Considering the lack of systematic reviews on e-government research, this study includes research categories, spatial structure, research paradigms and noteworthy future topics in the domain of e-government. We collect 142 keywords from 2646 papers published in the Web of Science from 2000 to 2019 as the study object. Then, we identify four research categories: (1) technology and modelling in e-government, (2) drivers of e-government development, (3) public management and (4) governmental management. From public and government perspectives, we outline the spatial structure which includes theories and practices research and conclude four research paradigms: (1) theoretical modelling and application, (2) e-government development, (3) status of public management and (4) status of governmental management. Finally, we develop a 3D spatial map to analyse noteworthy topics and explore the well-studied themes: government-to-citizen, government-to-government and government-to-business, and the under-studied themes: government-to-civil society organisations and citizens-to-citizens, which helps scholars research e-government roundly.
JayashreeSMMarthandanG.Government to e-government to e-society. J Appl Sci2010; 10: 2205–2210.
2.
BeldadAde JongMSteehouderM.How shall I trust the faceless and the intangible? A literature review on the antecedents of online trust. Comput Human Behav2010; 26: 857–869.
3.
BelangerFCarterL.Digitizing government interactions with constituents: an historical review of e-Government research in information systems. J Assoc Inf Syst2012; 13: 363–394.
4.
ChaseLC.A review of understanding e-government: Information systems in public administration. Inf Soc2009; 25: 75–76.
5.
ClarinvalASimonofskiAVanderoseBet al. Public displays and citizen participation: A systematic literature review and research agenda. TGPPP. Epub ahead-of-print 17June2020. DOI: 10.1108/tg-12-2019-0127.
6.
FarahMHSabaniA. Towards sustainable development goals: a literature review and a conceptual framework of governance issues in Africa. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on theory practice of electronic governance, Melbourne, VIC, 3-5 April 2019, pp. 202–211. New York: ACM.
7.
FrancisconEANascimentoMPGranatyrJet al. A systematic literature review of blockchain architectures applied to public services. In: Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 23rd international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design, Porto, Portugal, 6-8 May 2019, pp. 33–38. New York: IEEE.
8.
HanssonKBelkacemKEkenbergL.Open government and democracy: a research review. Soc Sci Comput Rev2015; 33: 540–555.
9.
ZhangHXuXLXiaoJY.Diffusion of e-government: a literature review and directions for future directions. Gov Inf Q2014; 31: 631–636.
10.
SteinbachMSiewekeJSussS.The diffusion of e-participation in public administrations: a systematic literature review. J Org Comp Elect Com2019; 29: 61–95.
11.
Adjei-BamfoPMaloreh-NyamekyeTAhenkanA.The role of e-government in sustainable public procurement in developing countries: a systematic literature review. Resour Conserv Recy2019; 142: 189–203.
12.
YildizM.E-government research: reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward. Gov Inf Q2007; 24: 646–665.
LuCTHuangSYLoPY.An empirical study of on-line tax filing acceptance model: integrating TAM and TPB. Afr J Bus Manag2010; 4: 800–810.
15.
CegarraJLMNavarroJGCPachonJRC.Applying the technology acceptance model to a Spanish city hall. Int J Inf Manag2014; 34: 437–445.
16.
GarrettPM.Social work’s ‘electronic turn’: notes on the deployment of information and communication technologies in social work with children and families. Crit Soc Policy2005; 25: 529–553.
17.
GoldfinchSGauldRBaldwinN.Information and communications technology use, e-government, pain and stress amongst public servants. N Technol Work Employ2011; 26: 39–53.
18.
GuitianEG.Digital democracy. Discourses on citizen participation and information and communications technology (ICT). Rev Estud Polit2016; 169–193.
19.
Lopez-LopezVIglesias-AnteloSVazquez-SanmartinAet al. E-Government, transparency & reputation: an empirical study of Spanish local government. Inf Syst Manag2018; 35: 276–293.
20.
GandiaJLMarrahiLHuguetD.Digital transparency and Web 2.0 in Spanish city councils. Gov Inf Q2016; 33: 28–39.
21.
Ortiz-RodriguezDNavarro-GaleraAAlcaraz-QuilesFJ.The influence of administrative culture on sustainability transparency in European local governments. Adm Soc2015; 50: 555-594.
22.
HudsonJ.Digitising the structures of government: the UK’s information age government agenda. Policy Polit2002; 30: 515–531.
23.
Al-MuwilAWeerakkodyVEl-haddadehRet al. Balancing digital-by-default with inclusion: a study of the factors influencing e-inclusion in the UK. Inform Syst Front2019; 21: 635–659.
24.
ManesRFBruscaIAversanoN.Financial sustainability as a driver for transparency and e-democracy: a comparative study in Italian and Spanish local governments. Int J Public Adm2018; 41: 22–33.
25.
SutopoBWulandariTAdiatiA.E-government, audit opinion, and performance of local government administration in Indonesia. Australas Account Bus Finance J2017; 11: 6–22.
26.
McDermottP.Building open government. Gov Inf Q2010; 27: 401–413.
27.
Sandoval-AlmazanR.Open government and transparency: building a conceptual framework. Convergencia-revista De Ciencias Sociales2015; 22: 203–227.
28.
NamT.Challenges and concerns of open government: a case of government 3.0 in Korea. Soc Sci Comput Rev2015; 33: 556–570.
29.
VeljkovicNBogdanovic-DinicSStoimenovL.Benchmarking open government: an open data perspective. Gov Inf Q2014; 31: 278–290.
30.
JanssenMZuiderwijkA.Infomediary business models for connecting open data providers and users. Soc Sci Comput Rev2014; 32: 694–711.
31.
BulgakovaEVBulgakovVGAkimovVS.The use of ‘big data’ in the public administration: the conditions, opportunities and prospects. Leg Sci Practice-bulletin Nizhniy Novgorod Academy Ministry Inter Russia2015; 31: 10–14.
32.
JanssenMvan den HovenJ.Big and open linked data (BOLD) in government: a challenge to transparency and privacy?Gov Inf Q2015; 32: 363–368.
33.
Luna-ReyesLFGil-GarciaJRCruzCB.Collaborative digital government in Mexico: some lessons from federal web-based interorganizational information integration initiatives. Gov Inf Q2007; 24: 808–826.
34.
KatsonisMBotrosA.Digital government: a primer and professional perspectives. Aus J Public Adm2015; 74: 42–52.
35.
Oui-SukU.Introduction of m. Government & IT Convergence Technology. Working Document, KAIST Institute for IT Convergence, Daejeon, December2010.
36.
MosseySBrombergDManoharanAP. Harnessing the power of mobile technology to bridge the digital divide: a look at U.S. Cities’ mobile government capability. J Inf Technol Politics2019; 16: 52–65.
37.
FaisalMNTalibF.E-government to m-government: a study in a developing economy. Int J Mob Comm2016; 14: 568–592.
38.
StrejcekGTheilM.Technology push, legislation pull? E-government in the European Union. Decis Support Syst2003; 34: 305–313.
39.
Di GiulioMVecchiG. Multilevel policy implementation and the where of learning: the case of the information system for school buildings in Italy. Policy Sci2019; 52: 119–135.
40.
JameelAAsifMHussainA.Good governance and public trust: assessing the mediating effect of e-government in Pakistan. Lex Localis2019; 17: 299–320.
41.
UlfMElinW.Balanced and integrated e-government implementation – exploring the crossroad of public policy-making and information systems project management processes. Trans Gov People Process Policy2018; 12: 191–208.
42.
AyhanMBAydinMEOztemelE.A multi-agent based approach for change management in manufacturing enterprises. J Intell Manuf2015; 26: 975–988.
43.
ZhangBYeYWShenXZet al. Design and implementation of levee project information management system based on WebGIS. R Soc Open Sci2018; 5: 180625.
44.
IraniZSharifAKamalMMet al. Visualising a knowledge mapping of information systems investment evaluation. Expert Syst Appl2014; 41: 105–125.
45.
MalangaDFKamangaBCG. E-records readiness at Karonga district council in Malawi applying IRMT e-records readiness assessment framework. Inf Dev2019; 35: 482–491.
46.
FilgueirasFCirenoFPalottiP.Digital transformation and public service delivery in Brazil. Lat Am Policy2019; 10: 195–219.
47.
MukamurenziSGronlundAIslamSM.Improving qualities of e-government services in Rwanda: a service provider perspective. Electron J Inf Syst Dev Countries2019; 85: e12089.
48.
TassabehjiRHackneyRMaruyamaT.Evaluating digital public services: a contingency value approach within three exemplar developing countries. Inf Technol People2019; 32: 1021–1043.
