, Volume 90, Issue 1, pp 9–23 | Cite as

Government organizations’ innovative use of the Internet: The case of the Twitter activity of South Korea’s Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

  • Seong Eun Cho
  • Han Woo Park


Noting the government’s role in diffusing information across various sectors of society, this study analyzes the Twitter activity of the Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MFAFF), one of Korea’s government organizations. From a broad perspective, this study provides a better understanding of innovation activity mediated by social media—particularly the government’s Twitter activity, a topic that has not been addressed by previous webometric research on Triple Helix relationships—by employing social network analysis and content analysis. The results indicate some limitations of the MFAFF’s activity on Twitter as a mutual communication channel, although Twitter has the potential to facilitate risk management. Further, based on the MFAFF’s confined use of its Twitter account, the results suggest that its Twitter account can be an effective information distribution channel, indicating Twitter’s value as a communication tool for innovation activity through social media. This study provides an empirical analysis of the government’s Twitter activity and contributes to the literature by providing an in-depth understanding of the Triple Helix relationship on the Web.


Government Innovative Policy promotion Semantic network analysis Twitter 



This work was supported by the 2011 Yeungnam University Research Grant and the National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded the Korean Government (NRF-2011-327-H000005). Further, the authors acknowledge the use of some tools developed by the WCU Webometrics Institute. Finally, the authors are grateful to Ji-Young Park for her assistance in collecting data and preparing this paper.


  1. Barash, V., & Golder, S. (2010). Twitter: Conversation, entertainment, and information, all in one network! Ch 10. In D. Hansen, B. Shneiderman, & M. A. Smith (Eds.), Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  2. Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, K. P. (2010). Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. Paper presented in the fourth international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media.Google Scholar
  3. Cho, S. E., Park, J. Y., & Park, H. W. (2011, forthcoming). Public relations of government organizations in the era of web2.0. In H. W. Park (Ed.). An introduction to Social Media. KyeongSan: WCU Webometrics Institute. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  4. Fang, Z. (2002). E-government in digital era: Concept, practice, and development. International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management, 10, 1–22.Google Scholar
  5. Garrett, R. K. (2011). Troubling consequences of online political rumoring. Human Communication Research, 37, 255–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goldbeck, J., Grimes, J., & Rogers, A. (2009). Twitter use by the U.S. congress. The paper presented in Human-Computer Interaction lab 27th Annual Symposium. Retrieved from
  7. Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., & Smith, M. A. (Eds.). (2010). Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  8. Hansen, D., Smith, M. A., & Shneiderman, B. (2011). Event graphs: Charting collections of conference connections. A paper presented to the Hawaii International Conference on System Science, Hawaii, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Holmberg, K. (2010). Co-inlinking to a municipal Web space: A webometric and content analysis. Scientometrics, 83, 851–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holmberg, K., & Thelwall, M. (2009). Local government web sites in Finland: A geographic and webometric analysis. Scientometrics, 79, 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hughes, A. L., & Palen, L. (2009). Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. International Journal of Emergency Management, 6, 248–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jo, H. J. (2010). Twitter and e-Government: Case studies of domestic and international political situation and regulation. Presented at The Korean Association for Regional Information Soceity Annual Conference. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  14. Khan, G. F., Moon, J. H., Park, H. W., Swar, B., & Rho, J. J. (2011). A socio-technical perspective on e-government issues in developing countries: A scientometrics approach. Scientometrics, 87(2), 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Khan, G. F., & Park, H. W. (2011, forthcoming). Measuring the Triple Helix on the Web: Longitudinal trends in the University-Industry-Government relationship in Korea. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Google Scholar
  16. Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lim, Y. S., & Park. H. W. (2010). Webometrics analysis of blog campaigns during 10.28 by-election. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 12, 539–551. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  18. Lim, Y. S., & Park, H. W. (2011, forthcoming). How do congressional members appear on the web? Tracking the web visibility of South Korean politicians. Government Information Quarterly.Google Scholar
  19. National Information Society Agency. (July 2009). CIO (Chief Information Officer) report: Digital government. Seoul: National Information Society Agency, 14. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  20. Park, H. W. (2003). Hyperlink network analysis: A new method for the study of social structure on the web. Connections, 25, 49–61.Google Scholar
  21. Park, H. W. (2004). Presence of Taiwan on the world wide web in South Korea: Dynamics of digital and geographical presence in cyberspace. International Information & Library Review, 36, 329–340.Google Scholar
  22. Park, H. W. (2010). Research of the humanities and social science in the e-science age: Internet research method. Social Science Research, 30. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  23. Park, H. W., & Bae, A. J. (2007). How 17th members of the National Assembly use websites: Optimistic and pessimistic views of digital politics. Digital Communication Review, 3, 57–93. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  24. Park, H. W., Hong, H. D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using Triple Helix indicators. Scientometrics, 65, 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Park, H. W., & Lee, Y. O. (2009). Complex text analysis using portal replies: Kwangun University BBK event on during the 17th presidential election. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 11, 731–744. Written in Korean.Google Scholar
  26. Park, H. W., Lee, Y. O., & Ryu, Y. D. (2009). Online discussion group network and civic participation. Issue Report for Information Culture and Digital Divide, 69. (written in Korean).Google Scholar
  27. Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2004). Understanding and application of KrKwic program for Korean content analysis. Journal of The Korean Data Analysis Society, 6, 1377–1388.Google Scholar
  28. Park, H. W., Park, S. J., Stuart, D., & Lee, S. W. (2009). Understanding of WeboNaver, a search engine program using the API: A web visibility analysis of members of the 18th National Assembly. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 11, 3427–3440. (written in Korean).Google Scholar
  29. Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. Retrieved December 09, 2005, from
  30. Parks, M. R., & Roberts, L. D. (1998). Making MOOsic: The development of personal relationships on-line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. A paper presented at the annual conference of the Western Speech Communication Association. Monterey, California. February, 1997. Retrieved from
  31. Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effect in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wasserman, S. K., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Wigand, F. D. L. (2010). Twitter in government: Building relationships one tweet at time. Presented in Information Technology: New Generations (ITNG), 7th International Conference at Las Vegas, NV (pp. 563–567). 12–14 April 2010.Google Scholar
  34. Wu, G., Hu, X., & Wu, Y. (2010). Effects of perceived interactivity, perceived web assurance and disposition to trust on initial online trust. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 16, 1–26.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. Yan, E., & Zhu, Q. (2008). Hyperlink analysis for government websites of Chinese provincial capitals. Scientometrics, 76, 315–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yum, J. O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55, 374–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Cyber Emotions Research Center, Yeungnam UniversityGyeongsanSouth Korea
  2. 2.Media and CommunicationYeungnam UniversityGyeongsanSouth Korea
  3. 3.Asia Triple Helix SocietySeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.The WCU Webometrics InstituteGyeongsanSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations