Social Indicators Research

, Volume 144, Issue 1, pp 299–313 | Cite as

Social and Political Factors Affect the Index of Public Management Efficiency: A Cross-Country Panel Data Study

  • María del Rocío Moreno-EnguixEmail author
  • Laura Vanesa Lorente-Bayona
  • Ester Gras-Gil
Original Research


The application of new technologies and the implementation of e-government have profoundly modified management systems in public administrations. In this article we create an index to measure efficiency in the management of public resources in the countries of the European Union for the period 2007–2012, both overall and in the management of resources in functions that generate most interest for citizens—education, health care, and social protection. In a second stage, we perform a cross-country panel data study to analyze how the implementation of e-government and other political and social variables influence the overall efficiency index and, by functions—human capita; state of development, democracy and corruption. Our results show that e-government, state of development, and human capital promote national expenditure efficiency. On the other hand, corruption promotes public inefficiency.


Public efficiency Public management Social factors 


  1. Afonso, A., & Alegre, J. G. (2011). Economic growth and budgetary components: A panel assessment for the EU. Empirical Economics, 41(3), 703–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Afonso, A., Schuknecht, L., & Tanzi, V. (2003). Public sector efficiency: An international comparison. ECB Working Paper No. 242, Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  3. Afonso, A., Schuknecht, L., & Tanzi, V. (2006). Public sector efficiency: Evidence for new EU member states and emerging markets. ECB Working Paper No. 581, Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  4. Afonso, A., Schuknecht, L., & Tanzi, V. (2010). Income distribution determinants and public spending efficiency. Journal of Economic Inequality, 8, 367–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Afonso, A., & St. Aubyn, M. (2005). Cross-country efficiency of secondary education provision: A semi-parametric analysis with nondiscretionary inputs. European Central Bank Working paper. No. 494, Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  6. Afonso, A., & St. Aubyn, M. (2006). Relative efficiency of health provision: A DEA approach with non-discretionary inputs. ISEG-UTL Economics Working Paper No. 33/2006/DE/UECE.Google Scholar
  7. Ala-Mutka, K., Broster, D., Cachia, R., Centeno, C., Feijóo, C., Haché, A., et al. (2009). The impact of social computing on the EU informationa society and economy. Seville: JCR-IPTS. Retrived from:
  8. Alshehri, M., & Drew, S. (2011). E-government principles: Implementation advantages and challenges. International Journal of Electronic Business, 9(3), 255–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Andersen, T. B. (2009). E-government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information Economics and Policy, 21(3), 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Azab, N. A., Kamel, S., & Dafoulas, G. (2009). A suggested framework for assessing electronic government readiness in Egypt. Electronic Journal of e-Government., 7(1), 11–28.Google Scholar
  11. Balaguer, M. T. (2004). La eficiencia en las Administraciones Locales ante diferentes especificaciones del output. Hacienda Pública Española, 170, 37–58.Google Scholar
  12. Balaguer-Coll, M. T., & Prior, D. (2009). Short-and long-term evaluation of efficiency and quality. An application to Spanish municipalities. Applied Economics, 41(23), 2991–3002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Berg, M. A. (2015). Some misconceptions about public investment efficiency and growth. Washington: International Monetary Fund.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Blühdorn, I. (2007). Democracy, efficiency, futurity: Contested objectives of social reform. In I. Blühdorn & U. Jun (Ed.), Economic efficiency–democratic empowerment. Contested modernization in Britain and Germany (pp. 69–98). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield (Lexington).Google Scholar
  15. Borras, J. (2004). International technical standards for e-government. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 2(2), 75–80.Google Scholar
  16. Bosco, B. (2016). Old and new factors affecting corruption in Europe: Evidence from panel data. Economic Analysis & Policy, 51, 66–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bose, N., Haque, M. E., & Osborn, D. R. (2007). Public expenditure and economic growth: A disaggregated analysis for developing countries. The Manchester School, 75(5), 533–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brewer, G. A., Neubauer, B. J., & Geiselhart, K. (2006). Designing and implementing E-government systems critical implications for public administration and democracy. Administration & Society, 38(4), 472–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chadwick, A., & May, C. (2003). Interaction between states and citizens in the age of the internet: “E-government” in the United States, Britain, and the European Union. Governance. An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institution, 16(2), 271–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Charoensukmongkol, P., & Moqbel, M. (2014). Does investment in ICT curb or create more corruption? A cross-country analysis. Public Organization Review, 14(1), 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chiang, L., & Liao, C. H. (2009). The influence of digital standardization on administrative efficiency in e-government: A view of standards development organizations. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 26, 455–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Demchak, C., Friis, C., & La Porte, T. (2000). Webbing governance: National differences in constructing the public face. In G. D. Garson (Ed.), Gandbook of public information system. New York: Marcel Dekker Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Devarajan, S., Swaroop, V., & Zou, H. F. (1996). The composition of public expenditure and economic growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 37(2), 313–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dreschler, W. (2005). The re-emergence of “Weberian” public administration after the fall of new public management: The central and eastern Europe perspective. Haldnuskultuur, 6, 94–108.Google Scholar
  25. Dunleavy, P., & Margetts, H. (2000). The advent of digital government: public bureaucracies and the state in the internet age. Paper for the annual conference of the American political science association, Washington.Google Scholar
  26. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkles, J. (2003). E-government and policy innovation in seven Liberia democracies. Paper prepared for the political studies association’s annual conference 2003, 15–17 April. Leicester University.Google Scholar
  27. Eom, T. H., & Rubenstein, R. (2006). Do state-funded property tax exemptions increase local government inefficiency? An analysis of New York State’s STAR program. Public Budgeting & Finance, 26(1), 66–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Eugène, B. (2007). The efficiency of the Belgian general government in an international perspective. Frankfurt: National Bank of Frankfurt.Google Scholar
  29. Fountain, J. (2001). Building the virtual state information technology and institutional change. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  30. Fountain, J. (2005). Building the virtual state information technology and institutional change. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  31. Giménez, V. M., & Prior, D. (2007). Long- and short-term cost efficiency frontier evaluation: Evidence from Spanish local governments. Fiscal Studies, 28(1), 121–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gujarati, D. N. (2003). Basic econometrics. United States Military Academy, West Point. New York: McGraw-HiII/lrwin.Google Scholar
  33. Herrera, S., & Pang, G. (2005). Efficiency of public spending in developing countries: An efficiency frontier approach. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hessami, Z., & Uebelmesser, S. (2016). A Political-economy perspective on social expenditures: corruption and in-kind versus cash transfers. Economics of Governance, 17(1), 71–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hiujboom, N., Van der Broek, T., Frissen, V., Kool, L., Kotterink, B., Meyerhoff Nielse, M. et al., (2009). Public services 2.0; The impact of social computing on public services. In Y. Punie, G. Msaucura, & D. Osimo (Eds.), JCR, scientific and technical reports.Google Scholar
  36. Horváthová, L., Horváth, J., Gazda, V., & Kubák, M. (2012). Fiscal decentralization and public debt in the European Union. Lex Localis, 10(3), 265–276.Google Scholar
  37. Hughes, O. E. (2003). Public management and administration (3rd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  38. Karunasena, K., Deng, H., & Singh, M. (2011). Measuring the public value of e-government: A case study from Sri Lanka. Transforming Government People, Process and Policy, 5(1), 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kasemsap, K. (2017). Technological Integration as a catalyst for industrial development and economic growth. In B. Christiansen & I. K. Yksel (Eds.), Electronic government: Principles and applications, (pp. 1–30). Hersey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  40. Kearns, I. (2004). Public value and e-government. London: Institute of Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
  41. Kim, T., & Kim, H. (2014). Which country uses public social expenditure efficiently among OECD countries? Applied Economic Letters, 24(10), 677–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. La Porte, T. M., Demchak, C. C., & De Jong, M. (2002). Democracy and Bureaucracy in the age of the Web: Empirical findings and theoretical speculations. Administration & Society, 34, 411–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lewis, B. D. (2018). Local government form in Indonesia Tax, expenditure and efficiency effects. Studies in Comparative International Development, 53(1), 25–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lim, E. T., Tan, C. W., Cyr, D., Pan, S. L., & Xiao, B. (2012). Advancing public trust relationships in electronic government: The Singapore e-filing journey. Information Systems Research, 23(4), 1110–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lonti, Z. & Woods, M. (2008). Towards government at a glance: Identification of core data and issues related to public sector efficiency. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance.Google Scholar
  46. Mahoney, N., Newman, J., & Barnett, C. (2010). Rethinking the public: Innovations in research, theory and politics. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mandl, U., Dierx, A., & Ilzkovitz, F. (2008). The effectiveness and efficiency of public spending (No. 301). Brussels: Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.Google Scholar
  48. Marquardt, D. W. (1970). Generalized inverses, ridge regression, biased linear estimation and nonlinear estimation. Technometrics, 12, 591–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Moreno-Enguix, M. R., & Lorente-Bayona, L. V. (2017). Factors affecting public expenditure efficiency in developed countries. Politics and Policy, 45(1), 105–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nguyen, T. V., Bach, T. N., Le, T. O., & Le, C. Q. (2017). Local governance, corruption and public service quality: Evidence from a national survey in Vietnam. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 30(2), 137–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Olsen, J. P. (2006). Maybe it is time to rediscover bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ortiz, D. (2003). Los indicadores como instrumentos para la evaluación de gestión pública. Una investigación empírica en el ámbito municipal. Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Granada.Google Scholar
  53. Pang, Tafti, A. R., & Krishnan, M. S. (2014). Information technology and administrative efficiency in U.S. State governments—a stochastic frontier approach. MIS Quarterly, 38(4), 1079-A16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pindado, J., & Requejo, I. (2015). Panel data: A methodology for model specification and testing., Wiley encyclopedia of management Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  55. Pollitt, C., & Boukaert, G. (2000). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Porter, M. E. (2005). Building the mircro-economic foundation of prosperity: Findings from the business competitiveness index. In The global competitiveness report 2005–2006, Geneva, Switzerland. World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  57. Prior, D., Balaguer, M. T., & Vela, J. M. (2002). Efficiency and quality in local government. The case of Spanish local authorities. Documents de Treball, Universitat Atónoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
  58. Samut, P. K., & Cafri, R. (2016). Analysis of the efficiency determinants of health systems in OECD countries by DEA and panel tobit. Social Indicators Research, 129(1), 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Saxena, S. (2017). Factors influencing perceptions on corruption in public service delivery via e-government platform. Foresight, 19(6), 628–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sole, F., & Schiuma, G. (2010). Using performance measures in public organizations: Challenges of Italian public administrations. Measuring Business Excellence, 14(3), 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Srivastava, S. C., Teo, T. S., & Devaraj, S. (2016). You can’t bribe a computer: Dealing with the societal challenge of corruption through ICT. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 511–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Srivastava, S. C., & Thompson, S. H. (2007). E-government payoffs: Evidence from cross-country data. Journal of Global Information Management, 15(4), 20–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. St. Aubyn, M. (2003). Evaluating efficiency in the Portuguese education sector. Economia, 26, 25–51.Google Scholar
  64. Sung, N. (2007). Information technology, efficiency and productivity: Evidence from Korean local governments. Applied Economics, 39(13–15), 1691–1703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Taeyoung, K., & Hongkyun, K. (2017). Which country uses public social expenditure efficiently among OECD countries? Applied Economics Letters, 24(10), 677–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tan, C. W., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2013). IT-mediated customer service content and delivery in electronic governments: An empirical investigation of the antecedents of service quality. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 77–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2012).
  68. Thompson, H. G., & Garbacz, C. (2007). Mobile, fixed line and Internet service effects on global productive efficiency. Information Economics and Policy, 19, 189–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. (2012).
  70. United Nations Development Programme Human Development Reports. (2012).
  71. United States Institute of Peace. (2010). Governance, corruption, and conflict. Retrieved February 02, 2015, from
  72. Valle-Cruz, D., & Sandoval-Almazán, R. (2016). Citizens’ perception in developing local e-governments: A structural equation modeling approach. In ACM international conference proceeding series (pp. 513–514).Google Scholar
  73. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Verhoeven, M., Gunnarsson, V., & Carcillo, S. (2007). Education and health in G7 countries: Achieving better outcomes with less spending. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar
  75. Von Walderberg, W. (2004). Electronic government and development. European Journal of Development Research, 16, 417–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Welp, Y., Urgell, F., & Aibar, E. (2007). From bureaucratic administration to network administration? An empirical study on e-government focus on Catalonia. Public Organization Review, 7, 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yu, C. (2008). Building a value-centric e-government service framework based on a business. Model Perspective., 5184, 160–174.Google Scholar
  78. Zhang, H., Xu, X., & Xiao, J. (2014). Diffusion of e-government: A literature review and directions for future directions. Government Information Quarterly., 31(4), 631–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • María del Rocío Moreno-Enguix
    • 1
    Email author
  • Laura Vanesa Lorente-Bayona
    • 2
  • Ester Gras-Gil
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Finance and Accounting, Faculty of Economics and BusinessUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Finance and Accounting, Faculty of Social SciencesUniversity of NebrijaMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations