IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gov/wpregi/1606.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Open innovative governance, transparency and citizens´ quality of life: An application to Portuguese municipalities

Author

Listed:
  • João Leitão
  • Helena Alves
  • Dina Pereira

Abstract

The new paradigm for public administration is founded on different meanings for distinct dimensions of open innovative governance. Thus, "open" may mean: open governance; open data; open information; and open innovation; which stand for new types of open relationships between citizens, firms and municipalities. In the context of citizens’ rights, open innovative governance is approached as the right to participate in the innovation process of agenda-setting and decision-making. The chapter discusses the effects of open innovative governance and municipalities’ transparency on citizens’ quality of life. To do so, we test different specifications of probit models, by taking as a reference a population of 308 Portuguese municipalities and using the data collected through the Local Authority site, integrated in the Local Government Integrity for Portugal initiative, in the period 2013-2014. To assess the effects on quality of life, a proxy for citizens’ well-being is considered, taking into account the positive variation of the citizens’ purchasing power index. The main results reveal a positive and significant influence of open innovative governance on citizens’ quality of life, regarding two dimensions: Plans and planning; and Taxes, fees, prices and regulations. Moreover, a positive and significant association between higher education institutions and citizens’ quality of life is revealed, although this could be counterbalanced by the negative effects associated with the condition of being a low density municipality and variation in purchasing power.

Suggested Citation

  • João Leitão & Helena Alves & Dina Pereira, 2016. "Open innovative governance, transparency and citizens´ quality of life: An application to Portuguese municipalities," Working Papers. Collection B: Regional and sectoral economics 1606, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    • Handle: RePEc:gov:wpregi:1606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://infogen.webs.uvigo.es/WPB/WP1606.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2016
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bjørnskov, Christian & Dreher, Axel & Fischer, Justina A.V., 2010. "Formal institutions and subjective well-being: Revisiting the cross-country evidence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 419-430, December.
    2. Randall W. Eberts, 2005. "Financing Local Economic Development: Experiences in Europe and the United States," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Local Governance and the Drivers of Growth, pages 175-229, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    3. Helliwell, John F. & Huang, Haifang, 2008. "How's Your Government? International Evidence Linking Good Government and Well-Being," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(4), pages 595-619, October.
    4. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2007. "Governance Matters VI: Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators, 1996-2006," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4280, The World Bank.
    5. Helliwell, John F., 2003. "How's life? Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective well-being," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 331-360, March.
    6. J. Ott, 2011. "Government and Happiness in 130 Nations: Good Governance Fosters Higher Level and More Equality of Happiness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 3-22, May.
    7. Marta Orviska & Anetta Caplanova & John Hudson, 2014. "The Impact of Democracy on Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 493-508, January.
    8. Bruno Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2000. "Happiness Prospers in Democracy," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 79-102, March.
    9. Tsang, Eric W. K., 2014. "Old and New," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 390-390, November.
    10. Seoyong Kim & Donggeun Kim, 2012. "Does Government Make People Happy?: Exploring New Research Directions for Government’s Roles in Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 875-899, October.
    11. Kaufmann, Daniel & Montoriol-Garriga, Judit & Recanatini, Francesca, 2008. "How does bribery affect public service delivery ? micro-evidence from service users and public officials in Peru," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4492, The World Bank.
    12. John Helliwell & Haifang Huang & Shun Wang, 2014. "Social Capital and Well-Being in Times of Crisis," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 145-162, February.
    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. Helliwell, John F. & Huang, Haifang & Grover, Shawn & Wang, Shun, 2018. "Empirical linkages between good governance and national well-being," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 1332-1346.
    2. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2018. "Assessing well-being in European regions. Does government quality matter?," Working Papers 2018/06, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    3. Niclas Berggren & Christian Bjørnskov, 2023. "Does legal freedom satisfy?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 1-28, February.
    4. Henri Njangang, 2019. "Governance and Happiness in African countries," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(2), pages 1546-1555.
    5. Bjørnskov, Christian & Dreher, Axel & Fischer, Justina A.V., 2010. "Formal institutions and subjective well-being: Revisiting the cross-country evidence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 419-430, December.
    6. Dieudonne Mignamissi & Yselle Flora Malah Kuete, 2020. "What Makes Africans Happy?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 2741-2754.
    7. John F. Helliwell & Haifang Huang & Shawn Grover & Shun Wang, 2014. "Empirical Linkages between Good Government and National Well-being," NBER Working Papers 20686, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Qiang Li & Lian An, 2020. "Corruption Takes Away Happiness: Evidence from a Cross-National Study," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 485-504, February.
    9. Eiji Yamamura, 2012. "The Effects of Information Asymmetry and Government Size on Happiness: A Case Study from Japan," The IUP Journal of Governance and Public Policy, IUP Publications, vol. 0(1), pages 7-20, March.
    10. Nikolova, Milena, 2016. "Minding the happiness gap: Political institutions and perceived quality of life in transition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(S), pages 129-148.
    11. O'Donnell, Gus & Oswald, Andrew J., 2015. "National well-being policy and a weighted approach to human feelings," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 59-70.
    12. Badunenko, Oleg & Cordero, Jose M. & Kumbhakar, Subal C., 2021. "Are you slacking? Where do you and your country stand in the happiness pursuit?," MPRA Paper 108316, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Lucía Macchia & Anke C. Plagnol, 2019. "Life Satisfaction and Confidence in National Institutions: Evidence from South America," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 14(3), pages 721-736, July.
    14. Yasar, Rusen, 2018. "Subjective well-being and income: A compromise between Easterlin paradox and its critiques," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 12, pages 1-23.
    15. Gregor Gonza & Anže Burger, 2017. "Subjective Well-Being During the 2008 Economic Crisis: Identification of Mediating and Moderating Factors," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1763-1797, December.
    16. Cordero, José Manuel & Salinas-Jiménez, Javier & Salinas-Jiménez, M Mar, 2017. "Exploring factors affecting the level of happiness across countries: A conditional robust nonparametric frontier analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(2), pages 663-672.
    17. Iban Ortuzar & Gemma Renart & Angels Xabadia, 2021. "Effects of Public Healthcare Budget Cuts on Life Satisfaction in Spain," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 311-337, July.
    18. Estela Núñez-Barriopedro & Rafael Ravina-Ripoll & Eduardo Ahumada-Tello, 2020. "Happiness perception in Spain, a SEM approach to evidence from the sociological research center," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 761-779, June.
    19. Yee Ngoo & Nai Tey & Eu Tan, 2015. "Determinants of Life Satisfaction in Asia," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 141-156, October.
    20. Mihaela Onofrei & Anca-Florentina Vatamanu & Georgeta Vintilă & Elena Cigu, 2021. "Government Health Expenditure and Public Health Outcomes: A Comparative Study among EU Developing Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-13, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Open Governance; Public Innovation; Quality of Life; Transparency.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R1 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:gov:wpregi:1606. 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: Patricio Sanchez-Fernandez (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/geviges.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.