Spatial data infrastructure (SDI) and E-governance: A quest for appropriate evaluation approaches

URISA Journal

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 43-55

  Georgiadou, Yola ^a   Rodriguez Pabón, Orlando ^b   Lance, Kate Trinka ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b BLL Groupe Conseil   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 44449129443     PISSN: 10458077     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Accenture. 2003. E-government leadership - realizing the vision, April 7, 2006, http://www.accenture.com/Global/Research_and_Insights/ By_Industry/Government/EGovVision.htm.
2. Accenture. 2004. E-government leadership: high performance, maximum value, April 7, 2006, http://www.accenture. com/Countries/Canada/ Research_And_Insights/eGovernmentValue.htm.
3. Aladwani, A. M. 2002. The development of two tools for measuring the easiness and usefulness of transactional Web sites. European Journal of Information Systems 11(3): 223-34.
4. Argyris, C., and D. Schön. 1996. Organizational learning II: theory, method and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
5. Averous, B., and D. Averous. 1998. Mesurer et manager la qualité de service: la méthode CYQ. Paris: INSEP Éditions.
6. Avgerou, C. 2000a. Information systems: what sort of science is it? OMEGA, The International Journal of Management Science 28(2000): 567-79.
7. Avgerou, C. 2000b. Recognising alternative rationalities in the deployment of information systems. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries (EJISDC) 3(7), 1-15.
8. Bannister, F. 2004. Deep e-government. EGPA 2004 Annual Conference: four months after: administering the new Europe, 1-4 September, 2004, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
9. Berghout, E., and D. Remenyi. 2005. The eleven years of the European Conference on IT evaluation: retrospectives and perspectives for possible future research. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation 8(2): 81-98.
10. Boonstra, J. J. 2004. Dynamics in organizational change and learning. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
11. Brynjolfsson, E., and L. Hitt. 1999. Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending. In Willcocks, L. P., and S. Lester, eds., Beyond the IT productivity paradox. Wiley Series in Information Systems.
12. Cameron, K S., and D. A. Whetten. 1983. Some conclusions about organizational effectiveness. In Cameron, K S., and D. A. Whetten, eds., Organizational effectiveness: a comparison of multiple models. New York: Academic Press, 261-77.
13. Chan, T.-O., M.-E. Feeney, A. Rajabifard, and I. Williamson. 2001. The dynamic nature of spatial data infrastructures: a method of descriptive classification. GEOMATICA 55(1): 65-72.
14. Chin, W. W., and M. K. O. Lee. 2000. A proposed model and measurement instrument for the formation of IS satisfaction: the case of end-user computing satisfaction. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Information Systems. Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 553-63.
15. Ciborra, C., and Associates. 2000. From control to drift: the dymmics of corporate information infrastructures. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
16. Clapp, J. L., J. D. McLaughlin, J. B. Sullivan, and A. P. Vonderohe. 1989. Toward a method for the evaluation of multipurpose land information systems. URISA, Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association 1: 39-45.
17. Craglia, M., and A. Johnston. 2004. Assessing the impacts of spatial data infrastructures: methods and gaps. 7th AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science. 29 April-1 May 2004, Heraklion, Greece.
18. Craglia, M., and K. Evmorfopoulou. 1999. Comparative evaluation of data infrastructures in Wallonia, Finland, Portugal and Great Britain. MADAME: methods for access to data and metadata in Europe, April 7, 2006, http://www.ec-gis.org/docs/F7952/D1.PDF.
19. Crompvoets, J., A. Bregt, A. Rajabifard, and I. Williamson. 2004. Assessing the worldwide developments of national spatial data clearinghouses. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 18(7): 665-89.
20. Davis, F. D., Jr. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319-40.
21. Danzinger, J. N. and V. K. Andersen. 2002. The impacts of information technology on public administration: an analysis of empirical research from the "golden age" of transformation. International Journal of Public Administration 25(5): 591-627.
22. De', R. 2005. E-government systems in developing countries: stakeholders and conflict. Paper read at Electronic Government, EGOV 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark.
23. Delgado, T., K. Lance, M. Buck, and H. Onsrud. 2005. Assessing an SDI readiness index. FIG Working Week 2005 Joint GSDI-8. April 16-21, 2005, Cairo, Egypt.
24. DeLone, W. H., and E. R. McLean. 1992. Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research 3(1): 60-95.
25. De Man, E. W. H. 2005. Understanding SDI: complexity and institutionalization. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 20(3): 329-43.
26. Didier, M. 1990. Utilité et valeur de l'information géographique. Ed. Paris: Économica, Paris.
27. Doherty, N., and M. King. 2004. The treatment of organisational issues in systems development projects: the implications for the evaluation of information technology investments. EJISE (Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation) 4(1), April 7, 2006, http:// www.iteva.rug.nl/.
28. Europe. 2004. Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an infrastructure for spatial information in the community (INSPIRE). Brussels: European Commission. July, report COM (2004).
29. Farbey, B., F. Land, and D. Targett. 1999. Evaluating investments in IT: findings and a framework. In Willcocks, L. P., and S. Lester, eds., Beyond the IT productivity paradox. Wiley Series in Information Systems: 183-215.
30. Farbey, B., F. Land, and D. Targett. 1999a. Evaluating investments in IT: findings and a framework. In Willcocks, L. P., and S. Lester, eds., Beyond the IT productivity paradox. Wiley Series in Information Systems: 183-215.
31. Frielink, A. B. 1961. Auditing automatic data processing. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
32. Gengatharen, D. E., and C. Standing. 2004. Evaluating the benefits of regional electronic marketplaces: assessing the quality of the REM success model. Ejise (Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation) 7(1): 11-20, April 7, 2006, http://www.iteva.rug.nl/.
33. Georgiadou, Y., S. Puri, and S. Sahay. 2005. Towards a potential research agenda to guide the implementation of spatial data infrastructures - a case study from India. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 19(10): 1113-30.
34. Giff, G., and D. J. Coleman. 2003. Spatial data infrastructures developments in Europe: a comparative analysis with Canada. Submitted to GeoConnections Secretariat, Natural Resources Canada. Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, University of New Brunswick.
35. Giff, G. 2005. Conceptual funding models for spatial data infrastructure implementation, Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of doctorate degree of philosophy at the Graduate Academic Unit of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, University of New Brunswick, March 2005.
36. Grönlund, Å. 2004. Introducing e-gov: history, definitions, and issues. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 15: 713-29.
37. Grönlund, Å. 2005. What's in a field - exploring the egovernment domain. Paper read at the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2005, Hawaii.
38. Grus, L., A. Bregt, and J. Crompvoets. 2006. Workshop on Exploring Spatial Data Infrastructures report, 19-20 January 2006, Wageningen, the Netherlands, Wageningen University, April 7, 2006, http://www.grs.wur.nl/ UK/Workshops/ Exploring+Spatial+ Data+Infrastructures/Program/.
39. Halsing, D., K. Theissen, and R. Bernknopf. 2006. A cost-benefit analysis of The National Map. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, circular 1271, http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/1271/.
40. Heeks, R. 2001. Understanding digital government project failures. IEEE Computer 34(2): 34.
41. Hirschheim, R., and S. Smithson. 1999. Evaluation of information systems: a critical assessment. In Willcocks, L. P., and L. Stephanie, eds., Beyond the IT productivity paradox. Wiley Series in Information Systems, 381-410.
42. Hyman, G., K. Lance, C. Perea, and D. I. Rey. 2001. NSDI in America: adoption and implemetation of national spatial data infrastructures. In Proceedings, 5th Conference GSDI, Cartagena, Colombia, May 22-24.
43. Irani, Z. 2002. Information systems evaluation: navigating through the problem domain. Information and Management 40 (2002): 11-24.
44. JRC. 2006. International Workshop on Spatial Data Infrastructures' Cost-Benefit/Return on Investment. Joint Research Centre, 12th-13th January 2006, Ispra, Italy, April 7, 2006, http://sdi.jrc.it/ws/ costbenefit2006/presentations.cfm.
45. Johnson, J. P. 1995. Case studies of dissemination policy in local government GIS agencies. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 19: 373-90.
46. Khazanchi, D., and B. E. Munkvold. 2003. On the rhetoric and relevance of IS research paradigms: a conceptual framework and some propositions. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on Information Systems (HICSS) 2003, 252.
47. King S. F., and J.-S. Liou. 2004. A framework for Internet channel evaluation. International Journal of Information Management 24(2004): 473-88.
48. Kok, B., and B. van Loenen. 2005. How to assess the success of national spatial data infrastructures? Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 29(2005): 699-717.
49. Krek, AI. 2000. Efficient pricing of geomarketing Internet services: European vs. American approach. In Proceedings of The Spatial Information Society: Shaping the Future, 6th EC-GIS workshop, Lyon, France.
50. Krek, A., and A. Frank. 2000. The economic value of geo information. Geo-Informations-Systeme, Journal for Spatial Information and Decision Making 13(3): 10-12.
51. Kuhn, W., S. Basedow, C. Brox, C. Riedemann, H. Rossol, K. Senkler, and K. Zens. 2000. Reference model 3.0 draft, Geospatial Data Infrastructure (GDI) North Rhine-Westfalia.
52. Lopez, X. R. 1998. The dissemination of spatial data: a North-American European comparative study on the impact of government information policy. Ed. Greenwich, CN: Ablex.
53. Lopez, X. R. 1997. Spatial data as a test bed for national information policy. In Craglia, M., and H. Couclelis, eds., Geographic information research "bridging the Atlantic." London: Taylor and Francis Ltd.
54. Lundell, B., and B. Ling. 2003. The 2G method for doubly grounding evaluation frameworks. Info Systems Journal 13(4): 375-98.
55. Margetts, H., and P. Dunleavy. 2002. Cultural barriers to e-government. Academic article in support of better public services through e-government. National Audit Office, Ordered by the House of Commons, London.
56. Margetts, H. 2003. Electronic government: method or madness. In School of Public Policy Working Paper Series, paper no. 3. London.
57. Masser, I. 1999. All shapes and sizes: the first generation of national spatial data infrastructures. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 13(1): 67-84.
58. Masser, I. 2000. Spatial data infrastructures in Europe. Proceedings of the International Conference - Quo Vadis Surveying of the 21st Century, FIG Working Week 2000 in Prague, Czech Republic, 22-26 May 2000.
59. Masser, I. 2003. International comparison. In Craglia, M., A. Annoni, M. Klopfer, C. Corbin, L. Hecht, G. Pichler, and P. Smits, eds., GINIE: Geographic Information Network in Europe. GINIE Deliverable 6.5.1, October 2003.
60. MetroGIS. 2004. MetroGIS performance measurement report. Prepared by MetroGIS staff, approved by MetroGIS Policy Board, April 7, 2006, http:// www.state.mn.us/intergov/metrogis/.
61. Nedovic-Budic, Z., M.-E. Feeney, A. Rajabifard, and I. Williamson. 2003. Are SDIs serving the needs of local planning? Case study of Victoria, Australia and Illinois, USA. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 28(2004): 329-51.
62. Nedovic-Budic, Z/, and J. Pinto. 1999. Understanding inter-organizational GIS activities: a conceptual framework. Urisa Journal 11(1): 53-64.
63. Nedovic-Budic, Z.. 1998. The impact of GIS technology. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 25(5): 681-692.
64. OECD. 2003. The e-government imperative. Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development, OECD e-Government Studies, Paris.
65. Onsrud, H. J. 1998. A global survey of national spatial data infrastructure activities, April 7, 2006, http://www.spatial. maine.edu/ ~onsrud/gsdi/surveysum.htm.
66. Parker, M. M., R. J. Benson, and H. E. Trainor. 1988. Information economics: linking business performance to information technology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
67. Pauknerova, E., C. Corbin, M. Craglia, and K. Margoldova. 2003. SDI in accession and pre-accession countries. In Craglia, M., ed., GI in the wider Europe. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, April 7, 2006, http:// www.ec-gis.org/ginie/doc/book/ch3.pdf.
68. Pavlova, R., U. Boes, E. Roccatagliata, and C. Luzet. 2002. GISEE geographic information systems technology and market in Southeast Europe. Final report, data analysis, and recommendations. Deliverable D.1.12, April 7, 2006, http://www. gisig.it/gisee/proj_documents/ FinPubReportGISEE.pdf.
69. Petricek, V., T. Escher, I. J. Cox, and H. Margetts. 2006. The Web structure of e-government - developing a methodology for quantitative evaluation, May 22-26, 2006, Edinburgh, U.K., April 8, 2006, http:kocour.ms.mff.cuni.cz/~petricek/papers/egov/petric ek06structure.pdf.
70. Petch, J., and D. Reeve. 1999. GIS organisations and people: a socio-technical approach. London: Taylor and Francis.
71. Rajabifard, A., I. Williamson, P. Holland, and G. Johnston. 2000. From local to global SDI initiatives: a pyramid of building blocks. In Proceedings of 4th Global Spatial Data Infrastructure Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, March 13-15, 2000.
72. Renkema T. J. W., and E. W Berghout. 1997. Methodologies for information systems investment evaluation at the proposal stage: a comparative review. Information and Software Technology 39: 1-13.
73. Rodriguez-Pabón, O., 2005. Cadre théorique pour l'évaluation des infrastructures d'information géospatiale. Centre de recherche en géomatique, Département des sciences géomatiques, Université Laval. Thèse de doctorat, April 7, 2006, http://www.theses.ulaval.ca/2005/23114/23114.html.
74. Rodriguez-Pabón, O., S. Roche, F. Brochu, C. Caron, and J.-J. Chevallier. 2002. Établissement de la valeur d'une infrastructure d'information géospatiale selon la perspective de l'interactionnisme sociale. Géomatique 2002 Joint ISPRS Symposium on Geospatial Theory, Processing and Applications. Ottawa, Canada, July 9-12, April 7, 2006, http://www.isprs.org/commission4/proceedings02/ pdfpapers/230.pdf.
75. Saleh, Y., and M. Alshawi. 2005. An alternative model for measuring the success of IS projects: the GPIS model. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 18(1): 47-63.
76. Scholl, H. J. 2005. Organizational transformation through e-government: myth or reality? Electronic Government, 4th International Conference, EGOV 2005, August 22-26, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark.
77. Seddon, P. B, S. Staples, R. Patnayakuni, and M. Bowtell. 1999. Dimensions of information systems success. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2(20): 1-61.
78. Serafeimidis, V., and S. Smithson. 2003. Information systems evaluation as an organizational institution - experience from a case study. Info Systems Journal 13(3): 251-74.
79. Smithson, S., and R. Hirschheim. 1998. Information systems evaluation: another look at an old problem. European Journal of Information Systems 7(3): 158-74.
80. Steudler, D. 2003. Developing evaluation and performance indicators for SDIs. In Williamson, I., A. Rajabifard, and M.-E. Feeney, eds., Developing spatial data infrastructures: from concept to reality. London: Taylor and Francis.
81. Symons, V. J. 1991. A review of information systems evaluation: content, context and process. European Journal of Information Systems 1(3): 205-12.
82. Symons, V. J. 1993. Evaluation and the failure of control: information systems development in the processing company. Accounting, Management and Information Technology 3: 51-76.
83. van de Donk, W., and I. Snellen. 1998. Towards a theory of public administration in an information age? In van de Donk, W., and 1. Snellen, eds., Public administration in an information age. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
84. Vandenbroucke, D. 2005. Spatial data infrastructures in Europe: State of play Spring 2005, Summary report of activity 5 of a study commissioned by the EC (EUROSTAT & DGENV) in the framework of the INSPIRE initiative, August 2005, April 8, 2006, http://.inspire.jrc.it/reports/ stateofplay2005/rpact05v42.pdf.
85. Wilsham, G. 1999. Interpretive evaluation design for information systems. In Willcocks, L. P., and S. Lester, eds., Beyond the IT productivity paradox. Wiley Series in Information Systems.
86. Walter, S. G., and T Spitta. 2004. Approaches to the ex-ante evaluation of investments into information systems. WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, WI - State-of-the-Art 46(3): 171-80.
87. Warnecke, L. 2003. Statewide leadership and coordination of geographic information and related technology in the 50 states. National States Geographic Information Council, NSGIC.
88. Wehn de Montalvo, U. 2001. Strategies for SDI implementation: a survey of national experiences. 5th Global Spatial Data Infrastructure Conference, Cartagena, Colombia.
89. Weill, P., and M. Broadbent. 1998. Leveraging the new infrastructure: how market leaders capitalize on IT. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
90. Weiss, L. S. 1998. Report of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure: Measures of Progress Workshop. For the U.S. Army Research Office.
91. Whittaker, L. 2001. Information systems evaluation: a post-dualist interpretation. Thesis de doctorate. Faculty of Engineering, University of Pretoria, April 7, 2006, http://u petd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/ etd-06142002-121347/ unrestricted/00body.pdf.
92. Willcocks, L. 1992. Evaluating information technology investments: research findings and reappraisal. Journal of Information Systems 2(3): 243-68.
93. Willcocks, L. P., and S. Lester. 1999. In search of information technology productivity: assessment issues. In Willcocks, L. P., and S. Lester, eds., Beyond, the IT productivity paradox. Wiley Series in Information Systems.
94. Wise, J. M.. 1997. Exploring technology and social space. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
95. Zouridis, S., and M. Thaens. 2005. Reflections on the anatomy of e-government. In Bekkers, V. H. V., ed., The information ecology of e-government. E-government as institutional and technological innovation in public administration. Amsterdam: IOS Press.