Digital Transformation: Both Boon and Bane for Democracies

Published Date : 9/24/2025 

A new report from the University of Basel explores how the digital transformation of states can make democracies more vulnerable to autocratic forces and centralization of power. The study examines the experiences of Switzerland, Germany, Estonia, and the UK. 

Does the digital transformation of the state make a democracy more vulnerable to illiberal developments, autocratic forces, or concentrations of power? This is the question posed by a new monitoring report from the University of Basel in Switzerland. Released in June 2025 by the university’s Public Institutions and Administration Research Forum (e-PIAF), the report is inspiring a rethinking of digital government.

Christian R. Ulbrich, co-director of e-PIAF and co-author of the paper, told SwissInfo in an interview that Switzerland’s slow, decentralized digital transformation can protect democracy. The e-PIAF started researching state digitalization several years ago, concluding that it promotes centralization and the concentration of influence in a few places and on a few individuals. This research was followed by a monitoring report titled 'The Road to Automated Democracy,' which explores how four countries—Switzerland, Germany, Estonia, and the UK—have applied digitalization.

Estonia is often cited as a trailblazer in digitalization. The country launched its electronic identity system in the early 2000s and has been working on making 100 percent of its government services digital. However, some social debates were skipped during its speedy digitalization, according to Ulbrich. For example, earlier this year, the Estonian Police and Border Guard Board decided to leverage the country’s data to catch offenders through its network of more than 200 automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras. This decision led to a political backlash, with the Data Protection Inspectorate (AKI) ordering the police to adhere to data protection standards in August.

New technologies are first taken up by the intelligence services and the police, followed by tax authorities and the rest of the public sector, Ulbrich points out. Countries with well-developed and democracy-compatible digital tools also export their concepts, methods, and software to other countries, some of which are less democratic. Estonia, for instance, has been collaborating with Saudi Arabia, including sharing its data exchange platform X-Road. However, Ulbrich notes, 'When I look at the world map and see who is buying the system, it is clear to me that authoritarian countries like Saudi Arabia will certainly not integrate data protection.'

On the other side of the spectrum from Estonia is Germany, which has at times taken an 'overly timid' approach to digital transformation. The country is attempting to avoid concentrations of power and influence by involving multiple stakeholders at many levels, leading to confusing organizational set-ups and high complexity. 'Even in the area of identification, Germany allows a second alternative method alongside the standard ID card (with e-ID function) with the ELSTER certificate,' the report highlights.

The UK belongs to its own category. The country jumped on the digitalization bandwagon early, often opting for the simplest solutions. This has resulted in a strong dependence on the private sector and off-the-shelf solutions from the likes of Microsoft. While access to public services, authentication, and identification is done through the GOV.UK platform, the country is lagging in the digital development of the backend.

Switzerland, on the other hand, while far from being considered a role model for digital transformation, has the greatest potential for democracy-compatible digitalization, the report argues. Although their efforts have received little attention, the country's efforts to digitize the courts and parliaments have been important for raising transparency. The Swiss Parliament has introduced the CuriaPlus database to enable direct data exchange with official data sources. The Swiss Federal Supreme Court is also experimenting with AI tools that are based on open-source technology and self-hosted. The country is currently preparing for a referendum on electronic identity, due to be held on September 28th.

The Road to Automated Democracy report also sees a chance for countries such as Switzerland and Germany to exceed Estonia in democracy-friendly digitalization. While Estonia started early with digitalization and is now partly locked-in in its chosen approach and technology, countries that started their digitalization journey later were able to build on a different technological and knowledge base. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS): 

Q: What is the main concern of the University of Basel's report on digital transformation?

A: The main concern is that digital transformation can make democracies more vulnerable to autocratic forces and centralization of power.

Q: What is unique about Switzerland's approach to digital transformation?

A: Switzerland's approach is slow and decentralized, which can protect democracy by avoiding the centralization of power.

Q: What issue did Estonia face with its digitalization efforts?

A: Estonia faced a political backlash when its police used data from automatic number plate recognition cameras, leading to a data protection order from the Data Protection Inspectorate (AKI).

Q: How does Germany's approach to digital transformation differ from Estonia's?

A: Germany's approach is more cautious and involves multiple stakeholders, leading to complex organizational setups, while Estonia's approach is more rapid and centralized.

Q: What is the current status of digital transformation in the UK?

A: The UK has a strong dependence on the private sector and off-the-shelf solutions, and while it has an advanced front-end platform (GOV.UK), it lags in the backend development. 

More Related Topics :