This paper presents evidence that -alongside the successes -many information systems in developing countries can be categorised as failing either totally or partially. It then develops a model which seeks to explain the high rates of failure. The model draws on contingency theory in order to advance the notion of design-actuality gaps: the match or mismatch between IS designs and local user actuality. This helps identify two high risk archetypes that affect IS in developing countries: country context gaps and 'hard-soft' gaps. The model is also of value in explaining the constraints that exist to local IS improvisations in developing countries. Overall, the paper shows how model and theory help understand IS cases in developing countries but, equally, how those cases provide valuable data to help develop IS models and theories.

In recent years, there has been rapid growth in the volume of research output on the topic of egovernment. To understand this research better, we used content analysis of 84 papers in egovernmentspecific research outlets (two journals and one conference series). Our analytical focus took in five main aspects: perspectives on the impacts of e government, research philosophy, use of theory, methodology and method, and practical recommendations. Normative evaluation identified some positive features, such as recognition of contextual factors beyond technology, and a diversity of referent domains and ideas. Alongside this, though, research draws mainly from a weak or confused positivism and is dominated by overoptimistic, atheoretical work that has done little to accumulate either knowledge or practical guidance for egovernment. Worse, there is a lack of clarity and lack of rigor about research methods alongside poor treatment of generalization. We suggest ways of strengthening egovernment research but also draw out some deeper issues, such as the role of research philosophy and theory, and the institutional factors -particularly pressures of competition and time -that may constrain development of egovernment as a research field.

The design-reality gap model can be used to address the problem of HIS failure, both as a post hoc evaluative tool and as a pre hoc risk assessment and mitigation tool. It also validates a set of methods, techniques, roles and competencies needed to support the dynamic improvisations that are found to underpin cases of HIS success.

We are moving to a new phase in ICT4Dthe application of information and communication technologies for international development. This new phase presents new opportunities for informatics professionals, and new markets for ICT vendors. It also brings new challenges to our established methods of working, and the need for new expertise and new worldviews. These must be understood if we are to harness digital technologies in the service of some of our world's most severe problems.

This editorial introduces the three papers in this Policy Arena on the contribution of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to development. Contribution in terms of technology diffusion and use - especially of mobile phones - is easy to detect. But focus has only recently shifted along the 'ICT-for-development value chain' from these indicators of ICT readiness and availability, to the question of development impact. In part, the absence or poor quality of ICT impact assessment to date derives from its lack of conceptual foundations. This editorial maps out the intellectual roots of the emerging sub-discipline of 'development informatics' to show where such foundations may come from. It also summarises the conceptualised contributions made by each of the Policy Arena papers. The papers draw on models of enterprise value chains, empowerment and Sen's capability theory to demonstrate ICTs' contribution to conceptions of development as economic growth, as sustainable livelihoods, and as freedom. Of course, not all ICT initiatives succeed, and the editorial provides a good practice summary drawn from experiences of success and failure. It moves beyond the perennial call for practitioners and policy makers to incorporate impact assessment as part of this good practice. First, by identifying the need to address motivational and structural issues around impact assessment. Second, by calling on policy makers to be more aware of the transformational potential of ICTs in development; so-called 'Development 2.0'. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.