Panos Panagiotopoulos

Digital technologies have continually raised expectations that governments can become more responsive to the needs of their audiences. Existing measures of digital government responsiveness have focused predominantly on service delivery aspects. The paper presents a comprehensive digital government responsiveness scale through a multi-stage process that includes item generation, scale construction and psychometric evaluation. Conceptualised as a formative higher-order construct, the scale integrates three dimensions: service-oriented, public value-oriented and user-oriented responsiveness. A pilot study with 373 users of digital government services in Shenzhen, China confirms the structural validity of the scale and supports item refinement. The findings indicate substantial differences in how responsiveness is perceived in traditional, civil servant–led interactions compared with AI‐mediated channels. We discuss how the scale provides an adaptable framework for assessing responsiveness across diverse digital interaction contexts.

Algorithms are disrupting established decision‐making practices in public administration. A key area of interest lies in algorithmic discretion or how public officials use algorithms to exercise discretion. The article develops a framework to explain algorithmic discretion by drawing on status quo bias theory and bureaucratic discretion. A study with police officers in the UK shows that—while officers still value their discretion—it is resistance via the aspects of status quo bias that accounts for a more substantial explanation. Transition costs, loss aversion, and performance uncertainty determine resistance and, in turn, reluctance to delegate discretion to algorithms. The study contributes to public administration research that demonstrates the influence of cognitive biases in the increasing use of algorithms in areas like policing. The article concludes with recommendations for embedding algorithmic discretion into the professional development of public officials to mitigate sources of status quo bias.

Developments in data science methods have changed how we design, review and publish social science research. The impact on academic development has been multifaceted: new research opportunities have come with additional demands on training researchers to develop advanced data skills and apply them to research outputs. For early career researchers, meeting existing work demands and investing time in data skills can be a difficult proposition. In this paper, we consider the challenges that doctoral and early career researchers face when it comes to short-and long-term career goals and discuss how to collectively overcome them. Recommendations are organised around the key areas identified by the Learning, Leading, Linking framework. We emphasise that doctoral researchers in social sciences should be supported to develop their skills and pursue meaningful collaborations with other disciplines and external stakeholders as domain specialists.

The article offers a novel conceptualisation of unions’ digital audiences and considers how their characteristics affect the practice of organising. Data were collected from the central Twitter accounts of 33 British unions resulting in 167,658 tweets and information from their 357,687 followers. Using textual and network methods, the analysis shows how unions interact with large, diverse and unexpected audiences including members, other individuals and organisations within their stakeholder groups. The findings support Twitter’s role as a tool for organising in directions like stakeholder engagement and reaching new audiences. The article further discusses how unions can respond to the imagined characteristics of their digital audiences and develop an approach to engagement that builds on the relationship between audiences and content.

On parle de réglementation basée sur l’information (IBR, pour « Information-based regulation ») lorsque les régulateurs utilisent l’information pour susciter des changements de comportement en vue d’atteindre des objectifs de politique publique. L’IBR est apparue comme une autre façon de réglementer les entreprises, par rapport aux instruments stratégiques plus traditionnels de commandement et de conduite des opérations directs et de marché dans l’État régulateur contemporain. Malgré un intérêt international croissant, des difficultés subsistent pour comprendre les rôles des régulateurs dans l’IBR, les fonctions des régulateurs dans la formation et l’exploitation des flux d’information, et les capacités administratives nécessaires pour les assumer. Dans le présent article, nous nous basons sur une méthodologie d’examen systématique pour synthétiser les conclusions de 130 articles évalués par un comité de lecture dans les domaines de la politique environnementale, énergétique et alimentaire. Nous développons une typologie des fonctions que peuvent assumer les régulateurs et décrivons les nouvelles capacités administratives requises dans l’État régulateur contemporain, notamment en matière de normalisation, d’assurance et d’intermédiation, ainsi que de gestion intelligente des données. Remarques à l’intention des praticiens La réglementation par l’information devient pratique courante dans de nombreuses régions du monde, dépassant ses frontières initiales aux États-Unis et dans d’autres pays développés. La conception et la mise en œuvre de ces systèmes créent de nouveaux défis pour les régulateurs. Notre étude intègre les recherches pertinentes dans trois domaines politiques (environnement, alimentation, énergie) et développe une nouvelle typologie des fonctions exercées par les régulateurs. Notre article est le premier à examiner la manière dont les rôles et les fonctions des régulateurs doivent changer dans l’environnement contemporain de l’information et de la réglementation. Il souligne également le fait qu’il est important que les régulateurs participent à l’IBR, une pratique traditionnellement considérée comme une approche en faveur de la déréglementation.

Information-based regulation occurs when regulators use information to drive changes in behaviours in order to achieve public policy objectives. Information-based regulation has emerged as an alternative way to regulate firms compared with more traditional direct command-and-control and market-based policy instruments within the contemporary regulatory state. Despite growing international interest, challenges remain in understanding the roles for regulators in information-based regulation, the functions of regulators in shaping and leveraging information flows, and the administrative capacities required to fulfil them. Based on a systematic review methodology, this article synthesises the findings of 130 peer-reviewed articles in the environmental, energy and food policy areas. It develops a typology of functions for regulators and outlines the new administrative capacities required in the contemporary regulatory state, particularly in standard setting, assurance and intermediation, and smart data management.Points for practitioners: Regulation by information is becoming popular in many part of the world beyond its original genesis in the US and other developed countries. The design and implementation of such schemes creates new challenges for regulators. Our review integrates relevant research in three policy areas (environment, food and energy) and develops a new typology of functions performed by regulators. The article is the first to discuss how the roles and functions of regulators need to change in the contemporary information and regulatory environment. It also emphasises the importance of regulatory involvement in information-based regulation, which has traditionally been seen as a deregulatory approach.