TRANSFORMING ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE IN UZBEKISTAN THROUGH DIGITAL PUBLIC SECTOR TOOLS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20690797Keywords:
digital governance, e-government, e-procurement, public sector digitalization, Uzbekistan, panel data analysis, economic reformAbstract
This research investigates how digital tools in government are transforming the method
Uzbekistan controls its economy. From the first glance at data from 2019 to 2023 and using a specific statistical
way of it called a Fixed Effects model framework, the research shows the effect of primary digitalization metrics
— for example, digital bidding execution, online public service platforms reach, web accessibility, and fiscal
clearness — on the national E-Government Development Index (EGDI). The most powerful ways to improve
are purchasing and making more services available online using a digital system for government. Furthermore,
internet access and more openly available financial data also play a pivotal role in this progress. These findings
suggest practical advice for Uzbekistan’s “Digital Uzbekistan 2030” plan and provide a useful map for other
improving nations that are trying to modernize their governments through technology.
References
[1] Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. PF-6079 dated October 5, 2020 “On approval
of the Strategy ‘Digital Uzbekistan — 2030’ and measures for its effective implementation.” Tashkent, 2020.
[2] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA). (2023). UN E-Government
Survey 2022: The Future of Digital Government. New York: United Nations.
[3] Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and Managing eGovernment: An International Text. London: SAGE
Publications.
[4] Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and
Poverty. New York: Crown Publishers.
[5] Welch, E. W., & Pandey, S. K. (2007). E-government and bureaucracy: Toward a better understanding
of intranet implementation and its effect on red tape. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,
17(3), 379–404.
[6] Khi, V. T., Moon, M. J., & Jung, K. (2021). E-procurement and governance quality: Evidence from
Korean government agencies. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 712–726.
[7] Ferraz, C., Finan, F., & Moreira, D. B. (2012). Corrupting learning: Evidence from missing federal
education funds in Brazil. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(4), 1512–1554.
[8] Aidarov, A., & Zhaksybekov, T. (2020). Digital procurement reforms and public sector integrity: Evidence
from Kazakhstan. Post-Communist Economies, 32(6), 721–740.
[9] Kaufmann, D., & Bellver, A. (2005). Transparenting transparency: Initial empirics and policy applications.
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, No. 3475.
[10] Mercer-Blackman, V., & Umaña, A. (2003). The effectiveness of fiscal policy in growth: Time series
evidence from countries in transition. IMF Working Paper, WP/03/208.
[11] Umarov, K., & Ergashev, B. (2022). Digital transformation of public service delivery in Uzbekistan:
Progress and challenges. Central Asian Journal of Public Administration, 4(1), 45–67.
[12] Nazarov, Z. (2023). Electronic procurement and cost efficiency in Uzbekistan’s public sector. Uzbekistan
Economic Review, 12(2), 88–104.
[13] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA). (2022). Methodology for the
UN E-Government Survey. New York: United Nations.
[14] International Budget Partnership. (2023). Open Budget Survey 2023. Washington, D.C.: International
Budget Partnership.
[15] Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. 2nd ed. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
[16] Public Procurement Agency of Uzbekistan. (2023). Annual Report on Public Procurement 2022.
Tashkent: Public Procurement Agency.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 GREEN ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.