Pub Date : 2023-11-08DOI: 10.1177/09520767231210025
Brian Dietrich, Michael Jankowski, Kai-Uwe Schnapp, Markus Tepe
This study examines how public employees and citizens exercise administrative discretion in a dilemma. To identify and compare the moral reasoning underlying discretionary choices, we conducted a conjoint experiment among public employees, future civil servants, and lay citizens in Germany. In the conjoint, respondents were forced to prioritize between two equally eligible welfare claimants. Claimants’ profiles vary concerning attributes reflecting earned-deservingness (e.g., non-self-inflicted welfare dependency), need-deservingness (e.g., dependent children), and attributes that can be used for unlawful discrimination (e.g., nationality). While some signs of discrimination exist, need-deservingness is the most important factor shaping respondents’ prioritization choices. More importantly, we find no substantial differences in prioritization choices among public employees and citizens, indicating congruence in moral reasoning. From these findings, we conclude that efforts to reflect on national prejudices in the education of civil servants should be intensified, and a renewed emphasis on administrative ethics is required to equip public employees with the ability to make impartial yet balanced judgments in administrative dilemmas.
{"title":"Prioritizing exceptional social needs. Experimental evidence on the role of discrimination and client deservingness in public employees’ and citizens’ discretionary behavior","authors":"Brian Dietrich, Michael Jankowski, Kai-Uwe Schnapp, Markus Tepe","doi":"10.1177/09520767231210025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231210025","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines how public employees and citizens exercise administrative discretion in a dilemma. To identify and compare the moral reasoning underlying discretionary choices, we conducted a conjoint experiment among public employees, future civil servants, and lay citizens in Germany. In the conjoint, respondents were forced to prioritize between two equally eligible welfare claimants. Claimants’ profiles vary concerning attributes reflecting earned-deservingness (e.g., non-self-inflicted welfare dependency), need-deservingness (e.g., dependent children), and attributes that can be used for unlawful discrimination (e.g., nationality). While some signs of discrimination exist, need-deservingness is the most important factor shaping respondents’ prioritization choices. More importantly, we find no substantial differences in prioritization choices among public employees and citizens, indicating congruence in moral reasoning. From these findings, we conclude that efforts to reflect on national prejudices in the education of civil servants should be intensified, and a renewed emphasis on administrative ethics is required to equip public employees with the ability to make impartial yet balanced judgments in administrative dilemmas.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"67 s265","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135342158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-12DOI: 10.1177/09520767231201799
Wolfgang Drechsler, Rainer Kattel, Salah Chafik
This essay explores whether religion has a place in addressing public challenges, particularly in the context of Non-Western Public Administration paradigms such as Confucian, Buddhist, and Islamic. The authors focus on Islam as a case study and highlight the need for real-life cases to build a grounded theory. To this end, the essay documents the authors’ ongoing research on Islamic Public Value. We argue that to understand Public Administration in a global context, it is essential to recognize the limitations of a Western perspective, from which the dichotomy of religious versus secular emerged, and in so doing, consider alternative departure points, i.e. paradigms incorporating religious or semi-religious elements.
{"title":"Islamic public administration and Islamic public value: Towards a research agenda","authors":"Wolfgang Drechsler, Rainer Kattel, Salah Chafik","doi":"10.1177/09520767231201799","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231201799","url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores whether religion has a place in addressing public challenges, particularly in the context of Non-Western Public Administration paradigms such as Confucian, Buddhist, and Islamic. The authors focus on Islam as a case study and highlight the need for real-life cases to build a grounded theory. To this end, the essay documents the authors’ ongoing research on Islamic Public Value. We argue that to understand Public Administration in a global context, it is essential to recognize the limitations of a Western perspective, from which the dichotomy of religious versus secular emerged, and in so doing, consider alternative departure points, i.e. paradigms incorporating religious or semi-religious elements.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135969568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-03DOI: 10.1177/09520767231200275
Tom Langbroek, Koen Verhoest
Innovation through collaboration has been increasingly adopted to tackle complex social issues. As a result, the development of public sector innovations is to a lesser degree an ‘in-house’ matter and public sector innovations are increasingly more developed in collaborative arrangements that force organizations to interact across organizational borders. Despite the growing body of literature on collaborative innovation, little is known about the influence of organizations on the interactions of their members when they are acting on behalf of their organization in such collaborative arrangements. Through social network analysis, we examine how organizations influence the eagerness of their representatives in arrangements for collaborative innovation to engage in interactions outside official meetings with other participants. We found that the representative’s freedom to act and the extent to which the higher-level managers of the own organization sees the innovation project as a priority stimulates the extent to which the representative interacts with other participants in the arrangement. Moreover, reciprocity and having a coordinating role in the process determines interaction as well.
{"title":"Explaining interactions in collaborative innovation arrangements: How organizations influence their representatives’ interactions in collaborative innovation arrangements","authors":"Tom Langbroek, Koen Verhoest","doi":"10.1177/09520767231200275","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231200275","url":null,"abstract":"Innovation through collaboration has been increasingly adopted to tackle complex social issues. As a result, the development of public sector innovations is to a lesser degree an ‘in-house’ matter and public sector innovations are increasingly more developed in collaborative arrangements that force organizations to interact across organizational borders. Despite the growing body of literature on collaborative innovation, little is known about the influence of organizations on the interactions of their members when they are acting on behalf of their organization in such collaborative arrangements. Through social network analysis, we examine how organizations influence the eagerness of their representatives in arrangements for collaborative innovation to engage in interactions outside official meetings with other participants. We found that the representative’s freedom to act and the extent to which the higher-level managers of the own organization sees the innovation project as a priority stimulates the extent to which the representative interacts with other participants in the arrangement. Moreover, reciprocity and having a coordinating role in the process determines interaction as well.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135738751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-25DOI: 10.1177/09520767231198737
Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts
This article examines the model of digital era governance (DEG) in the light of the latest-wave of data-driven technologies, such as data science methodologies and artificial intelligence (labelled here DSAI). It identifies four key top-level macro-themes through which digital changes in response to these developments may be investigated. First, the capability to store and analyse large quantities of digital data obviates the need for data ‘compression’ that characterises Weberian-model bureaucracies, and facilitates data de-compression in data-intensive information regimes, where the capabilities of public agencies and civil society are both enhanced. Second, the increasing capability of robotic devices have expanded the range of tasks that machines extending or substituting workers’ capabilities can perform, with implications for a reshaping of state organisation. Third, DSAI technologies allow new options for partitioning state functions in ways that can maximise organisational productivity, in an ‘intelligent centre, devolved delivery’ model within vertical policy sectors. Fourth, within each tier of government, DSAI technologies offer new possibilities for ‘administrative holism’ - the horizontal allocation of power and functions between organisations, through state integration, common capacity and needs-based joining-up of services. Together, these four themes comprise a third wave of DEG changes, suggesting important administrative choices to be made regarding information regimes, state organisation, functional allocation and outsourcing arrangements, as well as a long-term research agenda for public administration, requiring extensive and detailed analysis.
{"title":"Data science, artificial intelligence and the third wave of digital era governance","authors":"Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts","doi":"10.1177/09520767231198737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231198737","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the model of digital era governance (DEG) in the light of the latest-wave of data-driven technologies, such as data science methodologies and artificial intelligence (labelled here DSAI). It identifies four key top-level macro-themes through which digital changes in response to these developments may be investigated. First, the capability to store and analyse large quantities of digital data obviates the need for data ‘compression’ that characterises Weberian-model bureaucracies, and facilitates data de-compression in data-intensive information regimes, where the capabilities of public agencies and civil society are both enhanced. Second, the increasing capability of robotic devices have expanded the range of tasks that machines extending or substituting workers’ capabilities can perform, with implications for a reshaping of state organisation. Third, DSAI technologies allow new options for partitioning state functions in ways that can maximise organisational productivity, in an ‘intelligent centre, devolved delivery’ model within vertical policy sectors. Fourth, within each tier of government, DSAI technologies offer new possibilities for ‘administrative holism’ - the horizontal allocation of power and functions between organisations, through state integration, common capacity and needs-based joining-up of services. Together, these four themes comprise a third wave of DEG changes, suggesting important administrative choices to be made regarding information regimes, state organisation, functional allocation and outsourcing arrangements, as well as a long-term research agenda for public administration, requiring extensive and detailed analysis.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135859168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-21DOI: 10.1177/09520767231203283
Lars Brummel
This article analyses how managers and officials within public agencies perceive the accountability function of stakeholder bodies. Many agencies have established formal accountability relationships with societal stakeholders by introducing stakeholder bodies, such as client councils and user panels. The academic literature has however debated whether and how stakeholder bodies can reflect a full accountability mechanism. Based on original qualitative interviews with 25 representatives from nine Dutch agencies, this study distinguishes five different perspectives that agency managers and officials have about the accountability function of stakeholder bodies: a control perspective, an institutional perspective, a managerial perspective, learning perspective, and a reputational perspective. Agency managers or officials do not often describe stakeholder bodies as a form of accountability, but their experiences and perceptions include elements of accountability. Rather than strengthening control and scrutiny, stakeholder bodies are perceived as an accountability mechanism that relates to a mixture of agency demands and motives.
{"title":"Stakeholder involvement as a form of accountability? Perspectives on the accountability function of stakeholder bodies in Dutch public agencies","authors":"Lars Brummel","doi":"10.1177/09520767231203283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231203283","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses how managers and officials within public agencies perceive the accountability function of stakeholder bodies. Many agencies have established formal accountability relationships with societal stakeholders by introducing stakeholder bodies, such as client councils and user panels. The academic literature has however debated whether and how stakeholder bodies can reflect a full accountability mechanism. Based on original qualitative interviews with 25 representatives from nine Dutch agencies, this study distinguishes five different perspectives that agency managers and officials have about the accountability function of stakeholder bodies: a control perspective, an institutional perspective, a managerial perspective, learning perspective, and a reputational perspective. Agency managers or officials do not often describe stakeholder bodies as a form of accountability, but their experiences and perceptions include elements of accountability. Rather than strengthening control and scrutiny, stakeholder bodies are perceived as an accountability mechanism that relates to a mixture of agency demands and motives.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"2015 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136130247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1177/09520767231202334
Vanja Carlsson
Within the context of digital automation and profiling in the public sector, the rule of law and its inherent principle of legal certainty are highly debated concepts in relation to the desirable values and norms of equal treatment, transparency, and impartiality. However, scholars and policymakers disagree over whether automated decision-making (ADM) is beneficial for legal certainty. This debate highlights the ambiguity embedded in the substantive meaning of legal certainty. This article aims to analyze how the principle of legal certainty is interpreted and defined during the practical application of ADM in welfare services and to discuss the theoretical prerequisites for these definitions to be realized in ADM processes. The empirical case is the Swedish Public Employment Service, which makes extensive use of a statistical ADM tool for decision-making about whether or not to provide support to jobseekers. While the implementation of ADM by welfare institutions has been encouraged due to the assumption that it strengthens public and democratic principles, the study shows that, in practice, ADM processes are perceived as non-transparent and generate a relatively large proportion of incorrect decisions. This may be specifically disadvantageous for vulnerable individuals, who run the risk of being incorrectly denied the right kind of support while at the same time having a greater need for welfare support. The widespread future use of ADM in welfare services may affect how welfare rights and obligations and public principles are met in a new technological era.
{"title":"Legal certainty in automated decision-making in welfare services","authors":"Vanja Carlsson","doi":"10.1177/09520767231202334","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231202334","url":null,"abstract":"Within the context of digital automation and profiling in the public sector, the rule of law and its inherent principle of legal certainty are highly debated concepts in relation to the desirable values and norms of equal treatment, transparency, and impartiality. However, scholars and policymakers disagree over whether automated decision-making (ADM) is beneficial for legal certainty. This debate highlights the ambiguity embedded in the substantive meaning of legal certainty. This article aims to analyze how the principle of legal certainty is interpreted and defined during the practical application of ADM in welfare services and to discuss the theoretical prerequisites for these definitions to be realized in ADM processes. The empirical case is the Swedish Public Employment Service, which makes extensive use of a statistical ADM tool for decision-making about whether or not to provide support to jobseekers. While the implementation of ADM by welfare institutions has been encouraged due to the assumption that it strengthens public and democratic principles, the study shows that, in practice, ADM processes are perceived as non-transparent and generate a relatively large proportion of incorrect decisions. This may be specifically disadvantageous for vulnerable individuals, who run the risk of being incorrectly denied the right kind of support while at the same time having a greater need for welfare support. The widespread future use of ADM in welfare services may affect how welfare rights and obligations and public principles are met in a new technological era.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136307432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1177/09520767231202327
Alexander Gleiß, Konrad Degen, Alexander Knoth, Key Pousttchi, Ulrike Lucke
The educational sector currently faces a massive digital transformation with various digital offerings entering the market. To provide some orientation in this transforming space, a national digital education platform (NDEP) is under development in Germany as part of a nationwide flagship project. On the one hand, in efficiently connecting the relevant stakeholders to each other and to value-adding education-related offerings, various benefits emerge. On the other hand, monopolising the educational sector and influencing the respective market through a state-controlled platform bears potential regulatory risks from misuse of power by the platform to malpractice by the users. Against this background, we aim to identify and systematise these potential drawbacks prior to the platform’s actual development and implementation. We pursue a qualitative, interpretivist approach for policy analysis, based on ten elite interviews and two workshops. Our results are threefold: (1) We capture the consolidated NDEP architecture; (2) We categorise the range of relevant functions and value propositions of the NDEP; (3) We derive 23 regulatory areas of conflict across the three building blocks that result from the potential ecosystem and function scope configurations of the NDEP. As a contribution to research, we shed new interdisciplinary light on the governance and infrastructure of public-private platforms that enable innovation and collaboration while integrating respective market segments. As a contribution to practice, we provide clear guidance for policy-makers in strategizing the development and governance of and through national digital platforms in education.
{"title":"Governance principles and regulatory needs for a national digital education platform","authors":"Alexander Gleiß, Konrad Degen, Alexander Knoth, Key Pousttchi, Ulrike Lucke","doi":"10.1177/09520767231202327","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231202327","url":null,"abstract":"The educational sector currently faces a massive digital transformation with various digital offerings entering the market. To provide some orientation in this transforming space, a national digital education platform (NDEP) is under development in Germany as part of a nationwide flagship project. On the one hand, in efficiently connecting the relevant stakeholders to each other and to value-adding education-related offerings, various benefits emerge. On the other hand, monopolising the educational sector and influencing the respective market through a state-controlled platform bears potential regulatory risks from misuse of power by the platform to malpractice by the users. Against this background, we aim to identify and systematise these potential drawbacks prior to the platform’s actual development and implementation. We pursue a qualitative, interpretivist approach for policy analysis, based on ten elite interviews and two workshops. Our results are threefold: (1) We capture the consolidated NDEP architecture; (2) We categorise the range of relevant functions and value propositions of the NDEP; (3) We derive 23 regulatory areas of conflict across the three building blocks that result from the potential ecosystem and function scope configurations of the NDEP. As a contribution to research, we shed new interdisciplinary light on the governance and infrastructure of public-private platforms that enable innovation and collaboration while integrating respective market segments. As a contribution to practice, we provide clear guidance for policy-makers in strategizing the development and governance of and through national digital platforms in education.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136307898","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-13DOI: 10.1177/09520767231198995
Edoardo Ongaro, Alessando Sancino
{"title":"International public administration and management: Towards the third phase?","authors":"Edoardo Ongaro, Alessando Sancino","doi":"10.1177/09520767231198995","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231198995","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":"361 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135734895","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-31DOI: 10.1177/09520767231197801
Ulrik Roehl, J. Crompvoets
Public administrative bodies around the world are increasingly applying automated, administrative decision-making as underlying technologies such as machine learning mature. Such decision-making is a central element of emerging forms of algorithmic bureaucracies. With its direct exercise of public authority over individual citizens and firms, automated, administrative decision-making makes it particularly important to consider relations to values of good administration. Based on a multiple case-study, the article focuses on how empirical use of automated decision-making influences and transforms issues of good administration in four policy areas in Denmark: Business and social policy; labour market policy; agricultural policy; and tax policy. Supplementing emerging literature, the article exemplifies how public authorities struggle to apply automated decision-making in ways that support rather than undermine good administration. We identify six empirical relations of usage of automated, administrative decision-making and good administration: (I) Giving accurate and comprehensible reasons; (II) Informing addressees’ expectations; (III) Combining material and algorithmic expertise; (IV) Achieving effective oversight; (V) Continuously ensuring quality; and (VI) Managing high complexity. Additionally, we pinpoint related key capabilities for administrative bodies in order to support good administration.
{"title":"Inside algorithmic bureaucracy: Disentangling automated decision-making and good administration","authors":"Ulrik Roehl, J. Crompvoets","doi":"10.1177/09520767231197801","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231197801","url":null,"abstract":"Public administrative bodies around the world are increasingly applying automated, administrative decision-making as underlying technologies such as machine learning mature. Such decision-making is a central element of emerging forms of algorithmic bureaucracies. With its direct exercise of public authority over individual citizens and firms, automated, administrative decision-making makes it particularly important to consider relations to values of good administration. Based on a multiple case-study, the article focuses on how empirical use of automated decision-making influences and transforms issues of good administration in four policy areas in Denmark: Business and social policy; labour market policy; agricultural policy; and tax policy. Supplementing emerging literature, the article exemplifies how public authorities struggle to apply automated decision-making in ways that support rather than undermine good administration. We identify six empirical relations of usage of automated, administrative decision-making and good administration: (I) Giving accurate and comprehensible reasons; (II) Informing addressees’ expectations; (III) Combining material and algorithmic expertise; (IV) Achieving effective oversight; (V) Continuously ensuring quality; and (VI) Managing high complexity. Additionally, we pinpoint related key capabilities for administrative bodies in order to support good administration.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48552210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-30DOI: 10.1177/09520767231197600
Battulga Buyannemekh, José Ramón Gil-García, Mila Gascó-Hernández
Collaboration is increasingly perceived as essential for digital transformation in the public sector. Transforming services and internal operations through the use of information and communication technologies frequently requires the engagement of multiple stakeholders beyond government agencies. This is particularly important in the specific case of smart city initiatives, which intend to leverage technologies to address complex socio-economic and sustainability challenges in local jurisdictions. In addition, emergent research asserts that community organizations such as public libraries can be strategic partners in these multi-actor efforts but does not adequately assess the determinants of these collaborations for developing smart cities, which may result in significant digital transformation at the local level. Based on public management literature on collaboration, this article contributes to digital transformation research by quantitively testing the antecedents of existing collaborations between public libraries and other stakeholders to develop smart cities. Overall, our findings suggest that leadership, preexisting relationships, and agreement on initial aims significantly impact the extent and effectiveness of public libraries' collaborations in developing smart cities.
{"title":"Exploring emergent collaborations for digital transformation in local governments: The engagement of public libraries in the development of smart cities","authors":"Battulga Buyannemekh, José Ramón Gil-García, Mila Gascó-Hernández","doi":"10.1177/09520767231197600","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231197600","url":null,"abstract":"Collaboration is increasingly perceived as essential for digital transformation in the public sector. Transforming services and internal operations through the use of information and communication technologies frequently requires the engagement of multiple stakeholders beyond government agencies. This is particularly important in the specific case of smart city initiatives, which intend to leverage technologies to address complex socio-economic and sustainability challenges in local jurisdictions. In addition, emergent research asserts that community organizations such as public libraries can be strategic partners in these multi-actor efforts but does not adequately assess the determinants of these collaborations for developing smart cities, which may result in significant digital transformation at the local level. Based on public management literature on collaboration, this article contributes to digital transformation research by quantitively testing the antecedents of existing collaborations between public libraries and other stakeholders to develop smart cities. Overall, our findings suggest that leadership, preexisting relationships, and agreement on initial aims significantly impact the extent and effectiveness of public libraries' collaborations in developing smart cities.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49078916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：