Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
The Challenges in Implementing E-Democracy in the United States Read chapter Read first chapter

2018 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

8. User Centric Services Under the Web 2.0 Era. Coproduction, Execution and Efficiency of Public Services

Author : Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar

Published in: User Centric E-Government

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Public agencies are being pressured for innovation, driving service delivery towards a more personalized, outcome-driven, participative, efficient and collaborative model. This paper captures the perception of policymakers responsible of strategies for e-government in local governments about the influence of Web 2.0 technologies on: (a) the design and coproduction of public services; (b) the easy access to services and the problem solving in the execution of public services; and (c) the evaluation of public services and the improvement of efficiency and accountability. To answer these research questions, an e-survey was sent to policymakers responsible of strategies for e-government in large Spanish local governments. Findings indicate that Web 2.0 technologies are seen as simple adaptations of offline behaviour in public services, which fail to generate meaningful interaction with citizens. It responds to the “representation” strategy, which is focused on the “push” tactic in which no interactions are allowed and a means of “crowdsourced democracy” is produced.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Agile Collaborative Architecture for the Development of E-Government Services in Romania: Electronic Public Procurement Case Study
next chapter Towards User Centric E-Government
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
In this paper, Web 2.0 should be viewed as a networked platform, spanning connected devices to encourage collaboration, in terms of the creation, organization, linking and sharing of content [7, 8]. Thus, it is related to the technical platform on which social media applications are built to create and exchange user-generated content.
 
Literature
1.
2.
International Development Association (IDA) (2011) Information and Communication Technology Agency of Sri Lanka (ICTA), vol 3, Colombo, Sri Lanka
3.
Peedu G (2011) Enhancing public service user experience in information society. Master Thesis, Tallinn University, Estonia
4.
Asgarkhani M (2005) The effectiveness of e-service in local government: a case study. Electron J e-Government 3(4):157–166
5.
El-Haddadeh R, Weerakkody V, Al-Shafi S (2013) The complexities of electronic services implementation and institutionalization in the public sector. Inf Manag 50(4):135–143CrossRef
6.
Wagner SA, Vogt S, Kabst R (2016) How IT and social change facilitates public participation: a stakeholder-oriented approach. Gov Inf Q 33(3):435–443CrossRef
7.
Chang AM, Kannan PK (2008) Leveraging Web 2.0 in government. IBM Center for the Business of Government, Washington, DC
8.
O’Reilly T (2007) What is Web 2.0: design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Commun Strateg 65:18–37
9.
Rowe G, Frewer L (2005) A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Sci Technol Hum Values 30(2):251–290CrossRef
10.
Johnston E, Hansen D (2011) Design lessons for smart governance infrastructures. In: Ink D, Balutis A, Buss T (eds) American Governance 3.0: Rebooting the public square? National Academy of Public Administration, Washington, DC
11.
Huijboom N, Van den Broek T, Frissen V, Kool L, Kotterink B, Nielsen M, Millard J (2009) Public services 2.0: the impact of social computing on public services. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Joint Research Centre, European Commission. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
12.
Tuomi I (2002) Theory of innovation: change and meaning in the age of internet. Oxford University Press, Oxford
13.
Hui G, Hayllar R (2010) Creating public value in E-government: a public-private-citizen collaboration framework in Web 2.0. Aust J Public Adm 69(suppl 1):S120–S131CrossRef
14.
Escher T, Margetts H, Petricek V, Cox I (2006) Governing from the centre? Comparing the nodality of digital governments. In: Annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA, 31 Aug–4 Sept 2006
15.
Hood C, Margetts H (2007) The tools of government in the digital age. Palgrave, BasingstokeCrossRef
16.
Margetts H, Dunleavy P (2013) The second wave of digital-era governance: a quasi-paradigm for government on the Web. Philos Trans R Soc A:1–17
17.
Sandoval-Almazan R, Gil-Garcia J (2012) Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of E-government among municipalities. Gov Inf Q 29(suppl 1):S72–S81CrossRef
18.
Berry J, Portney K, Thomson K (1993) The rebirth of urban democracy. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
19.
Peters BG (2001) The future of governing. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence
20.
Russell CJ, Bobko P (1992) Moderated regression analysis and Likert scales: too coarse for comfort. J Appl Psychol 77(3):336–342CrossRef
21.
Chun S, Shulman S, Sandoval-Almazan R, Hovy E (2010) Government 2.0: marking connections between citizens, data and government. Information Polity 15:1–9
22.
Lathrop D, Ruma L (2010) Open government: collaboration, transparency, and participation in practice. O’Reilly, Sebastopol
23.
24.
Benkler Y (2006) The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press, New Haven
25.
Klein P (2008) Web 2.0: reinventing democracy. CIO Insight Magazine, pp 30–43
26.
Deloitte (2008) Change your world or the world will change you. The future of collaborative government and Web 2.0. Deloitte & Touche LLP and affiliated entities, Quebec
27.
Taylor JA (2012) The information polity: towards a two speed future? Inf Polity 17(3/4):227–237
28.
29.
Nam T (2012) Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Gov Inf Q 29(1):12–20CrossRef
30.
Parent M, Vandebeek CA, Gemino AC (2005) Building citizen trust through e-government. Gov Inf Q 22(4):720–736CrossRef
31.
Tyler TR (2006) Why people obey the law. Princeton University Press, Princeton
32.
Ho ATK (2002) Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Adm Rev 62(4):434–444CrossRef
33.
Bonham G, Seifert J, Thorson S (2001) The transformational potential of e-government: the role of political leadership. In: Fourth Pan European international relations conference, University of Kent, September 2001
34.
Abdelsalam HM, Gamal S, Reddick CG, Saeed S (2013) Web 2.0 applications’ use and perception for research collaboration in Egyptian public universities. Int J Services Technol Manag 19(1–3):99–119CrossRef
35.
36.
Thaler M, Sunstein C (2009) Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. Penguin, London, p 2009
37.
Faraz SH, Tanvir SH, Saeed S (2012) A study on privacy and security aspects of Facebook. Int J Technol Diff 3(4):48–55CrossRef
38.
Bertot JC, Jaeger PT, Munson S, Glaisyer T (2010c) Social media technology and government transparency. Computer 43(11):53–59CrossRef
39.
Graells-Costa J (2011) Administración colaborativa y en red. El profesional de la información 20(3):345–347CrossRef
40.
Koppenjan J, Klijn E-H (2004) Managing uncertainties in networks. Routledge, London
41.
Meijer A, Thaens M (2010) Alignment 2.0: strategic use of new internet technologies in government. Gov Inf Q 27(2):113–121CrossRef
42.
Welch EW (2012) The rise of participative technologies in government. In: Transformational government through eGov practice: socioeconomic, cultural, and technological issues. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, pp 347–367
43.
European Commission (2010) The European eGovernment Action Plan 2011–2015. Harnessing ICT to promote smart, sustainable & innovative Government. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. European Commission, Brussels
44.
Queensland State Archives (2010) Recordkeeping and Web 2.0. Survey report. Queensland State Archives, Sunnybank Hills
45.
Reggi L, Scicchitano S (2011) European Regions Financing Public e-Services: the Case of EU Structural Funds. Working Papers 1110, University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Rome
46.
Redell T, Woolcock G (2004) From consultation to participatory governance? A critical review of citizen engagement strategies in Queensland. Aust J Public Adm 63(3):75–87CrossRef
47.
Leighninger M (2011) Using online tools to engage – and be engaged by – the public. IBM Center for The Business of Government, Washington
48.
Hibbing JR, Theiss-Morse E (2002) Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef
49.
Oates WE (1972) Fiscal federalism. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York
50.
Briggs XS (2008) Democracy as problem solving: civic capacity in communities across the globe. MIT Press, CambridgeCrossRef
51.
Sirianni C (2009) Investing in democracy: engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
52.
Ter Bogt HJ, Van Helden GJ (2000) Management control and performance measurement in Dutch local government. Manag Account Res 11(2):263–279CrossRef
53.
Moon MJ (2002) The evolution of e-government among municipalities: rhetoric or reality? Public Adm Rev 62(4):424–433CrossRef
54.
Torres L, Pina V, Acerete B (2005) Gauging E-government evolution in EU municipalities. J Syst Cybern Inf 3(6):43–54
55.
