What drives global e-government? An exploratory assessment of existing e-government performance measures

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511488511.015

15 - What drives global e-government? An exploratory assessment of existing e-government performance measures

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009

M. Jae Moon and

Edited by

Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr. and

Richard M. Walker

Show author details

Eric W. Welch: Affiliation:
Associate Professor in the graduate programme in public administration University of Illinois at Chicago
M. Jae Moon: Affiliation:
Faculty member at the Department of Public Administration Korea University
Wilson Wong: Affiliation:
Associate professor of the Department of Government and Public Administration Chinese University of Hong Kong
George A. Boyne: Affiliation:
Cardiff University
Kenneth J. Meier: Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Laurence J. O'Toole, Jr.: Affiliation:
University of Georgia
Richard M. Walker: Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Perceived to be a technological solution for a better, more efficient and more effective government, e-government has been presented and implemented in nations around the world as one of the most compelling advances for government since the mid-1990s (OECD 2003). Many governments, including those at both the national and sub-national levels, have begun various e-government initiatives to develop and advance their online functions by providing public information and services to citizens and businesses and by interacting with citizens to obtain policy inputs (Demchak et al. 1998; Demchak et al. 2000; Welch and Wong 2001; Wong and Welch 2004). E-government has often been hailed as a means of promoting more effective intra- and intergovernmental relations (Ho 2002; Moon 2002). However, efforts to measure e-government performance have tended to out-distance the conceptual and theoretical work necessary to justify the measures and explain the results.

So what is e-government performance? Recent work by Stowers (2004) proposes a multi-dimensional framework based on different levels of government performance: input measures, output measures, intermediate outcome measures and ultimate outcome measures. Input measures represent various resources used for e-government efforts to develop and maintain e-government applications. The input measures might be operationalized in terms of personnel and financial costs. Output measures reflect specific ‘immediate actions’ and visible indicators resulting from e-government initiatives such as the number of hits, completed downloads, number of e-mail requests and completed financial service/financial transactions.

Type: Chapter
Information: Public Service Performance
Perspectives on Measurement and Management
, pp. 275 - 294

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511488511.015 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) and United Nations Division for Public Economics and Public Administration (UNDPEPA) (2001) Benchmarking E-government: A Global Perspective, Available at: www.unpan.org/e-government/Benchmarking%20E-gov%202001.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2004).

CyberSpace Policy Research Group (CyPRG), Available at: www.CyPRG.arizona.edu (accessed on 10 May 2004).

Demchak, C., Friis, C. and LaPorte, T. (1998) ‘Configuring public agencies in cyberspace: A conceptual investigation’ in Snellen, T. M. and Donk, W. B. H. J. (eds.) Public administration in an information age: A handbook. Amsterdam:IOS Press.Google Scholar

Demchak, C., Friis, C. and LaPorte, T. (2000) ‘Webbing governance: national differences in constructing the face of public organizations’, in Garson, D. (ed.) Handbook of public information systems. New York: Marcel Dekker Publishers.Google Scholar

Eschenfelder, K. R. ((2004) ‘How do government agencies review and approve text content for publication on their web sites? A framework to compare web content management practices’, Library and Information Science Research, 26: 463–481.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fountain, J. (2001) Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Washington, D. C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar

Freedom House (2002) Freedom in the world. Available at: www.freedomhouse.org/research/index.htm (accessed on 20 May 2004).

Ho, A. T-K. (2002) ‘Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative’, Public Administration Review, 62: 434–444.Google Scholar

Holzer, M. and Kim, S-T. (2003) Digital governance in municipalities worldwide. US, New Jersey: The E-government Institute/The National Center for Public Productivity of the State University of New Jersey-Newark and The Global e-Policy e-Government Institute of Sungkyunkwan University. Available at: www.worldmarketsanalysis.com/e_gov_report.html (accessed on 4 October 2005).Google Scholar

International Telecommunications Union (ITU) (2001) World telecommunications indicators. Geneva, Switzerland: ITU.

Kettl, Donald (1997) ‘The global revolution in public management: Driving themes, missing links’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16: 446–462.3.0.CO;2-H>CrossRef Google Scholar

Kirkman, G., Osorio, C. and Sachs, J. (2002) ‘Networked readiness index: Measuring the preparedness of nations for the networked world’, in Kirkman, G. (ed.) The global information technology report 2001–2002: Readiness for the networked world, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 10–29.Google Scholar

Lindley, C. (2003) World audit report, available at: www.worldaudit.org/civillibs.htm (accessed on 5 May 2004).

McArthur, J. and Sachs, J. (2001) ‘The growth competitiveness index: Measuring technological advancement and the stages of development’, in Sachs, J., Porter, M. and Schwab, K. (eds.) Global competitiveness report 2001–2002, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 28–51.Google Scholar

Moon, M. J. (2002) ‘The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality?’, Public Administration Review, 62: 424–433.CrossRef Google Scholar

Moon, M. J. and Norris, D. (2003) ‘Linkage between managerial innovation and e-government.’ Paper presented at Western Political Science Conference, April 2003, Denver, CO.

Norris, D. and Moon, M. J. (2005) ‘Advances in electronic government at the grassroots: Hare or tortoise?’, Public Administration Review, 65: 64–75.CrossRef Google Scholar

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2003) OECD e-government studies: The e-government imperative. Paris, France: OECD.

Osborne, D. and Gaebler, T. (1992) Reinventing government. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Stowers, G. (2004) Measuring the performance of e-government. Washington, D. C.: IBM Center for the Business of Government.Google Scholar

Welch, E. and Wong, W. (2001) ‘Global information technology pressure and government accountability: The mediating effect of the domestic context on website openness’, Journal of Public Administration Theory and Research 11: 509–538.CrossRef Google Scholar

Welch, E. and Fulla, S. (2005) ‘Virtual interactivity between government and citizens: The Chicago Police Department's Citizen ICAM Application Demonstration Case’, Political Communication, 22: 215–236.CrossRef Google Scholar

West, D. (2001) Global e-government survey. World Markets Research Centre. Available at: www.worldmarketsanalysis.com/e_gov_report.html (accessed on 15 May 2004).

West, D. (2003a) The urban e-government, 2003. Available at: www.insidepolitics.org/egovt03city.pdf (accessed on 15 May 2004).

West, D. (2003b) State and federal e-government in the United States. Available at: www.insidepolitics.org/egovt03us.pdf (accessed on 15 May 2004).

Wong, W. and Welch, E. (2004) ‘Does e-government promote accountability? A comparative analysis of website openness and government accountability’, Governance, 17: 275–297.CrossRef Google Scholar

World Bank (2004) A definition of e-government. Available at: www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/egov/definition.htm (accessed on 6 May 2004).

World Markets Research Center (2001) Global e-government survey. Available at: www.worldmarketsanalysis.com/e_gov_report.html (accessed on 15 May 2004).