A metatheory of e-government: Creating some order in a fragmented research field

Theoretical fragmentation in e-government studies hampers the further development of this field of study. This paper argues that a metatheory can reduce theoretical confusion. Ideas from the philosophy of the social sciences are used to develop a metatheory of e-government consisting of three dimensions: explaining/understanding, holism/individualism and change/maintenance. This metatheory is used to analyze a corpus of papers on e-government in both journals on public administration and information systems. The analysis of the 116 papers shows a bias towards explaining e-government (rather than understanding social constructions), analyzing holistic systems (rather than the behavior, attitudes and cognitions of individual actors) and studying incremental rather than transformational change. We conclude that the value of the metatheory lies in (1) facilitating debate about e-government between researchers with different perspectives, (2) enabling researchers to be clear about their social science perspective, and (3) developing educational programs that bring in various scientific perspectives.

[1]  Helen Margetts,et al.  Public management change and e-government: The emergence of digital-era governance , 2008 .

[2]  Birger Hjørland,et al.  Theory and metatheory of information science: a new interpretation , 1998, J. Documentation.

[3]  M. Castells.  The rise of the network society , 1996 .

[4]  Christine Bellamy,et al.  Introduction: Exploiting IT in Public Administration: Towards the Information Polity? , 1994 .

[5]  Christopher G. Reddick,et al.  Social media adoption at the American grass roots: Web 2.0 or 1.5? , 2013, Gov. Inf. Q..

[6]  Victor Bekkers,et al.  Why does e-government looks as it does? looking beyond the explanatory emptiness of the e-government concept , 2012, Inf. Polity.

[7]  M. J. Moon.  The Evolution of E-Government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality? , 2002 .

[8]  Åke Grönlund,et al.  e-Gov Research Quality Improvements Since 2003: More Rigor, but Research (Perhaps) Redefined , 2006, EGOV.

[9]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities , 2012, Gov. Inf. Q..

[10]  D. M. Klein,et al.  Metatheory and Family Studies , 2009 .

[11]  V. Homburg,et al.  Diffusion of Personalised Services among Dutch Municipalities: Evolving Channels of Persuasion , 2014 .

[12]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Understanding the evolution of e-government: The influence of systems of rules on public sector dynamics , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[13]  Andrew Whitmore,et al.  A statistical analysis of the construction of the United Nations E-Government Development Index , 2012, Gov. Inf. Q..

[14]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[15]  Janis R. Evink.  Information Ecology: Mastering the Information and Knowledge Environment , 1997 .

[16]  W. Scott,et al.  Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural and Open Systems Perspectives , 2006 .

[17]  I.Th.M. Snellen,et al.  Public administration in an information age : a handbook , 1998 .

[18]  Jen-Hung Huang,et al.  Elucidating usage of e-government learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[19]  C. Heflin,et al.  Clients’ Perspectives on a Technology-Based Food Assistance Application System , 2013 .

[20]  Jungwoo Lee,et al.  Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model , 2001, Gov. Inf. Q..

[21]  J. Keen,et al.  Interim Realities , 2012 .

[22]  G. Burrell,et al.  Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life , 2017 .

[23]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  New public management is dead. Long live digital-era governance , 2005 .

[24]  Kuldeep Kumar,et al.  Sustainable Collaboration: Managing Conflict and Cooperation in Interorganizational Systems , 1996, MIS Q..

[25]  J. Bransen.  The Philosophy of Social Science. An Introduction , 1996 .

[26]  W. Orlikowski.  The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations , 2014 .

[27]  Shin-Yuan Hung,et al.  User acceptance of mobile e-government services: An empirical study , 2013, Gov. Inf. Q..

[28]  T. Pinch,et al.  The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit Each Other , 1984 .

[29]  Hans Jochen Scholl,et al.  Is E-Government Research a Flash in the Pan or Here for the Long Shot? , 2006, EGOV.

[30]  Shoshana Zuboff.  In the Age of the Smart Machine , 1988 .

[31]  Helle Zinner Henriksen,et al.  Social media in public health care: Impact domain propositions , 2012, Gov. Inf. Q..

[32]  David Knights,et al.  Politics and Pain in Managing Information Technology: A Case Study from Insurance , 1992 .

[33]  Mon-Chi Lio,et al.  Can the internet reduce corruption? A cross-country study based on dynamic panel data models , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[34]  Jason L. Dedrick,et al.  Computing and Public Organizations , 1986 .

[35]  J. Ramon Gil-Garcia,et al.  Using institutional theory and dynamic simulation to understand complex e-Government phenomena , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[36]  D. Tranfield,et al.  Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review , 2003 .

[37]  J. Fountain.  Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change , 2001 .

[38]  C. Pollitt.  Mainstreaming Technological Change in the Study of Public Management , 2010 .

[39]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  Information Ecologies: Using Technology with Heart , 1999 .

[40]  Eric W. Welch,et al.  Social media use in local government: Linkage of technology, task, and organizational context , 2013, Gov. Inf. Q..

[41]  Haridimos Tsoukas,et al.  What is Management? An Outline of a Metatheory , 1994 .

[42]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Information Systems and Developing Countries: Failure, Success, and Local Improvisations , 2002, Inf. Soc..

[43]  Christos Michalakelis,et al.  Utilization of communications network potential: Public practices and effects , 2012, Gov. Inf. Q..

[44]  M. Bovens,et al.  From Street‐Level to System‐Level Bureaucracies: How Information and Communication Technology is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control , 2002 .

[45]  Mete Yildiz,et al.  E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[46]  S. Dawes.  The Evolution and Continuing Challenges of E-Governance , 2008 .

[47]  George Ritzer,et al.  Sociological Metatheory: A Defense of a Subfield by a Delineation of Its Parameters , 1988 .

[48]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  The External Control of Organizations. , 1978 .

[49]  Cory L. Armstrong.  Providing a clearer view: An examination of transparency on local government websites , 2011, Gov. Inf. Q..

[50]  Victor Bekkers,et al.  The Myths of E-Government: Looking Beyond the Assumptions of a New and Better Government , 2007, Inf. Soc..

[51]  Christopher G. Reddick,et al.  Interactions with e-government, new digital media and traditional channel choices: citizen-initiated factors , 2014 .

[52]  Ramón Rufín,et al.  Moderating Factors in Adopting Local e-Government in Spain , 2012 .

[53]  James L. McKenney,et al.  An Historical Method for MIS Research: Steps and Assumptions , 1997, MIS Q..

[54]  C. May,et al.  Interaction between States and Citizens in the Age of the Internet: “e-Government” in the United States, Britain, and the European Union , 2003 .

[55]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[56]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations , 2005, Gov. Inf. Q..

[57]  G. Garson,et al.  Public Information Technology and E-Governance: Managing the Virtual State , 2008 .

[58]  Mark Bovens,et al.  From street level to system level bureaucracies. How ICT is transforming administrative discretion and constitutional control , 2002 .