The purpose of this article is to examine official Chinese websites in the framework of e-Governance to understand the opportunities that such a communication tool could bring to improve the European – the European Union countries – audiences' understanding and the image of the central Chinese Government. The research hypothesis is that better accessibility and high-quality information as well as e-services will improve the level of trust of European citizens in the Chinese Government. This research is based on an empirical examination of the way in which official Chinese websites are accessed and perceived by European users. The sample group consists of respondents with a relation to China and studying or working in the fields of business, research, tourism and civil services. The data were collected using an online survey, and the sample totalled 143 respondents. The research revealed that European audiences find a correlation between access to and quality of information and e-services and trustworthiness, as well as a causal relation between quality of information and the improvement of image.
AlexanderMGBrewerMBHerrmannRK (1999) Images and affect: A functional analysis of out-group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology77(1): 78–93.
2.
AlsaghierHFordMNguyenA (2009) Conceptualising citizen's trust in e-government: Application of Q methodology. Electronic Journal of e-Government7(4): 295–310.
3.
BarzelayM (2001) The New Public Management, Berkeley: University of California Press.
BertotJCJaegerPTHansenD (2012) The impact of policies on government social media usage: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. Government Information Quarterly29(1): 30–40.
6.
BigleyGAPearceJL (1998) Straining for shared meaning in organization science: Problems of trust and distrust. The Academy of Management Review23(3): 405–421.
7.
BrewerPR (2004) Public trust in (or cynicism about) other nations across time. Political Behavior26(4): 317–341.
8.
Brewer PR, Aday S and Gross K (2005) Do Americans trust other nations? A panel study. Social Science Quarterly 86(1): 36--51.
9.
BrewerPRGrossKAdayS (2004) International trust and public opinion about world affairs. American Journal of Political Science48(1): 93–109.
10.
BrewerPRSteenbergenMR (2002) All against all: How beliefs about human nature shape foreign policy opinions. Political Psychology23(1): 39–58.
CurtinDMeijerAJ (2006) Does transparency strengthen legitimacy?Information Polity11(2): 109–123.
14.
DelheyJNewtonK (2005) Predicting cross-national levels of social trust: Global pattern or nordic exceptionalism?European Sociological Review21(4): 311–327.
15.
DenhardtJVDenhardtRB (2007) The new public service: Serving, not steering, Armonk, New York: ME Sharp.
16.
FlanaginAJMetzegerAM (2007) The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media and Society9(2): 319–342. .
17.
GerringJThackerSC (2004) Political institutions and corruption: The role of unitarism and parliamentarism. British Journal of Political Science34: 295–330.
18.
Government Online Project Service Center (GOPSC) (2000) ‘Zhengfu shangwang’ gongcheng baipishu’ (Government Online Project White Paper). Available at: http://www.scio.gov.cn/zfbps/index.htm (accessed 11 October 2015).
19.
Grimmelikhuijsen S (2009) Transparency of local public decision-making: Towards trust or demystification of government? In: The 2009 Annual Conference of EGPA, Malta, September.
20.
HoodCHealdD (2006) Transparency: The Key to Better Governance?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
HoogheI (2010) The limits of China's soft power in Europe. Beijing's public diplomacy puzzle. Clingendael Diplomacy Papers. Nº 25. January.
22.
HowardM (2001) e-Government across the globe: How will ‘e’ change government?Government Finance Review17(4): 6–9.
23.
HuangRLuoX (2001) An analysis of the present situation of distance communication of Chinese government. China Economic Quarterly39: 78–99. .
24.
HuangS-YChangC-MYuT-Y (2006) Determinants of user acceptance of the e-Government services: The case of online tax filing and payment system. Government Information Quarterly23(1): 97–122. .
25.
HughesCWackerG (2003) China and the Internet. Politics of the Digital Leap Forward. Politics in Asia, First ed. Curzon, London: Routledge.
26.
HurwitzJPeffleyM (1990) Public images of the Soviet Union: The impact on foreign policy attitudes. Journal of Politics52(1): 3–28.
27.
Internet World Stats (2011) Top 50 countries with the highest Internet penetration rate. IWS, 31 December. Available at: http://www.internetworldstats.com/top25.htm (accessed 11 December 2015).
28.
JunhuaZ (2001) China's ‘Government Online’ and attempts to gain technical legitimacy. ASIEN80: 93–115.
29.
LovelockPCartledgeS (1999) Special subject: E-China. China Economic Quarterly3: 19–35.
30.
McKnightDHChervanyNL (2006) Reflections on an initial trust-building model. In: BachmanRZaheerA (eds) Handbook of Trust Research, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 29–51.
31.
MayerRDavisJHSchoormanD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review20(3): 709–734.
32.
MeijerA (2012) Co-production in an information age: Individual and community engagement supported by new media. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations23(4): 1156–1172. .
33.
MeijerAGrimmelikhuijsenSBrandsmaJ (2012) Communities of public service support. Citizens engage in social learning in peer-to-peer networks. Government Information Quarterly29: 21–29.
34.
MishraAK (1996) Organizational responses to crisis. The centrality of trust. In: KramerRMTylerTR (eds) Trust in organizations, Frontiers of theory and research, Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 261–287.
35.
MölleringG (2001) The nature of trust: From Georg Simmel to a theory of expectation, interpretation and suspension. Sociology35(2): 403–420.
36.
NorrisP (2001) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
OliverRW (2004) What is Transparency?, New York: McGraw-Hill.
PollittC (1990) Managerialism and the Public Services, Oxford: Blackwell.
40.
QiuLJ (2000) Virtual censorship in China: Keeping the gate between the cyberspaces. International Journal of Communications Law and Policy. 4. Available at: www.ijclp.org (accessed 10 October 2015).
SchaferM (1997) Images and policy preferences. Political Psychology18(4): 813–829.
43.
SpearsRHaslamSA (1997) Stereotyping and the burden of cognitive load. In: SpearsROakesPJEllemersN (eds) The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 171–207.
44.
TolbertCMossbergerK (2006) The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review66(3): 354–369.
VaïsseJKundnaniH (2013) European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2012. European Council on Foreign Relations. London, 8 January. Available at: http://www.ecfr.eu/page/-/ECFR_SCORECARD_2012_WEB.pdf (accessed 9 February 2014).
WangZLimN (2011) The use of official and unofficial channels in government-citizen communication in China. Electronic Journal of e-Government9(1): 79–91.
49.
WongWWelchE (2004) Does e-government promote accountability? A comparative analysis of website openness and government accountability, governance. An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions17(2): 275–297.
50.
ZhangJ (2001) China's ‘Government Online’ and attempts to gain technical legitimacy. ASIEN80(July): 93–115.
51.
ZhaoxingX (1999) The Chinese government on line. Tinghua University Bulletin139: 7–10. .
52.
ZhengL (2013) Social media in Chinese government drivers, challenges and capabilities. Government Information Quarterly30(4): 369–376.
