Quite a number of smart-city initiatives from around the world have been analyzed and documented, and a growing body of academic knowledge is evolving around the phenomenon of the smart city. Smart-city government is seen as an important driver for developing a smart urban environment. The eCityGov Alliance in the Pacific Northwest of the USA represents a special case of a successful smart-city collaboration between nine neighboring municipalities, which combined forces to provide smart services to citizens and businesses that no single municipality could have provided alone. Developing and maintaining a collaborative governance model appears as the most important key success factor in such multi-jurisdictional smart-city undertakings. This study investigates the governance model of the eCityGov Alliance and its opportunities, and potential pitfalls. It concludes that the eCityGov Alliance can serve as a role model for such multi-jurisdictional smart-city initiatives.
AlAwadhiSSchollHJ (2013) Aspirations and realizations: The smart city of Seattle. Paper presented at the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-46), 7–11 January, Wailea, Maui, HI/USA.
2.
AlAwadhiSAldamaAChourabiH. (2012). Building understanding of smart city initiatives. Electronic Government7443: 40–53.
3.
Aldama-NaldaAChourabiHPardoTA. (2012) Smart cities and service integration initiatives in North American cities: A status report. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, 289–290.
BeckerJNiehavesBKrauseA (2009) Shared services strategies and their determinants: A multiple case study analysis in the public sector. AMCIS 2009 Proceedings14.
6.
BurtonJW (1990) Conflict: Human needs theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
7.
CaragliuADel BoCNijkampP (2009) Smart cities in Europe. Paper presented at the 3rd Central European Conference in Regional Science, 7–9 October, Košice, Slovak Republic.
8.
CasperS (2013) New-technology clusters and public policy: Three perspectives. Social Science Information52(4): 628–652.
9.
ChevalierM (1980) Needs-based decisionmaking. In: LedererKGaltungJAntalD (eds) Human needs: A contribution to the current debate. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, 329–341.
10.
ChourabiHNamTWalkerS. (2012) Understanding smart city initiatives: An integrative and comprehensive theoretical framework, Paper presented at the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-45), 4–7 January, Maui, Hawaii.
11.
DeakinM (2012) Intelligent cities as smart providers: COPs as organizations for developing integrated models of eGovernment Services. Innovation: The European journal of social science research25(2): 115–135.
EtzkowitzH (2003) Innovation in innovation: The Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Social Science Information42(3): 293–337.
18.
EtzkowitzH (2011) Normative change in science and the birth of the Triple Helix. Social Science Information50(3–4): 549–568.
19.
FeredayJMuir-CochraneE (2008) Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods5(1): 80–92.
20.
FisherRJ (1990) Needs theory, social identity and an eclectic model of conflict. In: BurtonJW (ed.) Conflict: Human needs theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 89–112.
21.
FlyvbjergB (2006) Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry12(2): 219–245.
22.
GaltungJ (1980) The basic needs approach. In: LedererKGaltungJAntalD (eds) Human Needs: A contribution to the current debate, Vol. 12. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, 55–125
GlaserBG (1999) The future of grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research9(6): 836–845. doi:10.1177/104973299129122199.
25.
GlaserBGStraussAL (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
26.
GormanGEClaytonPRice-LivelyMLGormanL (1997) Qualitative research for the information professional: A practical handbook. London: Library Association Publishing.
27.
GubaEG (1981) Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. ECTJ29(2): 75–91. doi:10.1007/BF02766777.
28.
HerrschelT (2013) Competitiveness and sustainability: Can ‘smart city regionalism’ square the circle?Urban Studies50(11): 2332–2348.
29.
HollandsRG (2008Will the real smart city please stand up?City12(3): 303–320.
30.
JanssenMJohaA (2006) Motives for establishing shared service centers in public administrations. International Journal of Information Management26(2): 102–115.
31.
JanssenMJohaA (2007) Understanding IT governance for the operation of shared services in public service networks. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations4(1): 20–34.
32.
JohaAJanssenM (2010) Public–private partnerships, outsourcing or shared service centres? Motives and intents for selecting sourcing configurations. Transforming Government: People, process and policy4(3): 232–248.
33.
KourtitKNijkampPArribasD (2012) Smart cities in perspective – A comparative European study by means of self-organizing maps. Innovation: The European journal of social science research25(2): 229–246.
34.
LedererKGaltungJAntalD (1980) Human needs: A contribution to the current debate, Vol. 12. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
35.
LeRouxKBrandenburgerPWPandeySK (2010) Interlocal service cooperation in US cities: A social network explanation. Public Administration Review70(2): 268–278.
36.
LombardiPGiordanoSFarouhHYousefW (2012) Modelling the smart city performance. Innovation: The European journal of social science research25(2): 137–149.
37.
MilwardHB (1994) Nonprofit contracting and the hollow state. Public Administration Review54(1): 73–77.
38.
MilwardHBProvanKG (1993) The hollow state: Private provision of public services. In: IngramHMSmithSR (eds) Public Policy for Democracy. Washington, DC: The Brooking Institution, 222–240.
39.
NahonKSchollHJ (2010) Siblings of a different kind: e-government and e-commerce. In: WimmerMAChappeletJ-LJanssenMSchollHJ (eds) Electronic Government, Proceedings of the 9th IFIP WG 8.5 International conference, egov 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland, 29 August–2 September. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, Vol. 6228: 25–37.
40.
NamTPardoTA (2011) Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. Paper presented at the 12th Annual Digital Government Research Conference, 12–15 June, College Park, MA.
41.
NiehavesBKrauseA (2010) Shared service strategies in local government – A multiple case study exploration. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy4(3): 266–279.
42.
OsborneDGaeblerT (1992) Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
43.
PattonMQ (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44.
RamsayM (1992) Human needs and the market. Aldershot: Avebury; Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
45.
RitchieJLewisJGillianE (2003) Designing and selecting samples. In: RitchieJLewisJ (eds) Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 77–108.
46.
RuddinLP (2006) You can generalize stupid! Social scientists, Bent Flyvbjerg, and case study methodology. Qualitative Inquiry12(4): 797–812.
47.
SchollHJAlAwadhiS (2015) Creating Smart Governance: The Key to Radical ICT Overhaul at the City of Munich, Information Polity, 20(3): 1–22.
48.
SchollHJAlAwadhiS (2015) Pooling and leveraging scarce resources: The smart eCityGov Alliance. In: BuiTSpragueF (eds) Proceedings of the 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-48). Kauai, HI: IEEE, 1–11.
49.
SchollHJSchollMC (2014) Smart governance: A roadmap for research and practice. In: KindlingMGreifenederE (eds) Proceedings of the 9th iConference. Berlin: Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (IDEALS), 163–176.
50.
SchollHJJurischMSchollMCKrcmarH (2014) Building sound foundations for smart city government: The case of Munich, Germany, International Journal of e-Planning Research3(4): 1–22. doi:10.4018/IJEPR.
51.
StraussALCorbinJM (1998) Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52.
UlbrichF (2010) Adopting shared services in a public-sector organization. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy4(3): 249–265.
53.
UrquhartCLehmannHMyersMD (2010) Putting the ‘theory’ back into grounded theory: Guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Information Systems20(4): 357–381. doi:10.1111/j.1365–2575.2009.00328.x.