Gallego R, Barzelay M (2010) Public management policymaking in Spain: the politics of legislative reform of administrative structure, 1991-1997. Governance 23(2):277–296CrossRef
56.
Bastida FJ, Benito B (2006) Financial reports and decentralization in municipal governments. Int Rev Adm Sci 72(2):223–238CrossRef
57.
58.
Roscoe JT (1975) Fundamental research statistics for the behavioural sciences, 2nd edn. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
59.
Fusch PI, Ness LR (2015) Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. Qual Rep 20(9):1408
60.
Mason M (2010) Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum Qual Soc Res 11(3)
61.
Bernard HR (2012) Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks
62.
Scupola A, Zanfei A (2016) Governance and innovation in public sector services: the case of the digital library. Gov Inf Q 33(2):237–249CrossRef
63.
Collison D, Lorraine N, Power D (2003) An exploration of corporate attitudes to the significance of environmental information for stakeholders. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 19(4):199–211CrossRef
64.
Hodge DR, Gillespie D (2003) Phrase completions: an alternative to Likert scales. Soc Work Res 27(1):45–55CrossRef
65.
Matell MS, Jacoby J (1971) Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert Scale Items? Study I: reliability and validity. Educ Psychol Meas 31(3):657–674CrossRef
66.
Norman G (2010) Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Adv Health Sci Educ 15(5):625–632CrossRef
67.
Wakita T, Ueshima N, Noguchi H (2012) Psychological distance between categories in the Likert scale comparing different numbers of options. Educ Psychol Meas 72(4):533–546CrossRef
68.
69.
Osimo D (2008) Web 2.0 in government: why? and how? Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Joint Research Centre, European Commission. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
70.
Irvin RA, Stansbury J (2004) Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth the effort? Public Adm Rev 64(1):55–65CrossRef
71.
Moynihan DP (2003) Normative and instrumental perspectives on public participation citizen summits in Washington, DC. Am Rev Public Adm 33(2):164–188CrossRef
72.
Bowden A (2005) Knowledge for free? Distributed innovation as a source of learning. Public Policy Adm 20(3):56–68
73.
Carter L, Bélanger F (2005) The utilization of e-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Inf Syst J 15(1):5–25CrossRef
74.
Brabham DC (2013) The four urban governance problem types suitable for crowdsourcing citizen participation. Citizen E-participation in urban governance: crowdsourcing and collaborative. Creativity, pp 50–68
75.
Porumbescu GA (2016) Linking public sector social media and e-government website use to trust in government. Gov Inf Q 33(2):291–304CrossRef
76.
Sumra KB, Bing W (2016) Crowdsourcing in local public administration: importance of online platforms. Int J Public Adm Digital Age 3(4):28–42CrossRef
77.
Mergel I (2013) Social media adoption and resulting tactics in the U.S. Federal Government. Gov Inf Q 30(2):123–130CrossRef
78.
Rodríguez Bolívar MP (2015) Governance models for the delivery of public services through the Web 2.0 technologies a political view in large Spanish Municipalities. Soc Sci Comput Rev 35(2):203–225CrossRef
79.
European Union (2013) European public sector innovation scoreboard 2013. A pilot exercise. European Union, Belgium
80.
Benington J, Hartley J (2001) Pilots, paradigms and paradoxes: changes in public sector governance and management in the UK. In: International research symposium on public sector management, Barcelona
81.
Cordella A, Tempini N (2015) E-government and organizational change: reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Gov Inf Q 32(3):279–286CrossRef
82.
Reddick C, Chatfield AT, Brajawidagda U (2017) Increasing policy success through the use of social media cross-channels for citizen political engagement. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Jan 2017
83.
Linders D (2012) From e-government to we-government: defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Gov Inf Q 29(4):446–454CrossRef
84.
Rodríguez Bolívar MP (2016) Characterizing the role of governments in smart cities: a literature review. In: Smarter as the new urban agenda. Springer, New York, pp 49–71CrossRef
85.
Freeman J (2016) Digital civic participation in Australian local governments: everyday practices and opportunities for engagement. In: Social media and local governments. Springer, New York, pp 195–218CrossRef
86.
Albino V, Berardi U, Dangelico RM (2015) Smart cities: definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. J Urban Technol 22(1):3–21CrossRef
87.
Degbelo A, Granell C, Trilles S, Bhattacharya D, Casteleyn S, Kray C (2016) Opening up smart cities: citizen-centric challenges and opportunities from GIScience. ISPRS Int J Geoinf 5(2):16CrossRef
88.
Sharif MHM, Troshani I, Davidson R (2016) Determinants of social media impact in local government. J Org End User Comput 28(3):82–103CrossRef
89.
Bertot JC, Jaeger PT, Hansen D (2012) The impact of polices on government social media usage: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. Gov Inf Q 29(1):30–40CrossRef
90.
Picazo-Vela S, Gutiérrez-Martínez I, Luna-Reyes LF (2012) Understanding risks, benefits, and strategic alternatives of social media applications in the public sector. Gov Inf Q 29(4):504–511CrossRef
91.
Brainard LA, Derrick-Mills T (2011) Electronic commons, community policing, and communication. Adm Theory Praxis 33(3):383–410CrossRef
92.
Meijer AJ, Koops BJ, Pieterson W, Overman S, Tije S (2012) Government 2.0: key challenges to its realization. Electron J e-Government 10(1):59–69
93.
Edelenbos J, Klijn EH, Steijn B (2011) Managers in governance networks: how to reach good outcomes? Int Public Manag J 14(4):420–444CrossRef
94.
Neblo MA, Esterling KM, Kennedy RP, Lazer DM, Sokhey AE (2010) Who wants to deliberateand why? Am Polit Sci Rev 104(03):566–583CrossRef
95.
Bengtsson Å, Christensen H (2016) Ideals and actions: do citizens’ patterns of political participation correspond to their conceptions of democracy? Gov Oppos 51(02):234–260CrossRef
96.
97.
98.
Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Chan FK, Hu PJ (2016) Managing citizens’ uncertainty in E-government services: the mediating and moderating roles of transparency and trust. Inf Syst Res 27(1):87–111CrossRef
99.
Westheimer J, Kahne J (2004) Educating the “good” citizen: political choices and pedagogical goals. Pol Sci Politics 37(02):241–247CrossRef
100.
Díaz-Díaz R, Pérez-González D (2016) Implementation of social media concepts for e-Government: case study of a social media tool for value co-creation and citizen participation. J Org End User Computing 28(3):104–121CrossRef
Metadata
Title
User Centric Services Under the Web 2.0 Era. Coproduction, Execution and Efficiency of Public Services
Author
Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar
Copyright Year
2018
Book
User Centric E-Government

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59441-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-59442-2

Copyright Year: 2018

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59442-2_8

Premium Partner

    Image Credits