Use of Service Patterns as an Approach to Modelling of Electronic Government Services

  • Wannessa R. Fonseca
  • Pedro L. P. Corrêa
Conference paper
Part of the Proceedings of the I-ESA Conferences book series (IESACONF, volume 7)


The government appears to be a high potential scenario for the deployment of service-oriented applications. The business processes in the service-oriented computational model are modelled and implemented as services. Interoperable service is a major goal of service orientation. Government organizations are adopting service use in order to achieve interoperability of government systems, but there is still a lack of technical support to reuse already conceived service concepts, as well as the efforts and experience of the experts who conceive services. Accordingly, this paper proposes a Service Specification Method for Electronic Government (SSMe-Gov) to support the development of systems of government. The method supports the specification of e-government services from service patterns. A lifecycle of services is also proposed for the specification of new services from service patterns. The lifecycle of services includes the activity of finding patterns of candidate services. The conception of services combined with the concept of patterns can help software architects to identify recurrent functional elements and reduce redundant efforts in the conception of services with the same purposes. Previous case studies show that it is feasible to set service patterns from the analysis of existing services in government.


Service Electronic government Service-oriented computing Reuse Service patterns 



The authors thank CAPES, the Brazilian government entity dedicated to the training of human resources and FAPEMAT, Foundation for Research Support of the State of Mato Grosso, for providing support towards the viability of the EPUSP/UFMT/CEPROMAT agreement for the completion of the PhD on which this work is based.


  1. 1.
    Papazoglou, M. P., Traverso, P., Dustdar, S., & Leymann, F. (2008). Service-oriented computing: A research roadmap. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 17(2), 223–255.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., & Vlissides, J. (2000). Padrões de Projeto. Porto Alegre: Bookman.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Assar, S., Boughzala, I., & Boydens, I. (2011). Back to practice, a decade of research in e-government. In S. Assar, I. Boughzala, & I. Boydens (Eds.) Practical studies in e-government (pp. 1–12). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gottschalk, P., & Solli-Saether, H. (2009). E-government interoperability and information resource integration: Frameworks for aligned development. New York: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    UNPAN. (2012). United Nations E-Government Survey 2012—E-Government for the People. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aguair, E. L., Oliveira, J. B. F., Labato, F. H., Carto, K., Silva, T. A. S., & Fernandes, S. G. (2010). Padrões Tecnológicos - o uso na prestação de serviços públicos e no relacionamento com o Governo Federal. In C. S. F. Mesquita & N. L. Bretas (Eds.), Panorama da Interoperabilidade no Brasil. Brasília: Orgs. MP/SLTI.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    UK. (2001). e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF). United Kingdom Government, United Kingdom, Version 6.0.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brasil. (2012). Padrões de Interoperabilidade de Governo Eletrônico—E-PING. Brasília: Comitê Executivo de Governo Eletrônico. Documento de Referência Versão 2012.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    UNDP. (2007). E-government interoperability: Guide. Thailand: UNDP.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Erl, T. (2009). SOA: Princípios de Design do Serviço. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sommerville, I. (2007). Engenharia de Software. São Paulo: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    White, L., Wilde, N., Reichherzer, T., El-Sheikh, E., Goehring, G., Baskin, A., et al. (2012). Understanding interoperable systems: Challenges for the maintenance of SOA applications. In 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS), 2012, pp. 2199–2206.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klischewski, R., & Askar, E. (2010). Success factors of developing G2G services: the case of Egypt. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, New York, NY, USA, 2010, pp. 152–160.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, P., Xiangxu, M., Zhiqi, S., & Han, Y. (2009). A reputation pattern for service oriented computing. In 7th International Conference on Information, Communications and Signal Processing, 2009, ICICS 2009, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fki, E., Tazi, S., & Dupuy, C. S. (2010). Towards a user intention aware service composition. In 10th Annual International Conference on New Technologies of Distributed Systems (NOTERE), 2010, pp. 113–120.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tchuta, L., & Chunhua, G. (2011). Atomic new service pattern. International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications, 5, 1–20. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marks, E. A., & Bell, M. (2006). Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA): A planning and implementation guide for business and technology (1st ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Arsanjani, A., Ghosh, S., Allam, A., Abdollah, T., Ganapathy, S., & Holley, K. (2008). SOMA: A method for developing service-oriented solutions. IBM Systems Journal, 47, 377–396.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gu, Q., & Lago, P. (2007). A stakeholder-driven service life cycle model for SOA. In 2nd International Workshop on SERVICE ORIENTED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING: In Conjunction with the 6th ESEC/FSE Joint Meeting, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 2007, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.CepromatCuiabáBrazil

Personalised recommendations