IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v6y2018i4p175-186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of User Participation Methods on E-Government Projects: The Case of La Louvière, Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony Simonofski

    (Leuven Institute for Research on Information Systems (LIRIS), Faculty of Economy and Business, KU Leuven/Computer Science Faculty, University of Namur, 5000 Namur, Belgium)

  • Benoît Vanderose

    (Computer Science Faculty, University of Namur, Belgium)

  • Antoine Clarinval

    (Computer Science Faculty, University of Namur, Belgium)

  • Monique Snoeck

    (Leuven Institute for Research on Information Systems (LIRIS), Faculty of Economy and Business, KU Leuven, Belgium)

Abstract

In recent years, information and communication technologies (ICT) have allowed governments to improve their internal functioning and to improve the delivery of information and services to their users. This application of ICT in governments has been conceptualized as “e-government”. However, more recently, smart cities emerged as a locally-embedded paradigm that proposes the design of innovative solutions across all domains of our everyday life (mobility, environment, economy, education, quality of life, and governance) with ICT as an enabler. In their recent evolutions, these two concepts have advocated for increased involvement of their stakeholders (citizens, businesses, public servants, etc.) through user-participation methods to support the design of their projects. This article intends to examine how these methods impact an e-government project and, more particularly, to find out which challenges and benefits practitioners experience. In order to reach that goal, we studied the case of the city of La Louvière (Belgium) through a one year plus study following action research’s best practices. This article contributes at several levels. First, it describes the challenges and benefits experienced with participation methods in a concrete project. Second, it proposes an e-government implementation process enhanced with these methods. Third, this article discusses the similarities and differences between e-government and smart cities through the lens of participation methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony Simonofski & Benoît Vanderose & Antoine Clarinval & Monique Snoeck, 2018. "The Impact of User Participation Methods on E-Government Projects: The Case of La Louvière, Belgium," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 175-186.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v6:y:2018:i:4:p:175-186
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v6i4.1657
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/1657
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1657?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert G. Hollands, 2015. "Critical interventions into the corporate smart city," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 8(1), pages 61-77.
    2. Robert G. Hollands, 2008. "Will the real smart city please stand up?," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 303-320, December.
    3. Anna Cossetta & Mauro Palumbo, 2014. "The Co-production of Social Innovation Social innovation : The Case of Living Lab Living Lab," Progress in IS, in: Renata Paola Dameri & Camille Rosenthal-Sabroux (ed.), Smart City, edition 127, pages 221-235, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anthony Simonofski & Benoît Vanderose & Antoine Clarinval & Monique Snoeck, 2018. "The Impact of User Participation Methods on E-Government Projects: The Case of La Louvière, Belgium," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 175-186.
    2. Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko, 2016. "City-as-a-Platform: The Rise of Participatory Innovation Platforms in Finnish Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-31, September.
    3. Małgorzata Baran & Monika Kłos & Monika Chodorek & Karolina Marchlewska-Patyk, 2022. "The Resilient Smart City Model–Proposal for Polish Cities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2020. "Why distance matters: The relatedness between technology development and its appropriation in smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Trencher, Gregory, 2019. "Towards the smart city 2.0: Empirical evidence of using smartness as a tool for tackling social challenges," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 117-128.
    6. Francesco Schiavone & Francesco Paolo Appio & Luca Mora & Marcello Risitano, 2020. "The strategic, organizational, and entrepreneurial evolution of smart cities," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1155-1165, December.
    7. J. Ramon Gil-Garcia & Tzuhao Chen & Mila Gasco-Hernandez, 2023. "Smart City Results and Sustainability: Current Progress and Emergent Opportunities for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    8. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2019. "Smart cities and entrepreneurship: An agenda for future research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    9. Huaxiong Jiang & Stan Geertman & Patrick Witte, 2020. "Avoiding the planning support system pitfalls? What smart governance can learn from the planning support system implementation gap," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1343-1360, October.
    10. Gimpel, Henner & Graf, Vanessa & Graf-Drasch, Valerie, 2020. "A comprehensive model for individuals’ acceptance of smart energy technology – A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    11. Alan-Miguel Valdez & Matthew Cook & Stephen Potter, 2018. "Roadmaps to utopia: Tales of the smart city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(15), pages 3385-3403, November.
    12. Stephen Leitheiser & Alexander Follmann, 2020. "The social innovation–(re)politicisation nexus: Unlocking the political in actually existing smart city campaigns? The case of SmartCity Cologne, Germany," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(4), pages 894-915, March.
    13. Adrian Buttazzoni & Marta Veenhof & Leia Minaker, 2020. "Smart City and High-Tech Urban Interventions Targeting Human Health: An Equity-Focused Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Secinaro, Silvana & Brescia, Valerio & Lanzalonga, Federico & Santoro, Gabriele, 2022. "Smart city reporting: A bibliometric and structured literature review analysis to identify technological opportunities and challenges for sustainable development," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 296-313.
    15. Lyons, Glenn, 2018. "Getting smart about urban mobility – Aligning the paradigms of smart and sustainable," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 4-14.
    16. Bernd W. Wirtz & Wilhelm M. Müller & Florian W. Schmidt, 2021. "Digital Public Services in Smart Cities – an Empirical Analysis of Lead User Preferences," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 299-315, June.
    17. Jalaluddin Abdul Malek & Seng Boon Lim & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2021. "Social Inclusion Indicators for Building Citizen-Centric Smart Cities: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-29, January.
    18. Eusebio Scornavacca & Francesco Paolone & Stefano Za & Laura Martiniello, 2020. "Investigating the entrepreneurial perspective in smart city studies," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1197-1223, December.
    19. Mora, Luca & Deakin, Mark & Reid, Alasdair, 2019. "Combining co-citation clustering and text-based analysis to reveal the main development paths of smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 56-69.
    20. Marta Bottero & Caterina Caprioli & Giancarlo Cotella & Marco Santangelo, 2019. "Sustainable Cities: A Reflection on Potentialities and Limits based on Existing Eco-Districts in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-22, October.

    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:cog:meanco:v6:y:2018:i:4:p:175-186. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.