How does policy attention affect e-government performance? The role of resource allocation and public–private collaboration
Abstract
Although governments are continually investing in e-government construction, differences in e-government performance exist. This study aims to examine how policy attention affects e-government performance through the mediating effect of resource allocation and the moderating effect of public–private collaboration. Analysis of panel data from 333 prefectural governments in China confirms that policy attention can increase e-government performance, but the effect size decreases under the mediating role of financial and human resources. Furthermore, higher public–private collaboration weakens the positive effect of government resources on e-government performance and policy attention on e-government performance.
Points for practitioners
This article can help practitioners recognize the importance of policy attention in guiding e-government implementation by verifying policy attention–resource allocation–e-government performance association. Moreover, this study also provides some suggestions for practitioners seeking to collaborate with private organizations by confirming the negative role of public–private collaboration between government resources and e-government performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Andrews R, Entwistle T (2010) Does cross-sectoral partnership deliver? An empirical exploration of public service effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20(3): 679–701.
Ariana S, Azim C, Antoni D (2020) Clustering of ICT human resources capacity in the implementation of E-government in expansion area: a case study from pali regency. Cogent Business & Management 7(1): 1–15.
Baekgaard M, Larsen SK, Mortensen PB (2019) Negative feedback, political attention, and public policy. Public Administration 97(1): 210–225.
Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6): 1173–1182.
Bevan S (2015) Bureaucratic responsiveness: effects of elected government, public agendas and European attention on the UK bureaucracy. Public Administration 93(1): 139–158.
Chen S, Christensen T, Ma L (2023) Reputation management and administrative reorganization: How different media reputation dimensions matter for agency termination. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 33(2): 217–231.
Connell A, Denny SE, Martin S (2022) How can subnational governments develop and deliver distinctive policy agendas? International Review of Administrative Sciences 88(4): 1159–1175.
Connelly BL, Certo ST, Ireland RD, et al. (2011) Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management 37(1): 39–67.
Cordella A, Willcocks L (2010) Outsourcing, bureaucracy and public value: Reappraising the notion of the “contract state”. Government Information Quarterly 27(1): 82–88.
David L, Chiako H (2022) Meta-analysis of collaboration and performance: moderating tests of sectoral differences in collaborative performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 32(2): 360–379.
Fan Z, Meng Q, Wei N (2019) Fiscal slack or environmental pressures: Which matters more for technological innovation assimilation? A configurational approach. International Public Management Journal 23(3): 1–33.
Fan Z, Christensen T, Ma L (2022) Policy attention and the adoption of public sector innovation. Public Management Review. Epub ahead of print 13 March 2022.
Gomes RC, Osborne SP, Erika L (2022) The myth of mayoral leadership in local government resource allocation: A multilevel analysis with Brazilian municipalities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 32(3): 561–575.
Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Hu G, Jin S, Pan W, et al. (2012) A hierarchical model of e-government service capability: An empirical analysis. Government Information Quarterly 29(4): 564–572.
Jin G, Shen K (2019) Political incentives for local officials and the diffusion of river chief system: From the perspective of officials’ age. Finance & Trade Economics 40(4): 20–34.
Jones BD, Baumgartner FR (2005) The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Jones BD, Baumgartner FR, Breunig C, et al. (2009) A general empirical law of public budgets: a comparative analysis. American Journal of Political Science 53(4): 855–873.
Jun KN, Weare C (2011) Institutional motivations in the adoption of innovations: The case of e-government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21(3): 495–519.
Kivleniece I, Quelin B (2012) Creating and capturing value in public–private ties: A private actor’s perspective. The Academy of Management Review 37(2): 272–299.
Lavie D (2006) The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Review 31(3): 638–658.
Lee CP, Chang K, Berry FS (2011) Testing the development and diffusion of e-government and e-democracy: A global perspective. Public Administration Review 71(3): 444–454.
Lee SY, Chen G (2022) Disaster experience and governments’ savings: The moderating role of organizational capacity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 32(3): 591–609.
Lee SY, Whitford AB (2013) Assessing the effects of organizational resources on public agency performance: Evidence from the US federal government. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory 23(3): 687–712.
Lian H (2018) Competition for attention in the Chinese bureaucracy. The Journal of Chinese Sociology 5(1): 1–25.
Liu T, Yang X, Zheng Y (2020) Understanding the evolution of public–private partnerships in Chinese e-government: Four stages of development. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration 42(4): 222–247.
Lowery D, Gray V, Baumgartner FR (2010) Policy attention in state and nation: Is anyone listening to the laboratories of democracy? Publius: The Journal of Federalism 41(2): 286–310.
Ma L, Wu X (2020) Citizen engagement and co-production of e-government services in China. Journal of Chinese Governance 5(1): 68–89.
Ma L, Christensen T, Zheng Y (2023) Government technological capacity and public–private partnerships regarding digital service delivery: Evidence from Chinese cities. International Review of Administrative Sciences 89(1): 95–111.
Mortensen PB (2009) Political attention and public spending in the United States. Policy Studies Journal 37(3): 435–455.
Mortensen PB, Green-Pedersen C (2015) Institutional effects of changes in political attention: Explaining organizational changes in the top bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25(1): 165–189.
Oliver C (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review 16(1): 145–179.
Osah J, Pade-Khene C (2020) E-government strategy formulation in resource-constrained local government in South Africa. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 17(4): 426–451.
Pan T, Fan B (2023) Institutional pressures, policy attention, and e-government service capability: Evidence from China’s prefecture-level cities. Public Performance & Management Review 46(2): 445–471.
Park S, Choi YT, Bok HS (2013) Does better e-readiness induce more use of e-government? Evidence from the Korean central e-government. International Review of Administrative Sciences 79(4): 767–789.
Picazo-Vela S, Gutiérrez-Martínez I, Duhamel F, et al. (2018) Value of inter-organizational collaboration in digital government projects. Public Management Review 20(5): 691–708.
Plourde Y, Parker SC, Schaan JL (2014) Expatriation and its effect on headquarters’ attention in the multinational enterprise. Strategic Management Journal 35(6): 938–947.
Porcher S (2016) Neither market nor hierarchy: Concurrent sourcing in water public services. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 26(4): 800–812.
Reddick CG (2006) Information resource managers and e-government effectiveness: A survey of Texas state agencies. Government Information Quarterly 23(2): 249–266.
Sharma S (2007) Exploring best practices in public private partnership (PPP) in e-government through select Asian case studies. The International Information & Library Review 39(3–4): 203–210.
Simon HA (1947) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organizations. Chicago, IL: Macmillan.
Singh K, Mahmood IP, Natarajan S (2017) Capital market development and firm restructuring during an economic shock. Organization Science 28(3): 552–573.
Song J, Liu H, Sun Y, et al. (2022) Contextual recipes for adopting private control and trust in public–private partnership governance. Public Administration. Epub ahead of print 7 January 2022.
Stowers GNL (2002) The State of Federal Websites: The Pursuit of Excellence. Arlington, VA: The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government.
Tan H, Zhao X, Zhang N (2022) Technology symbolization: Political mechanism of local e-government adoption and implementation. International Review of Administrative Sciences 88(2): 511–532.
Wang W (2016) The effects of political and fiscal incentives on local government behavior: An analysis of fiscal slack in China. International Public Management Journal 20(2): 294–315.
Wirtz BW, Daiser P (2018) A meta-analysis of empirical e-government research and its future research implications. International Review of Administrative Sciences 84(1): 144–163.
Zheng D, Chen J, Huang L, et al. (2013) E-government adoption in public administration organizations: Integrating institutional theory perspective and resource-based view. European Journal of Information Systems 22(2): 221–234.
Zheng Y, Yang X, Gan Q, et al. (2022) Understanding the modes of digital government construction in China from the perspective of public–private-partnership: A comparative analysis based on representative provinces and cities. Governance Studies 38(4): 38–50.
Zhu X, Zhang Y (2019) Diffusion of marketization innovation with administrative centralization in a multilevel system: Evidence from China. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 29(1): 133–150.
Zhu X, Zhao H (2021) Experimentalist governance with interactive central–local relations: Making new pension policies in China. Policy Studies Journal 49(1): 13–36.
Biographies
Taiting Pan is a PHD student in The School of Economics and Management, Harbin Engineering University, China. Her major is E-government and emergency management.
Bo Fan is a Professor in School of International and Public Affairs, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. His major is Public administration, and his research interests include E-government and Emergency management. He has published in Public Management Review, Government Information Quarterly, Decision Support Systems, European Journal of Operational Research, and so on.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: July 18, 2023
Issue published: June 2024
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in International Review of Administrative Sciences.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 138
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 0
There are no citing articles to show.
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
Get access
Get access
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
Access journal content via a university, library or employer subscription.
IIAS members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
