Skip to main content

Current Trends in Local E-Government

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Setting Sail into the Age of Digital Local Government

Part of the book series: Public Administration and Information Technology ((PAIT,volume 21))

  • 733 Accesses

Abstract

The wave of intensified economic globalization and the increasing density of networked computers since the fall of the Berlin Wall have become major forces across the industrialized countries and have touched all levels of government. Some argue that globalization has shifted the focus of economic and political activities to the global level at the expense of the national and grassroots level. There are also those who argue that the network technology underpinning the Internet concentrates power among the political elite rather than decentralizing decision making (Warschauer, 2003). Others disagree with these viewpoints and draw attention to the important role of the sub-national within the context of the globalized information technologies. In conjunction with the use of ICTs, local governments can serve as flows able to facilitate the dissemination of information and networks across and beyond government (Castells, 1989, 2006). Research efforts since 1996 also suggest the increasing importance of ICTs at the local level. According to the latest E-Government Reference Library (Version 10.0), a list of peer reviewed publications in this area compiled by Dr. Hans Scholl at the University of Washington, Table 2.1 illustrates the proliferation of local e-government peer-reviewed references (Fig. 2.1).

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

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahn, M., & Bretschneider, S. (2011). Politics of e-government: E-government and the political control of bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 71(3), 414–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aikins, S. K. (2009). Comparative study of municipal adoption of internet-based citizen participation. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 206–230). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Albrecht, S., Kohlrausch, N., Kubicek, H., Lippa, B., Märker, O., Trénel, M., et al. (2008). eParticipation—Electronic participation. Citizens and the business community in e-government. Study on behalf of the federal ministry of the interior, Division IT 1. Bremen, Germany: Institut für Informationsmanagement Bremen GMBH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alfano, G. (2011). Adapting bureaucracy to the internet. The case of Venice local Alfano government. Information Polity, 16, 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ask, A., Hatakka, M., & Grönlund, Å. (2009). The Örebro city citizen-oriented e-government strategy. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 752–772). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Baldersheim, H., & Kersting, N. (2012). The wired city: A new face of power? A citizen perspective. In K. Mossberger & S. E. Clarke (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of urban politics (pp. 590–606). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernhard, I. C. (2014). Local e-government in Sweden: Municipal contact centre implementation with focus on public administrators and citizens. The Journal of Community Informatics, 10(1). Retrieved May 10, 2014, from http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/860/1044

  • Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 169–200). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beynon-Davies, P., & Williams, M. D. (2003). Evaluating electronic local government in the UK. Journal of Information Technology, 18(June), 137–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bimber, B. (2003). Information and American democracy: Technology in the evolution of political power. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabinet Office. (2000). e.gov: Electronic government services for the 21st century. London: Cabinet Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (1989). The informational city: Information technology, economic restructuring, and the urban-regional process. Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2006). Network society: From knowledge to policy. In M. Castells & G. Cardoso (Eds.), The network society: From knowledge to policy (pp. 3–21). Washington, DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cegarro-Navarro, J., Pachón, J. R. C., & Cegarra, J. L. M. (2012). E-government and citizen’s engagement with local affairs through e-websites: The case of Spanish municipalities. International Journal of Information Management, 32, 469–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for Digital Government. (2008). Digital cities survey. Retrieved October 24, 2009, from http://www.govtech.com/dc/surveys/cities/89/2008

  • Chadwick, A. (2011). Explaining the failure of an on-line citizen engagement initiative: The role of internal institutional variables. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 8, 21–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, S. A., & Cho, J. (2012). E-participation and transparent policy decision making. Information Polity, 17, 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, I. J. (2009). Toward e-government sustainability: The information network village project in South Korea. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 773–793). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2006). I2010 eGovernment action plan: Accelerating eGovernment in Europe for the benefit of all. Retrieved August 18, 2014, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52006DC0173&from=EN

  • Coursey, D., & Norris, D. (2008). Models of e-government: Are they correct? An empirical assessment. Public Administration Review, 68(May/June), 523–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Criado, J. I., & Ramilo, C. M. (2003). E-government in practice: An analysis of web site orientation to the citizens in Spanish municipalities. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 16(3), 191–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropf, R. A., & Casaregola, V. (2007). The virtual town hall. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Mälkiä (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government: Vol. III I–Z (pp. 1611–1615). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • De-Miguel-Molina, M. (2010). E-government in Spain. An analysis of the right to quality e-government. International Journal of Public Administration, 33(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vivo, R., & Magnani, M. (2007). Innovative local e-government through the PEOPLE project. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Mälkiä (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government: Vol. III I–Z (pp. 1089–1094). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • DETR. (1998). Modern local government: In touch with people. London: DETR.

