A framework for e‐government: privacy implications

Purpose The paper proposes a conceptual framework of the stages of electronic government that describes and integrates the unique relationship between the government and its varied constituents, and identifies and applies the global constraints that affect the implementation of e‐government at each stage. Design/methodology/approach Building on and expanding stages of e‐government suggested in prior literature, a framework is designed to recognize that the five stages of e‐government will have differing impacts when considering six different categories of constituents. In addition, the framework considers three global constraints superimposed on these stages and relationship; laws and regulations, technical feasibility, and user feasibility. The paper then provides an example of implementation of the framework by exploring the issue of privacy in electronic government. Findings The relationships mapped the stages of e‐government, affected by global motivators and constraints, are unique and complex. Policy and implementation of e‐government should take account of these complexities. Privacy in e‐government issues differs significantly when global motivators and constraints are viewed across the complex framework of government stages by constituency. Research limitations/implications The relationships between constituents and stages of e‐government, together with the global constraints, should be incorporated into the process of decision‐making when government is considering the movement from one stage of e‐government to another. The framework provides new lenses through which e‐government implementation can be studied by researchers. Practical implications The framework can be used to guide planning and decision‐making for electronic government and aid in the identification of issues unique to each stage and constituency. Originality/value The use of framework allows researchers and practitioners to identify issues that may not be highlighted in a general discussion of e‐government that does not take into account the complexities of the e‐government environment.