User Centric Services Under the Web 2.0 Era. Coproduction, Execution and Efficiency of Public Services

Co-Production of Digital Public Services in Austrian Public Administrations

“…Given that citizens and public administrators are seen as the main users, their capabilities must be developed (Lember 2017) so that valued outcomes such as efficiency, an increased availability of services and personalized services can be achieved through co-production (Breit and Salomon 2015). The experts interviewed for this study agreed that co-production can help support public administrations, and also show that public administrations are opening up and providing digital opportunities for input from the users, and different technologies and online platforms, social media, living labs tools or products are being used to support active citizen participation (Bolivar 2017(Bolivar , 2018Williamson 2014) and contribute to public value co-creation processes (Cordella et al 2018).…”

A new methodology to support smartness at the district level of metropolitan areas in emerging economies: The case of Santiago de Chile

“…In essence, this is achieved by looking at the designed set of smartness metrics, where the strategies and objectives can be modified as needed. This transparency should drastically improve citizen satisfaction as it is one of the main issues usually reported by opinion polls (Paskaleva et al, 2015;Rodríguez Bolívar, 2018).…”

“…Moreover, the promise of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to trigger substantial changes has also failed. In practice, it has been a simple adaptation of offline services but not a new mechanism to increase interaction, transparency of government actions and improvement of services requested by citizens (Paskaleva et al, 2015;Rodríguez Bolívar, 2018). Smart City frameworks do not include the exact feedback of all citizens in order to comprehensively align policies with social needs.…”

“…The smartness of a city includes a more equitable and inclusive social development (Dobbs et al, 2011). Nevertheless, many papers show that despite efforts and initiatives, urban policy actions have yet to achieve the expected results, as smartness is evaluated in an aggregated way, while metropolitan areas are very heterogeneous systems (Khan, 2018;Rodríguez Bolívar, 2018;USA, 1984). This paper stems from this gap and offers a methodology that urban governments in metropolitan areas can apply to the process in order to harness the value of their actions and improve their decisionmaking processes (Tran Thi Hoang et al, 2019).…”