VISUAL MAPPING AND BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF PUBLICATIONS ON E-GOVERNMENT DEVELOPMENT INDEX

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the development of 269 studies between 2003 and 2024 in the Scopus database regarding the concept of "E-Government Development Index (EGDI)” and mapping the bibliometric analysis and trends of these studies with the VOSviewer analysis program. As a result of the research, it was found that the highest number of publications on the EGDI was concentrated in 2011, the country that provided the most support for studies in the EGDI was China; the highest number of publications originating from the University of Toronto. The most prominent contributing authors identified include Ali Q, Cunha MA, Janowski T, Kawula JD, Khan MYI, Lv B, Marino A, Martins J, Murphy E, and Nielsen MM. The most frequently used keywords in publication are identified as "e-government" (n=33), "electronic government" (10), "e-commerce" (8), "e-evaluation" (8), "internet" (5), and "e-governance" (59). The most cited publication is written by Tang, Karen et. al. with 521 citations. With the results obtained within the scope of the study, it is planned to provide researchers with a theoretical basis for e-government studies.

Keywords

• E-Government
• E-Government Development Index
• E-Governance
• Scopus

E-DEVLET GELİŞMİŞLİK ENDEKSİ İLE İLGİLİ YAYINLARIN GÖRSEL HARİTALANDIRILMASI VE BİBLİYOMETRİK ANALİZİ

Abstract

Bu çalışma, E-Devlet Gelişmişlik Endeksi (EGDI) ile ilgili literatürün gelişimini ve eğilim trendlerini bibliyometrik analiz yöntemi ile incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda 2003-2024 yılları arasında Scopus veri tabanında yer alan 269 çalışmanın verileri derlenerek VOSviewer analiz programı ile haritalandırılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler, anahtar kelimeler, ülkeler, yazarlar gibi bazı ölçütler çerçevesinde incelenerek eğilimler ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Yapılan araştırma sonucunda EGDI ile ilgili üretilen yayınların 2011 yılında yoğunlaştığı, EGDI'deki çalışmalara en fazla destek veren ülkenin Çin olduğu; en fazla yayının Toronto Üniversitesinden yapıldığı, Ali Q; Cunha, M.A; Janowski, T; Kawula J. D.; Khan, M.Y.I.; Lv, B.; Marino, A.; Martins, J.; Murphy, E.; Nielsen, M. M’nin en fazla katkı yapan yazarlar olduğu ortaya konulmuştur. Çalışmalarda en fazla kullanılan anahtar kelimeler ise “E-devlet” (n=33), “elektronik yönetim” (10), “e-ticaret” (8), “e-değerlendirme” (8), “internet” (5), “e-yönetim” (59) olarak tespit edilmiştir. En fazla atıf alan yayın, 521 atıf ile Tang, Karen vd. tarafından yapılmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında elde edilen bu sonuçlar ile araştırmacılara E-devlet çalışmalarına yönelik teorik bir zemin sunulması planlanmaktadır.

Keywords

• E-Devlet
• E-Devlet Gelişmişlik Endeksi
• E-Yönetişim
• Scopus

References

1. Abeka, M.J., Andoh, E., Gatsi, J.G., & Kawor, S. (2021). Financial development and economic growth nexus in ssa economies: the moderating role of telecommunication Development. Cogent Economics and Finance, 9(1), 1-24.
2. Alnuaimi, M., Shaalan, K., Alnuaimi, M., & Alnuaimi, K. (2011). Barriers to electronic government citizens' adoption: A case of municipal sector in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. Developments in E-systems Engineering (ss.398-403) içinde. Birleşik Arap Emirlikleri.
3. Arias, M. I., Serra, F., Guerrazzi, L., & Ferreira, M. P. (2019). Intellectual foundations and mainstream research of e-government in public administration. Management Research, 17(1), 89–115.
4. Arslan, E. (2022). Sosyal bilim araştırmalarında vosviewer ile bibliyometrik haritalama ve örnek bir uygulama. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(Özel Sayı 2), 33-56.
5. Azolibe, C.B., & Okonkwo, J.J. (2020). Infrastructure development and industrial sector productivity in sub-saharan africa. Journal of Economics and Development, 22(1), 91-109.
6. Babaoğlu, C. (2022). Adım adım ileriye: Birleşmiş Milletler e-devlet araştırmasında Türkiye. https://www.setav.org/adim-adim-ileriye-birlesmis-milletler-e-devlet-arastirmasinda-turkiye/ adresinden erişildi.
7. Baker, D. R. (1990). Citation analysis: a methodological review. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 26(3), 3–10.
8. Bindu, N., Sankar, C.P. & Kumar, K.S. (2019). From conventional governance to e-democracy: tracing the evolution of e-governance research trends using network analysis tools, Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 385-399.

9. Budak, N., & Özçelik, A. (2022). Devletin dijitalleşmesini tartışmak: dijital hükümet literatürü üzerine bibliyometrik bir analiz. Pamukkale Journal of Eurasian Socioeconomic Studies, 9(1), 62-82.
10. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Dijital Dönüşüm Ofisi. (2020). 2020 United Nations e-Government Development Index Unveiled. https://cbddo.gov.tr/en/news/4841/birlesmis-milletler-e-devlet-gelismislik-endeksi-2020-aciklandi adresinden erişildi.
11. Danziger, J. N., & K. V. Andersen (2002). The impacts of information technology in public administration: an analysis of empirical research from the "golden age" of transformation. International Journal of Public Administration 5(25), 591-627.
12. David, O. O. (2019). Nexus between telecommunication infrastructures, economic growth and development in africa: panel vector autoregression (P-VAR) analysis. Telecommunications Policy, 43(8), 1-17.
13. De Oliveira Almeida, G., Zouain, D. M., & Mahecha, Y. L. R. (2014). The status of e-government research: A bibliometric study. Business and Management Review, 3(11), 7-22.
14. Dias, G. P. (2014). Bibliometric analysis of portuguese research in egovernment. Procedia Technology, 16, 279-287.
15. Donthu, N., Badhotiya, G.K., Kumar, S., Soni, G., & Pandey, N. (2022). A retrospective overview of Journal of Enterprise Information Management using bibliometric analysis. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 35(2), 504-529.
16. Elbahnasawy, N.G. (2021). Can e-government limit the scope of the informal economy? World Development, 139, 1-24.
17. Elmatsani, H. M., Widianingsih, I., Nurasa, H., Munajat, E., & Suwanda, S. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of e-government and digital transformation research using vosviewer (Poster Presentation). Universitas Padjadjaran.
18. Elsevier (2024) Scopus: comprehensive, multidisciplinary, trusted abstract and citation database. https://www.elsevier.com/products/scopus?dgcid=RN_AGCM_Sourced_300005030 adresinden erişildi.
19. Elsevier (2024b). Scopus. https://assets.ctfassets.net/o78em1y1w4i4/28v2L8eQgAGxOnnvZlqJWh/7947feb83982b078ec1d70c297055c34/ELSV_15617_Scopus_Fact_Sheet_Update_WEB.pdf adresinden erişildi
20. Euronews (2022). Çin bilimsel makale sayısı ve etkinliği açısından ABD'yi geçerek dünyada lider oldu. https://tr.euronews.com/2022/08/14/cin-bilimsel-makale-sayisi-ve-etkinligi-acisindan-abdyi-gecerek-dunyada-lider-oldu adresinden erişildi.
21. Gupta, R. Muttoo, S.K. & Pal, S.K. (2017). The need for a development assessment index for e- governance in India. D., R., J. T. and B. R. (Editörler), 10th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ss. 414-422) içinde. Hindistan.
22. Hernández, A. C. C., Prieto, M. E. P., Pinto, L. B., & Martínez, E. G. (2024). Analysis of the e-government development index in the regions. Procedia Computer Science, 231, 559-565.
23. Ho, A.T.K. (2002). Reinventing local government and the e-government initiative. Public Administration Review, 62(4), 434-444.
24. Hodžić, S., Ravšelj, D., & Jurlina Alibegović, D. (2021). E-government effectiveness and efficiency in EU 28 and covid-19. Central European Public Administration Review, 19(1),159-180.
25. Ibrahim, A. H. H., Baharuddin, T., & Wance, M. (2023). Bibliometric analysis of e-government and trust: a lesson for Indonesia. Jurnal Borneo Administrator, 19(3), 269-284.
26. Kahraman, N. (2024). E-devlet başlığı ile yayınlanan makalelerin vosviewer ile bibliyometrik bir analizi. Bitlis Eren Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(1), 141-162.
27. Kabakuş, A. K. ve Ayaz, A. (2023). Kamu yönetiminde elektronik devlet araştırmalarının bibliyometrik analizi. B. Ö. (Ed.). Sosyal bilimlerde toplumsal sorunlara bakış: Uygulamalı çalışmalar içinde. Efe Akademi.
28. Kurnaz, S. Ç. (2024). Türkiye’nin e-devlet olgunluk düzeyi: bm e-devlet gelişmişlik endeksi üzerinden bir değerlendirme. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(Özel Sayı: Endüstri 4.0 ve Dijitalleşmenin Sosyal Bilimlerde Yansımaları), 1417-1449.
29. Kraemer, K. L., Danziger, J. N., & King, J. L. (1978). Local government and information technology in the united states. Local Government and Information Technology, OECD Informatics Studies, 12, 186-237.
30. Lis, A. (2018). Keywords co-occurrence analysis of research on sustainable enterprise and sustainable organisation. Journal of Corporate Responsibility and Leadership, 5(2), 47–66.
31. Lim, W. M., & Kumar S. (2024). Guidelines for interpreting the results of bibliometric analysis: A sensemaking approach. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 43, 2, 17-26.
32. Moral-Muñoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Santisteban-Espejo, A., & Cobo, M. J. (2020). Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: an up-to-date review. El Profesional De La Informa-Ción, 29(1), 1699-2407
33. Mukherjee, D., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2022). Guide-lines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148,101-115.
34. Napitupulu, D., & Yakup, R. (2021). A bibliometric analysis of e-government research. Library Philosophy and Practice, 5861.
35. Nguyen, T.T.T. (2023). Citizens' intentions to use e-government during the covid-19 pandemic: integrating the technology acceptance model and perceived risk theory, Kybernetes. 52(7), 2329-2346.
36. Nour, M. A., AbdelRahman, A. A., & Fadlalla, A. (2008). A context-based integrative framework for e-government initiatives. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 448-461.
37. OECD. (2024). 2023 OECD digital government index. https://www.oecd.org/publications/2023-oecd-digital-government-index-1a89ed5e-en.htm adresinden erişildi.
38. Orekhov, V.D., Prichina, O.S., Loktionova, Y.N., Yanina, O.N. & Gusareva, N.B. (2020). Scientific analysis of the happiness index regarding the human capital development. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 12, 467-478.
39. Özmen, E. (2023). E-Devlet söyleminin yeniden tanımlanmasına dönük kavramsal bir deneme: Dijital bürokrasi. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 56(1), 1-28.
40. Przeybilovicz, E., Cunha, M. A., & Ribeiro, M. M. (2023). Decolonizing e-government benchmarking. Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research bildiriler kitabı içinde (ss.570-582). ABD.
41. Ramzy, M., & Ibrahim, B. (2024). The evolution of e-government research over two decades: applying bibliometrics and science mapping analysis. Library Hi Tech, 42(1), 227-260.
42. Rejeb, A., Rejeb, K., Simske, S., Treiblmaier, H., & Zailani, S. (2022). The big picture on the internet of things and the smart city: a review of what we know and what we need to know. Internet of Things, 19(6), 1- 21
43. Small, H. (1973). Co-citation ın the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.
44. Song, Y., Natori T. & Yu X. (2024). Tracing the evolution of e-government: a visual bibliometric analysis from 2000 to 2023. Administrative Sciences, 14(133).
45. Sukarno, M. & Mutiarin, D. (2024). Mapping publication trend of e-government development index (Social Science Discipline Analysis). Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 12(1), 403-428.
46. Tian, M, Su, Y., & Ru, X. (2016). Perish or publish in China: Pressures on young Chinese scholars to publish in internationally indexed journals. Publications, 4(2), 1-16.
47. United Nations. (2014). United Nations e-government survey. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2014-Survey/E-Gov_Complete_Survey-2014.pdf adresinden erişildi.
48. United Nations. (2024). E-Government development endeks. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/About/Overview/-E-Government-Development-Index adresinden erişildi.
49. Veljković, N. S., Bogdanovic-Dinic, S., & Stoimenov, L. (2011). E government openness index. Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government, ECEG.
50. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2023). VOSviewer manual version 1.6.20. CWTS Meaningful Metrics. CWTS Meaningful Metrics.
51. VOSviewer (2024). VOSviewer. https://www.vosviewer.com/ adresinden erişildi.
52. Waoma, S., Judijanto, L., Izmuddin, I., & Wati, F. S. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of halal production in relation to halal authentication (database scopus 2013-2023). Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(6), 1-26.
53. Webster, J. and Watson, R.T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review, MIS Quarterly, 26(2), 13-23. Xie, Q., & Freeman, R. B. (2019). Bigger than you thought: China's contribution to scientific publications and its impact on the global economy. China & World Economy, 27(1), 1-27.
54. You, S., Zhou, K.Z., & Jia, L. (2021). How does human capital foster product ınnovation? the contingent roles of ındustry cluster features. Journal of Business Research, 130(March), 335–347.
55. Zahra, A. A., Nurmandi, A., Tenorio, C. B., Rahayu, R., Benectitos, S. H., Mina, F. L. P., & Haictin, K. M. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of trends in theory-related policy publications. Emerging Science Journal, 5(1), 96–110.
56. Zitt, M. & Bassecoulard, E. (1994). Development of a method for detection and trend analysis of research fronts built by lexical or cocitation analysis. Scientometrics, 30(1), 333–351.