SCRAN: Assembling a community of practice for standardising the transformation of eGovernment services

Managing E-Government Projects: Concepts, Issues, and Best Practices

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 223-240

  Deakin, Mark ^a  

^a EDINBURGH NAPIER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898398886     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0086-7.ch009     Document Type: Chapter

References (31)

1. Amin, A., & Cohendet, P. (2004). Architectures of knowledge. Oxon, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199253326.001.0001
2. Amin, A., & Roberts, J. (2008). Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice. Research Policy, 37(2), 353-369. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.11.003
3. Asheim, B., Cooke, P., & Martin, R. (2006). Clusters and regional development: Critical reflections and explorations. Economic Geography, 84(10), 109-112.
4. Ashem, B., Coenen, L., Moodysson, J., & Vang, J. (2007). Constructing knowledge-based regional advantage: implications for regional innovation policy. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 7(2-5), 140-155. doi:10.1504/IJEIM.2007.012879
5. Baquir, M., & Lyer, L. (2010). e-Government maturity over 10 years. In C. Reddick (Ed.), Comparative e-government. New York, NY: Springer Press.
6. Cooke, P. (2007). Regional innovation systems, asymmetric knowledge and the legacies of learning. In Rutten, R., Boekema, F., & Hospers, G. (Eds.), The learning region: Foundations, state of the art and future. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
7. Curwell, S., Deakin, M., Cooper, I., PaskalevaShapira, K., Ravetz, J., & Babicki, D. (2005). Citizens expectations of information cities: Implications for urban planning and design. Building Research and Information, 22(1), 55-66. doi:10.1080/0961321042000329422
8. Deakin, M. (2009). The IntelCities community of practice: The eGov services model for sociallyinclusive and participatory urban regeneration programmes. In Riddeck, C. (Ed.), Research strategies for egovernment service adoption. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
9. Deakin, M., & Allwinkle, S. (2005). The IntelCities elearning platform, knowledge management system and digital library for semantically interoperable e-governance services. In Cunningham, P. (Ed.), Innovation and the knowledge economy: Issues, applications and case studies. Washington, DC: ISO Press.
10. Deakin, M., & Allwinkle, S. (2006). The IntelCities community of practice: The e-learning platform, knowledge management system and digital library for semantically-interoperable e-governance services. International Journal of Knowledge. Culture and Change Management, 6(3), 155-162.
11. Deakin, M., Allwinkle, S., & Campbell, F. (2006). The IntelCities e-learning platform, knowledge management system and digital library for semantically rich e-governance services. International Journal of Technology. Knowledge in Society, 2(8), 31-38.
12. Deakin, M., Allwinkle, S., & Campbell, F. (2007). The IntelCities community of practice: The eGov services for socially-inclusive and participatory urban regeneration programmes. In Cunningham, P. (Ed.), Innovation and the knowledge economy: Issues, applications and case studies. Washington, DC: ISO Press.
13. Etzkowitz, H. (2008). The triple helix: Universityindustry-government innovation in action. Oxon, UK: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203929605
14. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and "mode 2" to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
15. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2002). Universities and the global knowledge economy NIP: A triple helix of university-industry-relations. Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.
16. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (Eds.). (2002). Universities and the global knowledge economy NIP: A triple helix of university-industry-government relations continuum. International Publishing Group Ltd.
17. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., & Schwartzman, S. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, UK: Sage Publications.
18. Halpern, D. (2005). Social capital. Bristol, UK: Polity Press.
19. Jauhiainen, J., & Suorsa, K. (2008). Triple helix in the periphery: The case of Multipolis in Northern Finland. Cambridge Journal of Regions. Economy and Society, 1(2), 285-301.
20. Jensen, J., & Bjorn, T. (2004). Narrating the triple helix concept in "weak" regions: Lessons from Sweden. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(5), 513-530. doi:10.1504/IJTM.2004.004287
21. Lee, L., Tan, X., & Trimmi, S. (2006). Current practices of leading e-government countries. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 100-104.
22. Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The knowledge-based economy: Modelled, measured, and simulated. Boca-Raton, FL: Universal Publishers.
23. Leydesdorff, L., & Cooke, P. (2006). Regional development in the knowledge-based economy: The construction of advantage. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(1), 1-15. doi:10.1007/s10961-005-5030-6
24. Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and "mode 2" to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123.
25. Paskaleva-Shapira, K. (2008a). Assessing local e-governance in Europe. International Journal of Electronic Governance, 4(4), 17-36.
26. Paskaleva-Shapira, K. (2008b). Enabling the smart city: The progress of city e-governance in Europe. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(4), 405-422. doi:10.1504/IJIRD.2009.022730
27. Rahman, H. (2010). Framework for e-governance. In Reddick, C. (Ed.), Comparative e-government. New York, NY: Springer Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6536-3_2
28. Riemer, K., & Klein, S. (2008). Is the V-form the next generation organisation? An analysis of challenges, pitfalls and remedies of ICT-enabled virtual organisations based on social capital theory. Journal of Information Technology, 23, 147-162. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000120
29. Smith, H. (2007). Universities, innovation, and territorial development: A review of the evidence. Environment and Planning C, 23(1), 98-1414.
30. Torres, L., Pina, V., & Royo, S. (2005). E-government and the transformation of public administration, in EU countries. Online Information Review, 29(5), 1-34. doi:10.1108/14684520510628918
31. Torres, L., Vicente, P., & Basilio, A. (2005). E-government developments on delivering public services among EU cities. Government Information Quarterly, 22, 217-238. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2005.02.004