[
Adeoye-Olatunde, O. A., & Olenik, N. L. (2021). Research and Scholarly Methods: Semi-structured Interviews. JACCP Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy, 4(10), 1358–1367. https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1441
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alsaawi, A. (2014). A Critical Review of Qualitative Interviews. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 3(4), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2819536
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Alzahrani, L., Al-Karaghouli, W., & Weerakkody, V. (2017). Analysing the critical factors influencing trust in e-government adoption from citizens’ perspective: A systematic review and a conceptual framework. International Business Review, 26(1), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.06.004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Androniceanu, A., & Georgescu, I. (2021). E-Government in European Countries, A comparative approach using the principal components analysis. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 14(2), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2021-0015
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ashik, F. R., Mim, S. A., & Neema, M. N. (2020). Towards vertical spatial equity of urban facilities: An integration of spatial and aspatial accessibility. Journal of Urban Management, 9(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2019.11.004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Asio, J. M. R., Gadia, E., Abarintos, E., Paguio, D., & Bake, M. (2021). Internet Connection and learning device availability of college students: Basis for Institutionalizing flexible learning in the new Normal. Studies in Humanities and Education, 2(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.48185/she.v2il.224
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bekele, W. B., & Ago, F. Y. (2020). Good governance practices and challenges in local government of Ethiopia: the case of Bonga Town Administration. Research in Educational Policy and Management, 2(2), 97–128. https://doi.org/10.46303/repam.2020.6
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2008). Trust and risk in e-government adoption. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2007.12.002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (201). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Clifton, J., Fuentes, D. D., & García, G. L. (2019). ICT-enabled co-production of public services: Barriers and enablers. A systematic review. Information Polity, 25(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-190122
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cordella, A., & Bonina, C. M. (2012). A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: A theoretical reflection. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 512–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.03.004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Debeljak, A., & Dečman, M. (2022). Digital transformation of Slovenian urban municipalities: A quantitative report on the impact of municipality population size on digital maturity. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 15(2), 25–51. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2022-0012
]Search in Google Scholar
[
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., Shafer, S., & Neckerman, K. (2004). From Unequal Access to Differentiated Use: A Literature Review and Agenda for Research on Digital Inequality. In Social inequality (pp. 355–400). Russell Sage Foundation.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Distel, B. (2020). Assessing citizens’ non-adoption of public e-services in Germany. Information Polity, 25(3), 339–360. https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-190214
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dobrolyubova, E. (2021). Measuring Outcomes of Digital Transformation in Public Administration: literature review and possible steps forward. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 14(1), 61–86. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2021-0003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ebbers, W. E., Jansen, M. G., & Van Deursen, A. J. (2016). Impact of the digital divide on e-government: Expanding from channel choice to channel usage. Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 685-692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.08.007
]Search in Google Scholar
[
European Commission. (2024). Digital Decade 2024: eGovernment Benchmark, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/digital-decade-2024-egovernment-benchmark
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Eurostat. (2024). E-government activities of individuals via websites. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/isoc_ciegi_ac/default/table?lang=en&category=isoc.isoc_i.isoc_ci_egi
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Eynon, R., & Helsper, E. (2010). Adults learning online: Digital choice and/or digital exclusion? New Media & Society, 13(4), 534–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810374789
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Faisal, M., Al-Qouz, EE, & and Husain, F. (2016). A direct method for measuring user experience in E-government portals (May 2016), 2016 15th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), Istanbul, Turkey, 2016, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET.2016.7760706
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E., & Chadwick, B. (2008). Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. BDJ, 204(6), 291–295. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2008.192
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hargittai, E., Piper, A. M., & Morris, M. R. (2019). From internet access to internet skills: digital inequality among older adults. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18(4), 881–890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0617-5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hassan, H., Shehab, E., & Peppard, J. (2011). Recent advances in e-service in the public sector: state-of-the-art and future trends. Business Process Management Journal, 17(3), 526–545. https://doi.org/10.1108/14637151111136405
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Haynes, A., & Loblay, V. (2024). Rethinking Barriers and Enablers in Qualitative Health Research: Limitations, Alternatives, and enhancements. Qualitative Health Research, 34(14), 1371–1383. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241230890
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Helsper, E. (2021). The Digital Disconnect: The social causes and consequences of digital inequalities, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526492982
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Helsper, E. J. (2012). A corresponding fields model for the links between social and digital exclusion. Communication Theory, 22(4), 403–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01416.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Helsper, E. J., & Van Deursen, A. J. a. M. (2016). Do the rich get digitally richer? Quantity and quality of support for digital engagement. Information Communication & Society, 20(5), 700–714. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2016.1203454
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hernandez, K., & Faith, B. (2023). Online but still falling behind: measuring barriers to internet use ‘after access.’ Internet Policy Review, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.14763/2023.2.1713
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jackson, E. A. (2020). Importance of the public service in achieving the UN SDGS. In Encyclopedia of the UN sustainable development goals (pp. 551-561). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95867-5_20
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Keyworth, C., Alzahrani, A., Pointon, L., Hinsby, K., Wainwright, N., Moores, L., Bates, J., & Johnson, J. (2022). Barriers and Enablers to Accessing Support Services Offered by Staff Wellbeing Hubs: A Qualitative Study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1008913
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kitsing, M. (2017). Internet Banking as a Platform for E-Government. Annual International Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (IE 2017), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.5176/2251-2039_ie17.30
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kozel, E., & Dečman, M. (2022). The Impact of Trust in Government - Young Voters’ Behavioral Intention to Use i-voting in Slovenia. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 15(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2022-0004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kumar, R., Sachan, A., Mukherjee, A., & Kumar, R. (2018). Factors Influencing E- Government Adoption in India: A Qualitative Approach. Digital Policy Regulation and Governance, 20(5), 413–433. https://doi.org/10.1108/dprg-02-2018-0007
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lajante, M., Del Prete, M., Sasseville, B., Rouleau, G., Gagnon, M., & Pelletier, N. (2023). Empathy Training for Service Employees: A Mixed-methods Systematic Review. PLoS ONE, 18(8), e0289793. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289793
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lee, Y. (2021). Government for Leaving No One Behind: Social Equity in Public Administration and Trust in Government. SAGE Open, 11(3), 215824402110292. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211029227
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Levesque, J., Harris, M. F., & Russell, G. (2013). Patient-centred Access to Health Care: Conceptualising Access at the Interface of Health Systems and Populations. International Journal for Equity in Health, 12(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-12-18
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lindgren, L, Madsen, C. Ø., Hofmann, S., & Melin, U. (2019). Close Encounters of the Digital Kind: A Research Agenda for the Digitalization of Public Services. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 427–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.03.002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lo Storto, C. (2016). The Trade-off Between Cost Efficiency and Public Service Quality: A Non-parametric Frontier Analysis of Italian Major Municipalities. Cities, 51,52–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/jxities.2015.11.028
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Logan, T. M., & Guikema, S. D. (2020). Reframing Resilience: Equitable Access to Essential Services. Risk Analysis, 40(8), 1538–1553. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13492
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McKown, S., Acquadro, C., Anfray, C., Arnold, B., Eremenco, S., Giroudet, C., Martin, M., & Weiss, D. (2020). Good Practices for the Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Linguistic Validation of Clinician-Reported Outcome, Observer-Reported Outcome, and Performance Outcome Measures. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00248-z
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mergel, L, Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining Digital Transformation: Results from Expert Interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Moore, M. H. (1997). Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Moore, M. H. (2019). Reflections on the Public Value Project. In Routledge eBooks (pp. 351–371). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315163437-24
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical Analysis of Strategies for Determining Rigor in Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mubarak, F., Suomi, R., & Kantola, S. (2020). Confirming the Links Between Socio-Economic Variables and Digitalization Worldwide: The Unsettled Debate on Digital Divide. Journal of Information Communication and Ethics in Society, 18(3), 415–430. https://doi.org/10.1108/jices-02-2019-0021
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nikiforova, A., & McBride, K. (2021). Open Government Data Portal Usability: A User- Centred Usability Analysis of 41 Open Government Data Portals. Telematics and Informatics, 58, 101539. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.tele.2020.101539
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Oliver, M. (2013). The Social Model of Disability: Thirty Years on. Disability & Society, 28(7), 1024–1026. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Park, S., & Humphry, J. (2019). Exclusion by Design: Intersections of Social, Digital and Data Exclusion. Information Communication & Society, 22(7), 934–953. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2019.1606266
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Penchansky, R., & Thomas, J. W. (1981). The Concept of Access. Medical Care, 19(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198102000-00001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Peters, K., & Halcomb, E. (2015). Interviews in Qualitative Research. Nurse Researcher, 22(4), 6–7. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.22.4.6.s2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ragnedda, M. (2020). Connecting the Digital Underclass. In Springer eBooks (pp. 85–104). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49079-9_5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ragnedda, M., Ruiu, M. L., & Addeo, F. (2022). The Self-reinforcing Effect of Digital and Social Exclusion: The InequalityLoop. Telematics and Informatics, 72, 101852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101852
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ramesh, R. (2020). How Equal is Access to Public Services? The Impact of Sociodemographic Background on Public Service Delivery in Sri Lanka. Journal of Developing Societies, 37(1), 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0169796x20970882
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Plata, J. A. R., & Pérez, M. C. G. (2019). Access to Basic Services: From Public Benefit Practice to a Sustainable Development Approach. In Encyclopedia of the UN sustainable development goals (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71061-7_80-l
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ribot, J. C., & Peluso, N. L. (2003). A Theory of Access. Rural Sociology, 68(2), 153–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831,2003.tb00133.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., Schulz, J., Hale, T. M., & Stern, M. ). (2015). Digital Inequalities and Why They Matter. Information Communication & Society, 18(5), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2015.1012532
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Salemink, K., Strijker, D., & Bosworth, G. (2015). Rural Development in the Digital Age: A Systematic Literature Review on Unequal ICT Availability, Adoption, and Use in Rural Areas. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 360-371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.09.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in Qualitative Research: Exploring its Conceptualization and Operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saunders, M. R., Lee, H., Maene, C., Schuble, T., & Cagney, K. A. (2014). Proximity Does not Equal Access: Racial Disparities in Access to High Quality Dialysis Facilities. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 1(4), 291-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-014-0036-0
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saurman, E. (2016). Improving Access: Modifying Penchansky and Thomas’s Theory of Access. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 21(1), 36–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819615600001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Small, M. L., & Cook,). M. (2021). Using Interviews to Understand Why: Challenges and Strategies in the Study of Motivated Action. Sociological Methods & Research, 52(4), 1591-1631. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124121995552
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Smith, J. A. (2016). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Getting at lived experience. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 303-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262622
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Swain, J. (2018). A Hybrid Approach to Thematic Analysis in Qualitative Research: Using a Practical Example. In SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435477
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Taipale, S. (2013). The Use of E-Government Services and the Internet: The Role of Aocio-demographic, Economic and Geographical Predictors. Telecommunications Policy, 37(4-5), 413–422. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.telpol.2012.05.005
]Search in Google Scholar
[
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. (No. 42809, 1–13). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3923923?v=pdf
]Search in Google Scholar
[
United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework. (2019). United Nations Sustainable Development Group, https://unsdg.un.org/resources/united-nations-sustainable-development-cooperation-framework-guidance
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations General Assembly. (1948). https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van De Walle, S., Zeibote, Z., Stacenko, S., Muravska, T., & Migchelbrink, K. (2018). Explaining Non-adoption of Electronic Government Services by Citizens: A Study among Non-users of Public e-Services in Latvia. Information Polity, 23(4), 399–409. https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-170069
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Deursen, A. J., & Van Dijk, J. A. (2013). The Digital Divide Shifts to Differences in Usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Deursen, A., Helsper, E., Eynon, R., & Van Dijk, J. (2017). The Compoundness and Sequentiality of Digital Inequality. International Journal of Communication, 11, 452–473.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Dijk, J. (2005). The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452229812
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Dijk, J. (2020). The Digital Divide.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017). Digital Divide: Impact of Access. The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0043
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Dijk, J., & Hacker, K. (2003). The Digital Divide as a Complex and Dynamic Phenomenon. The Information Society, 19(4), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240309487
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Van Winkle, B., Carpenter, N., & Moscucci, M. (2017). Why Aren’t Our Digital Solutions Working for Everyone? The AMA Journal of Ethic, 19(11), 1116–1124. https://doi.org/10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.11.stas2-1711
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Warren, M. (2007). The Digital Vicious Cycle: Links Between Social Disadvantage and Digital Exclusion in Rural Areas. Telecommunications Policy, 31(6–7), 374–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2007.04.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wei, Z., & Mukherjee, S. (2024). An Integrated Approach to Analyze Equitable Access to Food Stores under Disasters from Human Mobility Patterns. Risk Analysis, 45(2), 342–355. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.16873
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wiewiora, A., Keast, R., & Brown, K. (2015). Opportunities and Challenges in Engaging Citizens in the Co-Production of Infrastructure-Based Public Services in Australia. Public Management Review, 18(4), 483–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.999820
]Search in Google Scholar
