Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

E-Government

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance

  • 773 Accesses

Abstract

Main purposes of the chapter are to present research on the complexity of e-government systems research field dynamics from 2000 to 2018, and to present the business models approach in the public sector. Thematic subfields in the past as well as future trends were identified: the bibliometric and citation analysis of the Scopus database journal articles were utilized, with the focus of the e-government development. Results reveal that in the most prolific journals before 2011 the research was focused mainly on the information and information technology, implementation, strategies and processes, but in the last decade, on the e-government. After 2011 research became more focused on how to adopt e-government, factors influencing adoption, on data, trust, risk, and other selected viewpoints. As a result of the digitalization and the high-velocity, high-variety and high-volume of data produced daily, the rising awareness of the information hidden in the big-data bases, that are characteristic for the e-government as well, became more emphasized. The user’s perspective became the focus of e-government. The existing research results show that in the past, the perspective of the provider was in the forefront; nowadays it is the quality of e-government services for the user (life and work quality). This concept is closely linked to the idea of promoting internal efficiency, effectiveness and productivity, thus creating a basis for significant cost savings associated with e-government. We add the viewpoint of business ethics and social responsibility that is incorporated into the business ethics (and vice versa). From the business models perspective, most e-government portals today are hybrid business models and a combination of the four basic stand-alone models, namely information, communication, transaction and integration business models. It is important to add that also e-governance models should match the integral management model of the organization. During past years the e-government complexity is reflected in the dense network of building blocks of more sophisticated e-government system, which is beyond early systems and beyond local government borders, forming e-government ecosystems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aladwani, A. M. (2016). Corruption as a source of e-government projects failure in developing countries: A theoretical exposition. International Journal of Information Management, 36(1), 105–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcade, M. L., Rodriguez Bolivar, M. P., & Lopez Hernandez, A. M. (2017). Bibliometric analysis of ICT implementation in public administration: Contributions and research opportunities. Innovar, 27(63), 141–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • AL-Hujran, O., AL-Debei, M. M., Chatfield, A., & Migdadi, M. (2016). The imperative of influencing citizen attitude toward e-government adoption and use. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 189–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, K. V., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2006). E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee model. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 236–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthopoulos, L., Reddick, C. G., Giannakidou, I., & Mavridis, N. (2016). Why e-government projects fail? An analysis of the Healthcare.gov website. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 161–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2012). Defining e-governance. E-Service Journal, 8(2), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baqir, N. M., & Iyer, L. (2010). E-government maturity over 10 Years: A comparative analysis of e-government maturity in select countries around the world. In comparative e-government, (pp. 3–22). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belak, Ja. (2010). Integralni management, MER model. Aktualnosti managementa in razvoja 3. Maribor: MER Evrocenter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belak, Je, Duh, M., Mulej, M., & Štrukelj, T. (2010). Requisitely holistic ethics planning as pre-condition for enterprise ethical behaviour. Kybernetes, 39(1), 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012a). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 6(1), 78–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Hansen, D. (2012b). The impact of polices on government social media usage: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. Government Information Quarterly, 29(1), 30–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 123–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Börner, K., Boyack, K. W., Milojević, S., & Morris, S. (2012). Introduction to science modeling: Basic types of models, key definitions, and general framework for comparing process models. In V. A. Scharnhorst, K. Börner, & P. van den Besselaar (Eds.), Models of scientific dynamics: Meetings between the theory of complexity and information science (pp. 3–22). Verlag Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, L., & Bélanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust innovation and acceptance factors. Info Systems, 15(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casillas, J. C., & Acedo, F. J. (2007). Evolution of the intellectual structure of family business literature: A bibliometric study of FBR. Family Business Review, 20(2), 141–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chelliah, P. P. M., Thurasamy, R., Alzahrani, A. I., Alfarraj, O., & Alalwan, N. (2016). E-government service delivery by a local government agency: The case of E-licensing. Telematics and Informatics, 33, 925–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coursey, D., & Norris, D. (2008). Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 523–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M. (2014). Conundrums in benchmarking egovernment capabilities? Perspectives on evaluating European usage and transparency. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 12(2), 170–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dankova, P., Valeva, M., & Štrukelj, T. (2015). A comparative analysis of international CSR standards as enterprise policy/governance innovation guidelines. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(2), 152–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis. Lanham, MA and Toronto, Plymouth, UK: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dias, G. P. (2014). Bibliometric analysis of Portuguese research in e-government. Procedia Technology, 16, 279–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duh, M. (2016). Upravljanje in strateški management. Drugi ponatis. Ljubljana: GV založba.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duh, M., & Štrukelj, T. (2011). Integration and requisite holism of the enterprises’ governance and management as precondition for coping with global environmental changes. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 8(1), 41–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwivedi, Y. K. A. (2009). Bibliometric analysis of Electronic Government Research. In G. Sahu, Y. Dwivedi, & V. Weerakkody (Eds.), E-government development and diffusion: Inhibitors and facilitators of digital democracy (pp. 176–256). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. Journal of American Medical Association, 295(1), 90–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2003). Bibliometrics as a research field: A course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.97.5311&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed 1 November 2015.

  • Guijarro, L. (2007). Interoperability frameworks and enterprise architectures in e-government initiatives in Europe and the United States. Government Information Quarterly, 24(1), 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gundolf, K., & Filser, M. (2013). Management research and religion: A citation analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1), 177–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, M. P., & Jana, D. (2003). E-government evaluation: A framework and case-study. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. T. (2001). Bibliometrics of electronic journals in information science. Information Research, 7(1). Available at: http://informationr.net/ir/7-1/paper120.html. Accessed 1 November 2015.

  • Heeks, R., & Bailur, S. (2007). Analysing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 243–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helbig, N., Gil-Garcia, R., & Ferro, E. (2009). Understanding the complexity of electronic government: Implication from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung, S.-Y., Chang, C.-M., & Yu, T.-J. (2006). Determinants of user acceptance of the e-government services: The case of online tax filing and payment system. Government Information Quarterly, 23(1), 97–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (2010). ISO 26000, Social responsibility: Discovering ISO 26000 (online). Geneva, Switzerland: ISO—International Organization for Standardization (www.iso.org). Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/discovering_iso_26000.pdf. Accessed 29 June 2011.

  • Jaeger, P. T., & Thompson, K. M. (2003). E-government around the world: Lessons, challenges, and feature directions. Government Information Quarterly, 20(4), 389–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jinghua, Y. (2011). Research on characteristics and trends of e-government in China—A bibliometric analysis of core journal articles. Journal of Modern Information, 2011–01. Available at: http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-XDQB201101027.htm. Accessed 15 February 2018.

  • Kraus, S., Filser, M., O’Dwyer, M., & Shaw, E. (2014). Social entrepreneurship: An exploratory citation analysis. Review of Managerial Science, 8(2), 275–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liden, G. (2012). Is e-democracy more than democratic? An examination of the implementation of socially sustainable values in e-democratic process. Electronic Journal of—Government, 10(1), 84–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, C. Ø., Berger, J. B., & Phythian, M. (2014). The development in leading e-government articles 2001–2010: Definitions, perspectives, scope, research philosophies, methods and recommendations: An update of Heeks and Bailur. Electronic Government, 8653, 17–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, J. A., Koops, B.-J., Pieterson, W., & Overman, S. (2012). Government 2.0: Key challenges to its realization. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 10(1), 59–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulej, M. (1974). Dialektična teorija sistemov in ljudski reki. Naše Gospodarstvo, 21(3–4), 207–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulej, M., Božičnik, S., Čančer, V., Hrast, A., Jurše, K., Kajzer, Š., et al. (2013). Dialectical systems thinking and the law of requisite holism concerning innovation. Litchfield Park, AZ: Emergent Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. F., & Lloyd, B. A. (2006). The scholarly literature on e-government: Characterizing a nascent field. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 2(4), 40–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadomichelaki, X., Magoutas, B., Halaris, C., Apostolou, D., & Mentzas, G. (2006). A review of quality dimensions in e-government services. Electronic Government, 4048, 128–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Bachrach, D. G., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2005). The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s. Strategic Management Journal, 26(5), 473–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeybilovicz, E., Cunha, M. A., & Coelho, T. R. (2014). The development of studies on electronic government in Brazil: A bibliometric and sociometric study. Association for Information Systems, CONF-IRM 2014 Proceedings. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Erico_Przeybilovicz/publication/262804164_The_Development_of_Studies_on_Electronic_Government_in_Brazil_A_bibliometric_and_sociometric_study/links/0f317538e465d8870d000000.pdf. Accessed 15 February 2018.

  • Rainey, D. (2000). E-government: Getting IT right at the start. The Health Service Journal, 110(5728), suppl 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). Citizen’s adoption of an e-government system: Validating extended social cognitive theory (SCT). Government Information Quarterly, 32, 172–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddick, C. G. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets to servers? Government Information Quarterly, 22(1), 38–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reece, B. (2006). E-government literature review. Journal of E-Government, 3(1), 69–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sá, F., Rocha, A., & Pérez Cota, M. (2016a). Potential dimensions for a local e-government services quality model. Telematics and Informatics, 3, 270–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sá, F., Rocha, A., & Pérez Cota, M. (2016b). From the quality of traditional services to the quality of local e-government online services: A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 149–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarrayrih, M. A., & Sriram, B. (2015). Major challenges in developing a successful e-government: A review on the Sultanate of Oman. Journal of King Saud University—Computer and Information Sciences, 27(2), 230–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savoldelli, A., Misuraca, A. G., & Codagnone, C. (2013). Measuring the public value of e-government: The eGEP2.0 model. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 11(1), 373–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxena, K. B. C. (2005). Towards excellence in e-governance (CEXIM Working Paper Series, Working Paper 2005–1). Management Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seo, D., & Bernsenb, M. (2016). Comparing attitudes toward e-government of non-users versus users in a rural and urban municipality. Government Information Quarterly, 33(2), 270–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., Kumar, U., & Dwivedi, Y. E. (2011). E-government adoption model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Government Information Quarterly, 28(1), 17–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silcock, R. (2001). What is e-government? Parliamentary Affairs, 54, 88–101. Available at: http://catedras.fsoc.uba.ar/rusailh/Unidad%202/Silcock%202001,%20What%20is%20E-gov.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2018.

  • Solon, O. (2018, April 4). Facebook says Cambridge Analytica may have gained 37m more users’ data. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/04/facebook-cambridge-analytica-user-data-latest-more-than-thought. Accessed 7 April 2018.

  • Sternad, S., Gradišar, M., & Bobek, S. (2011). The influence of external factors on routine ERP usage. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 111(9), 1511–1530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Štrukelj, T. (2017). The importance of socially responsible strategic planning. Energy Management of Municipal Transportation Facilities and Transport (5 pgs.). Russian Federation: Far Eastern State Transport University. IOP Conf. Series, Earth and Environmental Science, 90 (1) 012003. Available at http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/90/1/012003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/90/1/012003.

  • Štrukelj, T., & Šuligoj, M. (2014). Holism and social responsibility for tourism enterprise governance. Kybernetes, 43(3–4), 394–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Šuligoj, M., & Štrukelj, T. (2017). Socially responsible enterprises for sustainable future: Greening practices from Slovenia: Towards a sustainable future. In S. Renko & A. Pestek (Eds.), Green economy in the Western Balkans (pp. 241–284). UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titah, R., & Barki, H. (2006). E-government adoption and acceptance: A literature review. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 2(3), 1–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (UN). (2014). United Nations e-government survey 2014. E-government for the future we want. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vakeel, K. A., & Panigrahi, P. K. (2018). Social media usage in e-government: Mediating role of government participation. Journal of Global Information Management, 26(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valle-Cruz, D., & Sandoval-Almazan, R. (2014). E-gov 4.0: A literature review towards the new government. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 333–334). Aguascalientes, Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eck, N. J. (2011). Methodological advances in bibliometric mapping of science. Available at: http://repub.eur.nl/pub/26509/EPS2011247LIS9789058922915.pdf. Accessed 1 November 2018.

  • van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2007). Bibliometric mapping of the computational intelligence field. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 15(5), 625–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2013). VOSviewer manual. Leiden: Univeristeit Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., Noyons, E. C. M., & Buter, R. K. (2010). Automatic term identification for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 82(3), 581–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verdegem, P., & Verleye, G. (2009). User-centered e-government in practice: A comprehensive model for measuring user satisfaction. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 487–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlahovic, N., & Vracic, T. (2015). An overview of e-government 3.0. implementation. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of information science and technology (3rd ed., pp. 2700–2708). Hershey: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waaijer, C. J. F., Van Bochove, C. A., & Van Eck, N. J. (2011). On the map: Nature and science editorials. Scientometrics, 86(1), 99–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weerakkody, V., & Dhillon, G. (2008). Moving from e-government T-government: A study of process reengineering challenges in a UK local authority context. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 4(4), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheelen, T. L., Hunger, J. D., Hoffman, A. N., & Bamford, C. E. (2018). Strategic management and business policy: Globalization, innovation and sustainability (15th ed.). London: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, B. W., & Daiser, P. (2015). E-Government, strategy process/instruments. e-book. Academia, Speyer. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/31199373/E-Government_-_Strategy_Process_Instruments.

  • Wu, J., & Guo, D. (2015). Measuring e-government performance of provincial government website in China with slacks-based efficiency measurement. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 96, 25–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H., Xu, X., & Xiao, J. (2014). Diffusion of e-government: A literature review and directions for future directions. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 631–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia

    Simona Sternad Zabukovšek, Samo Bobek, Polona Tominc & Tjaša Štrukelj

Authors
  1. Simona Sternad Zabukovšek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samo Bobek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Polona Tominc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tjaša Štrukelj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simona Sternad Zabukovšek .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Business and IRDO Institute for the Development of Social Responsibility, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia

    Matjaž Mulej

  2. Faculty of Management, Siedlce University of Natural Sciences and Humanities, Siedlce, Poland

    Grażyna O’Sullivan

  3. Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia

    Tjaša Štrukelj

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zabukovšek, S.S., Bobek, S., Tominc, P., Štrukelj, T. (2021). E-Government. In: Mulej, M., O’Sullivan, G., Štrukelj, T. (eds) Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance. Palgrave Studies in Governance, Leadership and Responsibility. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46095-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation