If We Build It, Will They Come?: An Appreciation of the Microfoundations of E-Government

Introduction

Efforts to apply technology to government offer the public a host of potential benefits (West, 2005). These benefits range from providing virtual access to information and service for citizen to transforming the way that government functions (Kim & Layne, 2001; Andersen & Henriksen, 2006). As technology advances and the level of technology sophistication in the general population becomes more pervasive, expectations by both citizens and policymakers rise. Unfortunately, the success of e-government efforts doesn’t always meet expectations. The recent experience of the United States with the website for the Affordable Care Act is just another reminder of a long litany of issues with the effectiveness of e-government. While there are certainly a host of potential reasons for any e-government failure, one of the least recognized is a lack of potential fit with the microfoundations of government. Microfoundations is a popular and often controversial concept in the social sciences (particularly economics), but lacks a consistent usage in the literature on e-government. For the purpose of this study, microfoundations refer to the structures and relationships that underpin certain social processes or activities that influence how institutions operate. Here, these social structures, and processes work as the foundation (hence the term, microfoundations)for government and effective government operation depends on their characteristics.

Putnam (2000; 1995) famously argues that social capital provides the microfoundations for effective national and local government. There is considerable evidence that social systems either promote or inhibit innovation (Rogers, 1983). Some researchers talk about a culture of innovativeness (Boehmke & Skinner, 2012) in states. These are factors that are generally ignored in approaches that look at what technology can potentially do and assume that installing it is adequate. The problem is that many e-government advocates ignore the microfoundations of both technology use and government. This approach, sometimes call the “field of dreams problem” (if you build it, they will come), characterizes the approach of a number of both practitioners and academics. If planners and policy makers had access to these additional dimensions, they could make smarter and more successful choices.

Since e-government activities are conducted by governmental institutions, the microfoundations of e-government cannot be completely separated from those of government per se. Still, it is unclear that effective governments are necessarily better at e-government than ineffective ones. Technology competence doesn’t always follow from excellence in other functions. This research will explore this dimension by offering a cross sectional consideration of the relationship between E-government quality and underlying value and governmental dimensions while controlling for the digital divide and per capita GNP. We will explore the following research questions:

• RQ1: Is there a relationship between underlying social values, social conditions, citizen characteristics and social capital and e-government outcomes?

• RQ2: Is this relationship (if any) affected by the digital divide and economic output?