    Google Scholar 

  • DETR. (2001). E-government: Delivering local government on-line. London: DETR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsche Bank Research. (2005). Digitale Okonomie und struktureller Wandel. Iconomics (April): 51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Die Bundesregierung. (1999). Moderner Staat—Moderne Verwaltung, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Die Bundesregierung. (2001). Bund on-line 2005. Umsetzungsplan für die E-Goverment-Initiative, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drüke, H. (2005). Local e-government in Germany. In H. Drüke (Ed.), Local electronic government. A comparative study (pp. 78–102). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Edmiston, K. D. (2003). State and local e-government. Prospects and challenges. American Review of Public Administration, 33(1), 20–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • E-Government in France. (2010). Invest in France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enticott, G. (2003). Researching local government using electronic surveys. Local Government Studies, 29(2), 52–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2010). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The European eGovernment Action Plan 2011-2015 Harnessing ICT to promote smart, sustainable & innovative Government. Retrieved March 22, 2014, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0743

  • European Commission. (2014). Digital agenda for Europe. Retrieved August 18, 2014, from http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en

  • Federal Ministry of the Interior. (2004). Modernizing the Federal Administration. Retrieved April 15, 2014, from www.staat-modern.de/dokumente/sm_bestellservice/,-548958/dok.htm

  • Ferro, E., Cantamessa, M., & Paolucci, E. (2005). Urban versus regional divide: Comparing and classifying digital divide. In M. Böhlen, J. Gamper, W. Polasek, & M. A. Wimmer (Eds.), E-government: Towards electronic democracy. International Conference, TCGOV 2005 Bolzano, Italy, March 2-4, 2005 (pp. 81–90). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fricke, C. (2002). Digitale Signatur—Rechtliche und technische Anforderungen. In Initiative D 21 (Ed.), Mit Internet Staat machen, Berlin (pp. 49–55).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabris, T., Gerald, G., Ihrke, K., Douglas, M., & Kaatz, J. (2000). Managerial innovation at the local level: Some effects of administrative leadership and governing board behavior. Public Productivity and Management Review, 23(June), 486–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, R. K., & Jensen, M. J. (2011). E-democracy writ small. The impact of the Internet on citizen access to local elected officials. Information, Communication & Society, 14(2), 177–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Garcia, R. J., & Martinez-Moyano, J. I. (2005). Exploring e-government evolution: The influence of systems rules on organizational action (Working Paper No. 05-001). Cambridge, MA: National Center for Digital Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Garcia, R. J., & Pardo, A. T. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22, 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GlobeScan. (2010). BBC World Service poll. Retrieved March 22, 2014, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08_03_10_BBC_internet_poll.pdf

  • Green, C. G., & Murrmann, S. K. (2007). An opportunity for e-democracy in rebuilding lower Manhattan. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Mälkiä (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government: Vol. III I–Z (pp. 1306–1310). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanssen, G. S. (2007). ICT in Norwegian local government—Empowering politicians? Local Government Studies, 33(3), 355–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanssen, G. S. (2008). E-communication: Strengthening the ties between councillors and citizens in Norwegian local government? Scandinavian Political Studies, 31(3), 333–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haug, V. A. (2007). Local democracy on-line: Driven by crisis, legitimacy, resources, or communication gaps? Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 4(2), 79–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heeks, R., & Bailur, S. B. (2007). Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 243–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heintze, T., & Bretschneider, S. (2000). Information technology and restructuring in public organizations: Does adoption of information technology affect organizational structures, communications, and decision-making. Journal of Public Administration Theory and Research, 10, 801–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernon, P. (2006). E-government in the United Kingdom. In P. Hernon, R. Cullen, & H. C. Relyea (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on e-government (pp. 55–65). Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilbert, M. (2009). The maturing concept of e-democracy: From e-voting and on-line consultations to democratic value out of jumbled on-line chatter. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(April/June), 87–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiller, J., & Belanger, F. (2002). Privacy strategies for electronic government. In M. A. Abramson & G. E. Means (Eds.), E-government 2001. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinnant, C., & O’Looney, J. (2003). Examining pre-adoption interest in on-line innovations: An exploratory study of e-service personalization in the public sector. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(4), 436–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinnant, C., & O’Looney, J. (2007). IT innovation in local government: Theory, issues, and strategies. In D. Garson (Ed.), Modern public information technology systems: Issues and challenges (pp. 186–203). Hershey, PA: IGI.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D., Novak, T., & Schlosser, A. (2001). The evolution of the digital divide: Examining the relationship of race to Internet access and usage over time. In B. Compaine (Ed.), The digital divide (pp. 36–59). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, S. H., & Fletcher, P. D. (2001). Introduction to a symposium on international applications of electronic government (e-government): Research, practice, and issues. Government Information Quarterly, 18, 75–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, S. H., Norris, D. F., & Fletcher, P. D. (2003). Electronic government at the local level: Progress to date and future Issues. Public Performance & Management Review, 26(4), 325–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer, M., Lung-Teng, H., & Seok-Hwi, S. (2004). Digital government and citizen participation in the United States. In A. Pavlichev & G. David Garson (Eds.), Digital government: Principle and best practices (pp. 306–319). Hershey, PA: IDEA Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, V., & Dijkshoorn, A. (2013). Diffusion of personalized services among Dutch municipalities. In V. Weerakkody & B. C. G. Reddick (Eds.), Public sector transformation through e-government. Experiences from Europe and North America (pp. 183–197). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Improvement & Development Agency & Society of Information Technology Management. (2002). Local e-government now: A worldwide view. London: Improvement & Development Agency & Society of Information Technology Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • International City/County Management Association and Public Technology, Inc. (ICMA/PTI). (2000). Digital government survey. Washington, DC: ICMA/PTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • International City/County Management Association and Public Technology, Inc. (ICMA/PTI). (2001). Is your local government plugged in? Highlights of the 2000 electronic government survey. Baltimore: University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • International City/County Management Association and Public Technology, Inc. (ICMA/PTI). (2002). Digital government survey. Washington, DC: ICMA/PTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • iSAC6+. (2014). Retrieved August 18, 2014, from http://www.isac6plus.eu/

  • Jackson, L. A., Zhao, Y., Kolenic, A., III, Fitzgerald, H. E., Harold, R., Von Eye, A., et al. (2008). Race, gender, and information technology use: The new digital divide. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(4), 437–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. J. (2009). Electronic democracy and citizen influence in government. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 288–305). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jukié, T., Kunsteli, M., Dečman, M., & Vintar, M. (2009). E-government in Slovene municipalities. Analysing supply, demand and its effects. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 163–184). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B. J., Kavanaugh, A. L., & Hult, K. M. (2011). Civic engagement and Internet use in local governance: Hierarchical linear models for understanding the role of local community groups. Administration & Society, 43(7), 807–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. J., Lee, J., & Kim, S. (2008). Linking local e-government development stages to collaboration strategy. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 4(3), 36–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, J. (1982). Local Government use of information technology: The next decade. Public Administration Review, 42(January/February), 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleindieck, R. (2002). Bund on-line 2005. In R. Heinrich & J. von Lucke (Ed.), Electronic government in Deutschland (pp. 118–129). Speyer, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kubicek, H., & Wind, M. (2003). E-government in Kommunen. Studie für die Enquetkommission “Zukunft der Städte in NRW” des Landtags Nordrhein Westfalen. Bremen, Germany: Institut für Informationsmanagement.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuk, G. (2002). The digital divide and the quality of electronic service delivery in local government in the United Kingdom. Government Information Quarterly, 20, 353–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunstelj, M., & Decman, M. (2005). Current state of e-government in Slovenian municipalities. The Electronic Journal of e-Government, 3(3), 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government. A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18, 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebreton, C. (2013). Les Territoires Numériques de la France de Demain. Rapport à la Ministère de l’Égalité des Territoires et du Logement, Cecile Duflot. Retrieved April 23, 2014, from http://www.strategie.gouv.fr

  • Lee, G., & Perry, J. (2002). Are computers boosting productivity: A test of the paradox in state governments. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12, 77–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenihan, D. G. (2005). Realigning governance: From e-government to e-democracy. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Practicing e-government: A global perspective (pp. 250–288). Hershey, PA: IDEA Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Li, M. H., & Feeney, M. K. (2014). Adoption of electronic technologies in local U.S. governments: Distinguishing between e-services and communication technologies. American Review of Public Administration, 44(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loiseau, G. (2000). La démocratie electronique municipale française: Au-delà des parangons de vertu. Hermes, 26–27, 213–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loiseau, G. (2011). Les sites internets des municipalités, les blogs, et les réseaux sociaux: Vers une multiplication des modalités participatives dans l’espace public local? In Forey Elsa et Geslot Christophe (dir.), Internet, machines à voter et démocratie, L’Harmattan, coll. “Questions contemporaines” (pp. 191–213).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maultasch-Oliveira, G., & Welch, E. (2013). Social media use in local government: Linkage of technology, task, and organizational context. Government Information Quarterly, 30, 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minstrom, M. (1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 738–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minstrom, M. (2000). Policy entrepreneurs and school choice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J. M. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J. M., & Norris, D. (2005). Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption of reinventing government and e-government at the municipal level. Information Systems Journal, 15, 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, C. Z. (2001). Modeling regional effects on state policy diffusion. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 103–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mossberger, K. C. (2009). Toward digital democracy in the information age. In C. Chadwick & P. N. Howard (Eds.), Routledge handbook of internet politics (pp. 173–185). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossberger, K. C., Tolbert, J., & McNeal, J. S. (2008). Digital citizenship: The Internet, society, and participation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossberger, K. C., Tolbert, J., & Stansbury, M. (2003). Virtual inequality: Beyond the digital divide. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moulder, E. (2001). E-government: What citizens want, what local governments provide. In M. Marik (Ed.), E-government: What citizens want, what local governments provide (Special data issue) (pp. 1–34). Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nasi, G. (2009). E-government and local service delivery: The case of Italian local government. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 735–751). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. F. (2007). Electronic government at the American grassroots. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Mälkiä (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government: Vol. II E–H (pp. 643–651). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. F., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Advancing e-government at the grassroots: Tortoise or hare? Public Administration Review, 65(1), 64–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. F., & Reddick, C. G. (2013). Local e-government in the United States: Transformation or incremental change? Public Administration Review, 73(1), 165–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nugent, J. D. (2001). If e-democracy is the answer, what is the question? National Civic Review, 90(Fall), 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Office of the e-Envoy. (2000). E-government: A strategic framework for public services in the information age. London: Cabinet Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panagiotopoulos, P., Moody, C., & Elliman, T. (2011). An overview assessment of epetitioning tools in the English local government. ePart, 6847, 204–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panagiotopoulos, P., Moody, C., & Elliman, T. (2012). Institutional diffusion of eparticipation in the English local government: Is central policy the way forward? Information Systems Management, 29(4), 295–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pantea, S., & Marten, B. (2013). Has the digital divide been reversed? Evidence from five EU countries. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Digital Economy Working Paper 2013/06. Retrieved May 12, 2014, from http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC80782.pdf

  • Paris, M. (2011). Local e-government and devolution: Electronic service delivery in Northern Ireland. Local Government Studies, 32(1), 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paskaleva-Shapira, K. (2009). Assessing local readiness for city e-governance in Europe. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 62–82). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peart, M. N., & Diaz, J. R. (2007). Comparative project on local e-democracy initiatives in Europe and North America. Geneva, Switzerland: eDemocracy Centre, Research Centre on Direct Democracy, University of Geneva. Retrieved February 13, 2012, from http://www.edemocracycentre.ch/files/ESF%20-%20Local%20E-Democracy.pdf

  • Petroni, G., & Tagliente, L. (2005). E-government in the Republic of San Marino: Some successful initiatives. In G. Petroni & F. Cloete (Eds.), New technologies in public administration (pp. 23–37). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2002). The digital disconnect: The widening gap between internet-savvy students and their schools. Retrieved February 13, 2012, from www.pewin-ternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Schools_Internet_Report.pdf

  • Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2006). Internet usage trends: Through the demographic lens. Retrieved February 13, 2012, from www.pewinternet.org/ppt/Fox_FTC_Nov_6_%202006.pdf

  • Pew Research Center. (2013). Anonymity, privacy, and security on-line. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. H., & Chase, B. (1998). Local government information technology trends: A 1995-1998 comparison for Virginia Local Governments. Government Finance Review, 14(August), 50–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prémat, C. (2013). How do French municipalities communicate on citizen involvement. In J. R. Gil-Garcia (Ed.), E-government: Success around the world. Cases, empirical studies, and practical recommendations (pp. 321–340). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, H. (2010). Framework of e-government at the local government level. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Comparative e-government (pp. 23–47). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Reddick, C. G. (2004). Models of e-government growth in local governments. E-Service Journal, 3(2), 59–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinwald, A., & Kraemmergaard, P. (2012). Managing stakeholders in transformational government. A case study in a Danish local government. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, J. (2009). E-government in Canada and Denmark: Contrasting local and inter-governmental perspectives. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 687–704). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saglie, J., & Vago, S. (2009). Size and e-democracy: On-line participation in Norwegian local politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 32(4), 382–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scavo, C. (2007). Development and use of the world wide web by U.S. local government. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Mälkiä (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government: Vol. I A–D (pp. 296–300). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellong, A. R. (2008). Government 2.0. An exploratory study of social networking services in Japanese local government. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 2(4), 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, J. W. (2006). E-government in the United States. In P. Hernon, R. Cullen, & H. C. Relyea (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on e-government (pp. 25–54). Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. J. (2007). E-democracy and local government—Dashed expectations. In A. Anttiroiko & M. Mälkiä (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government: Vol. II E–H (pp. 448–454). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snellen, I. (2005). Technology and public administration: Conditions for successful e-government development. In G. Petroni & F. Cloete (Eds.), New technologies in public administration (pp. 5–19). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowers, G. N. I. (2009). The little city that could: The case of San Carlos, California. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 705–718). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Streib, G. D., & Navarro, I. (2009). City managers and government development: Assessing technology literacy and leadership needs. In C. G. Reddick (Ed.), Handbook of research on strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: Comparative studies (pp. 349–366). New York: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Streib, G. D., & Willoughby, K. G. (2005). Local governments as e-governments: Meeting the implementation challenge. In J. Slack (Ed.), Symposium on the Limitations of Implementation Research. Public Administration Quarterly, 29(1), 77–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. S. (2002). Recruiting cyber townspeople: Local government and the Internet in a rural Japanese township. Technology in Society, 34, 349–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorpe, L., & Nielsen, J. (2004). Digital communication between local authorities and citizens in Denmark. Local Government Studies, 30(2), 230–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, C. J., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(May/June), 354–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Graft, P., & Svensson, J. (2006). Explaining eDemocracy development: A quantitative empirical study. Information Polity, 11, 123–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vintar, M., Kunstelj, M., Decman, M., & Bercic, B. (2003). Development of e-government in Slovenia. Information Polity, 8, 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Haldenwang, C. (2004). Electronic government (e-government) and development. The European Journal of Development Research, 16(Summer), 417–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion. Rethinking the digital divide. Boston: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weerakkody, V., & Dhillon, G. (2008). Moving from e-government to t-government: A study of process reengineering challenges in a UK local authority context. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 4(4), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch, E., Hinnant, C., & Moon, J. (2004). Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration, 15(3), 371–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, J. P., & Berman, E. M. (2001). The impact of revitalized management practices on the adoption of information technology. A national survey of local governments. Public Performance & Management Review, 24(3), 233–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wohlers, T. (2009). The digital world of local government: A comparative analysis of the United States and Germany. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6(April/June), 111–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, W., & Welch, E. (2004). Does e-government promote accountability? A comparative analysis of website openness and government accountability. Governance, 17(April), 275–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, J., & Sanjay, P. (2005). E-government application at local level: Issues and challenges: An empirical study. Electronic Government, 2(1), 56–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zorlu, S. (2005). Towards successful e-government facilitation in UK local authorities. In eGovernment Workshop, September 13, 2005, Brunel University, West London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wohlers, T.E., Bernier, L.L. (2016). Current Trends in Local E-Government. In: Setting Sail into the Age of Digital Local Government. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 21. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7665-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7665-9_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-7663-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-7665-9

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics