skip to main content
10.1145/3326365.3326370acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Study of E-governance and online donors for achieving financial resilience post natural disasters

Published: 03 April 2019 Publication History

Abstract

The world is witnessing an increasing number of natural disasters. Technology has helped to combat major aspects of the same while economic and financial losses of the victims are largely unavoidable. Disaster recovery involves collaborative role of governance, technology and financial aid. The present study aims to study the behavioural aspect of financial donors who offer monetary help for financial resilience of the victims. The study uses Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and extends it by measuring the effect of "voluntariness" in understanding the behaviour. The paper studies the floods in Kerala, India, and aims to understand how online financial donors helped in e-governance and rebuilding the State. The study collects primary data of 308 financial donors and tests it against eight hypotheses. The results show that while voluntariness acts as a mediating variable for performance expectancy and its relationship with behavioural intention, it has insignificant effect on effort expectancy. The study found four out of eight hypotheses were giving significant results. The results also confirm that e-governance portals and voluntariness activities were much higher in Kerala than any other state in the country. An important conclusion was that both societal influence and facilitating conditions played a significant role in inclining the financial donors to contribute using e-governance portals. The results could be inspiration to studies in areas where there are recurring disasters. The study also offers both practical and theoretical insights to the field of e-governance and financial resilience. Study can further be extended to geographical areas with recurring disasters to test the consistency of results.

References

[1]
Abramson, D. M., Grattan, L. M., Mayer, B., Colten, C. E., Arosemena, F. A., Bedimo-Rung, A., & Lichtveld, M. (2015). The resilience activation framework: a conceptual model of how access to social resources promotes adaptation and rapid recovery in post-disaster settings. The journal of behavioral health services & research, 42(1), 42--57.
[2]
Aldrich, D. P. (2012). Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery. University of Chicago Press.
[3]
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological bulletin, 103(3), 411.
[4]
Arouri, M., Nguyen, C., & Youssef, A. B. (2015). Natural disasters, household welfare, and resilience: evidence from rural Vietnam. World development, 70, 59--77.
[5]
Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative science quarterly, 421--458.
[6]
Bailey, A., Minto-Coy, I., & Thakur, D. (2017). IT Governance in E-Government Implementations in the Caribbean: Key Characteristics and Mechanisms. In Information Technology Governance in Public Organizations (pp. 201--227). Springer, Cham.
[7]
Baker, S. M. (2009). Vulnerability and resilience in natural disasters: A marketing and public policy perspective. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 28(1), 114--123.
[8]
Bakkour, D., Enjolras, G., Thouret, J. C., Kast, R., Mei, E. T. W., & Prihatminingtyas, B. (2015). The adaptive governance of natural disaster systems: Insights from the 2010 mount Merapi eruption in Indonesia. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 13, 167--188.
[9]
Behl, A., & Dutta, P. (2018). Humanitarian supply chain management: a thematic literature review and future directions of research. Annals of Operations Research, 1--44.
[10]
Benson, C., & Clay, E. (2004). Understanding the economic and financial impacts of natural disasters. The World Bank.
[11]
Bentler, P. M., & Mooijaart, A. B. (1989). Choice of structural model via parsimony: A rationale based on precision. Psychological bulletin, 106(2), 315.
[12]
Bettin, G., & Zazzaro, A. (2018). The impact of natural disasters on remittances to low-and middle-income countries. The Journal of Development Studies, 54(3), 481--500.
[13]
Burkart, C., Besiou, M., & Wakolbinger, T. (2016). The funding-Humanitarian supply chain interface. Surveys in Operations Research and Management Science, 21(2), 31--45.
[14]
Chandramauli, C. (2011). Census of India 2011: provisional population totals paper 1 of 2011 India Series 1, Chapter 6. New Delhi, India: Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner.
[15]
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295--336.
[16]
Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. Statistical strategies for small sample research, 1(1), 307--341.
[17]
Chu, E. (2016). The political economy of urban climate adaptation and development planning in Surat, India. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(2), 281--298.
[18]
Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of marketing research, 64--73.
[19]
Cortés, K. R., & Strahan, P. E. (2017). Tracing out capital flows: How financially integrated banks respond to natural disasters. Journal of Financial Economics, 125(1), 182--199.
[20]
Cretney, R. M. (2016). Local responses to disaster: The value of community led post disaster response action in a resilience framework. Disaster Prevention and Management, 25(1), 27--40.
[21]
Dwivedi, Y. K., Shareef, M. A., Mukerji, B., Rana, N. P., & Kapoor, K. K. (2017). Involvement in emergency supply chain for disaster management: a cognitive dissonance perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 1--16.
[22]
Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. University of Akron Press.
[23]
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 382--388.
[24]
Ghosh Roy, S., & Upadhyay, P. (2017). Does e-readiness of citizens ensure better adoption of government's digital initiatives? A case based study. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 30(1), 65--81.
[25]
Gupta, K. P., Bhaskar, P., & Singh, S. (2017). Prioritization of factors influencing employee adoption of e-government using the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 19(1/2), 116--137.
[26]
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 6).
[27]
Ibrahim, R., Hilles, S. M., Adam, S. M., & El-Ebiary, Y. (2017). Electronic government Services Usage, Adoption and Evaluation: A Review Paper. International Journal on Contemporary Computer Research (IJCCR), 1(1), 6--13.
[28]
Iyer, J., & Srivastava, R. K. (2018). Exploring the Factors associated with Employees' Intention to Use e-Government services in India. Journal of Applied Business & Economics, 20(5).
[29]
Iyer, L. S., & Rao, R. S. (2017). E-governance diffusion in the telecenters of Karnataka-a gender analysis. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 24(4), 452--468
[30]
John, L., Ramesh, A., & Sridharan, R. (2012). Humanitarian supply chain management: a critical review. International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 13(4), 498--524.
[31]
Jones, S., Irani, Z., Sivarajah, U., & Love, P. E. (2017). Risks and rewards of cloud computing in the UK public sector: A reflection on three Organisational case studies. Information Systems Frontiers, 1--24.
[32]
Kabra, G., & Ramesh, A. (2015). An empirical investigation of the enablers in humanitarian supply chain management in India: a case study. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 12(1), 30--42.
[33]
Kabra, G., & Ramesh, A. (2016). Information technology, mutual trust, flexibility, agility, adaptability: Understanding their linkages and impact on humanitarian supply chain management performance. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 7(2), 79--103.
[34]
Kabra, G., Ramesh, A., Akhtar, P., & Dash, M. K. (2017). Understanding behavioural intention to use information technology: Insights from humanitarian practitioners. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1250--1261.
[35]
Kim, H., & Marcouiller, D. W. (2016). Natural disaster response, community resilience, and economic capacity: A case study of coastal Florida. Society & Natural Resources, 29(8), 981--997.
[36]
Lowry, P. B., & Gaskin, J. (2014). Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE transactions on professional communication, 57(2), 123--146.
[37]
Mansoori, K. A. A., Sarabdeen, J., & Tchantchane, A. L. (2018). Investigating Emirati citizens' adoption of e-government services in Abu Dhabi using modified UTAUT model. Information Technology & People, 31(2), 455--481.
[38]
Mondlane, A., Hasson, K., & Popov, O. (2015). E-Governance and Natural Hazards in Mozambique: A Challenge for Backasting Method Used for Flood Risk Management Strategies. In Emerging Issues and Prospects in African E-Government (pp. 253--268). IGI Global.
[39]
Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American journal of community psychology, 41(1-2), 127--150.
[40]
Paton, D., & Johnston, D. (2017). Disaster resilience: an integrated approach. Charles C Thomas Publisher.
[41]
Pelling, M. (2012). The vulnerability of cities: natural disasters and social resilience. Routledge.
[42]
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of management, 12(4), 531--544.
[43]
Rahman, O., Wong, K. K. K., & Yu, H. (2016). The effects of mall personality and fashion orientation on shopping value and mall patronage intension. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 28, 155--164.
[44]
Sarker, M. N. I., Wu, M., Liu, R., & Ma, C. (2018, August). Challenges and Opportunities for Information Resource Management for E-Governance in Bangladesh. In International Conference on Management Science and Engineering Management (pp. 675--688). Springer, Cham.
[45]
Singh, H., Kar, A. K., & Ilavarasan, P. V. (2017a). Assessment of e-governance projects: an integrated framework and its validation. In Proceedings of the Special Collection on eGovernment Innovations in India (pp. 124--133). ACM.
[46]
Sinha, A., Kumar, P., Rana, N. P., Islam, R., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2017b). Impact of internet of things (IoT) in disaster management: a task-technology fit perspective. Annals of Operations Research, 1--36.
[47]
Siswanto, T., Shofiati, R., & Hartini, H. (2018, January). Acceptance and Utilization of Technology (UTAUT) as a Method of Technology Acceptance Model of Mitigation Disaster Website. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 106, No. 1, p. 012011). IOP Publishing.
[48]
Sivathanu, B. (2018). An Empirical Study of Cloud-Based E-Governance Services Adoption in India. International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 14(1), 86--107.
[49]
Soni, V., Dey, P. K., Anand, R., Malhotra, C., & Banwet, D. K. (2017). Digitizing grey portions of e-governance. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 11(3), 419--455.
[50]
Tapia, A. H., Maldonado, E., Ngamassi Tchouakeu, L. M., & Maitland, C. F. (2012). Coordinating humanitarian information: The problem of organizational and technical trajectories. Information Technology & People, 25(3), 240--258.
[51]
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425--478.
[52]
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 157--178.
[53]
Verma, K. K., Shrivastava, N., Patel, A. K., & Pandey, A. (2017, April). Status of E-governance and E-service in India. In Convergence in Technology (I2CT), 2017 2nd International Conference for (pp. 1099--1103). IEEE.
[54]
Walker, J., & Cooper, M. (2011). Genealogies of resilience: From systems ecology to the political economy of crisis adaptation. Security dialogue, 42(2), 143--160.
[55]
Williams, M. D., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(3), 443--488.
[56]
Wamba, S. F., Gunasekaran, A., Akter, S., Ren, S. J. F., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2017). Big data analytics and firm performance: Effects of dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 70, 356--365.
[57]
Witarsyah, D., Sjafrizal, T., Fudzee, M. D., Farhan, M., & Salamat, M. A. (2017). The critical factors affecting E-Government adoption in Indonesia: A conceptual framework. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 7(1), 160--167.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
ICEGOV '19: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
April 2019
538 pages
ISBN:9781450366441
DOI:10.1145/3326365
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 April 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. E-governance
  2. UTAUT
  3. disaster relief operations
  4. financial donors
  5. financial resilience

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

ICEGOV2019

Acceptance Rates

ICEGOV '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 81 of 171 submissions, 47%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 350 of 865 submissions, 40%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)18
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 26 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media