research-article

E-government intermediaries and the challenges of access and trust

Authors:

Lynn Dombrowski,

Gillian R. Hayes,

Melissa Mazmanian,

Amy VoidaAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), Volume 21, Issue 2

Article No.: 13, Pages 1 - 22

https://doi.org/10.1145/2559985

Published: 01 February 2014 Publication History

Abstract

In this article, we present the results of a study examining challenges related to access and trust for nutrition assistance outreach workers and suggest design implications for these challenges. Outreach workers are e-government intermediaries who assist clients with accessing and using e-government online applications, systems, and services. E-government intermediaries are not typical end users; they use e-government systems on behalf of clients, and as such their challenges differ from those of primary users. We detail social and technical aspects of these challenges to develop a nuanced understanding of access and trust in the ecosystems surrounding e-government systems. First, we describe how the practical accomplishment of access involves multiple stakeholders, actors, and practices. Second, we highlight how trust emerges through the e-government intermediaries’ work to project themselves as professional and competent through their technical practice. Last, we propose design implications sensitive to both the social and technical aspects of these challenges.

References

[1]

S. Al-Jaghoub, H. Al-Yaseen, and M. Al-Hourani. 2010. Evaluation of awareness and acceptability of using e-government services in developing countries: The case of Jordan. Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation 13, 1, 1--8.

[2]

F. Al-Sobhi, V. Weerakkody, and M. Albusaidy. 2010. The roles of intermediaries in the diffusion and adoption of e-government services. In Proceedings of the 16th Americas Conference on Information Systems. Paper 385.

[3]

F. Al-Sobhi, V. Weerakkody, and R. El-Haddadeh. 2011. The relative importance of intermediaries in egovernment adoption: A study of Saudi Arabia. In Proceedings of the 10th IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference on Electronic Government. 62--74.

Digital Library

[4]

M. Awoleye, A. Oluwaranti, W. Siyanbola, and R. Adagunodo. 2008. Assessment of e-governance resource use in south-western Nigeria. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. 154--159.

Digital Library

[5]

S. Bailur. 2010. The liminal role of the information intermediary in community multimedia centres. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development (ICTD’10). ACM, New York, NY, Article 5.

Digital Library

[6]

F. Bannister. 2010. Deep e-government: Beneath the carapace. In Hans J. Scholl (Ed.), E-Government: Information, Technology, and Transformation. M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, 33--51.

[7]

F. Bélanger and L. Carter. 2006. The effects of the digital divide on e-government: An empirical investigation. In Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 81--88.

Digital Library

[8]

F. Bélanger and L. Carter. 2009. The impact of the digital divide on e-government use. Communications of the ACM 52, 4, 132--135.

Digital Library

[9]

F. Bélanger, J. Hiller, and W. Smith. 2002. Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: The role of privacy, security, and site attributes. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11, 1, 245--270.

[10]

E. Blackstone, M. Boganno, and S. Hakim. 2005. Innovations in E-Government: The Thoughts of Governors and Mayors. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD.

[11]

J. Brenner. 2012. Pew Internet: Mobile. Retrieved January 10, 2014, from http://pewinternet.org/Commentary/2012/February/Pew-Internet-Mobile.aspx.

[12]

G. Bruno, E. Esposito, A. Genovese, and K. L. Gwebu. 2011. A critical analysis of current indexes for digital divide measurement. Information Society 27, 1, 16--28.

Digital Library

[13]

California Department of Public Health. 2013. CalFresh Outreach. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/cpns/pages/foodstampoutreach.aspx.

[14]

L. Carter and F. Bélanger. 2005. The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal 5, 1, 5--25.

[15]

L. Carter and V. Weerakkody. 2008. E-government adoption: A cultural comparison. Information Systems Frontiers 10, 4, 473--482.

Digital Library

[16]

K. Charmaz. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage, Thousands Oaks, CA.

[17]

N. Chaudhri and S. S. Dash. 2007. Community information centers: E-governance at subdistrict level: A case study. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance. 366--369.

Digital Library

[18]

J. Choudrie and Y. K. Dwivedi. 2005. A survey of citizens’ awareness and adoption of e-government initiatives, the ‘Government Gateway’: A United Kingdom perspective. In Proceedings of the eGovernment Workshop (eGOV’05).

[19]

S. Colesca and L. Dobrica. 2008. Adoption and use of e-government services: The case of Romania. Journal of Control and Computers 6, 1, 2004--2017.

[20]

K. Cunnyngham, L. Castner, and A. Schirm. 2010. Empirical Bayes Shrinkage Estimates of State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation Rates in 2005--2007 for All Eligible People and the Working Poor. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Techpartrate2005-2007.pdf.

[21]

J. N. Danziger and K. L. Kraemer. 1985. Computerized databased systems and productivity among professional workers: The case of detectives. Public Administration Review 45, 1, 196--209.

[22]

S. S. Dawes. 2002. The Future of e-Government. Center for Technology in Government, State University of New York, Albany, NY.

[23]

D. V. Dimitrova and Y. C. Chen. 2006. Profiling the adopters of e-government information and services: The influence of psychological characteristics, civic mindedness, and information channels. Social Science Computer Review 24, 2, 172--188.

Digital Library

[24]

L. Dombrowski, A. Voida, G. R. Hayes, and M. Mazmanian. 2012. The labor practices of service mediation: A study of the work practices of food assistance outreach. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1977--1986.

Digital Library

[25]

D. Ellwood. 1989. Poor Support: Poverty in the American Family. Basic Books, New York, NY.

[26]

General Accounting Office and D. McClure. 2001. Electronic Government: Challenges Must Be Addressed with Effective Leadership and Management. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.gao.gov/assets/90/81725.pdf.

[27]

T. Hall and J. Owens. 2011. The digital divide and e-government services. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV’11). 37--44.

Digital Library

[28]

T. Heintze and S. Bretschneider. 2000. IT and restructuring in public organizations. Does adoption of it affect organizational structures, communications and decision making&quest; Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10, 4, 801--830.

[29]

N. Helbig, J. R. Gil-García, and E. Ferro. 2009. Understanding the complexity of electronic government: Implications from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly 26, 89--97.

[30]

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

[31]

P. T. Jaeger and J. C. Bertot. 2010. Transparency and technological change: Ensuring equal and sustained public access to government information. Government Information Quarterly 27, 371--376.

[32]

J. Job. 2005. How is trust in government created&quest; It begins at home, but ends in the parliament. Australian Review of Public Affairs 6, 1, 1--23.

[33]

S. King, and S. Cotterill. 2007. Transformational government&quest; The role of information technology in delivering citizen-centric local public services. Local Government Studies 33, 3, 333--354.

[34]

K. Kraemer and J. King. 2006. Information technology and administrative reform: Will e-government be different&quest; International Journal of Electronic Government Research 2, 1, 1--20.

[35]

S. M. Lee, X. Tan, and S. Trimi. 2005. Current practices of leading e-government countries. Communications of the ACM 48, 10, 99--104.

Digital Library

[36]

Library of Congress. 2002. E-Government Act of 2002. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z&quest;c107:H.R.02458.ENR:

[37]

G. Mark, B. Al-Ani, and B. Semann. 2009. Resilience through technology adoption: Merging the old and the new in Iraq. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 368--698.

Digital Library

[38]

A. Mills, L. Carter, and F. Bélanger. 2010. Conceptualizing public service value in e-government services. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems. Paper 346.

[39]

M. J. Moon. 2002. The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality&quest; Public Administration Review 62, 4, 424--433.

[40]

M. J. Moon and D. Norris. 2005. Does managerial orientation matter&quest; The adoption of reinventing government and e-government at the municipal level. Information Systems Journal 15, 1, 43--60.

[41]

R. M. Morgan and S. D. Hunt. 1994. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing 58, 3, 20--38.

[42]

K. Mossberger. 2009. Towards digital citizenship: Addressing inequality in the information age. In A. Chadwick and P. N. Howard (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics. Taylor and Francis, New York, NY, 173--185.

[43]

K. Mossenburg, C. Tolbert, and M. Stansbury. 2003. Virtual Inequality: Beyond the Digital Divide. George Washington University Press, Washington, DC.

[44]

T. Nam and D. S. Sayogo. 2011. Who uses e-government&quest; Examining the digital divide in e-government use. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV’11). 27--36.

Digital Library

[45]

National Association of State Chief Information Officers. 2010. 2010 Recognition Awards for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Information Technology. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.nascio.org/awards/2010awards/.

