Next Article in Journal
Normative Environmental Configuration of SMEs within the Sustainable Development Discourse in South Africa: An Empirical Study
Previous Article in Journal
Time Series Analysis for Predicting Hydroelectric Power Production: The Ecuador Case
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 11
Issue 23
10.3390/su11236540
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Assessing the Moderating Effect of Corruption on the E-Government and Trust Relationship: An Evidence of an Emerging Economy

by
Arif Jameel
1,
Muhammad Asif
1,
Abid Hussain
1,
Jinsoo Hwang
2,*,
Noman Sahito
3 and
Mussawar Hussain Bukhari
4
1
School of Public Affairs, Zijingang Campus, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
2
The College of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Sejong University, 98 Gunja-Dong, Gwanjin-Gu, Seoul 143-747, Korea
3
Department of City and Regional Planning, Mehran University of Engineering & Technology, Jamshoro 76062, Pakistan
4
Department of Political Science, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur 63100, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(23), 6540; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236540
Submission received: 12 October 2019 / Revised: 8 November 2019 / Accepted: 19 November 2019 / Published: 20 November 2019
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The foremost purpose of this article is to investigate the effect of electronic-government (e-government) on public trust and the moderating impact of corruption on this relationship. The data was obtained through a structural questionnaire involving 800 Pakistani citizens at the local level. The true response rate was 58.3%. The data was analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis, multiple regression and stepwise hierarchal regression. The results showed there is an empirically significant association among e-government practices and public trust in local self-government and a negative moderating role of corruption. The findings suggest that e-government can develop a procedure-based trust by advancing connections with people and their insights of responsiveness. The individuals’ viewpoints about the state, including trust, are fundamental concerns for the governance and administrative system. Testing these above associations via a moderation technique is a novel process which contributed to the current study on e-government.

1. Introduction

Public trust (PT) in governmental organizations is broadly contemplated as a crucial element fostering good government in every kind of democratic system [1]. Those countries that have higher PT can run their affairs more proficiently and excellently than those with less citizen trust [2]. For the last thirty years, trust in the state has slid into a sheer decline dramatically in the USA [3,4,5]. Public trust in government has also undergone an acute collapse over all developed states, such as in Canada, Japan and European countries [6,7,8]. Lessening the falloff in individual trust in government through examining the interrelated components linked with the said fallout has been the center of investigation and theory in the USA and other western governments [9,10]. This declining point of citizens’ trust and its damaging results on countries and people has been the main source of concern for public representatives, media personnel and citizens [11]. Considering the nonexistence of the democratic or governmental trust, individuals turn to disappointment with current political conditions, which might produce dissatisfaction and weaken democratic progression, leaving behind a weak and unstable government that may be incapable of any local and national development [12]. A government built on e-government principals can boost transparency, citizen trust and economic efficiency by employing social welfare programs, although the association between e-government and citizens’ trust could be spoiled by the existence of corrupt practices and corruption. Corruption quenches communal trust and confines the local and national progress of democracy, economies and civil society. Low levels of public trust weaken the procedures of investing businesses, following government rules and guidelines, and increases business costs and obstructs economic and commercial activities in the state.
A study by Tolbert and Mossberger [13] revealed e-government as a method to spread public opinion to the state and to resolve the issue where public trust devolves into a state of fallout. They recommended e-government as a means to establish a transparent, effective, answerable and open government to fix the misplaced public trust in the economy. Therefore, it is essential for less developed nations to apply digital governance and e-government practices that increase public trust in the economy and local-self-government.
This condition has driven the impact of corruption in forming the association of public trust in state and e-government from the perspective of an emerging country e.g. Pakistan. This article is an endeavor to assess the multifaceted associations of e-government, public trust and corruption. As the Pakistani government has been a vigorous prey of mal-governance and corruption, it was chosen to analyze the influence of e-government elements in modeling public trust in local government and economic activities. A state-based on e-government can increase public trust as well as economic efficiency by implementing social welfare programs. However, the strength of the relationship of e-government and public trust can easily be destroyed by the presence of corruption. Corruption not only extinguishes social trust but also restrains the national development of politics, economies and society. The decreased level of trust among the public refrain them from investment, obeying rules and regulations, and further increases transaction costs, hinders businesses and economic activities in the country [12]. This article investigates the matter of e-governance by explaining public opinions about the working of government management. Public trust has been examined through confidence in political and administrative setups and confidence in Pakistani local government institutions. Corruption has been analyzed by pursuing the viewpoints of citizens about the rate of corruption occurring in government management. This research study postulates about the elements that decrease the public trust and the instruments of e-government that are necessary for forming public trust. Through recognizing the components needed to develop confidence, administrations can boost digital governance to fulfill the prospects of the public and hence, can enhance public trust to recover the legality of local self-government. The outcomes of this research add to the present literature by explaining public management from the perspective of moral laws and the digital economy. The aim of this article is to examine the impact of e-government on public trust and to explore the moderating influence of corruption on the association of e-government and public trust in local self-government. The following research questions have been utilized to lead this research:
  • What is the influence of e-government in building public trust in local-self-government?
  • To what magnitude does corruption moderate the influence of e-government practices in building public trust?

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

Figure 1 illustrates the hypothesized research framework where the direct effects of e-government practices on public trust were first examined first. Then, the moderating effect of corruption on the relationship between e-government practices and public trust was investigated.

2.1. E-Government

Since e-government is becoming a global phenomenon, governments worldwide are progressively becoming more attentive to the significant value of the emerging digital government as an important policy tool and strategic option for governments and economic activities [14,15,16]. Moreover, the e-government system has had increasing research attention and also, the consideration of the experts and public policy formulators [17,18,19]. As a matter of course, e-government is stated as “the application of the internet and the worldwide-web for providing governmental information and facilities to the people” [20]. It denotes “the utilization of Information Technology (IT), and other web-based telecommunication technologies to improve and/or enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery in the public sector” [21]. The digital government has broadly been described in the review of literature from different perspectives and dimensions. Various definitions demonstrate e-government from a narrow perception by using the Internet and ICTs to advance the performance of governmental systems. Whereas others cite it from a wider perception of reforming and transforming the system of the government and business process [22]. E-government has been used since the late 20th century as an extension of e-commerce in the government sector [23]. It is noted that worldwide governments are gradually realizing the significance of e-government as a device for developing the government sector and facilitating the delivery of services to people and businesses [24,25].
According to Panzardi, et al. [26], the World Bank has defined e-government from the transformative “Government Citizens Government Business Employees” and reformative public sector perspective as “government-owned or operated systems of ICTs that transform relations with citizens, the private sector and/or other government agencies so as to promote citizen empowerment, improve service delivery, strengthen accountability, increase transparency, or improve government efficiency”. From the perception of changing the management, e-government is described as the “use of ICT in public administrations combined with organizational change and new skills in order to improve public services, democratic processes and strengthen support to the public policies” [27]. The principles of e-government identified by the World Bank include the following: E-administration is to shift from a traditional office or paper processes into electronic processes, which is correlated to the administrative and modernized public programs [28,29]; e-services means the deeds, efforts or performances whose delivery is mediated by information technology [30].

2.2. E-Government and Public Trust

Recently, one of the main problems facing governments is the crisis of public trust. The application and utilization of e-government is believed to be able to overcome this gap of public trust. Thus, developing a trust-based relationship with the public should be a strategic aim for governments as a mean of engaging all citizens in all processes since citizens are considered as customers and actors of such processes [31,32,33]. Tolbert and Mossberger [13] studied the relationship between e-government and trust attitudes empirically through surveying 815 people who were reported as users of government websites. The findings show a significant relationship between trust and use of local government websites. Hence, it is suggested that e-government can increase process-based trust by improving interactions with citizens and perceptions of responsiveness. Similar results were obtained by Heeks [34] using a qualitative approach. Heeks explored the relationship between service delivery and trust in public organizations. Heeks found that e-government has positive impacts on public trust and confidence in government which in turn adds a public value to the country. Using another approach, Welch and Hinnant [35] surveyed a sample of 806 adults selected randomly from the Council on Excellence in the US Government to examine the effect of e-democracy, transparency and interactivity on the citizen trust in government. They applied a two-stage multiple equation model and found that internet use is positively associated with transparency satisfaction. However, internet use is negatively associated with interactivity satisfaction and that both interactivity and transparency are positively associated with citizen trust in government. Likewise, Welch, et al. [36] examined the same relation but with a mediating effect of e-government satisfaction and website satisfaction using the multiple-equation model that simultaneously predicts experience, satisfaction and trust. They found that the usage of the government website is positively associated with both e-government and web site satisfaction, in addition to the positive relationship between e-government satisfaction and citizens’ trust in government. Moreover, Parent, et al. [37] found a significant and positive impact of using the internet on trust and external political efficacy upon surveying 182 Canadian voters and analyzing it using structural equation modeling.
When e-government practices are applied and properly experienced by the local self-government, it delivers the best public services to the citizens, imparts accurate information regarding the public services, etc. As a result, this boosts public trust in local self-government and the economy. Hence, it can be hypothesized that:
H1. 
E-government is positively related to public trust in local self-government.
H1 (a). 
E-services are positively related to public trust in local self-government.
H1 (b). 
E-administration is positively related to public trust in local self-government.

2.3. Moderating Effect of Corruption on the Relationship between E-Government and Public Trust

Corruption refers to all activities which are not considered moral and ethical. Corruption is a broad notion that has considerable economic and development costs as economic and developmental progress is hampered by corruption. Corruption explained by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) as the misappropriation of official power for personal benefit through extortion, bribery, influence touting, prejudice, deception, or embezzlement, not only damages local or foreign investment and economic development, but also heightens poverty [38]. The corruption or corrupt practices are worldwide (i.e., prevailing through time and place) and compulsive (i.e., dejection the efficiency and legality of states, the governmental setup, and the market or economy setup) phenomenon [39]. As a result of witnessing this universal international phenomenon, several researchers have attempted to refine this notion. Definitional elements of corruption or corrupt practices help to describe it as a notion for research. As McMullan [40] narrated, corruption is basically an illegal action by definition. For a common understanding about corruption as misusing government authority for personal gain, the nonconformity from official responsibilities for the pursuit of personal benefits or gains is key to the concept. Corruption comes into view in several kinds of unlawful monetarist and/or managerial behaviors accompanied by persons with government jobs for their peculiar personal palpable and/or imperceptible gains. The representative kinds encompass bribery-like inducements and pay-offs, theft or dishonesty, favoritism shown as nepotism and privileged treatment, misuse of official power, and coercion profiting by forcible ways [41,42,43].
The relationship between e-governance and corruption has been analyzed by several authors [44,45,46], but Mistry and Jalal [47] were the first to establish causality for this important relationship. The results of their study suggested that the use of ICT in e-governance leads to lower corruption. The authors, in their analysis carried out during 2003–2010, have also found that the impact of e-government is higher in developing countries than in developed countries.
According to the theoretical framework, the relationship between trust and corruption is complex and if there is a high incidence of corruption, it will increase the distrust among citizens about the government. A person with a negative attitude towards the state government will most likely complain about taxes, corruption, nepotism or the ineffectiveness of administration. Citizens assume they will get impartial service, and when the service level ensures impartial and trustworthy services, trust in public administration increases. [48]. In local self- government, it is essential that e-government practices should be followed to build public trust in local-self-government management and develop the legitimacy of the political and organizational setup. Public trust or confidence in local government is an outcome or result of e-government [49].
The hypothesized framework also explains the moderating effect of corruption on e-government practices and public trust in local self- government. Corruption and corrupt practices have a twofold effect: they undermine the practices of e-government, good governance and economic activities; further, decrease the public trust [50,51]. In the presence of e-government practices, corruption has a minimal impact on trust and development and its consequence are small in number [49,52,53,54]. Trust may be defined as the extent to which the public or individuals can rely upon others. The E-administration of local bodies is precisely linked to the trust of individuals. The difficulty of the administrative setup boosts corruption and corrupt practices and then cuts the public trust [55]. Corruption weakens transparency, and diminishes and weakens the transparency and accountability structure. High-level corruption results in a low level of citizens trust [51,56]. E-services have the potential to create transparency and shape citizen trust in local self- government. Welch, Hinnant and Moon [36] identified a positive connection between e-services and public trust in the state and indicated that corruption moderates the association between e-services and public trust. Corruption undermines the relationship between e-government and public trust. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that:
H2. 
Corruption negatively moderates the association between e-government and public trust in local self- government.
H2 (a). 
Corruption moderates the influence of e-services on public trust in local self-government.
H2 (b). 
Corruption moderates the effect of e-administration on public trust in local self- government.

3. Research Methodology

3.1. Research Design and Data Collection

The existing study was intended to analyze the moderating influence of corruption on the association amid e-government and public trust in local-self-government in the prospect of an emerging state, specifically Pakistan. For gathering data from a large number of people, a survey field method was used. To enhance the authenticity of the data, a survey analysis technique was used. For empirical studies, the survey analysis was a better option for examining the association between the studied variables. It is noted that this methodology is usually exercised by social scientists. [57,58]. Principally, a sample comprising of 800 Pakistani inhabitants was chosen for the data gathering as recommended by Saunders [59]. For selecting the sample, the lowest age limit was eighteen years for the following reasons: The participants had to have a high school certificate which suggested that they could plainly read and understand the survey; the voting age is 18 in Pakistan; it was likely that the participants had certain opinions about the political system and knowledge about e-government, the practice of e-government services and the function of state. Owing to the ease of this approach, a convenient sampling method was applied. As this approach has less generalizability because of the bigger sample size, this approach was applied. These individuals were contacted in 3 main metropolis, i.e. (Lahore, Rawalpindi and Faisalabad) of the Punjab province, Pakistan irrespective of their sex, religious affiliations and profession. In 800 disseminated questionnaires, only 467 (58.3%) useful answers were obtained. The participants were guaranteed their privacy of the information.

3.2. Measures

The survey for this study was customized from published work. This study measured e-government using 17-items from [35,58]. The e-services construct was assessed by asking the participants to utter their point of agreement with questions like “Through browsing the Municipal government website, I can identify the required documents to complete the e-service”. Whereas e-administration was constructed by asking the participants questions like “Completing my transactions with Municipal government through e- administration procedures are better than doing it manually” The corruption impact was measured by consuming eight questions from [60]. The corruption variable was evaluated by enquiring the participants’ questions like “Corruption decreases your satisfaction with the quality of service”. Citizens’ trust in local government assessment used eight items from [60]. A public trust variable was assessed by asking the participant’s questions like “Local bodies services are delivered on time.” Hence, the complete survey comprised of items customized from an existent review of the literature. The data for this study was obtained by applying an empirical method. A 5-point Likert scale, spanning from “1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree” was applied to assess all questions.

4. Results

4.1. Common Method Bias (CMB)

When data is gathered at once and from the unitary source, it can encounter a problem of biasness that could highlight grave concerns regarding the validation of the study [61]. To test the biasness issue, Harman’s single factor test was applied. The results exhibited that every item of the hypothesized model might be characterized into four factors, and the initial factor simply explicated 38.82% of the variance. This statistical figure recommends that common biases are below 50%. Hence, there is no biasness problem in our statistical data [62].

4.2. Measurement Model

The measurement model of this research was evaluated on the basis of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) [63,64]. Primarily, the CFA was measured by examining the content, convergence and discernment validity. Regarding these three validities, construct validity is a very hard method, however, it is essential for this study as the meaning of the construct can change through the data gathering, and the participants could perceive dissimilar meanings [65,66]. Therefore, scholars paid special attention to the phase of data gathering. For validating the content, an experimental study of 50 sample answers to the survey was organized prior the main data gathering to assess Cronbach’s alpha, validity and the average variance extracted (AVE). Convergent validity assesses the stage to which an item is correlated with the hypothesized model’s other variables. Convergent validity was calculated by examining the AVE, Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR) values and the standardized loadings. To measure construct reliability, α is the widely used method in statistics [67,68]. Construct reliability demonstrates that constructs are free from any arbitrary error and outcomes are reliable. The adequate values for construct reliability are more than 0.70 [69,70], and every construct in the current analysis has alpha α values above 0.70, as presented in Table 1. The factor of public trust and other factors were calculated by merging all variables including e-government, corruption and public trust in a statistical package for social sciences. The factors were calculated by average centering the items. Average centering the constructs is generally performed before applying the moderation term in an SPPS regression analysis. This procedure cuts “multicollinearity amid a moderation term and its consistent major impacts. It can also ease the explanation of beta for the moderation terms” [71].
The results indicated that in this research, divergent validity is acceptable. Scholars have suggested the levels for the average variance extracted, composite reliability and alpha reliability of 0.50, 0.80 and 0.70 correspondingly [72,73]. Every mandatory value of the CFA exceeds the minimal point, as shown in Table 1. Consequently, the results show good divergent and convergent validity.

4.3. Regression Analysis

In this article, the hypothesized associations amid the constructs have been examined by a regression analysis [74]. For testing the influences of the variables, a stepwise hierarchical regression approach was applied. To examine the hypotheses having moderating effects, this research used the stepwise hierarchical moderation regression technique put forth by Baron and Kenny [75]. Table 2 shows all mandatory statistic values applied to assess the influence of the elements of e-government on PT accompanying the moderating influence of corruption. The values of R illustrate the relationship between the constructs and the statistical value of R square describes the extent of the change triggered by a PT as a consequence of the e-government. The results of every proposed hypothesis have been reported below.
Table 2 shows the multiple regression analysis that determined all predictors of citizens’ trust in the local self-government of Pakistan. In line with the results, 37.2 % (Adjusted R2 = 0.372, F = 74.33, and p = 0.0001) of the variance in the outcome variable (public trust) was expounded by the 2 independent variables, which included e-service and e-administration. To test multi-collinearity, the range of tolerance values was between 0.672 and 0.725 (a value closer to zero indicates a collinearity issue), while the range of the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) was between 1.379 and 1.487 (value greater than 3 indicates a problem with collinearity), which showed that multi-collinearity does not exist in the data. All the statistical values in Table 2 display that all proxies of e-government are significant and have an optimistic influence. Furthermore, e-services are observed to be greatly significant in establishing the public trust. Notably, a 1 unit increase in e-services results in 0.241 units’ increasing in public trust. However, the 1 unit increases in e-administration results in 0.178 units increasing in public trust. Moreover t-values are also greater than 1.96 and provide additional significance level [76]. The results prove the approval of each formulated hypothesis of our study, in particular H1 (a), H1 (b).
It is exhibited in Table 3 that the addition of a moderation term in the research framework showed the significant variation in R square i.e. 0.072. This shows the significant moderation influences of corruption (β = 0.129, t = 7.167, p = 0.000) in forecasting PT. Therefore, H2 (a) is accepted. The results presented in Table 4 disclosed that the addition of the moderation term in the research framework showed the significant R square change i.e. 0.089. This shows significant moderation influences of corruption (β = −0.059, t = −7.375, p = 0.000) in forecasting public trust. Hence, these results support H2 (b).

5. Discussion

In this research, all framed hypotheses regarding the hypothetical associations amid all three variables have been proved. The statistical results of the hypotheses examination display that e-services have a positive influence on public trust. It was argued that corrupt practices counteract the effect of e-service on public trust and the regression analysis in this article also displayed that corruption negatively moderated the association between e-service and PT. The hypothesis that e-administration has an optimistic effect on public trust is constant with the research of Tolbert and Mossberger [13] who unearthed that e-government/administration is essential to establish public trust. It also argued that corrupt practices impact the effect of e-administration and the rule of law on public trust. It has also been evidenced in this study that corruption pessimistically moderates the association between e-administration and individuals’ trust.
This study hypothesized and investigated that corruption undermines and negatively moderates the association amid the e-government and public trust. It was argued that corruption and partiality decrease the public trust considerably and it has also been evidenced by studies that corruption negatively impacts the public trust in local self- government. All hypotheses tested demonstrate the negative moderation impact of corruption on the association of e-government and citizens’ trust in local self- government.

6. Practical Implications

It is specifically imperative to form strategies at every level and organization of the state to eliminate any kind of corruption or corrupt actions so as to reconstruct or keep the public trust in the state. It is in the greatest interest of the country’s growth as public trust lessens in the state which dissuades the people to obey the rules and guidelines which enhance law execution expenditures. Conversely, boosted public trust can nurture investment by the people which eventually fosters economic development. The Pakistani administration seems to be receptive to those requests. For change to be operative, it ought to be entrenched "in the societies concerned and cannot be imposed from the outside” [48]. In a Pakistani context, sustainable growth or progress is difficult in the absence of e-governance, and exclusive of which business, along with civil society, can flourish. The Pakistani public administration must incorporate such an e-government based method that advances transparency and combats corrupt practices. For this, the utmost essential move might be to make sure that each individual in the state is given alike rights, protections and prospects under the constitution. This strategy is a solution to combating all mal-governance actions. By identifying the strong extent of disparity cross-ways of the state and by caring for the fundamental social rights of people (for instance, education, justice, healthcare, and nutrition), the administration of Pakistan can win public trust and loyalty of its inhabitant which can accelerate good governance and growth.
To promote ethical behavior among the citizens, particularly government officials, government sector officials should be provided with educational training on ethics. This research offers a contribution as empirical and novel research by combining e-government, public trust and corruption from the perspective of an emerging country. The findings might be essentially beneficial for mutual research and strategy formulating since this study explored the individual aspects of e-government, PT and corruption. The study findings propose suggestions for addressing the moral molding and reforming the conduct of the government employees, particularly in emerging countries. Henceforth, it offers the prospect for future research on the consideration of morals and culture on e-government and PT.

7. Future Research Direction

For future research, the complex relationship between these three variables can be investigated via different statistical tools to acquire further inclusive results. Qualitative research may also be conducted to cross-check the empirical study found on Transparency International (TI) and World Bank (WB) annual reports. This research was conducted in the Punjab province of Pakistan. Forthcoming research is also suggested to further the research empirically in other provinces of Pakistan for generalizing the research findings. Future studies could also be conducted in order to investigate societal characteristics like culture in detail as well as to compare the results of developed and developing countries.

8. Conclusions

This research establishes that e-government practices boost public trust and confidence in governance which are the most important pillars upon which the structures of fairness and democratic setups are built. This research also confirms that corruption negatively moderates the relationship between e-government practices and public trust. Our research findings align with the previous studies. Public trust is crucial as it has a twofold process effect. This occurs as it upsurges social harmony which eventually influences the states’ capability to rule proficiently. OECD and OECD [77] also unearthed that “trust in the state appears to be particularly grave in crisis conditions, like environmental disasters, financial crisis or democratic turmoil which emphases concentration on the indispensable operations of people governance. The ability of states to administer disasters and to apply effective exit tactics is frequently a condition for their existence and for their re-election. In the aftermath of major disasters, lack of trust may hamper emergency and retrieval”. This study also established that the e-government is connected with the working of public officials who at all times need public trust. The absence of every transparent public administration entrenched with corruption is a thoughtful threat to e-government and public trust. Corrupt practices as the main kind of unethical actions have been identified as “the single greatest obstacle to economic and social development” [78]. Weak e-government dimensions continued by corruption decline PT and all these have a collective impact on lessening the ability of social or public organizations to function for the communal good. Corrupt practices diminish communal and financial capital, which does not permit e-government to function proficiently, consequently bringing a decline in public trust.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: A.J.; methodology: A.J., M.A., A.H and M.H.B.; validation: J.H.; formal analysis: M.A. and A.J.; investigation: A.J, M.A., A.H., M.H.B. and N.S.; resources: J.H.; data curation: M.A. and J.H.; writing—original draft preparation: A.J.; writing—review and editing: A.J., M.A., A.H., J.H., M.H.B. and N.S; supervision: J.H. and M.H.B.

Funding

The study received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Clark, J.R.; Lee, D.R. The optimal trust in government. East. Econ. J. 2001, 27, 19–34. [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen, X.; Shi, T. Media effects on political confidence and trust in the People’s Republic of China in the post-Tiananmen period. East Asia 2001, 19, 84–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Cheema, G.S.; Popovski, V. Building Trust in Government: Innovations in Governance Reform in Asia; United Nations University Press: Tokyo, Japan, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  4. Zhao, D.; Hu, W. Determinants of public trust in government: Empirical evidence from urban China. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2017, 83, 358–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cooper, C.A.; Knotts, H.G.; Brennan, K.M. The importance of trust in government for public administration: The case of zoning. Public Adm. Rev. 2008, 68, 459–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kim, S. Public trust in government in Japan and South Korea: Does the rise of critical citizens matter? Public Adm. Rev. 2010, 70, 801–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Christopher, S.; Watts, V.; McCormick, A.K.H.G.; Young, S. Building and maintaining trust in a community-based participatory research partnership. Am. J. Public Health 2008, 98, 1398–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Miller, A.H.; Listhaug, O. Policy preferences and political distrust: A comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States. Scand. Political Stud. 1998, 21, 161–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Levi, M.; Stoker, L. Political trust and trustworthiness. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 2000, 3, 475–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Nye, J.S.; Zelikow, P.; King, D.C. Why People Don’t Trust Government; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bok, D.C. The Trouble with Government; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  12. Diamond, L. Building trust in government by improving governance. In Proceedings of the 7th Global Forum on Reinventing Government: “Building Trust in Government” Sponsored by the United Nations Session V: Elections Parliament, and Citizen Trust Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 26 June 2007. [Google Scholar]
  13. Tolbert, C.J.; Mossberger, K. The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Adm. Rev. 2006, 66, 354–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Khan, M. E-government, GIS and good governance. Public Manag. 2013, 95, 18–23. [Google Scholar]
  15. Das, J.; DiRienzo, C.; Burbridge, J. Global e-government and the role of trust: A cross country analysis. Appl. Technol. Integr. Gov. Organ. 2010, 5, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  16. Chhabra, S.; Jaiswal, M. E-Government Organizational Performance Framework: Case Study of Haryana State in India. In Social and Organizational Developments through Emerging E-Government Applications: New Principles and Concepts: New Principles and Concepts; Information Science Reference: Hersheyn, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 144–165. [Google Scholar]
  17. Al-Mayahi, I.; Mansoor, S. UAE e-goverment: SWOT analysis and TOWS matrix. In Proceedings of the 2012 Tenth International Conference on ICT and Knowledge Engineering, Bangkok, Thailand, 21–23 November 2012; pp. 201–204. [Google Scholar]
  18. Dwivedi, Y.K.; Williams, M.D.; Rana, N.P.; Williams, J. Reflecting on e-government research: Toward a taxonomy of theories and theoretical constructs. Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res. 2011, 7, 64–88. [Google Scholar]
  19. Alghamdi, I.A.; Goodwin, R.; Rampersad, G. E-government readiness assessment for government organizations in developing countries. Comput. Inf. Sci. 2011, 4, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. UN. United Nations E-Government Survey 2012: E-Government for the People; Division for Public Administration and Development: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  21. Jeong, C. Fundamental of Development Administration; Scholar Press: Selangor, Malaysia, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  22. Srivastava, S.C.; Teo, T. Citizen trust development for e-government adoption: Case of Singapore. In Proceedings of the 9th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems: I.T. and Value Creation, PACIS 2005, Bangkok, Thailand, 7 July–10 July 2005; pp. 721–734. [Google Scholar]
  23. Spremić, M.; Šimurina, J.; Jaković, B.; Ivanov, M. E-government in transition economies. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2009, 53, 518–526. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ojo, A.K.; Janowski, T.; Estevez, E. Determining Progress Towards e-Government: What are the core indicators? In Proceedings of the ECEG, Antwerp, Belgium, 16–17 June 2005; pp. 312–322. [Google Scholar]
  25. Han, R.; Jia, L. Governing by the Internet: Local governance in the digital age. J. Chin. Gov. 2018, 3, 67–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Panzardi, R.; Calcopietro, C.; Ivanovic, E.F. New-Economy Sector Study Electronic Government and Governance: Lessons for Argentina. New-Economy Sector Study: Electronic Government and Governance-Lessons from Argentina Retrieved. 2002. Available online: http://documents. worldbank. org/curated/en/527061468769894044/pdf/266390WP0E1Gov1gentina1Final1Report. pdf (accessed on 25 June 2019).
  27. Abdullah, A.; Rogerson, S.; Fairweather, N.B.; Prior, M. The motivations for change towards e-government adoption: Case studies from Saudi Arabia. In Proceedings of the E-Government Workshop, London, UK, 11 September 2006; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  28. Al-Zoubi, M.I.; Sam, T.L.; Eam, L.H. Analysis of e-government adoption and organization performance in the Jordan businesses sector. Acad. Res. Int. 2011, 1, 334. [Google Scholar]
  29. Jalali, F.; Khorasani, F. The relationship between e-government and the public trust among the citizens in district 5, Tehran. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2012, 4, 5261–5267. [Google Scholar]
  30. Bankole, F.O.; Bankole, O.O.; Brown, I. Mobile banking adoption in Nigeria. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 2011, 47, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kampen, J.K.; De Walle, S.V.; Bouckaert, G. Assessing the relation between satisfaction with public service delivery and trust in Government. The impact of the predisposition of citizens toward Government on evalutations of its performance. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 2006, 29, 387–404. [Google Scholar]
  32. Bouckaert, G.; Van de Walle, S. Comparing measures of citizen trust and user satisfaction as indicators of ‘good governance’: Difficulties in linking trust and satisfaction indicators. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2003, 69, 329–343. [Google Scholar]
  33. Cegarra-Navarro, J.G.; Pachón, J.R.C.; Cegarra, J.L.M. E-government and citizen’s engagement with local affairs through e-websites: The case of Spanish municipalities. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2012, 32, 469–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Heeks, R. Understanding and measuring eGovernment: International benchmarking studies. In Proceedings of the UNDESA Workshop, “E-Participation and E-Government: Understanding the Present and Creating the Future”, Budapest, Hungary, 27–28 July 2006; pp. 27–28. [Google Scholar]
  35. Welch, E.W.; Hinnant, C.C. Internet use, transparency, and interactivity effects on trust in government. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI, USA, 6–9 January 2003; p. 7. [Google Scholar]
  36. Welch, E.W.; Hinnant, C.C.; Moon, M.J. Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 2004, 15, 371–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Parent, M.; Vandebeek, C.A.; Gemino, A.C. Building citizen trust through e-government. Gov. Inf. Q. 2005, 22, 720–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Quah, J.S. Curbing Asian corruption: An impossible dream? Curr. Hist. N.Y. Phila. 2006, 105, 176. [Google Scholar]
  39. Choi, J.W. E-government and corruption: A cross-country survey. World Political Sci. 2014, 10, 217–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. McMullan, M. A theory of corruption. Sociol. Rev. 1961, 9, 181–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Caiden, G.E.; Dwivedi, O.; Jabbra, J.G. Where Corruption Lives; Kumarian Press: Bloomfield, NJ, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  42. Rose-Ackerman, S. Corruption: A Study in Political Economy; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  43. Guo, X.; Tu, W. Corruption tolerance and its influencing factors—The case of China’s civil servants. J. Chin. Gov. 2017, 2, 307–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Bertot, J.C.; Jaeger, P.T.; Grimes, J.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. 2010, 27, 264–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Shim, D.C.; Eom, T.H. E-government and anti-corruption: Empirical analysis of international data. Int. J. Public Adm. 2008, 31, 298–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lupu, D.; Lazăr, C.G. Influence of e-government on the level of corruption in some EU and non-EU states. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2015, 20, 365–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mistry, J.J.; Jalal, A. An empirical analysis of the relationship between e-government and corruption. Int. J. Digit. Account. Res. 2012, 12, 145–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Jameel, A.; Asif, M.; Hussain, A. Good Governance and Public Trust: Assessing the Mediating Effect of E-Government in Pakistan. Lex Localis J. Local Self Gov. 2019, 17, 299–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Elbahnasawy, N.G. E-government, internet adoption, and corruption: An empirical investigation. World Dev. 2014, 57, 114–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mimicopoulos, M.G.; Kyj, L.; Sormani, N.; Bertucci, G.; Qian, H. Public Governance Indicators: A Literature Review. 2007. Available online: https://publicadministration.un.org/publications/content/PDFs/E-Library%20Archives/2007%20Public%20Governance%20Indicators_a%20Literature%20Review.pdf (accessed on 19 November 2019).
  51. Clausen, B.; Kraay, A.; Nyiri, Z. Corruption and confidence in public institutions: Evidence from a global survey. World Bank Econ. Rev. 2011, 25, 212–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cho, Y.H.; Choi, B.D. E-government to combat corruption: The case of Seoul metropolitan government. Int. J. Public Adm. 2004, 27, 719–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ciborra, C.; Navarra, D.D. Good governance, development theory, and aid policy: Risks and challenges of e-government in Jordan. Inf. Technol. Dev. 2005, 11, 141–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Krishnan, S.; Teo, T.S.; Lim, V.K. Examining the relationships among e-government maturity, corruption, economic prosperity and environmental degradation: A cross-country analysis. Inf. Manag. 2013, 50, 638–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ray, B. Good governance, administrative reform and socio-economic realities: A South Pacific perspective. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 1999, 26, 354–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Dion, M. What is corruption corrupting? A philosophical viewpoint. J. Money Laund. Control 2010, 13, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhang, H.; Lu, Y.; Gupta, S.; Zhao, L. What motivates customers to participate in social commerce? The impact of technological environments and virtual customer experiences. Inf. Manag. 2014, 51, 1017–1030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zhuang, Y.; Lederer, A.L. An instrument for measuring the business benefits of e-commerce retailing. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2003, 7, 65–99. [Google Scholar]
  59. Saunders, M.N. Research Methods for Business Students, 5/e; Pearson Education India: Noida, India, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  60. Salminen, A.; Ikola-Norrbacka, R. Trust, good governance and unethical actions in Finnish public administration. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag. 2010, 23, 647–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Asif, M.; Qing, M.; Hwang, J.; Shi, H. Ethical Leadership, Affective Commitment, Work Engagement, and Creativity: Testing a Multiple Mediation Approach. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Qing, M.; Asif, M.; Hussain, A.; Jameel, A. Exploring the impact of ethical leadership on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in public sector organizations: The mediating role of psychological empowerment. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2019, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Mena, J.A. An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2012, 40, 414–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kanwel, S.; Lingqiang, Z.; Asif, M.; Hwang, J.; Hussain, A.; Jameel, A. The Influence of Destination Image on Tourist Loyalty and Intention to Visit: Testing a Multiple Mediation Approach. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Drost, E.A. Validity and reliability in social science research. Educ. Res. Perspect. 2011, 38, 105. [Google Scholar]
  66. Han, H.; Sahito, N.; Thi Nguyen, T.V.; Hwang, J.; Asif, M. Exploring the Features of Sustainable Urban Form and the Factors that Provoke Shoppers towards Shopping Malls. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Asif, M.; Jameel, A.; Hussain, A.; Hwang, J.; Sahito, N. Linking Transformational Leadership with Nurse-Assessed Adverse Patient Outcomes and the Quality of Care: Assessing the Role of Job Satisfaction and Structural Empowerment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Hussain, A.; Asif, M.; Jameel, A.; Hwang, J.; Sahito, N.; Kanwel, S. Promoting OPD Patient Satisfaction through Different Healthcare Determinants: A Study of Public Sector Hospitals. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Asif, M.; Jameel, A.; Sahito, N.; Hwang, J.; Hussain, A.; Manzoor, F. Can Leadership Enhance Patient Satisfaction? Assessing the Role of Administrative and Medical Quality. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Hussain, A.; Asif, M.; Jameel, A.; Hwang, J. Measuring OPD Patient Satisfaction with Different Service Delivery Aspects at Public Hospitals in Pakistan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Iacobucci, D.; Schneider, M.J.; Popovich, D.L.; Bakamitsos, G.A. Mean centering, multicollinearity, and moderators in multiple regression: The reconciliation redux. Behav. Res. Methods 2017, 49, 403–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Shaffer, J.A.; DeGeest, D.; Li, A. Tackling the problem of construct proliferation: A guide to assessing the discriminant validity of conceptually related constructs. Organ. Res. Methods 2016, 19, 80–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Flynn, B.B.; Sakakibara, S.; Schroeder, R.G.; Bates, K.A.; Flynn, E.J. Empirical research methods in operations management. J. Oper. Manag. 1990, 9, 250–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Manzoor, F.; Wei, L.; Hussain, A.; Asif, M.; Shah, S.I.A. Patient Satisfaction with Health Care Services; An Application of Physician’s Behavior as a Moderator. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Manzoor, F.; Wei, L.; Asif, M.; Haq, M.Z.u.; Rehman, H.u. The Contribution of Sustainable Tourism to Economic Growth and Employment in Pakistan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. OECD. Trust in Government, Policy Effectiveness and the Governance Agenda. Government at a Glance; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  78. Anello, E. Ethical Infrastructure for Good Governance in the Public Pharmaceutical Sector; World Health Organisation Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 11 06540 g001 550
Figure 1. Hypothesized model.
Figure 1. Hypothesized model.
Sustainability 11 06540 g001
Table
Table 1. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
Table 1. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
ConstructsItemsLoadingsCronbach’s AlphaComposite ReliabilityAverage Variance Extracted
E-services 0.9540.9440.685
Through browsing the Local government website, I can identify the required documents to complete the e-service. (e.g. local taxation, online fee)ES10.947
Through browsing the Local government website, I can have an idea of how the procedure of e-service will take place.ES20.702
I can track my e-service status by using the Local government online tracking functionality service.ES30.607
I can pay the Local e-service fees online.ES40.635
It is easy to conduct my Local e-service at any time.ES50.984
Local government information is easy to understand.ES60.833
Local government websites are regularly updated.ES70.816
My Local government regularly announces new services online.ES80.970
E-administration 0.9630.9600.728
Completing my transactions through e- administration procedures are better than doing it manually.EA10.771
Paperless e- administration reduces my administrative costs in Local government.EA20.831
Local government e-administration facilitates the procedure of my transactions among different administrative departments.EA30.917
E- Administration reduces the conflicting information in my transactions among different departments.EA40.940
Automated e-administration in Local government gives me prompt service.EA50.827
Doing transactions through e- administration minimizes Corruption actions in Local government.EA60.723
Doing transactions through e-administration avoids favoritism in Local government.EA70.914
Doing transactions through e- administration minimizes processing time.EA80.913
E- Administration provides more efficient Local governmental services.EA90.816
Public trust 0.9390.9370.682
Local government services are provided on time. (E.g. local taxation, online fee, etc.).PT10.759
The quality of Local government services is good.PT20.870
The behavior of the Local service provider is friendly and problem-solving.PT30.852
The political party continues the previous Local government program when came into authority.PT40.885
Local government public service providers are honest and fair.PT50.810
The promise made by Local government politicians is kept or fulfilled.PT60.779
Information about Local government service increases your satisfaction with the service.PT70.817
Local government politicians are more trustworthy as compare to the national level.PT80.823
Corruption 0.9330.9280.617
Corruption decrease your satisfaction with the quality of servicesC10.816
Corruption leads to low confidence in government to solve problem C20.847
Corruption leads to less information about government actions C30.787
Corruption decrease the importance of laws and regulation C40.812
Local government is more corrupted as compare to national C50.713
Corruption decrease the outcome of accountability C60.770
Corruption leads to low trust in government C70.763
Corruption decrease the outcome of accountability C80.769
Table
Table 2. Multiple regression analysis.
Table 2. Multiple regression analysis.
Outcome Variable:
Public Trust		Standardized Estimates95.0% CICollinearity Statistics
βSEtSig.Lower BoundUpper BoundToleranceVIF
E-Administration0.1780.0384.6840.0120.1310.2430.6721.487
E-Services0.2410.0425.7380.0000.1740.2970.7251.379
Model summaryR = 0.610; R2 = 0.372; F = 74.33; p = 0.00; Durbin-Watson (DW) = 1.779
Table
Table 3. Moderating effect of corruption on the relationship between E-services and public trust.
Table 3. Moderating effect of corruption on the relationship between E-services and public trust.
Outcome Variable: Public Trust
Step 1Step 2Step 3
βSEtβSEtβSEt
E-Service0.213 ***0.0258.5200.231 ***0.0249.6250.113 ***0.0323.531
Corruption 0.147 ***0.0314.742−0.317 ***0.076−4.171
E-Service × Corruption 0.129***0.0187.167
Δ R20.1270.1740.246
F Change79.48055.66453.743
Note: *** p < 0.001
Table
Table 4. Moderating effect of corruption on the relationship between E-administration and public trust.
Table 4. Moderating effect of corruption on the relationship between E-administration and public trust.
Outcome Variable: Public Trust
Step 1Step 2Step 3
βSEtβSEtβSEt
E-administration0.290 ***0.0338.7880.287 ***0.0338.6970.196 ***0.0345.765
Corruption 0.139 ***0.0324.344−0.357 ***0.078−4.578
E-Administration × Corruption −0.059 ***0.008−7.375
Δ R20.2870.3190.407
F Change75.23145.16351.815
Note: *** p < 0.001.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jameel, A.; Asif, M.; Hussain, A.; Hwang, J.; Sahito, N.; Bukhari, M.H. Assessing the Moderating Effect of Corruption on the E-Government and Trust Relationship: An Evidence of an Emerging Economy. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6540. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236540

AMA Style

Jameel A, Asif M, Hussain A, Hwang J, Sahito N, Bukhari MH. Assessing the Moderating Effect of Corruption on the E-Government and Trust Relationship: An Evidence of an Emerging Economy. Sustainability. 2019; 11(23):6540. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236540

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jameel, Arif, Muhammad Asif, Abid Hussain, Jinsoo Hwang, Noman Sahito, and Mussawar Hussain Bukhari. 2019. "Assessing the Moderating Effect of Corruption on the E-Government and Trust Relationship: An Evidence of an Emerging Economy" Sustainability 11, no. 23: 6540. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236540

APA Style

Jameel, A., Asif, M., Hussain, A., Hwang, J., Sahito, N., & Bukhari, M. H. (2019). Assessing the Moderating Effect of Corruption on the E-Government and Trust Relationship: An Evidence of an Emerging Economy. Sustainability, 11(23), 6540. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236540

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop