Government Information Quarterly最新文献_第3页

Unraveling the Nexus between National Culture and AI plan development and AI readiness: Insights from a configurational analysis 揭示国家文化与人工智能计划发展和人工智能准备之间的联系：来自配置分析的见解

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-09-25 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102078

James S. Denford , Gregory S. Dawson , Kevin C. Desouza

Artificial intelligence (AI) applications have increased in maturity and scale across the public sector, leading for calls to investigate AI's impact on public policy development and outcomes. This study investigates the intricate interplay between Hofstede's cultural dimensions and outcomes related to strategic AI plan development and national AI readiness. Utilizing qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), we examine data from 33 nations to discern patterns and configurations within this rich interplay. Our findings underscore the significance of considering multiple cultural dimensions in tandem, revealing a conjunctional relationship where no single cultural factor operates independently but rather should be viewed as a cohesive portfolio of dimensions. Equifinality is prevalent, indicating myriad pathways to both success and failure in strategic AI plan development and national AI readiness. We also find the relationship between national culture and national AI readiness stronger than that with strategic AI plans. We attribute this to national AI readiness being a measure of a known “as-is” state compared to strategic AI plans being an expression of an aspirational “to-be” state, a difference accentuated by the disruptive novelty of AI as technology and hence the immaturity of the AI field. We expect that, as the field matures and subsequent iterations of policy are developed, the national culture's relationship with strategic AI plans will strengthen as countries align those plans with their circumstances. Equifinality suggests that each country can find its own path, and while national culture offers valuable insights today, future research should explore how evolving cultural, institutional, and policy contexts shape the adaptation and refinement of strategic AI plans over time.

人工智能（AI）应用在公共部门的成熟度和规模都有所增加，导致人们呼吁调查人工智能对公共政策制定和结果的影响。本研究调查了Hofstede文化维度与人工智能战略计划制定和国家人工智能准备相关结果之间复杂的相互作用。利用定性比较分析（QCA），我们检查了来自33个国家的数据，以辨别这种丰富的相互作用中的模式和配置。我们的研究结果强调了串联考虑多个文化维度的重要性，揭示了一种联结关系，在这种关系中，没有单一的文化因素是独立运作的，而是应该被视为一个有凝聚力的维度组合。均等性普遍存在，表明人工智能战略计划制定和国家人工智能准备的成功和失败有无数种途径。我们还发现，与人工智能战略计划相比，国家文化与国家人工智能准备程度之间的关系更强。我们将此归因于国家人工智能准备程度是一种已知的“现状”状态的衡量标准，而人工智能战略计划是一种有抱负的“未来”状态的表达，人工智能作为技术的颠覆性新颖性和人工智能领域的不成熟加剧了这种差异。我们预计，随着该领域的成熟和随后的政策迭代的发展，国家文化与战略人工智能计划的关系将随着各国将这些计划与本国情况相结合而加强。均等性表明，每个国家都可以找到自己的道路，虽然民族文化在今天提供了有价值的见解，但未来的研究应该探索，随着时间的推移，不断变化的文化、制度和政策背景如何影响人工智能战略计划的适应和完善。

{"title":"Unraveling the Nexus between National Culture and AI plan development and AI readiness: Insights from a configurational analysis","authors":"James S. Denford , Gregory S. Dawson , Kevin C. Desouza","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102078","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102078","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Artificial intelligence (AI) applications have increased in maturity and scale across the public sector, leading for calls to investigate AI's impact on public policy development and outcomes. This study investigates the intricate interplay between Hofstede's cultural dimensions and outcomes related to strategic AI plan development and national AI readiness. Utilizing qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), we examine data from 33 nations to discern patterns and configurations within this rich interplay. Our findings underscore the significance of considering multiple cultural dimensions in tandem, revealing a conjunctional relationship where no single cultural factor operates independently but rather should be viewed as a cohesive portfolio of dimensions. Equifinality is prevalent, indicating myriad pathways to both success and failure in strategic AI plan development and national AI readiness. We also find the relationship between national culture and national AI readiness stronger than that with strategic AI plans. We attribute this to national AI readiness being a measure of a known “as-is” state compared to strategic AI plans being an expression of an aspirational “to-be” state, a difference accentuated by the disruptive novelty of AI as technology and hence the immaturity of the AI field. We expect that, as the field matures and subsequent iterations of policy are developed, the national culture's relationship with strategic AI plans will strengthen as countries align those plans with their circumstances. Equifinality suggests that each country can find its own path, and while national culture offers valuable insights today, future research should explore how evolving cultural, institutional, and policy contexts shape the adaptation and refinement of strategic AI plans over time.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 4","pages":"Article 102078"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145158725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Artificial Intelligence in deliberation: The AI penalty and the emergence of a new deliberative divide 审议中的人工智能：人工智能的惩罚和新的审议鸿沟的出现

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-09-24 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102079

Andreas Jungherr , Adrian Rauchfleisch

Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) promise help for democratic deliberation, such as processing information, moderating discussion, and fact-checking. But public views of AI's role remain underexplored. Given widespread skepticism, integrating AI into deliberative formats may lower trust and willingness to participate. We report a preregistered within-subjects survey experiment with a representative German sample (n = 1850) testing how information about AI-facilitated deliberation affects willingness to participate and expected quality. Respondents were randomly assigned to descriptions of identical deliberative tasks facilitated by either AI or humans, enabling causal identification of information effects. Results show a clear AI penalty: participants were less willing to engage in AI-facilitated deliberation and anticipated lower deliberative quality than for human-facilitated formats. The penalty shrank among respondents who perceived greater societal benefits of AI or tended to anthropomorphize it, but grew with higher assessments of AI risk. These findings indicate that AI-facilitated deliberation currently faces substantial public skepticism and may create a new “deliberative divide.” Unlike traditional participation gaps linked to education or demographics, this divide reflects attitudes toward AI. Efforts to realize AI's affordances should directly address these perceptions to offset the penalty and avoid discouraging participation or exacerbating participatory inequalities.

人工智能（AI）的进步有望帮助民主审议，如处理信息、主持讨论和事实核查。但公众对人工智能角色的看法仍未得到充分探讨。鉴于普遍存在的怀疑，将人工智能整合到审议形式中可能会降低信任和参与意愿。我们报告了一项预先注册的受试者内调查实验，其中有代表性的德国样本（n = 1850）测试了关于人工智能促进的审议的信息如何影响参与意愿和预期质量。受访者被随机分配到由人工智能或人类促成的相同审议任务的描述中，从而能够对信息效果进行因果识别。结果显示了一个明显的人工智能惩罚：参与者不太愿意参与人工智能促进的审议，并且预期审议质量低于人工促进的格式。在那些认为人工智能有更大的社会效益或倾向于将其拟人化的受访者中，惩罚减少了，但随着对人工智能风险的更高评估而增加。这些发现表明，人工智能促进的审议目前面临着公众的大量怀疑，并可能造成新的“审议鸿沟”。与传统的与教育或人口统计学相关的参与率差距不同，这种差距反映了人们对人工智能的态度。实现人工智能的能力的努力应该直接解决这些看法，以抵消惩罚，避免阻碍参与或加剧参与不平等。

{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in deliberation: The AI penalty and the emergence of a new deliberative divide","authors":"Andreas Jungherr , Adrian Rauchfleisch","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102079","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102079","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) promise help for democratic deliberation, such as processing information, moderating discussion, and fact-checking. But public views of AI's role remain underexplored. Given widespread skepticism, integrating AI into deliberative formats may lower trust and willingness to participate. We report a preregistered within-subjects survey experiment with a representative German sample (<em>n</em> = 1850) testing how information about AI-facilitated deliberation affects willingness to participate and expected quality. Respondents were randomly assigned to descriptions of identical deliberative tasks facilitated by either AI or humans, enabling causal identification of information effects. Results show a clear AI penalty: participants were less willing to engage in AI-facilitated deliberation and anticipated lower deliberative quality than for human-facilitated formats. The penalty shrank among respondents who perceived greater societal benefits of AI or tended to anthropomorphize it, but grew with higher assessments of AI risk. These findings indicate that AI-facilitated deliberation currently faces substantial public skepticism and may create a new “deliberative divide.” Unlike traditional participation gaps linked to education or demographics, this divide reflects attitudes toward AI. Efforts to realize AI's affordances should directly address these perceptions to offset the penalty and avoid discouraging participation or exacerbating participatory inequalities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 4","pages":"Article 102079"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145158724","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

State versus Technology: What drives trust in and usage of internet voting, institutional or technological trust? 国家与技术：是什么推动了对互联网投票的信任和使用，是机构的信任还是技术的信任？

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-09-05 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102068

Bogdan Romanov , David Duenas Cid , Peeter Leets

This study examines the combined influence of technological and institutional trust on citizens’ perceptions of and engagement with Internet voting, addressing gaps in the literature on digital governance and trust. While prior research often treats these trust dimensions separately, this article explores their interplay within the context of Estonia, which has utilized Internet voting for two decades. By constructing composite indices for technological and institutional trust through factor analysis, the study offers a novel methodological approach to operationalizing trust in digital governance (within the article, digital governance and e-governance are used interchangeably) research in general and Internet voting in particular, based on post-electoral survey data.

