A policy feedback and socio-technical approach to e-participation (PFSTEP): A cross-national analysis of technology and institutions to explain e-participation

References

• Alderete, M. V. (2018). The mediating role of ICT in the development of open government. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(3), 172–187. doi:10.1080/1097198X.2018.1498273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allison, P. D. (2012). Causal inference with panel data. Retrieved from https://statisticalhorizons.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Causal-Inference.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Anduiza, E., Gallego, A., & Cantijoch, M. (2010). Online political participation in Spain: The impact of traditional and internet resources. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(4), 356–368. doi:10.1080/19331681003791891
   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. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2011.09.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avgerou, C. (2001). The significance of context in information systems and organizational change. Information Systems Journal, 11(1), 43–63. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2575.2001.00095.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azad, B., Faraj, S., Goh, J. M., & Feghali, T. (2010). What shapes global diffusion of e-Government: Comparing the influence of national governance institutions. Journal of Global Information Management, 18(2), 85–104. doi:10.4018/jgim.2010040104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Be ́langer, F., & Carter, L. (2009). The impact of the digital divide on e-government use. Communication ACM, 52(4), 132–135. doi:10.1145/1498765.1498801
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Best, S., & Krueger, J. (2005). Analyzing the representativeness of internet political participation. Political Behavior, 27(2), 183–216. doi:10.1007/s11109-005-3242-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham, L. B., Nabatchi, T., & O’Leary, R. (2005). The new governance: Practices and processes for stakeholder and citizen participation in the work of government. Public Administration Review, 65(5), 547–558. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00482.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanc, D. L. (2020). E-participation: A quick overview of recent qualitative trends. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. DESA Working Paper No. 163. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2020/wp163_2020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Brabham, D. C. (2009). Crowdsourcing the public participation process for planning projects. Planning Theory, 8(3), 242. Retrieved from http://plt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/8/3/242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callon, M., & Law, J. (1989). On the construction of sociotechnical networks: Content and context revisited. Knowledge and Society, 8, 57–83.
   Google Scholar
• Chai, S., & Kim, M. (2012). A socio-technical approach to knowledge contribution behavior: An empirical investigation of social networking sites users. International Journal of Information Management, 32(2), 118–126. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2011.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., & Hsieh, J. (2009). Advancing e-governance: Comparing Taiwan and the United States. Public Administration Review, 69(S1), S151–S158. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02103.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cusatelli, C., & Giacalone, M. (2014). Evaluation indices of the judicial system and ICT developments in civil procedure. Procedia Economics and Finance, 17, 113–120. doi:10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00885-5
   Google Scholar
• Erumban, A. A., & De Jong, S. B. (2006). Cross-country differences in ICT adoption: A consequence of Culture? Journal of World Business, 41(4), 302–314. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2006.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fountain, J. (2001). Building the virtual state information technology and institutional change. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freedom House. (2016). Freedom on the net. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FOTN_2016_BOOKLET_FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Freedom House. (2017). Freedom in the world 2017. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2017
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. California, USA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Enacting electronic government success. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Gulati, G., Williams, C. B., & Yates, D. J. (2014). Predictors of on-line services and e-participation: A cross-national comparison. Government Information Quarterly, 3(1), 526–533. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2014.07.005
   Google Scholar
• Gulati, G. J., & Yates, D. J. (2011). Strategy, competition, and investment: Explaining the global divide in e-government implementation with policy variables. Electronic Government: An International Journal, 8(2/3), 124–143. doi:10.1504/EG.2011.039833
   Google Scholar
• Hsiao, C. (2003). Analysis of panel data (2nd ed.). New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jaya, E. S., Ascone, L., & Lincoln, T. M. (2018). A longitudinal mediation analysis of the effect of negative-self-schemas on positive symptoms via negative affect. Psychological Medicine, 48, 1299–1307. doi:10.1017/S003329171700277X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jho, W., & Song, K. J. (2015). Institutional and technological determinants of civil e-participation: Solo or duet? Government Information Quarterly, 3(2), 488–495. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.09.003
   Google Scholar
• Kim, C. K. (2007). A cross-national analysis of global e-government. Public Organization Review, 7(4), 317–329. doi:10.1007/s11115-007-0040-5
   Google Scholar
• Kling, R. (1980). Social analyses of computing: Theoretical perspectives in recent empirical research. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 12(1), 61–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger, B. S. (2002). Assessing the potential of internet political participation in the United States: A resource approach. American Politics Research, 30(5), 476–498. doi:10.1177/1532673X02030005002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Massachusetts, USA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leigh, A., & Atkinson, R. (2001). Clear thinking on the digital divide. Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Lowi, T. (1964). American business, public policy, case-studies, and political theory. World Politics, 16, 677–715. doi:10.2307/2009452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowi, T. J. (1972). Four systems of policy, politics, and choice. Public Administration Review, 32(4), 298–310. doi:10.2307/974990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macintosh, A., & Whyte, A. (2008). Towards an evaluation framework for eParticipation. Transforming Government People Process and Policy, 2, 16–30. doi:10.1108/17506160810862928
   Google Scholar
• Marien, S., & Christensen, H. (2013). Trust and openness: Prerequisites for democratic engagement. In K. N. Demetriou (Ed.), Democracy in transition. Political participation in the European Union (pp. 109–134). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Mettler, S. (2002). Bringing the state back in to civic engagement: Policy feedback effects of the G.I. Bill for World War II veterans. American Political Science Review, 96(2), 351–365. doi:10.1017/S0003055402000217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mettler, S., & Sorrelle, M. (2014). Policy feedback theory. In P. Sabatier & C. Weible (Eds.), Theories of the policy process [e-book Ch. 5] (3rd ed., Safari tech books online) (pp. 151-182). New York, NY: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mettler, S., & Soss, J. (2004). The consequences of public policy for democratic citizenship: Bridging policy studies and mass politics. Perspectives on Politics, 2(1), 55–73. doi:10.1017/S1537592704000623
   Google Scholar
• Moon, M. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424–433. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00196
   Web of Science ®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. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02647.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P., Walgrave, S., & Van Aelst, P. (2006). Does protest signify disaffection? Demonstra- tors in a postindustrial democracy. In M. Torcal & J. R. Montero (Eds.), Political disaffection in contemporary democracies: Social capital, institutions and politics (pp. 279–307). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowsky, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404–428. doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parvez, Z. (2008). E-Democracy from the perspective of local elected members. International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 4(3), 20–35. doi:10.4018/jegr.2008070102
   Google Scholar
• Pierson, P. (1993). When effect becomes cause: Policy feedback and political change. World Politics, 45, 595–628. doi:10.2307/2950710
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, R. (2005). A global diffusion model of e-governance. Journal of Public Policy, 25(1), 5–27. doi:10.1017/S0143814X05000279
   Google Scholar
• Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values, 25(1), 3–29. doi:10.1177/016224390002500101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royo, S., Yetano, A., & Acerete, B. (2014). E-Participation and environmental protection: Are local governments really committed? Public Administration Review, 74(1), 87–98. doi:10.1111/puar.12156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawyer, S., & Jarrahi, M. (2013). The sociotechnical perspective. In A. Tucker & H. Topi (Eds.), CRC handbook of computing. Chapman and Hall (in press). Retrieved from http://sawyer.syr.edu/publications/2013/sociotechnical%20chapter.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schattschneider, E. (1935). Politics, pressures and the tariff: A study of free private enterprise in pressure politics, as shown in the 1929–1930 revision of the tariff (Prentice-Hall political science series ed.). New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. The American Political Science Review, 87(2), 334–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Setia, M. S. (2016). Methodology series module 3: Cross-sectional studies. Indian Journal of Dermatology, 61(3), 261–264. doi:10.4103/0019-5154.182410
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skocpol, T. (1992). Protecting soldiers and mothers: The political origins of social policy in the United States. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A., Schlozman, K. L., Verba, S., & Brady, H. (2009). The demographics of online and offline political participation. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2009/09/01/the-demographics-of-online-and-offline-political-participation/
   Google Scholar
• Srivastava, S. C., & Teo, T. S. H. (2008). The relationship between e-government and national competitiveness: The moderating influence of environmental factors. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 23(2008). doi:10.17705/1CAIS.02305. Available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol23/iss1/5
   Google Scholar
• Tornatzky, L., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The process of technology innovation. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• 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. doi:10.1108/14684520510628918
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trist, E. L., Higgin, G. W., Murray, H., & Pollock, A. B. (1963). Organizational choice: Capabilities of groups at the coal face under changing technologies. London, UK: Tavistock Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Ullman, J. (2006). Structural equation modeling: Reviewing the basics and moving forward. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 35–50. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_03
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations [UN]. (2001/2020). E-Government survey. Retrieved from https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/Benchmarking-E-Government-2011
   Google Scholar
• United Nations [UN]. (2014). E-Government survey 2014. Retrieved 19 October 2020 from: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/portals/egovkb/documents/un/2014-survey/e-gov_complete_survey-2014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United Nations (UN). (2016).E-Government survey 2016. Retrieved 19 October 2020 from: https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2016-Survey/Executive%20Summary.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vaisey, S., Miles, A., & Hout, M. (2017). What you can—and can’t—do with three-wave panel data. Sociological Methods & Research, 46(1), 44–67. doi:10.1177/0049124114547769
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vicente, M. R., & Novo, A. (2014). An empirical analysis of e-participation. The role of social networks and e-government over citizens’ online engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 379–387. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2013.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Haldenwang, C. (2004). Electronic government (e-government) and development. The European Journal of Development Research, 16(2), 417–432. doi:10.1080/0957881042000220886
   Google Scholar
• West, D. (2005). Digital government technology and public sector performance (Safari tech books online ed.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• World Economic Forum [WEF]. (2016). Networked readiness index. Retrieved from http://reports.weforum.org/global-information-technology-report-2016/networked-readiness-index/
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, F., Shen, K., & Collier, A. (2014). Effects of national culture on e-government diffusion—A global study of 55 countries. Information & Management, 51(8), 1005–1016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005). Post-adoption variations in usage and value of e-business by organizations: Cross-country evidence from the retail industry. Information Systems Research, 16(1), 61–84. doi:10.1287/isre.1050.0045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar