nach oben

Information Systems Frontiers

Erschienen in:

08.03.2019

Design of an O2O Citizen Participation Ecosystem for Sustainable Governance

verfasst von: Jingrui Ju, Luning Liu, Yuqiang Feng

Erschienen in: Information Systems Frontiers | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Citizen participation is essential to create the public value required for sustainable governance. Offline citizen participation enables government policies through physical actions, but is not automatically quantified. Online citizen participation, especially the opinion expression, usually be facilitated by suitable incentives using a recorded participation process, but this makes only limited contribution to governance. The isolation of the processes of two participations limits their mutual promotion. Therefore, using a design science paradigm, we designed an O2O (Offline-to-Online or Online-to-Offline) citizen participation ecosystem for sustainable governance based on social exchange theory. The ecosystem includes three categories of key stakeholders: citizens, government organizations, and the O2O platform manager. Five components are specified: motivations, contextualized governance policies and strategies, offline/online citizen-to-government contributions, online/offline government-to-citizen rewards, and retention and recommendation. The ecosystem was evaluated and then improved using a case study on O2O green commuting governance in China. This study provides a reproducible framework to combine offline and online citizen participation to enhance collaborative social governance in the digital age.

Vorheriger Artikel Assessing the Gap between Technology and the Environmental Sustainability of European Cities

Nächster Artikel Transnational Digital Identity as an Instrument for Global Digital Citizenship: The Case of Estonia’s E-Residency

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

Alford, J. (2002). Defining the client in the public sector: A social-exchange perspective. Public Administration Review, 62(3), 337–346.CrossRef

Althoff, T., Jindal, P., & Leskovec, J. (2017). Online actions with offline impact: How online social networks influence online and offline user behavior. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining (WSDM '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 537–546. https://doi.org/10.1145/3018661.3018672, 2017.

Ariely, D., Bracha, A., & Meier, S. (2009). Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. American Economic Review, 99(1), 544–555.CrossRef

Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224.CrossRef

Bertot, J., Estevez, E., & Janowski, T. (2016). Universal and contextualized public services: Digital public service innovation framework. Government Information Quarterly, 33(2), 211–222.CrossRef

Brandtzaeg, P. B., Haugstveit, I. M., Lüders, M., & Følstad, A. (2016). How should organizations adapt to youth civic engagement in social media? A lead user approach. Interacting with Computers, 28(5), 664–679.CrossRef

Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21–53.CrossRef

Ceccagnoli, M., Forman, C., Huang, P., & Wu, D. J. (2012). Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem! The case of enterprise software. MIS Quarterly, 36, 263–290.CrossRef

Conroy, M., Feezell, J. T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: A study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1535–1546.CrossRef

Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900.CrossRef

Dawes, S. S., Vidiasova, L., & Parkhimovich, O. (2016). Planning and designing open government data programs: An ecosystem approach. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 15–27.CrossRef

Disterheft, A., Caeiro, S., Azeiteiro, U. M., & Leal Filho, W. (2015). Sustainable universities–a study of critical success factors for participatory approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 11–21.CrossRef

Dzur, A. W. (2003). Civic implications of restorative justice theory: Citizen participation and criminal justice policy. Policy Sciences, 36(3–4), 279–306.CrossRef

Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2(1), 335–362.CrossRef

Eveleens, C. P., van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Niesten, E. M. (2017). How network-based incubation helps start-up performance: A systematic review against the background of management theories. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(3), 676–713.CrossRef

Heimstädt, M., Saunderson, F., & Heath, T. (2014). Conceptualizing open data ecosystems: a timeline analysis of open data development in the UK. In Proceedings of the international Confernce for E-democracy and open government (CeDEM2014).245-255. sn. Krems, Austria. Retrieved from http://edocs.fuberlin.de/docs/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/FUDOCS_derivate_000000003562/discpaper2014_12-2.pdf.

Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.CrossRef

Hong, L., Fu, C., Wu, J., & Frias-Martinez, V. (2018). Information needs and communication gaps between citizens and local governments online during natural disasters. Information Systems Frontiers, 1–13.

Indulska, M., & Recker, J. (2010). 13. Design science in IS research: A literature analysis. Information systems foundations: The role of design science, 285–302.

Jänicke, M. (2012). Dynamic governance of clean-energy markets: How technical innovation could accelerate climate policies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 22(1), 50–59.CrossRef

Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221–236.CrossRef

Ju, J., Liu, L., & Feng, Y. (2018). Citizen-centered big data analysis-driven governance intelligence framework for smart cities. Telecommunications Policy, 42(10), 881–896.CrossRef

Kim, Y., & Darnall, N. (2016). Business as a collaborative partner: Understanding firms’ sociopolitical support for policy formation. Public Administration Review, 76(2), 326–337.CrossRef

Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2012). E-participation, transparency, and trust in local government. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 819–828.CrossRef

Kim, H. W., Kankanhalli, A., & Lee, S. H. (2018). Examining gifting through social network services: A social exchange theory perspective. Information Systems Research, 29(4), 805–828. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2017.0737.CrossRef

Lavie, D. (2006). The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 638–658.CrossRef

Leal Filho, W., Platje, J., Gerstlberger, W., Ciegis, R., Kääriä, J., Klavins, M., & Kliucininkas, L. (2016). The role of governance in realising the transition towards sustainable societies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 113, 755–766.CrossRef

Lorek, S., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Strong sustainable consumption governance–precondition for a degrowth path? Journal of Cleaner Production, 38, 36–43.CrossRef

Mergel, I., Rethemeyer, R. K., & Isett, K. (2016). Big data in urban affairs. Public Administration Review, 76(6), 928–937.CrossRef

Ogie, R. I., Forehead, H., Clarke, R. J., & Perez, P. (2018). Participation patterns and reliability of human sensing in crowd-sourced disaster management. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(4), 713–728.CrossRef

Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.CrossRef

Pendry, L. F., & Salvatore, J. (2015). Individual and social benefits of online discussion forums. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 211–220.CrossRef

Phang, C. W., & Kankanhalli, A. (2008). A framework of ICT exploitation for e-participation initiatives. Communications of the ACM, 51(12), 128–132.CrossRef

Phang, C. W., Kankanhalli, A., & Huang, L. (2014). Drivers of quantity and quality of participation in online policy deliberation forums. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(3), 172–212.CrossRef

Pina, V., Torres, L., & Royo, S. (2017). Comparing online with offline citizen engagement for climate change: Findings from Austria, Germany and Spain. Government Information Quarterly, 34(1), 26–36.CrossRef

Pita, C., Chuenpagdee, R., & Pierce, G. J. (2012). Participatory issues in fisheries governance in Europe. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 23(4), 347–361.CrossRef

Rist, S., Chidambaranathan, M., Escobar, C., Wiesmann, U., & Zimmermann, A. (2007). Moving from sustainable management to sustainable governance of natural resources: The role of social learning processes in rural India, Bolivia and Mali. Journal of Rural Studies, 23(1), 23–37.CrossRef

Rosenberger, M., Lehrer, C., & Jung, R. (2017). Integrating data from user activities of social networks into public administrations. Information Systems Frontiers, 19(2), 253–266.CrossRef

Schweitzer, F. M., Buchinger, W., Gassmann, O., & Obrist, M. (2012). Crowdsourcing: Leveraging innovation through online idea competitions. Research-Technology Management, 55(3), 32–38.CrossRef

Skågeby, J. (2010). Gift-giving as a conceptual framework: Framing social behavior in online networks. Journal of Information Technology, 25(2), 170–177.CrossRef

Toker-Yildiz, K., Trivedi, M., Choi, J., & Chang, S. R. (2017). Social interactions and monetary incentives in driving consumer repeat behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(3), 364–380.CrossRef

Tsui, A. S., Pearce, J. L., Porter, L. W., & Tripoli, A. M. (1997). Alternative approaches to the employee-organization relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1089–1121.CrossRef

Tukker, A., Emmert, S., Charter, M., Vezzoli, C., Sto, E., Andersen, M. M., et al. (2008). Fostering change to sustainable consumption and production: An evidence-based view. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(11), 1218–1225.CrossRef

Van Ham, H., & Koppenjan, J. (2001). Building public-private partnerships: Assessing and managing risks in port development. Public Management Review, 3(4), 593–616.CrossRef

Vicente, M. R., & Novo, A. (2014). An empirical analysis of e-participation. The role of social networks and e-government over citizens' online engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 379–387.CrossRef

Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357.CrossRef

Wang, X., & Van Wart, M. (2007). When public participation in administration leads to trust: An empirical assessment of managers’ perceptions. Public Administration Review, 67(2), 265–278.CrossRef

Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2004). Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3), 371–391.CrossRef

Wise, S., Paton, R. A., & Gegenhuber, T. (2012). Value co-creation through collective intelligence in the public sector: A review of US and European initiatives. Vine, 42(2), 251–276.CrossRef

Yan, Z., Wang, T., Chen, Y., & Zhang, H. (2016). Knowledge sharing in online health communities: A social exchange theory perspective. Information & Management, 53(5), 643–653.CrossRef

Yetano, A., & Royo, S. (2017). Keeping citizens engaged: A comparison between online and offline participants. Administration & Society, 49(3), 394–422.CrossRef

Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., & Davis, C. (2014). Innovation with open data: Essential elements of open data ecosystems. Information Polity, 19(1), 17–33.CrossRef

Titel: Design of an O2O Citizen Participation Ecosystem for Sustainable Governance
verfasst von: Jingrui Ju
Luning Liu
Yuqiang Feng
Publikationsdatum: 08.03.2019
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Information Systems Frontiers / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1387-3326
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-9419
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-019-09910-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

Transnational Digital Identity as an Instrument for Global Digital Citizenship: The Case of Estonia’s E-Residency

Barriers to the Development of Smart Cities in Indian Context

Composing Scientific Collaborations Based on Scholars’ Rank in Hypergraph

Leveraging Smart Supply Chain and Information System Agility for Supply Chain Flexibility

Applying Social Interaction Theory to Negotiation Modeling: Design of E-negotiation System

Farmer Cooperatives’ Intention to Adopt Agricultural Information Technology—Mediating Effects of Attitude

Premium Partner