Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy

Emerald Article: Information privacy concerns and e-government: a research agenda Lemuria Carter, Anastasia McBride

Article information:
To cite this document: Lemuria Carter, Anastasia McBride, (2010),"Information privacy concerns and e-government: a research agenda", Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, Vol. 4 Iss: 1 pp. 10 - 13 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506161011028777 Downloaded on: 04-04-2012 References: This document contains references to 22 other documents To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com This document has been downloaded 859 times.

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by University of Pretoria For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Additional help for authors is available for Emerald subscribers. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1750-6166.htm

TG 4,1

VIEWPOINT

Information privacy concerns and e-government: a research agenda

Lemuria Carter and Anastasia McBride
Department of Accounting, School of Business and Economics, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this viewpoint is to identify the potential for future research on information privacy and e-government. Design/methodology/approach Using a concise review of major privacy studies, the paper presents an overview of information privacy research in e-government. Using privacy calculus, it proposes seven factors that have an impact on ones concern for information privacy (CFIP) when disclosing information to or completing a transaction with the government. Findings The model posits that seven factors perceived internet privacy risk, collection, error, secondary use, improper access, reputation, and third party certicate have a signicant impact on CFIP. Originality/value This viewpoint provides a timely discussion on information privacy and e-government. It also provides several suggestions for future research in this area. This viewpoint is a call for research on information privacy and e-government. Keywords Information systems, Privacy, Government policy, Data security Paper type Viewpoint

10
Received 1 August 2009 Revised 2 September 2009 Accepted 7 October 2009

Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy Vol. 4 No. 1, 2010 pp. 10-13 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1750-6166 DOI 10.1108/17506161011028777

Introduction Electronic government allows citizens to complete government transactions, such as license renewal and tax ling, online. Many citizens, however, are reluctant to disclose personal information over the internet due to their concern for information privacy (CFIP). A recent study conducted by the PEW Internet and American Life Project revealed that 47 percent of internet users are aware of their digital footprint (Madden et al., 2007). Clarke (1999) posits that individuals are interested in having an appreciable inuence on the handling of data about themselves. This desire highlights the importance of understanding the publics CFIP. Information privacy refers to an individuals ability to control information about himself (Stone et al., 1983). The electronic environment introduces new challenges to maintaining information privacy. More than 158 million data records of US residents have been exposed due to security breaches since 2005 (Scheier, 2007). In 2007, Cyveillance identied more than 2.5 million stolen credit card numbers online in a 12-month period (Scheier, 2007). A Gartner survey also showed that more than 15 million US citizens were victims of identity theft during that same year. In light of the inherent risks of transmitting sensitive information electronically, many citizens want assurance that their personal information will not be made available to other individuals and organizations without their consent (Skinner et al., 2006). Much of the existing research on concern for information privacy (CFIP) focuses on citizens behavioral intentions. Most studies use CFIP to explain ones willingness to

disclose personal information (Dinev and Hart, 2005, 2006; van Slyke et al., 2006; Hui et al., 2006; Hoffman et al., 1999) or intention to transact online (Brown and Muchira, 2004; Eastlick et al., 2006; Pavlou et al., 2007; Resnick and Montania, 2003). CFIP consists of four components collection, unauthorized access, errors, and secondary use (Smith et al., 1996). Several studies have expanded the CFIP model by adding antecedents such as computer anxiety (Stewart and Segars, 2002), internet literacy and social awareness (Dinev and Hart, 2005). Many CFIP studies focus on individual privacy and e-commerce use. Dinev and Hart (2005, 2006), van Slyke et al. (2006), Hui et al. (2006), Stewart and Segars (2002), Brown and Muchira (2004), Kim et al. (2008), and Belanger et al. (2002). Few studies have examined concern for privacy as it relates to e-government services (Dinev and Hart, 2006). This study determines the factors that affect citizens CFIP when transacting in government services online (e-government). We posit that the privacy calculus could be used to enhance the e-government CFIP literature. The calculus could be used to illustrate the impact of seven prominent privacy factors perceived internet privacy risk, collection, error, secondary use, improper access, reputation and third party certicate on ones CFIP when completing e-government transactions. The e-government privacy calculus Laufer and Wolfe (1977) posit that the privacy calculus refers to a decision-making process whereby citizens weigh the anticipated benets and consequences before disclosing personal information. Culnan and Armstrong (1999) suggest that citizens are more likely to disclose personal information once they have been informed of the agencys privacy practices. Dinev and Hart (2006) extend the Culnan and Armstrong (1999) model to account for internet transactions. Our model incorporates perceived internet privacy risk (Dinev and Hart, 2006) into the privacy calculus. As aforementioned, our proposed calculus accounts for the impact of perceived internet privacy risk, collection, error, secondary use, improper access, reputation, and third party certicate on ones CFIP in an e-government environment: (1) Perceived internet privacy risk refers to the uncertainty associated with electronic transactions, particularly the loss that could result from an agency behaving opportunistically (Dinev and Hart, 2006; Kim et al., 2008). Perceived internet privacy risk is negatively related to a citizens CFIP. (2) Collection refers to the personal information that is obtained in order to complete electronic exchanges (Smith et al., 1996; van Slyke et al., 2006). Collection concerns stem from ones doubts about the ability of the collecting agency to obtain and store sensitive information securely. When conducting transactions over the internet it is necessary for agencies to collect data from citizens, therefore collection is integral to the success of e-services. Collection of citizens personal data is negatively related to CFIP. (3) Potential errors are also a major cause of apprehension for many citizens. This trepidation is related to an individuals concern that her personal information is protected from accidental or intentional errors (van Slyke et al., 2006). Many citizens believe that organizations are not employing enough safeguards to protect their personal information.

Privacy concerns and e-government 11

TG 4,1

12

(4) Unauthorized secondary use concerns are an individuals concerns about whether data collected for one purpose may be used for another purpose (van Slyke et al., 2006). Smith et al. (1996) posit that unauthorized secondary use is composed of two dimensions: internal (disclosure within the organization) and external (disclosure to another organization). Unauthorized secondary use of citizens personal information is negatively related to citizens CFIP. (5) According to Smith et al. (1996) and Solove (2006) improper access occurs when information is available to people not authorized to access that information. Citizens are reluctant to disclose information online to organizations because they believe that organizations may not be spending enough time preventing unauthorized access of their personal information. Improper access of citizens personal information is negatively related to citizens CFIP. (6) Reputation of a web site is a key factor in decreasing risk and developing trust (Kim et al., 2008). Citizens tend to trust organizations more if they have an established reputation. Reputation is dened as the overall perception of an entity based on ones experience with, knowledge of, and beliefs about the entity (Nam et al., 2006). (7) The presence of a third party certicate may also help to reduce CFIP. In the USA, this would include seals provided by the Council of Better Business Bureaus Inc., TRUSTe, and the Online Privacy Alliance (Nam et al., 2006). Citizens feel that their risk is minimized when they know that a company has the seal of a highly regarded, third party organization (Kim et al., 2006). Conclusion In conclusion, future research on privacy and e-government should incorporate elements of the privacy calculus. In particular, the aforementioned seven factors should be explored in the context of e-government. Future studies should help researchers gain a better understanding of how individuals develop privacy concerns and what consequences those concerns have on their interactions with others. There is also more research needed on how agencies can properly handle privacy-related complaints and restore citizen trust after a breach. Finally, future research should measure actual disclosure (transactions) rather than willingness to disclose (transact).
References Belanger, F., Hiller, J. and Smith, W.J. (2002), Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 11 Nos 3/4, pp. 245-70. Brown, M. and Muchira, R. (2004), Investigating the relationship between internet privacy concerns and online purchase behavior, Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, p. 62. Clarke, R. (1999), Internet privacy concerns conrm the case for intervention, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 60-7. Culnan, M.J. and Armstrong, P. (1999), Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: an empirical investigation, Organizational Sciences, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 104-15. Dinev, T. and Hart, P. (2005), Internet privacy concerns and social awareness as determinants of intention to transact, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 10 No. 2, p. 7.

Dinev, T. and Hart, P. (2006), An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions, Information Systems Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, p. 61. Eastlick, M.A., Lotz, S.L. and Warrington, P. (2006), Understanding online B-to-C relationships: an integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59 No. 8, p. 877. Hoffman, D.L., Novak, T.P. and Peralta, M. (1999), Building citizen trust online, Association for Computing Machinery: Communications of the ACM, Vol. 42 No. 4, p. 80. Hui, K.-L., Tan, B.C.Y. and Goh, C.-Y. (2006), Online information disclosure, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, Vol. 6 No. 4, p. 415. Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L. and Rao, H.R. (2008), A trust-based citizen decision-making model in electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 44, pp. 544-64. Laufer, R.S. and Wolfe, M. (1977), Privacy as a concept and a social issue: a multidimensional developmental theory, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 22-42. Madden, M., Fox, S., Smith, A. and Vitak, J. (2007), Digital Footprints: Online Identity Management and Search in the Age of Transparency, PEW Internet and American Life Project, Washington, DC. Nam, C., Song, C., Lee, E. and Park, C.I. (2006), Citizens privacy concerns and willingness to provide marketing-related personal information online, Advances in Citizen Research, Vol. 33, pp. 212-17. Pavlou, P.A., Liang, H. and Xue, Y. (2007), Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: a principal-agent perspective, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 1, p. 105. Resnick, M.L. and Montania, R. (2003), Perceptions of customer service, information privacy, and product quality from semiotic design features in an online web store, International Journal of Human-Computer Interactions, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 211-34. Scheier, R.L. (2007), Your datas less safe today than two years ago, Computerworld, August 20, available at: www.computerworld.com/s/article/9031104/Your_data_s_less_safe_today_ than_two_years_ago (accessed September 15, 2009). Skinner, G., Han, S. and Chang, E. (2006), An information privacy taxonomy for collaborative environments, Information Management & Computer Security, Vol. 14 No. 4, p. 382. Smith, H.J., Milberg, S.J. and Burke, S.J. (1996), Information privacy: measuring individuals concerns about organizational practices, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 20 No. 2, p. 167. Solove, D.J. (2006), A taxonomy of privacy, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 154 No. 3, pp. 477-564. Stewart, K.A. and Segars, A.H. (2002), An empirical examination of the concern for information privacy instrument, Information Systems Research, Vol. 13 No. 1, p. 36. Stone, E.F., Gardner, D.G., Gueutal, H.G. and McClure, S. (1983), A eld experiment comparing information-privacy values, beliefs and attitudes across several types of companies, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 3, pp. 459-68. van Slyke, C., Shim, J.T., Johnson, R. and Jiang, J. (2006), Concern for information privacy and online citizen purchasing, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 415-44. Corresponding author Lemuria Carter can be contacted at: Ldcarte2@ncat.edu To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Privacy concerns and e-government 13