A Panel Data Analysis of the Roles of Education Level and Financial Capacity on E-government Adoption for Higher Transparency and Efficiency in ASEAN Countries

• Autorzy: Zulkifli Mohamed , Farah Aida Ahmad Nadzri , Shahzadah Fahed Qureshi , Ahmed Abdullah Saad Al-Dhubaib , Johan Arifin , Nathrah Yacob
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

E-government involves the application of the latest innovations while providing the provision of efficient services in the government's management systems. Whereas, ease of doing business is an index by World Bank that shows the easiness of doing business in particular country. These two variables are investigated in our study as they may contribute to the inflows of Foreign Direct Investment in the economy. Additionally, the study also includes two control variables which are the contribution of private industry and public industry in the GDP. Prior studies related to the topic are discussed in this study to develop various hypotheses. To conduct effective research, 26-years of data from the ASEAN countries were collected. After applying various approaches and techniques including panel co-integration test and DOLS estimation for testing different variables and their respective data, first major hypothesis of the study related to the e-government was rejected. Yet, another hypothesis emerged, regarding the impact of control variables such as contribution of private sector in GDP and contribution of public sector in GDP. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

e-government; Foreign investment; Direct investments

PL

e-administracja; Inwestycje zagraniczne; Inwestycje bezpośrednie

• Czasopismo: Contemporary Economics
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: 14
• Numer: nr 4
• Strony: 532--541

Twórcy

autor

Zulkifli Mohamed

• Universiti Teknologi MARA, Kelantan, Malaysia

autor

Farah Aida Ahmad Nadzri

• Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia

autor

Shahzadah Fahed Qureshi

• Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan

autor

Ahmed Abdullah Saad Al-Dhubaib

• Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia

autor

Johan Arifin

• Universitas Islam Indonesia

autor

Nathrah Yacob

• Inti International College Subang

Bibliografia

• Abu-Shanab, E. A. (2017). E-government familiarity influence on Jordanians' perceptions. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 103-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.05.001
• Al-Hujran, O., Al-Debei, M. M., Chatfield, A., & Migdadi, M. (2015). The imperative of influencing citizen attitude toward e-government adoption and use. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 189-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.025
• Alam, M. B. (2017). E-government in India. In M. Sabharwal, & E. M. Berman (Eds.) Public administration in South Asia (pp. 173-192). Routledge.
• Anthopoulos, L., Reddick, C. G., Giannakidou, I., & Mavridis, N. (2016). Why e-government projects fail? An analysis of the Healthcare.gov website. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 161-173.
• Banerjee, P., & Chau, P. Y. (2004). An evaluative framework for analysing e-government convergence capability in developing countries. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 1(1), 29-48. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2004.004135
• Bishop, G. (2016). A rule of reason for inward FDI: Integrating Canadian foreign investment review and competition policy. SPP Research Paper, 9(34), 1-30.
• Bilan, Y., Hussain, H. I., Haseeb, M., & Kot, S. (2020). Sustainability and Economic Performance: Role of Organizational Learning and Innovation. Engineering Economics, 31(1), 93-103. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.31.1.24045
• Boateng, A., Hua, X., Nisar, S., & Wu, J. (2015). Examining the determinants of inward FDI: Evidence from Norway. Economic Modelling, 47, 118-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.02.018
• Buffat, A. (2015). Street-level bureaucracy and egovernment. Public Management Review, 17(1), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.771699
• Canare, T., Ang, A., & Mendoza, R. U. (2016). Ease of doing business: International policy experience and evidence. SSRN Working Paper, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2834757
• Corcoran, A., & Gillanders, R. (2015). Foreign direct investment and the ease of doing business. Review of World Economics, 151(1), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-014-0194-5
• Doshi, R., Kelley, J. G., & Simmons, B. A. (2019). The power of ranking: The ease of doing business indicator and global regulatory behavior. International Organization, 73(3), 611-643. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818319000158
• Dreze, J., & Sen, A. (1999). India: Economic development and social opportunity. Oxford University Press.
• Garcia, C., & Hinayon, D. (2018). Components of ease of doing business inferred from macroeconomic performance indicators. Journal of Educational and Human Resource Development, 6, 161-171.
• Gaur, A. (2017). Ease of doing business in India: Challenges & road ahead [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Technology and Business Management, Dubai, India.
• Güler, M., Mukul, E., & Büyüközkan, G. (2019). Analysis of e-government strategies with hesitant fuzzy linguistic multi-criteria decision making techniques. In C. Kahraman, S. Cebi, S. C. Onar, B. Oztaysi, A. C. Tolga, & I. U. Sari (Eds.), International Conference on Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems (pp. 1068-1075). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23756-1_126
• Hurtado, J. M. (2018). Country patterns and effects on the ease of doing business and competitiveness: a global study. International Journal of Competitiveness, 1(3), 206-220. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJC.2018.091478
• Hussain, H.I., Kamarudin, F., Mohamad Anwar, N.A., Nassir, A.M., Sufian, F., Mang Tan, K. (2020). Impact of country's governance dimensions on bank revenue efficiency: Overview on Middle East, Southeast Asia, and South Asia countries. Transformations in Business & Economics, 19(1), 191-228.
• Jayasuriya, D. (2011). Improvements in the world bank's ease of doing business rankings: Do they translate into greater foreign direct investment inflows?. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-5787
• Khan, F., & Majeed, M. (2019). ICT and e-Government as the sources of economic growth in information age: Empirical evidence from South Asian economies. South Asian Studies, 34(1), 227-249.
• Kottaridi, C., Louloudi, K., & Karkalakos, S. (2019). Human capital, skills and competencies: Varying effects on inward FDI in the EU context. International Business Review, 28(2), 375-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.10.008
• Kurfalı, M., Arifoğlu, A., Tokdemir, G., & Paçin, Y. (2017). Adoption of e-government services in Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 168-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.041
• Lee, I. H. I., Hong, E., & Makino, S. (2016). Location decisions of inward FDI in sub-national regions of a host country: Service versus manufacturing industries. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 33(2), 343-370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9456-6
• Legris, P., Ingham, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & management, 40(3), 191-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00143-4
• Martins, J., & Veiga, L. (2018, April). Electronic government and the ease of doing business. In A. Kankanhalli, A. Ojo, D. Soares (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 584-587). ACM.
• Milner, H. V., Tingley, D., Xu, C., & Chilton, A. (2019). The political economy of inward FDI: Opposition to Chinese mergers and acquisitions. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/pou049
• Moran, T.H. (2012). Foreign Direct Investment and Development. In G. Ritzer (Ed.),The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Globalization, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470670590.wbeog217
• Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics, 61(S1), 653-670. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1653
• Pedroni, P. (2001). Purchasing power parity tests in cointegrated panels. Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(4), 727-731. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465301753237803
• Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econometric theory, 20(3), 597-625.
• Sá, F., Rocha, Á., & Cota, M. P. (2016). Potential dimensions for a local e-Government services quality model. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 270-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.005
• Schnoll, H. J. (2015). E-government: Information, technology, and transformation:. Routledge.
• Tan, K. G., Gopalan, S., & Nguyen, W. (2018). Measuring ease of doing business in India's subnational economies: a novel index. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 7(3), 242-264.
• Tingley, D., Xu, C., Chilton, A., & Milner, H. V. (2015). The political economy of inward FDI: opposition to Chinese mergers and acquisitions. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 8(1), 27-57. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/pou049
• Uddin, M., Chowdhury, A., Zafar, S., Shafique, S., & Liu, J. (2019). Institutional determinants of inward FDI: Evidence from Pakistan. International Business Review, 28(2), 344-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.10.006
• Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
• Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., Chan, F. K., & Hu, P. J. (2016). Managing citizens' uncertainty in e-government services: The mediating and moderating roles of transparency and trust. Information Systems Research, 27(1), 87-111. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2015.0612

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5709/ce.1897-9254.424