E-government evaluation: Citizen's perspective in developing countries

Information Technology for Development

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 193-208

  Alshawi, Sarmad ^a   Alalwany, Hamid ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Citizen's perspective; Developing countries; e government; e government evaluation; Evaluation criteria; Evaluation framework

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; INFORMATION SERVICES;

CITIZEN'S PERSPECTIVES; E-GOVERNMENT EVALUATIONS; E-GOVERNMENT SERVICES; E-GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS; EVALUATION CRITERIA; EVALUATION FRAMEWORK; GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES; HOLISTIC EVALUATIONS;

E-GOVERNMENT;

EID: 70350605274     PISSN: 02681102     EISSN: 15540170     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/itdj.20125     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Aichholzer, G. (2003). Scenarios of e-government in 2010 and implications for strategy design. Electronic Journal of e-Government. Available at http://www.ejeg.com/
2. Belanger, F., Hiller, J., & Smith, W. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: The role of privacy, security, and site attributes. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3/4), 245-270.
3. Beynon-Davies, P. (2005). Constructing electronic government: The case of the UK Inland Revenue. International Journal of Information Management, 25(1), 3-20.
4. Bhatnagar, S. (2004). E-government: from vision to implementation: A practical guide with case studies. New Delhi, Thousand Oaks, London: Sage.
5. Caldwell, B., Cooper, M., Reid, L., and Vanderheiden, G. (2007) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0," eds., W3C Working Draft 17 May 2007 http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
6. Carter, L., & Belanger, F. (2004). Citizen adoption of electronic government initiatives. Proceedings of 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, Hawaii. January 5-8, 2004.
7. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
8. Doherty, N., & King, M. (2004). The treatment of organizational issues in systems development projects: The implications for the evaluation of information technology investments. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 4(1).
9. Eschenfelder, K. R., & Miller, C. (2005). The openness of government websites: Toward a sociotechnical government website evaluation toolkit. MacArthur Foundation/ALA Office of Information Technology Policy Internet Credibility and the User Symposium, Seattle, WA.
10. Fang, Z. (2002). E-government in digital era: Concept, practice, and development. International Journal of The Computer, The Internet and Management, 10(2), 1-22.
11. Farbey, B., Land, F., & Targett, D. (1993). How to assess your IT investment: A study of methods and practice. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
12. Farbey, B., Land, F., & Targett, D. (1995). A taxonomy of information systems applications: The benefits evaluation ladder. European Journal of Information Systems, 4, 41-50.
13. Fletcher, P. D. (2004). Portals and policy: Implications of electronic access to U.S. federal government information and services. In A. Pavlichev, & G. D. Garson (Eds.), Digital government: Principles and best practices. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
14. Fountain, J. (2003). Prospects for improving the regulatory process using e-rulemaking. Communications of the ACM, 46(1).
15. Galliers, R. D. (1992).'Choosing information systems research approaches, In R. D. Galliers (Ed.), Information systems research, issues, methods and practice guidelines. London: Blackwell Scientific.
16. Hatry, P. (1999). Performance measurement: getting results (p. 3). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
17. Heeks, R. (2003). Most e-government for development projects fail: How can risks be reduced? I-Government, Working Paper Series, Paper no. 14.
18. Hochstrasser, B. (1992). Justifying IT investment. Proceedings of the Advanced Information Systems Conference; The New Technologies in Today's Business Environment, UK, pp. 17-28.
19. Jansen, A. (2005). Assessing e-government progress-why and what. University of Oslo. Retrieved October, 2007, from http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/jus/afin/FINF4001/h05/undervisningsmateriale/AJJ-nokobit2005.pdf
20. Jones, S., & Hughes, J. (2001). Understanding IS evaluation as a complex social process: A case study of a UK local authority. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(1).
21. Jones, S., Irani, Z., Sharif, A., & Themistocleous, M. (2006). E-government evaluation: Reflections on two organizational studies. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, Hawaii. January 4-7, 2006.
22. Khalifa, G., Irani, Z., Baldwin, L. P., & Jones, S. (2004). Evaluating information technology with you in mind. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation. England: Academic Conferences Limited.
23. Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Association for Information Systems, 40(3), 191.
24. Mingers, J., & Stowell, F. (1997). Information systems: An emerging discipline? Information Systems Series (pp. 239-266). London: McGraw-Hill.
25. National Office for the Information Economy (NOIE).(2003).E-government benefits study. Canberra, Australia: NOIE.
26. Orange, G., Burke, A., Elliman, T., & Kor, A. (2006). CARE: An integrated framework to support continuous, adaptable, reflective evaluation of e-government systems. European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS), Alicante, Spain, July 6-7, 2006.
27. Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) E-Government Studies. (2003). The e-government imperative. Paris, France: OECD Publications.
28. Pascual, P. (2003). E-Government, E-Asian Task Force and the UNDP Asia Pacific Development Information Programme (UNDP-APDIP). Retrieved October, 2007, from http://www.apdip.net/publications/iespprimers/eprimer-egov.pdf
29. Petricek, V., Escher, T., Cox, I. J., & Margetts, H. (2006). The web structure of e-government- developing a methodology for quantitative evaluation. International World Wide Web Conference, Edinburgh, UK.
30. Poskitt, H. (2002). Accessibility arguments revisited. Dublin, Ireland: Frontend. Retrieved October, 2007, from http://www.frontend.com/accessibility/accessibility-arguments-revisited.html
31. Reilly, C., Horan, J., Johnston, R., Stanley-Smith, C., &Colm Butler, D. (2003). E-government more than an automation of government services. Information Society Commission.
32. Remenyi, D., Money, A., Sherwood-Smith, M., & Irani, Z. (2000). Effective measurement and management of IT costs and benefits. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
33. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
34. Scott, M., Golden, W., & Hughes, M. (2004). Implementing strategies for e-government; a stakeholder analysis approach. Proceedings of the European Conference in Information Systems, Turku, Finland. June 14-16, 2004.
35. Serafeimidis, V., & Smithson, S. (2000). Information systems evaluation in practice: A case study of organizational change. Journal of Information Technology, 15(2), 93-105.
36. Symons, V., & Walsham, G. (1988). The evaluation of information systems: A critique. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 15, 119-132.
37. Terry Ma, H., & Zaphiris, P. (2003). The usability and content accessibility of the e-government in the UK. London: Centre for Human-Computer Interaction Design, City University. Retrieved October, 2007, from http://www.soi.city.ac.uk/~zaphiri/Papers/HCII2003/HCII2003-Accessibility.pdf
38. United Nations (UN), Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2005). UN global e-government readiness report 2005, from e-government to e-inclusion, UNPAN/2005/14. Retrieved October, 2007, from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan021888.pdf
39. Walter, S., & Spitta, T. (2004). Approaches to the ex-ante evaluation of investments into information systems. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 46(3), 171-180.
40. Wang, L., Bretschneider, S., & Gant, J. (2005). Evaluating web-based e-government services with a citizen-centric approach. Proceedings of38thAnnual HawaiiInternational ConferenceonSystems Sciences, Big Island, Hawaii. January 3-6, 2005.
41. West, D. (2000). Assessing e-government: The internet, democracy and service delivery by state and federal governments. Brown University Available at http://www.insidepolitics.org/policyreports.html
42. Willcocks, L. (1992). Evaluating information technology investments: Research findings and reappraisal. Journal of Information Systems, 2(3), 243-268.
43. World Markets Research Centre & Brown University. (2001). Global e-government survey 2001. Available at http://www.worldmarketsanalysis.com/pdf/e-govreport.pdf
44. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.