Increasing e-Government Adoption through Social Media: A case of Nepal

Abstract: It is necessary to secure citizens confidence in government and the Internet to ensure

broader adoption of e-government. Empirical data shows that government’s communication efforts

have impact on citizens trust level. First, this study analyzes Nepalese ‘digital native’s trust level in

government and the Internet. Second, based on the findings of the ‘digital native’s’ trust level, this

study will predict if Nepalese e-government implementation will yield wider e-government adoption.

Third, this study measures effectiveness of government’s past communication outreach efforts and

also investigates possibilities of using social media to enhance citizen’s trust. Results indicate that

ineffective targeting of government’s communication outreach efforts have negatively impacted

‘digital native’s trust level in government and the Internet. Finally, recommendations to create critical

mass of e-government adopters using social media are discussed.

1. Introduction E-government is the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in government to

improve managerial effectiveness, deliver efficient public services, and promote democratic values (Gil-

Garcı et al. 2003). However, despite growing investment globally, adoptions of e-Government have been

slower than government’s expectations (Al-Shafi & Weerakkody, 2008). Citizens who had previously

used e-government services are returning back to the traditional method, because citizens only adopt e-

government, if they believe it to be trustworthy (ACSI, 2005, Horrigan, 2003, Van Dijk et al, 2006;

Belanger & Carter, 2008).

Citizens should have a reasonably higher level of trust in government and the Internet in order to trust e-

government (Srivastav & Teo, 2009). Although, empirical data show that there is a growing trust in the

Internet, citizen’s trust towards government has declined dramatically over the past thirty years (Singh et

al., 2010; Rosenstone & Hansen 1993; Hibbing & Theiss-Morse 2001). Government and citizens

misunderstand and mistrust each other at a fundamental level (Bach & Kaufman, 2009). As a result, if

citizens do not trust governmental policies and plans in advance, it is highly likely that they will not gain

sufficient level of trust after the implementation as well (Termeer, et al. 2009).

Citizen’s lack of awareness regarding benefits of e-government has contributed to the declining rate of e-

government adoption (Pilling, & Boeltzig, 2007). Communication had positive impacts on adoption of e-

government services in Canada, Singapore, Dubai, and the Netherlands (Teerling & Pieterson, 2009).

Thus, effective and targeted communication is necessary to build citizen’s awareness, knowledge,

perceptions, and trust towards e-government services (Teerling & Pieterson, 2009). Although,

communication channels differ in characteristics and viewership, governments usually take up a policy of

pushing the same information through every channel without considering citizen’s preferred choices of

channels (Ebbers et al., 2007; Teerling & Pieterson, 2009). Among various communication channels,

Internet has emerged as the most popular channel of interaction. However, recently, social media has

gained worldwide adoption at an immense scale emerging as the most preferred communication channel

on the Internet. In December of 2009, there were total of 300 million unique worldwide visitors on social

media websites (Nielsonwire, 2010)

Contrary to content and advertisement driven traditional media, social media is a platform for interaction

and relationships building (Eisenberg, 2008). In 2009, people spent 82 % more time on social media

compared to the previous year (Nielsonwire, 2010). Business community consider social media marketing

as the wave of the future, because social media is almost ubiquitous with ‘digital natives (DN)’ (JISC,

2007; Skul, 2008). ‘DNs belong to a generation born between 1980 and 1994. They seek instant

gratification, are impatient with linear thinking, have the ability to multitask, and are more concerned with

speed of access (Prensky, 2001; Bayne & Ross, 2007). Generally, DNs are deemed to have a high level of

trust in technology, particularly the Internet. Nepalese government’s e-government implementation plan

indentifies ‘DNs’ as the initial target group for e-government adoption to create critical mass required for

successful momentum necessary to attract new adopters. However, it is important to remember that

ubiquity with social media does not automatically translate their willingness to use e-government services

(Owen, 2004).

Nepal is one of the least developed countries in the world with a population of 28 million people (CIA,

2010). Nepal differs economically, socially and culturally with developed countries. As a result ‘DNs in

Nepal could exhibit different social media usage patterns compared to their counterparts in developed

countries. More importantly, Asian Development Bank (ADB) has granted 25 million US dollars for

implementation of ICT Development Project through an ADB technical assistance project (ADB, 2006).

The project is designed to improve the legal, regulatory, and institutional framework to expand ICT

accessibility and implement e-Government applications based on the roadmap identified by the e-

Government master plan. Therefore, before expending millions of dollars on e-government projects, it is

necessary to find out if current environment’s is favorable for e-government implementation.

This study is divided into 8 sections including this introductory remark. Section 2 discusses motivation,

aim, and research questions. Section 3 builds theoretical foundation based on literature review. Section 4

provides methodology. Section 5 presents results of the study followed by discussion of the findings on

section 6. Section 7 discusses limitations of the study. Finally, the section 8 provides conclusion.

2.  Aim and Research Questions 

There are several studies on e-government adoption (Ebrahim & Irani, 2005; Bugler & Bretschneider,

1993; Norris & Kraemer, 1996, Gronlund & Horan, 2004). Scholars generally believe lack of awareness

(Reffat, 2003), access to e-services (Fang, 2002; Darrell, 2002), usability of e-government websites

(Sampson, 2002), digital divide (InfoDev, 2002), lack of citizen’s interest (Sampson, 2002) and lack of

government support (Karunananda & Weerakkody, 2006) are hindering e-government adoption. However,

findings of a rigorous literature review illustrate trust as the most important factor necessary for e-

government adoption. Therefore, success of e-government projects depends on trust between government

and citizens (E-government handbook, 2007).

