Cited by 100COVID-19 Digital Contact TracingInformation Technology Governance and StrategyMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Digital Contact‐Tracing Adoption in the COVID‐19 Pandemic: IT Governance for Collective Action at the Societal Level

Riemer, Kai, Ciriello, Raffaele, Peter, Sandra, Schlagwein, Daniel·2020·European Journal of Information Systems

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a need for rapid, population-wide digital contact tracing. One solution, Bluetooth-enabled digital proximity tracing using smartphones, promises to preserve individual privacy while helping to contain society-wide viral outbreaks. However, this digital solution works effectively only if adopted by the majority of the population. This poses a collective action problem: everyone would benefit from wide-spread proximity tracing, but the benefits for the individual are indirect and limited. To facilitate such collective action at the societal level, this paper conceptualises the option space of IT governance actions for proximity tracing adoption along two dimensions: decision-making entities (who will govern the roll-out) and accountability enforcement (how strictly will adoption and use be enforced). Examining coherent governance approaches that arise from the framework, we show that there are no globally ideal approaches but only locally contextualised ones that depend on immediate health risk, prior experience with pandemics, societal values and national culture, role of government, trust in government and trust in technology in each society. The paper contributes specific propositions for governing digital contact tracing in the COVID-19 pandemic and general theoretical implications for IT governance for collective action at the societal level.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0960085x.2020.1819898

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 48 · Cited by 100

Authors
Riemer, K., Ciriello, R., Peter, S., & Schlagwein, D.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Riemer, Kai
Venue
European Journal of Information Systems
Published
2020-09-23
Volume
29
Issue
6
Pages
731-745
ISSN
  • 0960-085X (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-9344
OpenAlex
W3087523680
Cited by
100
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 2
FWCI
17.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Information Systems (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • The Sydney eScholarship Repository (The University of Sydney) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Technology Governance and Strategy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
digital contact tracing, COVID-19 pandemic, IT governance, collective action, smartphone adoption, public trust in government, trust in technology, pandemic preparedness, public health technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review