Epistemology and Theoretical Explorations of e-Governance

  • Amita Singh


Epistemology of e-governance is rooted into the processes of governance vis-a-vis the nature of Internet technology. ‘e’ Technology represent a complicated network for the transmission of knowledge and controls and not just a sequential chain of mechanics based upon linear relationships. These networks also generate a hybrid of public (government at the core) and private (vendors and donors) institutions to deliver many core services to people to facilitate development. The chapter attempts to clear some epistemological errors in treating e-governance in isolation of the nature of ICT. Theory helps to generate an understanding on epistemological directions of e-governance projects and may help take a cautious decision before venturing into a mega-capital intensive programme as the present trend of governance in the Asia Pacific suggests. Analysis undertaken in this section endorses a critique of positivism and social constructionism which are distinguished by their propinquity to attain controls over technology. This section also discusses the nature of technological determinism which defines e-governance policies. Carrying on the critique of postmodernist and post-structuralist against state authority and the so-called rhizomatic or nomadic cyberspace, a section of this chapter also analyses the enhancement of state capacity to control and regulate lives of citizens. In the last section, the historical and cultural context of ICT is discussed to demonstrate how state politics allies with ICT and certain religious cultures hate the whole Internet and social media trends. However, the state promotion of a particular direction for ICT and deterrence created by the religious ideologies has not prevented individuals to explore much more for themselves over the net. The study explores from across the world how many men and women have made their living and livelihood out of their Internet commerce, sales and transactions by using search engines for varieties of opportunities available to them. As the former theoretical framework is indicative of technological determinism, the latter is suggestive of a participatory, decentralised and interactive framework of e-governance. Policy planners can upgrade their ventures in a more balanced manner suitable to their country’s requirements.


Muslim Woman Instrumental Rationality Network Governance Islamic Country General Equilibrium Theory 


  1. Adams GB (1992) Enthralled with modernity: the historical context of knowledge and theory development in public administration. Public Admin Rev 52(4):363–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agamben G (2005) State of exception (trans: Attell K). University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. Aristotle (1981) The politics, The Penguin Classics, Saunders. In: Trevor J (ed) (trans: Sinclair T, Saunders TJ). Penguin Books Limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Aristotle. Nicomachean ethics (trans: Bartlet RC, Collins SD). University of Chicago Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Balsamo (1998a) Don’t leave science and technology to the technocrats and don’t leave the education of technocrats to academic in science and technology (2000, Engineering cultural studies: the postdisciplinary adventures of mindplayers, fools and others) In: Reid, Traweek (eds) Doing science + culture how cultural and interdisciplinary studies are changing the way we look at science and medicine. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Balsamo A (1998b) Introduction. Cult Stud 12:285–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barendregt B (2006) Cyber-Nasyid: transnational soundscapes in Muslim Southeast Asia. In: Holden T, Scrase T (eds) Medi@asia: communication, culture, context. Routledge, London, pp 171–187Google Scholar
  8. Barendregt B (2008) (With R. Pertierra) Supernatural mobile communication in the Philippines and Indonesia. In: Katz J (ed) Handbook of mobile communications studies, pp 377–388. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  9. Barendregt B (2009) Mobile religiosity in Indonesia; mobilized Islam, Islamized mobility and the potential of Islamic techno nationalism. In: Alampay E (ed) Living the information society in Asia. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, pp 73–92Google Scholar
  10. Barendregt B (2010) In the year 2020; Muslim futurities in Southeast Asia or the religiously inspired Information Society. In: Goto-Jones C, Modern East Asia Research Centre (Leiden) (eds) The Asiascape collection, vol 1, Essays in the exploration of CyberAsia. Asiascape.net and Modern East Asia Research Centre, Leiden, pp 44–50Google Scholar
  11. Barendregt B (2011) Pop, politics and piety: Nasyid Boy band Music in Muslim Southeast Asia. In: Weintraub AN (ed) Islam and popular culture in Indonesia and Malaysia. Routledge, London, pp 235–256Google Scholar
  12. Barrett W (1979) The illusion of technique. Anchor Doubleday, Garden CityGoogle Scholar
  13. Beckert J (2003) Economic sociology and embeddedness: how shall we conceptualize economic action? J Econ Issues XXXVII(3):769–787Google Scholar
  14. Bell D (1974) The coming of post-industrial society. Heinemann, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Bhabha HK (2006) The location of culture. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Bjiker W, Law J (eds) (1992) Shaping technology /building society. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  17. Blau Peter M (2002) Macrostructural theory. In: Turner JH (ed) Handbook of sociological theory. Springer, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Brignall T III (2002) The new panopticon: the internet viewed as a structure of social control. Theory & Science 3(1) [iuicode: http://www.icaap.org/iuicode?105.3.1.x], Source: http://theoryandscience.icaap.org/
  19. Castells M (1998, second edition, 2000) End of millennium, the information age: economy, society and culture, vol III. Blackwell, Cambridge, MA/Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  20. Christensen T, Lægreid P (2001) New public management. The transformation of ideas and practice. Ashgate, AldershotGoogle Scholar
  21. Clarke DD (1988) The design philosophy of the DARPA Internet Protocols. In: Proc. SIGCOMM ‘88, computer communication review, vol 18, No. 4, August, pp 106–114Google Scholar
  22. Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Collins R (1981) The microfoundations of macrosociology. Am J Sociol 86(5):984–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Crompton M (2004) Biometrics and privacy: the end of the world as we know it or the white knight of privacy? Aust J Forensic Sci 36(2):49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Deleuze G, Guattari F (1987) A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and schizophrenia (trans: Brain M). The University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  26. Durkheim E (1938) Rules of the sociological method. Free Press of Glencoe, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Feenberg A (2002a) Heidegger and Marcuse: the catastrophe and redemption of history. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Feenberg A (2002b) Transforming technology: a critical theory revisited. University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  29. Foucault M (1972) The archaeology of knowledge (trans: Sheridan Smith AM). Pantheon Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Foucault M (1977) Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison (trans: Sheridan A). Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Foucault M (1991) Discipline and punish: the birth of a prison. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Foucault M et al (1980) In: Colin G (ed) Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977. Pantheon, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Gibson W (1984) Neuromancer. Ace Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Glendinning C, Powell MA, Rummery K (2002) Partnerships, new labour and the governance of welfare. The Policy Press, BristolGoogle Scholar
  35. Goffman E (1967) Interaction ritual. Doubleday Anchor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Goffman E (1990) The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor, USA (Penguin Reprint 1990)Google Scholar
  37. Graebner W (1987) The engineering of consent: democracy and authority in twentieth century America. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  38. Guattari F (1995) Chaosmosis: An ethico-aesthetic paradigm (trans: Burns P, Pefouis J) Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  39. Haas PM (1992) Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination. Int Organ 46(1). Knowledge, Power and International Policy Coordination, Winter, 1–35Google Scholar
  40. Habermas J (1996) Between facts and norms. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. Habermas J (2006) Political communication in media society: does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Commun Theory 16:411–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hamman RB (1996) Rhizome@Internet. Using the Internet as an example of Deleuze and Guattari's ‘Rhizome’. http://www.socio.demon.co.uk/rhizome.html
  43. Heidegger M (1977) The question concerning technology (trans: Lovitt W). Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Higgs E (2001) The rise of the information state: the development of central state surveillance of the citizen in England 1500-2000. J Hist Sociol 14(2):190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hirshleifer J, Riley JG (1992) The analytics of uncertainty and information. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hugh M (2001) Investigating the information society. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Keman H (1997) Approaches to the analysis of institutions. In: Steunenberg B, van Vught F (eds) Political institutions and public policy. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  48. Knottnerus J, David JG (1997) The works of Peter M. Blau: analytical strategies, developments and assumptions. Sociol Perspect 40(1):109–128, University of California Press. Article Stable. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1389495
  49. Little IMD (1957) A critique of welfare economics, 2nd edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  50. Lukacs G (1978a) The ontology of social being, vol 1, Hegel’s false and his genuine ontology. Merlin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Lukacs G (1978b) The ontology of social being, vol 2, Marx’s basic ontological premises. Merlin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  52. Lyon D (2001) Surveillance society. Open University Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  53. Lyon D (2003) Surveillance after September 11. Polity Press, Cambridge, p 78Google Scholar
  54. MacKenzie D, Wajcman J (1999) The social shaping of technology, 2nd edn. Open University Press, Buckingham/PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  55. Mannheim K (1940) Man and society in an age of reconstruction. Harcourt, Brace and World, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. Marcuse H (1964a) One-dimensional man: studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Beacon Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  57. Marcuse H (1968) Industrialization and capitalism in the work of Max Weber. In: Marcuse H (ed). Beacon Press, Negations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  58. Markley R (ed) (1996) Virtual reality and their discontents. John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  59. Marx K (1967) Capital, volume 1: a critique of political economy: a critical analysis of capitalist. Progress Publishers, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  60. Marx K (1977) A contribution to the critique of political economy. Progress Publishers, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  61. McLaren G (2012) The triumph of virtual reality and its implications for philosophy and civilization. Cosmos Hist: The J Nat Soc Philos 8(1):383–411Google Scholar
  62. McLuhan M (1964) Understanding media. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  63. Michael B (2007) Control and consent: the theoretical basis for the right to privacy. Law and Governance 11(44)Google Scholar
  64. Miller P, O’Leary T (1989) Hierarchies and American ideals 1900–1940. Acad Manage Rev 14:250–265Google Scholar
  65. Mohamed-Saleck FM (2007) ICT in the Islamic World. In: Anttiroiko A, Malkia M (eds) Encyclopedia of digital government (3 Volumes)Google Scholar
  66. Mouzelis N (1995) Impasses of micro-sociological theorizing, overreaction to parsons. In: Sociological theory: what went wrong? Diagnosis and remedies. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  67. Parker C (2001) The open corporation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, USAGoogle Scholar
  68. Parkinson CN (1955) Parkinsons Law. The Economist. November 19thGoogle Scholar
  69. Parkinson CN (1958) Parkinson’s law: the pursuit of progress. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  70. Poster M (1990) The mode of information. Poststructuralism and social context. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 363–373Google Scholar
  71. Ramsden E, Kenneth B (1984) Bertrand Russell, Theory of Knowledge: The 1913 Manuscript. Allen and Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  72. Rawls AW (1987) The interaction order sui generis: Goffman’s contribution to social theory. Sociol Theory 5:136–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Rheingold H (1993) A slice of life in my virtual community. In: Harasim LM (ed) Global networks: computers and international communication. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  74. Rhodes R (1997) Understanding governance. Open University Press, BuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  75. Rhodes R (2000) The governance narrative. Publ Admin 78:345–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Russell B (1913) Theory of knowledge: The 1913 manuscript. Edited by ElizabethGoogle Scholar
  77. Sen A (1987) On ethics and economics. Basil Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  78. Shaiken H (1984) Work transformed. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  79. Smith Gregory WF (2003) Ethnomethodological readings of Goffman. In: Trevi O, Javier A (eds) Goffman’s legacy. Rowman and Littlefield, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  80. Solove DJ (2004) The digital person: technology and privacy in the information age. New York University Press, New York, pp 29–31Google Scholar
  81. Star SL (ed) (1995) Ecologies of knowledge: work and politics in science and technology. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  82. Stigler (1981:190) James Buchanan and Manchur Olson’sGoogle Scholar
  83. Stoker G (2000) Urban political science and the challenge of urban governance. In: Pierre J (ed) Debating governance: authority, steering and democracy. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  84. Strate L (1999) The varieties of cyberspace: Problems in definition and delimitation. West J Commun 63(3):382–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Tai Z (2010) Casting the ubiquitous net of information control: internet surveillance in China from Golden Shield to Green Dam, University of Kentucky. Information Science Reference, USA (an imprint of IGI Global)Google Scholar
  86. Toffler A (1970) The future shock. Random House Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  87. Turner BS (ed) (1990) Theories of modernity and postmodernity. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  88. Vieta M (2006) Herbert Marcuse’s critique of technological rationality: an exegetical reading. Draft paper, Available at http://www.academia.edu/1064711/Herbert_Marcuses_Critique_of_Technological_Rationality_An_Exegetical_Reading
  89. Walsham G (2000) IT globalization and cultural diversity. In: Avgerou C, Walsham G (eds) Information technology in context: studies from the perspective of developing countries. Ashgate, Aldershot/EnglandGoogle Scholar
  90. Weber M (1978) Economy and society. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  91. Webster A (1991) Science, technology and society. Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  92. Willcocks LP (2006) Michel Foucault in the social study of ICTs: critique and reappraisal. Soc Sci Comput Rev 24:274–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wittgenstein L Von (1953) Philosophical investigations (trans: Anscombe GEM). Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Online Sites Visited

  1. Carr N (2010) The shallows: what the Internet is doing to our brains. W.W. Norton and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Erumban AA, de Jong SB (2006) Cross country differences in ICT adoption: a consequence of culture? J World Bus 41:302–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Feenberg A (1988) The bias of technology. In: Pippen R, Feenberg A, Webel R (eds) Marcuse: critical theory and the promise of utopia. Bergin & Garvey, Amherst, pp 251–254Google Scholar
  4. For the limitations of Habermas’s attempt to bound the lifeworld, see Nancy Fraser (1987) What’s critical about critical theory: the case of Habermas and Gender. In: Benhabib S, Cornell D (eds) Feminism as critique. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Habermas J (1970) Toward a rational society (trans: Shapiro J). Beacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  6. Marcuse H (1964b) One-dimensional man. Beacon, Boston, pp xv–xviGoogle Scholar
  7. Poster M (1984) Foucault, Marxism and history. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Solow RM (1987) We’d better watch out. New York Times Book Review, July 12Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amita Singh
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for the Study of Law and GovernanceJawaharlal Nehru UniversityNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations