The digital government research community has developed several publication channels, including journals and conference series to evaluate, refine, and present the outcomes of its work to fellow researchers and the world. Developing and sustaining such channels requires institutional backing with sufficient financial, organizational, and communication capacity. Existing publication channels implement diverse institutional arrangements from commercial publishers and universities to international and non-profit organizations. However, besides institutional support, a key role in operating such channels are journal editors-in-chief and conference program chairs, who link the channels to the research community that supplies them with steady streams of research, and ensure that the channels maintain their relevance to the changing digital government field, ensure the quality of accepted publications, and contribute to the advancement of the field. This paper examines the evolving landscape of publication channels for digital government research, institutional arrangements for developing and sustaining such channels, and the role of the guardians of such channels – editors-in-chief and program chairs. The paper provides the context for a discussion among such guardians on the insights for publishing digital government research.

Governments struggle to harness emerging technologies to improve public services, address social needs, and produce public value. In response, we see a rise in GovTech startups and other non-government actors trying to bring innovative solutions to governments. While some public agencies welcome such help, many are reluctant to rely on external organizations to provide digital identities, data wallets and AI-based services to citizens, businesses, and the government itself. Many also fear engaging a dynamic ecosystem of small non-government actors working together and gaining more experience in the process. Consequently, the GovTech supply and demand are misaligned with each other and the public value imperative. Public tendering may help but does not protect against vendor lock-in and innovation-blocking. Co-creation of public and private solutions may be technically possible but may face institutional void, calling for trust frameworks, steward-ownership, ecosystem building or other alternative instruments. This paper presents a research challenge to examine GovTech evidence, learn about applicable theories, methods and knowledge gaps, and formulate theoretically and empirically well-grounded recommendations on GovTech and public value creation. It also outlines the response to the challenge: organizing a dg.o 2024 workshop and developing a special issue of Government Information Quarterly (GIQ).

Under pressure to fight corruption, hold public officials accountable, and build trust with citizens, many governments pursue the quest for greater transparency. They publish data about their internal operations, externalize decision-making processes, establish digital inquiry lines to public officials, and employ other forms of transparency using digital means. Despite the presence of many transparency-enhancing digital tools, putting such tools together to achieve the desired level of digital transparency, to design entire government systems for digital transparency, remains challenging. Design principles and other design guides are lacking in this area. This article aims to fill this gap. We identify a set of barriers to digital transparency in government, define 16 design principles to overcome such barriers, and evaluate these principles using three case studies from different countries. Some principles apply to projects, others to systems, yet others to entire organizations. To achieve digital transparency, before building and deploying digital solutions, government organizations should build technological and institutional foundations and use such foundations to organize themselves for transparency. The proposed design principles can help develop and apply such foundations.

The rise of Big, Open and Linked Data (BOLD) enables Big Data Algorithmic Systems (BDAS) which are often based on machine learning, neural networks and other forms of Artificial Intelligence (AI). As such systems are increasingly requested to make decisions that are consequential to individuals, communities and society at large, their failures cannot be tolerated, and they are subject to stringent regulatory and ethical requirements. However, they all rely on data which is not only big, open and linked but varied, dynamic and streamed at high speeds in real-time. Managing such data is challenging. To overcome such challenges and utilize opportunities for BDAS, organizations are increasingly developing advanced data governance capabilities. This paper reviews challenges and approaches to data governance for such systems, and proposes a framework for data governance for trustworthy BDAS. The framework promotes the stewardship of data, processes and algorithms, the controlled opening of data and algorithms to enable external scrutiny, trusted information sharing within and between organizations, risk-based governance, system-level controls, and data control through shared ownership and self-sovereign identities. The framework is based on 13 design principles and is proposed incrementally, for a single organization and multiple networked organizations.

This workshop of the CAP4CITY (Erasmus+ Strengthening Governance Capacity for Smart Sustainable Cities) project is to promote and stimulate the discussion and networking in the area of Digital Government. Smart Sustainable Cities and related concepts of Digital, Intelligent and Smart Cities represent a progression of how cities around the world apply digital technology to serve their populations, pursue sustainable socioeconomic development, and transform themselves in the process, and require strong capacity for public governance in the digital world. In order to identify the gaps concerning missing knowledge and training needs in this area we propose to validate a Smart Sustainable Cities roadmap through a scenario-building approach.