Waters and Burnett’s (2009) study on 275 nonprofit organization’s profile on Facebook concludes that

organizations are not using social media to its full potential, however, the study fails to assess Facebook’s

effectiveness as a relationship building tool. Stephenson & Bonabeau’s (2007) study identified

opportunities of integrating homeland security system with social media, but did not discuss challenges.

Avidar’s (2009) study explores Israel’s societal culture as an environment in which public relations

practice has to align. The study found that Israeli practioners are willing to use social media.

A high number of publications regarded trust as an important factor for e-government adoption and

identified communication as an important measure to build trust towards e-government. Other handful of

studies discussed government’s inability to adapt to the changing socio-technical landscape. Several

publications highlighted massive proliferation of social media. Similarly, there were numerous

publications dealing with ‘digital natives’, particularly focused on their characteristics. However, it was

not possible to find scholarly endeavors that discussed importance assessing existing e-government

strategies in the change in citizen online behavior, particularly in regards to using social media for e-

government adoption. Therefore, this study tries to fill the gap in Information Systems research by

investigating opportunities of increasing e-government adoption through effective interaction with DNs in

the new socio-technical landscape dominated by social media.

Therefore, the main aim of this study is to discover Nepalese DN’s trust level in government and the

Internet and also investigate possibilities of using social media to enhance trust in order to ensure high

level of e-government adoption. The aim of this study will be fulfilled by answering following research

questions.

• What is the trust level of Nepalese ‘digital natives’ towards Nepalese government?

• What is the trust level of Nepalese ‘digital natives’ towards the Internet?

• What are the effective digital channels to communicate and engage Nepalese ‘digital natives’?

• How can the Nepalese government utilize social media to its advantage, particularly to enhance or

maintain ‘digital natives’ trust towards government and the Internet?

3. Theoretical foundation & literature review 

Trust is the foundation of all human and institutional interaction (Duck, 1997; Kramer & Tyler, 1995).

Social psychologists describe trust as behavioral expectations of others, while personality psychologists

define trust as individual characteristics (Kim & Prabhakar, 2000). Trust in government refers to one’s

perceptions regarding the government’s integrity and ability to provide transparent services (Bacerra &

Gupta, 1999). Although, trust is often discussed in the context of individual and groups, it can also be

applied to technology. Trust in technology is the belief that technology can be used to accomplish desired

task satisfactorily (Srivastav & Teo, 2009). According to Teo et al. (2009) e-government adoption can

only take place, when citizens have a high level of trust both in government as well as in the Internet

3.1 Trust in government 

Citizen’s trust in government depends on their expectations based on previous interactions with various

government agencies (Zucker 1986). Trust in government can be categorized into relationship trust and

institutional trust. (Papadakis, 1999). Relationship trust is the sum of citizen’s belief in government’s

competence, benevolence, and integrity (Mayer et al., 1995). Competence is related to citizen’s perception

towards government’s technical and organizational capability to implement e-government (Mishra, 1996).

Benevolence is related to the belief that governments function in the best interest of citizens (Cummings

& Bromiley, 1996). Integrity implies to government’s honesty and promise keeping practices (Sheppard &

Sherman, 1998). Institutional trust on the other hand, refers to citizen’s perception towards institutional

environment e.g. Internet (McKnight et al., 2002). Institutional trust can be enhanced through legislative

measures such as developing and enforcing cyber laws, encryptions standards, and right to information

act.

3. 2 Trust in technology 

Citizen’s trust in technology can be divided broadly into two categories: belief in ‘competence’ and

‘perceived risk’ of the Internet (McKnight et al. 2002). Competence trust develops over time with

continued experience of using e-government services, while perceived risk can be reduced by fostering

institution based trust through development of technical security policies (Backhouse et al. 2005).

Institutional trust is essential, because citizens are reluctant to adopt e-government not only due to their

mistrust in government, but also in technology (Internet) used for e-government (Mayer et al., 1995;

Hoffman et al. 1999).

3.3 Trust in e­government 

Based on the discussions of section 3.1 and 3.2, it is safe to conclude that e-government adoption will not

take place unless citizens have high level of trust in government and the Internet (Carter & Belanger,

2006). As a result, citizens may either choose not to adopt or to revert to the traditional offline means of

interaction with the government (Teo et al. 2009; Srivastava and Teo, 2004). Various levels of citizen trust

in e-government can be expressed in the form of a 2X2 matrix (Figure 1). The matrix is borrowed from

Teo & Srivastava (2009). The figure 1 shows that differing levels of citizen trust in the two dimensions of

trust may lead to different performance outcomes of e-government implementation. Table 1 shows results

of e-government implementation based on the four criteria’s in the e-government trust grid (Figure 1).

Figure 1. E-government citizen trust grid.

High

Trust in government

Low Trust on Internet High

Source: Srivasta and Teo (2009).

Table 1. Scenarios of implementing e-government under various degree of trust. Scenarios Result of e-government implementation

Collaborative Total synergy between government and citizens which leads to success of e-government programs

Cooperative Citizens use government just to cooperate with the government, but avoid e-government where and when possible

Competitive Yield unpredictable and sporadic results

Adversarial Low level of adoption, thus leading to total failure.

3.4 Communication 

Citizen’s distrust in government occurs mostly during conversation and consultation. Therefore,

government needs to communicate their ability and commitment towards providing citizens with

convenient and dependable online services (Beöanger & Carter, 2008). Such type of publicity will rapidly

increase citizen’s perceptions of government’s trustworthiness, because users who have had positive

experiences with e-government services have a high tendency of recommending the services to others,

Cooperative

Collaborative

Adversarial

Competitive

thus providing an excellent opportunity to create critical mass (Freed, 2003). More importantly, it is

necessary for organizations to adopt social media as the primary communication channel, because it is

synonymous with DNs.

3.5 Social Media 

Social media will play an important role in online interaction and knowledge organization in the future

(Mislove et al., 2007). Social media websites (SMW) such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are

dominant players in social media space. In 2009, Facebook and Twitter saw usage increase of 200% and

368% respectively (Fitzgerald, 2010). McCarty (2008) believes governments operate in a centralized,

hierarchical manner, while the public work through networks of strong and weak ties to share information

and solve problems. Social media facilitates public to work in a networked manner. More importantly,

since, relationships are foundation of social media; it provides an effective way to connect with

communities (Waters et al. 2009). However, despite social media’s strength, governments have been slow

to adopt it.

4.  Methodology 

This section presents research methodology and is divided into three parts: research design, sample and

questionnaire design.

4.1 Research Design 

Interpretative studies are appropriate to study complex subjects such as human behavior and social

phenomenon (Villiers, 2005). Therefore, an interpretative research was selected for this study, because

this study required analysis of complex subjects such as trust, adoption, communication, usage behavior,

and social media. The complexity also called for quantitative and qualitative data synthesis. Therefore,

this study utilizes both quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitative method operates by numbers,

while qualitative method operates more by means of verbal aspects.

Survey questionnaire and semi structured interviews were used to collect quantitative and qualitative data.

The survey approach refers to a group of methods emphasizing quantitative analysis where data from large

population are collected through methods such as mail questionnaires or telephone interviews (Gable,

1994). Representative sampling is the hallmark of survey research. For example to be representative, the

response rate must be high (Krosnick, 1999). However, surveys with low response rates can be more

accurate than surveys with high response rates, particular when random sampling is not used (Visser et al.,

1996)

The purposes of the interviews were to access what is in and on the interviewee’s mind (Stenhouse, 1984).

Interviews provide respondents opportunities to reconstruct past, interpret the present, and predict the

future allowing access to the participant’s interpretations of the actions and events which have or are

taking place (Lincoln and Guba, 1985).

4.2 Sample 

A questionnaire was used to gather a mix of quantitative and qualitative data from the Nepalese ‘DNs’.

Since, students in high schools have parental and school’s control over their Internet usage, the DN’s who

were in the universities were surveyed for the purpose of this study. This part of the study used stratified

random sampling. Due to the deteriorating political situation and frequent transportation strikes, it was not

possible to travel outside of the capital city. As a result, only the students from Kathmandu University

were used as sample. Research assistant who is based in Kathmandu randomly distributed the

questionnaires at the university cafeteria on 9th April, 2010. Total of 100 questionnaires were randomly

distributed to the students as they entered the University cafeteria.

In order to explore possibilities of using social media to build or enhance DN’s trust towards government

and the Internet, two social media marketers were selected for interviews. One individual is owner of the

e-commerce site Thamel.com and other individual is the owner of the entertainment & events

management agency, Partynepal. The participants were contacted via email to secure interview dates and

time. Both interviews were conducted through Skype on 12th April, 2010. The interview questions are

included in Appendix II.

The findings of the study, particularly social media’s massive explosion and DN’s desire to be

communicated via social media were shared with the executives of two government bodies responsible for

e-government policy and implementation: High Level Commission for IT (HLCIT) and National IT

Center (NITC) respectively. The two executives are able to influence decisions regarding e-government in

Nepal. The government’s reflection was deemed necessary to find out if the findings are applicable in the

real world government scenario. The participants were interviewed through Skype on 21st of April, 2010.

4.3 Survey questionnaire and Interview design. 

The survey questionnaire consists of 25 survey items out of which 24 are designed to gather quantitative

data (Appendix 1). The survey items are designed to identify Nepalese ‘DN’s trust level in government

and the Internet, thus providing answer to the research questions. Beyond simply answering the research

questions, additional items were included to provide supporting information. The survey items were

designed to provide information about ‘DNs’ perception on trust in government, trust in technology,

preferred communication channel, Internet and social media usage patterns, and their opinion on

government’s presence on social media.

The first set of survey items were used to identify whether relationship based or institutional trust based

factors were contributing to DN’s trust level towards government in order to answers the first research

question. The second set of survey items were used to gather information regarding ‘DNs trust level

towards technology (Internet) in order to answers the second research question. The survey items were

designed to find out if competence trust or perceived risk of the Internet contributed to DNs current level

of trust in the Internet. The third set of survey items were used to indentify effective channels to be used

by the Nepalese government in their e-government outreach programs when targeting DNs. The survey

items were also designed to provide insight into effectiveness of government’s previous communication

outreach programs. The forth set of survey items were designed to understand DN’s view towards

government’s presence on social media in order to answer the fourth research questions. Additionally, the

interviews with the two social media experts were designed to provide answers to the fourth research

question which is discussed in the following section. Table 2 links the survey items and interview

questions with the research questions.

Table2. Matching survey questionnaire and interview questions with the main Research Questions.

Research Questions Questionnaire Interview

1 What is the trust level of Nepalese ‘digital natives’ towards Nepalese government 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

2 What is the trust level of Nepalese ‘digital natives’ towards and Internet technology? 1,2, 3, 9, 10, 11

3 What are the effective digital channels to communicate and engage Nepalese ‘digital natives’? 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, 18, 1,2

4 How can the Nepalese government utilize Social Media to its advantage, particularly to enhance

or maintain ‘digital natives’ trust towards government and the Internet?

19,20, 21, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

The semi structured interview consists of 7 questions designed to gather data from the two social media

experts (Appendix II). The interview questions were designed to gather information regarding their

patterns of social media usage to promote their business, social media websites used to promote their

businesses, ways government could use social media to enhance e-government trust and finally, ways

social media could be incorporated with the overall e-government strategy.

5. Results  

The survey questionnaires were distributed randomly to 100 respondents at Kathmandu University. 95

questionnaire were returned (N = 95). The respondent’s age ranged from 19-30 and the average age was

26. 60% of the respondents reported Bachelors degree as their highest degree. Further findings of this

study are divided into four sections: trust in government, trust in the Internet, effective communication

channels, and social media.

Trust in Government: Table 3 presents the results of DN’s trust level towards government. The results

are divided into two main categories: relationship and institutional trust.

Table 3. Digital native’s level of relationship and institutional trust towards government.

Yes No

n % n %

Relationship trust

Competency: Do you think government has capacity to deliver e-government services through Internet 35 37 % 60 63%

Benevolence: Do you think government acts on citizen’s interest 30 32 % 65 68%

Integrity: Do you think government is honest in its dealing 9 10% 86 90 %

Integrity: Do you think government is transparent 10 11% 85 89%

Institutional trust

Do you have awareness regarding privacy policy, cyber law, and encryption used by the government 4 4% 91 96%

n= Number of respondents

65 % of the respondents who had higher level of trust in government reported Masters Degree as their

highest level of education.

Trust in the Internet: The results show that 61% of the respondents never or rarely visited government

websites. Only 17% of the respondents visited government websites on a regular basis. The respondents

who visited government websites reported Masters Degree as their highest level of education. Table 4

presents DN’s perception of risk towards sharing information on the Internet in general as well as with the

government.

Table 4. Digital natives comfort level towards sharing information on the Internet

Very

Comfortable

Comfortable Neutral Uncomfortable Very

Uncomfortable

Do you feel comfortable sharing information on the Internet 46% 23% 10% 15% 6%

Do you feel comfortable sharing information on the Internet

with government

5% 20% 21% 25% 29%

The respondents (46%) who were comfortable sharing information on the Internet reported high school as

the highest level of education. The respondents (25%) who were comfortable and very comfortable

sharing information with the government over the Internet reported having master’s degree as their highest

level of education.

Effectiveness of Traditional Communication Channel: The respondents (14%) who had come across

government’s participatory policy making initiatives and media outreach program associated with it

reported Masters Degree as their highest level of education. Table 3 presents effectiveness of the

government’s participatory policy making initiatives and the visibility of participatory policy initiative’s

advertisement through traditional media.

Table 5. Effectiveness of governments communication for participatory policy outreach program

Yes No

Government disseminates policy related information through their website in order to promote participatory policy

making. Have you come across such initiatives?

14% 86%

Nepalese government advertises on print radio, and television about participatory policy making initiatives. Have you

come across such communication outreach?

27% 73%

The social media experts were only using Facebook to build personal network as well for business

promotion. However, they are also planning to expand to Twitter, YouTube, and other social media

websites as their adoption level grow with time.

Social Media –Digital Natives: The findings show that 64 % of the respondents use the Internet for more

than four hours per day while only 12 % of the respondents use Internet for less than two hours per day.

The respondents (64%) who use the Internet for more than four hours reported using social media

websites for more than four hours per day as well. Similarly, the respondents (12%) who use the Internet

for less than two hours per day also use social media sites for less than two hours per day. 60% of the

respondents who use YouTube and Facebook on a regular basis also use the Internet for more than four

hours per day.

The findings also show that 60% of the respondents who prefer viewing content recommended by their

friends through the social media websites also search for information on the World Wide Web. They were

also using the Internet for more than four hours per day. However, only 32% of the respondents prefer

content recommended by their friends on the social media websites, but did not actively look for content

on the Internet. In regards to the preferred content on social media, 37% of the respondent’s prefer

viewing pictures, while 21% preferred watching streaming videos on social media websites.

67% of the respondents were in favor of Nepalese government’s presence on social media. 56% of the

respondent considered government’s presence on social media as a sign of progressive and transparent

government. However, in regards to the open question, 89% of the respondents believed that the Nepalese

government should immediately open accounts on social media websites and disseminate governmental

information. 37% of the respondents believed government’s presence on social media will translate

government’s image into a modern one. 79% of the respondents hinted that they would prefer viewing

government related videos on YouTube at their leisure time. One respondent wrote:

Government’s presence on social media websites in order to interact with citizen to promote e-

government programs will help citizens believe that the government is transparent in its dealing

and also serious about e-government.

Social Media - Experts: Owner of thamel.com constantly scan discussions on social media websites and

Nepalese community websites to identify future business opportunities. However, both of them believe

that the government should have an immediate presence on social media. One expert said:

Yes, government should have presence on the social media websites, as most of the urban youth

have presence on these sites. If government also has presence on these sites, their program will be

visible to the urban youths.

Another expert said:

When people visit social media websites they are hungry from social content. Therefore, it is

simply providing the value they are seeking. For example, if the Ministry of Finance were to

update status every day on Facebook or Twitter, I would be interested to join their fan page and

see what they are up to.

Both of them said that the government could immediately use social media to promote two-way

communication with youths and promote transparency. Both of them believed that it will be mandatory in

the future for Nepalese government to integrate e-government services with the social media websites,

because that is where citizens with the Internet access will be. However, one expert said:

The social media platforms have to be localized before integrating with e-government.

6. Discussion 

In this section, the implications of the findings are discussed. While the findings are likely to be applicable

to every organization, this study focuses mainly on three things. First, identify factors contributing to

Nepalese DN’s current level of trust on government and the Internet. Second, based on the trust level

predict success of failure of e-government in Nepal. Third, explore opportunities of using social media to

build citizens trust and ultimately increase e-government adoption.

The findings show that DN’s have a relatively low level of trust in government. However, they have

comparatively higher level of relationship trust than institutional trust in government. Lack of

governmental transparency and dishonest dealings practices in the past have contributed to the lower level

of relationship trust. Therefore, in order to enhance citizens trust level, the government needs to increase

transparency and honesty in its dealing with citizens.

Although, relatively higher numbers of respondents believed in government’s capacity to deliver e-

government services, they were not aware of privacy policies and encryption on government websites,

cyber laws, and other security measures taken by the government. The government needs to also enhance

security on the Internet through various legislative and technical measures. Interestingly enough,

respondents who regularly visited government websites had Master’s degree, thus it is necessary to

convince DNs with Bachelors degree or lower to use the government websites by providing valuable

information on the websites.

The findings show that DN’s have a relatively low level of trust in the Internet when interacting with the

government. Most of them never or rarely visited government websites which resulted in a lower level of

competence trust, thus contributed to increasing perceived risk of the Internet. Therefore, even though

majority of the respondents were comfortable sharing information over the Internet, they did not feel

comfortable sharing information with the government. Therefore, the government needs to provide

valuable and timely information through the government websites in order to lure DN’s to visit the

government websites, because continuous interaction with the government website is necessary to enhance

competency trust on the Internet. Since, respondents who had higher level of trust on sharing information

with government also had Masters Degree, it is necessary to communicate with DN’s with Bachelors

degree or lower.

The findings also show that DN’s were not aware of government’s participatory policy making initiatives,

because the government’s communication outreach was not visible to DNs. This ineffective

communication outreach has contributed to citizens not knowing about governments participatory policy

formulation initiatives. As a result DN’s rarely visited government websites which in turn contributed to a

low level of competence trust towards the Internet.

The findings show that there is a direct link between social media usage and the number of hours spent on

the Internet. There is also a direct link between Facebook and YouTube usage with the number of hours

spent on social media. More importantly, majority of DN’s positive response towards government’s

presence on social media coupled with their Internet and social media usage patterns provides an excellent

opportunity for government to harness the potential of social media to enhance trust in government as well

as the Internet. Government can start by digitizing government’s communication outreach videos and print

advertisement and push those though social media.

Complimenting the views of DNs, social media experts also believed that the government would benefit

by having presence on social media, especially in terms of promoting transparency. They also hinted that

the government needs to start thinking about developing applications in local language as well.

The Nepal government’s e-government executives believed in embracing new technologies to empower

citizens. They were aware of social media’s popularity and were planning to utilize them soon, but did not

mention when citizens could see government’s using social media.

7. Limitations 

There are several limitations to this study. The sample was collected from only one university. Future

studies should seek larger sample sizes comprised of respondents from different universities in various

locations in Nepal. Future studies should engage technical staff of the government and social media

experts on a deeper level. At the same time also involve broader set of government executives to validate

these results. Future research could also investigate challenges associated with government’s presence on

social media.

8. Conclusion 

Trust is a fundamental element in the adoption process of delivering services on the Internet. The world

has seen several businesses solely operating on the Internet. For example, Amazon.com sells millions of

mechanizes yearly based on customers trust. Similarly, successful e-government adoption requires citizens

to have a high level of trust in government as well as the Internet.

Governments initially target small group of e-government adopters to create a critical mass required for

positive momentum of adoption, i.e. DN’s in Nepal’s case. DN’s low level of trust towards Nepal

government is traced to lack of transparency and dishonesty from the government’s side. Lack of technical

and legislative measures such as cyber laws, encryption, and privacy policies on government websites also

contributed to low level of trust on the Internet.

DN’s low level of trust in government and the Internet means Nepal’s e-government implementation will

fall under Adversarial section of the e-government trust grid (Fig 1) discussed in section 3.3. If e-

government is implemented in Nepal under current scenario, there is almost almost zero level of e-

government adoption. Therefore, it is necessary to take necessary actions to enhance DN’s trust level

towards government as well as the Internet prior to e-government implementation.

DN’s lower levels of trust towards government and the Internet are directly linked to government’s

ineffective communication. Therefore, it is apparent that governments communication outreach through

traditional media have not been effective at targeting DN’s. However, DN’s high level of engagement in

social media and their positive response towards government’s presence on social media provides newer

avenues for establishing a favorable environment to create critical mass required to generate momentum

for e-government adoption. However, relationship building, honesty, and transparency should be at the

heart of this trust building communication efforts through social media.

References 

ADB (2006). Road connectivity project to server Nepal’s poor. A Quarterly Newsletter of the Nepal Resident Mission of the Asian Development Bank. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Periodicals/NRM/vol6-no3.pdf

Al-Shafi, S. & Weerakkody, V. (2008). The use of wireless Internet parks to facilitate adoption and diffusion of e-government services: An empirical study in Qatar. Proceedings of the 14th AMCIS, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. August 14 - 17

American Customer Satisfaction Index (2005). E-government satisfaction index. Retrieved March 5, 2010 from http://fcg.nbc.gov/pdf/e-gov_comm_0305.pdf

Avidar, R. (2009). Social media, societal culture and Israeli public relations practice. Public Relations Review, 35 (4), 437-439

Bach, R. & Kaufman, D. (2009). A social infrastructure for hometown security: Evolving the homeland security paradigm. CNA Corporation.

Backhouse J., Hsu, C., Tseng, J. C., & Baptisa, J. (2005). A question of trust. Communications of the ACM, 48(9), 87-91.

Bayne, S. & Ross, J. (2007). The digital native and digital immigrant: a dangerous opposition. Proceedings of annual conference of the society for research into higher education. Brighton, Sussex, UK December 11-13

Becerra, M. & Gupta, A. K. (1999). Trust within the organization: integrating the trust literature with agency theory and transaction costs economics. Public Administration Quarterly, 23 (2), 177-203

Bélanger, F. & Hiller, J. (2006). A framework for e-government: Privacy implications. Business Process Management Journal, 12 (1), 49-60

Belanger, F., Hiller, J. & Smight, W. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security and site attributes, Journal of strategic Information Systems, 11 (3-4), 245-270

Bellanger, F. & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. Journal of Information systems. 17(2), 165-176

Bellanger, F. & Hiller, J. (2006). A framework of e-government: privacy implications. Business process management journal, 12 (19), 48-60

Bellanger, F., Hiller, J. & Smith, W. J. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and sites attributes. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11 (4), 245-270

Bradach, J. L. & Eccles, R. G. (1989). Price, authority, and trust: From ideal types to plural forms. Annual Review of Sociology, (15), 97-118.

Bugler, D. T. & Bretschneider, S. (1993). Technology push or program pull: Interest in new information technologies within public organizations. In B. Bozeman (Ed.), Public Management: The State of the Art (pp. 275−293) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Carter, L. & Belanger, F. (2005).The utilization of E-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance Factors. Information Systems Journal, 15 (1), 5–25.

CIA (2010). The world fact book. Retrieved on March 8th, 2010 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/np.html

Committee on Computing and Communications Research to Enable Better Use of Information Technology in Government. (2008). Information technology research, innovation, and e-Government Washington, D.C.: Computer science and telecommunications board, division on engineering and physical sciences.

Cullen, R. & Reilly, P. (2007). Information privacy and trust in government: A citizen-based perspective from New Zealand, Proceedings 40th Hawaii International Conference on Information Systems. January 3-6.

Cummings, L. L. & P. Bromiley (1996). The organizational trust inventory: OTI, R. Kramera and T. Tyler (eds.) Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 302–330

Darrell, W. (2002). U.S. State and federal e-Government full report, Retrieved on April 7, 2010 from http://www. insidepolitics.org/egovt02us.pdf

Duck, S. (1997). The handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research and interventions. New York: Wiley

Ebbers, W.E., Pieterson,W. J., Noordman, H.N., Pietersona, W. J. & Noordmana, H.N. (2007). Electronic government: Rethinking channel management strategies. Government Information Quarterly, 25 (2), 181–201

Ebrahim, Z. & Irani, Z. (2005). E-government adoption: architecture and barriers. Business Process Management Journal, 11 (5), 589-611

E-government Handbook. (2007). A Handbook for Citizen-centric e-Government. Retrieved on 18th April, 2010 from http://www.ccegov.eu/downloads/Handbook_Final_031207.pdf

Eisenberg, B. (2007). Understanding and aligning the value of social media Future Now's GrokDotCom /Marketing Optimization Blog. Retrieved on 2 April, 2010 from http://www.grokdotcom.com/2008/11/07/understanding-and-aligning-the-value-of-social-media/.

Fang, Z. (2002), E-Government in digital Era: Concept, practice and development. International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Information, 10 (2), 1-22.

Fitzgerald, M. (2010). Time spent on social media soared worldwide in '09. Editor and Publishes. Retrieved on 18th April, 2010 from http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004061607

FOSE. (2002). Adobe recognizes e-Government innovation: Internal revenue service employees honored for excellence in electronic tax form programs. Washington: B.W. G. Group.

Freed, L. (2003). American customer satisfaction index e-government satisfaction index. Retrieved on 24 April, 2010 from http://www.foreseeresults.com/_downloads/acsicommentary/ACSI_EGov_Report_Q4_2008.pdf

Fukutyama, F. (2001). Social capital, civil society and development. Third World Quarterly, 22 (1), 7 -20

Gable, G. G. (1994). Integrating case study and survey research methods: an example in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112-126.

Gil-Garcı´a, J. R., & Luna-Reyes, L. F. (2003). Towards a definition of electronic government: A comparative review. A. Mendez-Vilas, J. A. Mesa-González, V. Guerrero-Bote, &B F. Zapico-Alonso (Eds.),Techno-legal aspects of information society and new economy: an Overview. Formatex, Badajoz.

Grönlund, Å. & Horan, T. A. (2004). Introducing e-Gov: history, definitions and issues. Communications of the Association for Information systems, 15 (39), 713-729.

Hibbing, J. R. & Theiss-Morse, E. (2001). What is it about government that Americans dislike? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P & Peralta, M. (1999). Building consumer trust online. Communications of the ACM, 42 (4), 80–85.

Horrigon, J. (2003). Generation –four portal functionality: From unification to federation. Retrieved on 16th April, 2010 from http://www.gartner.com/resources/117500/117542/get_ready_for_fourthgenerati_117542.pdf

JISC (2007). Student expectations study – final project report, July 2007, JISC

Kim , K. & Prabhakar, B. (1998). Initial trust, perceived risk, and adoption of Internet banking. Proceedings of ICIS 2000, Brisbane, Australia, Dec. 10-13

Kim, H., Pan, G. & Pan, S. (2007), Managing IT-enabled transformation in the public sector: A case study on e-government in South Korea, Government Information Quarterly, 24 (2), 338-352

Kraemer, K. L. & King, J. L. (2006). Information technology and administrative reform: Will E-Government be different? International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 2 (1), 1−20.

Kramer, R. M. & Taylor, T. R. (1995). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.

Kurunananda, A. & Weerakkody, V. (2006). E-government implementation in Sri Lanka: Lessons from the UK, Proceedings of 8th International Information technology conference, Colombo, Sri Lanka, October 18-31

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985) Naturalistic inquiry, London, Sage.

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.

McCarty, M. (2008). Social networks to the rescue. Homeland security today magazine.

McKnight, D. H., Chervany, N. L. (2002). What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: an interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6 (2), 35-59

Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational Responses to Crisis - The Centrality of Trust .Trust in organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, 261-287.

Mislove, A., Marcon, M., Gummadi, K. P., Druschel, P. & Bhattacharjee, B. (2007). Measurement and analysis of online social networks. Proceedings of IMC 07. 24-26, 2007, San Diego, California, USA

Nielsen wire (2010). Led by Facebook, Twitter, global time spent on social media sites up 82% year over year. Retrieved on 8th April, 2010 from http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/global/led-by-facebook-twitter-global-time-spent-on-social-media-sites-up-82-year-over-year/

Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.

Owen, M. (2004). The myth of digital natives. Future lab, June 2004.

Papadakis, E. (1999). Constituents of confidence and mistrust in Australian institutions. Australian Journal of Political Science, 34 (1), 75-93.

Pilling, W. & Boeltzig, H. (2007). Moving towards e-government –effective strategies for increasing access and use of the internet among non-internet users in US and UK. Proceedings of 8th annual International Digital Government Research Conference, May 20-23, Philadelphia, USA.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On The Horizon, 9 (5), 1-6.

Reffat, R. (2003) Developing a successful e-Government. Working paper, school of architecture, design science and planning, University Of Sydney, Australia.

Rosenstone S. J. & Hansen, M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York:Macmillan. New York: Macmillan.

Rotter, L. B. (1971). Generalized expectations for interpersonal trust. American Psychologist, 26 (5), 443-452

Sampson, N. (2002). Bank marketing international: simplifying in (Form) ation Online. Retrieved on 10th April, 2010 from http://www.mandoforms.com/news/coverage/bankmarketing.html

Sawhney, M. & Zabin, J. (2002). Managing and measuring relational equity in the network economy. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 313-332.

Sheppard, B. & D. Sherman (1998). The Grammars of trust: A model and general implications. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 433-437.

Singh, N., Alhorr, H. S. & Bartikowski, B. P. (2010) Global e-commerce: A portal bridging the world markets. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 11 (1), 1-5.

Skul, D. (2008). Social network marketing - The wave of the future. Relativity Business Technology solutions.

Srivastava, S. C. & Teo, T. S . H. (2009). Citizen trust development for e-government adoption and usage: Insights from young adults in Singapore. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 25 (31), 359-378.

Srivastava, S. C. & Teo, T. S. H. (2004). A Framework for electronic government: Evolution, enablers and resource drainers. Proceedings of the eighth pacific Asia conference on information systems, (PACIS2004), 8 – 11, July. Shanghai, China.

Stenhouse, L. (1984). Library access, library use, and user education in academic sixth forms: an autobiographical account. In R.G. Burgess (ed.) The research process in education settings: ten case studies, London, Falmer press,

Stephenson, D. & Bonabeau, E. (2007). Expecting the unexpected: The need for a networked terrorism and disaster response strategy. Homeland Security Affairs III, no. 1. Retrieved on 16th April, 2010 from http://www.hsaj.org/?article=3.1.3

Teerling, M. L. & Pieterson, W. (2009). Multi-channel marketing: An experiment on leading citizens to online public services. The proceedings of the 10th International digital government research conference May 17-20, Puebla, Mexico.

Teo, T. S. H., S. C. Srivastava and L. Jiang (2009). Trust and electronic government success: An empirical study, Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), 99-131.

Termeer, C.J.A.M., Pot, W.D., Breeman, G.E. & van-Lieshout. M. (2009). Trust, knowledge, and democracy: The public debate about Dutch mega-stables. Proceedings of international conference towards knowledge democracy. Consequences for Science, Politics and Media, 25-27 August, Leiden

Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., Hanenburg, M. & Pieterson, W. (2006). Gebruik van Nederlandse elektronische overheidsdiensten. Enschede: University of Twente.

Villiers, M. R. (2005). Three approaches as pillars for interpretative information Systems research: development research, action research, and grounded theory. Proceedings of SAICSIT, 20-22 September, South Africa.

Visser, P.S, Krosnick, J. A., Marquette, J., Curtin, M. (1996). Mail surveys for election forecasting? An evaluation of the columbus dispatch poll. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60 (2), 181–227

Waters, D., Burnett, E., Lamm, A, & Lucas, J. (2009). Engaging stakeholders through social networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook. Public Relations Review, 35(2), 102-106.

Welch, E. W. & Hinnant, C. C. (2003). Internet use, transparency and interactivity effects on trust in government. Proceedings of the 36th annual Hawaii International conference on system sciences. , 5-8 January.

Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C. & Moon, M., J (2005). Linking citizen’s satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15 (3), 371-391.

Williamson, D. A. (2009). Social network advertising: trends for 2010. Retrieved on April 20, 2010 from http://www.emarketer.com/blog/index.php/social-network-advertising-trends-2010/

Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840–1920 Research in Organizational Behavior, (8), 53-111.

 

Appendices 

Appendix I 

Quantitative survey for digital natives

Demography

1. Age ____________

2. Gender

Male _________

Female ________

2. Highest level of education

High School ________

Bachelors _________

Masters _________

PhD ________

Internet & social media usage

3. How many hours do you use Internet on a daily basis? Please select one answer.

More than four hours per day ________

Four hours per day ________

Three hours per day ________

Two hours per day ________

Less than two hours per day _______

4. Do you use social networking websites? _____ if Yes, please tick appropriate ones

YouTube _______

Facebook _______

Twitter _______

Others ______________________________________________

5. How much time on average do you spend JUST on social networking sites each day?

More than four hours per day ________

Four hours per day ________

Three hours per day ________

Two hours per day ________

Less than two hours per day ________

6. Do you view content (news, blogs, Pdfs & videos) recommended by your friends through the social networking websites or do you actively search for information on the Web?

Prefer content recommended by friends ___________

Actively look for information on the Web ___________

Both ___________

7. Which type of media do you consume most on the Internet? Please select one.

Streaming videos __________

Podcast Videos __________

Streaming audio __________

Podcast audio __________

Websites __________

Blogs __________

News __________

Trust on Technology

Competence trust

8. Do you visit/use government Websites?

Always __________

Often __________

Rarely __________

Never __________

Perceived Risk

9. Do you feel comfortable sharing your personal and financial information over the Internet?

Very comfortable Comfortable Neutral Uncomfortable Very Uncomfortable

Perceived Risk

10. Do you feel comfortable sharing your personal and financial information over the Internet with Nepalese Government?

Very comfortable Comfortable Neutral Uncomfortable Very Uncomfortable

Trust on Government

Relationship trust: Competence trust

11. Do you think Nepalese government has capacity to deliver services through the Internet?

Yes _______

No ________

Relationship trust: Benevolence trust

12. Do you think Nepalese government always acts in citizen’s interest?

Yes _______

No ________

Relationship Trust: Integrity trust

12. Do you think Nepalese government is honest in its dealings?

Yes _______

No ________

Relationship Trust: Integrity trust

13. Do you think Nepalese government is transparent?

Yes _______

No ________

Institutional trust:

14. Are you aware of privacy policy, security, and encryption standards prescribed or used by government Websites?

Yes ________

No_________

Communication outreach

15. Government agencies disseminate policy related information through their Websites in order to promote participatory policy making. Have you ever come across such initiatives?

Yes __________

No ___________

Effectiveness of communication outreach through traditional media

16. Nepalese Government advertises on newspapers, radio, and television about participatory policy making initiatives? Have you come across such communication outreach?

Yes _________

No _________

Social Media

17. Do you think government should have presence on the Social Networking websites?

Yes ___________

No ___________

18. Only progressive and proactive governments have social networking websites presence.

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

19. In your opinion, how can government utilize social networking websites to build or maintain trust among young generations, particularly youth?

Appendix II

1. Do you use Social Networking Websites, if so please specify the sites and purpose of use?

2. Do you have your business’s presence on Social Networking Websites? If yes, can you please elaborate on why and how you use them for your business?

3. Do you think government should have presence on the Social Networking Websites? If yes, can you give reasons?

4. What do you think are some of the ways in which government could immediately benefit by having presence on social media (social networking Websites), particularly to build or enhance citizens trust towards government?

5. How can government utilize social networking websites to enhance ‘digital natives’ trust towards Internet to in order to foster adoption of e-government services?

6. In your opinion, what should be the government’s long term vision towards integrating social networking sites in overall e-government strategy?

7. Any other thoughts or comments?