Governments have increased their collaboration with the private sector regarding public service delivery, and their propensities to do so are largely shaped by their own in-house capacities. In this article, we theorize and analyze whether governments with an extremely low or extremely high technological capacity are more likely to collaborate with third-party platforms in order to jointly provide digital services. We expect there to be a U-shaped relationship between the technological capacity of those governments and their public–private partnership choices. An empirical analysis of digital service delivery across 290 prefecture-level cities in China corroborates this hypothesis. These results deepen our understanding of the competing motivations that drive the public–private partnership process.
Points for practitioners
Public–private collaboration has been widely adopted to promote digital service delivery. This article confirms the U-shaped relationship between government technological capacity and public–private collaboration in digital service delivery at the city level. To encourage the collaboration, it is crucial to target governments with varying capacities, which seems to be easier in large cities with high administrative rank and that are overall technologically mature and in a competitive environment technologically.
AlawadhiSAldama-NaldaAChourabiH, et al. (2012) Building understanding of smart city initiatives. In: International Conference on Electronic Government. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 40–53.
2.
AllenBAJuilletLPaquetG, et al. (2001)
E-governance & government on-line in Canada: Partnerships, people & prospects. Government Information Quarterly18(2): 93–104.
3.
AnthopoulosLReddickCGGiannakidouI, et al. (2016)
Why e-government projects fail? An analysis of the healthcare.gov website. Government Information Quarterly33(1): 161–173.
4.
BaylissKVan WaeyenbergeE (2018)
Unpacking the public private partnership revival. The Journal of Development Studies54(4): 577–593.
5.
BelachewMShyamasundarR (2013) Public private partnerships (PPP) in the e-government initiatives for developing nations: The case of Ethiopia. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (T Janowski, J Holm and E Estevez, eds), pp. 42–45. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.
6.
ChenAJPanSLZhangJ, et al. (2009)
Managing e-government implementation in China: A process perspective. Information & Management46(4): 203–212.
7.
Duhamel F, Gutierrez-Martinez I, Picazo-Vela S, et al. (2014) IT outsourcing in the public sector: A conceptual model. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy 8(1): 8–27.
8.
Fleta-Asín J, Muñoz F and Rosell-Martínez J (2020) Public--private partnerships: Determinants of the type of governance structure. Public Management Review 22(10): 1489–1514.
9.
GantmanS (2011)
IT outsourcing in the public sector: A literature analysis. Journal of Global Information Technology Management14(2): 48–83.
10.
GrimmelikhuijsenSGFeeneyMK (2017)
Developing and testing an integrative framework for open government adoption in local governments. Public Administration Review77(4): 579–590.
11.
HeAJMaL (2020)
Corporate policy entrepreneurship and cross-boundary strategies: How a private corporation champions mobile healthcare payment innovation in China?Public Administration and Development40(1): 76–86.
12.
HefetzAWarnerMVigoda-GadotE (2014)
Concurrent sourcing in the public sector: A strategy to manage contracting risk. International Public Management Journal17(3): 365–386.
13.
HodgeGGreveC (2013) Introduction: Public–private partnerships in turbulent times. In: GreveCHodgeG (eds) Rethinking Public–Private Partnerships: Strategies for Turbulent Times.
New York, NY:
Routledge, pp. 7–22.
14.
HodgeGAGreveC (2017)
On public–private partnership performance: A contemporary review. Public Works Management & Policy22(1): 55–78.
15.
HoodC (1996)
Beyond progressivism: A new global paradigm in public management?International Journal of Public Administration19(2): 151–177.
16.
HuangBYuJ (2019)
Leading digital technologies for coproduction: The case of visit once administrative service reform in Zhejiang Province, China. Journal of Chinese Political Science24(3): 513–532.
17.
HuiGHayllarMR (2010)
Creating public value in e‐Government: A public‐private‐citizen collaboration framework in Web 2.0. Australian Journal of Public Administration69: S120–S131.
18.
KaliannanMAwangHRamanM (2010)
Public–private partnerships for e-government services: Lessons from Malaysia. International Journal of Institutions and Economies2(2): 207–220.
19.
KarkinNJanssenM (2014)
Evaluating websites from a public value perspective: A review of Turkish local government websites. International Journal of Information Management34(3): 351–363.
20.
KimHJBretschneiderS (2004) Local government information technology capacity: An exploratory theory. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (RH Sprague, ed.), p. 10. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
21.
LayneKLeeJ (2001)
Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly18(2): 122–136.
22.
LemberVKattelRTõnuristP (2018)
Technological capacity in the public sector: The case of Estonia. International Review of Administrative Sciences84(2): 214–230.
23.
LiHWangQZhengC (2017)
Interjurisdictional competition and intracity fiscal disparity across Chinese prefectural cities. Governance30(3): 365–385.
24.
LiuTYangXZhengY (2020)
Understanding the evolution of public–private partnerships in Chinese e-government: Four stages of development. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration42(4): 222–247.
25.
LiuYLiHKostakosV, et al. (2014)
An empirical investigation of mobile government adoption in rural China: A case study in Zhejiang Province. Government Information Quarterly31(3): 432–442.
26.
MaL (2013)
The diffusion of government microblogging: Evidence from Chinese municipal police bureaus. Public Management Review15(2): 288–309.
27.
MaL (2014)
Diffusion and assimilation of government microblogging: Evidence from Chinese cities. Public Management Review16(2): 274–295.
28.
MaL (2020) Digital governance in China. In: ZangXChanHS (eds) Handbook of Public Policy and Public Administration in China.
Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 122–135.
29.
NamTPardoTA (2011) Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In: Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times (J Bertot, K Nahon, SA Chun, et al., eds), pp. 282–291. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.
30.
NiAYHoATK (2005)
Challenges in e-government development: Lessons from two information kiosk projects. Government Information Quarterly22(1): 58–74.
31.
OsborneSP (ed.) (2001) Public–Private Partnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective.
New York, NY:
Routledge.
32.
OsborneSP (ed.) (2010) The New Public Governance? Emerging Perspectives on the Theory and Practice of Public Governance.
London:
Routledge.
33.
Osei-KyeiRChanAP (2015)
Review of studies on the critical success factors for public–private partnership (PPP) projects from 1990 to 2013. International Journal of Project Management33(6): 1335–1346.
34.
ReddickCZhengY (2017)
Determinants of citizens’ mobile apps future use in Chinese local governments: An analysis of survey data. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy11(2): 213–235.
35.
RuuskaITeiglandR (2009)
Ensuring project success through collective competence and creative conflict in public–private partnerships—A case study of Bygga Villa, a Swedish triple helix e-government initiative. International Journal of Project Management27(4): 323–334. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.02.007
36.
SavasES (2000) Privatization and Public–Private Partnerships.
New York, NY:
Chatham House Publishers.
37.
ThoriLJHalvorM (2010)
With or without U? The appropriate test for a U‐shaped relationship. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics72(1): 109–118.
38.
TrebilcockMRosenstockM (2015)
Infrastructure public–private partnerships in the developing world: Lessons from recent experience. The Journal of Development Studies51(4): 335–354.
39.
TwizeyimanaJD (2017) User-centeredness and usability in e-government: A reflection on a case study in Rwanda. Paper presented at the International Conference on Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia, St. Petersburg, Russia.
40.
TwizeyimanaJDAnderssonA (2019)
The public value of e-government: A literature review. Government Information Quarterly36(2): 167–178.
41.
Van HamHKoppenjanJ (2001)
Building public–private partnerships: Assessing and managing risks in port development. Public Management Review3(4): 593–616.
42.
WangF (2014)
Explaining the low utilization of government websites: Using a grounded theory approach. Government Information Quarterly31(4): 610–621.
43.
WangHXiongWWuG, et al. (2018)
Public–private partnership in public administration discipline: A literature review. Public Management Review20(2): 293–316.
44.
WelchEWFeeneyMKParkCH (2016)
Determinants of data sharing in U.S. city governments. Government Information Quarterly33(3): 393–403.
45.
ZhangC-BLiY-NWuB, et al. (2017)
How WeChat can retain users: Roles of network externalities, social interaction ties, and perceived values in building continuance intention. Computers in Human Behavior69: 284–293.
46.
ZhangYWangY (2008)
Comparative study on e-government outsourcing mode. Chinese Public Administration274(4): 51–56.
47.
ZhengY (2015) Explaining government performance on e-participation in New Jersey: Government capacity and willingness. Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, Graduate School, Newark.
48.
ZhengYMaL (2021) How citizen demand affects the process of m-government adoption: An empirical study in China. Electronic Commerce Research. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-021-09470-3
49.
ZhengYManoharanAP (2016)
The influence of government capacity on e-services diffusion at municipal level in New Jersey. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA)3(4): 1–9.
50.
ZhengYSchachterHL (2018) The impact of administrator willingness on website eparticipation: Some evidence from municipalities. Public Performance & Management Review41(1): 1–21.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
