Delivering public value through open government data initiatives in a Smart City context

Information Systems Frontiers

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 213-229

  Pereira, Gabriela Viale ^a   Macadar, Marie Anne ^b   Luciano, Edimara M ^b   Testa, Maurício Gregianin ^b  

^a DANUBE UNIVERSITY KREMS   (Austria)

^b PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL   (Brazil)

Author keywords

E government; Open government data; Operations Center of Rio de Janeiro; Public value; Smart cities

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER NETWORKS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

E-GOVERNMENTS; OPEN GOVERNMENT DATA; OPERATIONS CENTERS; PUBLIC VALUES; SMART CITIES;

GOVERNMENT DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 84978870609     PISSN: 13873326     EISSN: 15729419     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10796-016-9673-7     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Agrawal, D., Kettinger, W., & Zhang, C. (2014). The Openness Challenge: Why Some Cities Take It On and Others Don’t. Proceedings of the 20th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Savannah.
2. Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public Value Pragmatism as the Next Phase of Public Management. The American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 130–148.
3. Awoleye, O. M., Ojuloge, B., & Ilori, M. O. (2014). Web application vulnerability assessment and policy direction towards a secure smart government. Government Information Quarterly, 31, S118–S125.
4. Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2011). The trouble with transparency: a critical review of openness in e-government. Policy & Internet,, 3(1), 1–30.
5. Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2014). ICT, public values and transformative government: a framework and programme for research. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 119–128.
6. Benington, J. (2009). Creating the Public in Order to Create Public Value? International Journal of Public Administration, 32(3–4), 232–249.
7. Castelnovo, W., & Simonetta, M. (2008). A Public Value Evaluation of e-Government Policies. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 11(2), 61–72.
8. Chourabi, H., et al. (2012). Understanding smart cities: An integrative framework. Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS), IEEE.
9. Cordella, A., & Bonina, C. M. (2012). A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: a theoretical reflection. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 512–520.
10. Cunha, M. A., Coelho, T. R., & Pozzebon, M. (2014). Internet e participação: o caso do orçamento participativo digital de Belo Horizonte. Revista de Administração de Empresas (RAE), 54(3), 296–308.
11. Digital Government. (2012). Digital Government: Building A twenty-first Century Platform to Better Serve The American People. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/digital-government/digital-government-strategy.pdf. Accessed 23 November 2014.
12. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
13. Faik, I., & Walsham, G. (2013). Modernisation through ICTs: towards a network ontology of technological change. Information Systems Journal, 23(4), 351–370.
14. Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., & Nam, T. (2015). What makes a city smart? Identifying core components and proposing an integrative and comprehensive conceptualization. Information Polity, 20(1), 61–87.
15. Gil-Garcia, J. R., Chengalur-Smith, I., & Duchessi, P. (2007). Collaborative e-government: impediments and benefits of information-sharing projects in the public sector. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(2), 121–133.
16. Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014). Being smart: emerging technologies and innovation in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 31, I1–I8.
17. Goldsmith, S., & Crawford, S. (2014). The Responsive City: Engaging communities through data-smart governance. New Jersey: Wiley.
18. Gonzalez-Zapata, F., & Heeks, R. (2015). The multiple meanings of open government data: understanding different stakeholders and their perspectives. Government Information Quarterly, doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.09.001
19. Grimsley, M., & Meehan, M. (2007). E-government information systems: evaluation-led design for public value and client trust. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(2), 134–148.
20. Halchin, L. E. (2004). Electronic government: Government capability and terrorist resource. Government Information Quarterly, 21(4), 406–419.
21. Harrison, T., Pardo, T.A., Cresswell, A., & Cook, M. (2011). Delivering Public Value through Open Government. Report from the Center for Technology in Government – State University of New York.
22. Harrison, T. M., Guerrero, S., Burke, G. B., Cook, M., Cresswell, A., Helbig, N., & Pardo, T.A. (2012). Open government and e-government: Democratic challenges from a public value perspective. Information Polity, 17, 83–97.
23. Heinze, N., & Hu, Q. (2005). e-Government research: a review via the lens of structuration theory. PACIS 2005 Proceedings. Paper 75.
24. Helbig, N., Gil-García, J. R., & Ferro, E. (2009). Understanding the complexity of electronic government: implications from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89–97.
25. Huang, Z. (2007). A comprehensive analysis of US counties’e-government portals: development status and functionalities. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(2), 149–164.
26. Irani, Z., Elliman, T., & Jackson, P. (2007a). Electronic transformation of government in the UK: a research agenda. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(4), 327–335.
27. Irani, Z., Love, P., & Montazemi, A. (2007b). E-government: past, present and future. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(2), 103.
28. Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: from transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221–236.
29. Janssen, M., & Kuk, G. (2016). Big and Open Linked Data (BOLD) in Research, Policy and Practice. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 26(1–2).
30. Janssen, M., Chun, A., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2009). Building the next generation of digital government infrastructures. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 233–237.
31. Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2012). Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management, 29(4), 258–268.
32. Janssen, M., Matheus, R., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2015). Big and Open Linked Data (BOLD) to Create Smart Cities and Citizens: Insights from Smart Energy and Mobility Cases. In.: Tambouris, E., Janssen, M., Scholl, H. J. et al. Electronic Government. Springer International Publishing. 9248: 79–90.
33. Jetzek, T., Avital, M., & Bjørn-Andersen, N. (2013). The Generative Mechanisms of Open Government Data ECIS 2013 Completed Research. Paper 156.
34. Krippendorff, K. (1989). Content analysis. In E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. L. Worth, & L. Gross (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Communication (1) (pp. 403–407). New York: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/226.
35. Luna-Reyes, L. F., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Romero, G. (2012). Towards a multidimensional model for evaluating electronic government: proposing a more comprehensive and integrative perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 29(3), 324–334.
36. Magalhaes, G., Roseira, C. & Manley, L. (2014). Business models for open government data. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV), ACM.
37. Maheshwari, D., & Janssen, M. (2014). Reconceptualizing measuring, benchmarking for improving interoperability in smart ecosystems: the effect of ubiquitous data and crowdsourcing. Government Information Quarterly, 31, S84–S92.
38. Majchrzak, A., Markus, M. L., & Wareham, J. (2012). ICT and Societal Challenges. MIS Quarterly Special Issue Call for Papers.
39. Matheus, R., Ribeiro, M.M., Vaz, J.C., & Souza, C.A. (2010). Case studies of digital participatory budgeting in Latin America: Models for citizen engagement. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV), ACM.
40. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), Art. 20, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0002204. Accessed 29 May 2016.
41. Meijer, A. (2009). Understanding modern transparency. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75, 255–269.
42. Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2015). Governing the smart city: a review of the literature on smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences. doi:10.1177/0020852314564308.
43. Moore, M. H. (1994). Public value as the focus of strategy. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 53(3), 296–303.
44. Nam, T., & Pardo, T.A. (2011). Smart city as urban innovation: focusing on management, Policy, and context. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV), ACM.
45. Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2014). The changing face of a city government: a case study of Philly31. Government Information Quarterly, 31, S1–S9.
46. Ojo, A., Curry, E., & Janowski, T. (2014). Designing Next Generation Smart City Initiatives - Harnessing Findings and Lessons from a Study of 10 Smart City programs, 22nd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2014), pp. 1–14.
47. Ojo, A., Curry, E., & Zeleti, F. A. (2015). A Tale of Open Data Innovations in Five Smart Cities. Proceedings of the 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), IEEE.
48. Open Knowledge Foundation (OKF). (2012). Open Data Handbook version 1.0.0. http://opendatahandbook.org/pdf/OpenDataHandbook.pdf
49. Peixoto, T. (2008). e-Participatory Budgeting: e-Democracy from theory to success? e-Working Papers, European University Institute Department of Political and Social Sciences, Badia Fiesolana, San Domenico di Fiesole, Italy.
50. Peled, A. (2011). When transparency and collaboration collide: the USA open data program. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(11), 2085–2094.
51. Peters, R. M., Janssen, M., & Van Engers, T. M. (2004). Measuring e-government impact: Existing practices and shortcomings. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Electronic Commerce, ACM.
52. Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Lal, B., Williams, M. D., & Clement, M. (2015). Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view. Information Systems Frontiers, 1–20.
53. Rowley, J. (2011). e-Government stakeholders - Who are they and what do they want? International Journal of Information Management, 31(1), 53–62.
54. Saebo, O., Rose, J., & Flak, L. S. (2008). The shape of eParticipation: characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 400–428.
55. Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Kumar, U. (2016). Service delivery through mobile-government (mGov): driving factors and cultural impacts. Information Systems Frontiers, 18(2), 315–332.
56. Ubaldi, B. (2013). Open government data: Towards empirical analysis of open government data initiatives. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 22, OECD Publishing.
57. Verdegem, P., & Verleye, G. (2009). User-centered E-government in practice: a comprehensive model for measuring user satisfaction. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 487–497.
58. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), XIII–XXIII.
59. Welch, E. W. (2012). The relationship between transparent and participative government: a study of local governments in the United States. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 93–115.
60. Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646–665.
61. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed. Thousands Oaks).
62. Zuiderwijk, A., et al. (2014). Special Issue on Innovation through Open Data: Guest Editors’ Introduction. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 9(2), i–xiii.