Public sector innovation in context: A comparative study of innovation types

References

• Aagaard, P. 2012. “The Challenge of Adaptive Capability in Public Organizations: A Case Study of Complexity in Crime Prevention.” Public Management Review 14 (6): 731–746. doi:10.1080/14719037.2011.642626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acik, A C., P Trott, and E Cinar. 2021. “Risk Governance Approach to Migration: A Viable Alternative to Precautionary Management.” Journal of Risk Research 25 (4): 468–487. doi:10.1080/13669877.2021.1957984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arundel, A, and D Huber. 2013. “From Too Little to Too Much Innovation? Issues in Measuring Innovation in the Public Sector.” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 27: 146–159. doi:10.1016/j.strueco.2013.06.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arundel, A, L Casali, and H Hollanders. 2015. “How European Public Sector Agencies Innovate: The Use of Bottom-Up, Policy-Dependent and Knowledge-Scanning Innovation Methods.” Research Policy 44 (7): 1271–1282. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2015.04.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arundel, A, C Bloch, and B Ferguson. 2019. ”Advancing Innovation in the Public Sector: Aligning Innovation Measurement with Policy Goals.” Research Policy 48 (3): 789–798. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Autio, E, M Kenney, P Mustar, D Siegel, and M Wright. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Innovation: The Importance of Context.” Research Policy 43 (7): 1097–1108. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamberger P. 2008. From the Editors Beyond Contextualization: Using Context Theories to Narrow the Micro-Macro Gap in Management Research. AMJ 51 (5): 839–846. doi: 10.5465/amj.2008.34789630
   Google Scholar
• Bernier, L, T Hafsi, and C Deschamps. 2015. “Environmental Determinants of Public Sector Innovation: A Study of Innovation Awards in Canada.” Public Management Review 17 (6): 834–856. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.867066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevir, M, R A. Rhodes, and P Weller. 2003. “Comparative Governance: Prospects and Lessons.” Public Administration 81 (1): 191–210. doi:10.1111/1467-9299.00342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloch, C, and M M. Bugge. 2013. “Public Sector Innovation-From Theory to Measurement.” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 27: 133–145. doi:10.1016/j.strueco.2013.06.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borins, S F. 2000a. “What Border? Public Management Innovation in the United States and Canada.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 19 (1): 46–74. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(200024)19:1<46:AID-PAM4>3.0.CO;2-Z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borins, S F. 2000b. “Loose Cannons and Rule Breakers, or Enterprising Leaders? Some Evidence About Innovative Public Managers.” Public Administration Review 60 (6): 498–507. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borins, S F. 2001. “Public Management Innovation in Economically Advanced and Developing Countries.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 67 (4): 715–731. doi:10.1177/0020852301674009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borins, S F. 2014. “The Persistence of Innovation in Government.” Brookings Institution Press with Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation
   Google Scholar
• Borins, S F. 2018. “Public Sector Innovation in a Context of Radical Populism.” Public Management Review 20 (12): 1858–1871. doi:10.1080/14719037.2018.1441430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, V, and V Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Bretschneider, S, F J. Marc-Aurele, and J Wu. 2004. ““Best Practices” Research: A Methodological Guide for the Perplexed.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15 (2): 307–323. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bugge, M M., and C W. Bloch. 2016. “Between Bricolage and Breakthroughs—framing the Many Faces of Public Sector Innovation.” Public Money and Management 36 (4): 4. doi:10.1080/09540962.2016.1162599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casula, M. 2020. “A Contextual Explanation of Regional Governance in Europe: Insights from Inter-Municipal Cooperation.” Public Management Review 22 (12): 1819–1851. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1665700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Jiyao, Richard M Walker, and Mohanbir Sawhney. 2020. ”Public Service Innovation: A Typology.” Public Management Review 22 (11): 1674–1695. Routledge. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1645874.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, T, and P Lægreid. 2013. “Chapter 10: Contexts and administrative reforms: a transformative approach.“ In Context in Public Policy and Management, edited by Pollitt, C. Edward Elgar Publishing. doi:10.4337/9781781955147.00019.
