Advertisement

Assessment of a Web-Based Water Information System Performance in the Context of Groundwater Governance

  • Nuno BarreirasEmail author
  • Francisco Nunes Correia
  • Rafaela Saldanha Matos
Article
  • 25 Downloads

Abstract

Portugal recently faced a severe financial crisis that led to the suspension of funding for water monitoring programmes of the Portuguese National Water Resources Information System (SNIRH). This caused a severe impact as SNIRH and shared databases are considered key mechanisms for sharing water basin, country and international policy and data. The available information and data quickly become outdated as well as incomplete and compromised, due to these financial cuts with evident impact in the operational and analytical mechanisms. Therefore, an assessment of these impacts and the identification of gaps and areas needing development and improvement, according to the fundamentals of OECD principles on water governance was strictly necessary, in order to comply with the substantial role of a national water information system (WIS). This study provided the first performance assessment of a WIS based on the refinement of the updated DeLone and McLean information system success, in the context of groundwater governance. The model consists of five analytical dimensions and the quantification of their relationships was made through the application of structural equations modelling and multiple correspondence analysis. The data for the model was collected through a questionnaire held at a national level. The proposed model proved to produce good reliability estimates and the findings of this research provide important input and implications for the water information systems, and for groundwater management and governance in particular. The paper ends with a discussion on the limitations and areas of improvement that could be addressed in future developments.

Keywords

Groundwater management Information system Performance Governance Success model 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia in the scope of the PhD programme H2Doc with the Ref. number PD/BD/105969/2014.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Almutairi H, Subramanian GH (2005) An empirical application of the DeLone and McLean model in the Kuwaiti private sector. J Comput Inf Syst 45:113–122.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2005.11645849 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bergkvist L (2015) Appropriate use of single-item measures is here to stay. Mark Lett 26:245–255.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9325-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergkvist L, Rossiter JR (2007) The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs. J Mark Res 44:175–184.  https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.44.2.175 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown MM (1996) An empirical assessment of the hurdles to geographic information system success in local government. State Local Gov Rev 28:193–204Google Scholar
  5. Byrne BM (2010) Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming. 2nd ed. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Clapp JL, McLaughlin JD, Sullivan JG, Vonderohe AP (1989) Toward a method for the evaluation of multipurpose land information systems. J Urban Reg Inf Syst Assoc 1:39–45Google Scholar
  7. DeLone WH, McLean ER (1992) Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf Syst Res 3:60–95.  https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.3.1.60 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DeLone WH, McLean ER (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J Manag Inf Syst 19:9–30.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diamantopoulos A, Sarstedt M, Fuchs C et al (2012) Guidelines for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: a predictive validity perspective. J Acad Mark Sci 40:434–449.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0300-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doll WJ, Torkzadeh G (1988) The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction. MIS Q 12:259–274.  https://doi.org/10.2307/248851 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. EC (2000) European Comission, Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of October 23 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. 1–73Google Scholar
  12. Eldrandaly KA, Naguib SM, Hassan MM (2015) A model for measuring geographic information systems success. J Geogr Inf Syst 7:328–347.  https://doi.org/10.4236/jgis.2015.74026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Franz CR, Robey D (1986) Organizational context, user involvement, and the usefulness of information systems. Decis Sci 17:329–356.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1986.tb00230.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gable G, Sedera D, Chan T (2008) Re-conceptualizing information system success: the IS-impact measurement model. J Assoc Inf Syst 9:. doi:  https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00164 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Galletta DF, Lederer AL (1989) Some cautions on the measurement of user information satisfaction*. Decis Sci 20:419–434.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1989.tb01558.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. George D, Mallery P (2009) SPSS for windows step by step: a simple study guide and reference, 17.0 update, 10th edn. Allyn & bacon, Inc., Needham Heights, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Hair JF, Black B, Babin B et al (2006) Multivariate data analysis, 6th edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  18. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen MR (2008) Structural equation Modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electron J Bus Res Methods 6:53–60.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.58 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model A Multidiscip J 6:1–55.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Igbaria M, Nachman SA (1990) Correlates of user satisfaction with end user computing: an exploratory study. Inf Manag 19:73–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-7206(90)90017-C CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jarupathirun S, Zahedi FM (2007) Exploring the influence of perceptual factors in the success of web-based spatial DSS. Decis Support Syst 43:933–951.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2005.05.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jöreskog K, Sörbom D (2017) LISREL 9.30 student editionGoogle Scholar
  23. Miles JNV, Shevlin M (1998) Effects of sample size, model specification and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Pers Individ Dif 25:85–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00055-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nedovic-Budic Z (1999) Evaluating the effects of GIS technology : review of methods. J Plan Lit 13:284–295.  https://doi.org/10.1177/08854129922092405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Obermeyer NJ, Pinto JK (2008) Managing geographic information systems. The Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. OECD (2018) Implementing the OECD principles on water governance: Indicator framework and evolving practices. OECD Publishing, Paris, OECD Studies on WaterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petter S, DeLone W, McLean E (2008) Measuring information systems success: models, dimensions, measures, and interrelationships. Eur J Inf Syst 17:236–263.  https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rai A, Lang SS, Welker RB (2002) Assessing the validity of IS success models: an empirical test and theoretical analysis. Inf Syst Res 13:50–69.  https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.1.50.96 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK et al (2006) Reportig structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results : a review. J Educ Res 99:232–338.  https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Seddon PB (1997) A Respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Info Sys Res 8:240–253.  https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.8.3.240 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Seddon PB, Yip SK (1992) An empirical evaluation of user information satisfaction (UIS) measures for use with general ledger accounting software. J Inf Syst 6:75–92Google Scholar
  32. Segars A, Grover V (1993) Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: a confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Q 17:517–525.  https://doi.org/10.2307/249590 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Steiger JH (2007) Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Pers Individ Dif 42:893–898.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Torkzadeh G, Doll WJ (1999) The development of a tool for measuring the perceived impact of information technology on work. Omega 27:327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ullman J (2001) Structural equation modeling. In: Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (eds) Using multivariate statistics, 4th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, pp 653–771Google Scholar
  36. Urbach N, Müller B (2012) The updated DeLone and McLean model of information systems success BT - information systems theory: explaining and predicting our digital society, Vol. 1. In: Dwivedi YK, Wade MR, Schneberger SL (eds) Springer New York. NY, New York, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  37. Urbach N, Smolnik S, Riempp G (2009) The state of research on information systems success. Bus Inf Syst Eng 1:315–325.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-009-0059-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang YS, Liao YW (2008) Assessing eGovernment systems success: a validation of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems success. Gov Inf Q 25:717–733.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Worrall L (1994) The role of GIS-based spatial analysis in strategic management in local government. Comput Environ Urban Syst 18:323–332.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0198-9715(94)90014-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CERIS, Instituto Superior TécnicoUniversidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.LNECLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations