Survey finds online services are easing the administrative burden

A survey by the Macau Civil Servants Federation and the Macao Chinese Civil Servants’ Association found that recent measures introducing online services for several procedures are easing residents’ bureaucratic burden.

The survey collected 2,063 valid questionnaires to understand the practical difficulties residents and civil servants face when accessing public services and their perceived administrative burden.

Analysis of the responses found that residents’ administrative burden centers on understanding procedures, such as how to apply and prepare documents. More than 60% most often use online services, and those accustomed to online handling report significantly lower burdens.

The survey, which scored responses out of five, found that residents’ administrative burden centers on cognitive and compliance steps, with understanding how to apply scoring highest at 2.99 and preparing and submitting documents at 2.94.

Psychological cost at 2.63 slightly exceeded economic cost at 2.50, indicating that burden perception is linked to administrative literacy.

Respondents scored highest on civic literacy (4.06), reflecting broad acceptance of rules. Still, comprehension literacy (2.6) and awareness of departmental functions (3.13) were markedly low, indicating difficulty understanding document terminology and identifying the responsible department.

Healthcare services (77.3%) and personal documentation services (52.1%) were the most commonly used. Online handling at 61.5% was the most common channel, followed by in-person handling at 32.7%.

In conclusion, residents accustomed to online handling reported a notably lower burden, and the more they trusted the complaint mechanism, the lower their perceived burden.

Regarding relationship culture, residents generally felt it is harder to get things done without connections, scoring 2.89. Still, they showed low acceptance of relying on connections (2.13), indicating that reliance on relationships stems from institutional inefficiency rather than endorsement of such a culture.

Results showed that residents struggle to understand document terminology and to identify which department is responsible.

Regarding the issue, a representative from the survey organizers said, “Residents may not understand government documents, or they may not know which department to contact when handling matters. We believe residents are not unwilling to cooperate with government requirements; instead, they lack the basic capacity to do so. When residents cannot understand forms, do not grasp the terminology, and do not know which department to approach, even with a high willingness to cooperate, it can be difficult to complete the application smoothly.”

The two organizations recommended that the government simplify the language of legal provisions and administrative documents, writing in a way that better matches residents’ understanding habits without affecting legal effect.

They also urged cross-departmental data sharing, shifting the burden from residents proving matters themselves to the government proactively verifying them, to reduce the burden of applying at its root.