KAMU YÖNETİMİNDE BİLGİ VE İLETİŞİM TEKNOLOJİLERİ (BİT) DESTEKLİ ORTAK YAPIM ÇALIŞMALARININ BİBLİYOMETRİK ANALİZİ

Yıl 2024, Sayı: 37, 221 - 251, 25.10.2024

Ayşegül Saylam

https://doi.org/10.15182/diclesosbed.1486847

Öz

Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri (BİT), vatandaş ve devletin ortak yapımına ilişkin girişimlerde (kamu politikalarının ve/veya hizmetlerinin geliştirilme, tasarlanma ve sunum süreci vb.) önemli bir aracı görevi üstlenmektedir. Günümüzde kamu yönetiminde BİT destekli ortak yapım girişimleri artmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı da bu alanda ortaya çıkan literatürün, betimsel, kavramsal, sosyal ve entelektüel yapısına ilişkin genel resmini analiz etmektir. Bu amaçla Web of Science Core Collection (WoS) veri tabanında bulunan 170 çalışma, R istatistik programı kullanılarak bilimsel haritalama ve sistematikleştirilmiş literatür taraması ile analiz edilmiş, bu alandaki kavramsal, betimsel, sosyal ve entelektüel yapı irdelenmiştir. Çalışma bulguları, kamu yönetiminde artan BİT destekli ortak yapım girişimlerine yönelik çalışmalara rehberlik etme ve ilerdeki çalışmalara referans noktası olma amacı gütmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ortak yapım, bibliyometrik analiz, bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri, bilimsel haritalama, kamu yönetimi

Kaynakça

• Adnan, M., Ghazali, M., & Othman, N. Z. S. (2022). E-Participation within the context of e-government initiatives: a comprehensive systematic review. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 8, 100015.
• Almeida, G., Cappelli, C., Maciel, C., & Mahecha, Y. (2018). Co-production of digital services: definitions, frameworks, cases and evaluation initiatives - findings from a systematic literature review. In Kő, A. & Francesconi, E. (Eds). Electronic government and the information systems perspective, (pp. 3-19). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98349-3_1.
• Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975.
• Arruda, H., Silva, E. R., Lessa, M., Proença Jr, D., & Bartholo, R. (2022). VOSviewer and bibliometrix. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 110(3), 392.
• Atabay, E., & İçigen, E. (2021). Turizm fotoğraf keşfinde kullanılan yenilikçi yöntemlere panoramik bir yolculuk. İç. C. Cobanoglu, E.G. Kucukaltan, M. Tuna, A. Basoda & S. Dogan (Eds.). Daha iyi bir dünya için turizm, (ss. 504-515). M3 Publishing.
• Avritzer, L. (2009). Participatory institutions in democratic Brazil. Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Bonsón, E., Royo, S., & Ratkai, M. (2015). Citizens' engagement on local governments' Facebook sites. An empirical analysis: The impact of different media and content types in Western Europe. Government Information Quarterly, 32(1), 52-62.
• Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: user and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67 (5), 846-860.
• Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2015). Distinguishing different types of coproduction: a conceptual analysis based on the classical definitions. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 427– 35.
• Castelnovo, W., Misuraca, G., & Savoldelli, A. (2016). Smart cities governance: The need for a holistic approach to assessing urban participatory policy making. Social Science Computer Review, 34(6), 724-739.
• Chatfield, A. T., Scholl, H. J. J., & Brajawidagda, U. (2013). Tsunami early warnings via Twitter in government: Net-savvy citizens' co-production of time-critical public information services. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 377-386.
• Clark, B. Y., Brudney, J. L., & Jang, S. G. (2013). Coproduction of government services and the new information technology: Investigating the distributional biases. Public Administration Review, 73(5), 687-701.
• Clifton, J., Díaz Fuentes, D., & Llamosas García, G. (2020). ICT-enabled co-production of public services: Barriers and enablers. A systematic review. Information Polity, 25(1), 25-48.
• Cobo, M. J., López‐Herrera, A. G., Herrera‐Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382-1402.
• Criado, J. I., Gil-García, J. R. (2019). Creating public value through smart technologies and strategies. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32, 438–450.
• Culnan, M.J. (1986). The intellectual development of management information systems, 1972–1982: a co-citation analysis. Manage. Sci. 32 (2), 156–172.
• Garfield, E. (2004). Historiographic mapping of knowledge domains literature. Journal of Information Science, 30(2), 119-145.
• Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J.A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?. Scientometrics. 105, 1809-1831.
• Garlatti, A., Fedele, P., Iacuzzi, S., & Garlatti Costa, G. (2019). Coproduction and cost efficiency: a structured literature review. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 32(1), 114-135.
• García, M. M., & Parejo, P. S. (2019). Decide Madrid: A case study on the use of an online platform for participatory budgeting. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age, 6(3), 45-60.
• Holzer, M., & Kim, S. T. (2007). Digital governance in municipalities worldwide: a longitudinal assessment of municipal websites throughout the world. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 872-885.
• Karkin, N., & Cezar, A. (2024). The generation of public value through e-participation initiatives: A synthesis of the extant literature. Government Information Quarterly, 41(2), 101935.
• Lawani, S. M. (1981). Bibliometrics: Its theoretical foundations, methods and applications. Libri, 31(1), 294-315. https://doi.org/10.1515/libr.1981.31.1.294.
• Lember, V., Brandsen, T., & Tõnurist, P. (2019). The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1665-1686.
• Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and reviewpapers 1997–2017: A selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics, 115, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2622-5
• Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454.
• Loeffler E. (2021). The four co’s: co-commissioning, co-design, co-delivery and co-assessment of public services and outcomes through traditional and digital mechanisms. In E. Loeffler (Ed.). Co-Production of Public Services and Outcomes (pp. 75-176). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55509-2_3.
• Loeffler, E., & Bovaird, T. (2018). From participation to co-production: widening and deepening the contributions of citizens to public services and outcomes. In E. Ongaro, & S. Van Thiel (Eds.). The palgrave handbook of public administration and management in Europe, (pp. 403-423). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Meijer, A. J. (2011). Networked coproduction of public services in virtual communities: From a government‐centric to a community approach to public service support. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 598-607.
• Meijer, A., & Boon, W. (2021). Digital platforms for the co-creation of public value. Policy and Politics, 49(2), 231-248. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16115951032181.
• Meijer, A.J. (2012). Co-production in an Information Age: Individual and Community Engagement Supported by New Media, VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1156–1172.
• Mergel, I. (2018). Open innovation in the public sector: drivers and barriers for the adoption of Challenge.gov. Public Management Review, 20(5), 726-745.
• Mu, R., Wang, Y., & Song, H. (2022). How does technological system design affect value creation? A systematic literature review of digital co-production. Global Public Policy and Governance, 2(4), 400-426.
• Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & M. Sicilia (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: the who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–76.
• Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: the who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–76.
• Nawi, H. M., Sapiai, N. S., Ishak, F. M., Mustapha, W. M. B. W., Arifin, N. B., & Zawawi, T. M. Z. bin M. (2021). A bibliometric analysis on e-participation. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(9), 1201–1215.
• Nieuwenhuizen W., & Meijer, A. (2021). ICT-Based co-production: a public values perspective. In Loeffler E. & Bovaird T. (Eds.). The palgrave handbook of co-production of public services and outcomes, (pp. 577-594). Palgrave Macmillan.
• OECD (2003). Promise and problems of e-democracy, challenges of online citizen engagement. OECD Publishing.
• Osborne, S. P. (2006). The new public governance?. Public Management Review, 8(3), 377-387.
• Osborne, S. P., & Strokosch, K. (2013). It takes two to tango? understanding the coproduction of public services by integrating the services management and public administration perspectives, British Journal of Management, 24.
• Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: coproduction, synergy and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073 – 87.
• Palumbo, R., & Manesh, M. F. (2023). Travelling along the public service co-production road: a bibliometric analysis and interpretive review. Public management review, 25(7), 1348-1384.
• Parks, R.B., Baker, P.C., Kiser, L., Oakerson, R., Ostrom, E., Ostrom, V., & Wilson, R. (1981). Consumers as coproducers of public services: some economic and institutional considerations. Policy Studies Journal, 9(7), 1001-1011.
• Ramirez , R. (1999). Value co-production: intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strategic Management Journal, 20 (1), 49 – 65.
• Rose, J., & Saebo, Ø. (2010). FixMyStreet: An analysis of citizen engagement in the UK. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 288-295.
• Santamaría-Philco, A., Cerdá, J. H. C., & Gramaje, M. C. P. (2019). Advances in e-participation: a perspective of last years. Ieee Access, 7, 155894-155916.
• Saylam, A. (2021a). Kamu yönetiminde bir e-katılım modeli olarak bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri (BİT) destekli kitle kaynak kullanımı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(2), 271-287.
• Saylam, A. (2021b). Kamu yönetiminde bilgi ve iietişim teknolojileri (BİT) destekli yaygın katılım modelleri: BİT destekli ortak yapım üzerinden bir inceleme. İç A. Saylam (Eds.). Kamu yönetiminde elektronik vatandaş katılım (ss. 103-137). Gazi Kitabevi.
• Saylam, A. (2022). E-devlet kavramının dijital devlet ve elektronik/dijital yönetişim kavramları ekseninde değerlendirilmesi. Third Sector Social Economic Review, 57(3), 2130-2149.
• Shaikh, A. K., Ahmad, N., Khan, I., & Ali, S. (2021). E-Participation within E-government: a bibliometric-based systematic literature review. International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 17(4), 15-39.
• Small, H.G., (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 24, 265–269.
• Small, H.G., (1978). Cited documents as concept symbols. Soc. Stud. Sci., 8 (3), 327–340.
• Steinbach, M., Sieweke, J. & Stefan Süß (2019). The diffusion of e- participation in public administrations: A systematic literature review. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 29(2), 61-95, DOI: 10.1080/10919392.2019.1552749.
• Thelwall, M. (2008). Bibliometrics to webometrics. Journal of Information Science, 34(4), 605-621. https://doi.org/10.1177/016555150708723.
• United Nations (2008). UN E-Government Survey 2008. UN Publishing.
• United Nations (2014). E-Government Survey 2014. UN Publishing.
• Voorberg, W.H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and coproduction: embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 1333-1357, doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.930505.
• Zavattaro, S. M., French, P. E., & Mohanty, S. D. (2015). A sentiment analysis of US local government tweets: The connection between tone and citizen involvement. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 333-341.
• Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429- 472.