IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/amfeco/v22y2020i53p275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Best Practices of the Social Innovations in the Framework of the E-Government Evolution

Author

Listed:
  • Vasja Roblek

    (Faculty of Organisation Studies, Slovenia)

  • Mirjana Pejic Bach

    (University of Zagreb, Faculty of Economics and Business, Croatia)

  • Maja Mesko

    (University of Primorska, Slovenia)

  • Tine Bertoncel

    (University of Primorska, Slovenia)

Abstract

The social innovations have been together with the advanced technology in the 21st century, taking an essential role in social structures and their informatization processes. Information technology has become an indispensable factor not only in industry and service businesses, but also in governing systems at the micro (cities and regions) and macro (state and nations) levels. The information processes, which includes automation, have in the last few years an important impact on the transformation from “classical” governance into the “smart governance”. In the paper are presented the best practices which show how could social innovations, together with the advanced technology also lead to the several democratic changes in the urban environment. It can be concluded that it will in many ways reorganize public decision – makings, create changes in democratic processes that are in accordance with socioeconomic and technological development, and will represent the basis for the emergence of the so-called the smartest social community and the ensuing novel processes of organization and operation.

Suggested Citation

  • Vasja Roblek & Mirjana Pejic Bach & Maja Mesko & Tine Bertoncel, 2020. "Best Practices of the Social Innovations in the Framework of the E-Government Evolution," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(53), pages 275-275, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:22:y:2020:i:53:p:275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_2868.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bev Wilson & Arnab Chakraborty, 2019. "Planning Smart(er) Cities: The Promise of Civic Technology," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 29-51, October.
    2. repec:aud:audfin:v:20:y:2018:i:49:p:805 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Chon-Kyun Kim, 2007. "A Cross-national Analysis of Global E-government," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 317-329, December.
    4. Silke Roth, 2018. "Introduction: Contemporary Counter-Movements in the Age of Brexit and Trump," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 23(2), pages 496-506, June.
    5. Emiliana De Blasio & Michele Sorice, 2018. "Populism between direct democracy and the technological myth," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Citrin, Jack, 1974. "Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(3), pages 973-988, September.
    7. Zareh Asatryan & Thushyanthan Baskaran & Theocharis Grigoriadis & Friedrich Heinemann, 2017. "Direct Democracy and Local Public Finances under Cooperative Federalism," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 119(3), pages 801-820, July.
    8. Lisa Blomgren Bingham, 2006. "The New Urban Governance: Processes for Engaging Citizens and Stakeholders," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 23(4), pages 815-826, July.
    9. Mohammad I. Merhi, 2018. "Does National Culture Have Any Impact on E-Government Usage?," International Journal of Technology Diffusion (IJTD), IGI Global, vol. 9(3), pages 29-45, July.
    10. Sangki, Jin, 2018. "Vision of future e-government via new e-government maturity model: Based on Korea's e-government practices," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 860-871.
    11. Tine Bertoncel & Ivan Erenda & Maja Meško, 2018. "Best Practices. Managerial Early Warning System as Best Practice for Project Selection at a Smart Factory," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 20(49), pages 805-805, August.
    12. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay & Massimo Mastruzzi, 2010. "Response to ‘What do the Worldwide Governance Indicators Measure?’," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 22(1), pages 55-58, February.
    13. William Dunn & David Miller, 2007. "A Critique of the New Public Management and the Neo-Weberian State: Advancing a Critical Theory of Administrative Reform," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 345-358, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodek, Nóra & Birkner, Zoltán & Máhr, Tivadar & Rentz, Tamás, 2020. "Social Innovation: Examples within Hungarian context," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2020), Virtual Conference, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Virtual Conference, 10-12 September 2020, pages 586-592, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    2. Ana Nesic & Slavica Mitrovic Veljkovic, & Maja Mesko & Tine Bertoncel, 2020. "Correlation of Trust and Work Engagement: a Modern Organizational Approach," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(Special 1), pages 1283-1283, November.
    3. Aleksander Aristovnik & Polonca Kovač & Eva Murko & Dejan Ravšelj & Lan Umek & Marie Bohatá & Bernhard Hirsch & Fabienne-Sophie Schäfer & Nina Tomaževič, 2021. "The Use of ICT by Local General Administrative Authorities during COVID-19 for a Sustainable Future: Comparing Five European Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Vasja Roblek & Oshane Thorpe & Mirjana Pejic Bach & Andrej Jerman & Maja Meško, 2020. "The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Sustainability Practices: A Comparative Automated Content Analysis Approach of Theory and Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-27, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric M. Uslaner, 2007. "Tax Evasion, Corruption, and the Social Contract in Transition," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper0725, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    2. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Pamela E. Ofori & Simplice A. Asongu & Vanessa S. Tchamyou, 2021. "The Synergy between Governance and Economic Integration in Promoting Female Economic Inclusion in Sub-Saharan Africa," Working Papers 21/071, European Xtramile Centre of African Studies (EXCAS).
    4. Galletta, Sergio & Jametti, Mario, 2015. "How to tame two Leviathans? Revisiting the effect of direct democracy on local public expenditure in a federation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 82-93.
    5. Olga I. Timofeeva, 2022. "Methodology and Results of Measuring the Transparency of Russian Regional Budgets," Finansovyj žhurnal — Financial Journal, Financial Research Institute, Moscow 125375, Russia, issue 6, pages 44-58, December.
    6. Thushyanthan Baskaran & Zohal Hessami, 2017. "Political alignment and intergovernmental transfers in parliamentary systems: evidence from Germany," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 75-98, April.
    7. Ienovan Alexandra Ana, 2018. "The Impact of Public Governance on Corruption," Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(2), pages 263-267, December.
    8. Massimo Finocchiaro Castro & Calogero Guccio, 2020. "Birds of a feather flock together: trust in government, political selection and electoral punishment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 263-287, September.
    9. Seri, Paolo & Bianchi, Annaflavia & Matteucci, Nicola, 2014. "Diffusion and usage of public e-services in Europe: An assessment of country level indicators and drivers," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 496-513.
    10. Tóth, Balázs, 2021. "Milyen kapcsolatban állnak a közszféra reformjai a gazdaságpolitikai paradigmákkal? [How reforms of the public sector relate to the paradigms of economic policy]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 205-222.
    11. Cipolletta, Germano & Fiorani, Gloria & Matei, Ani & Matei, Lucica & Meneguzzo, Marco & Mititelu, Cristina, 2010. "Public Sector Modernization Trends of the Member States of European Union.Trajectories of reforms in Italy and Romania," Apas Papers 267, Academic Public Administration Studies Archive - APAS.
    12. Del Bosco, Barbara & Cristina Bettinelli, 2020. "How Do Family SMEs Control Their Investments Abroad? The Role of Distance and Family Control," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 1-35, February.
    13. Serhiy SHKARLET & Igor OLIYCHENKO & Maksym DUBYNA & Maryna DITKOVSKA & Vladimir ZHOVTOK, 2020. "Comparative Analysis Of Best Practices In E-Government Implementation And Use Of This Experience By Developing Countries," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2020(34), pages 118-136, June.
    14. Stutzer, Alois & Baltensperger, Michael & Meier, Armando N., 2018. "Overstrained Citizens?," Working papers 2018/25, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    15. Rui Wang & Hang (Robin) Luo, 2019. "Does Financial Liberalization Affect Bank Risk-Taking in China?," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(4), pages 21582440198, November.
    16. Yuriy V. Belousov, 2022. "Transparent Budget in the System of Public Administration," Finansovyj žhurnal — Financial Journal, Financial Research Institute, Moscow 125375, Russia, issue 4, pages 79-91, August.
    17. Fiorenza Venturini, 2018. "The Unintended Composition Effect of the Subnational Government Fiscal Rules: The Case of Italian Municipalities," Working papers 70, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    18. Nunkoo, Robin & Smith, Stephen L.J., 2013. "Political economy of tourism: Trust in government actors, political support, and their determinants," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 120-132.
    19. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Examining the Moderation Effect of Political Trust on the Linkage between Civic Morality and Support for Environmental Taxation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    20. Glyptis, Loukas & Christofi, Michael & Vrontis, Demetris & Giudice, Manlio Del & Dimitriou, Salomi & Michael, Panayiota, 2020. "E-Government implementation challenges in small countries: The project manager's perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    best practices; e-government; e-participation; governance; public value theory; smart governance; social innovations;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:22:y:2020:i:53:p:275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Valentin Dumitru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.