Exploring the determinants of cross-boundary information sharing in the public sector: An e-Government case study in Taiwan

Abstract

This paper explores the complexity of cross-boundary information sharing in the public sector. In particular, determinants influencing interagency information sharing are investigated and discussed, and a case study of Taiwan e-Government is employed. Four perspectives, including technology, organization, legislation and policy, and environment, are used to conduct this exploratory inquiry. Legislation and policy is found to be the most influential factor among government agencies participating in information-sharing initiatives. Organizational factors are also found to be significant, but less so than legislation and policy. Technological factors are considered relatively more easily addressed when compared with legislation and policy and organizational factors. Finally, situational factors are also found to have respective impacts on interagency information sharing. In addition to factors that are discussed in the current literature, newly identified factors are illustrated to provide insights. Moreover, in order to better conceptualize how identified factors determine agencies’ intentions towards cross-boundary information sharing, theory of planned behaviour is used to form a theoretical discussion by integrating the identified factors of the study. Practical implications are also provided to address how cross-boundary information sharing among government agencies can be better achieved. Lastly, the conclusion outlines the contributions and limitations of this research and suggests future studies related to the current work.

Institutional and Actor-Oriented Factors Constraining Expert-Based Forest Information Exchange in Europe: A Policy Analysis from an Actor-Centred Institutionalist Approach

“…In the context of information exchange, researchers indicate the critical role that legislation and policy have on information exchange activities between actors [5,[8][9][10]. For example, actors adopt their own internal rules of procedure, codes of conduct, and data protection policies; they also establish inter-organisational agreements in order to govern the exchange of information.…”

“…All of these contain specific procedures and provisions for handling and requesting information, and requirements for interaction with other actors [25]. However, legislation and policies can also create barriers in information exchange, e.g., by prohibiting actors from sharing sensitive or privacy-related information [9,10]. Formal institutions can also constitute "structures of incentives" that increase or decrease the payoffs that are associated with given behavioural strategies [24] (p. 39).…”

“…In particular, researchers in the field indicate that actors possessing different cultures usually view and treat information differently. For example, owning information can be viewed and interpreted as an important source of power [10,27,35]. Accordingly, some actors have the belief that information sharing leads to a loss of power, social influence, valuable assets, and/or competitive advantages [10].…”

“…For example, owning information can be viewed and interpreted as an important source of power [10,27,35]. Accordingly, some actors have the belief that information sharing leads to a loss of power, social influence, valuable assets, and/or competitive advantages [10]. Also, actors with different organisational cultures can have competing interests; hence, there is less trust as to the use of shared information or the quality of received information [9,10,36,37].…”

“…Accordingly, some actors have the belief that information sharing leads to a loss of power, social influence, valuable assets, and/or competitive advantages [10]. Also, actors with different organisational cultures can have competing interests; hence, there is less trust as to the use of shared information or the quality of received information [9,10,36,37]. Thus, trust is considered an important attribute in organisational culture that has a strong influence on information exchange.…”