Electronic Government services in Brazil: an analysis of impact factors on the citizen’s usage decision

VARGAS, LUIZ CLAUDIO MENDES; MACADAR, MARIE ANNE; WANKE, PETER FERNANDES; ANTUNES, JORGE JUNIO MOREIRA

doi:10.1590/1679-395120200206

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Paper • Cad. EBAPE.BR 19 (spe) • Nov 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395120200206 copy

Electronic Government services in Brazil: an analysis of impact factors on the citizen’s usage decision

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

This article focuses on factors that influence the use of electronic government services by citizens. The academic literature has promoted reflections on the influence of various factors and, therefore, this article aims to assess whether socio-demographic factors influence the Brazilian citizens’ decision to use Electronic Government services. This study adopted a quantitative methodological approach, using statistical tests and a logistic regression model, based on the microdata of the ICT Household 2019 survey, coordinated by the Regional Center of Studies for the Development of the Information Society (CETIC.br). The results indicate a significant influence of age, family income, activity condition, economic class, level of education, type of access device, and use of e-commerce services on the probability of using Electronic Government services by Brazilian citizens. The article contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that impact demand and aims to subsidize public managers’ discussions about these services’ implementation.

Keywords:
Electronic Government; ICT Household; Logistic Regression

	Rural/urban area
Use of e-gov services	Area = 0 (rural)	Area = 1 (urban)	Line total
G1_Agg = 0 (No)	462 48.8 %	3700 34.1 %	4162
G1_Agg = 1 (Yes)	484 51.2 %	7135 65.9 %	7619
Column total	946	10835	11781

Use of e-gov Services	Mean	Standard deviation	Median
G1_Agg = 0 (No)	43.38	16.54	43
G1_Agg = 1 (Yes)	36.13	14.40	33

	Actual observations
Values predicted by the model	G1_Agg = 0 (No)	G1_Agg = 1 (Yes)	Line total
Estimated result = 0 (No)	2196	1198	3394
Estimated result = 1 (Yes)	1966	6421	8387
Column total	4162	7619	11781

Indicators	Result
Accuracy	0.7314
F-score (F1)	0.8023
Recall	0.8428
Precision	0.7656

Fundação Getulio Vargas, Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas Rua Jornalista Orlando Dantas, 30 - sala 107, 22231-010 Rio de Janeiro/RJ Brasil, Tel.: (21) 3083-2731 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: cadernosebape@fgv.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Luiz Claudio Mendes Vargas - Doctoral student in Administration at COPPEAD from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). E-mail: luiz.vargas@coppead.ufrj.br

Authors	Attributes
Van Dijk et al. (2008Van Dijk, J. A. G. M., Peters, O., & Ebbers, W. (2008). Explaining the acceptance and use of government Internet services: A multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in the Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 379-399.)	Social influence, attitude toward use, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, choice of preferred channel, access to digital media, experience with digital media, offer of services, age, gender, level of education, and occupation.
Bélanger and Carter (2008Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), 165-176.)	Trust in the Internet and government.
Venkatesh et al. (2012Venkatesh, V., Chan, F. K. Y., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2012). Designing e-government services: Key service attributes and citizens’ preference structures. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1-2), 116-133.)	Usability, IT resources, technical support, and security.
Alomari (2014Alomari, M. K. (2014). Discovering Citizens Reaction Toward E-Government: Factors in E-Government Adoption. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 11(1), 5-20.)	Trust in the Internet, website design, religious belief, Internet and computer skills confidence, word of mouth, resistance to change, perceived usefulness, complexity, and adoption.
Shareef et al. (2014Shareef, M. A., Kumar, V., Kumar, U., & Dwivedi, Y. (2014). Factors affecting citizen adoption of transactional electronic government. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 27(4), 385-401.)	Awareness, availability of resources, skills for multi-language use, quality of information, trust, security, perceived benefits, and image.
Araujo and Reinhard (2015Araujo, M. H., & Reinhard, N. (2015). Factors influencing the use of electronic government services in Brazil. Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI). Proceedings - Series of the Gesellschaft fur Informatik (GI), 221(4), 140-149.)	Social class, Internet access location, use of e-commerce, e-financial services, and e-mail.
Santos and Reihard (2015Santos, E. M., & Reinhard, N. (2015). Serviços de Governo Eletrônico: um estudo sobre o uso por indivíduos no Brasil. In Proceedings of 25º International Conference on Information Resources Management, Ottawa, Ontario.)	Preference for personal contact, difficulty of access, security, unavailability of services, and no return on requests.
Moraes and Meirelles (2017Moraes, G. H. D. S. M., & Meirelles, F. S. (2017). User’s perspective of eletronic government adoption in Brazil. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 12(2), 1-10.)	Perceived benefits, facilitating conditions, usability, social influence, security, trust, and habit.
Araujo et al. (2018Araujo, M. H., Reinhard, N., & Cunha, M. A. (2018). Serviços de governo eletrônico no Brasil: uma análise a partir das medidas de acesso e competências de uso da internet. Revista de Administração Pública, 52(4), 676-694.)	Social class, Internet access location, and use of the network for study, work, relationships, and research.
Barrera-Barrera et al. (2019Barrera-Barrera, R., Rey-Moreno, M., & Medina-Molina, C. (2019). Explanatory factors of the preference and use of electronic administration in Spain. Journal of Public Administration, 53 (2), 349-374.)	Gender, age, educational level, marital status, work situation, and religion.