全球實施電子化政府迅速擴增。電子化政府被視為具有各種不同利害關係者的政府目標。諸多政府目標之中，以民為本的政府即是本研究重要的研究觀點。以民為本的政府強調於「落實公民第一」。考量電子化政府計畫投資IT的表現，在過去諸多研究顯示IT投資者不會直接提高IT性能，但卻需要策略性地轉換商業策略。研究顯示有三個假定因素會影響以民為本的政府績效成功：(1)已經轉化日常政府程序的電子化政府(被視為電子化政府的品質)；(2)開放資料；(3)公民參與。因此，本研究旨在確定公民參與、電子化政府品質以及對以民為本的政府之開放資料的影響。本研究線上與紙本問卷以台北市民為樣本共回收142份。研究方法以結構方程模型來分析變數間的路徑係數。最後，本研究顯示公民參與對以民為本的政府績效有顯著性的影響。開放資料也顯著性影響公民參與。因此，開放資料也間接性影響以民為本的政府績效。然而，電子化政府品質和以民為本的政府績效之間以及電子化品質和公民參與間並不具顯著影響。

The growth of e-government implementation around the world has been rapidly increasing. E-government is conceived as the enabler of various government objectives towards different stakeholders. Among many government objectives, one particular objective that becomes focus of this study is the purpose of being citizen-centric government. Citizen-centric government is the concept that stressed on ‘putting citizens first’. Considers e-government initiative as the manifestation of IT investment, there were plenty of prior research stated that IT investment could not directly improve performance, yet it need to strategically transformed within business proses. There are three presumed determinants that affect the success of citizen-centric government performance: 1) e-government that has been transformed within government daily process (represented as e-government quality); 2) open data; 3) citizens’ participation. Thus this study aims to identify the influence of citizens’ participation, e-government quality, and open data towards citizen-centric government performance. Online and offline survey using 142 sample of Taipei citizens were conducted. The Structured Equation Model was used to analyse the path coefficient between variables. Finally this study revealed the positive significant direct influence of citizens’ participation towards citizen-centric government performance. Open data also has significant relationship with citizens’ participation. Therefore open data also indirectly influences citizen-centric government performance through citizen-centric government performance. Unfortunately, the relationship between e-government quality and citizen-centric government performance as well as e-government quality and citizens’ participation are not significant.

A. T. Kearney. (2009). How to Become a Citizen-Centric Government. Chicago: A.T. Kearney.
Advisory Group in Reform of Australian Administration. (2010). Ahead of the Game: Blueprint for the Reform of Australian Government Administration. Canberra: Australian Governmnet.
Alshomrani, S. (2012). A Comparative Study on United Nations E-Government Indicators between Saudi Arabia and USA. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 3, 411-419.
Ambrose, R., Lenihan, D., & Milloy, J. (2006). What is Citizen-centred Federalism and Why Does it Matter? In R. Ambrose, D. Lenihan, & J. Milloy, Managing the Federation: A Citizen-Centred Approach (pp. 5-17). Ottawa: The Crossing Boundaries National Council.
Ammons, D. N. (2002). Performance Measurement and Managerial Thinking. Public Performance and Management Review, 25(4), 344-347.
Andersen, K., & Henriksen, Z. (2006). E-government Maturity Models: Extension of the Layne and Lee Model. Government Information Quarterly, 23, 236-248.
Andrews, M., & Shah, A. (2003). Citizen-Centered Governance: A New Approach to Public Sector Reform. In A. Shah, Bringing Civility in Governance: Handbook on Public Sector Performance Reviews (Vol. 3). Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Arslan, B., & Ozturan, M. (2011). The Path to Information Technology Business Value: Case of Turkey. Technology and Investment, 52-63.
Ask, A., & Grönlund, Å. (2008). Implementation Challenges: Competing Structures When New Public Management Meets eGovernment. Electronic Government (pp. 25-36). Turin: Springer.
Attard, J., Orlandi, F., Scerri, S., & Auer, S. (2015). A systematic review of open government data initiatives. Government Information Quarterly, 32, 399-418.
Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2015). The great theory hunt: Does e-government really have a problem? Government Information Quarterly, 32, 1-11.
Baumgarten, J., & Chui, M. (2009). E-government 2.0. Retrieved 2015, from McKinsey on Government: http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/public_sector/e-government_20
Bertelsmann Foundation. (2001). Balanced e-government – Connecting efficient administration and responsive democracy. Retrieved from http://en.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/index.html
Bogdanović-Dinić, S., Veljković, N., & Stoimenov, L. (2014). How Open Are Public Government Data?An Assessment of Seven Open Data Portals. In M. Rodríguez-Bolívar, Measuring E-government Efficiency (pp. 25-43). Granada: Springer.
Brynjolfsson, E. (1993). The Productivity Paradox of Information Technology: Review and Assessment. Communications of the ACM.
54
Capgemini. (2012a). Public services online 'digital by default or by detour?' Assessing user centric Egovernment performance in Europe. Final Background Report. DG Connect.
Carter, L. (2009). Digital Britain: final report. 7650.
Chen, Y., & Gant, J. (2001). Transforming local e-Government services: the use of application service providers. Government Information Quarterly, 343-355.
Chiu, N. K. (1997). Service Targets and Methods of Redress: The Impact of Accountability in Malaysia. Public Administration and Development, 17, 175-180.
Córdoba, J.-R. (2014). Systemic Patterns of Practice to Improve E-Government Evaluation. In M. P. Rodríguez-Bolívar, Measuring E-government Efficiency (pp. 10-12). New York: Springer.
Dans, E. (2001). IT Investment in Small and Medium Enterprises: Paradoxically Productive? Electronic Journal of IS Evaluation, 4(1).
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 3(8), 982-1003.
De', R. (2008). Control, De-politicization and the eState. Electronic Government (pp. 61-72). Turin: Springer.
Deloitte Research. (2004). At the dawn of e-government: the citizens as customer. New York: Deloitte Research Public Sector Institute.
DeLone, W., & McLean, E. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal ofManagement Information Systems, 9(4), 9-30.
Dendrick, J., & Kraemer, K. L. (2001). The Productivity Paradox: Is itResolved? Is there a New One? What Does It All Mean for Managers? I.T. in Business.
Dutil, P., Howard, C., Langford, J., & Roy, J. (2007). Rethinking Government-Public Relationships in a Digital World: Customers, Clients or Citizens? Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 4(1), 77-90.
Efficiency Unit. (2000). News, Information and Views on Public Sector Reform. Retrieved from Hong Kong Government: http://www.info.gov.hk/eu/psrhk/hist_con.htm
European Commission. (2003). The Role of eGovernment for Europe’s Future. Digest of Electronic Commerce Policy and Regulation, 26, 168-170.
European Commission. (2010). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A digital agenda for Europe COM. Brussels.
Evans, D., & Yen, D. (2006). E - Government: Evolving relationship of citizens and government, domestic, and international development. Government Information Quarterly(23), 207-235.
Fernández-i-Marín, X. (2011). The impact of e-government promotion in Europe: Internet dependence and critical mass. Policy and Internet, 4.
55
Garson, G. D., & Khosrow-Pour, M. (2008). Handbook of Research on Public Information Technology (Vol. 2). IGI Global.
Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Martinez-Moyano, I. J. (2005). Exploring E-Government Evolution: The Influence of Systems of Rules on Organizational Action. Springfield: National Center for Digital Government.
Government of India. (2009). Citizen Centric Administration (The Heart of Governance): Twelfth Report. New Delhi: Second Administrative Reforms Commision.
Graham, K. A., & Phillips, S. D. (1997). Citizen Engagement: Beyond the Customer Revolution. Canadian Public Administration, 40(2), 255-273.
Grant, R. M. (2001). The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implication for Strategy Formulation. California Management Review, 114-135.
Grimsley, M., & Meehan, A. (2007). e-Government Information Systems: Evaluation-led Design for Public Value and Client Trust. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(2), 134-148.
Gruen, N. (2009). Engage: Getting on with government 2.0 report of the government 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/gov20taskforcereport/
Guarneros-Meza, V., Downe, J., Entwistle, T., & Martin, S. (2012). Putting the Citizen at the Centre?Assembling Local Governmnet Policy in Wales. Local Governmnet Studies, 65-82.
Heeks, R. (2001). Understanding e-Governance for Development. i-Government Working Paper Series. Manchester, United Kingdom: Institute for Development Policy and Management.
Heeks, R. (2002). e-Government in Africa: promise and practice. Information Polity, 97-114.
Heeks, R., & Bailur, S. (2007). Analyzing e-governmnet research: Perspectivers, phlosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly, 24, 243-265.
Heungsun Hwang, H. (2004). Generalized Structured Component Analysis. Psychometrica.
Hoyle, R. (1995). Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Jansen, A. (2005). Assesing E-government prograss - why and what. Norsk konferanse for organisasjoners bruk av IT (pp. 255-268). Bergen: NOKOBIT.
Jayashree, S., & Marthandan, G. (2010). Government to E-government to E-society. Journal of Applied Sciences, 10, 2205-2210.
Kang, D.-S., Kwon, H. Y., & Ko, Y.-S. (2008). Case Study on the Effects of Administrative Informatization on the Organizational Structure for the Central Government in Korea. In M. A. Wimmer, H. J. Scholl, & E. Ferro (Ed.), Electronic Government (pp. 49-60). Turin: Springer.
Kardaras, D. K., & Papathanassiou, E. A. (2008). An Exploratory Study of E-Government Services in Greece. In G. Garson, & M. Khosrow-Pour, Handbook of Research on Public Information Technology (pp. 162-174). IGI Global.
56
Karunasena, K., & Deng, H. (2012). Critical factors for evaluating the public value of e-government in Sri Lanka. Govenment Information Quarterly, 76-84.
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2000). Introduction. In J. S. Nye, & J. Donahue, Governance in a Globalization World. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Kernaghan, K., & Berardi, J. (2001). Bricks, Clicks and Calls: Clustering Services for Citizen-Centred Delivery. Canadian Public Administration, 44, 417-440.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Gilford Press.
Laskaridis, G., Markellos, K., Markellou, P., & Panayiotaki, A. (2008). E-Government's Barriers and Opportunities in Greece. In G. Garson, & M. Khosrow-Pour, Handbook of Research on Public Information Technology (pp. 175-191). IGI Global.
Lee, S., Tan, X., & Trimi, S. (2005). Current Practices of Leading E-Government Countries. Communication of the ACM, 48(10), 99-104.
Martins, M. (1995). Size of municipalities, efficiency, and citizens participation: a cross-European perspective. Environment and Planning C: Govenment and Policy, 441-458.
MOGAHA. (2006). 2006 Annual Report for e-Government. Seoul: Korea - Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs.
Moussa, A., & Schware, R. (1992). Informatics in Africa. World Development, 1737-1752.
Oates, W. (1972). Fiscal Federalism. Harcourt Brace Javanovich.
Open Government Partnership. (2012). About. Retrieved from http://www.opengovpartnership.org/about
Palvia, S. C., & Sharma, S. S. (2007). e-Government and e-governance: definitions/domain framework and status around the world. In V. A. Agarwal, & V. Ramana (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on e-Governance (ICEG), (pp. 1-12).
Peters, B. (1996). The Future of Governing: Four Emerging Models. Kansas: University Press of Kansas.
Reddick, C. G. (2007). E-Government and Creating a Citizen-Centric Government. In D. G. Garson, Modern Public Information Technology Systems: Issues and Challanges (pp. 114-135). Chapel Hill: IGI Global.
Rodríguez-Bolívar, M. P. (2004). The Need for Analyzing e-Government Efficiency: An Introduction. In M. P. Rodríguez-Bolívar, Measuring E - government Efficiency (pp. 1-7). New York: Springer.
Rowley, J. (2011). e-Government stakeholders-Who are they and what do they want? International Journal of Information Management, 31, 53-62.
Savoldelli, A., Codagnone, C., & Misuraca, G. (2014). Understanding the e-government paradox: Learning from literature and practice on barriers to adoption. Government Information Quarterly, S63-S67.
57
Seifert, J. W., & Chung, J. (2009). Using E-Governmnet to Reinforce Governmnet-Citizen Relationship. Social Science Computer Review, 27, 3-23.
Sideridis, G., Simos, P., Papanicolaou, A., & Fletcher, J. (2014). Using Structural Equation Modeling to Assess Functional Connectivity in the Brain Power and Sample Size Considerations. Educational and Psychological Measurement.
Solimun. (2012). Pemodelan Struktural Generalized Structured Component Analysis GSCA. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.
Solow, R. M. (1987). We'd Better Watch Out . New York: New York Times.
Strassman, P. (1990). The Business Value of Computers: An Executive's Guide. New Casnan, CT: Information Economics Press.
Subriadi, A. P. (2013). Information Technology Productivity Paradox: A Resource-Based View And Information Technology Strategic Alignment Perspective For Measuring Information Technology Contribution nn Performance. Journal of Theoritical and Applied Information Technology, 541-552.
Sung, N. (2007). Information technology, efficiency and productivity: evidence from Korean local government. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 1691-1703.
Sung, Y.-H., & Yeh, S.-C. (2010). Next Generation e-Government in Taiwan. The Innovative CIO and e-Participation Initiatives, 67-72.
Task Force on the Public Service. (2008). Transforming Public Services: Citizen-Centred-Performance Focused.
TEG. (2014). Retrieved 2015, from Taiwan E-Governance Research Center: http://www.teg.org.tw/web_zh/index.do
The World Bank. (2011). Introduction to e-Government. Retrieved 2015, from The World Bank: http://go.worldbank.org/JIXKPRB690
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). (2001a). The President'a management agenda-FY2002. Washington, DC.
United Nations. (2003). UN Global E-government Survey 2003. United Nations.
United Nations. (2014). United Nations E-Government Survey. New York: United Nations.
United Nations Development Programme. (2001). Making new technologies work for human development. New York: Oxford University Press.
Veljković, N., Bogdanović-Dinić, S., & Stoimenov, L. (2014). Benchmarking open government: An open data perspective. Government Information Quarterly, 31, 278-290.
Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: Research guidelines for different theory building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 16, 361-385.
Watt, J. H., & Berg, S. A. (2002). Research methods for communication science. Albany: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Welsh Assembly Government. (2010). Report on the Citizen-Centred Governance Review of the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales.
58
West, S., Finch, J., & Curran, P. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle, Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 56-75). Newbery Park, CA: Sage.
White House. (2009). Momorandum on transparency and open government. Washington, DC: White House.
Wimmer, M. (2002). A European Perspective towards Online One-Stop Government: the eGov Projects. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 1(1), 92-103.
Wolf, E., Harrington, K., Clark, S., & Miller, M. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models an evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(6), 913-934