Factors Influencing Citizen Engagement in Digital Government: A UTAUT–TOE Perspective

Qurrota Ayun  Majid; Dana Indra  Sensuse

doi:10.59395/ijadis.v7i2.1539

Authors

Qurrota Ayun Majid Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia
Dana Indra Sensuse Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59395/ijadis.v7i2.1539

Keywords:

Citizen Engagement, Digital Government, UTAUT, TOE, Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

The digital transformation of government needs to shift from simply digitizing public services to strengthening citizen engagement as an essential part of citizen-driven governance. Nevertheless, digital government evaluation frameworks still focus on technological readiness and service delivery and the factors of citizen engagement are yet to be comprehensively articulated. In this study, we aim to identify and analyze the factors affecting citizen engagement in digital government through a systematic literature review (SLR) with an integrated Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE) perspective. Based on 37 peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2025, we have identified 54 factors that can be categorized into seven main categories: individual determinants, technological context, organizational context, and environmental context. In addition to identifying factors, the study also distinguishes whether the evidence backing each of them is high or low, and which of these factors is consistent across contexts. We find that although individual factors are associated with technology adoption and initial engagement, the structural and sustainable factors affecting citizen engagement are strongest and more consistently experienced across the organization and environment. This study contributes theoretically to the understanding of citizen participation as a systemic digital governance phenomenon through the integration of UTAUT-TOE and to the policy-making and digital public service managers to design more inclusive and participatory digital government initiatives. Future work is in order to empirically confirm the findings and their real-world utility across different administrative and socio-economic settings, especially in developing countries.

563 164

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] S. I. X. Dimensions and O. F. A. Digital, The OECD Digital Government Policy Framework The OECD Digital Government Policy Framework Six dimensions of a Digital Government, no. 02, 2020.

[2] E. Growth, I. Insight, and U. December, GovTech Maturity Index Trends in Public Sector Digital Transformation, no. December, 2022.

[3] A. Digital, E-Government Survey 2024. 2024.

[4] OECD Economic Outlook, no. December. 2024.

[5] P. R. Joshi and S. Islam, E-government maturity model for sustainable E-government services from the perspective of developing countries, Sustain., vol. 10, no. 6, 2018, doi: 10.3390/su10061882. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061882

[6] L. Sundberg and J. Holmstrm, Citizen-centricity in digital government research: A literature review and integrative framework, vol. 29, pp. 5572, 2024, doi: 10.3233/IP-220047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-220047

[7] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view, MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425478, 2003, doi: 10.2307/30036540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

[8] L. G. Tornatzky and T. Gidley, The Processes of Technological Innovation.

[9] O. Hujran, A. Alarabiat, and M. AlSuwaidi, Analysing e-government maturity models, Electron. Gov., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 121, 2023, doi: 10.1504/EG.2022.10040036. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2023.127575

[10] . Waara, Examining Digital Government Maturity Models: Evaluating the Inclusion of Citizens, Adm. Sci., vol. 15, no. 3, 2025, doi: 10.3390/admsci15030073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15030073

[11] B. Kitchenham et al., Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-A tertiary study, Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 52, no. 8, pp. 792805, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2010.03.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.03.006

[12] C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Hst, M. C. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wessln, Experimentation in software engineering, vol. 9783642290. 2012. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2

[13] B. A. Kitchenham, Systematic review in software engineering: where we are and where we should be going, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Evidential Assessment of Software Technologies, in EAST 12. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2012, pp. 12. doi: 10.1145/2372233.2372235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2372233.2372235

[14] R. L. S. Silva and F. W. Neiva, Systematic Literature Review in Computer Science - A Practical Guide, no. November 2016, 2017, doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35453.87524.

[15] J. Durkiewicz and T. Janowski, Is digital government advancing sustainable governance? A study of oecd/eu countries, Sustain., vol. 13, no. 24, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su132413603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413603

[16] R. Y. Maulana and M. Deman, Collaborative Governance in the Digital Transformation Age: A Systematic Literature Review with Bibliometric Mapping, Cent. Eur. Public Adm. Rev., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 3160, 2023, doi: 10.17573/cepar.2023.1.02. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2023.1.02

[17] Gbczyska, A., & Vladova, K. (2023). Comparative analysis of selected process maturity assessment models applied in the public sector. Business Process Management Journal, 29(3), 911928. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-09-2022-0420 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-09-2022-0420

[18] I. M. S. Kawashita, A. A. Baptista, and D. Soares, E-government maturity models: More of the same?, 2020 7th Int. Conf. eDemocracy eGovernment, ICEDEG 2020, pp. 5866, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ICEDEG48599.2020.9096697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEDEG48599.2020.9096697

[19] N. F. Zakiuddin, S. M. Anggara, and Suhardi, Developing Digital Service Transformation Maturity Model in Public Sector, IEEE Access, vol. 12, no. December, pp. 174491174506, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3468341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3468341

[20] I. Alhadid, E. Abu-taieh, R. S. Alkhawaldeh, and S. Khwaldeh, Predictors for E-Government Adoption of SANAD App Services, Int. J. Environtmental Res. Public Heal., vol. 19, pp. 126, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148281

[21] B. Bokayev, Transforming E-government in Kazakhstan: A Citizen-Centric Approach, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 122, 2021.

[22] A. Galy and A. Tynyshbayeva, Innovating Public Service in Kazakhstan: Improving citizen orientation in the delivery of public services, Innov. J., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 121, 2022.

[23] I. B. Santoso, R. Hartanto, and L. E. Nugroho, Acceleration of Integrated Electronic-Based Government System in Indonesia with the Maturity Model of Electronic-Based Government System: A Systematic Literature Review, Proc. - 2021 IEEE 5th Int. Conf. Inf. Technol. Inf. Syst. Electr. Eng. Appl. Data Sci. Artif. Intell. Technol. Glob. Challenges Dur. Pandemic Era, ICITISEE 2021, pp. 1217, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ICITISEE53823.2021.9655933. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICITISEE53823.2021.9655933

[24] P. Karnsomdee, E-Government Adoption in Thai Public Sector Organizations: Citizens Perspective, J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. , vol. 20, no. 2, 2025, doi: 10.3390/jtaer20020103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer20020103

[25] V. Kruhlov and J. Dvorak, Social Inclusivity in the Smart City Governance: Overcoming the Digital Divide, Sustain., vol. 17, no. 13, pp. 121, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su17135735. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17135735

[26] T. Aljowder, M. Ali, and S. Kurnia, Development of a Maturity Model for Assessing Smart Cities: A Focus Area Maturity Model, Smart Cities, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 21502175, 2023, doi: 10.3390/smartcities6040099. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities6040099

[27] A. Aristovnik, D. Ravelj, and E. Murko, Decoding the Digital Landscape: An Empirically Validated Model for Assessing Digitalisation across Public Administration Levels, Adm. Sci., vol. 14, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.3390/admsci14030041. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14030041

[28] S. Esselimani, M. Sagsan, and S. Kiralp, E-government effect on participatory democracy in the maghreb: Indirect effect and government-led participation, Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc., vol. 2021, 2021, doi: 10.1155/2021/6642998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6642998

[29] G. Fesenko, T. Fesenko, H. Fesenko, A. Shakhov, A. Yakunin, and V. Korzhenko, Developing E-Maturity Model for Municipal Project and Program Management System, Eastern-European J. Enterp. Technol., vol. 1, pp. 1528, 2021, doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2021.225278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2021.225278

[30] H. Hashim, E-government impact on developing smart cities initiative in Saudi Arabia: Opportunities & challenges, Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 96, no. April, pp. 124131, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2024.04.008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2024.04.008

[31] O. Hujran, A. Alarabiat, A. S. Al-Adwan, and M. Al-Debei, Digitally Transforming Electronic Governments into Smart Governments: SMARTGOV, an Extended Maturity Model, Inf. Dev., vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 811834, 2023, doi: 10.1177/02666669211054188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669211054188

[32] A. Khan and S. Krishnan, Citizen engagement in co-creation of e-government services: a process theory view from a meta-synthesis approach, vol. 31, no. 4. 2021. doi: 10.1108/INTR-03-2020-0116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-03-2020-0116

[33] W. Li, The role of trust and risk in Citizens E-Government services adoption: A perspective of the extended UTAUT model, Sustain., vol. 13, no. 14, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13147671. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147671

[34] I. Mariani and I. Bianchi, Conceptualising Digital Transformation in Cities: A Multi-Dimensional Framework for the Analysis of Public Sector Innovation, Sustain., vol. 15, no. 11, 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15118741. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118741

[35] A. Nakakawa, H. A. Proper, F. P. Tulinayo, F. Namagembe, and S. Overbeek, Assessing Readiness for e-Government Enterprise Architecture in a Developing Economy - Towards an Integrated Maturity Model, Proc. - IEEE Int. Enterp. Distrib. Object Comput. Work. EDOCW, pp. 279288, 2021, doi: 10.1109/EDOCW52865.2021.00059. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW52865.2021.00059

[36] A. A. Okan, Exploring the Landscape of e-Government Maturity Models: Insights from Systematic Mapping Study and Comparative Analysis, Digit. Gov. Res. Pract., vol. 5, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.1145/3656586. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3656586

[37] J. Oredo, Evaluating the Impact of e-Government Initiatives on Citizens: Empowerment or Tokenism?, 2022 IST-Africa Conf. IST-Africa 2022, pp. 18, 2022, doi: 10.23919/IST-Africa56635.2022.9845570. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23919/IST-Africa56635.2022.9845570

[38] M. Sira and A. Kuzior, Digitalization of Government Management Processes in the Context of Sustainable Development, Manag. Syst. Prod. Eng., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 289310, 2025, doi: 10.2478/mspe-2025-0029. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/mspe-2025-0029

[39] R. Bastardo, J. Pavo, and N. P. Rocha, Methodological Quality of User-Centered Usability Evaluation of Digital Applications to Promote Citizens Engagement and Participation in Public Governance: A Systematic Literature Review, Digital, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 740761, 2024, doi: 10.3390/digital4030038. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/digital4030038

[40] S. Halim and B. Bounabat, Assessing Digital Government Maturity Model for Developed Countries. Application to Singapore, 2023 Int. Conf. Cloud Comput. Artif. Intell. Technol. Appl. CloudTech 2023, pp. 17, 2023, doi: 10.1109/CloudTech58737.2023.10366084. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CloudTech58737.2023.10366084

[41] C. Vrabie, From Presence to Performance: Mapping the Digital Maturity of Romanian Municipalities, Adm. Sci., vol. 15, no. 4, 2025, doi: 10.3390/admsci15040147. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15040147

[42] M. Alfadhli, M. Kucukvar, N. C. Onat, S. Al-Maadeed, and A. Abdessadok, Government Digital Transformation: A Tailor-Made Digital Maturity Assessment Framework, IEEE Access, vol. 13, no. March, pp. 7112071132, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3560999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3560999

[43] N. Karkin and A. Cezar, The generation of public value through e-participation initiatives: A synthesis of the extant literature, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 41, no. 2, p. 101935, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2024.101935. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.101935

[44] T. Mountasser and M. Abdellatif, Digital Transformation in Public Administration: A Systematic Literature Review, Int. J. Prof. Bus. Rev., vol. 8, no. 10, p. e02372, 2023, doi: 10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i10.2372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2023.v8i10.2372

[45] H. Lee and H. Lee, Public Service Delivery on Mobile Apps: Factors of Diversification and Coproduction Public Service Delivery on Mobile Apps: Factors of Diversification and Coproduction ABSTRACT, Int. J. Public Adm., vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 159171, 2024, doi: 10.1080/01900692.2022.2096068. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2096068

[46] L. Cingolani, The survival of open government platforms: Empirical insights from a global sample, Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 38, no. 1, p. 101522, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2020.101522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101522

[47] F. Iannacci, S. Karanasios, G. Viscusi, R. McManus, C. Rupietta, and C. W. Tan, Unboxing maturity models: A set-theoretic perspective on e-Government configurations over time, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., vol. 34, no. 1, p. 101874, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2024.101874. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2024.101874

[48] H. Shaker, J. Mani, P. Vijaya, P. Palanisamy, M. Al Shamli, and A. F. Aljuboori, Towards Omans Digital Transformation: A Comprehensive Analysis of Smart Government Development Index, 1st Int. Conf. Innov. Eng. Sci. Technol. Res. ICIESTR 2024 - Proc., pp. 16, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ICIESTR60916.2024.10798126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIESTR60916.2024.10798126

[49] S. Halim and B. Bounabat, Conception of a Digital Government Maturity Model for Developing Countries. Application to Uruguay, Proc. - 10th Int. Conf. Wirel. Networks Mob. Commun. WINCOM 2023, pp. 16, 2023, doi: 10.1109/WINCOM59760.2023.10322907. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/WINCOM59760.2023.10322907