Institutional Diffusion of eParticipation in the English Local Government: Is Central Policy the Way Forward?

Information Systems Management

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 295-304

  Panagiotopoulos, Panagiotis ^a   Moody, Christopher ^a   Elliman, Tony ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

digital governance; e government; e petitions; England; eParticipation adoption; institutional factors; local government democracy; online petitions; policy assessment; policy diffusion; UK; web content analysis

Indexed keywords

DIGITAL GOVERNANCE; E-GOVERNMENT; E-PARTICIPATION; E-PETITIONS; ENGLAND; INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS; LOCAL GOVERNMENT; ONLINE PETITIONS; POLICY ASSESSMENT; POLICY DIFFUSIONS; UK; WEB CONTENT ANALYSIS;

HARDWARE; INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

PUBLIC POLICY;

EID: 84867248742     PISSN: 10580530     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10580530.2012.716991     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Bauer, M. W. 2000. "Classical content analysis: A review". In Qualitative researching with text, image, and sound: A practical handbook, Edited by: Bauer, M. W. and Gaskell, G. 131-151. London, England: SAGE.
2. BBC. (2011). 100,000 sign petition calling for EU referendum. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14834871 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14834871)
3. Bekkers, V. and Homburg, V. 2007. The myths of E-government: Looking beyond the assumptions of a new and better government. The Information Society, 23(5): 373-382.
4. Bochel, C. in press. Petitions systems: Contributing to representative democracy? Parliamentary Affairs.,
5. Carman, C. 2010. The process is the reality: Perceptions of procedural fairness and participatory democracy. Political Studies, 58(4): 731-751.
6. Chadwick, A. and 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 - An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 16(2): 271-300.
7. Coleman, S. 2004. "The future of the internet and democracy beyond metaphors, towards policy". In Promise and problems of e-Democracy: Challenges of online citizen engagement, Edited by: Caddy, J. and Vergez, C. 143-162. Paris, France: OECD.
8. Colombo, C. September 2010 2010. "E-participation experiences and local government in Catalonia: An explanatory analysis". In IFIP 2nd International Conference on eParticipation, LNCS 6229, Edited by: Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A. and Glassey, O. September 2010, 82-94. Switzerland: Lausanne.
9. Communities and Local Government. (2008). Local petitions and calls for action consultation: Government response. http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/906840.pdf (http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/906840.pdf)
10. Communities and Local Government. (2009). Listening to communities: Consultation on draft statutory guidance on the duty to respond to petitions. http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/petitionsresponseconsultation (http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/petitionsresponseconsultation)
11. Cruickshank, P. and Smith, C. 2011. Understanding the "E-petitioner. Transforming Government: People Process and Policy, 5(4): 319-329.
12. Dawes, S. S. 2008. The evolution and continuing challenges of E-governance. Public Administration Review, 68(s1): 86-102.
13. DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147-160.
14. Fountain, J. 2008. "Bureaucratic reform and E-government in the united states: An institutional perspective". In The handbook of internet politics, 1st, Edited by: Chadwick, A. and Howard, P. N. 99-113. New York: Routledge.
15. Henriksen, H. Z. and Damsgaard, J. 2007. Dawn of E-government-An institutional analysis of seven initiatives and their impact. Journal of Information Technology, 22(1): 13-23.
16. Herring, S. C. 2010. "Web content analysis: Expanding the paradigm". In International handbook of internet research, 1st, Edited by: Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. and Herring, M. A. 233-249. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag.
17. Jungherr, A. and Jürgens, P. 2010. The political click: Political participation through E-petitions in Germany. Policy & Internet, 2(4): 131-165.
18. Lindner, R. and Riehm, U. 2009. Electronic petitions and institutional modernization. International parliamentary e-petition systems in comparative perspective. EJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 1(1): 1-11.
19. Lindner, R. and Riehm, U. 2011. Broadening participation through E-petitions? An empirical study of petitions to the German parliament. Policy & Internet, 3(1): 1-23.
20. Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act. (2009). http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2009/ukpga_20090020_en_1 (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2009/ukpga_20090020_en_1)
21. Localism Bill. (2010). Localism bill starts a new era of people power. http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/newsroom/1794971 (http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/newsroom/1794971)
22. Lowndes, V. 2005. Something old, something new, something borrowed. Policy Studies, 26(3-4): 291-309.
23. Macintosh, A. 2004. "Using information and communication technologies to enhance citizen engagement in the policy process". In Promise and problems of eDemocracy: Challenges of online citizen engagement, Edited by: Caddy, J. and Vergez, C. 19-142. Paris: OECD.
24. Macintosh, A., Malina, A. and Farrell, S. 2002. "Digital democracy through electronic petitioning". In Advances in digital government, Edited by: McIver, W. J. and Elmagarmid, A. K. 137-148. Boston, MA: Springer.
25. Medaglia, R. 2007. Measuring the diffusion of eParticipation: A survey on Italian local government. Information Polity, 12(4): 265-280.
26. Medaglia, R. 2012. eParticipation research: Moving characterization forward (2006-2011). Government Information Quarterly, 29(3): 346-360.
27. Mignerat, M. and Rivard, S. 2009. Positioning the institutional perspective in information systems research. Journal of Information Technology, 24(4): 369-391.
28. Miller, L. 2009. E-petitions at Westminster: The way forward for democracy?. Parliamentary Affairs, 62(1): 162-178.
29. National Assembly for Wales. 2011. "Petitioning: Bringing your issues to light". In National Assembly for Wales, Petitions Committee
30. Number10. (2008). E-petitions: Questions and answers. http://tna.europarchive.org/20080923154820/http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/faq (http://tna.europarchive.org/20080923154820/http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/faq)
31. Office for National Statistics. (2011). www.statistics.gov.uk/
32. Panagiotopoulos, P. and Al-Debei, M. M. September 2010. "Engaging with citizens online: Understanding the role of ePetitioning in local government democracy. Paper presented at Internet, Politics, Policy 2010: An Impact Assessment, St". In Anne's College, September, 16-17. University of Oxford.
33. Panagiotopoulos, P., Al-Debei, M. M., Fitzgerald, G. and Elliman, T. 2012. A business model perspective for ICTs in public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2): 192-202.
34. Panagiotopoulos, P. and Elliman, T. 2012. "Online engagement from the grassroots: Reflecting on over a decade of e-petitioning experience in europe and the UK". In Empowering open and collaborative governance: Technologies and methods for on-line citizen engagement in public policy making, Edited by: Charalabidis, Y. and Koussouris, S. 79-94. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
35. Panagiotopoulos, P., Moody, C. and Elliman, T. September 2011 2011. "An overview assessment of e-petitioning tools in the English local government". In IFIP 3nd International Conference on eParticipation, LNCS 6847, Edited by: Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A. and de Bruijn, H. September 2011, 204-215. Netherlands: Delft.
36. Pratchett, L. and Leach, S. 2003. Local government: Selectivity and diversity. Parliamentary Affairs, 56(2): 255-269.
37. Pratchett, L., Wingfield, M. and 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.
38. Rose, J. and Sæbø, O. 2010. Designing deliberation systems. The Information Society, 26(3): 228-240.
39. Sæbø, Ø., Rose, J. and Flak, L. S. 2008. The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3): 400-428.
40. Scott, J. K. 2006. "E" the people: Do U.S. municipal government web sites support public involvement?. Public Administration Review, 66(3): 341-353.
41. Seaton, J. 2005. The Scottish parliament and E-democracy. Aslib Proceedings, 57(4): 333-337.
42. van der Graft, P. and Svensson, J. 2006. Explaining eDemocracy development: A quantitative empirical study. Information Polity, 11: 123-134.
43. Weerakkody, V., Dwivedi, Y. K. and Irani, Z. 2009. The diffusion and use of institutional theory: A cross-disciplinary longitudinal literature survey. Journal of Information Technology, 24(4): 354-368.
44. White House. (2011). White house e-petitions. https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions (http://https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions)
45. Whyte, A., Renton, A. and Macintosh, A. 2005. E-petitioning in Kingston and Bristol: Evaluation of e-petitioning in the local e-Democracy national project, Edinburgh, Scotland: Napier University.