Abstract

This study investigates the impact of global networks on e-government development and the role of political regime types in e-government diffusion through international networks. We built a unique social network dataset that covers 148 countries for the years between 2003 and 2014. Our network dataset is rooted in two assumptions: 1) international organizations serve as peak organizations for international policy networks, 2) public managers who participate in international e-government conferences held by the UN and OECD work as boundary spanners. Our empirical evidence suggests that countries well embedded in global e-government networks receive ideas for public sector innovation from international conferences and show a high level of e-government development. However, political regime types serve as implicit and explicit filters of ideas for boundary-spanning activities. Ties between countries with the same political regime improve e-participation and ties between autocracies have a positive impact on online service delivery. However, ties between countries with different political regimes have no impact on e-participation and a negative influence on online service delivery. Thus, we debunk the democratic advantage perspective by demonstrating that democracies and autocracies have different ideas of and purposes for e-government.

摘要

本研究调查了全球网络对电子政务发展的影响以及政治政权类型在电子政务通过国际网络传播中的作用。我们建立了一个独特的社交网络数据集，涵盖 2003 年至 2014 年间的 148 个国家。我们的网络数据集植根于两个假设：1）国际组织作为国际政策网络的高峰组织，2）参与国际电子商务的公共管理者。 - 联合国和经合组织举办的政府会议具有跨越边界的作用。我们的经验证据表明，充分融入全球电子政务网络的国家从国际会议中获得公共部门创新的想法，并表现出高水平的电子政务发展。然而，政治政权类型充当跨边界活动的隐式和显式思想过滤器。具有相同政治制度的国家之间的联系改善了电子参与，独裁国家之间的联系对在线服务提供产生积极影响。然而，不同政体国家之间的联系对电子参与没有影响，对在线服务提供也没有负面影响。因此，我们通过证明民主国家和独裁国家对电子政务有不同的想法和目的来揭穿民主优势观点。不同政体国家之间的关系对电子参与没有影响，对在线服务提供也没有负面影响。因此，我们通过证明民主国家和独裁国家对电子政务有不同的想法和目的来揭穿民主优势观点。不同政体国家之间的关系对电子参与没有影响，对在线服务提供也没有负面影响。因此，我们通过证明民主国家和独裁国家对电子政务有不同的想法和目的来揭穿民主优势观点。