An Overarching Conceptual Framework for ICT-enabled Responsive Governance | Information Systems Frontiers Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

An Overarching Conceptual Framework for ICT-enabled Responsive Governance

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the recent years, responsiveness has gained importance as it is a critical element of public governance processes and acts as a driving factor for supporting the achievement of governance objectives, especially in the implementation phases. In this study, we identify the knowledge gaps in the realm of responsive governance based on a systematic literature review. Based on our analysis, we propose a conceptual framework of major building blocks (input, process and outcomes) for the development and implementation of responsive governance at the local, regional and national levels of administrative hierarchy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

We did not generate any datasets, because our work follows a systematic literature review. All reviewed and analysed articles are included in the reference list.

Notes

  1. https://www.fixmystreet.com/

  2. https://seeclickfix.com/

  3. https://latinno.net/en/case/2033/

  4. https://www.ushahidi.com/

  5. Responsive and Accountable Governance. World Public Sector Report 2015. UN. https://doi.org/10.18356/eb2395c8-en

References

  • Agarwal, B. (2001). Participatory exclusions, community forestry, and gender: An analysis for South Asia and a conceptual framework. World Development, 29(10), 1623–1648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, R., Mittal, N., Patterson, E., & Giorcelli, M. (2021). Evolution of the Indian LPG industry: Exploring conditions for public sector business model innovation. Research Policy, 50(4), 104196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, R., & Selen, W. (2009). Dynamic capability building in service value networks for achieving service innovation. Decision Sciences, 40(3), 431–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. The American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 130–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Badampudi, D., Wohlin, C., & Petersen, K. (2015). Experiences from using snowballing and database searches in systematic literature studies. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (pp. 1–10).

  • Batory, A., & Svensson, S. (2019). The use and abuse of participatory governance by populist governments. Policy & Politics, 47(2), 227–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, V. (2004). Virtual policy communities and responsive governance: Redesigning on-line debates. Information Polity, 9(3, 4), 193–203.

  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bommert, B. (2010). Collaborative innovation in the public sector. International Public Management Review, 11(1), 15–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2015). Will humans go the way of horses. Foreign Affairs, 94, 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The design and implementation of Cross-Sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66, 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buntaine, M. T., Nielson, D. L., & Skaggs, J. T. (2017). Escaping the Valley of Disengagement: Two Field Experiments on Motivating Citizens to Monitor Public Goods. AidData Working Paper 41.

  • Cabral, S., Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Potoski, M. (2019). Value creation and value appropriation in public and nonprofit organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 40(4), 465–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. D. (1971). Participatory technology. Science, 171(3972), 647–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castelnovo, W., & Sorrentino, M. (2018). The digital government imperative: A context-aware perspective. Public Management Review, 20(5), 709–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Wensley, A. K., & Polo Martín, M. D. L. Á. (2012). E-government and citizen’s engagement with local affairs through e-websites: The case of Spanish municipalities. International Journal of Information Management, 32(5), 469–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaffin, B. C., Gosnell, H., & Cosens, B. A. (2014). A decade of adaptive governance scholarship: Synthesis and future directions. Ecology and Society, 19(3), 56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Q., Min, C., Zhang, W., Ma, X., & Evans, R. (2021). Factors driving citizen engagement with government TikTok accounts during the COVID-19 pandemic: Model development and analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(2), e21463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H., & Rosenbloom, R. S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation’s technology spin-off companies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(3), 529–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choudrie, J., Zamani, E., & Al-Bulushi, A. (2017). Are online social networks, leading to a ‘better world in the Omani public sector? A qualitative study. In Information and Communication Technologies for Development: 14th IFIP WG 9.4 International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, ICT4D 2017, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, May 22–24, 2017, Proceedings 14 (pp. 669–680). Springer International Publishing.

  • Collingridge, D. (1980). The social control of technology. Frances Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, B. C., ‘t Hart, P., & Torfing, J. (2017). Public value creation through collaborative innovation. Public Management Review, 19(5), 655–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Guimarães, J. C. F., Severo, E. A., Júnior, L. A. F., Da Costa, W. P. L. B., & Salmoria, F. T. (2020). Governance and quality of life in smart cities: Towards sustainable development goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 119926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, M. D., Neulen, S., & Jansma, S. R. (2019). Citizens’ intentions to participate in governmental co-creation initiatives: Comparing three co-creation configurations. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 490–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. (2016). Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration, 94(1), 146–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deneulin, S. (2014). Wellbeing, justice and development ethics. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Devi, R. (2021). Role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Good Governance Process. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(10), 6387–6390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dufner, D., Holley, L. M., & Reed, B. J. (2003). Strategic information systems planning and US county government. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 11(1), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eggers, W. D., & Singh, S. K. (2009). The Public Innovator’s Playbook: Nurturing Bold Ideas in Government. Deloitte Research. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Public-Sector/dttl-ps-public-innovators-playbook-08082013.pdf, last accessed 19/06/2023

  • Fischer, F. (2012). Participatory governance: From theory to practice. In D. Levi-Faur (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Governance (pp. 457–471). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishenden, J., & Thompson, M. (2013). Digital government, open architecture, and innovation: Why public sector IT will never be the same again. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4), 977–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 253–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, N. J., & Ward, K. J. (2008). What governs governance, and how does it evolve? The sociology of governance-in-action. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(3), 519–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frediani, A. A. (2010). Sen’s Capability Approach as a framework to the practice of development. Development in Practice, 20(2), 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelb, A., Mittal, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2019). Towards Real-Time Governance: Using Digital Feedback to Improve Service, Voice, and Accountability. Center for Global Development.

  • Gil-Garcia, J. R., Dawes, S. S., & Pardo, T. A. (2018). Digital government and public management research: Finding the crossroads. Public Management Review, 20(5), 633–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, R., Agarwal, R., Roos, G., & Scott-Kemmis, D. (2013). Australian Public Sector Innovation-shaping the Future Through Co-creation. Report for the Institute of Public Administration Australia.

  • Greenhalgh, T., Jackson, C., Shaw, S., & Janamian, T. (2016). Achieving research impact through co-creation in community-based health services: Literature review and case study. The Milbank Quarterly, 94(2), 392–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griewald, Y., & Rauschmayer, F. (2014). Exploring an environmental conflict from a capability perspective. Ecological Economics, 100, 30–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guenduez, A. A., Mettler, T., & Schedler, K. (2020). Citizen participation in smart government: A conceptual model and two IoT case studies. Beyond smart and connected governments: Sensors and the internet of things in the public sector (189-209).

  • Guo, F., Zou, B., Zhang, X., Bo, Q., & Li, K. (2020). Financial slack and firm performance of SMMEs in China: Moderating effects of government subsidies and market-supporting institutions. International Journal of Production Economics, 223, 107530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money and Management, 25(1), 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J. (2006). Innovation and its contribution to improvement: A review for policymakers, policy advisers, managers and researchers. Department for Communities and Local Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helbig, N., Gil-García, J. R., & Ferro, E. (2009). Understanding the complexity of electronic government: Implications from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, K., & Roberts, T. (2018). Leaving No One Behind in a Digital World. Emerging Issues Report. Institute of Development Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., & Peters, G. (2004). The middle aging of new public management: Into the age of paradox? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(3), 267–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houston, D. J., Aitalieva, N. R., Morelock, A. L., & Shults, C. A. (2016). Citizen trust in civil servants: A cross-national examination. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(14), 1203–1214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyle, M. A. (2016). Conceptual reflection on responsive environmental governance. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(8), 610–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M., & Estevez, E. (2013). Lean government and platform-based governance—Doing more with less. Government Information Quarterly, 30, S1–S8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M., & Van Der Voort, H. (2016). Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. L. (1999). The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for resource management agencies. Conservation Ecology, 3(2). http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art8

  • Ju, J., Liu, L., & Feng, Y. (2019). Design of an O2O citizen participation ecosystem for sustainable governance. Information Systems Frontiers, 21, 605–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasimati, A. E., Kourouthanassis, P., Zamani, E. D., & Giaglis, G. M. (2013). "The Wireless Readiness Innovation Index: Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Public Sector in New Service Introduction". In the Proceedings of 2013 International Conference on Mobile Business. 22. http://aisel.aisnet.org/icmb2013/22

  • Kaur, K., & Gupta, S. (2022). Towards dissemination, detection and combating misinformation on social media: a literature review. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, (ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-02-2022-0066

  • King, S., & Cotterill, S. (2007). Transformational government? The role of information technology in delivering citizen-centric local public services. Local Government Studies, 33(3), 333–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, P. G., Mahoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Pitelis, C. N. (2013). Capabilities and strategic entrepreneurship in public organizations. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(1), 70–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klievink, B., Bharosa, N., & Tan, Y. H. (2016). The collaborative realization of public values and business goals: Governance and infrastructure of public–private information platforms. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 67–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., Edelenbos, J., & Steijn, B. (2010). Trust in governance networks: Its impacts on outcomes. Administration & Society, 42(2), 193–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koliba, C., Meek, J. W., & Zia, A. (2017). Governance networks in public administration and public policy. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. J., Lee, M., Lee, H., & Cruz, R. A. (2021). Mining service quality feedback from social media: A computational analytics method. Government Information Quarterly, 38(2), 101571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee-Geiller, S., & Lee, T. D. (2019). Using government websites to enhance democratic E-governance: A conceptual model for evaluation. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 208–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberatore, A., & Funtowicz, S. (2003). ‘Democratising’ expertise, ‘expertising’ democracy: What does this mean, and why bother? Science and Public Policy, 30(3), 146–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lips, S., Tsap, V., Bharosa, N., et al. (2023). Management of national eID infrastructure as a state-critical asset and public-private partnership: Learning from the case of Estonia. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10363-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madon, S., Ranjini, C. R., & Anantha Krishnan, R. K. (2022). Aadhaar and social assistance programming: Local bureaucracies as critical intermediary. Information Technology for Development, 28(4), 705–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maldonado, E. A., Maitland, C. F., & Tapia, A. H. (2010). Collaborative systems development in disaster relief: The impact of multi-level governance. Information Systems Frontiers, 12, 9–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manza, J., & Cook, F. L. (2002). A democratic polity? Three views of policy responsiveness to public opinion in the United States. American Politics Research, 30(6), 630–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martins, H. F., Mota, J. P., & Marini, C. (2019). Business models in the public domain: The public governance canvas. Cadernos EBAPE. BR, 17, 49–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massa, L., Tucci, C. L., & Afuah, A. (2017). A critical assessment of business model research. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 73–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A. (2007). Why don’t they listen to us? Reasserting the role of ICT in Public Administration. Information Polity, 12(4), 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, A. J., Curtin, D., & Hillebrandt, M. (2012). Open government: Connecting vision and voice. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 10–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittal, N., Agarwal, R., & Selen, W. (2018). Value creation and the impact of policy interventions: Indian LPG supply chain case study. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 29(1), 64–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukhopadhyay, S., Bouwman, H., & Jaiswal, M. P. (2019). An open platform centric approach for scalable government service delivery to the poor: The Aadhaar case. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 437–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nam, T. (2012). Suggesting frameworks of citizen-sourcing via Government 2.0. Government Information Quarterly, 29(1), 12–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Namisango, F., Kang, K., & Beydoun, G. (2022). How the structures provided by social media enable collaborative outcomes: A study of service co-creation in nonprofits. Information Systems Frontiers, 24, 517–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10090-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, M., & V. (2016). The concept of responsiveness in the governance of research and innovation. Science and Public Policy, 43(6), 831–839. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scv078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielson, M. V. (2016). The concept of responsiveness in the governance of research and innovation. Science and Public Policy, 43(6), 831–839.

    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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2016). Digital government strategies for transforming public services in the welfare areas, OECD comparative study. https://www.oecd.org/gov/digital-government/Digital-Government-Strategies-Welfare-Service.pdf. (Accessed on 12/06/22).

  • O'Flynn, J. (2005). A Public Value Framework for Contractual Governance. PUBLIC, 7, ESADEs Institute of Public Management, Barcelona.

  • Page, S. B., Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., Seo, D., & Stone, M. M. (2021). Ambidexterity in cross-sector collaborations involving public organizations. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(6), 1161–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panagiotopoulos, P., Klievink, B., & Cordella, A. (2019). Public value creation in digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, I. O., Mikalef, P., Giannakos, M. N., Krogstie, J., & Lekakos, G. (2018). Big data and business analytics ecosystems: Paving the way towards digital transformation and sustainable societies. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 16(3), 479–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-018-0377-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 307–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2006). From IT leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: The case of new product development. Information Systems Research, 17(3), 198–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellizzoni, L. (2004). Responsibility and environmental governance. Environmental Politics, 13(3), 541–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, G. V., Macadar, M. A., Luciano, E. M., & Testa, M. G. (2017). Delivering public value through open government data initiatives in a Smart City context. Information Systems Frontiers, 19, 213–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porcaro, K. (2022). Building responsive governance for learning networks. Learning Health Systems, 6(2), e10288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porumbescu, G. A. (2016). Linking public sector social media and e-government website use to trust in government. Government Information Quarterly, 33(2), 291–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prat, A., & Strömberg, D. (2013). The political economy of mass media. Advances in Economics and Econometrics, 2, 135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29, S72–S81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santhanam, R., & Hartono, E. (2003). Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 125–153. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sareen, S., & Waagsaether, K. L. (2022). New municipalism and the governance of urban transitions to sustainability. Urban Studies, 00420980221114968 [Online First], pp.1–19, https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980221114968

  • Scholl, H. J., & Scholl, M. C. (2014). Smart governance: A roadmap for research and practice. In iConference 2014 Proceedings (pp. 163–176).

  • Scott, M., DeLone, W. H., & Golden, W. (2009). Understanding net benefits: a citizen-based perspective on eGovernment success. ICIS 2009 proceedings, 86.

  • Scott-Kemmis, D. (2018). Myths, crises and complacency: Innovation policy in the United States and Australia. United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney.

  • Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities. OUP Catalogue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sher, P. J., & Lee, V. C. (2004). Information technology as a facilitator for enhancing dynamic capabilities through knowledge management. Information & Management, 41(8), 933–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soe, R. M., & Drechsler, W. (2018). Agile local governments: Experimentation before implementation. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 323–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2011). Enhancing collaborative innovation in the public sector. Administration & Society, 43(8), 842–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørum, H., Medaglia, R., & Andersen, K. N. (2009). Assessment of website quality: Scandinavian web awards right on track? In International Conference on Electronic Government (pp. 198–209). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

  • Speer, J. (2012). Participatory governance reform: A good strategy for increasing government responsiveness and improving public services? World Development, 40(12), 2379–2398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, R., & Deneulin, S. (2009). Human development policy analysis. In An Introduction to the Human Development and Capability Approach (pp. 297–299). Routledge.

  • Stamati, T., Papadopoulos, T., & Anagnostopoulos, D. (2015). Social media for openness and accountability in the public sector: Cases in the Greek context. Government Information Quarterly, 32(1), 12–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, A. (2008). “Opening up” and “closing down” power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33(2), 262–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svahn, F., Mathiassen, L., & Lindgren, R. (2017). Embracing digital innovation in incumbent firms: How Volvo cars managed competing concerns. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taeihagh, A. (2021). Governance of artificial intelligence. Policy and Society, 40(2), 137–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, C. (2007). The challenges of building participatory local government. Participatory Governance, 81–95.

  • Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 172–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2018). Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world. Research Policy, 47(8), 1367–1387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todisco, L., Tomo, A., Canonico, P., Mangia, G., & Sarnacchiaro, P. (2021). Exploring social media usage in the public sector: Public employees’ perceptions of ICT’s usefulness in delivering value added. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 73, 100858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomo, A., De Nito, E., & Canonico, P. (2019). New perspectives on public governance: Challenging issues and emerging solutions. Journal of Development and Administrative Sciences, 35(1), 2–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonelli, A. O., de Souza Bermejo, P. H., Aparecida dos Santos, P., Zuppo, L., & Zambalde, A. L. (2017). IT governance in the public sector: A conceptual model. Information Systems Frontiers, 19, 593–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2019). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnhout, E., Van Bommel, S., & Aarts, N. (2010). How participation creates citizens: Participatory governance as performative practice. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 26.

  • Van Duivenboden, H., & Thaens, M. (2008). ICT-driven innovation and the culture of public administration: A contradiction in terms? Information Polity, 13(3–4), 213–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigoda, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 527–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. A. (2005). Democratizing Innovation. The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Von Holdt, K. (2010). Nationalism, bureaucracy and the developmental state: The South African case. South African Review of Sociology, 41(1), 4–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wade, M., & Hulland, J. (2004). The resource-based view and information systems research: Review, extension, and suggestions for future research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 107–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallmeier, F., Helmig, B., & Feeney, M. K. (2019). Knowledge construction in public administration: A discourse analysis of public value. Public Administration Review, 79(4), 488–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wan, S., Paris, C., & Georgakopoulos, D. (2015). Improving government services using social media feedback. In Surya Nepal, Cécile. Paris, & Dimitrios Georgakopoulos (Eds.), In Social Media for Government Services (pp. 221–246). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., Medaglia, R., & Jensen, T. B. (2021). When Ambiguity Rules: The emergence of adaptive governance from (in) congruent frames of knowledge sharing technology. Information Systems Frontiers, 23, 1573–1591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), 13–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weerakkody, V., Janssen, M., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2011). Transformational change and business process reengineering (BPR): Lessons from the British and Dutch public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 28(3), 320–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weill, P., & Woerner, S. L. (2013). Optimizing your digital business model. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54(3), 71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windrum, P., & Koch, P. M. (Eds.). (2008). Innovation in public sector services: entrepreneurship, creativity and management. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, L. Y. (2006). Resources, dynamic capabilities and performance in a dynamic environment: Perceptions in Taiwanese IT enterprises. Information & Management, 43(4), 447–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamani, E. D., & Vannini, S. (2022). Understanding Digital Poverty in South Yorkshire. Partnerships and Regional Engagement (PRE), South Yorkshire Office for Data Analytics. Available at: https://www.flipsnack.com/uos/digital-poverty-research-note.html. Last accessed 19/05/2023.

  • Zamani, E. D., Griva, A., & Conboy, K. (2022a). Using business analytics for SME business model transformation under pandemic time pressure. Information Systems Frontiers, 24(4), 1145–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamani, E. D., Smyth, C., Gupta, S., & Dennehy, D. (2022b). Artificial intelligence and big data analytics for supply chain resilience: A systematic literature review. Annals of Operations Research, 1–28 [Online First]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04983-y

  • Zerbian, T., & de Luis Romero, E. (2023). The role of cities in good governance for food security: lessons from Madrid’s urban food strategy. Territory, Politics, Governance, 11(4), 794–812.

  • Zurbriggen, C., & Lago, M. G. (2019). An experimental evaluation tool for the Public Innovation Lab of the Uruguayan government. Evidence & Policy, 15(3), 437–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Marketing Management Area, Indian Institute of Management Rohtak, Rohtak, India

    Amit Anand Tiwari

  2. Information Systems Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India

    Samrat Gupta

  3. Information School, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

    Efpraxia D. Zamani

  4. Indian Administrative Service Government of Tamil Nadu Information Technology, Chennai, India

    Neeraj Mittal

  5. Management Department, Business School, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Renu Agarwal

Authors
  1. Amit Anand Tiwari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samrat Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Efpraxia D. Zamani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Neeraj Mittal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Renu Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Efpraxia D. Zamani.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Figures 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8

Fig. 3
figure 3

Year of publication

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Type of study

Full size image
Fig. 5
figure 5

Type of data

Full size image
Fig. 6
figure 6

Type of country economy

Full size image
Fig. 7
figure 7

Level of analysis

Full size image
Fig. 8
figure 8

Type of institution

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tiwari, A.A., Gupta, S., Zamani, E.D. et al. An Overarching Conceptual Framework for ICT-enabled Responsive Governance. Inf Syst Front 26, 1161–1182 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10415-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10415-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation