Virtual Social Networks as Public Sphere: Relating E-government Maturity, ICT Laws, and Corruption

  • Jithesh Arayankalam
  • Satish KrishnanEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 558)


The role of e-government in reducing corruption is an active area of research in information systems (IS). Drawing on the concept of public sphere from political science literature, we seek to explore how the diffusion of virtual social networks (VSNs) influence the relationships between e-government maturity in a country, its ICT laws and corruption. Our analyses based on publicly available archival data substantiates the (1) relationship between e-government maturity in a country and its corruption through the indirect effect of ICT laws; (2) interaction effect of VSN diffusion in a country on its e-government maturity and ICT laws; and (3) interaction effect of VSN diffusion in a country on its ICT laws and corruption. The key contribution of this research is the reestablishment of the idea of public sphere in the context of VSN diffusion, and how it affects e-government outcomes of a country.


E-government maturity ICT laws Corruption Virtual social networks diffusion Public sphere 


  1. 1.
    Abu-Shanab, E.A., Harb, Y.A., Al-Zoubi, S.Y.: E-government as an anti-corruption tool: citizens perceptions. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 6(3), 232–248 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahn, M.J., Bretschneider, S.: Politics of e-government: e-government and the political control of bureaucracy. Public Adm. Rev. 71(3), 414–424 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aiken, L.S., West, S.G., Reno, R.R.: Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions, 1st edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Banerjee, P., Chau, P.Y.K.: An evaluative framework for analysing e-government convergence capability in developing countries. Electron. Gov. Int. J. 1(1), 29–48 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barr, A., Serra, D.: Corruption and culture: an experimental analysis. J. Public Econ. 94(11–12), 862–869 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P.T., Grimes, J.M.: Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: e-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Gov. Inf. Q. 27(3), 264–271 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhatnagar, S.: E-government and access to information. Glob. Corruption Rep. 2003, 24–32 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhattacherjee, A., Shrivastava, U.: The effects of ICT use and ICT Laws on corruption: a general deterrence theory perspective. Gov. Inf. Q. 35(4), 703–712 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burstein, P.: Public opinion, demonstrations, and the passage of antidiscrimination legislation. Public Opin. Q. 43(2), 157–172 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Camaj, L.: From ‘window dressing’ to ‘door openers’? Freedom of Information legislation, public demand, and state compliance in South East Europe. Gov. Inf. Q. 33(2), 346–357 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Charoensukmongkol, P., Moqbel, M.: Does investment in ICT curb or create more corruption? A cross-country analysis. Public Organ. Rev. 14(1), 51–63 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chawla, R., Bhatnagar, S.: Online delivery of land titles to rural farmers in Karnataka, India. In: Scaling Up Poverty Reduction: A Global Learning Process and Conference, pp. 25–27. The World Bank, Shanghai (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cho, Y.H., Choi, B.D.: E-government to combat corruption: the case of Seoul metropolitan government. Int. J. Public Adm. 27(10), 719–735 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., Aiken, L.S.: Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 3rd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey (1983)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Costanza-Chock, S.: The immigrant rights movement on the net: between web 2.0 and communication popular. Am. Q. 60(3), 851–864 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elbahnasawy, N.G.: E-government, internet adoption, and corruption: an empirical investigation. World Dev. 57, 114–126 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Facebook Company Info. Accessed 30 Mar 2019
  18. 18.
    Flak, L.S., Dertz, W., Jansen, A., Krogstie, J., Spjelkavik, I., Ølnes, S.: What is the value of e-government–and how can we actually realize it? Transform. Gov.: People Process Policy 3(3), 220–226 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fox, J.: Regression Diagnostics, 1st edn. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Garcia-Murillo, M.: Does a government web presence reduce perceptions of corruption? Inf. Technol. Dev. 19(2), 151–175 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gilbert, D., Balestrini, P., Littleboy, D.: Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e-government. Int. J. Public Sector Manag. 17(4/5), 286–301 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gujarati, D.N.: Basic Econometrics, 3rd edn. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Habermas, J.: The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, 1st edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1989)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Habermas, J., Lennox, S., Lennox, F.: The public sphere: an encyclopedia article (1964). New German Critique 3, 49–55 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L.: Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Uppersaddle River (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Halpern, D., Gibbs, J.: Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(3), 1159–1168 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hampton, K.N., Lee, C., Her, E.J.: How new media affords network diversity: direct and mediated access to social capital through participation in local social settings. New Media Soc. 13(7), 1031–1049 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hayes, A.F.: Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd edn. Guilford Publications, New York (2017)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Heeks, R.: Information technology and public sector corruption. Information Systems for Public Sector Management Working Paper No. 4 (1998)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Heidenheimer, A.J.: The topography of corruption: explorations in a comparative perspective. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 48(149), 337–347 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ho, A.T.: Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Adm. Rev. 62(4), 434–444 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Holden, S.H., Norris, D.F., Fletcher, P.D.: Electronic government at the local level: progress to date and future issues. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 26(4), 325–344 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Howard, P.N., Duffy, A., Freelon, D., Hussain, M.M., Mari, W., Maziad, M.: Opening closed regimes: what was the role of social media during the Arab Spring? Social Science Research Network (2011). SSRN: or
  34. 34.
