Public-Sector Digital Transformation and Administrative Burden

Authors

  • Logan Henderson Author

Keywords:

digital government, administrative burden, public services, inclusion, public value

Abstract

This review examines public-sector digital transformation and administrative burden. The organizing question is when digital services reduce time and friction rather than transfer work and exclusion risk to citizens. Ten related scholarly sources are synthesized through a decision-centered framework spanning problem definition, mechanism, measurement, evaluation, implementation, and governance. The review does not invent experiments, pooled estimates, or unreported quantitative results. It instead evaluates the strength and transferability of the available evidence, with particular attention to using online uptake as the sole measure of public value. The resulting framework links technical or empirical performance to explicit use conditions and identifies tests that should precede wider adoption in government service design and public administration.

References

  1. Alshallaqi, M., & Al-Mamary, Y. H. (2024). Paradoxical digital inclusion: The mixed blessing of street-level intermediaries in reducing administrative burden. Government Information Quarterly, 41(1), 101913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.101913
  2. Brown, A., Fishenden, J., Thompson, M., & Venters, W. (2017). Appraising the impact and role of platform models and Government as a Platform (GaaP) in UK Government public service reform: Towards a Platform Assessment Framework (PAF). Government Information Quarterly, 34(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.03.003
  3. Cordella, A., & Tempini, N. (2015). E-government and organizational change: Reappraising the role of ICT and bureaucracy in public service delivery. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 279-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.03.005
  4. Giest, S., & Samuels, A. (2022). Administrative burden in digital public service delivery: The social infrastructure of library programs for e‐inclusion. Review of Policy Research, 40(5), 626-645. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12516
  5. Madsen, C. Ø., Lindgren, I., & Melin, U. (2021). The accidental caseworker – How digital self-service influences citizens' administrative burden. Government Information Quarterly, 39(1), 101653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101653
  6. Mergel, I. (2019). Digital service teams in government. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.07.001
  7. Reissig, L., Stoinescu, A., & Mack, G. (2022). Why farmers perceive the use of e-government services as an administrative burden: A conceptual framework on influencing factors. Journal of Rural Studies, 89, 387-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.01.002
  8. Shen, Y., Cheng, Y. D., & Yu, J. (2022). From recovery resilience to transformative resilience: How digital platforms reshape public service provision during and post COVID-19. Public Management Review, 25(4), 710-733. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2033052
  9. Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of E-Government – A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001
  10. Wang, Q., Su, M., Zhang, M., & Li, R. (2021). Integrating Digital Technologies and Public Health to Fight Covid-19 Pandemic: Key Technologies, Applications, Challenges and Outlook of Digital Healthcare. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(11), 6053. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18116053

Downloads

Published

2026-08-08

Issue

Vol. 1 (2026): Archive

Section

Review

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Enterprise, Policy and Economic Dynamics

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.