Development Management
Development Management
ISSN 2413-9610 e-ISSN 2663-2365 UDC 004; 005; 35; 336; 65
DOI: 10.57111/devt
Submit an article

Article

Download article

Mechanisms for overcoming departmental barriers in the digitalisation of ethno-national policy: From “information silos” to integrated governance

Yuli Chen*

yuli_chen@outlook.com

Received 02.03.2026, Revised 14.07.2026, Accepted 01.09.2026 Published 29.09.2026

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to identify management models that can ensure consistent data exchange in the context of digital transformation of the public sector. The methodology was based on an interdisciplinary combination of tools of public administration, digital governance, analysis of information systems, and ethno-political studies, which allowed tracing the features of the functioning of state registers, mechanisms of interdepartmental interaction, and data management practices during 2015-2025 through comparative analytical and institutional approaches. The results of the study showed that “information silos” in ethno-national policy are formed through the differentiation of competencies between statistical, migration, educational, and security institutions. Comparison of national models showed that the Ukrainian digital governance system ensured the development of service platforms (dozens of registries were integrated through the Diia system, the number of users exceeded 21 million, and the Trembita platform processes millions of transactions every month), but has not formed a complete analytical consolidation between state registers. It was established that the centralised control model of China provides a high speed of analytical processing of information (more than 90% of large cities have implemented elements of smart city governance), but is accompanied by risks of excessive digital control and strengthening of supervisory functions of the state. Estonia’s experience has shown that the combination of interoperability, cryptographic protection, and transparent audit of data access creates a more balanced system of interagency coordination: more than 1,000 organisations and more than 3,000 services interact through the X-Road platform, and 87.59% of the population uses electronic public services. The study confirmed that the regulation of personal data protection simultaneously performs the function of legal protection and becomes a factor of institutional isolation between state structures. The study found that overcoming information fragmentation in the field of ethno-national monitoring requires a transition from a model of data accumulation by individual departments to a management system based on standardised exchange protocols, unified metadata, and access audit mechanisms. The practical significance of the results lies in the possibility of their use by public authorities, digital governance structures, analytical centres, and developers of state information systems for the development of safe models of interdepartmental data exchange in the field of ethno-national policy and public administration


Keywords:

personal data protection; interoperability; once-only principle; predictive management; federal data management

https://doi.org/10.63341/devt/3.2026.27

Retrieved from Volume 25, No. 3, 2026

Pages 27-42

References Suggested citation

References

  1. Ansari, K. (2025). A project of regionalism in international relations entitled cybersecurity in regional integration efforts: Learning from Estonia’s cyber attack and its impact on the Baltic region. SSRN. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.5219190.
  2. Balabukha, K. (2026). Digital maturity and the quality of data-driven management decisions: The experience of developing countries. Investments: Practice and Experience, 5, 205-214. doi: 10.32702/2306-6814.2026.5.205.
  3. Boyoli, K. (2022). Facing the digital divide in E-stonia: A field study on the inclusion of senior citizens in the digital society of Estonia. Lund: Lund University.
  4. Charalabidis, Y., Loukis, E., Alexopoulos, C., & Lachana, Z. (2019). The three generations of electronic government: From service provision to open data and to policy analytics. In I. Lindgren, M. Janssen, H. Lee, A. Polini, M. Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar, H. Jochen Scholl & E. Tambouris (Eds.), Electronic government (pp. 3-19). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-27325-5_1.
  5. China Academy of Information and Communications Technology. (2026). Government digital and intelligent transformation development research report (2025). Retrieved from https://www.caict.ac.cn/kxyj/qwfb/ztbg/202603/t20260309_715551.htm.
  6. China Internet Network Information Center. (2026). 57th statistical report on China’s Internet development. Retrieved from https://www.ecns.cn/news/cns-wire/2026-02-05/detail-iheznyiy1140391.shtml.
  7. Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. (2023). CAPAC Chair commends 2020 Census data product. Retrieved from https://capac-chu.house.gov/press-release/capac-chair-commends-2020-census-data-product.
  8. de Frutos Lucas, J., & Haugo, H.T. (2024). Moving forward with the European health data space: The need to restore trust in European health systems. The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, 40, article number 100906. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100906.
  9. Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine. (2021). With EU support, the Trembita system helps develop digital governance in Ukraine. Retrieved from https://www.eeas.europa.eu/node/94854_en?s=232.
  10. Di Giulio, M., & Vecchi, G. (2021). Implementing digitalization in the public sector. Technologies, agency, and governance. Public Policy and Administration, 38(2), 133-158. doi: 10.1177/09520767211023283.
  11. Digital and Population Data Services Agency. (2022). Suomi.fi data exchange layer. Retrieved from https://www.suomi.fi/services/suomi-fi-data-exchange-layer-digital-and-population-data-services-agency/4ab88971-b9fb-443c-99aa-bc361bac7548.
  12. dos Santos, M.T. (2025). Algorithmic bias and place of residence: Feedback loops in financial and risk assessment tools. Global Journal of Human-Social Science, 25(1), 17-30. doi: 10.34257/GJHSSFVOL25IS1PG17.
  13. Dudoit, A., Labillois, T., & Hubert, A.M. (2026). Public sector data interoperability in Canada: Building a shared, sovereign capacity to serve citizens. Montreal: CIRANO.
  14. EU Artificial Intelligence Act. (2021). Retrieved from https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/.
  15. European Commission. (2024). Estonia 2024 digital decade country report. Retrieved from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/factpages/estonia-2024-digital-decade-country-report.
  16. European Commission. (n.d.). New European interoperability framework: Promoting seamless services and data flows for European public administrations. Retrieved from https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/collection/iopeu-monitoring/european-interoperability-framework-detail.
  17. European Migration Network. (2020). Accurate, timely, interoperable? Data management in the asylum procedure. Retrieved from https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-06/netherlands_data_management_2020_en.pdf#13#1.
  18. Eurostat. (2026). E-government activities of individuals via websites. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/isoc_ciegi_ac__custom_15335971/bookmark/table?lang=en&bookmarkId=e2a0291b-a8a1-4a5e-944f-ece75240fb4b.
  19. General Data Protection Regulation. (2016, April). Retrieved from https://gdpr-info.eu/art-9-gdpr/.
  20. Guan, J. (2025). Data sharing governance and management framework. In J. Guan (Ed.), Governance and management of medical scientific data sharing and application (pp. 37-68). Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-95-2806-6_2.
  21. Guo, M., & Zhou, Y. (2025). Boosting sustainable urban development: How smart cities improve emergency management – evidence from 275 Chinese cities. Sustainability, 17(15), article number 6851. doi: 10.3390/su17156851.
  22. Health and Welfare Information Systems Centre. (n.d.). Social services and benefits data register. Retrieved from https://www.tehik.ee/sotsiaalteenuste-ja-toetuste-andmeregister-star.
  23. Institute of Medicine. (2009). Race, ethnicity, and language data: Standardization for health care quality improvement. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219748/?report=printable.
  24. International Organization for Migration. (2025). Migration in Ukraine: 2024 facts and figures. Retrieved from https://ukraine.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl1861/files/documents/2026-03/iom-ukraine_facts-2024-eng.pdf.
  25. Jeleel-Ojuade, A. (2024). The role of information silos: An analysis of how the categorization of information creates silos within financial institutions, hindering effective communication and collaboration. SSRN. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4881342.
  26. Jung, J. (2020). Seongnam-si checks floating population every 5 minutes with big data technology. Retrieved from https://gam.newspim.com/news/view/20200501000050.
