e-government has been touted by many as a technologica

8/15/2019 E-government has been touted by many as a technologica

1/25

The American Review of Public Administration

41(4) 428 –452© The Author(s) 2011

Reprints and permission: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0275074010377654

http://arp.sagepub.com

Adoption ofE-CommunicationApplications in

U.S. Municipalities:The Role of PoliticalEnvironment,Bureaucratic Structure,and the Natureof Applications

Michael J. Ahn1

Abstract

E-government has been touted by many as a technological answer to improve citizen participation,

government accountability, and transparency by facilitating a greater level of communication and

flow of public information between citizens and the government. This article examines how politi-

cal environment, government structure, and the nature of individual e-government applicationsinfluence the likelihood of adoption. Using data obtained from multiple sources, logistic regres-sions are conducted on a sample of six e-government applications that possess varying degrees of

communicative and organizational impacts on the government to observe how different factorsinfluence their adoption. Findings include a general disinclination for adopting e-government appli-

cations with high communicative impact; however, such disinclination dissipated when there was

a high level of political competition in the area and perceived demand for online communication;active traditional channels of political communication, such as political parties and accessibility tolocal council members, reduced the likelihood of adoption; the preferences of the elected mayors

coincided with the perceptions of nonelected officials who favor e-government applications that

would reduce the workload while disfavoring applications that would increase it.

Keywords

E-government, information and communication technology, local and urban public administration/

governance, administration/citizen relations, governance

1University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Michael J. Ahn, McCormack Graduate School of Policy Studies, University of Massachusetts Boston,

Boston, McCormack Building, 3rd Floor, Room 422, 100 Morrissey Boulevard, MA 02125-3393, USA

Email: [email protected]


2/25

Ahn 429

The introduction of new information and communication technologies (ICTs), such as the World

Wide Web and e-mail in the early 1990s, and their rapid diffusion and adoption by the general

public has significantly changed the way people communicate and exchange information. Often

compared to the rewiring of the nervous system in our society, the new ICTs have fundamentally

changed the manner and efficiency in which information is searched and exchanged. As the newtechnologies became widely available and their impact more evident, some began to envision a

new information era where the new information and communication technologies would dramati-

cally improve, among other things, government performance and democracy. The ICTs were

thought to improve government services by increased economies of scale in providing services

(Edmiston, 2003, pp. 20-45), make public bureaucrats more responsive and accountable to citizens

(Applebaum, 2002, pp. 17-31), improve government openness and transparency (La Porte,

Demchak, & De Jong, 2002, pp. 411-446), recover citizens’ trust in government (Tolbert & Mossberger,

2006, pp. 354-369; Welch, Hinnant, & Moon, 2005), and facilitate citizen participation in public

affairs (Furlong & Kerwin, 2005, pp. 353-370; Nye, 2002).

The new information technologies have begun to be adopted by governments around the world

as a medium of public service delivery and information. With the increasing use of ICTs in gov-

ernment service delivery, a loosely defined term, electronic government (e-government), came to

be widely used to refer to the provision of governmental services and information using the Internet

and other digital means (Gant, Gant, & Johnson, 2002; Moon, 2002; West, 2004, pp. 15-27). The

practice of e-government grew quickly and became a worldwide phenomenon with an increasing

web presence of nations on the Internet and considerable improvements in the quality of their

e-government practices over time (West, 2008; United Nations Online Network in Public Admin-

istration and Finance [UNPAN], 2005). Similarly, the United States has also made significant

advancements in their e-government efforts over time (Fountain, 2001; West, 2005).

Government websites have evolved quickly to provide more sophisticated and complex admin-

istrative services, and furthermore, they began to expand beyond the mere delivery of governmentservices and administrative transactions over the Internet to include functions that enable online

communication between citizens and the government. In the age of ever-declining citizen partici-

pation in public affairs and government (Putnam, 2000), the emergence of e-government applica-

tions capable of providing easy and convenient ways to directly communicate with the government

and its officials is thought to have significant implications as they may provide the government

with new opportunities and potential to invigorate civic engagement in public affairs and enhance

government accountability and transparency. Some scholars have argued that new ICTs may be

able to bring the government closer to citizens and revive citizen participation in public affairs

(Edmiston, 2003, pp. 20-45; Tsagarousianou, 1998; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development, 2003) and enhance government accountability and transparency by allowing citizensto access government records and information (Doctor & Dutton 1998; Edmiston, 2003, pp. 20-45;

Kakabadse, Kakabadse, & Kouzmin, 2003, pp. 44-60; Kamarck & Nye, 2002; Nye, 2002; Scott,

2006, pp. 341-353; Stanley & Weare, 2004, pp. 503-527; Thomas & Streib, 2003, pp. 83-102;

Tsagarousianou, Tambini, & Bryan, 1998; Wilhelm, 2000). However, various studies on

e-government find that the democratic potential of e-government is mostly underutilized (Ho,

2002, pp. 434-444; West, 2004, pp. 15-27) and although e-government efforts have made signifi-

cant advancement in making government services available online, they tend to lag behind when

it comes to enabling communication between citizens and the government. However, little is

known why such a pattern of adoption emerges for communication-type applications. This research

attempts to understand and identify key factors that affect the adoption of e-government applica-

tions that work as a channel of communication between citizens and the government. Taking a

step forward from what has been learned from previous e-government adoption literature, this

research includes many overlooked aspects in the e-government adoption literature: the political


3/25

430 The American Review of Public Administration 41(4)

environment surrounding the government and various structural attributes of the adopting govern-

ment that react to its political environment.

In the following sections, a theoretical framework is introduced that explains the adoption of

e-government applications, followed by the data and methodology used to test the framework.

Findings are then elaborated on, followed by discussions and conclusions.

Theoretical Framework

Current e-government researches explain e-government adoption with an underlying assumption

that e-government will be adopted when the perceived stream of future economic benefits from

adoption outweighs that of costs. E-government applications are assumed to enhance economic

efficiency as the use of online applications would increase the economies of scale in providing

government services over the websites. Adoption is generally explained through an input–output

model where the perceived benefit from e-government services is measured by various demo-

graphic and environmental variables, such as population, education, income, and urban status

where high values in these variables translate into a high number of e-government users, therefore

greater benefits from adopting e-government applications and organizational characteristics, such

as the size of government and budget measure the general capacity of the government orga-

nization in providing these services (the cost side of providing e-government services). There-

fore, when the net benefits are perceived to be high, the government would move toward adopting

e-government applications.

Although this economic benefit–cost framework is useful in understanding the adoption of

e-service applications whose benefits or costs to the government are relatively easy to conceptual-

ize in an economic value scale, this framework falls short of explaining the adoption of commu-

nication type e-government applications whose benefit and cost implication is difficult to measure

from a purely economic point of view. Therefore, this research proposes a model that explainsthe adoption of e-communication applications with a set of variables that encompass the structure

variations of the adopting government and the political environment surrounding it. Previous

researches have explored the role of political leadership (Ho & Ni, 2004, pp. 164-180), as well

as some political characteristics in the environment on e-government adoption (Weare, Musso,

& Hale, 1999, pp. 3-27); however, they were confined to small geographical areas, and this research

examines the role of political environment and bureaucratic structure on U.S. municipalities at

large and focuses on the adoption of e-government applications that enable communication between

citizens and the government.

In addition, the role of the nature of communication-type e-government applications is examined.

The basic argument is that the nature of individual e-government applications (such as the functionsand purposes they serve) influence the way they are implemented by the government. Recognizing

a considerable difference in the nature and functions of communication-type applications from their

service-delivery-type counterparts, a distinction is made between them where the former is coined

as e-service (electronic service) applications and the latter e-communication (electronic communica-

tion). E-service applications include government service transactions between citizens and the

government, such as online real property tax payment, parking violation payment, and online resident

parking permit renewal, to highlight a few examples, and a host of other services that are designed

to enable government service transactions to take place over the Internet, whereas e-communications

include online channels of communication between citizens and the government ranging from simple,

one-way e-mail newsletters to citizens to two-way online interaction and dialogue between citizens

and the government. E-service enables transactions previously performed at brick and mortar gov-

ernment offices to be performed over the Internet whereas e-communication complement preexisting

communication channels, such as face-to-fact contact, telephone, and letters to take place online.


4/25

Ahn 431

By nature, if e-service applications influence the government’s capacity in its provision of

services to citizens, e-communication applications affect the government’s capacity in commu-nicating with citizens. The “consequences” of adopting e-service and e-communication are expected

to be different. While e-government, service-type applications in particular, is known to improve

efficiency, accuracy, and effectiveness of government services (Norris & Moon, 2005, pp. 64-75),

the effect of improving communication between citizens and the government through e-commu-

nication applications—sometimes termed as e-democracy —have potential to change the degree

and quality of public participation in government (Kakabadse et al., 2003, pp. 44-60). Therefore

it is theorized that such perception of the differences in the nature and potential outcomes of dif-

ferent types of e-government applications would influence the adoption decision by the govern-

ment. Here, the adoption of e-service applications is expected to be influenced by the government’s

general capacity in providing services (government organizational capacity) and the perceiveddemand for e-service applications (demographic factors), whereas adoption of e-communication

applications is influenced by various attributes in the political environment that influence the

degree of demand for improved communication with the government from citizens (political

environment) and the structural characteristics of the adopting government that reacts to such a

political environment and demand (government structural attributes). The improved online com-

munication may encompass simple and more efficient dissemination of government information

or it may include online civic dialogue and participation in the government. Regardless, democratic

rationale and demand for improved communication is reflected in the government’s decision to

adopt e-communication applications, contingent on the incentives in the government, shaped by

the government’s governing structure, to follow-up on such demand.

As Figure 1 shows, three key factors are thought to be important in this model—the nature of

e-communication applications, political environment, and government structural attributes. If the

organizational capacity and demographic factors shape economic rationale behind the adoption

Organizational

Capacity

Nature Of

E-Communication

Applications

Political

Environment-

Democratic Rationale

Government

Structural

Attributes

Demographic

Characteristics

Adoption

Political Rationale

Economic Rationale

Figure 1. Theory of e-government adoption


5/25


of e-government applications, political environment and government structural attributes influence

political rationale behind adoption. Here, the nature of e-communication applications define the

kind of political and communicative impact that each application would bring to the government,

whereas the political environment defines the political characteristics of the district in which these

e-communication applications would operate. Government structural attributes and their politicalenvironment influence the way the government responds to individual e-communication applica-

tions, primarily contingent on their perception of how adopting each application would affect its

communication with citizens.

Individual e-communication applications, with their distinctive nature, present the adopting

government with the potential for improving different aspects of communication with citizens.

The government then perceives some applications to be beneficial and proceeds to adopt them,

while avoiding others, primarily depending on their political factors inside and outside the gov-

ernment bureaucracy.

In the following section, variables that are selected for political environment, structural attri-

butes, organizational capacity, and demographic characteristics are elaborated on, as well as the

methodology used in the analysis.

Method

Data Sources

Multiple data sources are used for the analysis. Data on the adoption of six sample e-communication

applications were obtained from a survey administered by the International City/County Manage-

ment Association (ICMA) in 2004. The ICMA distributed a mail survey that captured various

aspects of local government activities in the area of e-government to 7,944 municipalities and

counties (7,095 municipalities and 849 counties). Among the 7,944 that received the survey, 3,410(3,007 municipalities and 403 counties) returned the survey with a response rate of 42.9%. The

ICMA administered another survey that measured the structural characteristics of municipalities

in 2001. Some 4,244 municipalities returned the survey with a response rate of 53.9%. Various

demographic characteristics were collected using the 2002 City County Databook from the Census

Bureau. Political environmental characteristics, such as voter turnout and the outcomes of the

Presidential election in 2000 are collected from David Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections

and American University’s Federal Elections Project,1 respectively. The analysis was limited to

857 observations at the municipal level after merging all five separate data sets.

Dependent Variables—E-Communication Applications

Six e-government applications are selected from 19 applications2 that the ICMA (2004 ICMA

e-government survey) surveyed to identify their adoption and availability on local government

websites. These applications are selected because among the 19 applications used by the ICMA,

they function as a channel of communication whereas others function as a channel of service

delivery. They are

1. Online codes/ordinances (e-Code)

2. Online requests for services, such as pothole repair (e-Request )

3. Online council agendas/minutes (e-Minute)

4. Online communication with individual elected and appointed officials (e-Com)

5. Online newsletter (e-News)

6. Online streaming video (e-Video)


6/25

Ahn 433

Each application differs from one another in terms of the nature and substance of communication,

and therefore, they differ in the kind of impact they would bring to the government’s communication

with citizens. In addition, each application requires different levels of technical, financial, and human

resource commitment necessary to adopt and manage the application (organizational resource com-

mitment). Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of these e-communication applications and theirimplications to the government if they are adopted and used as a channel of communication.

As summarized in Table 1, each application differs from one another in its functionality and

implications to the government, and therefore, some applications have greater impact on com-

munication between citizens and the government than others. For instance, a direct online com-

munication between citizens and the elected (and appointed) officials, electronic newsletter, and

streaming video applications would have much more communicative and political impact than

posting government codes and ordinances online and enabling citizens to request services over

the government websites. If the sample e-communication applications can be lined up according

to the degree of impact they would have on the communication in an ascending scale, it may look

something like this:

E-Code


7/25


Table 1. Characteristics of Sample E-Communication Applications

Application Interactivity ImplicationsImpact on

Communication

OrganizationalResource

Commitment

E-Code One-way Improves the efficiency in disseminatingmunicipal codes and ordinances tocitizens. The application may reducethe workload of officials who previouslyhad to individually respond to citizenrequests for codes and ordinances bymail or phone since they can find thesame information available online

Low Low

E-Request One-way E-service mainly enhances theconvenience of citizens in makingservice requests to the government.

Instead of having to visit governmentoffice, make phone calls or write aletter, they can now make the samerequest over the Internet. Theapplication may increase the workloadof officials since they now have torespond to another channel throughwhich citizens make service requests

Low Medium

E-Minute One-way Citizens can obtain council agenda/minute. Potentially improvegovernment transparency as citizensare able to see the agendas discussed

and decisions reached in local council

Medium Low

E-Com Two-way Enables citizens to initiate onlinecommunication to voice theirsuggestions, concerns, and any otherissues to the government. Thegovernment, especially its electedofficials, can use this opportunity toreceive feedback; survey citizenpreferences and public sentiment. Thisapplication may improve the image ofthe government to be moredemocratic and accountable by

allowing citizens to voice their opinionsdirectly to the government. Althoughnot obliged, responding to each onlineopinion may be time-consuming

High Low–medium

E-News One-way Enables the government and its electedofficials to communicate directly tocitizens and improve their ability toinform citizens of new programs,initiatives, and governmentachievements. This application providesthe elected officials with a direct andconvenient access to many of politicalconstituents in the district

High High

E-Video One-way Same as e-newsletter, but uses image-intensive medium of communication-video

High High


8/25

Ahn 435

in the area, increase the need to engage in communication with the government in order to convey

their opinions and political preferences to the government (such as e-Com) or to obtain public

information (such as e-News, e-Video, e-Minute, and to a lesser degree, e-Code).

Political competitiveness is measured by the absolute value of the differences in the percentage

of residents in the 2000 presidential election who voted for George W. Bush and Al Gore. Presi-

dential election data at the

municipal level was not available, so data at the surrounding county

level are used as proxy. That is, if municipality A is situated inside county B, then the election

data in county B is used instead. The percentage who voted for Al Gore was subtracted from those

who voted for George W. Bush and only the absolute values of the differences are used as this

measures the extent to which there is a disparity in political preferences in the jurisdiction where

smaller differences (between those who voted for Bush and Gore) represent a greater level of

political competition (as two different political preferences are close to a tie) in the area. A large

gap would indicate a low level of competition as the difference between the two political prefer-

ences is large. It is hypothesized that a high level of political competition in the jurisdiction islikely to increase the demand for e-communication as it would enable different political parties,

interest groups, and individual citizens to contact the government to influence and voice their

preferences and/or oversee/obtain information on government activities and decisions. The value

of such communication is expected to be higher in a politically competitive environment than in

a politically stable environment. Therefore,

Hypothesis 1: High-level political competition is expected to increase the likelihood of

e-communication adoption.

Voter turnout among the voting age population in the 2000 presidential election is used to measurethe level of citizen engagement in politics. Because such data at the municipal level were unavail-

able, surrounding county-level data are used. Low voter turnout is seen as an indication of citizen

apathy in politics whereas high turnout represents greater citizen engagement in politics. Similar to

Hypothesis 1, it is hypothesized that high-level citizen engagement in politics is expected to increase

the likelihood of adoption as it raises the demand for e-communication applications.

Hypothesis 2: High-level citizen engagement in politics is expected to increase the likelihood

of e-communication adoption.

Diversity in the environment is measured by a demographic factor—racial homogeneity—from

the 2002 City County Data Book (the Census) where the level of racial diversity is expected to be

commensurate to various political and economic interests in the area as racial minorities, with their

own political and economic agenda, seek to make their local government more responsive to their

Table 2. Distribution of E-Communication Adopters/Nonadopters

Application

n (%)

TotalNonadopter Adopter

E-Code 277 (32) 580 (68) 857E-Request 593 (69) 264 (31) 857E-Minute 202 (24) 655 (76) 857E-Com 318 (37) 539 (63) 857E-News 611 (71) 246 (29) 857E-Video 791 (92) 66 (8) 857


9/25


needs and interests (Simmons & Simmons, 2004, pp. 374-388). The percentage White population

in the municipalities is used where a higher percentage of White population indicates a more

homogenous population, whereas a lower White population percentage indicates greater diversity

in the area. High levels of diversity in the environment are also expected to increase the likelihood

of e-communication adoption as they are perceived by the minorities as new opportunities forcommunication that would allow them to engage in direct communication with the government

and obtain public information which may not have been readily available for minorities.

Hypothesis 3: Diversity is expected to increase the likelihood of e-communication adoption.

In addition, the degree to which citizens in given municipalities are sensitive to the

party affili-

ation of their council representatives is used as a measure of party sensitivity. The 2001 ICMA form

of government survey questioned if “the political party affiliation of council candidates appear on

the ballot in a local general election?” It is assumed that in jurisdictions where the party affiliation

of council candidates appears on the ballot, citizens in the jurisdiction are thought to be oriented

toward certain political parties and indicate a greater role of political parties in communicating and

voicing the preferences of their constituents to the government. A greater role of political parties as

a channel of political communication is thought to substitute the need for e-communication applica-

tions and reduce the likelihood of their adoption.

Hypothesis 4: A greater level of party sensitivity would reduce the likelihood of the adoption

of e-communication applications.

Government Structural Characteristics. Four broad aspects of government structure are mea-sured from the 2001 ICMA Form of Government survey. They are the form of government, political

responsiveness of the chief executive official (CEO hereafter) and the council, allocation of decision-making authority between the chief executive official and local council, and the availability of

formal channels of citizen engagement in government decision making, such as legislative refer-

endum, popular referendum, initiatives, and recall. These factors are selected because, if political

environmental variables capture the perceived demand for e-communication applications from the

environment, these variables influence how the government responds to such demand based on the

way the structure of governance is defined (form of government), the extent to which political

actors in the government (the council or the CEO) are responsive to the needs of citizens, the

concentration of decision-making authority in the government between the council and the CEO,

and the extent to which citizens are allowed to participate in the decision making through formal

means of citizen participation, such as legislative referendum, popular referendum, initiatives, andrecall. The basic premise is that the political actors would respond positively (adoption) to the

perceived demand for e-communication applications from the environment as they have political

incentives to be responsive to the needs of citizens.

Form of government. First, form of government is thought to define the broad framework of

governance as depending on the form, the representative body of the government is defined, whether

it be the elected mayor, local council, and town meeting. The ICMA survey identified five forms

of government in their survey—Mayor–Council, Council–Manager, Commission, Town Meeting,

and Representative Town Meeting.4 Among 857 sample municipalities, 576 are in council–manager

form (67%), 240 are in mayor–council (28%), whereas the remaining 39 are scattered across town

meeting (3%), commission (2%), and representative town meeting (0.12%). A dummy variable

was created where it was coded 1 if mayor–council form and 0 if council–manager form. The

remaining 39 other forms of government are merged into the council–manager form category

instead of being left in their own categories because the number of observations were too small


10/25

Ahn 437

for valid statistical analysis and they were deemed more compatible with the council–manager

form of government than that of the mayor–council form. Only in the mayor–council form of

government, there is an elected official in the executive branch of the government whereas in other

forms of government, government decision making is performed through collective decision mak-

ing by a group of representatives or citizens where the executive branch of the government merelyimplements the decision outcomes. It is hypothesized that the mayor–council form of government

would be more susceptible to political influences (Feoick, Jeong, & Kim, 2003, pp. 616-625) as

the elected mayors would have greater incentives in engaging in some form of communication

with their constituents through which they can survey the changing preferences and sentiment of

citizens and be able to inform them of their achievements and initiatives while in office. Council

members in the council–manager form are also subject to political influences in the following

election. However, the political pressure is diffused as there are multiple members in local council

and the actions of the executive branch is not the sole responsibility of a single council member,

rather that of the collective decision making of the council as a whole. In addition, legislative

councils tend to have some reservations about online communication applications that link citizens

directly to the executive branch of government as it perceives such applications as infringements

of their functions as the representative branch of government. Therefore,

Hypothesis 5: A mayor–council form of government is more likely to adopt e-communication

applications than a council–manager form of government.

Political responsiveness of the political actors. Political responsiveness of the chief elected official

and the council is measured by a series of structural variables that systematically influence the

degree to which they stay responsive to the preferences or “will” of their constituents. These vari-

ables include (a) the method of selecting the chief elected official, (b) percentage of council members

elected by ward or smaller district as opposed to elected at large, (c) existence of term limits forchief elected official, (d) existence of term limits for council members, (e) the frequency with which

the council meets in formal sessions, and (f) the size of the council.

The existence of term limits as well as the method of selecting a CEO are collected from the

2001 ICMA form of government survey to measure the political responsiveness of the political

actor in the executive branch—the CEO. It is reasonable to assume that when the CEO is elected

through popular vote, he/she is held directly accountable to voters and, therefore, more responsive

to their political preferences and agenda. In addition, term limits for the CEO and council members

are expected to reduce their political responsiveness compared with when they are not subject to

such constraints, as political incumbents perceive “dead-ends” to their career in that jurisdiction,

especially when they are in their last term.In addition to the political responsiveness of the CEO, four additional variables are obtained

from the 2001 ICMA survey to measure the political responsiveness of the council. They are the

percentage of council members elected by ward or smaller district as opposed to elected at large,

size of the council (number of council members), and the frequency in which the council meets in

formal sessions. First, the percentage of council members who are elected by a ward or district (as

opposed to elected at large) and the size of the

council is used to measure the overall “accessibility”

of the council to citizens—the ease in which citizens can contact and communicate with council

members. It is reasonable to expect that when council members are elected by smaller ward districts

(as opposed to the district at large) and when there are more council representatives, citizens may

have more opportunities in communicating with council members. Here, greater accessibility to

the council by citizens are assumed to translate into greater political responsiveness as council

members who encounter citizens more frequently are relatively more sensitive to their needs than


11/25


those who are not. Term limits on the CEO are thought to have a similar effect of reducing political

responsiveness on the council members as well. The number of times the council meets in a formal

session is added, where more frequent meetings are considered to indicate a high degree of political

responsiveness, whereas infrequent meetings indicate otherwise. These variables are used to test

the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 6: High political responsiveness of political actors will lead to a high level of

e-communication adoption.

Allocations of decision-making authority between the CEO and the council . To examine the relationship

between the allocation of decision-making authority between the CEO and the council and its impact

on the adoption of e-communication applications, four variables are selected that measure where

decision-making authority is concentrated in the government. These variables include the extent to

which an elected mayor has the independent authority to develop and make recommendations for the

budget submitted to the council, the range of issues the

mayor can vote in council meetings, whether

the

mayor has the

authority to appoint department heads, and whether the

mayor has veto power to

council-passed measures. The basic premise in this research is that leadership plays an important role

in the adoption decision (Ho & Ni, 2004, pp. 164-180), and although nonelected public administrators

and managers make many government decisions—including the decision regarding e-government

adoption—their decisions would reflect the preferences of the elected officials whom they are held

accountable to (Dunn & Legge, 2000, pp. 73-88). Here, the adoption would follow the preferences

of the elected officials who hold more decision-making authority in the government, whether it is the

CEO or the council. Consistent with Hypothesis 5, which predicted positive correlations between the

mayor–council form and adoption, the following hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 7: When greater authority is concentrated on elected mayors, e-communicationapplications are more likely to be adopted.

Formal citizen participatory authority . An item from the 2001 ICMA form of government survey is

included, which measured whether citizens in given jurisdictions are given a legal provision for

popular referendum, legislative referendum, initiatives, and recall.5 A composite variable is created

that adds the number of provisions that the government provides for each participatory mechanism.

For example, if there are provisions for popular referendum and initiatives, the composite variable

has a value of 2. It is proposed that greater options for citizens to influence government decision

making would reduce the demand for e-communication applications as they are expected to substitute

and diminish the demand for online citizen participation and communication—e-communication.

Hypothesis 8: Availability of formal citizen participation in government decision making

reduces the likelihood of adoption.

Organizational Capacity and Demographic Factors. Some variables are included to controlfor the effects of the government’s organizational capacity in providing e-government services

and demographic factors. As detailed in Appendix A, these include government’s budgetary

capacity (lack of financial resources), technical expertise (lack of technical expertise), and the

willingness (and unwillingness) of nonelected public administrators to cooperate with e-government

initiatives ( staff resistance to change). With greater budgetary capacity, technical expertise, and

willingness of nonelected public administrators, the government is deemed to possess greater

levels of organizational capacities in adopting and providing e-government services, including


12/25

Ahn 439

e-communication applications. Therefore, greater organizational capacity is expected to increase

the likelihood of e-communication adoption.

In addition, demographic variables such as population, population change, education, income,

and unemployment rate are included in the analysis. As a result of the lack of matching data at

the municipal level, county-level data surrounding each municipality is used as proxy for educa-tion, income, and unemployment rate. As explained previously, high levels of population, educa-

tion, income, and a low level of unemployment are assumed to indicate a high level of perceived

demand for e-government services in general and increase the likelihood of adoption. Previous

studies have found some significant relationships between environment and e-government

applications, such as size and population (Norris & Moon, 2005, pp. 64-75; Weare et al., 1999,

pp. 3-27. See Appendix A for a summary of all independent variables used in the analysis.

Statistical Analysis

First, ordinary least squares (OLS) analysis was conducted to examine common factors that influ-

ence the level of e-communication adoption. The level of adoption was measured by a dependent

variable that aggregate six e-communication applications, ranging from 0 to 6, 0 indicating no

adoption and 6 indicating high adoption.

Level of Adoption (0-6) = f ( Political Environment, Government Structural Attributes,

Organizational Capacity, Demographic Factors)

As shown in Table 3, the analysis indicates that political competition (Hypothesis 1), party sen-

sitivity (Hypothesis 4), and political responsiveness (Hypothesis 6) affect the level of e-communication

adoption. Consistent with the initial expectation, a greater level of political competition in the

environment increased the level of adoption. The negative coefficient indicates that when there isa dominant political preference and a large gap between competing political preferences in the area,

e-communication is less likely to be adopted. Conversely speaking, this means that when the gap is

narrower and there exists more intensive political competition between different political preferences,

e-communication is more likely to be adopted. Dominance of a political preference reduces the need

to communicate with the government to influence the government decision making and oversee/

obtain information on government activities and decisions while greater political competition would

increase such needs. Also as anticipated, a greater role of political party reduced the level of adop-

tion. This points to a substitutive relationship between traditional means of political participation

(as measured by political parties) and e-communication application. That is, in areas where political

parties play a significant role in communicating political preferences of citizens to government,the demand for online communication with the government declines.

However, political responsiveness of political actors (Hypothesis 6) showed mixed signs of influ-

ence on adoption. First, contrary to the initial expectation, political responsiveness of an elected mayor

did not have any statistically significant impact on the level of e-communication adoption whereas

that of a council showed mixed signs of influence. Although larger council size had a positive impact

on adoption as anticipated, a higher percentage of council members elected by ward and district (as

opposed to at large election, therefore more accessible to citizens) had a negative impact on the level

of adoption. This seems to indicate another substitutive relation between the accessibility to council

members and e-communication application where more accessible council members substitute for

the need for e-communication application. Last, contrary to the initial expectation, greater diversity

(as measured by percentage White population) had a negative impact on adoption. Lack of techni-

cal expertise had a negative impact on adoption and population and education had a positive impact.


13/25


To take into account the effects of the nature of individual applications on their adoption, a

series of logistic regressions are conducted using six discrete dependent variables that measure

the adoption status of the six sample e-communication applications where 1 denotes adoption and

0 nonadoption. Depending on the nature of each e-communication application, different explana-

tory sets of variables are expected to have different impacts on adoption. The logistic model has

the following specifications where adoption (A) of application i is a function of constructs for

political environment, government structural attributes while controlling for organizational capac-

ity and demographic variations as described above.

Adoption Ai (0, 1) = f ( Political Environment, Government Structural Attributes,

Organizational Capacity, Demographic Factors)

Table 3. Regression Analysis Results

Variables Estimate

Intercept −5.40302

Government structural variablesCEO election 0.02881CEO term limit 0.14761Percent council by district −0.00337**Council term limit 0.28184Frequency council meeting 0.05109Number of council members 0.07461*CEO vote all issues −0.24722CEO can veto −0.25162CEO submit budget −0.24984CEO appoint head of department 0.14197Provision on citizen participation 0.0593

Mayor–council form −0.16115Organizational capacity

Financial resource as barrier −0.3963***Lack of technical expertise 0.21Staff resistance to change −0.17859

Demographic variablesPopulation 0.43746***Population change 0.01603Percent bachelor 0.0222**Median household income 0.25132Unemployment rate 0.0067

Political environmentPercentage White population 0.00993*Political competition −0.00987**Voter turnout 0.0012Party sensitivity −0.44144***

R2 0.2669Adjusted R2 0.2398

*p


14/25

Ahn 441

Table 4 shows the results of all six logistic analyses. Only the coefficients and standard errors

are included (see Appendix B for the odds ratios). As shown in the table, logistic analysis reveals

how the nature of each application induces different factors to influence adoption. Some applica-

tions seem to induce greater influence from economic factors (demographic and organizational

capacity variables) whereas others depend more on political factors (political environment andorganizational attributes). Population was the only variable that showed consistently positive influ-

ence on adoption across all e-government applications.

For online codes and ordinances application (e-Code), all political environments, structural

attributes, organizational capacity, and demography factors influenced its adoption. Considering

that e-Code is relatively close to an e-service-type application in its nature, it is surprising to find

that the application was subject to numerous variables in the political environment and govern-

ment structural attributes. The analysis shows that the adoption was influenced by whether or not

the mayor was elected by citizens and by the extent of bureaucratic authority he or she has in the

government. As expected, when the mayor was elected directly through popular election and when

the mayor had relatively more power in bureaucratic decision making, the adoption was more

likely to take place (Hypotheses 6 and 7). Two structural attributes of the council—such as number

of council members and council term limits—showed a statistically significant and positive rela-

tionship with the adoption. Greater council accessibility, measured by the number of council

members, improved the odds of adoption (Hypothesis 6). However, term limits imposed on council

members had a positive impact on adoption, contrary to initial expectation. As anticipated in

Hypothesis 1, the negative coefficient for the political competition variable indicates, when there

is a dominant political preference (indicated by a large percentage difference between voters who

voted for Bush or Gore) in the area (low political competitiveness), e-Code was less likely to be

adopted. Population, level of education, and percentage White population showed a statistically

significant and positive influence on adoption.

The online requests for services application (e-Request) was mainly influenced by organizationalcapacity factors, the power of mayoral authority, and population. First, contrary to the initial

expectation (Hypothesis 7), greater mayoral authority in the government relative to its council had

a negative impact on adoption indicating potential disincentives from the part of the mayor regard-

ing this application. Financial barriers had a negative impact on its adoption, and it is interesting

to note that this is the only application whose adoption was impeded by staff resistance. E-request

application is an online application that, once adopted and operational, may considerably increase

the amount of workload for government officials as it allows citizens to make requests for govern-

ment services through an additional and convenient channel of communication (the internet).

Therefore, it is possible that the adoption of this application receives some resistance from non-

elected government staffs. However, it is interesting to note that greater mayoral authority coinci-dently had statistically significance and negative impact on adoption, potentially illuminating a

link between the two.

The online council agenda and minute application (e-Minute) was heavily influenced by political

environment and demographic factors. It was surprising that government structural attributes had

no effect, especially variables measuring political responsiveness of the council. Low political

competitiveness in the environment (Hypothesis 1) reduced the likelihood of adoption and greater

party sensitivity also reduced it (Hypothesis 4). This is consistent with the initial expectation that

when political parties are active in the area, they substitute the demand for online channels of

communication, therefore reducing the likelihood of adoption. Diversity—measured by percentage

White population—was expected to increase the likelihood of adoption in general; however, high

levels of diversity consistently showed negative associations with the adoption of online council

minute, online code, and online communication. Positive coefficients for the diversity variable

that are consistent across the adoption of three different e-communication applications may in fact


15/25


16/25

Ahn 443

point to a construct validity issue with the variable in which racial diversity does not necessarily

translate into diversity in political, sociological, and economic preferences. Rather, it measures

the varying degree of access to the Internet among different ethnic groups as there persists a gap,

although it is improving over time, in the access between the Whites and minorities in America

(Fox, 2005; Horrigan, 2008).The online communication with individual elected and appointed officials application (e-Com)

was primarily influenced by political environment factors and demography. Consistent with

other applications, a low level of political competitiveness reduced the likelihood of adoption

(Hypothesis 1). Also as expected, greater citizen engagement in politics had a positive impact on adop-

tion as high level of voter turnout had a positive relationship with the application (Hypothesis 2).

Again, high White population was positively associated with the adoption, as well as population

and population change. However, government structural attributes and organizational capacity

had no effect.

The adoption of electronic newsletters to residents/businesses (e-News) was influenced by other

substitutive channels of citizen participation. When the council was more accessible to citizens

(Hypothesis 6) and when political parties played a relatively greater role in the area (Hypothesis 4),

e-News was less likely to be adopted. Lack of financial resources had statistical significance and

negative impact on adoption whereas population and income had a positive effect.

Last, the streaming video (e-Video) application was negatively associated with the level of citizen

engagement in politics (voter turnout—Hypothesis 2). It is interesting to observe that voter turnout,

which had a statistically significant and positive impact on the e-Com application, showed a nega-

tive influence on the e-Video application, potentially indicating a reluctance by the government to

engage in one-to-many communication with a large number of residents/businesses (as opposed

one-to-one communication with e-Com) when there is a high level of citizen engagement in politics.

Considering that this application may require the most organizational capacity (in creating video

content and adopting and managing a web system that can broadcast the video content over thegovernment website), lack of financial capacity had a significant negative impact on adoption.

Population continued to have positive impact on adoption as well.

Discussion

Putting together the outcomes from the logistic analyses, some interesting facts emerge. First,

looking at the frequency distribution of adoption of the sample applications lined up according to

the level of impact on communication (from low to high impact, left to right), a fitted linear line

shows a steady decline from the e-Code application to e-Video. The declining frequency of the

adoption indicates that municipalities in general are reluctant to adopt applications that are highly political in nature and possess a potentially greater impact on the communication between citizens

and the government. E-Code, and e-Minute, with the exception of e-Request, all display a higher

rate of adoption than e-Com, e-News, and e-Video, where the first three applications are thought

to be less political in nature and suggest a less significant impact on government communication

with citizens than the latter three applications (see Figure 2).

Economic rationale continued to play an important role in adoption even after controlling for

various political factors. Consistent with previous researches, demographic variables showed a

relatively consistent and positive impact on adoption signifying the importance of the economies

of scale implications typically associated with larger populations, rapid population growth, high

education, and income. As mentioned, population was the only variable that had a positive impact

on all six applications, and population change and education showed a relatively consistent and

positive influence on adoption. A higher percentage of White population was also associated with

a greater likelihood of adoption. As discussed earlier, if demographic factors capture the demand


17/25


side of the “market” for e-government applications, government organizational capacity factors

measure the capacity of the suppliers where greater capacity translates into relatively low costs in

providing the service (e-government). Here, the analysis indicates that when the government did

not suffer from a lack of financial resources and staff resistance, they were more likely to adopt

e-communication applications. This indicates that economic rationale continues to be an important

factor in adoption of e-communication applications, and this may imply that e-communication

applications are still very much regarded as more in line with service-type applications rather than

channels of communication with citizens with substantial political implications. In other words,the political and communicative potential of e-communication applications may not have entered

the minds of the government and its officials as a political channel of communication but rather

a service to be adopted.

Despite the more pronounced and consistent influence of the economic factors on adoption, the

influence of political factors on adoption was also visible in the analysis. Greater political com-

petitiveness (Hypothesis 1) was generally associated with a high likelihood of adoption (e-Code,

e-Minute, e-Com) whereas a greater role of political parties (Hypothesis 3) had a negative impact

(e-Minute and e-News). High level of citizen engagement (Hypothesis 2) in politics (voter turnout)

showed mixed directions of influence depending on the nature of the application (positive on

e-Com, negative on e-Video). In addition, greater mayoral authority (measured by veto power,Hypothesis 7) was negatively associated with the adoption of e-Request, whereas high accessibility

to local councils (Hypothesis 6) reduced the adoption of the e-News application. However, contrary

to initial expectations and contrary to findings from previous research (Moon, 2002; Norris &

Moon, 2005, pp. 64-75), form of government (Hypothesis 5) did not have any significant impact

on the adoption of any of the e-communication applications. In addition, availability of formal

citizen participatory authority did not have any substitute effect as initially expected and did not

influence the adoption of any e-communication applications.

Two variables that measure the level of demand for e-communication applications as elaborated

in Hypotheses 1 and 2—political competition and citizen engagement in politics (voter turnout)—

had a positive impact on adoption. In particular, greater political competition increased the adoption

of the e-Com application that enables online communication with the elected officials and e-Minute,

which enables citizens to oversee the council activities. This is consistent with the citizen engage-

ment in politics variable in which greater voter turnout increases the adoption of the e-Com

Figure 2. Adoption frequency distribution


18/25

Ahn 445

application. However, it is perplexing to see that it had a statistically significant and negative

impact on online streaming video as it implies that greater citizen participation and engagement

in politics somehow discourage the government to engage in direct one-to-many communication

with citizens. Although not statistically significant, voter turnout had a negative impact on the

adoption of other applications with a similar nature, such as e-News and e-Minute.Looking at the negative effect of the accessibility to council members (percentage council

members elected by ward and smaller district, Hypothesis 6) and the role of political parties

(Hypothesis 4) on adoption, e-communication applications and other traditional channels of com-

munication seem to be in a substitutive relationship with one another. That is, greater role of

political parties and more accessible council members reduce the likelihood of e-communication

adoption, illuminating that when there are well-established traditional channels of citizen partici-

pation in the community, they were preferred to relatively new and high-tech forms of citizen

communication—e-communication.

The analysis also reveals another interesting aspect about the relationship between the elected

officials and nonelected public administrators concerning the adoption of e-communication appli-

cations. Dunn and Legge (2002, pp. 401-422) have found that most local government managers

in the United States posit a strong role for themselves in policy making while viewing public

management and implementation to be within the exclusive purview insulated from politics. This

may indicate that nonelected public administrators may exert great influence in government deci-

sion making and the elected officials tend to be more conscious of their perceptions of the workload

implications (Ho & Ni, 2004, pp. 164-180) associated with individual e-communication applica-

tions. Here, e-communication applications that increase the workload may not be favored over

applications that reduce it. This relationship is more apparent in the adoption of e-Request, whose

adoption was impeded by the resistance from staff, while greater mayoral authority reduced its

likelihood of adoption.

This is also supported in the adoption pattern of e-Request application. From Table 2, the lownumber of adopters for e-Request stands out next to e-Code and e-Minute. All three applications,

e-Code, e-Request, and e-Minute, are thought to be less political in nature than e-Com, e-News,

and e-Video applications; however, unlike e-Code and e-Minute, the e-Request application reduces

the barriers of inconveniences that may have prevented citizens from making service requests in

conventional channels of communication, and therefore, increase the workload. Consequently, only

264 municipalities have adopted the application, only slightly higher than the e-Com application.

However, such general disincentive or resistance toward e-communication applications is overcome

when there is a sufficient level of demand. For instance, when there is a high degree of political

competitiveness in the community, more e-government applications are adopted, and when there

is greater citizen engagement in the government, e-government applications are more likely to beadopted. So when there is greater perceived demand for e-communication applications, general

resistance to adopting these applications is overcome and move toward adoption.

Conclusion

This research began with a question about the potential of e-communication applications in our

system of democracy and set out to test a model of e-government adoption emphasizing the role

of political forces surrounding the adoption. Analysis reveals that both economic as well as politi-

cal factors influenced the adoption and there is general disincentive toward adopting applications

that are highly political in nature while applications relatively more service-type in nature that

require less resource commitment were favored. Such disincentives, however, seem to dissipate

when there was a sufficient level of demand for these applications present in the area.


19/25


20/25

447

A p p e n

d i x A

I n d e

p e n

d e n t

V a r i a

b l e s ,

M e a s u r e m e n t s ,

a n

d D a t a

S o u r c e s

C o n c e p t

V a r i a b l e

M e a s u r e m e n t / S o u r c e s

N

M e a n

S D

M i n i m u m

M a x i m u m

S t r u c t u r a l

a t t r i b u t e s

C E O e l e c t i o n

H o w

i s y o u r c h i e f e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l s e l e c t e d ? d u m m y v a r i a b l e ( 1 = y

e s ,

0 = o

t h e r w

i s e ) . 2 0 0 1 I C M A F o r m o f G

o v e r n m e n t ( F O G )

8 3 7

0 . 7 5 5

0 . 4 3 0

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

C E O t e r m l i m i t

I s t h e r e a l e g a l l i m i t o n t h e n u m b e r o f t e

r m s a l l o w e d f o r t h e p o s i t i o n o f

c h i e f e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l ? d u m m y v a r i a b l e ( 1

=

y e s , 0 =

n o ) . 2 0 0 1 I C M A F O G

8 2 5

0 . 1 2 1

0 . 3 2 7

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

P e r c e n t c o u n c i l

b y d i s t r i c t

= ( n

o . o

f c o u n c i l m e m b e r s e l e c t e d b y w a r d ) / ( n o . o

f c o u n c i l m e m b e r s ) .

2 0 0

1 I C M A F O G

8 3 2

2 8 . 5

7 8

4 0 . 9

7 1

0 . 0 0

0

1 0 0 . 0 0 0

C o u n c i l t e r m

l i m i t

I s t h e r e a l e g a l l i m i t o n t h e n u m b e r o f

t e r m s a c o u n c i l m e m b e r m a y

s e r v e ? D u m m y ( 1 = y

e s , 0 = n

o ) . 2 0 0 1

I C M A F O G

8 5 2

0 . 1 2 2

0 . 3 2 8

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

F r e q u e n c y

c o u n c i l m e e t i n g

H o w

o f t e n d o e s t h e c o u n c i l m e e t i n f o

r m a l s e s s i o n ? ( r e c o d e d ) 1 =

o n c e a m o n t h , 2 = t

w i c e a m o n t h , 3 = t

h r e e t i m e s a m o n t h , 4 = o

n c e a

w e e

k , 5 = m

o r e t h a n o n c e a w e e

k . 2

0 0 1 I C M A F O G

8 1 1

2 . 0 4 9

0 . 6 9 2

1 . 0 0

0

5 . 0 0 0

N u m b e r o f

c o u n c i l m e m b e r s

H o w

m a n y c o u n c i l p o s i t i o n s a r e o n y o

u r c o u n c i l ? 2 0 0 1 I C M A F O G

8 5 4

6 . 3 4 0

1 . 7 1 4

3 . 0 0

0

1 9 . 0

0 0

C E O v o t e a l l

i s s u e

U n d e r w h a t c i r c u m s t a n c e s d o e s t h e c h i e f e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l h a v e t h e

a u t h o r i t y t o v o t e i n c o u n c i l m e e t i n g ?

1 = a

l l i s s u e s , 0 = o

t h e r w

i s e .

2 0 0

1 I C M A F O G

8 2 8

0 . 6 1 0

0 . 4 8 8

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

C E O c a n v e t o

D o e

s t h e c h i e f e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l h a v e t h e

a u t h o r i t y t o v e t o c o u n c i l -

p a s s e d m e a s u r e s ? 1 = y

e s , 0 = n

o . 2

0 0

1 I C M A F O G

8 1 2

0 . 2 5 1

0 . 4 3 4

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

C E O s u b m i t

b u d g e t

W h o h a s t h e i n d e p e n d e n t a u t h o r i t y t o

d e v e l o p a n d m a k e

r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t h e b u d g e t s u b

m i t t e d t o t h e c o u n c i l ? 1 = (

c h i e f

e l e c

t e d o

f f i c i a l +

c o m

b i n a t i o n o

f c h

i e f e l e c t e

d o

f f i c i a l a n

d c h

i e f a

p p o

i n t e

d

o f f i c i a

l ) , 0 = o

t h e r w

i s e . 2

0 0 1 I C M A F O

G

8 4 1

0 . 1 5 5

0 . 3 6 2

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

C E O a p p o i n t

h e a d o f

d e p a r t m e n t

I f a n y o f y o u r d e p a r t m e n t h e a d s a r e a p p o i n t e d , w h o a p p o i n t s t h e m ? 1

= ( c h

i e f e

l e c t e

d o

f f i c i a l +

c o m

b i n a t i o n o

f c h

i e f e

l e c t e

d o

f f i c i a l a n

d c h

i e f

a p p

o i n t e

d o

f f i c i a l ) , 0 = o

t h e r w

i s e . 2

0 0 1

I C M A F O G

7 9 0

0 . 2 5 4

0 . 4 3 6

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

P r o v i s i o n o n

c i t i z e n

p a r t i c i p a t i o n

D o e s y o u r m u n i c i p a l i t y h a v e a p r o v i s i o n f o r : i n i t i a t i v e , l e g i s l a t i v e

r e f e r e n d u m , p o p u l a r r e f e r e n d u m , r e c a l l ? 0 =

n o n e , 1 =

1 o

f t h e a

b o v e , 2 =

2

o f t h e a

b o v e , 3 = 3

o f t h e a

b o v e , 4 = a l l

o f t h e a

b o v e . 2

0 0 1 I C M A F O G

8 5 7

2 . 2 8 2

1 . 4 3 0

0 . 0 0

0

4 . 0 0 0

M a y o r – c o u n c i l

f o r m

I n d i c

a t e t h e c u r r e n t f o r m o f g o v e r n m e n t a s d e f i n e d b y y o u r c h a r t e r ,

o r d

i n a n c e , o r s t a t e l a w . 1 = m

a y o r – c o

u n c i

l f o r m , 0 = o

t h e r w

i s e . 2

0 0 1

I C M

A F O G

8 5 5

0 . 2 8 1

0 . 4 5 0

0 . 0 0

0

1 . 0 0 0

( c o n t i n u e

d )


21/25


22/25

Ahn 449

Appendix B

Odds Ratios for Logistic Regression

Application Variables

Odds Ratio

E-Code E-Service E-Minute E-Com E-News E-Video

Intercept 2.2853 0.00001* 0.0148 0.0101 1.7612E-08*** 0.0000CEO election 1.5496 0.8759 1.3028 0.8577 0.8087 1.3354CEO term limit 1.0988 1.8806 1.0757 0.7624 1.3593 0.7979Percentage council by district 0.9965 0.9966 0.9982 0.9980 0.9927*** 0.9993Council term limit 3.3122 0.5877 1.9300 1.7819 1.3290 1.0543Frequency council meeting 0.9583 1.1709 1.3262 0.9570 1.0876 0.7748Number of council members 1.1860 1.0999 1.0911 1.0490 1.0059 1.0561CEO vote all issues 0.9357 0.7422 0.8613 0.7304 0.6513 0.7921CEO can veto 0.6532 0.5172** 0.7157 0.8107 1.1991 1.0656CEO submit budget 0.7321 0.9241 0.6525 0.9814 0.6179 1.1105

CEO appoint head ofdepartment

1.4727* 0.8551 1.0450 1.1595 1.2705 1.5954

Provision on citizenparticipation

1.0312 1.0961 1.0194 1.1055 1.0764 1.0233

Mayor–council form 0.9545 1.0979 0.7981 0.9672 0.6410 0.3988Financial resource as barrier 0.5503*** 0.7008* 0.7277 0.8283 0.6004** 0.4051**Lack of technical expertise 1.3672 1.4830 0.8369 1.1952 1.2387 1.1926Staff resistance to change 0.8750 0.6446** 1.0544 0.9693 0.8390 0.6560Population 1.86661*** 1.3151*** 2.0011*** 1.6106*** 1.3064** 2.1460***Population change 1.0158 0.9919 1.0374** 1.0357** 1.0065 1.0006Percentage bachelor 1.0514** 1.0062 1.0446* 1.0084 1.0075 1.0336

Median household income 0.3934 1.9513 0.6698 0.8437 4.4567** 2.9177Unemployment rate 0.9682 1.0101 1.0126 1.0296 0.9996 0.9731Percentage White population 1.0187* 1.0055 1.0239** 1.0145* 0.9974 0.9869Political competition 0.9856** 0.9978 0.9818** 0.9887* 0.9905 0.9998Voter turnout 1.0167 0.9994 0.9959 1.0194* 0.9894 0.9451**Party sensitivity 0.8092 0.7714 0.4784*** 0.6933 0.5228** 0.5968

Note. N = 673.*p


23/25


online requests for services, such as pothole repair; online registration for use of recreational facilities/

activities, such as classes and picnic areas; online voter registration; online property registration,

such as animal, bicycle registration; forms that can be downloaded for manual completion; online com-

munication with individual and elected and appointed officials; GIS mapping/data; employment info./

applications; council agenda/minutes; codes/ordinances; electronic newsletter sent to residents/businesses;streaming video.

3. Distribution of adopters and nonadopters among all municipalities surveyed by ICMA, 2004:

Application Nonadopter Adopter Total

Codes/ordinances 1,013 (34%) 1,935 (66%) 2,948Online request of services 2,083 (71%) 871 (29%) 2,954Council agenda/minute 729 (24%) 2,256 (76%) 2,985Online communication 999 (34%) 1,907 (66%) 2,906Electronic newsletter 2,072 (72%) 794 (28%) 2,866Streaming video 2,529 (91%) 259 (9%) 2,788

4. More information on the definitions of local governments can be found on the ICMA website (Form of

Local Government Structure at http://icma.org/main/ld.asp?ldid=11226&hsid=10&tpid=20).

5. The ICMA provides the following definitions of initiative, legislative referendum, popular referendum

and recall. Initiative is defined as “initiative allows citizens to place charter, ordinance, or home rules

changes on the ballot by collecting a required number of signatures on a petition.” Here the government

can provide provisions that

• Requires that before any charter, ordinance, or home rule change proposed by citizens through a

petition process is placed on the ballot for vote, the council must consider it. Vote results are binding

on the local government. • Requires that any charger, ordinance, or home rule change proposed by the citizens through a peti-

tion process must be placed directly on the ballot for a vote. Vote results are binding on the local

government.

• Allows citizens to place on the ballot a question for voter approval or rejection. The voter response

is nonbinding on the local government.

Legislative referendum allows the council to place any question on the ballot for voter approval or

rejection where the results may be binding or non-binding. Popular referendum allows citizens to

collect signatures on a petition to place on the ballot any charter, ordinance, or home rule change that

has been adopted by the local government before the change can take effect. Recall allows citizensto collect signatures on a petition to place on the ballot a question of whether an elected official should

be removed from office before the expiration of his/her term.

References

Applebaum, A. I. (2002). Failure in the cybermarketplace of ideas. In E. C. Kamarck & J. S. Nye (Eds.),

Governance.com: Democracy in the information age (pp. 17-31). Cambridge, MA: Visions of Governance

in the 21st Century.

Doctor, S., & Dutton, W. H. (1998). The first amendment online: Santa Monica’s public electronic network.

In R. Tsagarousianou, D. Tambini, & C. Bryan (Eds.), Cyberdemocracy: Technology, cities, and civic

networks (pp. 125-151). London, England: Routledge.

Dunn, D. D., & Legge, J. S., Jr. (2000). U.S. local government managers and the complexity of responsibil-

ity and accountability in democratic governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,

11, 73-88.


24/25


25/25


Tsagarousianou, R. (1998). Electronic democracy and the public sphere: Opportunities and challenges.

In R. Tsagarousianou, D. Tambini, & C. Bryan (Eds.), Cyberdemocracy: Technology, cities, and civic

networks (pp. 167-178). London, England: Routledge.

Tsagarousianou, R., Tambini, D., & Bryan, C. (Eds.). (1998). Cyberdemocracy: Technology, cities, and civic

networks. London, England: Routledge.United Nations Online Network in Public Administration and Finance. (2005). UN global E-government

readiness report 2005: From E-government to E-inclusion. New York, NY: United Nations. Retrieved

from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan021888.pdf.

Weare, C., Musso, J. A., & Hale, M. L. (1999). Electronic democracy and the diffusion of municipal web pages

in California. Administration & Society, 31, 3-27.

Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with E-government and trust

in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 371-391.

West, D. M. (2004). E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public

Administration Review, 64, 15-27.

West, D. M. (2005). Digital government: Technology and public sector performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

West, D. M. (2008, August 17). Improving technology utilization in electronic government around the world ,

2008 (Brookings Governance Studies). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Wilhelm, A. G. (2000). Democracy in the digital age: Challenges to political life in cyberspace. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Bio

Michael J. Ahn is an assistant professor at the Department of Public Policy and Public Affairs at the

McCormack Graduate School of Policy Studies, University of Massachusetts Boston where he teaches and

conducts research in IT in the public sector, e-government, public organization, performance management,

and international comparative public administration. He received his PhD at the Maxwell School of Citizen-ship and Public Affairs at Syracuse in 2007.

e-government has been touted by many as a technologica

Documents