Explaining the failure of an online citizen engagement initiative: The role of internal institutional variables

Journal of Information Technology and Politics

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 21-40

  Chadwick, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Citizen engagement; Democracy; e democracy; Governance; Internet; Online consultation; Online forums; Organizations; Public services

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952518015     PISSN: 19331681     EISSN: 1933169X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19331681.2010.507999     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. 6, P. (2004). E-Governance: Styles of political judgment in the information age polity. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
2. Asgarkhani, M. (2005). Digital government and its effectiveness in public management reform: A local government perspective. Public Management Review, 7(3), 465-487.
3. Åström, J., & Granberg, M. (2008). Urban planners, wired for change?-Understanding elite support for e-participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4(2), 63-77.
4. Baldersheim, H., & Øgård, M. (2008). Innovation in e-government: Analysis of municipal Web pages in the Nordic countries. Information Polity, 13(3/4), 125-137.
5. Beynon-Davies, P., & Martin, S. (2004). Electronic local government and the modernisation agenda: Progress and prospects for public service improvement. Local Government Studies, 30(2), 214-229.
6. Bimber, B. (2001). Information and political engagement in America: The search for effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 53-67.
7. Bloomfield, B. P., & Hayes, N. (2009). Power and organizational transformation through technology: Hybrids of electronic government. Organization Studies, 30(5), 461-487.
8. Borins, S. (2004). A holistic view of public sector information technology. Journal of E-Government, 1(2), 3-29.
9. Borins, S., & Brown, D. (2007). E-consultation: Technology at the interface between civil society and government. In S. Borins, K. Kernaghan, D. Brown, N. Pontis, P. 6, & F. Thompson (Eds.), Digital state at the leading edge (pp. 251-76). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
10. Boulianne, S. (2009). Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26(2), 193-211.
11. California Secretary of State. (2004). California statewide election results: November 2004 general election. California Secretary of State's Office. Retrieved from http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general
12. Carter, L., & Bélanger, F. (2005). The utilization of e-government services: Citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 5-25.
13. Chadwick, A. (2003). Bringing e-democracy back in: Why it matters for future research on e-governance. Social Science Computer Review, 21(4), 443-455.
14. Chadwick, A. (2009). Web 2.0: New challenges for the study of e-democracy in an era of informational exuberance. I/S: Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 5(1), 9-41.
15. Chadwick, A., & May, C. (2003). Interaction between states and citizens in the age of the Internet: "E-government" in the United States, Britain, and the European Union. Governance, 16(2), 271-300.
16. Ciborra, C. (2002). The labyrinths of information: Challenging the wisdom of systems. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
17. Coleman, S. (2004). Connecting parliament to the public via the Internet. Information, Communication and Society, 7(1), 1-22.
18. Coleman, S. (2005). New mediation and direct representation: Reconceptualizing representation in the digital age. New Media and Society, 7(2), 177-198.
19. Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. G. (2009). The Internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice, and policy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
20. Conroy, M. M., & Evans-Cowley, J. (2006). E-participation in planning: An analysis of cities adopting on-line citizen participation tools. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24(3), 371-384.
21. Contini, F., & Lanzara, G. F. (Eds.). (2009). ICT and innovation in the public sector: European studies in the making of e-government. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
22. Coursey, D., & Norris, D. F. (2008). Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 523-536.
23. Cullen, R., & Hernon, P. (2006a). Citizens' response to e-government. In P. Hernon, R. Cullen, & H. C. Relyea (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on e-government: Serving today and building for tomorrow (pp. 181-208). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
24. Cullen, R., & Hernon, P. (2006b). More citizen perspectives on e-government. In P. Hernon, R. Cullen, & H. C. Relyea (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on e-government: Serving today and building for tomorrow (pp. 209-242). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
25. Dawes, S. S. (2009). Governance in the digital age: A research and action framework for an uncertain future. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 257-264.
26. Dimitrova, D. V., & Chen, Y. (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.
27. Docter, S., & Dutton, W. H. (1998). The First Amendment online: Santa Monica's Public Electronic Network. In R. Tsagarousianou, D. Tambini, & C. Bryan (Eds.), Cyberdemocracy: Technology, cities, and civic networks (pp. 125-151). London, England: Routledge.
28. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). Digital era governance: IT corporations, the state, and e-government. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
29. Edmiston, K. D. (2003). State and local e-government: Prospects and challenges. American Review of Public Administration, 33(1), 20-45.
30. Edwards, A. (2008). What e-politicians do with words: Online communication between councillors and citizens. Information Polity, 13(3/4), 233-248.
31. Escher, T., & Margetts, H. (2007, August). Understanding governments and citizens online: Learning from e-commerce. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
32. Fedorowicz, J., Gelinas Jr., U. J., Gogan, J. L., & Williams, C. B. (2009). Strategic alignment of participant motivations in e-government collaborations: The Internet payment platform pilot. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 51-59.
33. Ford, N., & Murphy, G. (2008). Evaluating the potential of a Web-based portal to support the leverage of professional expertise across local authority boundaries. Local Government Studies, 34(3), 397-418.
34. Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
35. Gauld, R., Gray, A., & McComb, S. (2009). How responsive is e-government? Evidence from Australia and New Zealand. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 69-74.
36. Gibson, R. K., Lusoli, W., & Ward, S. J. (2005). Online participation in the UK: Testing a contextualised model of Internet effects. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 7(4), 561-583.
37. Goodwin, I. (2005). The Internet, organisational change and community engagement: The case of Birmingham city council. Prometheus, 23(4), 367-384.
38. Grönlund, A. (2003). Emerging electronic infrastructures: Exploring democratic components. Social Science Computer Review, 21(1), 55-72.
39. Hands, J. (2005). E-deliberation and local governance: The role of computer mediated communication in local democratic participation in the United Kingdom. First Monday, 10(7). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1258/1178
40. Hardy, C. A., & Williams, S. P. (2008). E-government policy and practice: A theoretical and empirical exploration of public e-procurement. Government Information Quarterly, 25(2), 155-180.
41. Haug, A. V. (2008). Local democracy online-driven by crisis, legitimacy, resources, or communication gaps? Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4(2), 79-99.
42. Ho, A. T. (2002). Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Administration Review, 62(4), 434-443.
43. Ho, A. T., & Ni, A. Y. (2004). Explaining the adoption of e-government features: A case study of Iowa county treasurers' offices. American Review of Public Administration, 34(2), 164-180.
44. Janssen, M., Kuk, G., & Wagenaar, R. W. (2008). A survey of Web-based business models for e-government in the Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 25(2), 202-220.
45. Jensen, M. J., Danziger, J. N., & Venkatesh, A. (2007). Civil society and cyber society: The role of the Internet in community associations and democratic politics. Information Society, 23(1), 39-50.
46. Jung, J., Qiu, J. L., & Kim, Y. C. (2001). Internet connectedness and inequality: Beyond the "divide." Communication Research, 28(4), 507-535.
47. Justice, J. B., Melitski, J., & Smith, D. L. (2006). e-government as an instrument of fiscal accountability and responsiveness: Do the best practitioners employ the best practices? American Review of Public Administration, 36(3), 301-322.
48. Kim, S., Kim, H. J., & Lee, H. (2009). An institutional analysis of an e-government system for anti-corruption: The case of OPEN. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 42-50.
49. Krueger, B. S. (2005). Government surveillance and political participation on the Internet. Social Science Computer Review, 23(4), 439-452.
50. Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.
51. Lazer, D., & Mayer-Schönberger, V. (Eds.). (2007). Governance and information technology: From electronic government to information government. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52. Lee, J., & Kim, J. (2007). Grounded theory analysis of e-government initiatives: Exploring perceptions of government authorities. Government Information Quarterly, 24(1), 135-147.
53. Macintosh, A., Robson, E., Smith, E., &Whyte, A. (2003). Electronic democracy and young people. Social Science Computer Review, 21(1), 43-54.
54. Mahrer, H., & Krimmer, R. (2005). Towards the enhancement of e-democracy: Identifying the notion of the "middleman paradox." Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 27-42.
55. Margetts, H. (2008). Public management change and e-government: The emergence of digital-era governance. In A. Chadwick & P. N. Howard (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of Internet politics (pp. 114-127). London, England: Routledge.
56. Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2002). Cultural barriers to e-government (HC704-III). London, England: UK National Audit Office.
57. Marston, G. (2006). Employment services in an age of e-government. Information Communication and Society, 9(1), 83-103.
58. McNeal, R., Hale, K., & Dotterweich, L. (2008). Citizen- government interaction and the Internet: Expectations and accomplishments in contact, quality, and trust. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 5(2), 213-229.
59. McNeal, R. S., Tolbert, C. J., Mossberger, K., & Dotterweich, L. J. (2003). Innovating in digital government in the American states. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1), 52-70.
60. Media Audit (2006). Media audit data for the county capital in TechCounty, July-August 2006. Houston, TX: International Demographics.
61. Moon, M. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424-433.
62. Moon, M. J., & Norris, D. F. (2005). Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption of reinventing government and e-government at the municipal level. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 43-60.
63. Morgeson III, F. V., & Mithas, S. (2009). Does e-government measure up to e-business? Comparing end user perceptions of U.S. Federal government and e-business Web sites. Public Administration Review, 69(4), 740-752.
64. Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & Stansbury, M. (2003). Virtual inequality: Beyond the digital divide. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
65. Mundkur, A., & Venkatesh, M. (2009). The role of institutional logics in the design of e-governance systems. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(1), 12-30.
66. Norris, D. F., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Advancing e-government at the grassroots: Tortoise or hare? Public Administration Review, 65(1), 64-75.
67. Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
68. Parvez, Z., & Ahmed, P. (2006). Towards building an integrated perspective on e-democracy. Information Communication and Society, 9(5), 612-632.
69. Pratchett, L., Wingfield, M., & Polat, R. K. (2006). Local democracy online: An analysis of local government Web sites in England and Wales. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 2(3), 75-92.
70. Reddick, C. G. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets to servers? Government Information Quarterly, 22(1), 38-57.
71. Reddick, C. G., & Frank, H. A. (2007). The perceived impacts of e-government on U.S. cities: A survey of Florida and Texas city managers. Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 576-594.
72. Rose, R. (2005). A global diffusion model of e-governance. Journal of Public Policy, 25(1), 5-27.
73. Schlosberg, D., Zavestoski, S., & Shulman, S. W. (2007). Democracy and e-rulemaking-Web-based technologies, participation, and the potential for deliberation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4(1), 37-55.
74. Scott, J. K. (2006). "E" the people: Do U.S. municipal government Web sites support public involvement? Public Administration Review, 66(3), 341-353.
75. Sriramesh, K., & Rivera-Sánchez, M. (2006). E-government in a corporatist, communitarian society: The case of Singapore. New Media and Society, 8(5), 707-730.
76. Stanley, J. W., Weare, C., & Musso, J. (2004). Participation, deliberative democracy, and the Internet: Lessons from a national forum on commercial vehicle safety. In P. M. Shane (Ed.), Democracy online: The prospects for political renewal through the Internet (pp. 167-179). London, England: Routledge.
77. Streib, G., & Navarro, I. (2006). Citizen demand for interactive e-government: The case of Georgia consumer services. American Review of Public Administration, 36(3), 288-300.
78. Sweeney, A. D. P. (2008). Electronic government-citizen relationships-exploring citizen perspectives. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4(2), 101-116.
79. Thomas, J. C., & Streib, G. (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.
80. Thomas, J. C., & Streib, G. (2005). E-democracy, e-commerce, and e-research: Examining the electronic ties between citizens and governments. Administration and Society, 37(3), 259-280.
81. Tolbert, C. J., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 354-369.
82. Tolbert, C. J., Mossberger, K., & McNeal, R. (2008). Institutions, policy innovation, and e-government in the American states. Public Administration Review, 68(3), 549-563.
83. Torres, L., Pina, V., & Acerete, B. (2006). E-governance developments in European Union cities: Reshaping government's relationship with citizens. Governance, 19(2), 277-302.
84. Tsai, N., Choi, B., & Perry, M. (2009). Improving the process of an e-government initiative: An in-depth case study of Web-based GIS implementation. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 368-376.
85. U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). U.S. Census Bureau data for the TechCounty capital. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
86. U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). U.S. Census Bureau county business patterns. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
87. Van den Haak, M. J., de Jong, M. D. T., & Schellens, P. J. (2009). Evaluating municipal Websites: A methodological comparison of three think-aloud variants. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 193-202.
88. Vedel, T. (2006). The idea of electronic democracy: Origins, visions and questions. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(2), 226-235.
89. Weinstein, M. (2006). TAMS analyzer: Anthropology as cultural critique in a digital age. Social Science Computer Review, 24(1), 68-77.
90. Welch, E. W., & Fulla, S. (2005). Virtual interactivity between government and citizens: The Chicago police department's citizen ICAM application demonstration case. Political Communication, 22(2), 215-236.
91. West, D. M. (2004). E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review, 64(1), 15-27.
92. West, D. M. (2005). Digital government: Technology and public sector performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
93. West, D. M. (2008). State and federal e-government in the United States, 2008. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
94. Whyte, A., & Macintosh, A. (2001). Transparency and teledemocracy: Issues from an "e-consultation." Journal of Information Science, 27(4), 187-198.
95. Whyte, A., & Macintosh, A. (2003). Representational politics in virtual urban places. Environment and Planning A, 35(9), 1607-1627.
96. Wiklund, H. (2005). A Habermasian analysis of the deliberative democratic potential of ICT-enabled services in Swedish municipalities. New Media and Society, 7(2), 247-270.
97. Wohlers, T. E. (2009). The digital world of local government: A comparative analysis of the United States and Germany. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(2), 111-126.
98. Wong, W., & Welch, E. (2004). Does e-government promote accountability? A comparative analysis ofWebsite openness and government accountability. Governance, 17(2), 275-297.
99. Wood, L., Bernt, P., & Ting, C. (2009). Implementing public utility commission Web sites: Targeting audiences, missing opportunities. Public Administration Review, 69(4), 753-763.
100. Wright, S. (2006). Government-run online discussion fora: Moderation, censorship and the shadow of control. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 8(4), 550-568.
101. Wright, S. (2008). Read my day? Communication, campaigning and councillors' blogs. Information Polity, 13(1/2), 81-95.
102. Wright, S., & Street, J. (2007). Democracy, deliberation and design: The case of online discussion forums. New Media and Society, 9(5), 849-869.
103. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). London, England: Sage.