   Google Scholar
• Ciddi, S. 2018. Why Turkey Won’t Be an EU Member Anytime Soon. Retrieved 18 August 2021. https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/turkey-and-eu-partnership-may-be-better-membership
   Google Scholar
• Cinar, E. 2021. ”Chapter 3: Public Sector Innovation ” In Innovation Management and New Product Development, edited by Trott, P, 7th ed, 80–96. London: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Clausen, T H., M A. Demircioglu, and G A. Alsos. 2020. ”Intensity of Innovation in Public Sector Organizations: The Role of Push and Pull Factors.” Public Administration 98 (1): 159–176. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/padm.12617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornet, S, and S Barpanda. 2020. “Exploring Social Innovation Through Co-Creation in Rural India Using Action Research.” Social Enterprise Journal 17 (2): 240–259. doi:10.1108/SEJ-12-2019-0099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damanpour, F, R M. Walker, and C N. Avellaneda. 2009. ”Combinative Effects of Innovation Types and Organizational Performance: A Longitudinal Study of Service Organizations.” Journal of Management Studies 46 (4): 650–675. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00814.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damanpour, F, and M Schneider. 2009. “Characteristics of Innovation and Innovation Adoption in Public Organizations: Assessing the Role of Managers.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20 (1): 259. doi:10.1093/jopart/mun021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Vries, H, V Bekkers, and L Tummers. 2016. “Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda.” Public Administration 94 (1): 146–166. doi:10.1111/padm.12209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demircioglu, M A. 2020. “The Effects of Organizational and Demographic Context for Innovation Implementation in Public Organizations.” Public Management Review 22: 12. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1668467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demircioglu, M A., and R Vivona. 2021. “Depoliticizing the European Immigration Debate: How to Employ Public Sector Innovation to Integrate Migrants.” Research Policy 50 (2): 104150. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferlie, E. 2021. “Concluding Discussion: Key Themes in the (Possible) Move to Co-Production and Co-Creation in Public Management.” Policy and Politics 49 (2): 305–317. doi:10.1332/030557321X16129852287751.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Formez PA News. 2010. http://www.formez.it/notizie/united-nations-public-service-awards-2010.html
   Google Scholar
• Freeman.1995. The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furukawa, S. 1999. ”Political Authority and Bureaucratic Resilience: Administrative Reform in Japan.” Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory 1 (3): 439–448. Routledge. doi:10.1080/14719039900000016.
   Google Scholar
• Gonzalez, R, J Llopis, and J Gasco. 2013. “Innovation in Public Services: The Case of Spanish Local Government.” Journal of Business Research 66 (10): 2024–2033. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.02.028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hantrais, L. 1999. “Contextualization in Cross-National Comparative Research.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 2 (2): 93–108. doi:10.1080/136455799295078.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley J, Sørensen E and Torfing J. 2013. Collaborative Innovation: A Viable Alternative to Market Competition and Organizational Entrepreneurship. Public Admin Rev 73 (6): 821–830. doi:10.1111/puar.12136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, S. 2015. “Citizen Participation in Budgeting: A Trade-Off Between Knowledge and Inclusiveness?” Public Administration Review 75: 4. doi:10.1111/puar.12377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishihara, T. 2021. “Public Sector Reform and Public Management Theory ―cases of Japan.” Public Management Review 1–10. doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1893093.
   Google Scholar
• Jain, P. 2002. “The Catch-Up State: E-Government in Japan.” Japanese Studies 22 (3): 237–255. doi:10.1080/1037139022000036940.
   Google Scholar
• Jain, P. 2011. “Japan’s Subnational Government: Toward Greater Decentralization and Participatory Democracy.” Japanese Politics Today. doi:10.1057/9780230370838_10.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, P S. 2017. “The Development of Modern Public Administration in East Asia.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 83 (2): 225–240. doi:10.1177/0020852316685162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korac, S, I Saliterer, and R M. Walker. 2017. “Analysing the Environmental Antecedents of Innovation Adoption Among Politicians and Public Managers.” Public Management Review 19 (4): 566–587. doi:10.1080/14719037.2016.1200119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kudo, H. 2015. “Bridging the Gap Between Reform Practices and Literatures: New Public Service Delivery of Japanese Local Governments.” International Public Management Review 16 (1): 147–164.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, S. 2010. “New Public Management for the ‘Classical Continental European Administration’: Modernization at the Local Level in Germany, France and Italy.” Public Administration 88 (4): 1116–1130. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01869.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapuente, V, and K Suzuki. 2020. “Politicization, Bureaucratic Legalism, and Innovative Attitudes in the Public Sector.” Public Administration Review 80 (3): 454–467. doi:10.1111/puar.13175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massey A and Johnston K. 2016. Governance: public governance to social innovation?. policy polit 44 (4): 663–675. doi: 10.1332/030557314X14042230109592.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masujima, T. 2005. “Administrative Reform in Japan: Past Developments and Future Trends.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 71 (2): 295–308. doi:10.1177/0020852305053887.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMullin, C. 2021. “Challenging the Necessity of New Public Governance: Co‐production by Third Sector Organizations Under Different Models of Public Management.” Public Administration 99 (1): 5–22. doi:10.1111/padm.12672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mele, V. 2008. “Explaining Programmes for Change: Electronic Government Policy in Italy (1993-2003).” Public Management Review 10 (1): 21–49. doi:10.1080/14719030701763179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mele, V. 2010. “Innovation Policy in Italy (1993-2002): Understanding the Invention and Persistence of a Public Management Reform.” Governance 23 (2): 251–276. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2010.01478.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mele, V, and E Ongaro. 2014. “Public Sector Reform in a Context of Political Instability: Italy 1992–2007.” International Public Management Journal 17 (1): 111–142. doi:10.1080/10967494.2013.849168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mergel, I. 2019. “Digital Service Teams in Government.” Government Information Quarterly 36 (4): 101389. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2019.07.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. 2010. Press Release. http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/announce/2010/5/0519_03.html
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G. 2006. ”The Process of Social Innovation.” Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization 1 (2): 145–62. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Natalini, A, and F Stolfi. 2012. ”Mechanisms and Public Administration Reform: Italian Cases of Better Regulation and Digitalization.” Public Administration 90 (2): 529–543. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01998.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuendorf, A K. 2002. The Content Analysis Guidebook. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ongaro, E. 2009. Public Management Reform and Modernization: Trajectories of Administrative Change in Italy, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain. Publishing: Edward Elgar. doi:10.4337/9781849802284.
   Google Scholar
• Ongaro, E. 2011. “The Role of Politics and Institutions in the Italian Administrative Reform Trajectory.” Public Administration 89 (3): 738–755. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01885.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ongaro, E, T Gong, and Y Jing. 2021. “Public Administration, Context and Innovation: A Framework of Analysis.” Public Administration and Development 41 (1): 4–11. doi:10.1002/pad.1902.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2020. OECD Statistics. Retrieved 17 August 2021. https://stats.oecd.org/
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. 1998. Voluntary Organisations and Innovation in Public Services, Vol. 8, 3. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S P., and L Brown. 2011. “Innovation, Public Policy and Public Services Delivery in the UK. The Word That Would Be King?” Public Administration 89 (4): 1335–1350. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01932.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2011. “Not Odious but Onerous: Comparative Public Administration.” Public Administration 89 (1): 114–127. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01904.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. 2013. ”Chapter 22: Context: what kind of missing link?” In Context in Public Policy and Management: The Missing Link?, edited by C Pollitt, 415–422. Edward Elgar Publishing. doi:10.4337/9781781955147.00036.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C, and G Bouckaert. 2017. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis-Into the Age of Austerity. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Qiu, H, and S Chreim. 2021. ”A Tension Lens for Understanding Public Innovation Diffusion Processes.” Public Management Review 1–21. Routledge. doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1942532.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghavan, A, M A. Demircioglu, and A Taeihagh. 2021. “Public Health Innovation Through Cloud Adoption: A Comparative Analysis of Drivers and Barriers in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18 (1): 334. doi:10.3390/ijerph18010334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, N C., and P J. King. 1991. “Policy Entrepreneurs: Their Activity Structure and Function in the Policy Process.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 1 (2): 147–175.
   Google Scholar
• Salge, T O. 2011. “A Behavioral Model of Innovative Search: Evidence from Public Hospital Services.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (1): 181–210. doi:10.1093/jopart/muq017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salge T Oliver. 2012. The temporal trajectories of innovative search: Insights from public hospital services. Research Policy 41(4): 720–733. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.01.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott I. 2021. Context and innovation in traditional bureaucracies: A Hong Kong study. Public Admin Dev 41(1): 12–22. doi:10.1002/pad.1899.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sezen, S. 2016. “International versus Domestic Explanations of Administrative Reforms: The Case of Turkey.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 77 (2): 322–346. doi:10.1177/0020852311399229.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, E, J Bryson, and B Crosby. 2021. “How Public Leaders Can Promote Public Value Through Co-Creation.” Policy & Politics 49 (2): 267–286. doi:10.1332/030557321X16119271739728.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suzuki, K. H. Ha, and C N. Avellaneda. 2020. ”Direct and Non‐linear Innovation Effects of Demographic Shifts.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 79 (3): 351–369. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suzuki, K, B E. Dollery, and M A. Kortt. 2021. “Addressing Loneliness and Social Isolation Amongst Elderly People Through Local Co-Production in Japan.” Social Policy & Administration 55 (4): 674–686. doi:10.1111/spol.12650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szkuta, K, R Pizzicannella, and D Osimo. 2014. “Collaborative Approaches to Public Sector Innovation: A Scoping Study.” Telecommunications Policy 38 (5–6): 558–567. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2014.04.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torfing, J, and P Triantafillou. 2016. ”Enhancing Public Innovation by Transforming Public Governance?” In Enhancing Public Innovation by Transforming Public Governance, edited by Jacob Torfing and Peter Triantafillou. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316105337.001.
   Google Scholar
• Torfing, J, and C Ansell. 2017. “Strengthening Political Leadership and Policy Innovation Through the Expansion of Collaborative Forms of Governance.” Public Management Review 19 (1): 37–54. doi:10.1080/14719037.2016.1200662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torfing, J, L B. Andersen, C Greve, and K K. Klausen. 2020. Public Governance Paradigms: Competing and Co-Existing. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Torugsa, N A., and A Arundel. 2016. “Complexity of Innovation in the Public Sector: A Workgroup-Level Analysis of Related Factors and Outcomes.” Public Management Review 18 (3): 392–416. doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.984626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torugsa, N A., and A Arundel. 2017. “Rethinking the Effect of Risk Aversion on the Benefits of Service Innovations in Public Administration Agencies.” Research Policy 46 (5): 900–910. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.03.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TRT News. 2015. http://www.trthaber.com/haber/turkiye/afadin-afken-projesi-finale-kaldi-178479.html
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. 2015. “United Nations Public Service Awards Submission Rules for Nominations and Evaluation Process.” http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN93340.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Van Acker, W, and G Bouckaert. 2018. “What Makes Public Sector Innovations Survive? an Exploratory Study of the Influence of Feedback, Accountability and Learning.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 84 (2): 249–268. doi:10.1177/0020852317700481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Voet, J. 2019. “Organizational Decline and Innovation in Public Organizations: A Contextual Framework of Cutback Management.” Perspectives on Public Management and Governance 2 (2): 139–154. doi:10.1093/ppmgov/gvy010.
   Google Scholar
• Virtanen, T. 2013. “Chapter1: Context in the Context: Missing the Missing Links in the Field of Public Administration. In Context in Public Policy and Management: The Missing Link, edited by Pollitt, C, 3–21. doi:10.4337/9781781955147.00036.
   Google Scholar
• Voorberg, W H., V J.J.M. Bekkers, and L G. Tummers. 2015. “A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the Social Innovation Journey.” Public Management Review 17 (9): 1333–1357. doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.930505.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R M. 2006. ”Innovation Type and Diffusion: An Empirical Analysis of Local Government.” Public Administration 84 (2): 311–335. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00004.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker R M. 2007. An Empirical Evaluation of Innovation Types and Organizational and Environmental Characteristics: Towards a Configuration Framework. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18 (4): 591–615. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R M. 2008. ”An Empirical Evaluation of Innovation Types and Organizational and Environmental Characteristics: Towards a Configuration Framework.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18 (4): 591–615. Oxford University Press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, RM, F Damanpour, and CA. Devece. 2011. ”Management Innovation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Effect of Performance Management.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (2): 367–86. Oxford University Press.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R M. 2014. “Internal and External Antecedents of Process Innovation: A Review and Extension.” Public Management Review 16 (1, SI): 21–44. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.771698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker R M, Berry F S and Avellaneda C N. 2015. LIMITS ON INNOVATIVENESS IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT: EXAMINING CAPACITY, COMPLEXITY, AND DYNAMISM IN ORGANIZATIONAL TASK ENVIRONMENTS. Public Admin 93 (3): 663–683. doi:10.1111/padm.12159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windrum, P. 2008. “Innovation and entrepreneurship in public services.“ In: Innovation in Public Sector Services: Entrepreneurship, Creativity and Management, edited byP Windrum and P Koch Vols. 1. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• WIPO. 2021. Global Innovation Index 2021: Tracking Innovation Through the COVID-19 Crisis. Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Wirtz, B W., P R. Kubin, and J C. Weyerer. 2021. “Business Model Innovation in the Public Sector: An Integrative Framework.” Public Management Review 1–36. doi:10.1080/14719037.2021.1972703.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The World Bank Group. 2021. ”The Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) Project. http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/
   Google Scholar
• Wu, J, L Ma, and Y Yang. 2013. “Innovation in the Chinese Public Sector: Typology and Distribution.” Public Administration 91 (2): 347–365. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02010.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xing, Y, Y Liu, and S C. L. Cooper. 2018. “Local Government as Institutional Entrepreneur: Public–private Collaborative Partnerships in Fostering Regional Entrepreneurship.” British Journal of Management 29 (4): 670–690. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye, L, X Peng, L Q. Aniche, P H. Scholten, and E M. Ensenado. 2021. “Urban Renewal as Policy Innovation in China: From Growth Stimulation to Sustainable Development.” Public Administration and Development 41 (1): 23–33. doi:10.1002/pad.1903.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, M M. 2020. ”Implementation of Digital‐era Governance: The Case of Open Data in US Cities.” Public Administration Review 80 (2): 305–315. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/puar.13156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar