The implementation of information technologies in government could have significant effects on efficiency, transparency, and corruption. However, it is not clear whether and how citizens perceive these effects. Based on a survey conducted in 2015, this study examines the role of technology use and its effects on transparency, efficiency, and corruption in Mexican local governments from the perspective of citizens. Specifically, the paper seeks to respond to the following question: What technology-related factors affect citizens' perceptions of transparency, efficiency, and corruption? The results of multivariate regression analyses indicate that interactions between citizens and municipal governments, supported by technologies, do affect citizens' perception of transparency, efficiency, and corruption. The most impactful technologies identified were websites, social media, and mobile technologies. The only demographic factor that had a significant effect on citizens' perception was employment status.
Belanche-GraciaD., Casaló-AriñoL.V., and Pérez-RuedaA., Determinants of multi-service smartcard success for smart cities development: A study based on citizens' privacy and security perceptions, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 154-163, 2015.
2.
AlomariM.K., SandhuK., and WoodsP., Exploring citizen perceptions of barriers to e-government adoption in a developing country, Transform. Gov. People Process Policy, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 131-150, 2014.
3.
NavarreteC., Trust in E-Government Transactional Services: A Study of Citizens' Perceptions in Mexico and the U.S., in 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-43), pp. 1-10.
4.
El-ShetehyA., Citizens' Perception of the Egyptian eGovernment Portal After Revolution, in 12th European Conference on eGovernment (ECEG 2012), pp. 201-208.
5.
WachsM.. The Role of Citizens' Opinions in Urban Transportation Planning, in Defining Transportation Requirements, Proceedings of the 1968 Transportation Engineering Conference of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and the New York Academy of Science, New York: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (1969), pp. 205-214.
6.
PaulS., A Report Card on Public Services: A Comparative Analysis of Five Cities in India, 1997.
7.
Puron-CidG., SantamariaJ.J.S., SiordiaO.S., and MoctezumaD., Using Social Media As a Tool for Assessing Citizens Perception of Regional Development Dimensions for Policy Making, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 338-339.
8.
Valle-CruzD., Sandoval-AlmazanR., and Gil-GarciaJ.R., The Effects of Technology Use on Efficiency, Transparency, and Corruption in Municipal Governments: Preliminary Results from a Citizen Perspective, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 289-294.
9.
KrenzP., Basmer-BirkenfeldS.-V., Buxbaum-ConradiS., RedlichT., and WulfsbergJ., Facing the conflict of transparency and non-disclosure of knowledge within value creation networks, in 2015 Second International Conference on eDemocracy eGovernment (ICEDEG), 2015, pp. 26-33.
10.
MitchellH., Egovernment Sites Starting to Take Transparency Seriously, EContent, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 8-12, May 2011.
11.
ZakaluznyR., Finding ways to be efficient and effective, Ottawa Business Journal, p. 11, 11-Feb-2008.
12.
StroetmannK.A., Health System Efficiency and eHealth Interoperability - How Much Interoperability Do We Need, in New Perspectives in Information Systems and Technologies, Volume 2, RochaÁ., CorreiaA.M., TanF.B., and StroetmannK.A., Eds. Springer International Publishing, 2014, pp. 395-406.
13.
IonescuL., The Role of Technology in Combating Corruption, Econ. Manag. Financ. Mark., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 101-106, Sep. 2013.
14.
dos Santos BritoK., dos Santos NetoM., da Silva CostaM.A., GarciaV.C., and de Lemos MeiraS.R., Using Parliamentary Brazilian Open Data to Improve Transparency and Public Participation in Brazil, in Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2014, pp. 171-177.
15.
Gil-GarciaJ.R., Chengalur-SmithI., and DuchessiP., Collaborative e-Government: impediments and benefits of information-sharing projects in the public sector., Eur. J. Inf. Syst., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 121-133, 2007.
16.
DavisF.D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Q., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319-340, 1989.
17.
Padilla-MeléndezA., and Garrido-MorenoA., Use of E-Collaboration Technologies Among Students of Management: Media and Communication IS&T Book Chapter | IGI Global, in Encyclopedia of E-Collaboration, IGI Global, 2008, pp. 667-672.
18.
DavisF.D., BagozziR.P., and WarshawP.R., User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models, Manage Sci, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982-1003, agosto 1989.
19.
AlthunibatA., ZainN.A.M., and AshaariN.S., Modelling the factors that influence mobile government services acceptance, Afr. J. Bus. Manag., vol. 5, no. 34, pp. 13030-13043, 2011.
20.
KimJ., and HwangT., An Integrative Analysis of Transactional E-government Web Usage, in 18th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2012), Seattle, Washington, USA, 2012, pp. 1-10.
21.
ZhaoF., and KhanM.S., An Empirical Study of E-Government Service Adoption: Culture and Behavioral Intention, Int. J. Public Adm., vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 710-722, 2013.
22.
WangH.-J., and LoJ., Determinants of citizens' intent to use government websites in Taiwan, Inf. Dev., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 123-137, 2013.
23.
MusaA., BebićD., and DrmanP., Transparency and Openness in Local Governance: A Case of Croatian Cities, Hrvat. Komparat. Javna Uprava, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 415-450, Jul. 2015.
24.
MitchellH., Egovernment Sites Starting to Take Transparency Seriously, EContent, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 8-12, May 2011.
25.
CogniniR., FalcioniD., PolzonettiA., and ReB., EGOV: A solution for public services execution, in 2014 First International Conference on eDemocracy eGovernment (ICEDEG), 2014, pp. 59-64.
26.
ArmstrongC.L., Providing a clearer view: An examination of transparency on local government websites, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 11-16, 2011.
27.
Luna-ReyesL.F., PardoT.A., Gil-GarciaJ.R., NavarreteC., ZhangJ., and MellouliS., Digital Government in North America: A Comparative Analysis of Policy and Program Priorities in Canada, Mexico, and the United States, Comp. E-Gov., vol. 25, pp. 139-160, 2010.
28.
CuccinielloM., NasiG., and ValottiG., Assessing Transparency in Government: Rhetoric, Reality and Desire, in 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-45), Maui, HI, USA, 2012, pp. 2451-2461.
29.
DawesS.S., Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 377-383, 2010.
30.
Cerrillo-i-MartinezA., Icts' Contribution to Enhancing Government Transparency, Arbor-Cienc. Pensam. Cult., vol. 188, no. 756, pp. 707-724, 2012.
31.
BertotJ.C., JaegerP.T., and GrimesJ.M., Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 264-271, 2010.
32.
MatheusR., VazJ.C., and RibeiroM.M., Open Government Data and the Data Usage for Improvement of Public Services in the Rio De Janeiro City, in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, New York, NY, USA, 2014, pp. 338-341.
33.
de M. MirandaP.R., da CunhaM.A.V.C., and FilhoJ.M.P., eParticipation in Smart Cities of Developing Countries: Research-Based Practical Recommendations, in Smarter as the New Urban Agenda, Gil-GarciaJ.R., PardoT.A., and NamT., Eds. Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 315-332.
34.
ParkhurstN.D., MorrisT., TahyE., and MossbergerK., The Digital Reality: E-Government and Access to Technology and Internet for American Indian and Alaska Native Populations, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 217-229.
35.
BonsónE., TorresL., RoyoS., and FloresF., Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 123-132, 2012.
36.
Francisco-Javier and García-Marco, Updating official publications to the web 3.0: a quantum leap in e-Gov transparency and citizen participation is on sight. Springer-Verlag, 2010.
37.
BertotJ.C., JaegerP.T., MunsonS., and GlaisyerT., Social Media Technology and Government Transparency, Computer, vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 53-59, 2010.
38.
BertotJ.C., JaegerP.T., and GrimesJ.M., Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government, Transform. Gov. People Process Policy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 78-91, 2012.
39.
BertotJ.C., JaegerP.T., and GrimesJ.M., Crowd-sourcing transparency: ICTs, social media, and government transparency initiatives. Digital Government Society of North America, 2010.
40.
ParkM.J., KangD., RhoJ.J., and LeeD.H., Policy Role of Social Media in Developing Public Trust: Twitter communication with government leaders, Public Manag. Rev., vol. 0, no. 0, pp. 1-24, Jul. 2015.
41.
PriyambodoT.K., and PrayudiY., Information security strategy on mobile device based egovernment, ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 652-660, 2015.
42.
Valle-CruzD., and Sandoval-AlmazánR., Social Media Governments from Innovators to Laggards: The Case of Mexican Local Governments with Diffusion of Innovations Theory, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 250-255.
43.
CriadoJ.I., and Rojas-MartínF., Adopting Social Media in the Local Level of Government: Towards a Public Administration 2.0?, in Social Media and Local Governments, M. Z. Sobaci, Ed. Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 135-152.
44.
AdityaR., BoydC., DawsonE., and ViswanathanK., Secure e-Voting for Preferential Elections, in Electronic government: Second international conference, EGOV 2003, Prague, Czech Republic, September 2003?: proceedings, vol. 2739, R. Traunmüller, Ed. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, 2003, pp. 246-249.
45.
Garcia-MurilloM., The effect of internet access on government corruption, Electron. Gov. Int. J., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 22-40, 2010.
46.
LioM.-C., LiuM.-C., and OuY.-P., Can the internet reduce corruption? A cross-country study based on dynamic panel data models, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 47-53, 2011.
47.
ElbahnasawyN.G., E-Government, Internet Adoption, and Corruption: An Empirical Investigation, World Dev., vol. 57, pp. 114-126, 2014.
48.
PathakR.D., NazR., RahmanM.H., SmithR.F.I., and AgarwalK.N., E-Governance to Cut Corruption in Public Service Delivery: A Case Study of Fiji, Int. J. Public Adm., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 415-437, 2009.
49.
ChatfieldA.T., and BrajawidagdaU., Political Will and Strategic Use of YouTube to Advancing Government Transparency: An Analysis of Jakarta Government-Generated YouTube Videos, in Electronic Government, WimmerM.A., JanssenM., and SchollH.J., Eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013, pp. 26-37.
50.
Garcia-MurilloM., Does a government web presence reduce perceptions of corruption?, Inf. Technol. Dev., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 151-175, 2013.
51.
YunE.G., A Comparative Analysis of Corruption in Canada and South Korea: Focusing the Effect of Corruption on Societal Development and Social Capital, Korea Obs., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 143-165, 2013.
52.
ArnoldJ.R., Political awareness, corruption perceptions and democratic accountability in Latin America, Acta Polit., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 67-90, 2012.
53.
Abu-ShanabE.A., HarbY.A., and Al-ZoubiS.Y., E-government as an anti-corruption tool: citizens perceptions, Int. J. Electron. Gov., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 232-248, 2013.
54.
GrimmelikhuijsenS., Linking transparency, knowledge and citizen trust in government: an experiment, Int. Rev. Adm. Sci., vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 50-73, 2012.
55.
AlomariM.K., SandhuK., and WoodsP., Exploring citizen perceptions of barriers to e-government adoption in a developing country, Transform. Gov. People Process Policy, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 131-150, 2014.
56.
BarbosaA.F., PozzebonM., and DinizE.H., Rethinking E-Government Performance Assessment from a Citizen Perspective, Public Adm., vol. 91, no. 3, pp. 744-762, 2013.
57.
El-ShetehyA., Citizens' Perception of the Egyptian eGovernment Portal After Revolution, in 12th European Conference on eGovernment (ECEG 2012), Barcelona, Spain, 2012, pp. 201-208.
58.
PathakR.D., BelwalR., SinghG., NazR., I. SmithR.F., and ZoubiK.A., Citizens' perceptions of corruption and e-governance in Jordan, Ethiopia and Fiji - the need for a marketing approach, Electron. Gov. Int. J., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 309, 2012.
59.
AxelssonK., MelinU., and LindgrenI., Public e-services for agency efficiency and citizen benefit - Findings from a stakeholder centered analysis, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 10-22, 2013.
60.
BelancheD., CasaloL., and FlavianC., Citizen Adoptation of E-government Based on TAM and TPB Models, Jul. 2010.
61.
CarterL., and BelangerF., Citizen adoption of electronic government initiatives, in Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004, pp. 10.
62.
LinF., FofanahS.S., and LiangD., Assessing citizen adoption of e-Government initiatives in Gambia: A validation of the technology acceptance model in information systems success, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 271-279, abril 2011.
63.
KhayyatN.T., Effects of Information Technology on Cost, Quality and Efficiency in Provision of Public Services, Inf. Commun. Tech. Policies Pract., pp. 73-90, 2010.
64.
AndradeA., and JoiaL., Information Technology and the Efficiency of the Brazilian Judiciary System, in Electronic Government, vol. 7443, SchollH.J., JanssenM., WimmerM., MoeC., and FlakL., Eds. Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2012, pp. 126-136.
65.
LunaD.E., Gil-GarciaJ.R., Luna-ReyesL.F., Sandoval-AlmazanR., and Duarte-ValleA., Improving the performance assessment of government web portals: A proposal using data envelopment analysis (DEA), Inf. Polity Int. J. Gov. Democr. Inf. Age, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 169-187, 2013.
66.
AvanchaS., BaxiA., and KotzD., Privacy in Mobile Technology for Personal Healthcare, ACM Comput Surv, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 3:1-3:54, diciembre 2012.
67.
KrishnamurthyR., Use of Social Media Technologies for Intra-agency Collaboration: Evidence from US Local Governments, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 325-326.
68.
FusiF., and FeeneyM.K., Wasting Time on Facebook?: When Social Media Can Be Useful for Local Governments, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 318-319.
69.
KuM., Gil-GarciaJ.R., and ZhangJ., The Formation and Evolution of Cross-boundary Digital Government Knowledge Networks: A Mixed-method Case Study, in Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 171-180.
70.
KaoC., Evaluation and improvement of e-government: the case of European countries, in 2015 Second International Conference on eDemocracy eGovernment (ICEDEG), 2015, pp. 104-107.
71.
BannisterF., and ConnollyR., ICT, public values and transformative government: A framework and programme for research, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 119-128, 2014.
72.
ArchmannS., and IglesiasJ.C., Towards A More Effective And Efficient EGovernment: The Importance Of Shared Service, in 4th International Conference on Methodologies, Technologies and Tools enabling e-Government (MeTTeG 2010), Olten, Switzerland, 2010, pp. 21-32.
73.
AagesenG., and KrogstieJ., Service delivery in transformational government: model and scenarios, Electron. Gov. Int. J., vol. 8, no. 2/3, pp. 242-258, 2011.
74.
Valle-CruzD., and Sandoval-AlmazánR., E-gov 4.0: A Literature Review Towards the New Government, in Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2014, pp. 333-334.
75.
Gil-GarciaJ.R., HelbigN., and OjoA., Being smart: Emerging technologies and innovation in the public sector, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 31, Supplement 1, pp. I1-I8, Jun. 2014.
76.
Gil-GarciaJ.R., PardoT.A., and BakerA., Understanding Context through a Comprehensive Prototyping Experience: A Testbed Research Strategy for Emerging Technologies, in 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2007. HICSS 2007, 2007, pp. 104-104.
77.
Gil-GarciaJ.R., Towards a smart State? Inter-agency collaboration, information integration, and beyond, Inf. Polity Int. J. Gov. Democr. Inf. Age, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 269-280, 2012.
78.
Gil-GarciaJ.R., E-Government Success Factors and Measures: Theories, Concepts, and Methodologies. IGI Global, 2013.
79.
Sandoval-AlmazanR., and Gil-GarciaJ.R., Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. S72-S81, 2012.
80.
BasuS., E-Government and Developing Countries: An Overview, Int. Rev. Law Comput. Technol., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 109-132, 2004.
81.
AmentaV., BuzziM., and AbbaL., E-government Services: Accessibility and Usability, in 7th International Conference on Methodologies, Technologies and Tools Enabling e-Government (MeTTeG 2013), Vigo, Spain, 2013, pp. 51-60.
82.
SalimA., and WangusiN., Mobile Phone Technology: An Effective Tool to Fight Corruption in Kenya, in Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, New York, NY, USA, 2014, pp. 300-305.
83.
GjermundrødH., and DionysiouI., A conceptual framework for configurable privacy-awareness in a citizen-centric eGovernment, Electron. Gov., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 258-282, 2015.
84.
SchenkT., Building a government data strategy: aligning open data and advanced research with the public and open science principles, in 2015 Second International Conference on eDemocracy eGovernment (ICEDEG), 2015, pp. 18-18.
85.
CoxM., Does e-Government Curb Corruption? G2E Service Delivery of Ethics Training in the U.S, in 13th European Conference on eGovernment (ECEG 2013), Como, Italy, 2013, pp. 144-151.
86.
MichenerG., and BerschK., Identifying transparency, Inf. Polity Int. J. Gov. Democr. Inf. Age, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 233-242, 2013.
87.
Sandoval-AlmazánR., Open Government Success Factors in Government Websites: The Mexican Experience, in E-Government Success Factors and Measures: Theories, Concepts, and Methodologies, Gil-GarciaJ.R., Ed. 2013, pp. 235-251.
88.
LindstedtC., and NaurinD., Transparency is not Enough: Making Transparency Effective in Reducing Corruption, Int. Polit. Sci. Rev., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 301-322, Jun. 2010.
89.
ParkH., and BlenkinsoppJ., The roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction, Nternational Rev. Adm. Sci., vol. 77 (2), pp. 254-274, 2011.
90.
LiuY., and ZhouC., A citizen trust model for e-government, in 2010 IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering and Service Sciences (ICSESS), 2010, pp. 751-754.
91.
CarterL., and BelangerF., The Utilization of E-Government Services: Citizen Trust, Innovation and Acceptance Factors, Inf. Syst. J., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 5-25, Jan. 2005.
92.
LuB., ZhangS., and FanW., Social Representations of Social Media Use in Government An Analysis of Chinese Government Microblogging From Citizens' Perspective, Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev., p. 0894439315595222, Jul. 2015.
93.
Chee-WeeT., BenbasatI., and CenfetelliR.T., Building Citizen Trust towards E-Government Services: Do High Quality Websites Matter?, in Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Proceedings of the 41st Annual, 2008, pp. 217-217.
94.
GrimmelikhuijsenS., Linking transparency, knowledge and citizen trust in government: an experiment, Int. Rev. Adm. Sci., vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 50-73, Mar. 2012.
95.
HongH., Government websites and social media's influence on government-public relationships, Public Relat. Rev., vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 346-356, 2013.
