Into the void: A realist evaluation of the eGovernment for You (EGOV4U) project

Evaluation

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 47-64

  Horrocks, Ivan ^a   Budd, Leslie ^a  

^a OPEN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

community capitals; context mechanism outcome (CMO) configurations; e government; e services; multi channel networks; realist evaluation; theory driven evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920973103     PISSN: 13563890     EISSN: 14617153     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1356389014566133     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Ackroyd SCritical Realist Applications in Organisation and Management Studies. Fleetwood SAckroyd S, ed. London: Routledge; 2004:137-63.
2. Archer MRealist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995:
3. Archer MStructure, Agency and the Internal Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003:
4. Astbury B,Leeuw FL.Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation.American Journal of Evaluation. 2010;31 (3): 363-81
5. Bamberger M,Rugh J,Mabry LReal World Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2006:
6. Bennett ARevitalizing Causality: Realism about Causality in Philosophy and Social Science. Groff R, ed. Abingdon: Routledge; 2008:205-19.
7. Bhaskar RA Realist Theory of Science. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester; 1978:
8. Bhaskar RThe Possibility of Naturalism. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester; 1979:
9. Bourdieu PHandbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Richardson J, ed. New York: Greenwood Press; 1986:241-58.
10. Carter B,New CMaking Realism Work. Carter BNew C, ed. London: Routledge; 2004:1-20.
11. Chen JJ-TTheory-driven Evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE; 1990:
12. Chen JJ-T,Rossi P.The theory-driven approach to validity.Evaluation and Program Planning. 1987;10:95-103
13. EC (2010a) A Digital Agenda for Europe – Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. European Commission, p. 5. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/digital-agenda/.
14. EC (2010b) A Digital Agenda for Europe – Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. European Commission, p. 24. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/digital-agenda/.
15. Ekins P,Hillman M,Hutchinson RWealth Beyond Measure: An Atlas of New Economics. London: Gaia Books; 1992:
16. Emery M,Flora CB.Spiraling –up: mapping community transformation with community capitals framework.Community Development. 2006;37:19-35
17. Critical Realist Applications in Organisation and Management Studies. Fleetwood SAckroyd S, ed. London: Routledge; 2004:
18. Flora CB.Enhancing community capitals: the optimization equation.Rural Development News. 1997;21 (1): 16-25
19. Green G,Grimsley M,Stafford BThe Dynamics of Neighbourhood Sustainability. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation; 2005:
20. Grimsley M,Meehan A,Tan A.Evaluative design of e-Government projects: a community development perspective.Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy. 2007;1 (2): 174-93
21. Grootaert CSocial Capital Initiative. Washington DC: World Bank; 1998:
22. Horrocks I.Applying the Morphogenetic Approach: outcomes and issues from a case study of information systems development and organisational change in British local government.Journal of Critical Realism. 2009;8 (1): 374-402
23. Mark MM,Henry GT.The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence.Evaluation. 2004;10 (1): 35-57
24. Meehan A,Budd L,Grimsley M, et ale-government for You (EGOV4U) Impact Evaluation Framework. Brussels: EC; 2012:
25. New C.Realising the potential: the ESRC seminar series on social realism and empirical research.Journal of Critical Realism; 2001; 2001. 43.
26. Pawson R.Evidence-based policy: in search of a method.Evaluation. 2002a;8 (2): 157-81
27. Pawson R.Evidence-based policy: the promise of ‘realist synthesis’.Evaluation. 2002b;8 (3): 340-58
28. Pawson R,Manzano-Santaella A.A realist diagnostic workshop.Evaluation. 2012;18 (2): 176-91
29. Pawson R,Tilley NRealistic Evaluation. London: SAGE; 1997:
30. Perlman R,Ma YJ,McGilvray J,Common MNatural Resource and Environmental Economics. 2003) Natural Resource and Environmental Economics, 3rd edn.Harlow: Pearson Education.Harlow: Pearson Education; 2003:
31. Sayer ARealism and Social Science. London: SAGE; 2000:
32. StiglitzJESenAFitousiJ-P (2008) Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. URL: http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr.
33. The Politics of Evaluation. Taylor DBalloch S, ed. Bristol: The Policy Press; 2005:
34. Van Dijk JStudy on the Social Impact of ICT (CPP N°55A – SMART N°2007/0068). Germany: Fachbereich Wirtschaftsinformatik und Neue Medien, Universität Siegen; 2010:
35. Walker S,Martinez LM,Trevorrow P.Tracing trade union innovation: a framework for evaluating trade union learning projects in a time of complexity.Transfer. 2007;13 (2): 267-90
36. Weiss CHEvaluation. 1998) Evaluation, 2nd edn.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1998: