E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government

Author(s): Soonhee Kim and Jooho Lee

Source: Public Administration Review , NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2012, Vol. 72, No. 6
(NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2012), pp. 819-828
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41688008

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Wiley and American Society for Public Administration are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Soonhee Kim

Syracuse University
Jooho Lee

University of Nebraska at Omaha

E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government

in government (Citrin and Muste 1999; Kim 2010;

This article examines the relationship between electronic Soonhee Kim is professor in the

Kweit and Kweit 2007).

participation (e-participation) and trust in local govern-
Department of Public Administration and
International Affairs in the Maxwell School
ment by focusing on five dimensions of the e-participation of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse

Though scholars acknowledge the potential role of

process: (1) satisfaction with e-participation applica- University. She is coeditor of The Future
of Public Administration Around the
citizen participation
tions, (2) satisfaction with government responsiveness to in public administration decision
World: The Minnowbrook Perspective
making in influencing public trust in government, the
e-participants, (3) e-particip ants' development through (Georgetown University Press, 2010)

specific form of the relationship between the process

the participation , (4) perceived influence on decision and Public Sector Human Resource

Management (Sage, 2012).

of citizen participation and its impact on building
making, and (5) assessment of government transparency.
E-mail: shkim07@maxwell.syr.edu
Using data from the 2009 E-Participation Surveypublicin
trust in government is yet to be tested (Mizrahi
Seoul Metropolitan Government, this article finds andthat
Vigoda-Gadot 2009). Several scholars address Jooho Lee is assistant professor in the
this concern and call for more studies on understand-
e-participants satisfaction with e-participation applica- School of Public Administration, University
of Nebraska at Omaha. His research inter-
tions is directly associated with their development ingand
citizens' development and citizens' perceived
ests include e-government/e-participation,
influence of participation on decision making in the
their assessment of government transparency . The findings
information technology management in the

context of political cultures in different countries

reveal that e-participants' satisfaction with govern- public sector, public organization theory,

(Fung and Wright 2001; Mizrahi and Vigoda-Gadot

ment responsiveness is positively associated with their social and organizational networks, and

human resource management.

2009). While there are various definitions of citizen
perceptions of influencing government decision making.
E-mail: jooholee@unomaha.edu
participation, Verba, Scholzman, and Brady (1995)
Furthermore, there is a positive association between
defined it as any voluntary action by citizens that is
e-participants' perception of influencing government
decision making and their assessment of government
more or less directly aimed at influencing the manage-
transparency. Finally, the article finds that there is
mentaof collective affairs and public decision making.
Arnstein (1969) introduced a ladder of participation
positive association between e-participantš ' assessment
of government transparency and their trust in thethatlocal
describes levels of interaction and influence in
the decision-making process from elemental to more
government providing the e-participation program.
in-depth participation (e.g., information, communica-
tion, consultation, deliberation and decision making).
emphasized citizen participation in public
Over administration emphasized the last
administration two making
decision citizen asdecision
a meansdecades, participation making researchers as in a public have means Meanwhile, the evolution of citizen participation in
of collaborating with citizens to promote demo- public administration decision making faces a new
cratic values such as responsiveness and account- phase as many government agencies have initiated
ability (Franklin and Ebdon 2004; Fung 2006; electronic government (e-government) development
Irvin and Stansbury 2004; King, Feltey, and Süsel and taken advantage of Internet-based applications
1998; Nelson and Wright 1995; Weeks 2000). The to facilitate community development and com-
emerging literature on collaborative governance in munication with constituents and to provide online
public administration suggests that citizens should application services (Heeks and Bailur 2007; Norris
be considered not only customers, but also col- and Moon 2005; West 2004). A growing body of
laborative partners in a governance era for build- literature focuses on government efforts to utilize new
ing democratic and effective governance (O'Leary technologies to enable greater citizen participation in
and Bingham 2008; O'Leary, Van Slyke, and Kim policy formation and evaluation and to create greater
2010). Several scholars have also emphasized that information exchange between citizens and govern-
government efforts to provide more opportunities ment (Komito 2005; Macintosh and Whyte 2008;
Public Administration Review,
for citizen participation and input into government Norris 1999; OECD 2001). Many governments
Vol.72, Iss. 6, pp. 819-828. ©2012 by
performance evaluation and policy decision making have adopted various forms of electronic participa- The American Society for Public Administration.

represent an important strategy for improving trust tion (e-participation) applications, including online D01: 10.1 1 1/j.1 540-621 0.201 2.02593.x.

E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government 819

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
forums, virtual discussion rooms, electronic juries, and electronic participation and input into government performance evaluation
polls (OECD 2003). and policy decision making can be important for improving trust in
government (Citrin and Muste 1999; Kim 2010; Kweit and Kweit
The field of e-government has progressed significantly; however, 2007; Wang 2001).
the literature has left significant gaps in our understanding of the
relationships among the management of e-participation applica- Meanwhile, several scholars have explored the role of e-government
tions, citizens' experiences of e-participation, and e-participants' in public trust in government (Morgeson, Van Amburg and Mithas
trust in government. To fill some of these 201 1; Welch, Hinnant, and Moon 2005).
gaps, this article develops a theoretical model Welch, Hinnant, and Moon (2005) found
of the process of e-participation and analyzes This article develops a theo- that government Web site use is positively
the impact of the e-participation process retical model of the process of associated with e-government satisfaction and
on participants' trust in government. This e-participation and analyzes the Web site satisfaction and that e-government
article explores how the impact of citizen satisfaction is positively associated with trust
impact of the e-participation
e-participation on trust in local govern- in government. However, few studies have
process on participants' trust in
ment is facilitated by five dimensions of the examined the process of e-participation
e-participation process: (1) satisfaction with
government. and its impact on building trust in govern-
e-participation applications, (2) satisfaction ment. In this article, e-participation refers
with government responsiveness to e-participants, (3) citizens' to citizens' voluntary participation and involvement in public
development through the participation, (4) perceived influence on administration affairs and public decision making through the use
decision making, and (5) assessment of government transparency. of Web-based applications provided by the government. Diverse
e-participation applications can be utilized for increasing the trans-
In order to examine several hypotheses, the study uses the 2009 parency of the political and administrative process, for enhancing
E-Participation Survey data collected from 1,076 e-participants in citizens' direct involvement, and for improving the quality of
a program called Cheon Man Sang Sang Oasis (hereafter Oasis) opinion formation by opening new spaces of information and
run by the Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) in South Korea deliberation (Trechsel et al. 2003).
since 2006. The Oasis program was designed to receive input from
the residents of Seoul about SMG's public policies, programs, and This study proposes a theoretical model of the process of
management practices. Based on the findings, the article discusses e-participation. As depicted in figure 1 , the model emphasizes that
the managerial and policy implications of e-participation programs the effect of the e-participation process on e-participants' trust in
for building public trust in local government. government is moderated by the extent to which e-participants
are satisfied with e-participation applications and the quality of
Literature Review and Hypotheses government responsiveness to e-participants' needs, e-participants'
While there is little agreement on the definition of trust at the development through participation, their perceived influence on
institutional level, public trust in government can be assessed by the decision making, and their assessment of government transparency.
extent to which citizens have confidence in public institutions to This section reviews six hypotheses of the e-participation process
operate in the best interests of society and its constituents (Cleary proposed in the article, which may facilitate the impact of
and Stokes 2006; Inoguchi et al. 2005). Several scholars have identi- e-participation on e-participants' trust in the government
fied that citizens' perceptions of economic and political performance providing the e-participation programs.
influence their trust in government (Donovan and Bowler 2004;
Mishler and Rose 2001). Furthermore, scholars argue that insti- E-Participation Applications and Citizens' Development
tutional context, political culture, changing behaviors and values In terms of designing e-participation applications, several scholars
of citizens, and citizen-state relationships are important factors in have found that the ease and effectiveness of using e-participation
determining the level of trust in government (Andrain and Smith applications motivates citizens' active use of such applications (Kim,
2006; Christensen and Laegreid 2005). Moreover, scholars indicate Kim, and Lennon 2006; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Malhotra
that government efforts to provide more opportunities for citizen 2005). The purpose of citizens' utilization of e-participation

Figure 1 Proposed Model of E-Participation and Trust in Government

820 Public Administration Review • November | December 2012

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
applications varies depending on what they need or what they and deliver them to key decision makers accurately (Halvorsen
expect. For example, some e-participants may visit the 2003; King, Feltey, and Süsel 1998; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and
e-participation programs to locate public policy and program Malhotra 2005).
information (e.g., policy proposals, progres-
sive reports) associated with community This research proposes that e-participants'
issues. Some e-participants may participate
This research proposes that satisfaction with the quality of government
in the programs to propose their input or e-participants' satisfaction responsiveness can be positively related
to ask about policy and community issues. with the quality of govern- to e-participants' individual development
Other e-participants may want to view other ment responsiveness can be through e-participation. E-participants
e-participants' ideas or share their thoughts
positively related to e-partici- who receive quality feedback and responses
with others. Depending on the level of through the interaction with government
pants' individual development
e-participation experience, e-participants may employees are likely to perceive that they
need or expect various technological sup-
through e-participation. gain useful policy information that helps
ports. Accordingly, e-participation applica- them better understand government agen-
tions should be designed to meet citizen needs by offering quality cies and community issues (Blackburn and Bruce 1995; Sabatier
application services. Quality services in e-participation programs can 1988; Yankelovich 1991). Tajfel and Turner (1986) found that
allow e-participants to make suggestions, to locate policy and com- the quality of government response to the citizen participants
munity information, to ask government employees about policy and facilitates participants' self-esteem by reinforcing their sense
community issues, and to view other participants' input, easily and of being an important part of the community, which increases
effectively (Coleman et al. 2008; West 2004). identification with the community. Moreover, the quality of
feedback and responsiveness often motivates e-participants to
This study proposes that e-participation applications with easy-to- participate frequently (Moon and Sproull 2008), which may
use and effective functions (e.g., online help desk, search engine increase interaction with other e-participants and, in turn,
services, or well-designed content structure) are more likely to help enhance the opportunity to gain support from other
e-participants access and gain information about what govern- e-participants and shared understanding with others.
ment agencies do for their communities and to submit policy
comments and ideas. Furthermore, e-participants may be able to This study further notes that the quality of government response
enjoy a better opportunity to gain support and shared understand- to e-participants can be positively associated with e-participants'
ing with other participants when e-participation applications are perceived influence on decision making through e-participation.
equipped with useful technological functions that make it easy to Scholars have highlighted that citizen participation serves as a means
share their thoughts with other e-participants. Finally, initiating of affecting and controlling government bureaucracy and, in turn,
and suggesting policy input for the community, engaging others' enhancing a sense of ownership and empowerment (Box 2007;
thoughts and suggestions, and sharing input with others can serve Roberts 2004). Also, participation introduces citizen monitoring,
as a means of individual e-participant's learning and development which increases the likelihood of catching deception and ensures
(Bandura 1977). Therefore, this study proposes the following the government's commitment to openness and honesty (Yang and
hypothesis related to satisfaction with e-participation applications Holzer 2006). As a result, e-participation may enhance the opportu-
and e-participants' perceptions of individual development through nity for e-participants to have a greater monitoring role over public
e-participation: administration. Based on this argument, this research proposes the
following hypotheses:
Hypothesis Is E-participants' satisfaction with the user-
friendliness of e-participation applications is positively associ- Hypothesis 2: E-participants' satisfaction with the quality of
ated with the degree of e-participants' development through government responsiveness is positively related to the degree
e-participation. of e-participants' development through e-participation.

Government Responsiveness, Citizen Development, and
Influence on Decision Making
Prior studies have emphasized that participants' satisfaction with
citizen participation programs is affected by government employ-
ees' responsiveness to participants' needs and quality feedback to
participants' input (Kweit and Kweit 2004; Parasuraman, Zeithaml,
and Malhotra 2005; Webler and Tuler 2000). Halvorsen (2003)
found that participants who perceive a high quality of interactions
and communications with government employees are more likely
to believe that the agency in charge of managing the participation
program is responsive to public concerns. Because citizens' input
is processed through electronic transactions in the e-participation
applications, e-participants' satisfaction also depends on the
extent to which the participation process is managed to deal with
participants' input securely and fairly (Webler and Tuler 2000)
Hypothesis 3: E-participants' satisfaction with the quality of
government responsiveness is positively associated with their
perceived influence on decision making.
Citizens' Development, Influence on Decision Making, and
Government Transparency
Another important question that has not been explored in the field
of citizen participation and e-participation is how e-participants'
development and perceived influence on decision making through
their e-participation experiences is associated with e-participants'
assessments of government transparency. This study proposes that
e-participants' perceptions of individual development that emerge
from satisfaction with the quality of government responsiveness
and with the user-friendliness of e-participation applications are
likely to be associated with their positive assessment of government

E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government 821

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
transparency. For example, e-participants who learn more about more transparency can also serve as a key variable that affects
community issues (thanks to easy-to-use e-participation applications public trust in government (Kweit and Kweit 2007; Vigoda-Gadot
and the quality of government responsiveness) are likely to perceive 2007; Wang and Wan Wart 2007). This study proposes the follow-
that the government agencies offering the e-participation program ing hypothesis:
are capable of improving transparency, two-way communication
with citizens, and participatory governance. Hypothesis 6: E-participants' assessment of government
transparency is positively associated with their trust in the
Roberts (2004) argued that citizens' ownership and empowerment government that provides the e-participation programs.
are the essence of citizen participation values. One can argue that
e-participants' perceived influence in decision making through their Research Methods
e-participation experiences may lead to reduced conflicts regarding Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) has been working on how
public policy and programs between e-participants and government to use information technology to expand citizen participation in
agencies. Also, e-participants who perceive greater influence on pub- government affairs beyond traditional methods of citizen engage-
lic administration decisions and governance issues may show posi- ment since the administration of former Mayor Goh Kun in 1998.
tive assessments of government transparency. In order to measure The evolution of e-government development and e-participation
e-participants' assessments of government transparency, this study applications at the local level in South Korea should be understood
focuses on openness, corruption, two-way communication with in the context of (1) the South Korean Self-Governance Act 1988,
citizens, and fair and increased opportunities to participate in the which encouraged local governance and decentralization, and (2)
rulemaking process in the government that provides e-participation national government reform efforts aimed at e-government develop-
programs. This study suggests the following hypotheses: ment to promote transparency, participation, and anticorruption
(Kim 2009).
Hypothesis 4: lhe degree of e-participants' development
through e-participation is positively associated with their This research focuses on Oasis, which is one of the e-participation
assessment of transparency in the government. programs within the SMG portal site that provides well-organized
and systematic opportunities to participate in government proc-
Hypothesis 5: E-participants' perceived influence on decision esses. The Oasis has provided citizens with an opportunity to
making through e-participation is positively associated with submit their ideas and suggestions on proposed specific policies
their assessment of transparency in the government. via policy forums in the Web portal since October 2006.
It. further provides e-participants an opportunity to propose new
Government Transparency and E-Participants' ideas that may contribute to enhancing government effective-
Trust in Government ness and resolving community issues related to any public policy
Several studies have suggested that citizens' evaluation of govern- and programs in the SMG and governance issues in the city of
Seoul. Since 2006, 50,896 members have joined the Oasis (as of
ment performance is positively associated with trust in government
(Chang and Chu 2006; Kim 2010; Mishler and Rose 2001; OrrenFebruary 201 1), and they have made 122,21 1 proposals and com-
1997). For example, Chang and Chu (2006) and Kim (2010) ments on Seoul government policies, projects, and practices (as of
revealed that citizens' perceptions of government performance February 201 1).
on the economy and control of political corruption are positively
Data collection. To test our research hypotheses, we designed a
associated with their trust in government institutions in several East
survey questionnaire and implemented a Web-based survey in 2009.
Asian countries. Furthermore, several studies have argued that gov-
ernment reform efforts emphasizing more democratic and citizen-The sample frame was 10,136 members of the Oasis who had
posted at least one suggestion last three years. As of June 2009,
centered transformation have promoted public trust in government
34,792 citizens had joined the Oasis. The Oasis serves as an
(Kweit and Kweit 2007; Vigoda-Gadot 2007; Wang and Wan Wart
electronic channel of citizen participation in the decision-making
2007). For example, several scholars reported that those who believe
processes of the SMG. Using the Oasis, citizens view, submit, and
that bureaucracy has made efforts to involve citizens in the admin-
istrative process have greater trust in the government (Kim 2010; share their ideas and suggestions on SMG policies and programs
Kweit and Kweit 2007). Scholars have also paid attention to the associated with community and governance issues.
association between political corruption and the degree of public
trust in government (Delia Porta 2000; Pharr and Putnam 2000; Of 10,136 members, we collected survey data from 1,076 partici-
Seligson 2002). Using the European Commission's Eurobarometer pants (for a response rate of 10.6 percent). Because of the voluntary
data, Delia Porta (2000) found that the degree of perceived cor- nature of Web-based surveys and the low response rate, we per-
ruption is negatively associated with trust in government in Italy, formed nonresponse bias test to see whether samples of the popu-
France, and Germany. lation had an equal opportunity to respond to the survey (Moon
1999; Rainey, Pandey, and Bozeman 1995). We found that the
A recent study on citizens' satisfaction with e-government and respondents and nonrespondents were not significantly different in
its association with trust in the federal government in the Unitedterms of age, gender, or living location. Nonresponse bias therefore
States found that if citizens find e-government transparent, they was not a concern for the validity of the data.
are more likely to return to the site, recommend it, use it, and
express more trust in the government agency (Sternstein 2010). Table 1 shows the characteristics of the samples. It should be noted
Citizens' positive assessment of government performance towardthat female samples are underrepresented.

822 Public Administration Review • November | December 2012

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Table 1 Demographics of Oasis Survey on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 ("s
Variables Characteristics Respondents (%) to 5 ("strongly agree"). E-participants' development

Gender Male 73.9 adapting the index of seven items (Irvin and Stansb
Female 26.1 and Kweit 2004; Roberts 2004) with a five-point L
Age 20s 22.1 items capture the extent of e-participants' perceived e
30s 29.3
Oasis participation on individual development. Inf
40s 27.8
50s 15.2 sion making was measured by using the three item
Over 60s 2.5 on previous studies (Irvin and Stansbury 2004; Kw
Monthly income (missing = 3) Less than $ 1 ,667 1 6.7 2004; Roberts 2004). Assessment of government tra
$1,667-$2,492 25.5 measured by the index of five items. Table 2 present
$2,500-$3,332 23.4
with Cronbach's alphas and corresponding survey it
$3,333-$4,166 15.2
$4,167-$4,999 9.3 ardized factor loadings.1 All the survey items associ
More than $5,000 9.9 respective constructs were found to be statistically s
( p < .001), providing evidence of adequate converge

Measurement. Public trust in government is measured by the single

To control for the potential effects of individual ch
item adopted from the Asia Barometer Survey (Inoguchi et al.
trust in government, gender, age, and income varia
2005): "To what extent do you trust Seoul Metropolitan
in the model (Kim 2010; Welch, Hinnant, and Mo
Government to operate in the best interests of society?" The item
gender, male was coded as 1, while female was code
was rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("don't trust at
ure age, respondents were asked to indicate their ye
all") to 5 ("trust a lot"), with a higher score indicating greater trust.
then was transformed into their age. Income variab
While the one item may not capture different aspects of public trust
a survey item: "Which of the following broad categ
in government (e.g., Welch, Hinnant, and Moon 2005), the item
your total monthly income in 2009?" The item incl
can assess the extent to which citizens have confidence in public
ries; (1) $1,667 or less, (2) $l,667-$2,492, (3) $2,5
institutions to operate in the best interests of society and its
(4) $3,333-$4,l66, (5) $4,l67-$4,999, (6) $5,000
constituents (Cleary and Stokes 2006; McAllister 1995).

Analyses
Satisfaction with e-participation applications (five items)and
and Model
satis- Assessment
Structural
faction with the quality of government responsiveness equation
were modeling (SEM) was used to em
measured
the proposed
by modifying the service quality index (Lee, Kim, and Ahnmodel,
201 1; which appears in figure 1 . SE
Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Malhotra 2005). technique
Those items were
that rated
simultaneously assesses the reliabilit

Table 2 Constructs, Survey Items, and Standardized Factor Loadings

Constructs Survey Items Factor loadings

Satisfaction with e-participation (1 ) Oasis is easy to search for content and proposals available on Oasis Web sites. .780a
applications (a = .85) (2) Oasis provides effective functions that deal with my questions (Help desk, Q&A, contact information). .698
(3) Oasis provides well-designed content structure. .808
(4) Oasis has content-rich services. .665
(5) Oasis provides the functions that are easy to submit ideas and to get feedback. .690
Satisfaction with government (1) SMG has provided answers and feedback to my proposal in a sincere manner. ,793a
responsiveness (a = .87) (2) SMG has provided answers and feedback to others' proposal in a sincere manner. .772
(3) I found the Oasis process to be very responsive to my needs. .765
(4) I have confidence that my proposal is delivered accurately .787
(5) I trust that my proposal is delivered securely. .614
(6) The proposal is selected fairly through Oasis process. .671
E-participants' development My participation in Oasis has
(a = .89) (1) increased my self-esteem. ,804a
(2) contributed to community building. .704
(3) helped me build better civic duties. .769
(4) provided for an opportunity to learn more about community issues. .753
(5) helped me gain useful information through the interaction with other participants. .61 1
(6) positive impact on my career development. .770
(7) helped me gain support and shared understanding from other participants. .694
Influence on decision-making (1) SMG actually uses my proposal(s) for making and implementing policies and pr
(a = .82) (2) My proposal is helpful for SMG to make and implement policies and programs even though they do
actually.
(3) SMG actually uses others' proposal(s) for making and implementing policies and programs. .781
Assessment of government (1) SMG's service operation processes have been more transparent. .795a
transparency (a = .89) (2) SMG employees' engagement in corruption has been reduced. .699
(3) SMG has promoted two-way communication with the public. .834
(4) SMG has provided the residents of Seoul with greater opportunities to participate in t
(5) SMG has provided the residents of Seoul with an equal opportunity to participate in th

Note: Cronbach's alpha in parentheses; Oasis (the e-participation program); SMG (Seoul Metropolitan Government).
a. For model identification purpose, loading is fixed at 1 for the indicator in unstandardized solution.

E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local G

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
the measures of theoretical constructs and estimates the relation-
ships among these constructs (Kline 1998). It is used to analyze
measurement and structural models with multi-item constructs,
and it is widely used in public administration research (Morgeson
III et al, 201 1). Specifically, the measurement model tests the reli-
ability and validity of the indicators for the corresponding construct
(also known as latent variable or factor), while the structural model
validates the hypothesized paths among constructs (Kline 1998).
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is used to validate the meas-
urement model, and path analysis is applied to test the structural
model, lhe measurement model should be validated prior to
testing the structural model (Anderson and Gerbing 1988; Garson
201 1; Perry et al. 2008). AMOS 7.0 was used and parameters were
estimated by the maximum likelihood method. Both models are
assessed with widely used goodness-of-fit indices such as the com-
parative fit index (CFI), incremental fit index (IFI), and root mean
square error of approximation (RMSEA).
Measurement model. The first step was to use CFA by imposing a
model in which all factors were allowed to covary. As for the data
model fit criteria, a measurement model can be valid when the value
of %2/df is less than 3, values of CFI and IFI are equal to or greater
than .90 - ideally, equal to or greater than .95 - and the value of
RMSEA is less than .08 (Byrne 2001; Kline 1998). The overall
model fit measures such as CFI (.927), IFI (.92 7), and RMSEA
(.060) are good, indicating that the proposed CFA model can be
retained as a valid measurement model. However, the %2 statistic is
significant (1512.8, p = .000, df = 310, n = 405), which is not
indicative of a model fit, and %2/df (4.88) does not meet the
traditional criteria (%2/df < 3). However, this rule has been
considered inappropriate because the %2 statistic is often very
sensitive to a large sample size (Byrne 2001; Kline 1998).
Structural model. The second step was to modify the measurement
model to predict theoretically derived paths in the proposed model.
Table 3 shows the goodness-of-fit indices of the hypothesized
structural model. Although the parsimonious index of %2/df does
not support the proposed structural model, the other parsimonious
fit index of RMSEA supports the model (.059) given that the
Table 3 Nested Model Comparisons: Goodness-of-Fit Indices
Structural Model Z2(df) z2Mf Az2(Adf) CFI IFI RMSEA
Hypothesized model 1880.3*** (394) 4.77 .912 .895 .059
Alternative model 1 3283.5*** (396) 8.29 -1(403.2*** (2) .828 .829
Alternative model 2 2839.2*** (396) 7.17 -958.9*** (2) .854 .855
Alternative model 3 2397.1 *** (395) 6.08 -516.8*** (1) .881 .881
Alternative model 4 1814.6*** (393) 4.62 65.7*** (1) .916 .900
***p< .001.
Table 4 Correlation Matrix
Mean
1. Satisfaction with e-participation applications 17.52 3.57
2. Satisfaction with government responsiveness 18.72 4.31 0.60***
3. E-participants' development 23.10 4.78 0.47*** 0.62***
4. Influence on decision making 9.79 2.50 0.50*** 0.70*** 0.58***
5. Assessment of government transparency 27.19 6.47 0.53*** 0.53*** 0.54*** 0.52***
6. E-participants' trust in government
***p< .001.
824 Public Administration Review • November | December 2012
This content downloaded from
103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
threshold scores are usually lower than .08 (Byrne 2001; Kline
1998). CFI supports the validity of the model (CFI = .912), while
IFT does not (IFI = .895). Those scores are considered an excellent
fit if they are greater than .9.
To assess the fitness of the hypothesized model and to determine the
best model to represent the data, we used the change in chi-square
test (Bender and Bonett 1980) to compare the hypothesized model
with four alternative models (Seibert, Kraimer, and Liden 2001).
Alternative model 1 simply assumes that all constructs are directly
associated with e-participants' trust in government, lhe alternative
model 2 hypothesizes that the e-participation value constructs (i.e.,
e-participants' social learning and influence on decision making) and
e-participants' assessments of government transparency are directly
associated with trust in government. However, unlike alternative
model 1 , model 2 specified that the association between satisfac-
tion constructs (i.e., satisfaction with e-participation applications
and e-participants relation management) and trust in government
is mediated by e-participants' assessments of government transpar-
ency. Alternative model 3 modifies model 2 by specifying that the
e-participation value constructs mediate the link between the satis-
faction constructs and trust in government. That is, the satisfaction
constructs are indirectly associated with trust in government through
the e-participation value constructs. Finally, alternative model 4
modifies the hypothesized model by adding the direct association
between satisfaction constructs and assessment of transparency.
As shown in table 3, the comparison shows that the hypothesized
model provides a significantly better fit than alternative models 1 , 2
and 3. However, the change in chi-square test shows that alternative
model 4 performs significantly better than the hypothesized model
(A%2 = 65.7, A df= 1 ,/> < .001). Moreover, alternative model 4
provides better RMSEA (.058) and goodness-of-fitness indices
(CFI = .916, IFI = .900). Therefore, alternative model 4 is retained
as the revised study model because it is the best-fitting model. All of
these alternative models include the control variable paths.
Results
Table 4 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlation
statistics of latent and dependent variables. All of the 15 bivariate
correlations are statistically significant at < .001. The magnitude of
Cronbach's coefficient for the multiple-item measures and trust meas-
ure ranges from .39 (between influence on decision making and trust
in government) to .70 (between the quality of the e-participants'
.082 relation management and influence on decision making).
.076
.069 The standardized parameter estimates for all paths in the revised
.058
model are reported in figure 2. The ¿-statistics for path coefficients
for six hypotheses are statistically significant.
S.D 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 2 Results of Revised Model

Figure 2 reveals that hypothesis 1 is supported (ß = .12, p < .01). research found that citizens' satisfaction with e-participation appli-
Also, the direction of the path is positive, consistently support- cations and government responsiveness has a direct and positive
ing the hypothesis. The revised model indicates that satisfaction association with e-participants' perceptions of individual develop-
with e-participation applications has a direct positive effect on ment through e-participation. E-participants' greater satisfaction
e-participants' assessment of government transparency (ß = .30, with the quality of government responsiveness is also positively
p < .001). But further analysis shows no direct link to trust in associated with their perceived influence on decision making
government (ß = .009 ,p < .756). through e-participation. And, the study observed that e-participants'
assessments of government transparency become more favorable
As expected, hypothesis 2 is supported by the data (ß =.59, when they perceive that individual development and influence on
p < .001). That is, e-participants' satisfaction with government government decision making are enhanced through e-participation.
responsiveness has a direct effect on their positive perceptions of Finally, we found that assessments of government transparency are
individual development through e-participation. The results also positively associated with e-participants' trust in the government
support hypothesis 3 (ß = .84, p < .001). That is, the study sample that provides e-participation programs.
reported that satisfaction with government responsiveness is posi-
tively related to their perceptions of influencing government deci- High costs for accessing policy information and engaging in admin-
sion making. This structural path was the strongest and the most istrative decision-making processes have been criticized as a barrier to
significant in the model. The revised model, however, suggests that citizen participation (Irvin and Stansbury 2004; Thomas and Streib
there is no direct association between e-participants' satisfaction 2003). As noted earlier, Web-based e-participation applications have
with government responsiveness and their assessment of govern- been advocated as a crucial tool for e-government to facilitate citizen
ment transparency (ß =-.04, p < .694). participation by offering easier and more effective access to policy
information and involvement in administrative decision-making
In addition, the results support hypothesis 4 (ß = .32, p < .001). procedures (Walker 2010; Welch, Hinnant, and Moon 2005; West
E-participants who perceived enhanced individual development 2004). The results of this study suggest that e-participation applica-
through their e-participation experiences tions focusing on user-friendly design are
reported positive assessments of government The results of this study suggest likely to create a positive perception of govern-
transparency. The results show that there is ment transparency. Another important lesson
that e-participation applica-
a positive relation between e-participants' from the study is that citizen satisfaction
tions focusing on user-friendly
perceived influence on government decision with e-participation applications is indirectly
making and their assessment of government design are likely to create a posi- related to trust in government through either
transparency (hypothesis 5) (ß = .27, p < .001). tive perception of government enhanced individual development through
Finally, the data reveal that hypothesis 6 is also transparency. e-participation or positive assessments of
supported (ß = .70, p < .001). As expected, government transparency. It is worthwhile
e-participants' assessment of government trans- to note that this result is inconsistent with
parency is positively associated with their trust in the government the observations of prior studies that have examined the direct
that provides the e-participation programs. This structural path is the link between satisfaction with e-government applications and trust
second strongest and significant in the model. (Welch, Hinnant, and Moon 2005; Morgeson, Van Amburg, and
Mithas 201 1).
Implications
This study has explored the structure of e-participation process and The study results show that satisfaction with the quality of gov-
its effect on e-participants' trust in government. Using survey data ernment responsiveness (e.g., ongoing feedback to e-participants
collected from residents of Seoul who have hands-on experience and credibility for the security of e-participation management) is
with the e-participation program run by SMG in South Korea, this positively associated with e-participants' perceptions that they can

E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government 825

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
influence government decision making through e-participation. Conclusion
These findings support prior studies regarding the important role This exploratory study contributes to the public trust literature by
of empowerment in delivering effective participation programs uncovering several dimensions of e-participations role in influenc-
(Moon and Sproull 2008; Kim, Kim, and Lennon 2006). However, ing public trust in government. Instead of a simple and direct link
e-participants' satisfaction with government responsiveness is not between e-participation and public trust, the study proposed and
directly linked to their perceptions of government transparency. tested the structural model of the e-participation process, citizens'
Rather, e-participants' perceptions of individual development development and empowerment, government transparency, and pub-
and influence on government decision making mediate the link lic trust in government. Furthermore, few empirical studies have been
between satisfaction with the quality of government responsive- conducted to examine how e-government technologies and manage-
ness and perceived government transparency. Moreover, the study ment of e-participation shapes participants' perceived influence on
participants show greater trust in the local government that provides decision making and their assessments of government transparency.
e-participant programs when they have a more favorable assessment
of government performance toward more transparency. The results There are important gaps in the discourse of public administra-
are consistent with prior observations (Wang and Wan Wart 2007; tion when it comes to the effectiveness of citizen participation and
Kweit and Kweit 2007; Vigoda-Gadot 2007). e-participation programs in various countries. The study model
and findings raise a bigger and important question regarding
The proposed e-participation process model and the results of a how to conduct local e-participation research in the context of
structural equation analysis found in the study indicate that govern- decentralization in different regions and countries. How to design
ment leaders need to pay more attention to the process and apply e-participation programs and how to evaluate the effectiveness
a management capacity-building approach to effectively manage of the programs could be affected by different cultures, differ-
e-participation programs in local government. Scholars in public ent national values, and different institutional needs in different
administration and government agencies have also stressed the countries. The results of this study could be outcomes of unique
need to understand the ways in which management capacity and citizenship evolution that has been affected by South Korea's his-
processes can contribute to improved innovation and performance torical, political, and cultural evolution for the last several decades.
(Ingraham, Joyce, and Donahue 2003; Walker and Boyne 2006). Accordingly, more in-depth case studies in various regions and
The results of this study indicate that in order to effectively manage countries may help develop e-participation models, and scholarly
e-participation program, government leaders should emphasize a efforts to perform rigorous testing of the models with valid data
formal evaluation tool for assessing the user-friendliness of specific would facilitate theory building about e-participation effectiveness
e-participation applications, the quality of government responsive- in public administration.
ness to e-participants' needs, and government performance on
transparency. While it has several theoretical and practical implications, this
study has limitations to address. First, the study findings are based
Inviting citizens' and employees' input to enhance the quality of on one sample of citizens who experienced one e-participation
e-participation process management and to assess the effective- program run by one city government. The study sample may limit
ness of the e-participation programs should be considered. When the external validity of the research. The results may not apply
government leaders adopt a system of managing for results for equally to a different context such as e-participation in urban local
e-participation programs, they should consider three key compo- governments in other countries. Further studies need to examine
nents (Ingraham, Joyce, and Donohue 2003): (1) clear objectives of whether the findings can be applied in different contexts. Also, it
specific e-participation applications, (2) performance measurement should be noted that sampling bias could be involved in this study
of the applications, and (3) continuous monitoring of the effective- because the response rate was low and female samples were under-
ness of the e-participation applications. In order to continuously represented. We call for future research to use a more representative
improve the effectiveness of e-participation programs, government sample to verify the findings. Second, as noted earlier, we measured
leaders should send a report of e-participation effectiveness to major public trust in government using a single survey item. As it is more
stakeholders and solicit feedback. Government leaders also need to sensitive to measurement error than multiple-item measures, the
pay attention to the investment in human results associated with public trust should be
resource capacity for enhancing the quality of For effective and efficient interpreted cautiously. We suggest that future
government responsiveness. Recognizing the studies use multiple items to broadly and
communication between
accomplishments of teams and individuals comprehensively capture the public trust in
that help improve e-participation effective- e-participants and government government.
ness through the high quality of government employees, government leaders
responsiveness should be considered. Finally, need to emphasize managementAcknowledgments
for effective and efficient communication The authors would like to thank the Seoul
capacity building for govern-
between e-participants and government Metropolitan Government for supporting
ment agencies to coordinate
employees, government leaders need to this research project. An earlier version of
and enable integration, sharing, this article was presented at the 1st Global
emphasize management capacity building for
and transfer of information and Conference on Transparency Research
government agencies to coordinate and enable
integration, sharing, and transfer of infor- knowledge within agencies and (Rutgers University-Newark, May 2011)
and at the Annual International Confer-
mation and knowledge within agencies and governmental networks.
ence of the Korean Association for Public
governmental networks.

826 Public Administration Review • November | December 2012

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Administration (Seoul, South Korea, October 2011). Note that Heeks, Richard, and Savita Bailur. 2007. Analyzing E-Government Research:

this article is an equal collaboration, and the order of authorship Perspectives, Philosophies, Theories, Methods, and Practice. Government

is alphabetical. Information Quarterly 24(2): 243-65.

Ingraham, Patricia W, Philip G. Joyce, and Amy Kneedler Donahue. 2003.
Notes Government Performance: Why Management Matters. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

1 . Maximum likelihood estimation technique is used to calculate the factor University Press.

loadings (A,) between observed indicators and the corresponding construct Inoguchi, Takashi, Miguel Basáñez, Akihiko Tanaka, and Timur Dadabaev. 2005.
(Shumacker and Lomax 2004, 66-69). Values and Life Styles in Urban Asia: A Cross-Cultural Analysis and Sourcebook

2. 1 ,200 Korean won was equal to approximately US$ 1 as of September 1 , 201 1 . Based on the Asia Barometer Survey of 2003. Mexico City: Siglo XXI Editores.
Irvin, Renee A., and John Stansbury. 2004. Citizen Participation in Decision
References Making: Is It Worth the Effort? Public Administration Review 64(1): 55-65.

Anderson, James C., and David W. Gerbing. 1988. Structural Equation ModelingKim,
in Minjeong, Jung-Hwan Kim, and Sharron J. Lennon. 2006. Online Service
Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychological Bulletin Attributes Available on Apparel Retail Web Sites: An E-S-Qual Approach.
103(1): 411-23. Managing Service Quality 16(1): 51-77.
Andrain, Charles F., and James T. Smith. 2006. Political Democracy, Trust, and Social
Kim, Soonhee. 2009. Management Strategy for Local Governments to Strengthen
Justice. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Transparency in Local Governance. Seoul, Korea: United Nations Project Office
Arnstein, Sherry R. 1969. A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American on Governance.

Planning Association 3 5 (4) : 21 6-24.

Bandura, Albert. 1977. Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press. of Critical Citizens Matter? Public Administration Review
Bender, Peter M., and Douglas G. Bonett. 1980. Significance Tests and Goodness King, Cheryl Simrell, Kathryn M. Feltey, and Bridget O'Ne
of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures. Psychological Bulletin 88(3): Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Partic
588-606. Administration. Public Administration Review 58(4): 317-
Blackburn, J. Walton, and Willa M. Bruce, eds. 1995. Mediating Environmental Kline, Rex B. 1998. Principles and Practice of Structural Equati
Conflicts: Theory and Practice. Westport, CT: Quorum. York: Guilford Press.

Box, Richard C. 2007. Citizen Governance: Leading American Communities into the
Komito, Lee. 2005. E- Participation and Governance: Widenin
21st Century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Journal of e-Government 3(1): 39-48. http://www.ejeg.com/
Byrne, Barbara M. 2001. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, [accessed July 28, 2012].
Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kweit, Mary Grisez, and Robert W Kweit. 2004. Citizen Part
Chang, Eric C. C., and Yun-han Chu. 2006. Corruption and Trust: Exceptionalism Evaluation in Disaster Recovery. American Review of Public
in Asian Democracies. Journal of Politics 68(2): 259-71. 354-73.
Christensen, Tom, and Per Laegreid. 2005. Trust in Government: The Relative

Importance of Service Satisfaction, Political Factors, and Demography. Public
Performance and Management Review 28(4): 487-5 1 1 .
Citrin, Jack, and Christopher Muste. 1999. Trust in Government. In Measures of
Political Attitudes, edited by John P. Robinson, Phillip R. Shaver, and Lawrence
S. Wrightsman, 462-532. New York: Academic Press.
American Politics Research 35(3): 407-25.
Lee, Jooho, Hyun Joon Kim, and Michael Ahn. 201 1. The W
E-Government Service Adoption by Business Users: The R
Quality and Trust in Technology. Government Information
222-30.

Cleary, Matthew R., and Susan C. Stokes. 2006. Democracy and the Culture of Skepticism:
Macintosh, Ann, and Angus Whyte. 2008. Towards an Evaluation Framework
Political Trust in Argentina and Mexico. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. for eParticipation. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 2(1):
Coleman, Renita, Paul Lieber, Andrew L. Mendelson, and David D. Kurpius. 16-30.
2008. Public Life and the Internet: If You Build a Better Website, Will Citizens
McAllister, Daniel J. 1995. Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for
Become Engaged? New Media and Society 10(2): 179-202. Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations. Academy of Management Journal
Delia Porta, Donatella. 2000. Social Capital, Beliefs in Government, and Political 38(1): 24-59.
Corruption. In Disaffected Democracies: What's Troubling the Trilateral Countries?
Mishler, William, and Richard Rose. 2001. Political Support for Incomplete
edited by Susan J. Pharr and Robert D. Putnam, 202-29. Princeton, NJ: Democracies. International Political Science Review 22(4): 303-20.
Princeton University Press. Mizrahi, Shlomo, and Eran Vigoda-Gadot. 2009. Citizens' Learning, Involvement,
Donovan, Todd, and Shaun Bowler. 2004. Reforming the Republic: Democratic and Participation in Decision-Making under the Democratic Ethos:
Institutions for the New America. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/ A Theoretical Framework and the Israeli Experience. International Journal of
Prentice Hall.
Public Administration 32(5): 438-60.
Franklin, Aimee L., and Carol Ebdon. 2004. Aligning Priorities in Local Budgeting
Moon, M. Jae. 1999. The Pursuit of Managerial Entrepreneurship: Does
Processes. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management Organization Matter? Public Administration Review 59(1): 31-43.
16(2): 210-27.
Moon, Jae Yun, and Lee S. Sproull. 2008. The Role of Feedback in Managing the
Fung, Archon. 2006. Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Public Internet-Based Volunteer Work Force. Information Systems Research 19(4):
Administration Review 66(1): 66-75. 494-515.

Fung, Archon, and Erik Olin Wright. 2001. Deepening Democracy: Innovations in
Morgeson, Forrest V., Ill, David Van Amburg, and Sunil Mithas. 201 1. Misplaced
Empowered Participatory Governance. Politics and Society 29(1): 5-41. Trust? Exploring the Structural of the E-Government-Citizen Trust
Garson, G. David. 201 1. Structural Equation Modeling, http://faculty.chass.ncsu. Relationship. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (2):
edu/garson/PA765/structur.htm [accessed July 28, 2012]. 257-83.

Halvorsen, Kathleen E. 2003. Assessing the Effects of Public Participation. Public Nelson, Nici, and Susan Wright. 1995. Power and Participatory Development: Theory
Administration Review 63(5): 535-43.
and Practice. London: Intermediate Technology.

E-Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government 827

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Norris, Donald F., and M. Jae Moon. 2005. Advancing E-Government at the Sternstein, Aliya. 2010. Study Links Online Transparency Effo
Grassroots: Tortoise or Hare? Public Administration Review 65(1): 64-75. Government, http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ ng_20 1 00

Norris, Pippa. 1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government. Tajfel, Henri, and John Turner. 1986. The Social Identity Theo
New York: Oxford University Press. Behaviors. In Psychology of Intergroup Relations , 2nd ed., e

O'Leary, Rosemary, and Lisa Blomgren Bingham, eds. 2008. The Collaborative Public Worchel and William G. Austion, 7-24. Chicago: Nelson-H
Manager: New Ideas for the Twenty-First Century. Washington, DC: Georgetown Thomas, John Clayton, and Gregory Streib. 2003. The New
University Press. Citizen-Initiated Contacts in the Era of E-Government. Jou

O'Leary, Rosemary, David M. Van Slyke, and Soonhee Kim, eds. 2010. The Future Administration Research and Theory 23(1): 83-102.

of Public Administration around the World: The Minnowbrook Perspective. Trechsel, Alexander H., Raphael Kies, Fernando Mendez, and

Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 2003. Evaluation of the Use of New Technologies in Order

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2001. Democracy in Europe. http://www.erepresentative.org/docs

The Hidden Threat to E-Government. Avoiding Large Government IT Failures. eDemocracy-inEurope-2004.pdf [accessed July 28, 2012].
Policy Brief no. 8. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/19/12/190l677.pdf [accessed Verba, Sidney, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady

July 28, 2012]. Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge

University Press.

Vigoda-Gadot,
org/dataoecd/62/58/1 1923037.pdf [accessed July 28, 2012]. Eran. 2007. Citizens' Perceptions of Politics an
Administration:
Orren, Gary. 1997. Fall from Grace: The Public's Loss of A Five- Year National Study of Their Relati
Faith in Government.
withS.Services,
In Why People Don't Trust Government, edited by Joseph Nye, Jr.,Trust in Governance,
Phillip D. and Voice Orientations.
Administration
Zelikow, and David C. King, 1-18. Cambridge, MA: Harvard and Research 17(2): 285-305.

University Press. Walker, Richard M., and George A. Boyne. 2006. Public Man
and 2005.
Parasuraman, A., Valarie Zeithaml, and Arvind Malhotra. Organizational
E-S-Qual: Performance:
A An Empirical Assessmen
Government
Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality. s of
Journal Public Service Improvement Strategy. Journa
Service
Research 7(3): 213-33. Management 25(2): 371-93.
Walker,
Perry, James L., Jeffrey L. Brudney, David Coursey, and LauraShawn T. 2010.
Littlepage. 2008.Budget Mapping: Increasing Citizen
ofthe
What Drives Morally Committed Citizens? A Study of Government viaof
Antecedents Interactive
Public Design. Paper presented at
International
Service Motivation. Public Administration Review 68(3): 445-58. Conference on Systems Science, Honolulu,
Wang,
Pharr, Susan J., and Robert D. Putnam. 2000. Disaffected XiaoHu. What's
Democracies: 2001. Assessing Public Participation in U.S.
Journal
Troubling the Trilateral Countries? Princeton, NJ: Princeton of Public
University Administration 21(2-4): 323-74.
Press.
Wang,
Rainey, Hal G., Sanjay K. Pandey, and Barry Bozeman. 1995.XiaoHu, and
Research Montgomery
Note: Public van Wart. 2007. When Pu
in Administration
and Private Managers' Perceptions of Red Tape. Public Administration Leads to Trust: An Empirical Assessment
Review
55(6): 565-73. Perceptions. Public Administration Review 67(2): 265-78.
Webler,
Roberts, Nancy. 2004. Public Deliberation in an Age of DirectThomas, and Seth Tuler. 2000. Fairness and Compet
Citizen Participation.
Participation: Theoretical Reflections from a Case Study. Ad
American Review of Public Administration 34(4): 315-53.
Society
Sabatier, Paul A. 1988. An Advocacy Coalition Framework 32(5):
of Policy 566-95.and the
Changes
Weeks, Edward
Role of Policy-Oriented Learning Therein. Policy Sciences 21(2-3): C. 2000. The Practice of Deliberative Democr
129-68.
Seibert, Scott, Maria Kraimer, and Robert Liden. 2001. Large-Scale Trials.
A Social Capital Publicor
Theory Administration Review 60(4): 36

Career Success. Academy of Management Journal. Welch, Eric W, Charles C. Hinnant, and M. Jae Moon. 2005
44(2): 219-37.
Satisfaction
Seligson, Mitchell. 2002. The Impact of Corruption on Regime with E-Government and Trust in Government.
Legitimacy:
Administration
A Comparative Study of Four Latin American Countries. Research
Journal of Politics 64 and Theory 15(3): 371-91.

(2): 408-33. West, Darrell M. 2004. E-Government and the Transformati

and Citizen Attitudes. Public Administration Review 64(1
Seoul Metropolitan Government. 2010. Seoul Ranked First in 100 Cities Survey
Yang, Kaifeng, and Marc Holzer. 2006. The Performance-Tr
on E-Government 4 Consecutive Times, http://english.seoul.go.kr/gtk/news/
for Performance Measurement. Public Administration Re
news_view.php?idx= 10929 [accessed July 28, 2012].
Yankelovich,
Shumacker, Randall, and Richard Lomax. 2004. A Beginner's GuideDaniel. 1991. Coming to Public Judgment: Making
to Structural
Equation Modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Complex World. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

828 Public Administration Review • November | December 2012

This content downloaded from

103.5.181.57 on Fri, 28 May 2021 15:23:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms