Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Barriers for Sustainable e-Participation Process: The Case of Turkey

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Government e-Strategic Planning and Management

Part of the book series: Public Administration and Information Technology ((PAIT,volume 3))

Abstract

This chapter aims to evaluate what could be some possible barriers for a sustainable e-participation process in a developing country case. Sustainability refers to the provision of uninterrupted and successfully implemented programs in related to e-participation in terms of expectations and gained results. For such purpose(s), it is of utmost importance that regarding infrastructures are provided, and related precautions are ensured before enrolling in. It is argued that sustainable e-participation is kept consistent if possible barriers are successfully considered. In this context, possible and potential barriers for sustainable e-participation process are derived from the literature, but confined to five types in drawing the framework. As a country case, Turkey is evaluated in terms of some current indicators presenting an overview of information and communication technologies’ (ICTs) infrastructure and its use before discussing about barriers. Administrative, legal, institutional, and cultural dimensions that produce and feed the barriers are described next. After addressing these dimensions, it is concluded that there are some potential barriers before e-participation process. Resistance from bureaucracy for sharing their monopoly over policy making, the lack of expertise in designing methods for e-participation, privacy concerns in data sharing, a big accumulation of legal and administrative arrangement burden, and potential inertia at citizens’ side toward policy-making issues are among threat-posing features for a sustainable e-participation process in Turkey.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alican, F. (2007). Experts without expertise: E-society projects in developing countries — the case of Turkey. Information Polity, 12(4), 255–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, K. V., Henriksen, H. Z., Secher, C., & Medaglia, R. (2007). Costs of e-participation: The management challenges. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 1(1), 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelopoulos, S., Kitsios, F., Kofakis, P., & Papadopoulos, T. (2010). Emerging barriers in e-government implementation. In M. A. Wimmer et al. (Eds.), EGOV 2010 (pp. 216–225), LNCS 6228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Åström, J., Karlsson, M., Linde, J., & Pirannejad, A. (2012). Understanding the rise of e-participation in non-democracies: Domestic and international factors. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 142–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azad, B., & Faraj, S. (2009). E-Government institutionalizing practices of a land registration mapping system. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badouard, R. (2010). Pathways and obstacles to eParticipation at the European level. Journal of eDemocracy, 2(2), 99–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, M., Newman, J., Knops, A., & Sullivan, H. (2003). Constituting ‘the public’ in public participation. Public Administration, 81(2), 379–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, S. (2004). E-government and developing countries: an overview. International Review of Law Computers & Technology, 18(1), 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedford, T., Clark, J., & Harrison, C. (2002). Limits to new public participation practices in local land use planning. Town Planning Review, 73(3), 311–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bimber, B. (2001). Information and political engagement in America: The search for effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 53–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braa, J., Monteiro, E., & Sahay, S. (2004). Networks of action: Sustainable health information systems across developing countries. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 337–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • BTK (2012). Transparency Arrangements in Broadband Services and Service Quality Applications. Ankara: BTK Publications (In Turkish).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciborra, C., & Navarra, D. D. (2005). Good governance, development theory, and aid policy: Risks and challenges of e-government in Jordan. Information Technology for Development, 11(2), 141–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleland, B., Mulvenna, M., Galbraith, B., Wallace, J. G., & Martin, S. (2012). Innovation of eParticipation strategies using living labs as intermediaries. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 10(2), 120–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. E. (2006). Citizen satisfaction with contacting government on the internet. Information Polity, 11(1), 51–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conroy, M. M., & Evans-Cowley, J. (2006). E-participation in planning: An analysis of cities adopting on-line citizen participation tools. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24(3), 371–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coursey, D., & Norris, D. F. (2008). Models of e-government: Are they correct? An Empirical Assessment, Public Administration Review, 68(3), 523–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, J. V. (1972). Citizen participation in public affairs. Public Administration Review, 32(SI), 589–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, S. S. (2008). The evolution and continuing challenges of e-governance. Public Administration Review, 68(S1), S86–S102.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Juana-Espinosa, S., Claver-Cortés, E., & Tarí, J. J. (2012). Barriers and facilitators to egovernment in spanish municipalities: A study before and after the recession. In Mila Gascó (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on eGovernment (pp. 176–185), Barcelona, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedorowicz, J., Gogan, J. L., & Culnan, M. J. (2010). Barriers to interorganizational information sharing in e-government: A stakeholder analysis. The Information Society, 26(5), 315–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeney, M. K., & Welch, E. W. (2012). Electronic participation technologies and perceived outcomes for local government managers. Public Management Review, 14(6), 815–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French, S., & Bayley, C. (2011). Public participation: Comparing approaches. Journal of Risk Research, 14(2), 241–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fu, Y., & Xiao, K. (2012). Promoting sustainable e-government with multichannel service delivery: A case study. IEEE 3rd International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), (pp. 694–697). Beijing, China.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, C. (2008). The implications of new information and communication technologies for sustainability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10(3), 291–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, C. (2010). Theoretical foundations of defining the participatory. Co-Operative, Sustainable Information Society, Information, Communication & Society, 13(1), 23–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furuholt, B. & Wahid, F. (2008). E-government challenges and the role of political leadership in Indonesia: The case of Sragen. In Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS ’08) (pp. 1–10). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, B., Cleland, B., Martin, S., Wallace, J., Mulvenna, M., & McAdam, R. (2013). Engaging user communities with eParticipation technology: Findings from a European project. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(3), 281–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauld, R. (2005). Health care information and communications technology: Promises and challenges for government and health services. Journal of E-Government, 2(1), 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gokmen, A. (2012). Virtual business operations, e-commerce & its significance and the case of Turkey: Current situation and its potential. Electronic Commerce Research, 12(1), 31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grönlund, Å., & Susha, I. (2012). A communication genre perspective on e-petitioning: The case of the citizens’ initiative. In E. Tambouris, A. Macintosh, and Øystein Sæbø (Eds.), ePart 2012 (pp. 37–48), LNCS 7444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, G. J. “Jeff”, Yates, D. J., & Tawileh, A. (2010). Towards E-participation in the Middle East and Northern Europe. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Comparative E-Government. Integrated Series in Information Systems (vol. 25, pp. 71–90). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeks, R. (2002a). Information systems and developing countries: Failure, success, and local improvisations. The Information Society, 18(2), 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heeks, R. (2002b). e-Government in Africa: Promise and practice. Information Polity, 7(2–3), 97–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Retrieved February 15, 2013 from https://www.nic.tr.

  • ICTA. (2012). Annual Report 2011, Information and Communication Technologies Authority. Retrieved February, 15, 2013 from http://www.tk.gov.tr/kutuphane_ve_veribankasi/raporlar/faaliyet_raporlari/ar2011.pdf.

  • ITU. (2012). Measuring the Information Society 2012, International Communication Union, Geneva. Retrieved February 15, 2013 from http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/material/2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaisara, G., & Pather, S. (2011). The e-government evaluation challenge: A South African batho pele-aligned service quality approach. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakaya Polat, R. (2012). Digital exclusion in Turkey: A policy perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 589–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karkın, N., & Çalhan, H. S. (2012). An interactive e-participation model for the public administration system in Turkey: SIBIYO. Ege Acad Rev, 12(1), 105–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassen, M. (2013). Globalization of e-government: open government as a global agenda; benefits, limitations and ways forward. Information Development 30 Jan 2013. doi: 10.1177/0266666912473620.

  • Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2012). E-Participation transparency, and trust in local government. Public Administration Review, 72(6), 819–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koussouris, S., Charalabidis, Y., & Askounis, D. (2011). A review of the European union e-Participation action pilot projects. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(1), 8–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraemer, K., & King, J. L. (2006). Information technology and administrative reform: will e-government be different? International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 2(1), 1–20. doi:10.4018/jegr.200601010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, R., & Best, M. L. (2006). Impact and sustainability of e-government services in developing countries: Lessons learned from Tamil Nadu, India. The Information Society: An International Journal, 22(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, W. (2005). Barriers to e-government integration. The Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(5), 511–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, M. B. (2005). Public participation in planning: An intellectual history. Australian Geographer, 36(3), 283–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löfgren, K. (2007). The governance of e-government : A governance perspective on the swedish e-government strategy. Public Policy and Administration, 22(3), 335–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombardi, P., Huovila, P., & Sunikka-Blank, M. (2010). The potential of e-participation in sustainable development evaluation: Evidence from case studies. In C. Reddick (Ed.), Politics, Democracy and E-Government: Participation and Service Delivery (pp. 1–16). Hershey: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A. (2008). E-democracy and e-participation research in Europe. In H. Chen et al. (Eds.), Digital Government: E-Government Research, Case Studies, and Implementation, Integrated Series in Information Systems (vol. 17, pp. 85–102). New York, US: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A., Coleman, S., & Schneeberger, A. (2009). eParticipation: The research gaps. In A. Macintosh & E. Tambouris (Eds.), Electronic Participation (ePart 2009) (vol. 5694, pp. 1–11), LNCS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, E., & Reimer, U. (2010). Process support for increasing participation in eparticipation. Journal of eDemocracy, 2(1), 46–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier-Rabler, U., & Huber, S. (2010). Sustainable e-participation through participatory experiences in education. Journal of eDemocracy, 2(2), 131–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mbako, V., Bwalya, K. J., Du Plessis, T., & Rensleigh, C. (2012). Implications of e-Government in Botswana in the realm of e-participation: Case of Francistown. In I. Management Association (Ed.), Digital Democracy: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 1070–1089). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medaglia, R. (2007). Measuring the diffusion of eparticipation: A survey on Italian local government. Information Polity, 12(4), 265–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medaglia, R. (2012). eparticipation research: Moving characterization forward (2006–2011). Government Information Quarterly, 29(3), 346–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mergel, I. (2010). The use of social media to dissolve knowledge silos in government. In O’Leary, R., Kim, S. and Van Slyke, D. M. (Eds.) The Future of Public Administration, Public Management and Public Service around the World: The Minnowbrook Perspective (pp. 177–187), Washington: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milewa, T., Valentine, J., & Calnan, M. (1999). Community participation and citizenship in British health care planning: Narratives of power and involvement in the changing welfare state. Sociology of Health & Illness, 21(4), 445–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molinari, F. (2010). On sustainable eparticipation. In E. Tambouris, A. Macintosh, & O. Glassey (Eds.), ePart 2010 (vol. 6229, pp. 126–139), LNCS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. F., & Reddick, C. G. (2012). local e-government in the United States: Transformation or incremental change? Public Administration Review, 73(1), 165–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2012). OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey 2012, OECD Publishing. Retrieved February, 15 2013 from doi: 10.1787/eco_surveys-tur-2012-en.

  • Parlak, B., & Sobaci, Z. (2010). A comparative analysis of local agenda 21 websites in turkey in terms of e-participation. In Reddick, C. (Ed.), Politics, Democracy and E-Government: Participation and Service Delivery (75–93).

    Google Scholar 

  • Panopoulou, E., Tambouris, E., Tarabanis, K. A. (2010). eparticipation initiatives in Europe: Learning from practitioners. In E. Tambouris, A. Macintosh, & O. Glassey (Eds.), Electronic Participation (ePart 2010) (pp. 54–65), LNCS 6229. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panopoulou, E., Tambouris, E., Sanchez-Nielsen, E., Zotou, M., & Tarabanis, K. (2011). Learning from eparticipation initiatives of regional and local level authorities in Greece and Spain. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 13(1), 77–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paskaleva-Shapira, K., Azorín, J., & Chiabai, A. (2008). Enhancing digital access to local cultural heritage through e-governance: Innovations in theory and practice from Genoa, Italy, Innovation. The European Journal of Social Science Research, 21(4), 389–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahm, D. (1997). The role of information technology in building public administration theory. Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer and Utilization, 10(3), 71–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeder, S., Poppenborg, A., Michaelis, S., Märker, O., & Salz, S. R. (2005). “Public budget dialogue”—an innovative approach to e-participation. In M. Böhlen, J. Gamper, W. Polasek, & M. A. Wimmer (Eds.), E-Government: Towards Electronic Democracy (pp. 48–56), LNCS 3416. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, W. R., & Grant, G. G. (2010). Critical issues pertaining to the planning and implementation of e-government initiatives. Government Information Quarterly, 27(1), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royo, S., Yetano, A., & Acerete, B. (2012). E-participation and climate change: are local governments actively promoting responsible behaviors and offering opportunities for citizen involvement?. 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS), (pp. 2462–2471).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sæbø, Ø., Flak, L. S., & Sein, M. K. (2011). Understanding the dynamics in e-participation initiatives: Looking through the genre and stakeholder lenses. Government Information Quarterly, 28(3), 416–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sæbø, Ø., Rose, J., & Flak, L. (2008). The shape of eparticipation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 400–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, C., & Rose, J. (2008). Designing the e-participation artefact. International Journal of Electronic Business, 6(6), 572–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuppan, T. (2009). E-government in developing countries: Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 118–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwester, R. W. (2009). Examining the barriers to e-government adoption. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(1), 113–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. K. (2006). “E” the people: Do U.S. municipal government web sites support public involvement? Public Administration Review, 66(3), 341–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sideridis, A. B., Pimenidis, E., Protopappas, L., & Koukouli, M. (2012). An evaluation of the initiatives and the progress madeon e-government services in the EU. In H. Jahankhani et al. (Eds.), ICGS3/e-Democracy 2011, LNICST 99 (pp. 263–270).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, L., & Cullen, R. (2009). Participation 2.0: A case study of e-participation within the New Zealand government. Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). Los Alamitos: IEEE Press (5–8 Jan 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Söyler, Y. (2009). Transition of e-government legal framework. Türk İdare Dergisi, 465, 151–176. (In Turkish).

    Google Scholar 

  • SPO. (2011), Information Society Statistics of Turkey 2011, retrieved from http://www.bilgitoplumu.gov.tr/Documents/1/Yayinlar/Turkish_Information_Society_ Statistics_2011.pdf [access date: February 10, 2013].

  • Torres, L., Pina, V., & Royo, S. (2005). E-government and the transformation of public administrations in EU countries: Beyond NPM or just a second wave of reforms? Online Information Review, 29(5), 531–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN. (2012). United Nations e-Government Survey 2012: e-Government for the People, New York, Retrieved February 15, 2013 from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan048065.pdf.

  • Wigand, F. D. L. (2010). Adoption of Web 2.0 by Canadian and US governments. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Comparative E-Government. Integrated Series in Information Systems 25 (pp. 161–181). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yıldız, M. (2010). Digital divide in Turkey: A general assessment. In E. Ferro, Y. K. Dwivedi, J. R. Gil-Garcia, D. M. D. Williams (Eds.), Overcoming Digital Divides: Constructing an Equitable and Competitive Information Society (pp. 75–89), Hershey, PA.: Idea Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Pamukkale University, Kinikli, 20070, Denizli, Turkey

    Naci Karkin

Authors
  1. Naci Karkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naci Karkin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Economics, Technological Education Institute of Thessaly Larissa, Thessaly, Greece

    Leonidas G. Anthopoulos

  2. Department of Public Administration, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA

    Christopher G. Reddick

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Karkin, N. (2014). Barriers for Sustainable e-Participation Process: The Case of Turkey. In: Anthopoulos, L., Reddick, C. (eds) Government e-Strategic Planning and Management. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 3. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8462-2_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation