Controlling corruption necessitates collaboration between service providers and recipients, as emphasized by the co-creation theory. In this context, e-participation has emerged as a promising avenue for fostering collaboration through online platforms in the ongoing battle against corruption. This research relies on national-level data obtained from the World Bank, Transparency International, and the United Nations to investigate the relationship between e-participation and the control of corruption. Through a comprehensive data analysis involving 136 countries over a five biennial period from 2012 to 2020, the results reveal no statistically significant correlation between e-participation and corruption control. This finding raises pertinent questions about the effectiveness of current e-participation approaches, or the measurements employed to evaluate their impact on combating corruption. The implications of this finding are significant for policymakers and governance monitoring bodies, underscoring the need for a re-evaluation and enhancement of existing e-participation mechanisms and anti-corruption strategies within the co-creation framework.
AlathurS.IlavarasanP. V.GuptaM. P. (2016). Determinants of e-participation in the citizens and the government initiatives: Insights from India. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 55(1), 25–35.
2.
AmirkhanyanA. A.CheonO.DavisJ. A.MeierK. J.WangF. (2019). Citizen participation and its impact on performance in U.S. nursing homes. The American Review of Public Administration. 49(7), 840–854.
3.
AndersenT. B. (2009). E-Government as an anti-corruption strategy. Information Economics and Policy, 21, 201–210.
4.
AnsellC.TorfingJ. (2021). Public governance as co-creation: A strategy for revitalizing the public sector and rejuvenating democracy. Cambridge University Press.
5.
ArwatiD.LatifD. V. (2019). Factors inhibiting public participation in corruption prevention through E-government application in Indonesia. Global Business & Management Research, 11(2), 81–86.
6.
AuerD.RömerF.TjadenJ. (2020). Corruption and the desire to leave quasi-experimental evidence on corruption as a driver of emigration intentions. IZA Journal of Development and Migration, 11(1), 1–31
7.
BlancD. L. (2020). E-participation: A quick overview of recent qualitative trends (Department of Economic and Social Affairs, DESA Working Paper No. 163, ST/ESA/2020/DWP/163). DESA.
8.
ChoiJ. W. (2014). E-government and corruption: A cross country survey. World Political Science Review, 10(2), 217–236.
9.
DangL.SeemannA.-K. (2021). The role of collaborative housing initiatives in public value co-creation: A case study of Freiburg, Germany. Voluntary Sector Review, 12(1), 59–80.
10.
DaoudJ. (2017). Multicollinearity and regression analysis. Journal of Psychology: Conference Series, 949, 012009. 10.1088/1742-6596/949/1/012009
11.
DoddM. D.BrummetteJ.HazletonV. (2015). A social capital approach: An examination of Putnam’s civic engagement and public relations roles. Public Relations Review, 41(4), 472–479.
12.
Ear-DupuyH.SerratO. (2017). Fighting corruption with ICT: Strengthening civil society’s role. In SerratO. (Ed.), Knowledge solutions (pp. 797–811). Singapore: Springer.
13.
GauriV. (2013). Redressing grievances and complaints regarding basic service delivery. World Development, 41, 109–119.
14.
HaugN.MergelI. (2021). Public value co-creation in living labs: Results from three case studies. Administrative Sciences, 11(3), 74–89.
15.
HeywoodP. M. (2018). Combating corruption in the twenty-first century: New approaches. Daedalus, 147(3), 83–97.
16.
HorvathC.CarpenterJ. (2020). Co-creation in theory and practice: Exploring creativity in the global North and South (1st ed.). Policy Press.
17.
IngramsA.SchachterH. L. (2019). E-participation opportunities and the ambiguous role of corruption: A model of municipal responsiveness to sociopolitical factors. Public Administration Review, 79(4), 601–611.
18.
IonescuL. (2013). The impact that E-government can have on reducing corruption and enhancing transparency. Economics, Management, and Financial Markets, 8(2), 210–215.
19.
JoS.NabatchiT. (2018). Co-production, co-creation, and citizen empowerment. In BrandsenT.SteenT.VerschuereB. (Eds.), Co-production and co-creation engaging citizens in public services (pp. 231–239). Routledge.
KouassiN. K.SmithH. J. M.Huerta CuervoR. (2023). Insights on co-creation in Mexico: Challenges to its application of public-private partnerships. International Review of Public Administration. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659
LeeJ.KimS. (2018). Citizens’ e-participation on agenda setting in local governance: Do individual social capital and e-participation management matter?Public Management Review, 20(6), 873–895.
25.
LeeK.ChoiS. O.KimJ.JungM. (2018). A study on the factors affecting decrease in the government corruption and mediating effects of the development of ICT and E-government: A cross-country analysis. Journal of Open Innovation, 4(3), 41–52.
26.
LindeJ.KarlssonM. (2013). The dictator’s new clothes: The relationship between E-participation and quality of government in non-democratic regimes. International Journal of Public Administration, 36(4), 269–281.
27.
MedagliaR. (2012). E-Participation research: Moving characterization forward (2006–2011). Government Information Quarterly, 29(3), 346–360.
28.
MondoB. V. (2016). Measuring political corruption from audit results: A new panel of Brazilian municipalities. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 22(1), 477–498.
29.
NamT. (2018). Examining the anti-corruption effect of e-government and the moderating effect of national culture: A cross-country study. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 273–282.
30.
NeshkovaM. I.KalesnikaiteV. (2019). Corruption and citizen participation in local government: Evidence from Latin America. Governance, 32(1), 677–693.
31.
OsborneS. P.RadnorZ.StrokoschK. (2016). Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment?Public Management Review, 18(5), 639–653.
32.
PeraR.OcchiocupoN.ClarkeJ. (2016). Motives and resources for value co-creation in a multi-stakeholder ecosystem: A managerial perspective. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4033–4041.
33.
SchatzF. (2013). Fighting corruption with social accountability: A comparative analysis of social accountability mechanisms’ potential to reduce corruption in public administration. Public Administration and Development, 33(3), 161–174.
34.
SrivastavaS. C.TeoT. S. H.DevarajS. (2016). You can’t bribe a computer: Dealing with the societal challenge of corruption through ICT. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 511–526.
United Nations. (2021). Citizen engagement. Public Institutions and Digital Government, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the United Nations. Retrieved April 5, 2021, from https://publicadministration.un.org/en/eparticipation
Van HolmE. J. (2019). Unequal cities, unequal participation: The effect of income inequality on civic engagement. The American Review of Public Administration, 49(2), 135–144.
40.
VerdenicciS.HoughD. (2015). People power and anti-corruption; Demystifying citizen-centred approaches. Crime, Law and Social Change, 64(1), 23–35.
41.
WaheduzzamanW.KhandakerS. (2022). E-participation for combating corruption, increasing voice and accountability, and developing government effectiveness: A cross-country data analysis. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 81(4), 549–568.
42.
WaheduzzamanW.MiahS. (2015). Readiness assessment of e-Government: A developing country perspective. Journal of Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 9(4), 498–516.
43.
WilliamsO.LindenfalkB.RobertG. (2023). New development: Mitigating and negotiating the co-creation of dis/value-Elinor Ostrom’s design principles and co-creating public value. Public Money & Management, 43(1), 45–50.
YangY.WuJ. (2013). Are the “bigger fish” caught? China’s experience of engaging citizens in performance measurement system. Public Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 144–182.
47.
YetanoA.RoyoS. (2017). Keeping citizens engaged: A comparison between online and offline participants. Administration & Society, 49(3), 394–422.
48.
ZhaoX.XuH. D. (2015). E-government and corruption: A longitudinal analysis of countries. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(6), 410–421.
49.
ZhengY. (2016). The impact of E-participation on corruption: A cross-country analysis. International Review of Public Administration, 21(2), 91–103.
