# A Review of Digital Era Governance Research in the First Two Decades: A Bibliometric Study
## 4 Results
### Scientific Production  
The most relevant countries, sources and authors in DEG research, are identified based on documents published and citations received during the whole period between 2001 and 2020. Due to the large number of different countries, sources and authors involved in DEG \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Authors** & **Year** & **Document Title** & **Source Title** & **Cited by** \\ \hline [PERSON], [PERSON]. & 2001 & Developing fully functional E-government: & Gov. Inf. Q. & 1640 \\  & & & The utilization of e-government services: & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON]. & 2005 & Citizen trust, innovation and & Inf. Syst. J. & 1321 & 2001– \\  & & acceptance factors & & 2001– \\ [PERSON]. & 2002 & The evolution of E-government among & & 2005 \\  & & municipalities: Rhetoric or reality? & & 1261 & \\ West D.M. & 2004 & E-Government and the Transformation of & & \\  & & Service Delivery and Citizen Attitudes & & \\ [PERSON]. & 2002 & Reinventing local governments and the & & \\  & & E-government initiative & & \\ \hline [PERSON], Jaeger P.T., & 2010 & Using ICTs to create a culture of & & \\ [PERSON]. & 2010 & transparency: E-government and social & & Gov. Inf. Q. & 1243 \\  & & media as openness and anti-corruption & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON] & 2006 & New public management is dead—Long & J. Public Adm. Res. & 970 & 2006– \\  & & live digital-era governance & Theory & 2010 \\ [PERSON], [PERSON]. & 2008 & Trust and risk in e-government adoption & & Syst. & 688 \\ [PERSON]. & 2007 & E-government research: Reviewing the & & Gov. Inf. Q. & 647 \\  & & literature, limitations, and ways forward & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON] & 2008 & Trust and electronic government success: & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON]. & 2008 & An empirical study & & \\ \hline [PERSON], [PERSON] & 2012 & Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON]. & 2012 & Open Data and Open Government & & Inf. Syst. Manag. & 940 \\ [PERSON], [PERSON], [PERSON], & 2015 & Recommender system application & & Decis. Support & 754 \\  & & developments: A survey & & Syst. & 2011– \\  & & From e-government to we-government: & & \\ [PERSON]. & 2012 & Defining a typology for citizen & Gov. Inf. Q. & 682 & 2011– \\  & & coproduction in the age of social media & & 2015 \\  & & Local e-government 2.0: Social media and & & Gov. Inf. Q. & 540 \\  & & corporate transparency in municipalities & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON], & 2012 & The impact of polices on government social & & \\ [PERSON]. & 2012 & media usage: Issues, challenges, and & & \\ \[PERSON], [PERSON]. & 2016 & Governing the smart city: a review of the & & \\  & & literature on smart urban governance & Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. & 527 \\  & & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON], & & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON], & 2017 & An empirical validation of a unified model & & \\ [PERSON], [PERSON] & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\  & & & \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Most relevant documents by the number of citations in DEG research by sub-period. research, the presentation focuses on top-cited 20 countries, sources and authors. The top-cited 20 countries altogether cover 54.1% of all documents and 74.8% of all citations in DEG research (see Figure 4). Additional information is provided by the size of a circle, which is in proportion to the E-Government Development Index (EDGI) 2020, presenting the state of e-government development for a corresponding country [20] and by the colour of a circle, presenting time dimension (average publication year of the document) in scientific production. While the United States with 1061 documents and 42,213 citations stands out among all countries, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are the most relevant countries in the European context, whereas the Netherlands is identified as a country with more recent DEG research. This is in line with [PERSON] et al.