skip to main content
10.1145/2463728.2463841acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

The digital divide's devaluing of local e-government

Published: 22 October 2012 Publication History

Abstract

Despite an abundance of literature on the potential of e-government to improve service delivery and alter the relationship between citizens and government, few scholars have addressed perhaps the most obvious barrier: the digital divide. This proposed research highlights the importance of understanding the complexity of technology and the digital divide as well as users themselves before implementing solutions.

References

[1]
Bertot, J. C., & Jaeger, P. T. (2006). User-centered e-government: Challenges and benefits for government websites. Government Information Quarterly, 23, 163--168.
[2]
Brewer, G. A., Neubauer, B. J., & Geiselhart, K. Designing and implementing e-government systems: Critical implications for public administration and democracy. Administration and Society, 38(4), 472--499.
[3]
Coursey, D., & Norris, D. F. (2008). Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 523--536.
[4]
Ferro, E., & Molinari, F. (2010). Making sense of e-government 2.0 strategies: "no citizens, no party." eJournal of E-Government and E-Democracy, 2(1), 56--68.
[5]
Goldfinch, S. (2007). Pessimism, computer failure and information systems development in the public sector. Public Administration Review, 67(5): 917--929.
[6]
Gordo, B. (2008). Disconnected: A community and technology needs assessment of the Southeast Los Angeles Region (SELA). Retrieved from Academia.edu: http://bit.ly/Al3j51
[7]
Green, L. (2001). Technoculture: From alphabet to cybersex. St. Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
[8]
Helbig, N., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Ferro, E. (2009). Understanding the complexity of e-government: Implications from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89--87.
[9]
Hilbert, M. (2011). The end justifies the definition: The manifold outlooks on the digital divide and their practical usefulness for policy-making. Telecommunications Policy, 35, 715--736.
[10]
ICMA. (2011). Electronic government 2011. Retrieved from the ICMA website: http://bit.ly/Hrgpok
[11]
Kvasny, L. (2006). Cultural (re)production of digital inequality in a US community technology initiative. Information, Communication & Society, 9(2), 160--181.
[12]
Nabatchi, T. (2012). A manager's guide to evaluating citizen participation. Retrieved from the IBM Centerl for the Business of Government website: http://bit.ly/At8mkm
[13]
Milliard, J. (2008). E-Government measurement for policy makers. European Journal of e-Practice. Retrieved from http://www.epractice.eu/files/4.3.pdf
[14]
Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & Stansbury, M. (2003). Virtual inequality: Beyond the digital divide. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
[15]
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). (2011). Digital nation: Expanding Internet usage. Retrieved from the NTIA website: http://1.usa.gov/xOqiUJ
[16]
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404--428.
[17]
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398--427.
[18]
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2009). Rethinking e-government services: User-centered approaches. Retrieved from the OECD website: http://bit.ly/2XRQ3A
[19]
Pena-Lopez, I. (2011). The disempowering goverati: E-aristocrats or the delusion of e-democracy. eJournal of E-Government and E-Democracy, 3(1), 1--21.
[20]
Reddick, C. G. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets to the servers? Government Information Quarterly, 22(1), 38--57.
[21]
Rowley, J. (2011). E-government stakeholders---Who are they and what do they want? International Journal of Information Management, 31(1), 53--62.
[22]
Schradie, J. (2011). The digital production gap: The digital divide and Web 2.0 collide. Poetics, 39(2), 145--168.
[23]
Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., Kumar, U., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2011). E-government adoption model (GAM): Differing service maturity levels. Government Information Quarterly, 28(1), 17--35.
[24]
Van Dijk, J., Peters, O., & Ebbers, W. (2008). Explaining the acceptance and use of government internet services: A multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in the Netherlands. Lecture Notes in Computer Sciences, 4084, 269--280.
[25]
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.
[26]
Wang, Yih-Jeou. (2009). Rethinking e-government services: User-centered approaches. Retrieved from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development website: http://bit.ly/2XRQ3A

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
ICEGOV '12: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
October 2012
547 pages
ISBN:9781450312004
DOI:10.1145/2463728
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

  • Macao Foundation, Macao SAR Govt: Macao Foundation, Macao SAR Government
  • University at Albany - State University of New York: University at Albany - State University of New York

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 22 October 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. digital divide
  2. e-government demand
  3. evaluation
  4. user-centered

Qualifiers

  • Poster

Conference

ICEGOV '12
Sponsor:
  • Macao Foundation, Macao SAR Govt
  • University at Albany - State University of New York

Acceptance Rates

ICEGOV '12 Paper Acceptance Rate 23 of 98 submissions, 23%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 350 of 865 submissions, 40%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 132
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 21 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media