Mandatory innovation in a decentralised system: the adoption of an e-government innovation in Dutch municipalities

Wouter Jans, Sebastianus A.H. Denters, Ariana Need, Minna Marja-Leena van Gerven-Haanpää

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Local governments, especially in decentralised states, are increasingly performing tasks previously the responsibility of national government as well as new tasks. This research studies the conditions affecting the adoption of a mandated e-government innovation – ‘Basic Registration Addresses and Buildings’ (BAG), in Dutch municipalities (N=429) between 2008 and 2011. In contradiction to what theory suggested, a great deal of variation in the timing of adoption was found. The results of Event History Analysis (EHA) show that early adoption of BAG was primarily the result of a municipality’s command over resources. More resourceful municipalities, that is, with better past e-government performance, that are better informed, and included in more extensive policy networks were more likely to adopt this innovation relatively early. Of the motivational factors included in our study, the degree of political alignment between the municipal council and national government proved an important factor in the timing of a municipality’s adoption. This is a surprising finding, as it is an uncontroversial and technical governance innovation. This research also shows that classical diffusion explanations play a role, even in the case of a mandated innovation for which the time frame, and thus the time to learn from other governments, was relatively short.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)36-60
Number of pages25
JournalActa politica
Volume51
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Mar 2016

Keywords

  • METIS-310153
  • IR-95378

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Mandatory innovation in a decentralised system: the adoption of an e-government innovation in Dutch municipalities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this