大数据、区块链、人工智能等新兴技术在短短十多年间，经历了从科技创新到广泛扩散的深度转型，深刻影响人类经济社会发展和全球治理。世界各国加快数字化治理向纵深推进，数字政府正在成为全球公认的新型电子政务形态。与发达国家相比，我国数字政府发展还存在较大差距。
一、世界主要国家数字政府概况
据《2022联合国电子政务调查报告》显示，丹麦、韩国、美国、英国、新加坡等15个国家处于EGDI（规范化综合指数）非常高水平组，五个国家指数分别为0.9717、0.9529、0.9151、0.9138和0.9133，其中丹麦连续三期排名第一。中国电子政务排名从2012年的第78位上升为第43位，成为全球增幅最高的国家。
（一）从发展阶段看
丹麦、美国等主要国家处于数字政府建设的后期阶段或者高级阶段，数字政府成熟较高，当前重点聚焦于绩效评估科学化与政务流程再造高效化，旨在建立用户优化、便捷高效的公共部门。比如，英国政府正在加紧测试政府绩效评估系统，试图通过该系统保证政府公共决策“数据仪表盘”的实时呈现与可视化等。
（二）从管理体制看
许多国家已经完成了机构改革，以更好支持数字政府转型。在193个联合国成员国中，有145个国家设有首席信息官或类似职位。各国都在积极改善电子政务以及公共服务的在线支持，将政府数字化转型与国家发展战略融为一体，更多国家开始关注通过电子政务建设整体政府，解决协同治理问题。
（三）从数据驱动看
欧美等国家数字治理的“国家主义”态势更加明显并不断升级，数字治理不断升级为数智治理并纷纷抢占人工智能的战略高地。比如，美国成立了专门管理人工智能的国家机构；欧盟及其成员国法国、德国、英国均出台了人工智能的洲战略或国家战略，技术进步驱动治理实践的发展趋势更加明显。
总的来看，其他国家数字政府建设涉及六个方面，即制定数字政府建设的战略规划，建立首席信息官数字政府管理运行制度，深化政务数据的开放和应用，注重政务数据的融合与共享，借助人工智能技术打造智能化政府，重视颁布法令保护数据安全与公民隐私等。
二、我国数字政府建设现状
近年来，东部地区数字政府发展的良好态势最为迅猛，中部地区紧随东部之后，而西部地区整体发展略为缓慢，涌现出以广东省、浙江省和贵州省为代表的三大模式。
（一）整体推进、管运分离的广东模式
广东省采取“制度创新+技术创新”构建数字政府管理新体制，政府侧撤并和调整了省委和省直各部门44个内设信息化机构，组建广东省政务服务数据管理局为数字政府改革建设行政主管机构，统一全省数字政府规划、标准制定、资源配置、业务协同、监督管理。企业侧由腾讯、联通等多家公司共同投资成立数字广东网络建设有限公司，经政府采购程序确定后，为各单位统一提供建设运维运营服务。
（二）以点带面、政企合作的浙江模式
浙江省采用“政府牵引+社会参与”的建设运营模式，充分发挥政府的引导与管理作用，以及企业的技术积累与沉淀优势。以“最多跑一次”改革为牵引，积极推动政务服务、城市治理、服务企业等多方面的信息化升级，全面推进政府治理体系和治理能力的现代化。
（三）国企操盘、数据融合的贵州模式
贵州省注重打造贵州省大数据局、贵州省大数据产业发展中心、云上贵州大数据集团“三位一体”的发展格局。以实施大数据战略行动、建设国家大数据（贵州）综合试验区为统领，充分依托“一云一网一平台”汇聚全省数据资源优势，在大数据支撑数字政府建设方面走在了全国前列。
从未来发展看，组织结构扁平高效，行政职能日趋数字化，数据治理上升到更高地位等将成为我国数字政府的主要特征。截至2021年12月底，我国有23个省级（占比71.9%）和31个重点城市（占比96.9%）地方政府明确了政务数据管理机构，承担起数字政府建设工作，这些举措将有利于推进数字政府建设步入“快车道”。
三、中外数字政府建设比较
（一）发展理念有所不同，数据地位重视不够
我国数字政府建设坚持以人民为中心思想，围绕国家治理体系现代化与“条”“块”结合的政府力量，开发形成了全国统一流程的在线服务平台，实现国内政务、医疗、交通、农业与社区治理等多场景数字应用。但从数据管理的角度看，这一阶段数据更多被作为一种应用资源，只是在政府内部共享，以及不同程度对社会开放，与典型国家数据治理的高级阶段相比，我们实际上还差了好多年。加强数字政府建设是推进治理现代化的重要举措，数据驱动下政府业务运行呈现出动态性、多元性、周期性、复杂性等新特征，只有基于数据流转规律优化业务运行路径，才能不断提升数字政府辅助决策能力。
（二）体制机制相对保守，协同治理效果不佳
目前，我国已有二十多个省级政府先后成立了大数据管理局或大数据中心等，统筹推进本地区信息化、数字化工作。这些单位多为厅级或副厅级，以履行管理职能居多，不过部门性质和归属尚未完全统一。比如，北京市大数据中心是隶属于市经济和信息化局的事业单位，天津市大数据管理中心归市委网信办“管辖”，福建省大数据管理局、江西省大数据中心皆由发展和改革委员会管理等。各地建立的大数据管理局往往配套设立事业单位属性的大数据中心，并通过采购或外包等方式由企业完成技术准备和运维保障，有可能会出现大数据管理局过度依赖企业，很难对政府本身“开刀”深化改革等问题。
（三）数据共享梗阻较多，制度优势彰显不够
2018年以来，我国统一的国家政务服务平台投入运行，各地区政府服务平台也相继投入使用，不过数据作为数字政府有效运转的关键要素，其在政府部门间的有效分享与流通依然存在一定程度的不顺畅。对于数字政府建设中跨部门数据共享等问题，还没有针对性的实际举措，暴露出我国数字政府建设方面缺乏必要的制度规范，相应的政策试点向制度构建的演进之路仍然较为漫长。如何将我国的制度优势，更好通过数字政府这一新型载体转化为治理效能，将成为当前和今后一段时期的重点课题。
四、典型国家数字政府建设对我国的启示
2021年12月，日本早稻田大学与国际CIO协会、亚太经合组织联合发布《第16届世界数字政府调查排名报告》。其中，前四名分别是丹麦（94.2748），新加坡（94.0520），英国（93.9841）和美国（93.7210），成为数字政府建设的“典型国家”。中国（66.6266）位列第49名，相比2020年下降了12名。典型国家数字政府在战略规划、制度机制、技术支撑和数据治理等多个方面为其他国家做出了“表率”，对我国加快政府职能转变，以更有效的治理模式、更有力的工具手段建设数字政府提供了参考借鉴。
（一）加强数字政府的战略指引与项目规划
典型国家普遍重视政府数字化转型的战略规划制定，通过规划明确发展愿景并指明发展方向，同时将“开放、整体和以公民为中心”等价值理念贯穿其中。不仅有国家层面的顶层设计，还有各级地方政府的行动规划，微观层面也极其重视系统治理。其中，英国政府发布的每一项相关战略都上升到国家层面。在其转型过程中，政府始终先行，从中央层面推动政府数字化的协同建设。美国出台诸多法案与战略规划文件推进数字政府建设，并明确每一阶段数字政府发展规划与建成效果，较好地促进了政府决策模式智能化等。
具体做法是，各国均高度重视政府数字化转型过程中ICT项目或数字服务的有效投资与集约管理。尤其是在后疫情时代经济下行压力增大和公共预算大幅削减的新形势下，更加关注政府的统管与监督。在政企合作数字化项目投资中，则侧重于“成本—收益”分析（事先评估），以及基于关键绩效指标的评价与用户反馈（事后评估），在此基础上审慎做出数字化项目是否实施以及优先级等决策。此外，各国利用数字技术强化对项目的指导和监督，实现项目管理的数字化转型，降低了各部门分头决策的成本和其他风险。积极发挥统一数字基础设施的作用，建立各类共享池实现政府部门模型、代码、应用共享，避免了重复开发和浪费。
（二）优化数字政府的制度体制和运行机制
数字政府的构建必须有完善的组织管理体系作为支撑，为此诸多国家均设立了专门的管理机构，比如英国的政府数字服务局（GDS)，美国的首席数据官（CDO）制度等。其中，美国联邦总务署（GSA）在数字政府中的职能发挥，为我国机关事务管理提供了一系列经验启示。在美国数字政府发展进程中，GAS主要扮演三种重要角色，即产品和服务的优质提供者；标准化、技术性解决方案的设计者及前沿及创新型项目的发起方和领导者，承担了数字政府的大部分工作。
实践证明，强化职能部门联动协作能力，可以提升数字政府管理水平。面对政府数字化转型，各国都在加快促进金字塔式公共组织体系向扁平化网络状组织结构变革，从而实现数据在各部门间流通与共享。通过搭建跨部门整体框架与机制，持续推进公共服务内容整合及各部门业务协同，由国家层面统一整合不同部门工作和社会各类资源，积极完善数字技术在网络治理中的支撑作用，为社会、企业、用户提供一站式的政务服务。各国都搭建了电子化政务服务网络，并基于大数据、云计算技术推进政府公共数据信息网站建设，不断深化国家数字化与智能化程度。
（三）数字化转型依赖最新技术与深度应用
从典型国家案例来看，数字政府可以通过云计算和大数据，再造服务和治理流程，重建后台职能，基于数据重新分配公共服务资源，使其得到更合理的使用，并通过构建数字平台将用户需求、供给、对策等融为一体，从而形成新的政府治理模式。多个国家已经部署并开展的“政府即平台”数字政府建设框架，就是最新技术与治理理念有机融合的“典范”。这启示我们要大力提高技术管理能力，以此作为数字政府建设的重要抓手。各国都主推政企合作模式寻求技术支持，比如“数字丹麦”的成功就离不开社会企业的“默默奉献”。
各国始终关注新兴技术研发与应用，重视数字共享技术普及。加快数据采集技术研发，聚焦半导体、芯片等ICT技术升级突破，推出多元化数字政府办公APP。推广网络爬虫、自然语言等算法，定量分析公民需求、情感等方面数据，提高政府服务质量。新兴技术社会化应用引领全球发展方向，基于云计算的在线服务、移动服务已逐渐被各国认可并接受，不断拓展政务服务渠道，创新政府信息服务方式。比如，2017年起，美国就开始推行移动政府建设（Mobile Government)，实现了多平台一体化问政，这一做法在许多国家得到了“复制推广”。
（四）打造数字政府的数据治理与防护体系
各国政府都在致力于思考如何缩小数字鸿沟，减少数字排斥，促进数字共融。比如，新加坡有着完备的数字系统治理体系和运行机制，提出“政府信息化特派专员制度”，通过定期轮岗、分权执行建设计划实现统一协调。同时，制定了标准规范与顶层设计，涉及数据治理、数字服务与（数字）信息管理等方面的一整套基础标准或最佳实践指南。美国联邦政府的数据治理体系则凸显出开放数据的引领与贯通特性，围绕开放数据逐步明确方向、理念、方法，体现在多个方面的政策设计之中，从而将开放数据有效贯通其间，并系统性地充实政府数据治理的整体内容。
信息数据的安全与隐私问题是数字政府面临的重要挑战，典型国家在数字政府建设过程中，始终将治理工具的发展与公民隐私保护放到同等重要高度。由于数字政府是基于大数据的智能公共决策模式，是从海量数据中实时挖掘出有价值信息辅助决策的过程，相应的数据安全与隐私保护问题便成了数字治理的新问题。比如，为防止数据滥用所引发的风险，美国政府出台了一系列法律法规，对联邦网络系统、关键基础设施和国家的网络安全与风险防控进行了详细规定。2018年，丹麦提出了最新的网络和信息安全战略，要求政府部门必须熟悉并能够预防数字风险，以便继续使用数字解决方案来推动社会发展。实践证明，以攻防为主的传统安全观已难以应对新的数字风险，必须跳出传统思维，以协作为基础，推动政府、社会与个人一体联动，不断提升安全认知维度，共同提高防护措施，构建整体防护体系。
翻译：
In just over a decade, emerging technologies such as big data, blockchain and artificial intelligence have undergone a profound transformation from scientific and technological innovation to widespread diffusion, with a profound impact on human economic and social development and global governance. Countries around the world are accelerating the deepening of digital governance, and digital government is becoming a new form of e-government recognized worldwide. Compared with the developed countries, there is still a big gap in our digital government development.
I. Overview of Digital government in major countries in the world
According to the 2022 UN e-Government Survey, 15 countries including Denmark, South Korea, the United States, the United Kingdom and Singapore are in the very high level group of the Standardized Composite Index (EGDI), with the five countries’ indexes at 0.9717, 0.9529, 0.9151, 0.9138 and 0.9133, respectively. Denmark ranked first for three consecutive periods. China’s e-government ranking rose from 78th in 2012 to 43rd, the highest increase in the world.
(1) From the stage of development
Denmark, the United States and other major countries are in the late stage or advanced stage of digital government construction, and the digital government is relatively mature. Currently, the focus is on scientific performance evaluation and efficient government process reengineering, aiming at establishing a convenient and efficient public sector with optimized users. For example, the British government is testing a government performance evaluation system to ensure real-time presentation and visualization of the government’s “data dashboard” of public decision-making.
(2) From the management system
Many countries have already completed institutional reforms to better support the digital government transition. Of the 193 UN member states, 145 have a chief information officer or similar position. All countries are actively improving e-government and online support for public services, integrating government digital transformation with national development strategies, and more countries begin to pay attention to building a whole government through e-government to solve the problem of collaborative governance.
(3) From the data-driven view
The “nationalistic” trend of digital governance in Europe and the United States has become more obvious and constantly upgraded. Digital governance is constantly upgraded to multi-intelligence governance and has seized the strategic heights of artificial intelligence. The US, for example, has set up a national agency to manage artificial intelligence; The European Union and its member states, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, have all introduced continental or national strategies on artificial intelligence, and the development trend of governance practice driven by technological progress is more obvious.
In general, digital government construction in other countries involves six aspects, namely, formulating strategic planning for digital government construction, establishing chief information officer digital government management and operation system, deepening the openness and application of government data, paying attention to the integration and sharing of government data, building intelligent government with the help of artificial intelligence technology, and attaching importance to promulgation laws to protect data security and citizens’ privacy.
2, the current situation of the digital government construction in our country
In recent years, the eastern region has witnessed the most rapid development of digital government, followed by the central region, while the overall development of the western region has been a little slow. Three major models have emerged, represented by Guangdong Province, Zhejiang Province and Guizhou Province.
(1) Guangdong model of overall promotion and separation of management and transportation
Guangdong Province has adopted “institutional innovation + technological innovation” to build a new system of digital government management. The government has removed and adjusted 44 internal information organizations of the provincial Party Committee and departments directly under the provincial government, and set up the Guangdong Provincial Government Service Data Administration Bureau as the administrative authority for digital government reform and construction, so as to unify the provincial digital government planning, standard formulation, resource allocation, business coordination, supervision and management. The enterprise side is jointly invested by Tencent, Unicom and other companies to set up Digital Guangdong Network Construction Co., LTD. After the government procurement process, it provides unified construction, operation and maintenance services for all units.
(2) Zhejiang model of government-enterprise cooperation based on point and surface
Zhejiang Province adopts the construction and operation mode of “government traction + social participation”, giving full play to the guiding and management role of the government, as well as the advantages of technological accumulation and precipitation of enterprises. Guided by the “no more than one trip” reform, we will actively promote the upgrading of information technology in government services, urban governance, and service enterprises, and comprehensively modernize the government’s governance system and capacity.
(3) Guizhou model of state-owned enterprise trading and data fusion
Guizhou Province focuses on creating a “trinity” development pattern of Guizhou Big Data Bureau, Guizhou Big Data Industry Development Center and Guizhou Big Data Group on the cloud. Guided by the implementation of big data strategic actions and the construction of the National Big Data (Guizhou) comprehensive Pilot Zone, it gathers the advantages of data resources of the whole province by fully relying on the “one cloud, one network and one platform”, and is at the forefront of the country in the construction of digital government supported by big data.
From the perspective of future development, the main characteristics of our digital government will be the flat and efficient organization structure, the increasingly digital administrative functions, and the rise of data governance to a higher position. By the end of December 2021, local governments in 23 provincial-level (71.9%) and 31 key cities (96.9%) have designated government data management organizations to undertake the construction of digital government. These measures will help push the construction of digital government into the “fast lane”.
3. Comparison of digital government construction between China and Foreign countries
(1) Different development concepts, not enough attention to the status of data
China’s digital government construction adheres to the people-centered idea. Centering on the modernization of the national governance system and the combination of “article” and “block” of the government, we have developed and formed an online service platform with a unified national process to realize multi-scene digital applications in domestic government affairs, medical care, transportation, agriculture and community governance.
However, from the perspective of data management, data in this stage is regarded as more of an application resource, only shared within the government and open to the society to varying degrees. Compared with the advanced stage of typical national data governance, we are actually many years behind. Strengthening the construction of digital government is an important measure to promote the modernization of governance. The data-driven government business operation presents new features such as dynamic, diversified, cyclical and complex. Only by optimizing the business operation path based on the law of data flow can the digital government’s auxiliary decision-making ability be continuously improved.
(2) The system and mechanism are relatively conservative, and the collaborative governance effect is not good
At present, more than 20 provincial governments have set up big data administration bureaus or big data centers to promote regional informatization and digitization. Most of these units are department level or deputy department level, in order to perform management functions, but the nature and attribution of the departments have not been completely unified. For example, Beijing Big Data Center is a public institution affiliated to the Municipal Bureau of Economy and Information Technology, Tianjin Big Data Management Center is under the “jurisdiction” of the Municipal Network and Information Technology Office, and Fujian Big Data Management Bureau and Jiangxi Big Data Center are all managed by the Development and Reform Commission.
The Big data administration bureaus set up around the country often set up big data centers with the attributes of public institutions, and enterprises complete technical preparation and operation and maintenance guarantee through procurement or outsourcing. There may be problems such as the over-dependence of Big Data Administration bureaus on enterprises and the difficulty of deepening reform of the government itself.
(3) There are many obstructions in data sharing and insufficient display of institutional advantages
Since 2018, China’s unified national government affairs service platform has been put into operation, and local government service platforms have also been put into use. However, as a key element for the effective operation of digital government, the effective sharing and circulation of data among government departments are still not smooth to a certain extent. For the problems of cross-departmental data sharing in the construction of digital government, there are no targeted measures, which exposes the lack of necessary institutional norms in the construction of digital government, and the corresponding policy pilot is still a long way from the evolution of institutional construction. How to transform the institutional advantage of our country into governance efficiency through the new carrier of digital government will become a key topic in the current and future period.
4. The enlightenment of the typical national digital government construction to our country
In December 2021, Waseda University of Japan, CIO International Association and APEC jointly released the 16th World Digital Government Survey Ranking Report. Among them, the top four are Denmark (94.2748), Singapore (94.0520), the United Kingdom (93.9841) and the United States (93.7210), which have become the “typical countries” of digital government construction. China (66.6266) ranked 49th, down 12 places from 2020. Typical national digital government has set an example for other countries in many aspects such as strategic planning, institutional mechanism, technical support and data governance. It provides reference for China to accelerate the transformation of government functions and build digital government with more effective governance mode and more powerful tools and means.
(1) Strengthening strategic guidance and project planning for digital government
Typical countries generally attach great importance to the formulation of strategic planning for government digital transformation, through which the development vision is clearly defined and the development direction is indicated, and the values of “openness, integrality and citizen centered” are permeated. There is not only top-level design at the national level, but also action planning of local governments at all levels. At the micro level, systematic governance is also attached great importance.
Among them, every relevant strategy issued by the British government rises to the national level. In the process of its transformation, the government always takes the lead and promotes the collaborative construction of government digitization from the central level. The United States has introduced a number of bills and strategic planning documents to promote the construction of digital government, and clearly defined the development planning and completion effects of digital government at each stage, which has better promoted the intelligent decision-making mode of government.
In particular, countries are attaching great importance to effective investment and intensive management of ICT projects or digital services in the digital transformation of government.
Especially in the new situation of increasing economic downward pressure and drastic reduction of public budget in the post-epidemic era. More attention is paid to government management and supervision. In government-enterprise cooperation digital project investment. Emphasis is placed on “cost-benefit” analysis (pre-evaluation), evaluation based on key performance indicators and user feedback (post-evaluation), and on this basis. The implementation of digital project and priority decisions are prudentially made. In addition, countries use digital technologies to strengthen project guidance and supervision and achieve a digital transformation of project management. Reducing the cost and other risks of separate decision-making among departments. We should actively play the role of unified digital infrastructure, establish various sharing pools to realize the sharing of models, codes and applications of government departments, and avoid repeated development and waste.
(2) Improving the institutions, systems and operational mechanisms of the digital government
The construction of digital government must be supported by a sound organization and management system. For this purpose, many countries have set up special management institutions. Such as the Government Digital Service (GDS) in the UK and the Chief Data Officer (CDO) system in the US. Among them, the United States Federal General Services Administration (GSA) in the function of digital government. Provides a series of experience for our government affairs management. In the development process of digital government in the United States. GAS plays three important roles: quality provider of products and services. Designers of standardized, technical solutions and sponsors and leaders of cutting-edge and innovative projects undertake much of the work of digital government.
Practice has proved that strengthening the coordination ability of functional departments can improve the level of digital government management. Faced with the digital transformation of government. All countries are accelerating the transformation of the pyramid public organization system to the flat network organization structure. So as to realize the flow and sharing of data among various departments.
By building an inter-departmental framework and mechanism. We will continue to promote the integration of public service content and business coordination among various departments. Integrate the work of different departments and various social resources at the national level. And actively improve the supporting role of digital technology in network governance. So as to provide one-stop government services for society, enterprises and users. All countries have built e-government service networks And promoted the construction of government public data information websites based on big data and cloud computing technologies. Constantly deepening the country’s digitalization and intelligence.
(3) Digital transformation relies on the latest technology and deep application
From the perspective of typical national cases, digital government can reconstruct service and governance processes. Rebuild background functions through cloud computing and big data, redistribute public service resources based on data. So that they can be used more reasonably, and build digital platforms to integrate user demand. Supply and countermeasures, thus forming a new governance model. The “government as a platform” digital government construction framework. Which has been deployed and carried out in many countries, is a “model” of organic integration of the latest technologies and governance concepts. This enlighten us to greatly improve the ability of technology management as an important point of digital government construction. Countries are mainly promoting government-enterprise cooperation to seek technical support. For example, the success of “Digital Denmark” cannot be achieved without the “silent dedication” of social enterprises.
Countries have always paid close attention to the research. Development and application of emerging technologies and the popularization of digital sharing technologies. We will accelerate research and development of data acquisition technologies. Focus on breakthroughs in upgrading ICT technologies such as semiconductors and chips, and launch diversified digital government office apps. To promote web crawler, natural language and other algorithms. Quantitatively analyze the data of citizens’ needs and emotions, and improve the quality of government services.
The social application of emerging technologies leads the direction of global development. Online services and mobile services based on cloud computing have been gradually recognized and accepted by various countries. The government is constantly expanding the channels of government service and innovating the ways of government information service. For example, in 2017, the United States began to implement the construction of Mobile Government. Realizing the integration of multi-platform political inquiry. And this practice has been “copied and promoted” in many countries.
(4) Build a data governance and protection system for digital government
Governments are thinking about how to bridge the digital divide, reduce digital exclusion and promote digital inclusion. For example, Singapore has a complete digital system governance system and operation mechanism. It proposes a “special commissioner system for Government informatization” to achieve unity and coordination through regular job rotation and decentralized implementation of construction plans. At the same time, it has developed standard specifications and top-level design. A set of basic standards or best practice guidelines covering data governance, digital services and (digital) information management. The data governance system of the US federal government highlights the leading and penetrating characteristics of open data. It gradually clarifies the direction, concepts and methods around open data. Which are reflected in the policy design in many aspects. So as to effectively integrate open data and systematically enrich the overall content of government data governance.
The security and privacy of information data are important challenges faced by digital government.
Typical countries always put the development of governance tools and the protection of citizens’ privacy on the same level during the construction of digital government. As digital government is an intelligent public decision-making mode based on big data. It is a process of mining valuable information from massive data in real time to assist decision-making. And the corresponding data security and privacy protection issues have become a new problem of digital governance. For example, in order to prevent risks caused by data abuse. The US government has issued a series of laws and regulations, stipulating in detail the security and risk prevention and control of the federal network system. Critical infrastructure and national network.
In 2018, Denmark introduced its latest cyber and information security strategy. Which requires that government departments must be familiar with and able to prevent digital risks in order to continue using digital solutions to drive social development. Practice has proved that the traditional concept of security. Which focuses on offense and defense, is no longer able to cope with new digital risks. It is necessary to think outside the traditional mindset and. On the basis of collaboration, promote the integration of government, society and individuals, constantly enhance the dimension of security cognition. Jointly improve protective measures. And build an overall protection system.
本文由数字化转型网（www.szhzxw.cn）转载而成，来源：广东数字政府研究院；编辑/翻译：数字化转型网宁檬树。
免责声明: 本网站(http://www.szhzxw.cn/)内容主要来自原创、合作媒体供稿和第三方投稿，凡在本网站出现的信息，均仅供参考。本网站将尽力确保所提供信息的准确性及可靠性，但不保证有关资料的准确性及可靠性，读者在使用前请进一步核实，并对任何自主决定的行为负责。本网站对有关资料所引致的错误、不确或遗漏，概不负任何法律责任。
本网站刊载的所有内容(包括但不仅限文字、图片、LOGO、音频、视频、软件、程序等) 版权归原作者所有。任何单位或个人认为本网站中的内容可能涉嫌侵犯其知识产权或存在不实内容时，请及时通知本站，予以删除。
