms, such as discussion of
virtual world, which increased the number of vot-
law bills, provisional measures, deliberative
ing participants (Best et al. 2010; Sampaio 2009).
Digital Transformation, Brazil
OPD has shown to be a productive area for
new features, and innovations can be identified
in different categories: service innovation, when
the digital version complements and reinforces
popular participation; delivery innovation, when
it creates a new category; public policy innova-
tions, when changes are promoted as a result of
learning from experiences. This is the case for
Internet voting and the provision of equipment
(computers and electronic ballot boxes) in various
locations, specifically to increase participation.
As for the degree of innovation, more specific
changes can be characterized as incremental and
since new forms to accomplish this are offered,
they can be categorized as radical. The OPD
data presented here do not allow for characteriza-
tion in the case of transformational innovation,
which would demand in-depth studies from that
perspective.
Participation in the varying e-Consultation
mechanisms is related to the debate and definition
stages of possible alternatives, where different
ideas are proposed for discussion, allowing pro-
posals to be defended, rejected, or reformulated
(Kingdon 1995; Possamai 2011). In some situa-
tions, ideas and proposals can progress, although
one of the main weaknesses of these mechanisms
is that there is no system for providing feedback
to participants regarding the utilization, or
otherwise, of their contributions. This generates
questions on the effectiveness of these spaces
and could lead to reduced participation
(Rothberg 2010).
Directions and Challenges
It is believed that ICT broadens and strengthens
social participation and, consequently, promotes
the improvement of digital democracy. It is
emphasized that the tools developed in the field
of digital democracy allow for the expansion of
popular participation. Unidirectional government
communication, with the disclosure of data via
the Information Access Law, has made the most
progress, reinforced by specific legislation
that demands active transparency and the
country’s admission to the principles of an Open
5
Government Partnership. In an analysis of LAI
compliance, the actions of external (MPF) and
internal (Comptroller General’s Office – CGU)
control bodies have produced an improvement
in indicators developed by each of the public
authorities, reinforcing e-information on elec-
tronic government sites.
On communication and bidirectional partici-
pation, there has been an increase in the use of
dialogue channels that choose to capture society’s
insights, with instruments such as online public
consultations, especially by the federal govern-
ment and digital participatory budgeting; the latter
being more commonly adopted by municipal
governments. They are innovations in public pol-
icies that incorporate a conceptual and systemic
innovation perspective when proposing new ways
of communicability that aim to strengthen and
increase civil participation. Discussion mecha-
nisms are included in this perspective, such as
enquiries, forums, and chats, among others,
which enable not only conceptual and systemic
interlocution with the government, but also pro-
mote dialogue among citizens, creating the oppor-
tunity to discuss different views on the same
theme. This deliberative process can generate sub-
sidies, which can be incorporated on the prepara-
tion of a final proposal for a public enquiry, or
influence voters when voting on digital participa-
tory budgeting.
On the other hand, conceptual innovations
have certain limitations that restrict their results
and limit them to a perspective closer to service
innovation or service delivery, which, conse-
quently, drive them further away from the possi-
bilities of transformational change. One of the
main criticisms of the online query mechanisms
and virtual discussion tools is that, in general,
participants receive no feedback on submitted
proposals, meaning it is not known if they were
taken into consideration and whether they contrib-
uted, or otherwise, to the decision-making pro-
cess. This lack of return may discourage further
participation, reducing the tool’s credibility. To
finalize, it is affirmed that ICT has generated
innovation not only in e-Democracy and
e-Participation, but also in terms of government
management and services.
6 Digital Transformation, Brazil
Cross-References
▶ Brazil
▶ Digital Democracy
▶ Digital Transformation
▶ Electronic Government
▶ Public Innovation
References
Agune RM (2006) Impacto do governo eletrônico da
gestão governamental: Observatório de Tecnologias
de Informação. In: Anales del Congreso Ìbero
Americano de e-Gov, Santiago, October
Barbosa H (2015) Comunicação, transparência e consultas
públicas on-line: a import^ancia da participação em
políticas de saúde. Comunicação Soc 37(3):127–152
Best N, Ribeiro MM, Matheus R, Vaz JC (2010) Internet e
a participação cidadã nas experiências de orçamento
participativo digital no Brasil. Cad PPG-AU/UFBA
9(special edition):105
Chahin A, Cunha MA, Knight PT, Pinto SL (2004)
E-gov.Br: A próxima revolução brasileira: Eficiência,
qualidade e democracia: o governo eletrônico no Brasil
e no mundo. Prentice Hall, São Paulo
Cunha MA, Coelho TR, Pozzebon M (2014) Internet e
participação: o caso do orçamento participativo digital
de Belo Horizonte. Rev Adm Empres 54(3):296–308
Dahlberg L, Siapera E (2007) Radical democracy and
the internet: interrogating theory and practice. Palgrave
Macmillan, New York
de Pinho JAG (2008) Investigando portais de governo
eletrônico de estados no Brasil: muita tecnologia,
pouca democracia. Rev Adm Pública Rio J 42:471–493
Diniz EH, Barbosa AF, Junqueira AR, Prado O (2009)
O governo eletrônico no Brasil: perspectiva histórica
a partir de um modelo estruturado de análise. Rev Adm
Pública Rio J 43(1):23
Gil-Garcia JR, Pardo TA (2005) E-government success
factors: mapping practical tools to theoretical founda-
tions. Gov Inf Q 22:187–216
ITU (2014) Measuring the information society report,
2014. https://doi.org/10.3359/oz0303157
Janowski T (2015) Digital government evolution: from
transformation to contextualization. Gov Inf Q 32:
221–236
Kingdon J (1995) Agendas, alternatives, and public
policies. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York
Marques F (2010) Internet, canais de participação e efeitos
políticos: um estudo do Portal da C^amara. Fronteiras
Estud Midiáticos 12(2):82–94
Matheus R (2009) Consultas públicas do Governo Federal
e agências reguladoras. In: Anais do II Congresso
Consad de Gestão Pública, Brasília
Nielsen (2014) An era of growth: the cross-platform
report. Retrieved from http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/
insights/reports/2014/an-era-of-growth-the-cross-platf
ormreport.html
OGP – Open Government Partnership (2011) Declaração
de governo aberto. Available at http://www.governo
aberto.cgu.gov.br/central-de-conteudo/documentos/ar
quivos/declaracao-governo-aberto.pdf. Last access on:
17 June 2016
Possamai AJ (2011) Democratização do Estado na era
digital: e-participação no ciclo de políticas públicas.
Master’s in Political Science, Federal University of
Rio Grande do Sul, Institute of Philosophy and
Human Sciences, Post-Graduation in Political Science
program
Rothberg, Danilo (2010) Contribuições a uma teoria da
democracia digital como suporte à formulação de
políticas públicas. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia,
Tecnología y Sociedad - CTS 14(5):87–105
Sampaio R (2009). Governança eletrônica no Brasil:
limites e possibilidades introduzidos pelo orçamento
participativo na internet. Planej Polít Públicas
(33):123–144
Sampaio RC (2013) Democracia digital no Brasil: uma
prospecção das iniciativas relevantes. Rev Eletrônica
Ciênc Polít 4(1–2):55–89