  27. Kasiwi, A.N., Wahyuni, H.I., & Ratminto. (2025). Digital transformation and cross-organizational interoperability in electronic-based government systems. Journal of Governance and Development, 21(2), 64-76. doi: 10.32890/jgd2025.21.2.5.
  28. Kirilenko, A. (2025). Public administration for sustainable development: Mechanisms and strategies of state and regional administration in the conditions of war and reconstruction of Ukraine. Mariupol: Mariupol State University.
  29. Klarmann, J.P. (2025). Algorithmic bias and fairness on trial: Discussing the future role of AI systems like COMPAS in EU criminal justice. Retrieved from https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:2048951/FULLTEXT03.pdf#page=102.
  30. Kovnyi, Y., Roshkanyuk, V.M., Panov, A.V., Vovk, M., & Dubova, K. (2023). Legal regulation of ethno-national policies (national minorities, indigenous peoples, multiculturalism). Cuestiones Políticas, 41(77), 158-171. doi: 10.46398/cuestpol.4177.11.
  31. Kulkarni, A., Bassin, P., & Srinivasa, S. (2025). From dashboards to do-boards: A data-driven architecture for policy support systems. In A. Kő, F. Buccafurri, G. Kotsis, A.M. Tjoa & I. Khalil (Eds.), Electronic government and the information systems perspective: EGOVIS 2025 (pp. 175-189). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-032-02225-7_12.
  32. Kurniawati, M.V., Zulmy, M.F., & Ruldeviyani, Y. (2025). The optimizing data quality in interagency data sharing: A framework. Jurnal Ilmu Komputer dan Informasi, 18(1), 47-66. doi: 10.21609/jiki.v18i1.1310.
  33. Lee, J.S., Jun, J.H., Kim, D.H., & Oh, S.J. (2025). Implementation of a patient risk behavior monitoring system using real-time sensor data and AI. IEEE Access, 20, 177907-177918. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3617960.
  34. Léonard, M.N. (2023). Counting racial diversity: Naming and numbering. In Racial diversity in contemporary France: The case of colorblindness (pp. 66-85). Bristol: Bristol University Press. doi: 10.46692/9781529208023.005.
  35. Marak, S. (2025). X-Road technology: A digital backbone of Estonia’s cyber security and DPI. Future Shift Labs. Retrieved from https://futureshiftlabs.com/x-road-technology-a-digital-backbone-of-estonias-cyber-security-and-dpi/.
  36. Marcovitch, I., & Moffatt, F. (2024). Information management standards in Canadian public safety and security: Enhancing interoperability, collaboration and resilience. In F. Moffatt & B. Rector (Eds.), Information management capabilities in public safety and security: Challenges, strategies and frameworks (pp. 37-59). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-68146-2_4.
  37. Matteby, M. (2025). From silos to synergy: Institutional entrepreneurship in collective digital transformation in the public sector. Retrieved from https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-4127/paper15.pdf.
  38. Mendoza Castaneda, N. (2026). Challenges in public policy coordination. Sustainability Transitions: Economics, Policy & Society, 3, article number 18. doi: 10.65835/steps.2026.3.18.
  39. Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine. (2024). 21+ million Ukrainians use Diia. Retrieved from https://diia.gov.ua/news/21-mln-ukraintsiv-korystuiutsia-diieiu.
  40. Nalbantoğlu, C. (2022). EU – China relations and data governance policies: The role of civil societies in overcoming geopolitical challenges in cyberspace. Deusto Journal of European Studies, 5, 51-73. doi: 10.18543/ced.2555.
  41. Nepomnyashchyy, O., Radchenko, O., Marusheva, O., Prav, Y., & Shandryk, V. (2022). The public policy implementation mechanisms in the context of digitalization. Economic Affairs, 67(4), 787-794. doi: 10.46852/0424-2513.4s.2022.12.
  42. Nguyen, T.C. (2025). Estonia’s X-Road and the digital state: A socio-technical approach to public governance transformation. GRADUS, 12(2), 1-8. doi: 10.47833/2025.2.ART.015.
  43. Odinaka, N., Okolo, C.H., Chima, O.K., & Adeyelu, O.O. (2022). Translating regulatory risk into strategic opportunity: A policy-to-strategy mapping toolkit for U.S. infrastructure projects. Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research, 3(1), 607-617. doi: 10.54660/.JFMR.2022.3.1.607-617.
  44. Okolo, F.C., Etukudoh, E.A., Ogunwole, O., Osho, G.O., & Basiru, J.O. (2022). Policy-oriented framework for multi-agency data integration across national transportation and infrastructure systems. Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research, 3(1), 140-149. doi: 10.54660/.IJFMR.2022.3.1.140-149.
  45. Oldbury, K. (2022). Pilots and digital platforms: Insights into public capacity to plan and govern smart mobility towards sustainable urban mobility. In M. Albrecht, S. Sidorenko, H. Nielsen, J. Kortelainen & L. Poikolainen (Eds.), Multiple Nordic geographies: Book of abstracts (p. 129). Kuopio: University of Eastern Finland.
  46. Ontario Community Health Profiles Partnership. (n.d.). Ontario COVID-19 heterogeneity project. Retrieved from https://www.ontariohealthprofiles.ca/mobilitytool/index.php.
  47. Orazzo, A., & Cappelletti, A. (2025). Digital mediation and the reshaping of interethnic relations in contemporary China: AI surveillance and grid governance in Xinjiang. Journal of Contemporary China. doi: 10.1080/10670564.2025.2605235.
  48. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). The path to becoming a data‑driven public sector. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-path-to-becoming-a-data-driven-public-sector_059814a7-en/full-report/component-5.html.
  49. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). Czech Republic. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2023/03/oecd-public-governance-reviews-czech-republic_1a1f74c6/41fd9e5c-en.pdf#64#62.
  50. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (n.d.). X-Road Trust Federation for cross-border data exchange. Retrieved from https://oecd-opsi.org/innovations/x-road-trust-federation-for-cross-border-data-exchange/.
  51. Parizek, M. (2013). The organizational-cybernetic approach to international institutions. Prague: Charles University.
  52. Pemmasani, P.K., & Nasaruddin, M.A. (2022). Strengthening public sector data governance: Risk management strategies for government organizations. International Journal of Modern Computing, 5(1), 108-118.
  53. Public Authority Algorithmic and Automated Decision-Making Systems Bill of the UK. (2024). Retrieved from https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2024-12-13/debates/AA0C1C17-11FA-410E-A394-846703400F55/PublicAuthorityAlgorithmicAndAutomatedDecision-MakingSystemsBill(HL).
  54. Quek, H.Y., et al. (2023). The conundrum in smart city governance: Interoperability and compatibility in an ever-growing ecosystem of digital twins. Data & Policy, 5, article number e6. doi: 10.1017/dap.2023.1.
  55. Ran, X., Chen, G., & Guo, B. (2026). A narrower access gap, yet persistent divides: The digital inequality among China’s urban-rural older adults. BMC Public Health, 26, article number 1733. doi: 10.1186/s12889-026-27131-8.
  56. Regulation of the Republic of Estonia No. 20 “On the Establishment and Statutes of the Register of Children and Teachers in Pre-School Education”. (2025, August). Retrieved from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/422082025024.
  57. Romano, M., & Albrecht, J. (2026). How knowledge silos affect emergency management application development. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 13, article number 175. doi: 10.1057/s41599-025-06450-y.
  58. Sarioglo, V., & Korzhunova, N. (2026). Information support for socio-economic policy in Ukraine: From fragmented data to evidence-based decisions in the context of European approaches. Demography and Social Economy, 63(1), 61-79. doi: 10.15407/dse2026.01.061.
  59. Seo, J.E., & Kwon, H.Y. (2023). Study on government data governance framework: Based on the national data strategy in the US, the UK, Australia, and Japan. In R. Lee (Ed.), Big data, cloud computing, and data science engineering (pp. 133-144). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-19608-9_11.
  60. Smutchak, Z., Tsinaridze, R., Burlaienko, T., & Dubinina, O. (2025). Demographic security and sustainable development of Ukraine in the conditions of active migration of the population. Problems of Sustainable Development, 20(2), 71-85. doi: 10.35784/preko.7140.
  61. Spyropoulos, A.Z., & Tsiantos, V. (2025). Interoperable semantic systems in public administration: AI-driven data mining from law-enforcement reports. Computers, 14(9), article number 376. doi: 10.3390/computers14090376.
  62. Statistics Canada. (2024). Disaggregated data action plan: 2024-2025 accomplishments report – from commitment to continuity (Catalogue no. 11-627-M). Retrieved from https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/about/transparency/disaggregated-data-accomplishments/disaggregated-data-accomplishments-2024-2025.pdf.
  63. Statistics Canada. (2025). Disaggregated data action plan (DDAP). Retrieved from https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/trust/modernization/disaggregated-data.
  64. Sunday, O.S., & Awoyomi, O.O. (2026). Cross agency data fusion and predictive intelligence to reduce fraud across U.S. benefits programs. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 30(2), 101-111. doi: 10.30574/wjarr.2026.30.2.1167.
  65. Szymańska, J. (2018). Information systems in EU migration management. Retrieved from https://pism.pl/publications/Information_Systems_in_EU_Migration_Management.
  66. Thanh, D.V. (2024). Diversity and inclusion in indigenous ethnic research during the digital age. In D. Van Thanh, M. Ashwill & H. Anh Tuan (Eds.), Vietnamese higher education at a crossroads (pp. 127-143). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-61838-3_6.
  67. U.S. Department of Education. (2026). Foundations for evidence-based policymaking. Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/research/foundations-evidence-based-policymaking.
  68. Valenti, C., & Yasukawa, L. (2024). Missing education data on internally displaced people (IDPs). In M. Delprato & D.D. Shephard (Eds.), Achieving equitable education (pp. 103-119). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: 10.4337/9781035313839.00012.
  69. Van Rossem, W., & Pelizza, A. (2025). Bridging silos or adding friction? The data work behind re-identification across interoperable data infrastructures. Big Data & Society, 12(4). doi: 10.1177/20539517251388349.
  70. Vasylieva, T., Zakharkin, O., & Yarovenko, H. (2025). Digital transformations of Ukraine’s cybersecurity system in wartime. Hamburg: The Academic Research and Publishing. doi: 10.61093/978-3-911748-05-6/2025.
  71. Wang, C., Yin, Y., & Hu, H. (2026). The rise of algorithmic governance and the dual revolution: Applications, challenges, and governance of artificial intelligence in public administration. Technology in Society, 86, article number 103264. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103264.
  72. Yihan, X., & Zhenlin, L. (2024). Digital transformation and the frontier of China’s state governance. Social Sciences in China, 45(2), 70-91. doi: 10.1080/02529203.2024.2367313.
  73. Yun, H. (2025). China’s data sovereignty and security: Implications for global digital borders and governance. Chinese Political Science Review, 10(2), 178-203. doi: 10.1007/s41111-024-00269-9.
  74. Zhang, W., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Digital urban governance in China: Foundations and applications. Singapore: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-96-6325-5.

Suggested citation

Chen, Y. (2026). Mechanisms for overcoming departmental barriers in the digitalisation of ethno-national policy: From “information silos” to integrated governance. Development Management, 25(3), 27-42. https://doi.org/10.63341/devt/3.2026.27