AbramsonMark A.HarrisRoland S.III, eds. 2003. The procurement revolution. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
2.
AbramsonMark A.MeansGrady E., eds. 2001. E-government 2001. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
3.
Accenture.2004. E-government leadership: High performance, maximum value. www.accenture.com. Accessed July 14, 2005.
4.
ArtertonF. Christopher. 1988. Political participation and teledemocracy. PS: Political Science and Politics21:620–26.
5.
BeckerTed. 1993. Teledemocracy: Gathering momentum in state and local governance. Spectrum: The Journal of State Government66:14–19.
6.
BrownMary M.BrudneyJeffrey L.. 1998. Public sector information technology initiatives: Implications for programs of public administration. Administration & Society30:421–42.
7.
BrowningGraeme. 2002. Electronic democracy: Using the Internet to transform American politics. Medford, NJ: CyberAge Books.
8.
BryanCathyTsagarousianouRozaTambiniDamian1998. Electronic democracy and the civic networking movement in context. In Cyberdemocracy: Technology, cities, and civic networks, ed.TsagarousianouRozaTambiniDamianBryanCathy. New York: Routledge.
9.
CloeteFanie. 2003. Assessing governance with electronic policy management tools. Public Performance and Management Review26:276–90.
10.
CorbittBrian J.Al-QirimNabeel A.Y., eds. 2004. E-business, e-government small and medium-sized enterprises: Opportunities and challenges. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
11.
CrewsonPhilip E.FisherBonnie S.. 1997. Growing older and wiser: The changing skill requirements of city administrators. Public Administration Review57:380–86.
12.
DaviesAnnetteThomasRobyn2002. Gendering and gender in public service organizations: Changing professional identities under new public management. Public Management Review4:461–84.
13.
DevadossPaul R.PanShan L.HuangJimmy C.. 2002. Structural analysis of e-government initiatives: A case study of SCO. Decision Support Systems34:253–69.
14.
DunleavyPatrickMargettsHelenBastowSimonTinklerJane2006. New public management is dead— long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory16:467–94.
15.
EggersWilliam D.2005. Government 2.0: Using technology to improve education, cut red tape, reduce gridlock, and enhance democracy. New York: Rowan & Little-field.
16.
FountainJane E.2001. Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
17.
GattikerUrs E.2001. The Internet as a diverse community: Cultural, organizational, and political issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
Graafland-EssersIrmaEttedguiEmile. 2003. Benchmarking e-government in Europe and the US. Santa Monica: RAND.
19.
HalachmiArie. 2004. Information technology and productivity. In Public productivity handbook. 2nd ed., ed.HolzerMarcLeeSeok-Hwan, 673–86. New York: Marcel Dekker.
20.
Hart-Teeter. 2003. The new e-government equation: Ease, engagement, privacy and protection. Washington, DC: Council for Excellence in Government. www.excelgov.org/index.php?keyword=a432c0db469bdf. Accessed March 6, 2007.
21.
HeeksRichard ed. 1999. Reinventing government in the information age: International practice in IT-enabled public sector reform. London: Routledge.
22.
HoAlfred T.K.2002. Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Administration Review62:434–44.
23.
HoldenStephen H.NorrisDonald F.FletcherPatricia D.. 2003. Electronic government at the local level. Public Performance and Management Review26:325–44.
24.
HolzerMarcKimByong-Joon, eds. 2004. Building good governance: Reforms in Seoul. Newark, NJ: National Center for Public Productivity.
25.
HolzerMarcLinWeiwei2007. A longitudinal perspective on MPA education in the United States. Journal of Public Affairs Education13:345–64.
26.
HolzerMarcMelitskiJamesRhoSeung-YongSchwesterRichard. 2005. Restoring trust in government: The potential of digital citizen participation. Washington, DC: IBM Endowment for the Business of Government.
27.
HorriganJohn B.2004. How Americans get in touch with government: Internet users benefit from the efficiency of e-government, but multiple channels are still needed for citizens to reach agencies and solve problems. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
28.
KamarckElaine C.NyeJoseph S., eds. 1999. Democracy.com? Governance in a networked world. Hollis, NH: Hollis Publishing.
29.
KaylorCharlesDeshazoRandyVan EckDavid. 2001. Gauging e-government: A report on implementing services among American cities. Government Information Quarterly18:293–307.
30.
Korac-KakabadseAndrewKorac-KakabadseNada. 1999. Information technology's impact on the quality of democracy: Reinventing the democratic vessel. In Reinventing government in the information age: International practice in IT-enabled public sector reform, ed.HeeksRichard. London: Routledge.
31.
MalinaAnna. 1999. Perspectives on citizen democratisation and alienation in the virtual public sphere. In Digital democracy: Discourse and decision making in the information age, ed.HagueBarry N.BrianD. Loader, 23–38. London: Routledge.
32.
MälkiäMattiAnttiroikoAri-ViekkoSavolainenReijo. 2004. eTransformation in governance: New directions in government and politics. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
33.
McLeanIain. 1989. Democracy and the new technology. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
34.
MelitskiJames. 2003. Capacity and e-government performance: An analysis based on early adopters of Internet technologies in New Jersey. Public Performance and Management Review26:376–90.
35.
MelitskiJames. 2004. E-government and information technology in the public sector. In Public productivity handbook. 2nd ed., ed.HolzerMarcLeeSeok-Hwan, 649–72. New York: Marcel Dekker.
36.
MoonM. Jae. 2002. The evolution of e-government among municipalities: Rhetoric or reality?Public Administration Review62:424–33.
37.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.2003. E-government imperative. Paris: OECD Publication Service.
38.
PascualPatricia J.2003. E-government. New York: Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme, United Nations Development Programme. eprimers.apdip.net/series. Accessed July 11, 2005.
39.
ScottJames K.2005. E-services: Assessing the quality of municipal government Web sites. State and Local Government Review37:151–65.
40.
ScottJames K.. 2006. “E” the people: Do U.S. municipal government Web sites support public involvement?Public Administration Review66:341–53.
41.
ShanePeter M.2002. The electronic federalist: The Internet and the eclectic institutionalization of democratic legitimacy. Paper presented at the Prospects for Electronic Democracy Conference, Pittsburgh.
42.
SkrzyckiCindy. 2003. U.S. opens online portal to rule-making: Web site invites wider participation in the regulatory process. Washington Post, January 23, E01.
43.
ThomasRobynDaviesAnnette2002. Gender and new public management: Reconstituting academic subjectivities. Gender, Work and Organization9:372–97.
44.
WatsonRichard T.AkselsenSigmundEvjemoBeneteAarsaetherNils1999. Teledemocracy in local government. Communications of the ACM42:58–63.
45.
WeareChristopherMussoJuliet A.HaleMatthew L.. 1999. Electronic democracy and the diffusion of municipal Web pages in California. Administration and Society31:3–27.
46.
WeberLori M.2002. A survey of the literature on the Internet and democracy. Paper presented at the Prospects for Electronic Democracy Conference, Pittsburgh.
47.
WestDarrell M.2004. E-government and the transformation of service delivery and citizen attitudes. Public Administration Review64:15–27.
48.
WestJonathan P.BermanEvan M.. 2001. The impact of revitalized management practices on the adoption of information technology. Public Performance and Management Review24:233–53.
49.
WestenTracy. 2000. E-democracy: Ready or not, here it comes. National Civic Review89:217–27.
50.
WilhelmAnthony G.1998. Virtual sounding boards: How deliberative is on-line political discussion. Information, Communication and Society1:313–338.
51.
WitschgeTamara. 2002. Online deliberation: Possibilities of the Internet for deliberation. Paper presented at the Prospects for Electronic Democracy Conference, Pittsburgh.
52.
Working Group on E-government in the Developing World.2002. Roadmap for e-government in the developing world. Los Angeles: Pacific Council on International Policy.