Abstract

In public administration, digital technologies are considered a necessary direction of technical modernisation, improving the work of government agencies and the quality of their interaction with stakeholders. However, along with the benefits, several ethical concerns exist about using digital technologies. The purpose of the article is to analyse the state of the implementation of digital innovations in the field of public administration, as well as to systemise and analyse the main groups of ethical concerns arising in connection with the use of digital technologies in public administration. The article uses methods of bibliometric, comparative, and statistical analysis. The Google trends toolkit was used to study global trends in interest in e-governance, e-government, digital government, and related terms. Digital government and e-government were identified as the most common terms to define the use of digital technologies in public administration. The bibliographic analysis was carried out using VOSviewer v.1.6.18 based on Scopus articles for 2001-2022 and made it possible to identify four clusters of scientific research on e-government / digital government and ethics. The analysis used the criterion of at least five times the co-occurrence of all keywords in publications. Based on data from the World Bank, an analysis of the level of maturity of government technologies in European countries, particularly Ukraine, was carried out. The analysis showed that most countries had reached a very high level of e-government development in the European region. In recent years, Ukraine has significantly increased the indicators of the level of e-government, especially regarding the provision of digital administrative services. The article systematises the main ethical issues of using digital technologies in public administration. Three ethical problems were formed, namely 1) privacy, security, and data protection; 2) transparency and accountability; 3) inclusion, accessibility, and non-discrimination. The third group is defined as the most relevant at the current moment. The growing digital divide in the world necessitates the search for effective mechanisms to increase digital inclusion and ensure equal access to e-government for all stakeholders. The results of the research can be useful for scientists, state, and local self-government bodies in managing their technological and digital modernisation.

Keywords: digital government, digital technologies, e-government, e-inclusion, ethical issues, privacy, security, transparency.

JEL Classification: O30, Q41, Q42.

Cite as: Pakhnenko, O., & Kuan, Z. (2023). Ethics of Digital Innovation in Public Administration. Business Ethics and Leadership, 7(1), 113-121. https://doi.org/10.21272/bel.7(1).113-121.2023

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Al-Besher, A., Kumar, K. (2022). Use of artificial intelligence to enhance e-government services. Measurement: Sensors, 24, 100484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
2. AlHussainan, O.N., AlFayyadh, M.A., Al-Sabe, A., Alkandari, A.M. (2022). The factors of E-government service quality in Kuwait during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 18(1). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Androniceanu, A., Georgescu, I. (2021). E-government in European countries, a comparative approach using the principal components analysis. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 14(2), 65-86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
4. Gebeyehu, S., Twinomurinzi, H. (2022). A collaborative consumption digital platform for government organizations using design science. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 3(1), 1-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Giest, S. (2017). Big data for policymaking: Fad or fasttrack? Policy Sciences, 50(3), 367-382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Giest, S., Samuels, A. (2022). Administrative burden in digital public service delivery: The social infrastructure of library programs for e-inclusion. Review of Policy Research. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Harrison, T.M., Luna-Reyes, L.F. (2022). Cultivating trustworthy artificial intelligence in digital government. Social Science Computer Review, 40(2), 494-511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Hochstetter, J., Diaz, J., Dieguez, M., Espinosa, R., Arango, J., Cares, C. (2022). Assessing transparency in eGovernment electronic processes. IEEE Access, 10, 3074-3087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Janssen, M., Rana, N.P., Slade, E.L., & Dwivedi, Y.K. (2018). Trustworthiness of digital government services: Deriving a comprehensive theory through interpretive structural modelling. Public Management Review, 20(5), 647-671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Kim, C. (2014). Anti-corruption initiatives and E-government: A cross-national study. Public Organization Review, 14(3), 385-396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Liywalii, E., Tembo, S. (2019). The Impact of Ethical Issues on E-Government Implementation: A Case of Zambia. International Journal of Information Science, 9(2), 27-39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Ma, S., Hao, F., Lin, Y., Liang, Y. (2022). The construction of big data computational intelligence system for E-government in cloud computing environment and its development impact. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Mišić, J. (2021). Ethics and governance in the digital age. European View, 20(2), 175-181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Morte-Nadal, T., Esteban-Navarro, M.A. (2022). Digital competences for improving digital inclusion in E-government services: A mixed-methods systematic review protocol. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Muliawaty, L., Framesthi, D.B. (2020). Ethics of Public Administration in the Era of Technology Disruption and Government Innovation. Otoritas: Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, 10(2), 132-141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Nam, H., Kim, S., Nam, T. (2022). Identifying the directions of technology-driven government innovation. Information (Switzerland), 13(5). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Roman, A.V. (2015). Framing the questions of E-government ethics: An organizational perspective. American Review of Public Administration, 45(2), 216-236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Sharma, G., Xi, B., Wang, Q. (2012). E-Government: Public Participation and Ethical Issues. Journal of E-Governance, 35, 195-204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
19. Sigfrids, A., Nieminen, M., Leikas, J., Pikkuaho, P. (2022). How Should Public Administrations Foster the Ethical Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence? A Review of Proposals for Developing Governance of AI. Frontiers in Human Dynamics, 4, 858108. [Google Scholar]
20. The World Bank (2022). GovTech Maturity Index. Available at: [Link]
21. Vu, G.C., Vu, C.T. (2021). Digital government: A Vietnamese perspective. International Journal of Public Law and Policy, 7(3), 249-272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Zeebaree, M., Agoyi, M., Aqel, M. (2022). Sustainable adoption of E-government from the UTAUT perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(9), 5370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Zuiderwijk, A., Chen, Y., Salem, F. (2021). Implications of the use of artificial intelligence in public governance: A systematic literature review and a research agenda. Government Information Quarterly, 38(3), 101577.[Google Scholar][CrossRef]