Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Government 3.0: Scenarios and Roadmap of Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Scientific Foundations of Digital Governance and Transformation

Part of the book series: Public Administration and Information Technology ((PAIT,volume 38))

  • 1022 Accesses

Abstract

The broad diffusion of so-called disruptive technologies in the public sector is expected to heavily impact and give a strong digital boost to public service provisioning. To ensure acceptance and sustainability, the benefits and challenges of using disruptive technologies in public service provisioning need to be well researched. This chapter applies scenario-based science and technology roadmapping to outline potential future uses of disruptive technologies. It develops a roadmap of research for Government 3.0. Based on a literature review of disruptive technologies in Government 3.0, thirteen scenarios sketch possible use of internet of things, artificial intelligence, machine learning, virtual and augmented reality, big data and other disruptive technologies in public service provisioning. Subsequently, gap analysis is applied to derive a roadmap of research, which outlines nineteen research actions to boost innovation in public service with the use of disruptive technologies, thereby building on engagement of and interaction with expert stakeholders from different fields. We conclude with recommendations for a broader and more informed discussion about how such new (disruptive) technologies can be successfully deployed in the public sector—leveraging the expected benefits of these technologies while at the same time mitigating the drawbacks affiliated with them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, D., Musabay, N., & Bah, A., et al., (2019). Ethics emerging: The story of privacy and security perceptions in virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 14th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgarten, J., & Chui, M. (2009). E-government 2.0. McKinsey Q. https://doi.org/10.2202/1944-2866.1016.

  • Berkhout, F., Hertin, J., & Jordan, A. (2002). Socio-economic futures in climate change impact assessment: Using scenarios as “learning machines.” Global Environmental Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bermejo, C., Huang, Z., Braud, T., & Hui, P. (2017). When augmented reality meets big data. In Proceedings of the IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops ICDCSW 2017 (pp. 169–174). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDCSW.2017.62.

  • Bicking, M., & Wimmer, M. A. (2011). Concept to integrate open collaboration in technology roadmapping: Stakeholder involvement in strategic e-government planning. In Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–12).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29, 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burdea, G., & Coiffet, P. (2003). Virtual reality technology. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environment, 12, 663–664. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474603322955950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charalabidis, Y., & Lachana, Z. (2020a). On the science foundation of digital governance and transformation. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 214–221). ACM, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charalabidis, Y., & Lachana, Z. (2020). Towards a science base for digital governance. The 21st Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 383–389). ACM.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Charalabidis, Y., Lampathaki, F., Misuraca, G., & Osimo, D. (2012). ICT for governance and policy modelling: Research challenges and future prospects in Europe. In: Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charalabidis, Y., Loukis, E., Alexopoulos, C., & Lachana, Z. (2019). The three generations of electronic government: From service provision to open data and to policy analytics. In I. Lindgren et al., (Eds.), Proceedings of Electronic Government 2019 (pp. 3–17). LNCS 11685, Springer, Cham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-C., & Hsieh, T.-C. (2014). Big data for digital government. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijpada.2014010101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chui, K. T., Alhalabi, W., Pang, S. S. H., et al., (2017). Disease diagnosis in smart healthcare: Innovation, technologies and applications. Sustain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chun, S. A., Shulman, S., Sandoval, R., & Hovy, E. (2010). Government 2.0: Making connections between citizens, data and government. Information Polity. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-2010-0205.

  • Codagnone, C., & Wimmer, M. A. (Eds.) (2007) Roadmapping eGovernment research: Visions and measures towards innovative government in 2020. eGovRTD2020 Project Consortium, Clusone, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dey, B., Sorour, K., & Filieri, R. (2016) ICTs in developing countries: Research, practices and policy implications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton-Calabria, E., & Allen, W. L. (2015). Developing ethical approaches to data and civil society: From availability to accessibility. Innovation, 28, 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2014.985193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2007). Qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine Einführung (9th edn.). Rowohlt Taschenbuch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gov 3.0. (2018). Report for electronic governance research and practice worldwide (Deliverable D 1.0).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gov 3.0. (2019). Government 3.0 roadmap 2nd version (Deliverable D2.2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2013). Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Generation Computer Systems, 29, 1645–1660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, L., Shi, F., & Tu, J. (2016). Textual analysis and machine leaning: Crack unstructured data in finance and accounting. The Journal of Finance and Data Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfds.2017.02.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Z., Hui, P., & Peylo, C. (2014). When augmented reality meets big data.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2017). A definition for gamification: Anchoring gamification in the service marketing literature. Electronic Markets. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0212-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ITU. (2012). Overview of the Internet of Things.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32, 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M., Van Der Duin, P., & Wimmer, M. A. (2007). Methodology for scenario building. In C. Codagnone & M. A. Wimmer (Eds.), Roadmapping eGovernment Research: Visions and Measures towards Innovative Governments in 2020 (pp. 21–27). MY Pring snc di Guerinoni Marco & C., Clusone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. A., Dana, G., Jordan, N. R., et al. (2012). Using participatory scenarios to stimulate social learning for collaborative sustainable development. Ecology and Society, 17, 9. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04780-170209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazhamiakin, R., Marconi, A., Martinelli, A., et al. (2016). A gamification framework for the long-term engagement of smart citizens. In IEEE 2nd International Smart Cities Conference: Improving the Citizens Quality of Life, ISC2 2016—Proceedings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff, R. N., Boylan, R., & Simons, G. R. (2004). Disruptive technology roadmaps. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00048-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. (2012). Augmented reality in education and training. TechTrends, 56, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-012-0559-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopes, C. V., & Lindström, C. (2012). Virtual cities in Urban planning: The Uppsala case study. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 7, 88–100. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-18762012000300009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luger, G. F. (2005). Artificial intelligence: Structures and strategies for complex problem solving.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majstorovic D, Wimmer MA (2014) Future scenarios of ICT solutions for governance and policy modelling. In: ACM International Conference Proceeding Series

    Google Scholar 

  • Majstorovic, D., Wimmer, M. A., Lay-Yee, R., et al. (2015). Features and added value of simulation models using different modelling approaches supporting policy-making: A comparative analysis. In M. Janssen, M. A. Wimmer, & A. Deljoo (Eds.), Policy practice and digital science: Integrating complex systems, social simulation and public administration in policy research (pp. 95–124). Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, G. D., Cumming, G. S., & Carpenter, S. R. (2003). Scenario planning: A tool for conservation in an uncertain world. Conservation Biology, 17, 358–366. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01491.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porwol, L., & Ojo, A. (2017). VR-participation: On the feasibility of next-gen virtual reality technologies as participation channel. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, DGO 2017 Part F1282 (pp. 570–571). https://doi.org/10.1145/3085228.3085261.

  • Ratcliffe, J. (2000). Scenario building: A suitable method for strategic property planning? Property Management, 18, 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1108/02637470010328322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronzhyn, A., Spitzer, V., & Wimmer, M. (2019). Scenario technique to elicit research and training needs in digital government employing disruptive technologies. In 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research on - dg.o 2019 (pp. 41–47). ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronzhyn, A., & Wimmer, M. A. (2019). Literature review of ethical concerns in the use of disruptive technologies in government 3.0. In L. Berntzen (Ed.), ICDS 2019: The thirteenth international conference on digital society and eGovernments (pp. 85–93). IARIA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronzhyn, A., Wimmer, M. A., Viale Pereira, G., & Alexopoulos, C. (2020). Gamification in public service provisioning: Investigation of research needs. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roselli, D., Matthews, J., & Talagala, N. (2019). Managing bias in AI. In: The Web Conference 2019—Companion of the World Wide Web Conference, WWW 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz Estrada, M. A. (2011). Policy modeling: Definition, classification and evaluation. Journal of Policy Modelling. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2011.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2009). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (3rd edn.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schouten, B., Ferri, G., de Lange, M., & Millenaar, K. (2017). Games as strong concepts for city-making.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, P. (1996). The art of the long view: Planning for the future in an uncertain world

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, T. Q., & Medaglia, R. (2019). Mapping the challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the public sector: Evidence from public healthcare. Government Information Quarterly, 36, 368–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, L., & Richter, C. (2015). Big data and urban governance. Geographies of urban governance (pp. 175–191). Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viale Pereira, G., Charalabidis, Y., Alexopoulos, C., et al. (2018). Scientific foundations training and entrepreneurship activities in the domain of ICT-enabled governance. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research Governance in the Data Age - dgo ’18 (pp. 1–2). ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viale Pereira, G., Wimmer, M. A., & Ronzhyn, A. (2020). Research needs for disruptive technologies in smart cities. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 620–627). Athens.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, M. A., Codagnone, C., & Ma, X. (2007). Developing an E-government research roadmap: Method and example from E-GovRTD2020. In Proceedings of EGOV 2007 (pp. 1–12). LNCS 4656, Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimmer, M. A., Pereira, G. V., Ronzhyn, A., & Spitzer, V. (2020). Transforming government by leveraging disruptive technologies: Identification of research and training needs. eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 12, 87–114. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v12i1.594.

  • Yapo, A., & Weiss, J. (2018). Ethical implications of bias in machine learning. In Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 5365–5372).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. E-Government Research Group, University of Koblenz-Landau, Koblenz, Germany

    Alexander Ronzhyn & Maria A. Wimmer

Authors
  1. Alexander Ronzhyn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria A. Wimmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria A. Wimmer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of the Aegean, Samos, Greece

    Yannis Charalabidis

  2. University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway

    Leif Skiftenes Flak

  3. Danube University Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria

    Gabriela Viale Pereira

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ronzhyn, A., Wimmer, M.A. (2022). Government 3.0: Scenarios and Roadmap of Research. In: Charalabidis, Y., Flak, L.S., Viale Pereira, G. (eds) Scientific Foundations of Digital Governance and Transformation. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 38. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92945-9_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation