A very interesting test for the Greek InfoSoc Operational Programme is to compare it to similar programmes in Portugal and Spain, countries with a similar degree of development. The comparative position of the three countries arises from qualitative comparison of their operational programmes, combined with quantitative comparison based on three categories of fields of intervention - policy targets.
|The Case of Spain: Infrastructure|
|The Case of Portugal: e-learning|
|The Case of Greece: Balance|
|The Case of Spain: Infrastructure
For Spain the top priorities in programme policy are infrastructure and access. Based on a 4-field categorisation, infrastructure is the main area of intervention accounting for around 59.2% of the programme, while the other areas have small differences: e-learning with 16.4%, e-government with 12.6% and e-business with 11.8%.
This policy focus is confirmed by categorising the 5 areas of intervention where infrastructure and access account for 71% of the programme overall. This is followed by applications and services with 14.1% and content with 14%. The involvement of skills in the programme is very low with just 0.9%.
These findings are confirmed by an analysis of the programmes based on categorisation of 11 areas of intervention where the infrastructure and cheaper-faster internet for students and researchers together account for 68.3% of the programme.
Characteristic findings of the analysis based on this categorisation are the exceptionally low involvement of online health services and smart transport systems in the programme as well as the lack of employment in the knowledge-based economy actions in the programme.
|The Case of Portugal: e-learning
For Portugal the top priority in programme policy is e-learning. Based on a 4-field categorisation, e-learning accounts for 42.9% of the programme. This is followed by the other three areas of intervention with major figures, namely infrastructure (23.6%), e-government (18.1%) and e-business (15.4%).
Based on a 5-field categorisation, access is the top priority accounting for 31.4% of the programme. This is followed by applications and services with 26.3% and content with 22.6% with the lowest degree of participation being held by infrastructure (10.5%). The involvement of skills in the programme is very low with just 9.2%.
The 11-field categorisation analysis confirms these findings in general and places emphasis on health and transport.
Online health services are extremely high priority accounting for 8.3% of the programme. ON the contrary, though, there is a lack of priorities for smart transport systems.
|The Case of Greece: Balance
In the case of Greece, there is a relatively balanced set of priorities based on the 4-field categorisation. The most important priorities are infrastructure and e-government accounting for 30.1% and 29.8% respectively followed by e-learning with 24.3%. Relatively lower but still significant is e-business accounting for 15.8%.
Based on 5-field categorisation of the areas of intervention, applications and services are the most important priority accounting for 35.1% of the programme followed by infrastructure which accounts for 20.4%. Relatively low yet still important is the participation of skills (16.8%), access (11.7%) and content (16%).
Based on 11-field categorisation, the most important priorities are e-government and e-content accounting for 17.2%, 16.8% and 14.7% respectively. This is followed by employment in the knowledge-based economy and e-business accounting for 12.3% and 10.9% respectively.
The two fields relating to the internet account for 9.9% while health services and smart transport systems account for lower yet significant figures of 5.7% and 4.5% respectively in the Operational Programme budget.