Applying linear and logistic regression analyses, the study explicitly examines how these trust dimensions affect citizens’ trust in Internet voting systems and their actual use of such technology. The findings reveal that institutional trust is significantly more influential than technological trust, consistently emerging as the primary driver for both trusting Internet voting and engaging in its usage. Technological trust, in contrast, demonstrates only marginal predictive strength, highlighting the greater importance citizens place on institutional legitimacy, transparency, and accountability. These results emphasize the compensatory nature of institutional trust, suggesting that robust institutional frameworks allow citizens to confidently engage with complex technological systems despite limited technical understanding. Consequently, this research enhances theoretical insights into trust dynamics within digital governance, particularly in contexts where political sensitivity and institutional credibility significantly impact technology adoption.

本研究考察了技术和制度信任对公民对互联网投票的看法和参与的综合影响，解决了数字治理和信任方面的文献空白。虽然先前的研究通常将这些信任维度分开对待，但本文在爱沙尼亚的背景下探讨了它们的相互作用，爱沙尼亚已经利用互联网投票二十年了。通过因子分析构建技术和制度信任的综合指数，本研究提供了一种基于选举后调查数据的数字治理（在本文中，数字治理和电子治理可互换使用）研究中的信任运作的新方法，特别是互联网投票研究。运用线性和逻辑回归分析，该研究明确考察了这些信任维度如何影响公民对互联网投票系统的信任以及他们对此类技术的实际使用。研究结果显示，制度信任比技术信任更有影响力，一直是信任互联网投票和参与互联网使用的主要驱动因素。相比之下，技术信任仅显示出微弱的预测力，凸显了公民对制度合法性、透明度和问责制的更大重视。这些结果强调了制度信任的补偿性，表明健全的制度框架使公民能够自信地参与复杂的技术系统，尽管技术理解有限。因此，本研究增强了对数字治理中信任动态的理论见解，特别是在政治敏感性和机构可信度显著影响技术采用的背景下。

{"title":"State versus Technology: What drives trust in and usage of internet voting, institutional or technological trust?","authors":"Bogdan Romanov , David Duenas Cid , Peeter Leets","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102068","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102068","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines the combined influence of technological and institutional trust on citizens’ perceptions of and engagement with Internet voting, addressing gaps in the literature on digital governance and trust. While prior research often treats these trust dimensions separately, this article explores their interplay within the context of Estonia, which has utilized Internet voting for two decades. By constructing composite indices for technological and institutional trust through factor analysis, the study offers a novel methodological approach to operationalizing trust in digital governance (within the article, digital governance and e-governance are used interchangeably) research in general and Internet voting in particular, based on post-electoral survey data.</div><div>Applying linear and logistic regression analyses, the study explicitly examines how these trust dimensions affect citizens’ trust in Internet voting systems and their actual use of such technology. The findings reveal that institutional trust is significantly more influential than technological trust, consistently emerging as the primary driver for both trusting Internet voting and engaging in its usage. Technological trust, in contrast, demonstrates only marginal predictive strength, highlighting the greater importance citizens place on institutional legitimacy, transparency, and accountability. These results emphasize the compensatory nature of institutional trust, suggesting that robust institutional frameworks allow citizens to confidently engage with complex technological systems despite limited technical understanding. Consequently, this research enhances theoretical insights into trust dynamics within digital governance, particularly in contexts where political sensitivity and institutional credibility significantly impact technology adoption.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 4","pages":"Article 102068"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144997730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The use and misuse of metaphors in e-government studies 电子政务研究中隐喻的使用与误用

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-09-02 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102067

Mete Yildiz , Dilek Dede

Metaphors explain relatively unknown, abstract, or complicated concepts by employing relatively better-known, concrete, and simple ones. Since e-government is a complex and multi-faceted phenomenon, many metaphors are used to understand and explain what e-government is and how it evolves. However, metaphors used in e-government studies and their functions have not been systematically examined in detail. Bridging this gap in the literature is necessary and important because metaphors serve specific communication functions between e-government experts and the general public, as well as among e-government scholars with diverse disciplinary backgrounds. This article examines the use of explicitly-used metaphors in e-government literature. To this end, we first identify different metaphors through a systematic review of the literature. Then, the reasons for, functions of, and benefits and risks associated with metaphor use in e-government studies are analyzed. The findings uncovered five types of metaphors (illumination, dimming, simplification, translation, and manipulation) in e-government studies. The findings reveal that metaphors can help scholars create a shared language among themselves and ease the communication of complex ideas to the general public. For practitioners, different metaphors can provide insights into e-government and help translate implicit knowledge into explicit. However, caution is necessary to avoid manipulative uses of metaphors that could lead to miscommunication and resource inefficiencies. Ultimately, the success of a metaphor hinges on its ability to effectively communicate concepts in various contexts, highlighting the importance of careful and context-sensitive usage in communication. The final section offers suggestions for further research, including examining the outcomes and impacts of metaphor use in various settings.

隐喻通过使用相对熟知的、具体的和简单的概念来解释相对陌生的、抽象的或复杂的概念。由于电子政务是一个复杂的、多方面的现象，人们使用了许多隐喻来理解和解释电子政务是什么以及它是如何发展的。然而，隐喻在电子政务研究中的应用及其功能尚未得到系统的详细考察。在文献中弥合这一差距是必要和重要的，因为隐喻在电子政务专家和公众之间以及具有不同学科背景的电子政务学者之间具有特定的沟通功能。本文考察了电子政务文献中显性隐喻的使用。为此，我们首先通过对文献的系统回顾来识别不同的隐喻。然后，分析了在电子政务研究中使用隐喻的原因、作用、收益和风险。研究结果揭示了电子政务研究中的五种隐喻类型（照明、暗化、简化、翻译和操纵）。研究结果表明，隐喻可以帮助学者们在他们之间创造一种共同的语言，并简化复杂思想与公众的交流。对于实践者来说，不同的隐喻可以提供对电子政务的见解，并有助于将隐性知识转化为显性知识。然而，必须谨慎避免使用可能导致误解和资源效率低下的隐喻。最终，隐喻的成功取决于它在不同语境中有效传达概念的能力，这突出了在交际中谨慎使用和上下文敏感的重要性。最后一节提出了进一步研究的建议，包括检查隐喻在不同环境下使用的结果和影响。

{"title":"The use and misuse of metaphors in e-government studies","authors":"Mete Yildiz , Dilek Dede","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102067","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102067","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Metaphors explain relatively unknown, abstract, or complicated concepts by employing relatively better-known, concrete, and simple ones. Since e-government is a complex and multi-faceted phenomenon, many metaphors are used to understand and explain what e-government is and how it evolves. However, metaphors used in e-government studies and their functions have not been systematically examined in detail. Bridging this gap in the literature is necessary and important because metaphors serve specific communication functions between e-government experts and the general public, as well as among e-government scholars with diverse disciplinary backgrounds. This article examines the use of explicitly-used metaphors in e-government literature. To this end, we first identify different metaphors through a systematic review of the literature. Then, the reasons for, functions of, and benefits and risks associated with metaphor use in e-government studies are analyzed. The findings uncovered five types of metaphors (illumination, dimming, simplification, translation, and manipulation) in e-government studies. The findings reveal that metaphors can help scholars create a shared language among themselves and ease the communication of complex ideas to the general public. For practitioners, different metaphors can provide insights into e-government and help translate implicit knowledge into explicit. However, caution is necessary to avoid manipulative uses of metaphors that could lead to miscommunication and resource inefficiencies. Ultimately, the success of a metaphor hinges on its ability to effectively communicate concepts in various contexts, highlighting the importance of careful and context-sensitive usage in communication. The final section offers suggestions for further research, including examining the outcomes and impacts of metaphor use in various settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 4","pages":"Article 102067"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144934153","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Bridging local and global: Convergence, divergence and dialogue in digital government research communities 弥合地方和全球：数字政府研究社区的融合、分歧和对话

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-08-23 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102065

Lei Zheng, Hong Zhang

Digital government research lies at the intersection of global technological trends and local institutional contexts. This study analyzes 3521 articles from a leading Chinese academic journal and 1428 studies from a top international journal—all addressing digital government—to explore thematic convergences and divergences between domestic and international research, using China as a case. The findings demonstrate that while the Chinese domestic and the international research communities follow similar technological trajectories, they develop distinct research priorities shaped by their respective contexts. Through further examining 200 highly cited publications (2004–2023) - including both Chinese-language works from CNKI and English-language articles from Web of Science, all focusing on China and with Chinese co-authorship, the study uncovers how boundary-spanning researchers employ distinct citation patterns and methodological approaches when navigating different academic communities. These scholars serve as critical bridges facilitating cross-community dialogue and knowledge exchange. The paper concludes with specific recommendations for fostering deeper collaboration between domestic and international digital government research communities.