[46]

M. Nord, M. Andrews, and S. Carlson. 2008. Household Food Security in the United States, 2008. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/55953/2/ERR83&percnt;20full&percnt;20doc.pdf.

[47]

P. Norris. 2001. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.

Digital Library

[48]

R. O’Neill. 2009. The transformative impact of e-government on public governance in New Zealand. Public Management Review 11, 6, 751--770.

[49]

E. Oreglia, Y. Liu, and W. Zhao. 2011. Designing for emerging rural users: Experiences from China. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’11). 1433--1436.

Digital Library

[50]

T. Parikh and K. Ghosh. 2006. Understanding and designing for intermediated information tasks in India. IEEE Pervasive Computing 5, 2, 32--39.

Digital Library

[51]

C. W. Phang, Y. Li, J. Sutanto, and A. Kankanhalli. 2005. Senior citizens’ adoption of e-government: In quest of the antecedents of perceived usefulness. In Proceedings of the 28th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 130--138.

Digital Library

[52]

W. Pieterson and J. N. Dijk. 2007. Channel choice determinants: An exploration of the factors that determine the choice of a service channel in citizen initiated contacts. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Bridging Disciplines and Domains. 173--182.

Digital Library

[53]

R. D. Putnam and L. M. Feldstein. 2003. Better together. Restoring the American Community. Simon and Schuster, New York, NY.

[54]

F. J. Riggins and S. Dewan. 2005. The digital divide: Current and future research directions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 6, 12, 298--337.

[55]

N. Sambasivan, E. Cutrell, K. Toyama, and B. Nardi. 2010. Intermediated technology use in developing communities. In Proceedings of the 2010 CHI (CHI’10). ACM, New York, NY, 2583--2592.

Digital Library

[56]

B. Schneider and B. Bowen. 2010. Winning the service game: Revisiting the rules by which people co-create value. In P. Maglio, C. Kieliszewski, and J. C. Spohrer (Eds.), The Handbook of Service Science. Springer, New York, NY, 31--60.

[57]

B. Semann and G. Mark. 2011. Technology-mediated social arrangements to resolve breakdowns in infrastructure during ongoing disruption. ACM Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 18, 4, Article 21.

Digital Library

[58]

J. Sherman. 2009. Those Who Work, Those Who Don’t: Poverty, Morality, and Family in Rural America. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.

[59]

J. Sipior, C. Ward, T. Burke, and R. Connolly. 2010. An empirical evaluation of e-government inclusion among the digitally disadvantaged in the United States. Information Resources Management Journal 23, 4, 21--39.

Digital Library

[60]

A. Sukumaran, S. Ramlal, E. Ophir, V. Kumar, G. Mishra, V. Evers, V. Balaji, and C. Nass. 2009. Intermediated technology interaction in rural contexts. In Proceedings of CHI’09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA’09). ACM, New York, NY, 3817--3822.

Digital Library

[61]

J. C. Thomas and G. Streib. 2003. The new face of government: Citizen-initiated contacts in the era of e-government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13, 1, 83--102.

[62]

L. Torres, N. Pino, and S. Royo. 2005. E-government and the transformation of public administration in EU countries. Online Information Review 29, 5, 531--553.

[63]

K. Toyama. 2010. Human--computer interaction and global development. Foundations and Trends in Human-Computer Interaction 4, 1, 1--79.

Digital Library

[64]

W. Tucker and E. Blake. 2008. The role of outcome mapping in developing a rural telemedicine system. In Proceedings of IST-Africa.

[65]

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2012. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Retrieved November 24, 2012, from http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/applicant_recipients/apply.htm.

[66]

U.S. House of Representatives. 2010. Testimony to the USHR Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, and Forestry. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from http://democrats.agriculture.house.gov/testimony/111/h012510/Swanson.pdf.

[67]

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

[68]

K. Zickuhr and A. Smith. 2012. Digital Differences. Retrieved March 10, 2014, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences.aspx.

[69]

N. Zillien and E. Hargittai. 2009. Digital distinction: Status-specific types of Internet usage. Social Science Quarterly 90, 2, 274--291.

Cited By

Çoban ŞFethi STanova CObaegbulam O(2024)Adoption of e-Government Services in the Northern Part of Cyprus: The Role of Blockchain Technology AwarenessSage Open10.1177/2158244024129289814:4Online publication date: 30-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241292898
Darusalam DJanssen MJayanti SSitompul RSaid JSanusi Z(2024)Public administration digitalization effects on corruption: Lesson learned from IndonesiaDigital Government: Research and Practice10.1145/36913515:4(1-13)Online publication date: 2-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3691351
Doyle DFiesler CPater JBrubaker J(2024)Designing for Researcher Access in the U.S. Mortality Data EcosystemProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870328:CSCW2(1-31)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3687032
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

E-government intermediaries and the challenges of access and trust
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing
  2. Human computer interaction (HCI)
2. Social and professional topics

Recommendations

Promoting Transparency and Strengthening Public Trust in Government through Information Communication Technologies?: A Study of Ghana's E-Governance Initiative

This paper attempts to examine Ghana's quest to use ICT as a tool to enhance transparency and build public trust in government. The questions the paper attempts to answer are: what are the main challenges confronting the government's e-governance ...
Trust and risk in e-government adoption

Citizen confidence in government and technology is imperative to the wide-spread adoption of e-government. This study analyzes the impact of trust and risk perceptions on one's willingness to use e-government services. We propose a model of e-government ...
Trust Factors Affecting the Adoption of E-Government for Civic Engagement
Electronic Government
Abstract
This study aims to investigate trust factors affecting the use and adoption of e-government services, which lead to civic engagement. The constructs identified in this study are related to the theories of technology adoption in addition to trust ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction Volume 21, Issue 2

February 2014

203 pages

ISSN:1073-0516

EISSN:1557-7325

DOI:10.1145/2592268

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2014 ACM.

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 the author(s) 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].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 February 2014

Accepted: 01 December 2013

Revised: 01 October 2013

Received: 01 January 2013

Published in TOCHI Volume 21, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

35
Total Citations
View Citations
839
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)46
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 02 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Çoban ŞFethi STanova CObaegbulam O(2024)Adoption of e-Government Services in the Northern Part of Cyprus: The Role of Blockchain Technology AwarenessSage Open10.1177/2158244024129289814:4Online publication date: 30-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241292898
Darusalam DJanssen MJayanti SSitompul RSaid JSanusi Z(2024)Public administration digitalization effects on corruption: Lesson learned from IndonesiaDigital Government: Research and Practice10.1145/36913515:4(1-13)Online publication date: 2-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3691351
Doyle DFiesler CPater JBrubaker J(2024)Designing for Researcher Access in the U.S. Mortality Data EcosystemProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870328:CSCW2(1-31)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3687032
Watson CCrivellaro CParnaby AKharrufa A(2024)Hostile Systems: A Taxonomy of Harms Articulated by Citizens Living with Socio-Economic DeprivationProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642562(1-17)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642562
Tran AGuo GTaylor JChan KRaymond EDisalvo C(2024)Situating Datasets: Making Public Eviction Data Actionable for Housing JusticeProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642452(1-16)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642452
Eliza IUrmi MAnan MMunim MGalib FIslam A(2024)eDakterBari: A human-centered solution enabling online medical consultation and information dissemination for resource-constrained communities in BangladeshHeliyon10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e2310010:1(e23100)Online publication date: Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23100
Saxena DGuha S(2023)Algorithmic Harms in Child Welfare: Uncertainties in Practice, Organization, and Street-level Decision-makingACM Journal on Responsible Computing10.1145/36164731:1(1-32)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3616473
Jo JXie JCarroll J(2023)Food with Dignity: Public Values in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Mobile ApplicationsProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Information Technology for Social Good10.1145/3582515.3609541(246-256)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3582515.3609541
van den Velden JSadowski B(2023)Creating public value with municipal Wi-Fi networks: a bottom-up methodologyDigital Policy, Regulation and Governance10.1108/DPRG-12-2019-010725:2(77-103)Online publication date: 17-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-12-2019-0107
Kumar RMukherjee ASachan A(2023)Factors influencing indirect adoption of e-Government services: a qualitative studyInformation Systems and e-Business Management10.1007/s10257-023-00637-z21:3(471-504)Online publication date: 4-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10257-023-00637-z
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents