IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/polsoc/v41y2022i3p343-357..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining public officials’ opinions on blockchain adoption: a vignette experiment
[Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets]

Author

Listed:
  • Diego Cagigas
  • Judith Clifton
  • Daniel Díaz-Fuentes
  • Marcos Fernández-Gutiérrez
  • Juan Echevarría-Cuenca
  • Celia Gilsanz-Gómez

Abstract

Blockchain is emerging as one of the major disruptive technologies of our times. In the context of public administration, blockchain heralds major transformations of public service provision and has the potential to increase the transparency of, and citizens’ trust in, public administration and its services. However, the introduction of blockchain to public administrations means potentially changing aspects of the job performed by public officials, including their day-to-day activities and responsibilities, and even their very control over administrative processes. While some public officials may view blockchain positively as a means of improving current administrative practices, others may view it more negatively and resist it. The acceptance or otherwise of blockchain is, therefore, a fundamental issue for analysis. We conduct a vignette experiment to probe public officials’ opinions on the introduction of blockchain in the provision of public services in a local council. We follow an influential classification of blockchain configurations to analyze whether different configurations of blockchain affect public officials’ opinions toward its implementation. Results show that a more public configuration of certain aspects of the blockchain increases the likelihood that public officials will accept blockchain, while it is also associated with an increase in trust in public administration and its services.

Suggested Citation

  • Diego Cagigas & Judith Clifton & Daniel Díaz-Fuentes & Marcos Fernández-Gutiérrez & Juan Echevarría-Cuenca & Celia Gilsanz-Gómez, 2022. "Explaining public officials’ opinions on blockchain adoption: a vignette experiment [Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 343-357.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:41:y:2022:i:3:p:343-357.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/polsoc/puab022
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Papathanasiou, Angeliki & Cole, Rosanna & Murray, Philip, 2020. "The (non-)application of blockchain technology in the Greek shipping industry," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 927-938.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. Buurman, Margaretha & Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert & Van den Bossche, Seth, 2012. "Public sector employees: Risk averse and altruistic?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 279-291.
    4. Kouhizadeh, Mahtab & Saberi, Sara & Sarkis, Joseph, 2021. "Blockchain technology and the sustainable supply chain: Theoretically exploring adoption barriers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    5. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    6. Judith Clifton & Amy Glasmeier & Mia Gray, 2020. "When machines think for us: the consequences for work and place," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 13(1), pages 3-23.
    7. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(6), pages 2188-2244.
    8. J. Ramon Gil-Garcia & Sharon S. Dawes & Theresa A. Pardo, 2018. "Digital government and public management research: finding the crossroads," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 633-646, May.
    9. Bernd W. Wirtz & Robert Piehler & Marc-Julian Thomas & Peter Daiser, 2016. "Resistance of Public Personnel to Open Government: A cognitive theory view of implementation barriers towards open government data," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(9), pages 1335-1364, October.
    10. Janssen, Marijn & Weerakkody, Vishanth & Ismagilova, Elvira & Sivarajah, Uthayasankar & Irani, Zahir, 2020. "A framework for analysing blockchain technology adoption: Integrating institutional, market and technical factors," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 302-309.
    11. Stephen P. Osborne, 2018. "From public service-dominant logic to public service logic: are public service organizations capable of co-production and value co-creation?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 225-231, February.
    12. Torugsa, Nuttaneeya (Ann) & Arundel, Anthony, 2017. "Rethinking the effect of risk aversion on the benefits of service innovations in public administration agencies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 900-910.
    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. Judith Clifton & Leslie A Pal, 2022. "The policy dilemmas of blockchain [Blockchain technology and decentralized governance: Is the state still necessary?]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(3), pages 321-327.
    2. Cagigas, Diego & Clifton, Judith & Diaz-Fuentes, Daniel & Fernández-Gutiérrez, Marcos & Harpes, Carlo, 2023. "Blockchain in Government: Towards an Evaluation Framework," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 277947, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).

    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. Janne Tukiainen & Sebastian Blesse & Albrecht Bohne & Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Jan Jäässkeläinen & Ari Luukinen & Antti Sieppi, 2021. "What Are the Priorities of Bureaucrats? Evidence from Conjoint Experiments with Procurement Officials," EconPol Working Paper 63, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    2. Oguntegbe, Kunle Francis & Di Paola, Nadia & Vona, Roberto, 2022. "Behavioural antecedents to blockchain implementation in agrifood supply chain management: A thematic analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Annie Tubadji & Toby Denney & Don J. Webber, 2021. "Cultural relativity in consumers' rates of adoption of artificial intelligence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 1234-1251, July.
    4. Arundel, Anthony & Bloch, Carter & Ferguson, Barry, 2019. "Advancing innovation in the public sector: Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 789-798.
    5. Asrar Ahmed Sabir & Iftikhar Ahmad & Hassan Ahmad & Muhammad Rafiq & Muhammad Asghar Khan & Neelum Noreen, 2023. "Consumer Acceptance and Adoption of AI Robo-Advisors in Fintech Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    6. Cagigas, Diego & Clifton, Judith & Diaz-Fuentes, Daniel & Fernández-Gutiérrez, Marcos & Harpes, Carlo, 2023. "Blockchain in Government: Towards an Evaluation Framework," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 277947, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    7. Alberto Peralta & Luis Rubalcaba, 2021. "How Governance Paradigms and Other Drivers Affect Public Managers’ Use of Innovation Practices. A PLS-SEM Analysis and Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-28, May.
    8. Balci, Gökcay & Surucu-Balci, Ebru, 2021. "Blockchain adoption in the maritime supply chain: Examining barriers and salient stakeholders in containerized international trade," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    9. Peter Sasitharan Gandhi Maniam & Catherine Prentice & Anne-Marie Sassenberg & Jeffrey Soar, 2023. "Identifying an Optimal Model for Blockchain Technology Adoption in the Agricultural Sector," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-19, September.
    10. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    11. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    12. Lai, Kee-hung & Feng, Yunting & Zhu, Qinghua, 2023. "Digital transformation for green supply chain innovation in manufacturing operations," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    13. Clara Cardone-Riportella & María José Casasola-Martinez & Isabel Feito-Ruiz, 2014. "Do Entrepreneurs Come From Venus Or Mars? Impact Of Postgraduate Studies: Gender And Family Business Background," Working Papers 14.04, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Financial Economics and Accounting (former Department of Business Administration), revised Sep 2014.
    14. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    15. Ruijie Zhu & Guojing Zhao & Zehai Long & Yangjie Huang & Zhaoxin Huang, 2022. "Entrepreneurship or Employment? A Survey of College Students’ Sustainable Entrepreneurial Intentions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Cette, Gilbert & Devillard, Aurélien & Spiezia, Vincenzo, 2021. "The contribution of robots to productivity growth in 30 OECD countries over 1975–2019," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    17. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.
    18. Pan, Jing Yu & Liu, Dahai, 2022. "Mask-wearing intentions on airplanes during COVID-19 – Application of theory of planned behavior model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 32-44.
    19. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.
    20. Jacqueline Ruth & Steffen Willwacher & Oliver Korn, 2022. "Acceptance of Digital Sports: A Study Showing the Rising Acceptance of Digital Health Activities Due to the SARS-CoV-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-16, January.

    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:oup:polsoc:v:41:y:2022:i:3:p:343-357.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .

    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.