    Husted, B.W.: Wealth, culture, and corruption. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 30(2), 339–359 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hwang, M.S., Li, C.T., Shen, J.J., Chu, Y.P.: Challenges in e-government and security of information. Inf. Secur. 15(1), 9–20 (2004)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kaplan, A.M., Haenlein, M.: Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Bus. Horiz. 53(1), 59–68 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Khan, A., Krishnan, S.: Conceptualizing the impact of corruption in national institutions and national stakeholder service systems on e-government maturity. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 46, 23–36 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kiecolt, K.J., Nathan, L.E.: Secondary Analysis of Survey Data, 1st edn. Sage Publications, New Delhi (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kim, S., Kim, H.J., Lee, H.: An institutional analysis of an e-government system for anti-corruption: the case of OPEN. Gov. Inf. Q. 26(1), 42–50 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Krishnan, S., Lymm, J.: Determinants of virtual social networks diffusion: insights from cross-country data. Comput. Hum. Behav. 54, 691–700 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Krishnan, S., Teo, T.S.H., Lim, V.K.G.: Examining the relationships among e-government maturity, corruption, economic prosperity and environmental degradation: a cross-country analysis. Inf. Manag. 50(8), 638–649 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Layne, K., Lee, J.: Developing fully functional e-government: a four stage model. Gov. Inf. Q. 18(2), 122–136 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lee, J.: 10 year retrospect on stage models of e-government: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Gov. Inf. Q. 27(3), 220–230 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lee, G., Kwak, Y.H.: An open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Gov. Inf. Q. 29(4), 492–503 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lio, M.C., Liu, M.C., Ou, Y.P.: Can the internet reduce corruption? A cross-country study based on dynamic panel data models. Gov. Inf. Q. 28(1), 47–53 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nyman-Metcalf, K.: e-Governance in law and by law. In: Kerikmäe, T. (ed.) Regulating eTechnologies in the European Union, pp. 33–51. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  47. 47.
    Panagiotopoulos, P., Bigdeli, A.Z., Sams, S.: Citizen–government collaboration on social media: the case of Twitter in the 2011 riots in England. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(3), 349–357 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Panteli, N.: Virtual social networks: a new dimension for virtuality research. In: Panteli, N. (ed.) Virtual Social Networks, pp. 1–17. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London (2009). Scholar
  49. 49.
    Papadopoulou, P., Nikolaidou, M., Martakos, D.: What is trust in e-government? A proposed typology. In: 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Parent, M., Vandebeek, C.A., Gemino, A.C.: Building citizen trust through e-government. Gov. Inf. Q. 22(4), 720–736 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Picci, L.: The quantitative evaluation of the economic impact of e-government: a structural modelling approach. Inf. Econ. Policy 18(1), 107–123 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Preacher, K.J., Hayes, A.F.: Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 40(3), 879–891 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Robertson, C.J., Watson, A.: Corruption and change: the impact of foreign direct investment. Strateg. Manag. J. 25(4), 385–396 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Shaw, M.: Crime, police and public in transitional societies. Transform. Crit. Perspect. South. Afr. 49(1), 1–24 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Shelley, L.I.: Crime and corruption in the digital age. J. Int. Aff. 51(2), 605–620 (1998)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Siau, K., Long, Y.: Synthesizing e-government stage models - a meta-synthesis based on meta-ethnography approach. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 105(3/4), 443–458 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Srivastava, S.C.: Is e-government providing the promised returns? A value framework for assessing e-government impact. Transform. Gov.: People Process Policy 5(2), 107–113 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Teo, T.S.H., Srivastava, S.C., Jiang, L.: Trust and electronic government success: an empirical study. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 25(3), 99–132 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
  60. 60.
    Tolbert, C.J., Mossberger, K.: The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Adm. Rev. 66(3), 354–369 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Turow, J., Hennessy, M.: Internet privacy and institutional trust: insights from a national survey. New Media Soc. 9(2), 300–318 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    UN: Information and Communication Technology Policy and Legal Issues for Central Asia (2007). Accessed 30 Mar 2019
  63. 63.
    UN.: The United Nations E-Government Survey (2012). Accessed 30 Mar 2019
  64. 64.
    Uslaner, E.M.: Trust and corruption. In: The New Institutional Economics of Corruption, pp. 90–106. Routledge (2004)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Von Haldenwang, C.: Electronic government (e-government) and development. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 16(2), 417–432 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    WEFGITR: The global information technology report 2016. World Economic Forum, vol. 1. Citeseer (2016). Accessed 30 Mar 2019
  67. 67.
    Welch, E.W., Wong, W.: Global information technology pressure and government accountability: the mediating effect of domestic context on website openness. J. Public Adm. Res. Theor. 11(4), 509–539 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wescott, C.G.: E-government in the Asia-pacific region. Asian J. Polit. Sci. 9(2), 1–24 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wilson, C., Dunn, A.: The Arab Spring| Digital media in the Egyptian revolution: descriptive analysis from the Tahrir data set. Int. J. Commun. 5, 25 (2011)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wimmer, M., Codagnone, C.: Roadmapping e-Government: Research Visions and Measures Towards Innovative Governments in 2020. eGovRTD2020 Project Consortium, Clusone (2007)Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Woszczynski, A.B., Whitman, M.E.: The problem of common method variance in IS research. In: The Handbook of Information Systems Research, pp. 66–78. IGI Global (2004)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Yang, K., Callahan, K.: Citizen involvement efforts and bureaucratic responsiveness: participatory values, stakeholder pressures, and administrative practicality. Public Adm. Rev. 67(2), 249–264 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Zhao, F.: An empirical study of cultural dimensions and e-government development: implications of the findings and strategies. Behav. Inf. Technol. 32(3), 294–306 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indian Institute of Management KozhikodeKozhikodeIndia

Personalised recommendations