A System Dynamics Approach to the Paper Dematerialization Process in the Italian Public Administration

  • S. Armenia
  • D. Canini
  • N. Casalino


The dematerialization problem is still young, it hasn’t been well analyzed yet and its definition is nearly absent in the literature. This paper concentrates on the problem with a methodological approach which will try to describe the underlying structures, the overall system behaviours, processes and stakeholders. We will give an interpretation of the not always linear relationships and of the feedback loops among the involved variables, also considering those soft interactions which typically arise in those complex systems connected with social environments and which often are not properly taken into account or even neglected. We will thus formalize a dynamical hypothesis so that, with a systemic approach, we can design a system dynamics model that may help us in validating those hypothesis and in building a useful decision support system, in order to provide the Public Administration Management with the chance to make policy analysis and strategic support concerning the major issues related to the dematerialization process.


System Dynamic Model Adoption Rate System Dynamics Approach Digital Document Soft Interaction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    CNIPA - Centro Nazionale dell’Informatica nella Pubblica Amministrazione, www.cnipa.
  2. 2.
    CNIPA (2006). The dematerialization of administrative documentation, Quaderno n. 24.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    CNIPA (2006). White Book concerning the document dematerialization in the Italian public administration, InterMinistry WorkGroup on document dematerialization by means of elec-tronic formats.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ridolfi, P. (2006). Document dematerialization: Ideas for a roadmap, CNIPA, Italy.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sterman, J. D. (2000) Business Dynamics. System thinking and modelling for a complex world, Irwin, McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Integra module. Il Pensiero sistemico, Systems Thinking,
  7. 7.
    Longobardi, G. (2001). Cost Analysis on the automation of document production, CNIPA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ossimitz, G. (2000). Development of systems thinking skills, Klagenfurt University 3(2): 26.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sterman, J. (2002). All models are wrong: reflections on becoming a systems scientist, System Dynamics Review, 18(4): 501-531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morecroft, J. D. W. and Sterman, J. (1994). Modeling for learning organizations, Portland, OR, Productivity Press, 3(8): 85-87.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burns, J. R. (2002). A matrix architecture for development of system dynamic models.In Pro-ceedings of the 20. International Conference of the System, Dynamics Society, Palermo, Italy, July 2002.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burns, J. R. (2002). A component strategy for the formulation of system dynamics mod-els.System Dynamics Conference 2002.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Radzicki, M. J. (2003). Foundation of system dynamics modelling.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline, Milan, Sperling & Kupfer.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanneman, R. (1988). Modeling dynamic social systems - computer-assisted theory bulding, Newbury Park, CA, Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Armenia
    • 1
  • D. Canini
    • 1
  • N. Casalino
    • 2
  1. 1.Università di Tor VergataRomaItaly
  2. 2.Università LUISS – Guido CarliRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations