Perceptions about the effectiveness of e-participation: A multistakeholder perspective

Measuring E-government Efficiency: The Opinions of Public Administrators and Other Stakeholders

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 257-275

  Royo, Sonia ^a   Yetano, Ana ^a   Acerete, Basilio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84976350520     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-9982-4_14     Document Type: Chapter

References (64)

1. Alió M, Gallego A (2002) Civic entities in environmental local planning. A contribution from a participative research in the metropolitan area of Barcelona. GeoJournal 56(2):123-134.
2. Andersen HT, van Kempen R (2003) New trends in urban policies in Europe: evidence from the Netherlands and Denmark. Cities 20(2):77-86.
3. Andersen KV, Henriksen HZ, Secher C, Medaglia R (2007) Costs of e-participation: the management challenges. Transform Gov People Process Policy 1(1):29-43.
4. Arnstein SR (1969) Ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 35(4):216-224.
5. Astleithner F, Hamedinger A (2003) Urban sustainability as a new form of governance: obstacles and potentials in the case of Vienna 1. Innov Eur J Soc Sci 16(1):51-75.
6. Bertot JC, Jaeger PT, Grimes JM (2010) Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Gov Inf Q 27(3):264-271.
7. Bertot JC, Jaeger PT, Hansen D (2012) The impact of polices on government social media usage: issues, challenges, and recommendations. Gov Inf Q 29(1):30-40.
8. Bingham LB, Nabatchi T, O'Leary R (2005) The new governance: practices and processes for stakeholder and citizen participation in the work of government. Public Adm Rev 65(5):547-558.
9. Bonsón E, Torres L, Royo S, Flores F (2012) Local e-government 2.0: social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Gov Inf Q 29(2):123-132.
10. Brainard LA, McNutt JG (2010) Virtual government-citizen relations: informational, transactional, or collaborative? Adm Soc 42(7):836-858.
11. Bucek J, Smith B (2000) New approaches to local democracy: direct democracy, participation and the 'third sector'. Environ Plann C 18(1):3-17.
12. Burton P (2009) Conceptual, theoretical and practical issues in measuring the benefits of public participation. West Eur Polit 15(3):263-284.
13. Cheyne C, Comrie M (2002) Enhanced legitimacy for local authority decision making: challenges, setbacks and innovation. Policy Polit 30(4):469-482.
14. Cooper TL, Bryer TA, Meek JW (2006) Citizen-centered collaborative public management. Public Adm Rev 66:76-88.
15. Cunningham C, Tiefenbacher J (2008) Evaluating the effectiveness of public participation efforts by environmental agencies: repermitting a smelter in El Paso, Texas, USA. Environ Plann C 00026(00004):841-857.
16. Davies BB, Blackstock K, Rauschmayer F (2005) 'Recruitment', 'composition', and 'mandate' issues in deliberative processes: should we focus on arguments rather than individuals? Environ Plann C 23(4):599-616.
17. Dutil PA, Howard C, Langford J, Roy J (2007) Rethinking government public relationships in a digital world: customers, clients, or citizens? J Inf Technol Polit 4(1):77-90.
18. Feeney MK, Welch EW (2012) Electronic participation technologies and perceived outcomes for local government managers. Public Manag Rev 14(6):815-833.
19. Few R, Brown K, Tompkins EL (2007) Public participation and climate change adaptation: avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Clim Policy 7(1):46-59.
20. Font J, Navarro C (2013) Personal experience and the evaluation of participatory instruments in Spanish cities. Public Admin 91(3):616-631.
21. Fung A (2006) Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Adm Rev 66:66-75 Halvorsen KE (2003) Assessing the effects of public participation. Public Adm Rev 63(5): 535-543.
22. Hui G, Hayllar MR (2010) Creating public value in e-government: a public-private-citizen collaboration framework in Web 2.0. Austr J Public Adm 69:S120-S131.
23. IDEA (2001) Democracy at the local level. The international IDEA handbook on participation, representation, conflict management, and governance. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm.
24. Irvin RA, Stansbury J (2004) Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth the effort? Public Adm Rev 64(1):55-65.
25. Joseph RC (2012) E-government meets social media: realities and risks. IT Prof 14(6):9-15.
26. Klijn E-H, Edelenbos J, Steijn B (2010) Trust in governance networks: its impacts on outcomes.Adm Soc 42(2):193-221
27. Kolsaker A, Lee-Kelley L (2008) Citizens' attitudes towards e-government and e-governance: a UK study. Int J Public Sector Manag 21(7):723-738.
28. Lowndes V, Pratchett L, Stoker G (2001) Trends in public participation: part 1-local government perspectives. Public Adm 79(1):205-222.
29. Mahrer H, Krimmer R (2005) Towards the enhancement of e-democracy: identifying the notion of the 'middleman paradox'. Inf Syst J 15(1):27-42.
30. Mergel I (2013) Social media adoption and resulting tactics in the U.S. federal government.Gov Inf Q 30(2):123-130.
31. Mergel I, Bretschneider SI (2013) A three-stage adoption process for social media use in government.Public Adm Rev 73(3):390-400.
32. Musso J, Weare C, Hale M (2000) Designing web technologies for local governance reform: good management or good democracy? Polit Commun 17(1):1-19.
33. Nam T (2012) Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Gov Inf Q 29(1):12-20.
34. Norris DF, Reddick CG (2013) Local E-government in the United States: transformation or incremental change? Public Adm Rev 73(1):165-175.
35. OECD (2003) Promise and problems of E-democracy: challenges of online citizen engagement.OECD, Paris.
36. Panagiotopoulos P, Sams S, Elliman T, Fitzgerald G (2010) E-petitions and social networks- assessing the connections: E-government bulletin, issue 321. Available at http://www.headstar.com/egblive/?p=617 . Accessed 15 Oct 2010.
37. Pateman C (1970) Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
38. Portney K (2005) Civic engagement and sustainable cities in the United States. Public Adm Rev 65(5):579-591.
39. Portney K (2013) Taking sustainable cities seriously. Economic development, the environment, and quality of life in American cities, 2nd edn. MIT, Cambridge.
40. Portney KE, Berry JM (2010) Participation and the pursuit of sustainability in U.S. cities. Urban Aff Rev 46(1):119-139.
41. Rauschmayer F, van den Hove S, Koetz T (2009) Participation in EU biodiversity governance: how far beyond rhetoric? Environ Plann C 27(1):42-59.
42. Reddel T (2002) Beyond participation, hierarchies, management and markets: 'new' governance and place policies. Austr J Public Adm 61(1):50-63.
43. Reddick CG (2011) Citizen interaction and e-government: evidence for the managerial, consultative, and participatory models. Transform Gov People Process Policy 5(2):167-184.
44. Reddick CG, Norris DF (2013) E-participation in local governments: an empirical examination of impacts. Paper presented at the 14th annual international conference on digital government research, Quebec, Canada.
45. Royo S, Yetano A, Acerete B (2011) Citizen participation in German and Spanish local governments.A comparative study. Int J Public Adm 34(3):139-150.
46. Sæbø Ø, Rose J, Skiftenes Flak L (2008) The shape of eParticipation: characterizing an emerging research area. Gov Inf Q 25(3):400-428.
47. Sæbø Ø, Rose J, Molka-Danielsen J (2010) eParticipation: designing and managing political discussion forums. Social Sci Comput Rev 28(4):403-426.
48. Schellong A, Girrger P (2010) Government 2.0 in betaphase a analysis of eParticipation and Web 2.0 applications of Germany's 50 largest cities and 16 federal states. CSC, Wiesbaden.
49. Scott JK (2006) "E" the people: do U.S. municipal government web sites support public involvement? Public Adm Rev 66(3):341-353.
50. Smyth P, Reddel T (2000) Place management; a new way forward in redressing social exclusion in Queensland. Natl Hous Action 14(2):9-14.
51. Snead JT (2013) Social media use in the U.S. executive branch. Gov Inf Q 30(1):56-63.
52. Tambouris E, Liotas N, Tarabanis K (2007) A framework for assessing eParticipation projects and tools. Paper presented at the 40th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Hawaii.
53. Taylor M (2007) Community participation in the real world: opportunities and pitfalls in new governance spaces. Urban Stud 44(2):297-317.
54. Taylor-Smith E (2010) eParticipation to support the information society European commission workshop report on eParticipation. Brussels: European Commission workshop report on eParticipation.Available at http://www.epractice.eu/ . Accessed 18 Feb 2012.
55. Thomas JC, Streib G (2005) E-democracy, E-commerce, and E-research: examining the electronic ties between citizens and governments. Adm Soc 37(3):259-280.
56. Tolbert CJ, Mossberger K (2006) The effects of E-government on trust and confidence in government.Public Adm Rev 66(3):354-369.
57. United Nations (2012) United nations E-government survey 2012. E-government for the people.UN, New York.
58. Wang X, Hawkins CV, Lebredo N, Berman EM (2012) Capacity to sustain sustainability: a study of U.S. cities. Public Adm Rev 72(6):841-853.
59. Welch EW, Hinnant CC, Moon MJ (2004) Linking citizen satisfaction with E-government and trust in government. J Public Adm Res Theory 15(3):371-391.
60. Yang KF (2005) Public administrators' trust in citizens: a missing link in citizen involvement efforts. Public Adm Rev 65(3):273-285.
61. Yang KF, Callahan K (2007) Citizen involvement efforts and bureaucratic responsiveness: participatory values, stakeholder pressures, and administrative practicality. Public Adm Rev 67(2):249-264.
62. Yang KF, Holzer M (2006) The performance-trust link: implications for performance measurement.Public Adm Rev 66(1):114-126.
63. Yetano A, Royo S, Acerete B (2010) What is driving the increasing presence of citizen participation initiatives? Environ Plann C Gov Policy 28(5):783-802.
64. Zavattaro SM (2013) Social media in public administration's future: a response to Farazmand.Adm Soc 45(2):242-255.