数字政府研究处于全球技术趋势和地方制度背景的交叉点。本研究以中国为例，分析了3521篇来自中国领先学术期刊的文章和1428篇来自国际顶级期刊的研究，这些研究都是关于数字政府的，以探讨国内外研究的主题趋同与分歧。研究结果表明，尽管中国国内和国际研究界遵循相似的技术轨迹，但他们根据各自的背景制定了不同的研究重点。通过进一步研究2004-2023年200篇高被引论文（包括CNKI的中文论文和Web of Science的英文论文），该研究揭示了跨界研究人员在不同学术群体中如何使用不同的引用模式和方法方法。这些学者是促进跨社区对话和知识交流的重要桥梁。论文最后提出了促进国内和国际数字政府研究团体之间更深层次合作的具体建议。

{"title":"Bridging local and global: Convergence, divergence and dialogue in digital government research communities","authors":"Lei Zheng, Hong Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102065","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102065","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital government research lies at the intersection of global technological trends and local institutional contexts. This study analyzes 3521 articles from a leading Chinese academic journal and 1428 studies from a top international journal—all addressing digital government—to explore thematic convergences and divergences between domestic and international research, using China as a case. The findings demonstrate that while the Chinese domestic and the international research communities follow similar technological trajectories, they develop distinct research priorities shaped by their respective contexts. Through further examining 200 highly cited publications (2004–2023) - including both Chinese-language works from CNKI and English-language articles from Web of Science, all focusing on China and with Chinese co-authorship, the study uncovers how boundary-spanning researchers employ distinct citation patterns and methodological approaches when navigating different academic communities. These scholars serve as critical bridges facilitating cross-community dialogue and knowledge exchange. The paper concludes with specific recommendations for fostering deeper collaboration between domestic and international digital government research communities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 3","pages":"Article 102065"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144890102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The evolution of theoretical contributions in digital government research: Insights from GIQ 数字政府研究中理论贡献的演变：来自GIQ的见解

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-08-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102066

Peter André Busch , Marius Rohde Johannessen , Samuli Pekkola

Digital government researchers have debated theoretical progress in the domain. With a surge in publications over the past decade, examining its theoretical progress is timely. This reflection article offers a case analysis of theoretical contributions in digital government research through a literature review of 279 articles published in Government Information Quarterly (GIQ), the domain's leading journal, in the period 2000–2024. Our findings reveal: (1) a preponderance of theoretical extensions, often drawing on well-established theories from other domains but lacking a digital government-specific focus, and (2) “unfinished” theories, often aligned with emerging technologies and trends. While our analysis focuses solely on GIQ, it indicates a need for further development and refinement of the domain's theories, and explicit stances of using and further developing “borrowed” theories from other domains.

数字政府研究人员对该领域的理论进展进行了争论。随着过去十年出版物的激增，研究其理论进展是及时的。本文通过对2000-2024年期间发表在政府信息季刊（GIQ）上的279篇文章的文献综述，对数字政府研究的理论贡献进行了案例分析。我们的研究结果显示：(1)理论延伸占主导地位，通常借鉴其他领域的成熟理论，但缺乏数字政府的具体重点；(2)“未完成”的理论，通常与新兴技术和趋势保持一致。虽然我们的分析只关注于GIQ，但它表明需要进一步发展和完善该领域的理论，以及使用和进一步发展从其他领域“借鉴”的理论的明确立场。

引用次数: 0

Extrusive effects of digital government: Reframing the citizen–state relationship 数字政府的挤出效应：重塑公民与国家的关系

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-08-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102064

Eric C. Mota , Peter G. Klein

Digital government systems are widely adopted to improve public sector performance, yet concerns persist about their potential to undermine privacy and expand governmental control. This study challenges that prevailing narrative by introducing the concept of extrusive effects—instances where digital government implementations actively enhance citizen autonomy and reduce governmental discretion. Drawing on a unique dataset of 205 implementations across 70 countries from 1999 to 2022, we use text mining and evidence-based coding to identify 674 empirically verified effects. Our analysis reveals that extrusive effects are not isolated anomalies but constitute a systematic phenomena shaped by emerging technologies such as distributed ledgers, decentralized computing, and cryptographic protocols. Building on this discovery, we expand existing classifications of digital government effects to better reflect the evolving relationship between citizens and public administrations—capturing both intrusive effects that expand governmental discretion and extrusive effects that constrain it. These findings provide a more comprehensive foundation for evaluating digital government’s welfare implications and offer new tools for aligning technological design with democratic governance.

数字政府系统被广泛用于改善公共部门的绩效，但人们仍然担心它们可能会破坏隐私并扩大政府控制。本研究通过引入挤出效应的概念来挑战主流叙事，即数字政府实施积极增强公民自主性和减少政府自由裁量权的实例。利用1999年至2022年70个国家205个实施方案的独特数据集，我们使用文本挖掘和循证编码来确定674个经经验验证的效果。我们的分析表明，挤出效应不是孤立的异常现象，而是由分布式账本、去中心化计算和加密协议等新兴技术形成的系统现象。在这一发现的基础上，我们扩展了现有的数字政府效应分类，以更好地反映公民与公共行政之间不断演变的关系——捕捉扩大政府自由裁量权的侵入性效应和限制其自由裁量权的挤出性效应。这些发现为评估数字政府的福利影响提供了更全面的基础，并为将技术设计与民主治理相结合提供了新的工具。

{"title":"Extrusive effects of digital government: Reframing the citizen–state relationship","authors":"Eric C. Mota , Peter G. Klein","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102064","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102064","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital government systems are widely adopted to improve public sector performance, yet concerns persist about their potential to undermine privacy and expand governmental control. This study challenges that prevailing narrative by introducing the concept of <strong>extrusive effects</strong>—instances where digital government implementations actively enhance citizen autonomy and reduce governmental discretion. Drawing on a unique dataset of 205 implementations across 70 countries from 1999 to 2022, we use text mining and evidence-based coding to identify 674 empirically verified effects. Our analysis reveals that extrusive effects are not isolated anomalies but constitute a systematic phenomena shaped by emerging technologies such as distributed ledgers, decentralized computing, and cryptographic protocols. Building on this discovery, we expand existing classifications of digital government effects to better reflect the evolving relationship between citizens and public administrations—capturing both <em>intrusive</em> effects that expand governmental discretion and <em>extrusive</em> effects that constrain it. These findings provide a more comprehensive foundation for evaluating digital government’s welfare implications and offer new tools for aligning technological design with democratic governance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 3","pages":"Article 102064"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144860727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Data collaboration in digital government research: A literature review and research agenda 数字政府研究中的数据协作：文献综述和研究议程

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-08-14 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102063

Juliane Schmeling , Sami al Dakruni , Ines Mergel

Sovereign data infrastructures are a central building block of the European Data Strategy, yet little is known about how public administrations share and collaborate on both open and restricted data. This research addresses the gap by systematically analysing the existing literature on data collaboration within the field of digital government research. We thereby make a methodological contribution to digital government research through a rigorous literature review framework that includes Structural Topic Modelling to understand the different themes of the scientific discussion in the field of digital government. We propose an innovative data collaboration framework that includes the ecosystem, the organisational, and the individual levels, enhancing our understanding of the multidimensional nature of data collaboration. Our analysis reveals that while the emphasis is on innovation and participation, critical aspects like standardisation and data management have a declining topic prevalence, despite their importance in developing federated data ecosystems. This comprehensive analysis not only sheds light on the current landscape but also informs a structured research agenda in digital government, aiming to contribute to the advancement of the field.

主权数据基础设施是欧洲数据战略的核心组成部分，但人们对公共管理部门如何在开放和受限数据上共享和协作知之甚少。本研究通过系统分析数字政府研究领域内关于数据协作的现有文献来解决这一差距。因此，我们通过严格的文献综述框架（包括结构主题建模）为数字政府研究做出了方法论贡献，以理解数字政府领域科学讨论的不同主题。我们提出了一个创新的数据协作框架，包括生态系统、组织和个人层面，增强我们对数据协作的多维本质的理解。我们的分析显示，虽然重点是创新和参与，但标准化和数据管理等关键方面的主题流行率正在下降，尽管它们在开发联合数据生态系统中很重要。这一全面的分析不仅揭示了当前的形势，而且为数字政府的结构化研究议程提供了信息，旨在为该领域的进步做出贡献。

{"title":"Data collaboration in digital government research: A literature review and research agenda","authors":"Juliane Schmeling , Sami al Dakruni , Ines Mergel","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102063","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102063","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Sovereign data infrastructures are a central building block of the European Data Strategy, yet little is known about how public administrations share and collaborate on both open and restricted data. This research addresses the gap by systematically analysing the existing literature on data collaboration within the field of digital government research. We thereby make a methodological contribution to digital government research through a rigorous literature review framework that includes Structural Topic Modelling to understand the different themes of the scientific discussion in the field of digital government. We propose an innovative data collaboration framework that includes the ecosystem, the organisational, and the individual levels, enhancing our understanding of the multidimensional nature of data collaboration. Our analysis reveals that while the emphasis is on innovation and participation, critical aspects like standardisation and data management have a declining topic prevalence, despite their importance in developing federated data ecosystems. This comprehensive analysis not only sheds light on the current landscape but also informs a structured research agenda in digital government, aiming to contribute to the advancement of the field.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 3","pages":"Article 102063"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144829386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Theorizing the evolution of public data ecosystems: An empirically grounded multi-generational model and future research agenda 公共数据生态系统演化的理论化：基于经验的多代模型和未来研究议程

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-08-13 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102062

Anastasija Nikiforova , Martin Lnenicka , Mariusz Luterek , Petar Milic , Manuel Pedro Bolívar Rodríguez

Public Data Ecosystems (PDEs) are increasingly viewed as dynamic socio-technical systems shaped by evolving interactions among actors, infrastructures, data types, and governance mechanisms. Yet, most existing research remains static or domain-specific, offering limited insight into the temporal and co-evolutionary dynamics of PDEs. To address this gap, this study adopts a theory-building approach to examine how PDEs evolve over time and to define a forward-looking research agenda. Drawing on empirical insights from five European countries, we investigate how key meta-characteristics and attributes of PDEs manifest, shift, and co-evolve in practice. Leveraging a recent multi-generational model as an analytical lens, we assess its alignment with real-world trajectories, identify overlooked and emerging features, and revise its structure accordingly. In doing so, we theorize PDE evolution as a multi-generational process shaped by institutional, technological, and contextual dynamics. This results in a refined model that better captures the complexity and diversity of PDE development, particularly considering emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI, and large language models (LLMs) shaping the forward-looking PDE generation. Building on these insights, we propose a future research agenda comprising 17 directions organized around revised meta-characteristics. This agenda supports the development of sustainable, resilient, and intelligent PDEs. The study contributes to the theorization of PDEs by offering an empirically grounded, temporally aware, and actionable roadmap for future research and policy design.

公共数据生态系统（PDEs）越来越被视为动态的社会技术系统，由行动者、基础设施、数据类型和治理机制之间不断发展的相互作用形成。然而，大多数现有的研究仍然是静态的或特定于领域的，对pde的时间和共同进化动态提供了有限的见解。为了解决这一差距，本研究采用理论构建方法来研究pde如何随着时间的推移而演变，并确定前瞻性的研究议程。借鉴五个欧洲国家的经验见解，我们研究了pde的关键元特征和属性在实践中如何显现、转变和共同演化。利用最近的多代模型作为分析镜头，我们评估其与现实世界轨迹的一致性，识别被忽视和新出现的特征，并相应地修改其结构。在此过程中，我们将PDE进化理论化为一个由制度、技术和环境动态形成的多代过程。这导致了一个精细的模型，更好地捕捉了PDE开发的复杂性和多样性，特别是考虑到新兴技术，如人工智能（AI）、生成式AI和大型语言模型（llm）塑造了前瞻性的PDE生成。基于这些见解，我们提出了一个未来的研究议程，包括围绕修订后的元特征组织的17个方向。该议程支持可持续、有弹性和智能的pde发展。该研究为未来的研究和政策设计提供了一个基于经验、具有时效性和可操作性的路线图，从而有助于将pde理论化。

{"title":"Theorizing the evolution of public data ecosystems: An empirically grounded multi-generational model and future research agenda","authors":"Anastasija Nikiforova , Martin Lnenicka , Mariusz Luterek , Petar Milic , Manuel Pedro Bolívar Rodríguez","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102062","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102062","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Public Data Ecosystems (PDEs) are increasingly viewed as dynamic socio-technical systems shaped by evolving interactions among actors, infrastructures, data types, and governance mechanisms. Yet, most existing research remains static or domain-specific, offering limited insight into the temporal and co-evolutionary dynamics of PDEs. To address this gap, this study adopts a theory-building approach to examine how PDEs evolve over time and to define a forward-looking research agenda. Drawing on empirical insights from five European countries, we investigate how key meta-characteristics and attributes of PDEs manifest, shift, and co-evolve in practice. Leveraging a recent multi-generational model as an analytical lens, we assess its alignment with real-world trajectories, identify overlooked and emerging features, and revise its structure accordingly. In doing so, we theorize PDE evolution as a multi-generational process shaped by institutional, technological, and contextual dynamics. This results in a refined model that better captures the complexity and diversity of PDE development, particularly considering emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI, and large language models (LLMs) shaping the forward-looking PDE generation. Building on these insights, we propose a future research agenda comprising 17 directions organized around revised meta-characteristics. This agenda supports the development of sustainable, resilient, and intelligent PDEs. The study contributes to the theorization of PDEs by offering an empirically grounded, temporally aware, and actionable roadmap for future research and policy design.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 3","pages":"Article 102062"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144829385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Tensions in time-saving technologies: Adjusting work rhythms in the digitalized public sector frontline 省时技术的紧张关系：调整数字化公共部门前线的工作节奏

IF 1 1区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Government Information Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-07-31 DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2025.102058

Louise Jørring, Lise Justesen , Ursula Plesner

Digital technologies are increasingly being implemented in public sector organizations with the ambition to enhance efficiency by saving employees' time. Frontline workers, who are often described as lacking resources and working under constant time constraints, are continuously confronted with the introduction of new, supposedly time-saving technologies. However, the concept of time and how digital technologies impact frontline workers' use of time in practice are rarely examined explicitly in public administration research. This article foregrounds the concept of time, drawing on qualitative fieldwork in Denmark's public employment services to examine how frontline workers navigate time tensions introduced by supposedly time-saving technologies. The findings reveal that these technologies reinforce tight linear schedules, requiring frontline workers to balance both time delays and time gains. This dynamic necessitates flexible adjustments of work rhythms as employees speed up or slow down their tasks to adjust to the digitalized environment. To understand these temporal tensions—how they are created and handled—this article draws on insights from science and technology studies, applying the distinction between monochronic time—in which events are approached as unfolding sequentially with a focus on one event at a time—and polychronic time, in which events are unpredictable and may unfold simultaneously or in other non-linear ways. Based on our study, we argue for an explicit focus on temporality in public administration literature, offer a conceptual vocabulary to explore it further, and advocate for understanding how time-saving technologies unfold in everyday practice, while acknowledging the coexistence of monochronic and polychronic time orientations in organizations.

数字技术越来越多地应用于公共部门机构，目的是通过节省员工的时间来提高效率。一线工人经常被描述为缺乏资源和在持续的时间限制下工作，他们不断面临着新的、据称可以节省时间的技术的引入。然而，在公共行政研究中，时间的概念以及数字技术如何影响一线员工在实践中的时间利用很少得到明确的研究。本文强调了时间的概念，利用丹麦公共就业服务的定性实地调查，研究一线工人如何应对由所谓的节省时间的技术引入的时间紧张。研究结果表明，这些技术加强了紧凑的线性时间表，要求一线工人平衡时间延迟和时间增益。随着员工加快或放慢工作节奏以适应数字化环境，这种动态需要灵活调整工作节奏。为了理解这些时间紧张——它们是如何产生和处理的——本文借鉴了科学和技术研究的见解，应用了单时间时间和多时间时间之间的区别，单时间时间是指事件在同一时间集中于一个事件，按顺序展开，多时间时间是指事件是不可预测的，可能同时展开或以其他非线性方式展开。基于我们的研究，我们主张在公共管理文献中明确关注时间性，提供一个概念性词汇来进一步探索它，并倡导理解节省时间的技术如何在日常实践中展开，同时承认组织中单时性和多时性时间取向的共存。

{"title":"Tensions in time-saving technologies: Adjusting work rhythms in the digitalized public sector frontline","authors":"Louise Jørring, Lise Justesen , Ursula Plesner","doi":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102058","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.giq.2025.102058","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital technologies are increasingly being implemented in public sector organizations with the ambition to enhance efficiency by saving employees' time. Frontline workers, who are often described as lacking resources and working under constant time constraints, are continuously confronted with the introduction of new, supposedly time-saving technologies. However, the concept of time and how digital technologies impact frontline workers' use of time in practice are rarely examined explicitly in public administration research. This article foregrounds the concept of time, drawing on qualitative fieldwork in Denmark's public employment services to examine how frontline workers navigate time tensions introduced by supposedly time-saving technologies. The findings reveal that these technologies reinforce tight linear schedules, requiring frontline workers to balance both time delays and time gains. This dynamic necessitates flexible adjustments of work rhythms as employees speed up or slow down their tasks to adjust to the digitalized environment. To understand these temporal tensions—how they are created and handled—this article draws on insights from science and technology studies, applying the distinction between <em>monochronic time</em>—in which events are approached as unfolding sequentially with a focus on one event at a time—and <em>polychronic time</em>, in which events are unpredictable and may unfold simultaneously or in other non-linear ways. Based on our study, we argue for an explicit focus on temporality in public administration literature, offer a conceptual vocabulary to explore it further, and advocate for understanding how time-saving technologies unfold in everyday practice, while acknowledging the coexistence of monochronic and polychronic time orientations in organizations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48258,"journal":{"name":"Government Information Quarterly","volume":"42 3","pages":"Article 102058"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144748718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0