From presence to performance: Mapping the digital maturity of Romanian municipalities

Vrabie, Catalin Article From presence to performance: Mapping the digital maturity of Romanian municipalities Administrative Sciences Provided in Cooperation with: MDPI – Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, Basel Suggested Citation: Vrabie, Catalin (2025) : From presence to performance: Mapping the digital maturity of Romanian municipalities, Administrative Sciences, ISSN 2076-3387, MDPI, Basel, Vol. 15, Iss. 4, pp. 1-23, https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15040147 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/321291 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Received: 23 March 2025 Revised: 10 April 2025 Accepted: 12 April 2025 Published: 17 April 2025 Citation: Vrabie, C. (2025). From Presence to Performance: Mapping the Digital Maturity of Romanian Municipalities. Administrative Sciences, 15(4), 147. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci15040147 Copyright: © 2025 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/). Article From Presence to Performance: Mapping the Digital Maturity of Romanian Municipalities Catalin Vrabie Faculty of Public Administration, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, 012244 Bucharest, Romania; [email protected]o Abstract: In recent years, technological advancements have significantly transformed the public sector, with many institutions embracing digital solutions to enhance service delivery. Romanian city halls are actively incorporating digitalization into their sustainable development strategies, aiming to improve service efficiency and accessibility. This study examines the adaptability of Romanian city halls in the face of technological changes. By evaluating the official web portals of all 103 municipalities in Romania using 23 indicators, the research provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state (mid 2024) of e-services delivered via the web portals of the respective municipality. Even though the study findings are indicating a certain degree of maturity in digitalization, with most municipalities offering online services such as property tax payments, public transportation information, and civil status documents, it also reveals significant disparities in the quality and availability of these services across the country, underscoring the need for more standardized digitalization efforts. This research contributes valuable insights for policymakers and public institutions aiming to enhance service delivery through digital means and highlights the crucial role of technology in public sector transformation. The conclusions emphasize the importance of the adaptability of public institutions to ensure continuity and efficiency in service delivery. Keywords: city portals; online services; digitalization; urban governance; smart cities 1. Introduction The rapid advancement of technology has profoundly impacted various sectors, including public administration. Digitalization, characterized by the adoption of web-based platforms for electronic public services, has become a pivotal component in the strategies of public institutions worldwide. Romanian city halls are no exception, as they seek to improve the efficiency and accessibility of their services through digital transformation. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this trend, necessitating a swift transition from traditional, on-site activities to remote solutions (Anthony & Andreas,2023;Zamfir et al., 2021;Matthias et al.,2020). Smart cities are the ones that use technology and data to enhance the quality of life for citizens while promoting sustainable development, and they have shown significant potential in transforming public service delivery (Zuhdy & Fauzi,2021;Bharule et al.,n.d.). The adaptability of public institutions to technological changes is crucial for the success of smart city initiatives. However, the extent to which these changes have been implemented and their effectiveness remains under-explored, particularly in the context of Romanian municipalities to whom the present study refers (Schachtner,2021;Muller-Torok & Prosser, 2021;WHO,2023). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15040147 Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 2 of 23 This study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the adaptability of Romanian city halls in the digital era. By examining the official web portals of all 103 municipalities using 23 specific indicators, this research assesses the current state of e-services and identifies both the progress and disparities in digital service delivery. Key findings indicate significant strides in digitalization but also highlight considerable variations in service quality and availability across municipalities. The significance of this study lies in its comprehensive analysis of the digital transformation of public services in Romania, offering valuable insights for policymakers and public institutions. By identifying the best practices and areas needing improvement, this research contributes to the ongoing discourse on smart city development and digital governance. It underscores the importance of standardized approaches to digitalization to ensure equitable access to high-quality public services for all citizens. The conclusion emphasizes the need for adaptable public institutions to maintain efficient service delivery (Budd et al.,2020;Nature,2022;Xu & Tang,2020). Based on the scope of the study, the following research questions (RQs) are proposed: • RQ1: To what extent have Romanian municipalities implemented digital services on their official websites as of mid-2024? • RQ2: What patterns of digital maturity can be observed across different classes of analysis (e.g., transparency, e-documents, and communication)? • RQ3: How do the results align with existing e-government maturity models, particularly in distinguishing municipalities at the transactional (e-Gov 2.0) and integrated service (e-Gov 3.0) stages? These questions guide the design of the analytical framework and provide a structured lens for interpreting the findings presented in this study. 2. Context Many scholars propose that the various stages of digitalization, or its maturity level, can be observed through the delivery of electronic public services via the web, ranging from the static display of information to a fully integrated platform for services provided (Pardo,2000;Baltac,2011;Vrabie,2009b). The last stage is defined by the continuous and effortless dissemination of information within the administrative web space. The primary objective of this article is not just to advocate for personalized digital services as an essential progression but instead to examine these services as a model for the diffusion of web technologies, focusing specifically on the most offered services on Romanian city halls’ web portals. To achieve a thorough understanding, we analyzed the prevalence of internet-based electronic services across all 103 municipalities in Romania. Romania is a decentralized state, meaning that municipalities have considerable autonomy from the central public administration, including the design and management of electronic services (Baltac,2011;Vrabie,2009a). At the national level, digitalization initiatives are coordinated by the Ministry of Research, Innovation, and Digitalization, in conjunction with the Ministry of Development, Public Works, and Administration. Unlike other European countries such as Estonia and Denmark, Romania does not have a chief information officer (CIO) at either the central or local levels to oversee digitalization efforts aimed at achieving interand intra-institutional collaboration. The absence of a CIO in Romanian’s public institutions may result in a lack of coherent strategies, inefficient resource utilization, and slower progress in digitalization efforts (United Nation,2020;Ojo et al.,2007;Obi,2007). The country is the twelfth largest in Europe, as it is in the center-east of the continent (Figure 1left) and is also the sixth most populous in the European Union. It is divided Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 3 of 23 into 41 counties (see Figure 1right), with each of them having a different number of municipalities (103 in total), cities (216), and towns (2862). Adm. Sci. 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 24 The country is the twelfth largest in Europe, as it is in the center-east of the continent (Figure 1 left) and is also the sixth most populous in the European Union. It is divided into 41 counties (see Figure 1 right), with each of them having a different number of municipalities (103 in total), cities (216), and towns (2862). Municipalities are the richest administrative units, which is why this article only focuses on them, and they have the widest range of self-government tasks among all. They are responsible for delivering the services that their local community needs. Based on the above, municipalities are directly influencing the digitalization level. Figure 1. (left) Location of Romania in Europe; (right) the counties and municipalities of Romania. Source: authors’ own work. 3. Literature Review E-government initially involved publishing information on public institution websites. This first phase was followed by enabling citizens to communicate with these institutions via email, leading to more sophisticated websites with integrated intranet platforms for streamlined electronic document management (Vrabie, 2016). The subsequent phase allowed for online payments and greater citizen interaction through social media, webcams, and virtual meeting applications, effectively making citizens active participants in the governance process (Vrabie & Dumitrascu, 2018; Timan et al., 2021; Vrabie, 2023). The development of the rather new concept of e-government 3.0 has seen the incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in administrative tasks, enhancing public servants’ analytical and decision-making capabilities and strengthening citizen–institution relationships (Vrabie, 2022). Theoretical approaches from researchers such as Orlikowski (Orlikowski, 2000) and Cziarniawska and Sevon (Czarniawska & Sevón, 2005) in the early 2000s highlight environmental pressures as the impetus for developing web platforms and electronic services. Orlikowski and Barley (Orlikowski & Barley, 2001) further illuminate the process of technology development and organizational change by advocating for the implementation of electronic services. Marc Holzer’s analyses, presented in “Digital Governance in Municipalities Worldwide” (Holzer & Manoharan, 2016), offer a valuable model for studying digitalization at the local level. Complementary research from journals like the Journal of Web Semantics [issues 2020–2024], Sustainability and Smart Cities [issues 2020–2024], Government Information Quarterly [issues 2020–2024], and the International Journal of Web Services Research [issues 2020–2024] indicate a broad focus on e-government, though not always at the comprehensive scale this study aims to achieve. Don Tapscott’s seminal work “Grown Up Digital” (Tapscott, 2008), alongside studies by Homburg and Dijkshoorn on personalized e-government services (Homburg & Dijkshoorn, 2011), underscores the increasing importance of citizen interaction with public Figure 1. (left) Location of Romania in Europe; (right) the counties and municipalities of Romania. Source: authors’ own work. Municipalities are the richest administrative units, which is why this article only focuses on them, and they have the widest range of self-government tasks among all. They are responsible for delivering the services that their local community needs. Based on the above, municipalities are directly influencing the digitalization level. 3. Literature Review E-government initially involved publishing information on public institution websites. This first phase was followed by enabling citizens to communicate with these institutions via email, leading to more sophisticated websites with integrated intranet platforms for streamlined electronic document management (Vrabie,2016). The subsequent phase allowed for online payments and greater citizen interaction through social media, webcams, and virtual meeting applications, effectively making citizens active participants in the governance process (Vrabie & Dumitrascu,2018;Timan et al.,2021;Vrabie,2023). The development of the rather new concept of e-government 3.0 has seen the incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in administrative tasks, enhancing public servants’ analytical and decision-making capabilities and strengthening citizen–institution relationships (Vrabie,2022). Theoretical approaches from researchers such as Orlikowski (Orlikowski,2000) and Cziarniawska and Sevon (Czarniawska & Sevón,2005) in the early 2000s highlight environmental pressures as the impetus for developing web platforms and electronic services. Orlikowski and Barley (Orlikowski & Barley,2001) further illuminate the process of technology development and organizational change by advocating for the implementation of electronic services. Marc Holzer’s analyses, presented in “Digital Governance in Municipalities Worldwide” (Holzer & Manoharan,2016), offer a valuable model for studying digitalization at the local level. Complementary research from journals like the Journal of Web Semantics [issues 2020–2024], Sustainability and Smart Cities [issues 2020–2024], Government Information Quarterly [issues 2020–2024], and the International Journal of Web Services Research [issues 2020–2024] indicate a broad focus on e-government, though not always at the comprehensive scale this study aims to achieve. Don Tapscott’s seminal work “Grown Up Digital” (Tapscott,2008), alongside studies by Homburg and Dijkshoorn on personalized e-government services (Homburg & Dijkshoorn,2011), underscores the increasing importance of citizen interaction with public Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 4 of 23 administration. Successful examples include national initiatives like Estonia’s eesti.ee (Riigi Portal eesti.ee,n.d.), Norway’s Norway.no (Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs,n.d.), Belgium’s MyMinFin (belgium.be,n.d.), the Netherlands’ MijnOverheid app (MijnOverheid,n.d.), and Denmark’s borger.dk (borger.dk,n.d.). Despite increasing demand for efficient public services, there is a global trend of declining trust in governmental bodies (Hallahan,2017;Fombrun & van Riel,2017;Vangelov, 2023). This dynamic underscores the need for upgraded infrastructure, enhanced services, and adaptive leadership, although limited budgets and rising demands often slow down these efforts (Iancu,2013). The literature on public management posits that web applications can address these challenges by promoting good governance through improved service delivery, task automation, and decision support, particularly when enhanced by AI. Online platforms also boost transparency, accountability, and citizen engagement (Thakhathi & Langa,2022;de Lange-Ros et al.,2018;Schachtner,2021;Etscheid,2019;Kolkman,2020). Research by Ibtissem et al. (Ibtissem et al.,2018), who used advanced statistical methods, highlights the challenges emerging economies face in addressing governance issues. Digital platforms, particularly those powered by AI, are heralded as revolutionary for public management, facilitating e-petitioning through automated responses (Munshi et al.,2021;Zalwert,2021). Studies by Hreˇno et al. (Hreˇno et al.,2011) and Piaggesi (Piaggesi, 2021) further discuss achieving semantic interoperability and the future of connectivity, respectively. Verma’s bibliometric review (Verma,2022) suggests that smart technologies are fostering smarter governance, although this view is optimistic. The integration of web technologies into public service delivery is now seen as a cornerstone of smart city development, enhancing efficiency, accessibility, and citizen engagement. Recent studies have explored various facets of this integration, highlighting both its potential and challenges. For instance, Latupeirissa et al. (Latupeirissa et al.,2024) conducted a comprehensive review of digital transformation projects in public service delivery, finding that such initiatives improve efficiency, increase citizen involvement, and enhance government accountability. However, they also identified challenges like the digital divide, which can exacerbate inequalities by excluding individuals lacking access to or familiarity with digital platforms. Similarly, Pislaru et al. (2024) examined the role of artificial intelligence in governance processes, focusing on AI-driven tools like chatbots that facilitate effective communication between public institutions and citizens. Their study suggests that these technologies can improve service delivery and foster greater public participation. Iqbal and Olariu (2021) explored the integration of information and communication technologies (ICTs) with citizens’ lives, emphasizing the importance of tighter integration to bring new services to the public. They review known technologies that play a significant role in the transition to Society 5.0, aiming to meet the various needs of society members through ICT integration. Furthermore, Itair et al. (Itair et al., 2023) discuss the concept of smart public spaces, which involve citizens in governance and leverage smart technology for monitoring, providing real-time information and services and improving facility efficiency. Madan and Ashok (Madan & Ashok,2023) identify key contextual variables affecting the adoption of online services, emphasizing the importance of governance maturity in IT implementation. Ahn and Chen (Ahn & Chen,2022) find that public employees are generally positive about the integration of technology, anticipating improvements in efficiency and service quality. Similarly, Eom and Lee (Eom & Lee,2022;Zankova,2021) conclude that actor-based computing models and large-scale data utilization can enhance government decision-making, leading to cost savings and improved event anticipation. The proper implementation of current web applications is expected to significantly improve citizen engagement with government services. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 5 of 23 These studies collectively affirm the critical role of web technologies in modernizing public services, promoting sustainable development, and enhancing the quality of life in urban environments. They also highlight the necessity for inclusive digital strategies that address access disparities to ensure equitable benefits for all citizens. The measurement of e-services in public administration has been widely studied through various models and frameworks. Some of the most influential theoretical models include Layne and Lee’s E-Government Maturity Model (2001), a four-stage framework progressing from cataloging (basic online information) to transactional services (interactive e-services), vertical integration (interconnectivity between different government levels), and horizontal integration (seamless, interoperable services across agencies) (Layne & Lee,2001). United Nations E-Government Development Index (EGDI): this index evaluates online services, telecommunication infrastructure, and human capital, offering a global benchmark for assessing digital governance maturity (United Nations,2025). The digitalization of public services extends beyond administrative functions to key economic sectors such as transportation, mobility solutions, and shared services. Research by the European Central Bank (European Central Bank,2023) highlights the transformative economic effects of digitalization in urban mobility, particularly in the integration of smart transport solutions with municipal governance. While these frameworks provide valuable insights, they are often designed for comparative national assessments rather than detailed municipal evaluations. Therefore, the need for a localized, context-specific measurement framework remains relevant, especially in the case of Romania’s municipal services. 4. Research Methodology Despite the existence of the above theoretical models, they do not fully capture the municipal-level digitalization trends observed in Romania, specifically • Lack of granularity: the UN EGDI and Holzer’s model focus on broad national indicators, failing to assess municipal service differentiation. • Limited citizen-centric indicators: many frameworks emphasize technological availability rather than usability, citizen interaction, and service efficiency. • Absence of local governance autonomy considerations: Romania’s decentralized governance structure allows municipalities to implement digital services independently, which is not reflected in standard global indices. To address these gaps, this study adopts a municipality-specific evaluation framework. Unlike existing models, this classification provides a practical, municipality-centered assessment that highlights variations in digital governance implementation at the local level. Public authorities promote the values of their initiatives or ongoing projects primarily by posting them on their websites (Feeney & Brown,2017;Khudeira,n.d.;Vrabie,2009a, 2011). As early as 1999, Jon M. Kleinberg from Cornell University (Kleinberg,1999) examined the network structure of hyperlinked environments and developed a set of algorithmic tools to extract information from such link structures. For data collection in this study, the authors employed the ParseHub API (ParseHub, 2023) to simultaneously gather information from all 103 official municipal websites. To mitigate data loss from websites that were temporarily down during the initial query, the process was repeated one week later. This methodology ensured more comprehensive and accurate data collection. The selection of municipalities for this study was based on Romania’s official classification of administrative territorial units. As mentioned, we included all 103 municipalities, which are defined as the highest-ranking cities in Romania’s administrative hierarchy. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 6 of 23 These are distinct from towns and communes due to their larger population, economic influence, and wider scope of administrative responsibilities. No additional demographic filters (such as population size thresholds or economic indicators) were applied, ensuring comprehensive national coverage. The initial list of URLs was derived from official registries maintained by the Ministry of Development, Public Works, and Administration and cross-validated with public data from the Association of Romanian Municipalities. This ensured that each domain was accurately mapped to its respective administrative unit. In instances of ambiguity or missing links, manual searches were conducted using the municipality’s name and verified through government portals and contact information. To ensure data accuracy, we employed a two-stage quality assurance mechanism: • Automated scraping using ParseHub API was used to gather structured data uniformly across all web pages. • Manual validation was conducted on a sample to cross-check the scraper outputs against the actual website content. This included verifying the accuracy of indicator detection and the correct association between each web portal and its city hall. This study categorized the queries into five distinct classes that are essential for evaluating municipal websites. The first class, transparency, focused on the municipality’s compliance with relevant regulations. The second class, e-documents, examined various aspects related to electronic documents. The third class, communication, aimed to extract critical information on the municipality’s use of new media. The fourth class assessed the availability of useful online information, such as city maps, live cameras, and newsletters. The final class evaluated the ease of website navigation and overall user-friendliness. The responses to the queries were then rated on a fixed-point scale, as outlined in the table below. These five analytical categories were not predefined but emerged from the logical grouping of indicators based on their function, as shown in Table 1. For the analysis, 48 instruments were initially used to investigate specific websites. However, for this study, only 23 were considered based on their relevance to the research question. The remaining 25 indicators, while valuable for assessing broader aspects of good governance and local administrative performance, focused primarily on traditional governance concerns rather than digital maturity. Examples of these excluded indicators include measures such as reporting the presence of potholes in city roads; assessing whether public transportation adequately serves citizens’ needs, particularly in newly developed neighborhoods; and evaluating the cleanliness of public spaces or the availability and quality of recreational facilities. Such governance-focused indicators, although important, did not directly contribute to evaluating the municipalities’ digital maturity and were therefore set aside for a separate, governance-centered analysis. The 23 instruments were grouped into the five classes mentioned above, with each containing a different number of indicators, as shown in Table 1. All 23 indicators were equally weighted to ensure fairness and methodological consistency. For binary indicators (e.g., the presence of a mayor’s contact form or downloadable forms), a fixed score of 1 point was awarded for presence and 0 for absence. However, two indicators (C51—Pleasant Design and C52—Easy Browsing) required subjective evaluation. For these, a 5-point Likert scale was applied using predefined rubrics (detailed in Table 2with very relevant references from the field), and scores were converted into normalized values (out of 5 points) to align with other categories. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 7 of 23 Table 1. Classes of analysis used in this study. C1 Transparency C2 E-Documents C3 Communication C4 Practical Content C5 Generalities C11. Employee’s declaration of wealth C21. Online forms and/or off-line (.pdf, .doc, and .xls) C31. Mayor cabinet direct contact line (by email, tel., or WhatsApp number) C41. City map on the Google map platform (updated and maintained by the municipality) C51. Pleasant design of the city official website 1 C12. Organizational chart C22. Tracking of submitted application C32. Online suggestions of improvement C42. In site search by keywords C52. Easy browsing inside the website 2 C13. Minutes of the internal/public meetings C23. Online petitioning C33. Social media official presence (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc.) C43. Multiple language selector C53. Contact information regarding private companies that provide public services C14. Employees’ resumes C24. Public announcements C34. Sign-in/Log-in section for citizens C44. City news section C15. Budget information - - C45. List of live cameras and web addresses for citizens to connect - C16. Existence of legislation and city/county decisions - - C46. Newsletter subscription - Maximum no. of points per class = 6 Maximum no. of points per class = 4 Maximum no. of points per class = 4 Maximum no. of points per class = 6 Maximum no. of points per class = 3 Maximum no. of points per city = 23 1,2 While the first four classes are easy to measure (‘0’ for non-existent information and ‘1’ for existing information), the C5 subclass, generalities, needs some further explanation. Therefore, in the table below we present the C51 and C52 subclasses’ criteria. Table 2. Criteria for the C51 and C52 subclasses (Anusha,2014;Alsaeedi,2020;Mallon,2014;Bigby, 2018;Craig,n.d.). Grade Description 1 - The portal’s design is very poor, unprofessional, and probably executed in-house. - Difficult navigation: the site is built in .html; it has no dynamism, and the maximum number of clicks needed to reach the last page of a branch is more than four. 2The design is poor and is probably executed in-house. - Difficult navigation: the site is built in .html, and it has no dynamism. 3 - Satisfactory design, yet the page is overloaded. - Difficult navigation, bushy menus, and hard to identify exactly where the information can be found; general information about the municipality is displayed in a to “be there” manner. 4 - Pleasant contrasts, airy page/easy navigation, but with bushy menus even if they are executed in advanced programming languages (ASP, PHP, etc.). - The information about the municipality is rich and “at sight”. 5 - The website is executed in a professional manner, and the pages are airy. - Navigation is completely dynamic and intuitive; the information about the municipality is very rich and easy to find. Although multiple evaluators were not used for scoring, a standardized rubric was applied throughout to reduce potential scoring bias as addressed in the limitation sec- Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 8 of 23 tion of this article. Future work will incorporate inter-rater reliability testing to further enhance objectivity. The instruments used were chosen based on a systematic review of previous research on e-government service measurement and municipal digitalization. The selection process followed these steps: • Literature Review: There were examined global e-government assessment frameworks, such as the United Nations E-Government Development Index (EGDI) (United Nations,2025), Layne and Lee’s E-Government Maturity Model (Layne & Lee,2001), and Holzer’s Digital Governance Model (Holzer & Manoharan,2016). Also, the authors reviewed municipal-focused studies, including those by Feeney and Brown (2017) and Homburg and Dijkshoorn (2011), which evaluated online services at the local government level. • Alignment with Romanian Municipal Practices: The list was refined by considering actual services provided by Romanian municipalities (as observed in a preliminary website analysis conducted between 2012 and 2024). Only indicators with a clear public service function (e.g., e-petitions, online tax payments, and transparency reports) were included. Expert Validation: a panel of digital governance specialists and municipal IT officers reviewed the list to ensure relevance and feasibility. Below, one can see the formula needed to convert the 1-to-5 scale into points: C51 =GC51 ×0.20 (1) C52 =GC52 ×0.20 (2) where C51 and C52 — Values for the named subclasses; GC51 and GC52 — Grades received by each subclass. The formulas for every class and for the final result used in the present study are as follows: C1 (TRANSPARENCY)= MaxC1 ∑ i=1 C1(i)(3) C2 (E−DOCUMENTS)= MaxC2 ∑ i=1 C2(i)(4) C3 (COMMUNICATION)= MaxC3 ∑ i=1 C3(i)(5) C4 (USEFUL CONTENT)= MaxC4 ∑ i=1 C4(i)(6) C5 (GENERALITIES)= MaxC5 ∑ i=1 C5(i)(7) Ms = MaxC1 ∑ i=1 C1(i)+ MaxC2 ∑ i=1 C2(i)+ MaxC4 ∑ i=1 C4(i)+ MaxC4 ∑ i=1 C4(i)+ MaxC5 ∑ i=1 C5(i)(8) where Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 15 of 23 developed in-house using popular content management systems (CMSs) such as Joomla, WordPress, or Drupal. However, the quality of these websites is not inherently determined by the platform itself. Rather, it depends on how well the platform is customized, the design choices made, and the level of professional expertise involved in implementation. While some newer technologies offer advanced features, they can also introduce inefficiencies (e.g., bloated code or sluggish performance) if not carefully managed. Likewise, well-maintained legacy systems can still deliver highly usable and efficient user experiences. Therefore, the observed design shortcomings are more likely attributable to a lack of specialized design expertise or insufficient investment in front-end customization than to the CMS choice alone. 5.3. Discussion of Differences Between Categories A comparative analysis of the five e-governance categories reveals notable disparities: • Best-Performing Category: transparency. This is expected, as Romanian law mandates the publication of financial records, budgets, and public meeting minutes (Law no. 52/2003). The high scores indicate compliance with legal requirements rather than proactive digital innovation. • Weakest Category: generalities. This category assesses user experience, accessibility, and design quality. The lower scores suggest that esthetics and navigability are not a priority for many municipalities. Possible causes: limited IT expertise among municipal staff and reliance on in-house development using basic CMS platforms (Joomla and WordPress). • Emerging Trend: e-documents and communication. Significant growth in electronic forms and online petitions. However, tracking systems for submitted applications are still underdeveloped (only 73.79% availability). This indicates a shift toward transactional e-government (e-Gov 2.0), which has not yet reached fully integrated services (e-Gov 3.0). To illustrate the integration of indicators with e-government maturity models, the data reveal clear examples: • A majority (85.44%) of municipalities provide e-petitioning systems (C23) and online tracking of submitted applications (73.79%), positioning them solidly within the “Transactional” stage. • One exemplary municipality, achieving the highest overall score of 23 points, offers advanced integrated services like personalized log-in experiences, comprehensive multilingual portals, regularly updated Google Maps integration, and live camera feeds, thus demonstrating a transition toward the “Integrated Services” stage (e-Gov 3.0). 6. Study Limitations While this study provides valuable insights into the e-governance capabilities of Romanian municipalities, several limitations must be considered when interpreting the results: • Nature of the data: This study’s national scope makes replication difficult. Moreover, despite querying all Romanian municipalities at the same time, with the same tools and indicators, thereby controlling for potential intervening and confounding factors and reducing the risk of endogeneity, this limitation still exists; • Temporal validity: Given the dynamic nature of online content, the data collected may not fully represent the current state of municipal websites, especially following administrative changes in June 2024 (Biroul Electoral Central [BEC],2024). This limitation is common in digital research and reflects the inherent velocity of webbased environments; Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 16 of 23 • Inability to make international comparisons: comparing the results of this study with those from other countries may be inaccurate due to differences in economies, policies, approaches, and general conditions that influence the pace of digitalization; • Limited indicators: This study relied on specific indicators to assess e-governance capacity, which may not capture all aspects of the local public administration’s capabilities. The use of additional or alternative indicators and/or sources of data could potentially yield different results; • Cross-sectional data: This study is based on a snapshot of data at a specific point in time, which may not reflect changes in e-governance capacity over time. Longitudinal data would provide a more precise depiction of the associations between the variables under investigation. • Potential for measurement error: The process of collecting data for some indicators and assigning scores may be subject to human error or biases. Subjective interpretation was necessary in class C5 (generalities). However, a standardized rubric was applied to maintain scoring consistency. • Primary focus on assessing online engagement: This focus may not capture the full spectrum of interactions and communication channels between citizens and government bodies. Additionally, the research may not account for potential barriers to online engagement, such as digital literacy, internet access, or the effectiveness of the digital tools provided by the institutions. Consequently, the findings might not fully reflect the overall engagement and interaction between citizens and their local governments. • The study primarily focuses on the availability and structural readiness of digital services, rather than their actual usage (adoption rates) or effectiveness (e.g., reduced administrative burden or improved citizen satisfaction). While this provides a useful proxy for evaluating municipal digital maturity, it does not capture the full spectrum of digital service performance. This limitation arises largely from the absence of publicly available usage data or citizen feedback analytics on municipal platforms. Consequently, while this study can assess how well-prepared municipalities are in offering digital services, it cannot evaluate how those services are being received or utilized. We have therefore chosen to interpret “digital maturity” in this study as digital infrastructure maturity, focusing on the supply side of e-government. Future research will aim to complement this structural analysis with demand-side indicators, including platform usage metrics, citizen satisfaction surveys, and administrative efficiency improvements. • The present analyses primarily evaluate municipal website features as a proxy for e-government maturity, focusing on the availability of online services, transparency, and digital engagement, and this study is not focusing on interoperability and citizens’ usage. By addressing these limitations in future research, a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between city population size and e-governance capabilities can be achieved. 7. Findings The concepts of smart cities and e-government 3.0 represent the forefront of leveraging advanced technologies to enhance urban living, governance, and public services. From the perspective of municipal web pages, these trends manifest through the implementation of various digital tools, solutions, and strategies that facilitate communication between citizens and local governments and streamline the delivery of public services. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 17 of 23 • Enhanced user experience: municipal web pages should prioritize a user-centric design, ensuring easy navigation, engaging content, and an intuitive interface that encourages citizen participation in governance processes and access to online services. • Integrated services: E-government 3.0 envisions the seamless integration of public services across different departments and agencies, enabling citizens to access services more efficiently. Municipal web pages can serve as one-stop portals, linking various departments and offering access to multiple services from a single platform. • Data-driven decision-making: Smart cities use data to enhance decision-making and optimize resource allocation. Municipal web pages can incorporate data analytics tools and dashboards that provide insights into urban trends, patterns, and challenges, enabling local governments to make informed decisions and formulate targeted policies. • Open data and transparency: E-government 3.0 emphasizes governance transparency and openness. Municipal web pages can function as platforms for sharing open data, budget information, and legislative updates, promoting accountability and encouraging citizen involvement in the decision-making process. • Digital participation and collaboration: Municipal web pages can facilitate digital participation by offering online voting, electronic referendums, and public consultations. This enables citizens to directly influence governance and fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility within the community. • Based on Layne and Lee’s (2001) four-stage model, our findings indicate that most Romanian municipalities are in the “Transactional” stage (e-Gov 2.0), with some larger cities transitioning toward “Integrated Services” (e-Gov 3.0). However, smaller municipalities remain in earlier stages (web presence and interactional services). •While this study frequently references the transition toward e-Gov 3.0 and the potential integration of AI into public services, we must clarify that no AI-specific indicators were included in this year’s analysis. Despite actively investigating municipal websites and communications for evidence of AI deployment (e.g., chatbots, automated workflows, or decision support systems), we found only isolated and exploratory cases. These early implementations were either not operational at the time of evaluation or lacked sufficient scale or relevance to include in a structured framework. As such, their exclusion was based on empirical insufficiency rather than conceptual oversight. However, we anticipate that AI adoption at the municipal level will follow a trajectory similar to social media integration, that is, initially sparse and fragmented but increasingly normalized. Given the longitudinal nature of our research, we plan to revisit this analysis annually and will introduce AI-specific indicators when appropriate, thereby strengthening the link between Romania’s digital infrastructure and the broader e-Gov 3.0 paradigm. The optimism associated with smart cities and e-government 3.0 can be seen in municipal web pages by adopting advanced technologies, user-centric designs, and innovative solutions that enhance citizen engagement, promote transparency, and streamline public services. 8. Discussions and Conclusions This article examines the state of digitalization in Romania through an analysis of municipal websites. Viewing the evolution of e-government as a pyramidal structure over time, it can be argued that the information and communication technology (ICT) sector is progressively advancing towards maturity. This advancement sets the stage for the forthcoming e-government 3.0, which is marked by the broader integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in government operations. The adoption of AI is expected to streamline and enhance various processes, thereby contributing to the overall development Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 18 of 23 of the e-government landscape by reducing administrative burdens, enhance public sector transparency, and increase service personalization, thereby improving citizens’ trust in institutions. The methodological contribution of this study is twofold: • Municipality-Level Digitalization Assessment: unlike previous studies that focus on national or regional digital governance trends, this research evaluates digital services at the municipal level, providing a more granular and actionable perspective for policymakers. • Comprehensive E-Service Evaluation: By employing a five-category framework, this study bridges the gap between theoretical e-governance maturity models and realworld municipal service evaluations (Table 7). This allows for a more precise benchmarking of Romanian municipalities and offers policy recommendations tailored to the local context. Table 7. Comparison of measurement models for e-services. Framework Scope Key Indicators Limitations Layne and Lee’s (2001) Model National and Theoretical Stages: informational, transactional, and integrated Focuses on national trends and lacks citizen interaction indicators UN E-Government Index (EGDI) Global and Benchmarking Online services, infrastructure, and human capital Aggregates national data and does not assess municipal variation Holzer Model (2016) Digital Governance Evaluation Privacy, usability, content, services, and engagement Less emphasis on automation and AI-based services This Study’s Model (2025) Municipality-Level Evaluation Transparency, e-documents, communication, practical content, and generalities Tailored to Romanian municipalities and lacks AI-specific indicators Data source: adapted from Layne and Lee’s model, EGDI, and Holzer. Research conducted in other countries often includes a broader range of indicators, such as online payments (Holzer & Manoharan,2016;Homburg & Dijkshoorn,2011; Gonzalez et al.,2007), citizen participation in governance through electronic voting or referendums (Tapscott,2008;Chaieb et al.,2018), and online surveys to gather public opinions on potential city hall actions (Holzer & Manoharan,2016;Homburg & Dijkshoorn,2011). A significant correlation is observed between the outcomes from each analytical category and the overall result (Table 8). However, this study aimed to identify which aspect had the most substantial impact on the final outcomes. Before applying Pearson correlation, we conducted visual inspections through scatterplots to assess the linearity of relationships between each analytical category and the final score. The data exhibited moderately linear patterns across most variables. Additionally, we verified the absence of significant outliers that could have distorted the results. These preliminary checks support the appropriateness of using Pearson correlation for this analysis. The ‘Generalities’ category exhibited the lowest correlation at 0.295, primarily because websites are often developed in-house by non-professionals, leading to the omission of many crucial features. Based on the findings of this study, Romanian municipalities are progressing toward e-Gov 3.0 but remain in an early developmental stage. The widespread adoption of digital tools, such as e-petitioning, online tax payments, and social media integration, demonstrates an increasing commitment to citizen engagement. However, AI-enabled services, chatbots, and predictive analytics are still absent from most municipal platforms, indicating that Romanian municipalities are primarily operating at the advanced e-Gov 2.0 stage rather Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 19 of 23 than fully transitioning to e-Gov 3.0, which demonstrates that while Romania has made significant strides in digital governance, full integration into the e-Gov 3.0 model requires further investment in AI, data interoperability, and automation. Table 8. Correlation between the final result and the classes of analysis. Class Analyzed Pearson Correlation with the Final Results (Cj and Ms) Transparency 0.740 E-Documents 0.845 Communication 0.543 Useful content 0.842 Generalities 0.295 Data source: authors’ own compiled data. While this study primarily focuses on the technical and operational aspects of digital services, the economic and social effects of digitalization should also be acknowledged. These effects align with OECD’s research on e-government’s role in economic development (OECD,2022,2024) and are evident in three key areas: • Local Economic Growth: digital transformation optimizes administrative processes, reducing bureaucratic burdens for businesses and residents. • Employment and workforce implications: the transition to e-government 3.0 introduces both efficiencies and challenges in the public sector workforce. • Digital inclusion and social equity: despite improvements in online municipal services, the digital divide remains a concern in Romania. After reviewing the present study, one can observe the need for standardized digital service guidelines. The government should implement a national standard for municipal digital services to reduce disparities between cities, while the municipal staff should receive professional training on website development, usability, and citizen engagement strategies. Nevertheless, national and EU funds should prioritize digitization projects in weaker regions (northeast and south) to reduce the digital divide. This study provides a foundation, but further research is needed to capture the full spectrum of e-government maturity. To complement this research, future studies will incorporate user-centered evaluation methods such as user adoption and satisfaction metrics (through sentiment analysis on citizens feedback) and impact assessments by comparing municipalities with strong vs. weak e-government maturity to see if digitalization reduces administrative burdens and higher digitalization correlates with increased public trust and participation in local governance. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the author. Acknowledgments: The present study builds upon a larger and longstanding research initiative that began in 2010, with foundational studies published in the Smart Cities and Regional Development (SCRD) Impact Studies platform (SCRD Archive). The initiative aims to provide national-level research, data, and insights to support policymakers in formulating and enhancing policies around the concept of smart cities. Related studies can also be found in other reputable scientific platforms, such as the ACM Digital Library, arXiv, and similar repositories. The current work is positioned as a continuation, update, and supplementary analysis of these earlier publications. Any perceived Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 20 of 23 similarities in methodology, wording, or structure are due to the adherence to a specific research design and format that has been consistently applied throughout this series to maintain coherence, comparability, and/or comparison. Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflicts of interest. References Ahn, M. J., & Chen, Y.-C. (2022). Digital transformation toward AI-augmented public administration: The perception of government employees and the willingness to use AI in government. Government Information Quarterly,39(2), 101664. [CrossRef] Alsaeedi, A. (2020). Comparing web accessibility evaluation tools and evaluating the accessibility of webpages: Proposed frameworks. Information,11(1), 40. [CrossRef] Anthony, L., & Andreas, H. (2023). Designing smart and resilient cities for a post-pandemic world. Routledge. Anusha, R. (2014). A study on website quality models. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications,4(12), 1–5. Baltac, V. (2011). Tehnologia informatiilor—Notiuni de baza. Andreco Educational. Baltac, V. (2019). Smart cities—A view of societal aspects. Smart Cities,2(4), 538–548. [CrossRef] belgium.be. (n.d.). Uw online overheidsdienst. Available online: https://my.belgium.be/nl (accessed on 11 April 2023). Bharule, S., Takahashi, K., Kudo, S., Wee, V., & Seetha Ram, K. E. (n.d.). adb.org. Available online: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/ files/event/723361/files/adbi-pn-rethinking-cities-resilience-growth-post-covid-19-pandemic-era.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2023). Bigby, G. (2018, January 24). How to evaluate the quality of your website design. Dyno Mapper. Available online: https://dynomapper.com/ blog/19-ux/188-how-to-evaluate-the-quality-of-your-website-design (accessed on 11 April 2023). Biroul Electoral Central [BEC]. (2024, July 10). Comunicat de presa (Retrieved from Alegeri locale 2024). Available online: https:// locale2024.bec.ro/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/comunicat_74.pdf (accessed on 9 April 2025). borger.dk. (n.d.). borger.dk. Available online: https://www.borger.dk/ (accessed on 11 April 2023). Bryer, T., & Zavattaro, S. (2011). Social media and public administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis,33(3), 325–340. [CrossRef] Budd, J., Miller, B., & Manning, E. (2020). Digital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19. Nature Medicine,26, 1183–1192. [CrossRef] Cassel, D. (2016, November 13). Bulletin board systems: Social media before the internet. The New Stack. Available online: https:// thenewstack.io/bulletin-board-systems-social-media-internet/ (accessed on 3 April 2023). Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society, volume I. The information age, economy, society, and culture. Wiley-Blackwell. Chaieb, M., Yousfi, S., Lafourcade, P., & Robbana, R. (2018). Verify-your-vote: A verifiable blockchain-based online voting protocol. HAL Open Science. Available online: https://hal.science/hal-01874855 (accessed on 11 April 2023). Craig, W. (n.d.). How to measure the effectiveness of web designs. Web FX. Available online: https://www.webfx.com/blog/web-design/ how-to-measure-the-effectiveness-of-web-designs/ (accessed on 8 April 2023). Czarniawska, B., & Sevón, G. (2005). Global ideas: How ideas, objects, and practices travel in the global economy. Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press. de Lange-Ros, A. S., de Waal, B. M., & van Veenstra, A. F. (2018). The impact of robotization and automation on future employment in the Netherlands. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,137, 304–316. Driscoll, K. (2016, October 24). Social media’s dial-up ancestor: The bulletin board system. IEEE Spectrum. Available online: https:// spectrum.ieee.org/social-medias-dialup-ancestor-the-bulletin-board-system (accessed on 3 April 2023). Duke, W. (2019, April 26). What are the benefits of surveillance cameras in public places for unified city-wide security plans? 3 Sixty Integrated. Available online: https://www.3sixtyintegrated.com/blog/2019/04/26/benefits-of-surveillance-cameras-in-public-places/ (accessed on 8 April 2023). Eom, S.-J., & Lee, J. (2022). Digital government transformation in turbulent times: Responses, challenges, and future direction. Government Information Quarterly,39(2), 101690. [CrossRef] Etscheid, J. (2019). Artificial intelligence in public administration. In Electronic government. EGOV 2019. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer. [CrossRef] European Central Bank. (2023). Working paper series. Digitalisation and the economy. Available online: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/ pdf/scpwps/ecb.wp2809~6d29dc358d.en.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2025). Feeney, M. K., & Brown, A. (2017). Are small cities online? Content, ranking, and variation of U.S. municipal websites. Government Information Quarterly,34(1), 62–74. [CrossRef] Fombrun, C. J., & van Riel, C. B. (2017). The reputational landscape. Oxford University Press. Gil, Y., & Artz, D. (2007). Towards content trust of web resources. Journal of Web Semantics,5(4), 227–239. [CrossRef] Gonzalez, R., Gasco, J., & Llopis, J. (2007). E-government success: Some principles from a Spanish case study. Industrial Management & Data Systems,107(6), 845–861. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 21 of 23 Google. (2024). Google maps metrics and infographics. Available online: https://sites.google.com/a/pressatgoogle.com/google-maps-for -iphone/google-maps-metrics (accessed on 8 April 2023). Google Search Central. (2024). Advanced: How search works. Google. Available online: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/ advanced/guidelines/how-search-works (accessed on 8 April 2023). Hallahan, K. (2017). Global trust in government, media and business. The Australian Journal of Public Administration,76(3), 275–285. [CrossRef] Haque, E. (2020). The #7 benefits of surveillance cameras in public places. GetLockers. Available online: https://getlockers.com/ benefits-of-surveillance-cameras-in-public-places/ (accessed on 8 April 2023). Heath, T., & Motta, E. (2008). Ease of interaction plus ease of integration: Combining Web2.0 and the Semantic Web in a reviewing site. Journal of Web Semantics,6(1), 76–83. [CrossRef] Holt, K. (2020, February 27). As internet forums die off, finding community can be harder than ever. Engadget. Available online: https://www.engadget.com/2020-02-27-internet-forums-dying-off.html?guccounter=1&guce _ referrer=aHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce _ referrer _ sig=AQAAAK1JVK8r _ ehGk5CAAqtBhMqYILETFls _ PqNKG2aPFCIlT1Af7 5AUKCCwyi5-zVfuU4a3MCcfGE137tG2_dH5sLFWo0fWGFb2DOrBhDXXL7d (accessed on 3 April 2023). Holzer, M., & Manoharan, A. P. (2016). Digital governance in municipalities worldwide. E-Governance Institute. Homburg, V., & Dijkshoorn, A. (2011). Diffusion of personalized e-government services among Dutch municipalities: An empirical investigation and explanation. International Journal of Electronic Government Research,7(4), 21–37. [CrossRef] Hood, M. (2018, June 7). How to use social media for effective citizen engagement. Forum One. Available online: https://www.forumone .com/ideas/how-use-social-media-effective-citizen-engagement/ (accessed on 7 April 2023). Hreˇno, J., Bednár, P., Furdík, K., & Sabol, T. (2011). Integration of government services using semantic technologies. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research,6(1), 143–154. [CrossRef] Iancu, D. C. (2013). European compliance and politicization of public administration in Romania. Innovative Issues and Approaches in Social Sciences,6(1), 103–117. Ibtissem, M., Mohsen, B., & Jaleleddine, B. (2018). Quantitative relationship between corruption and development of the Tunisian stock market. Public and Municipal Finance,7(2), 39–47. Iqbal, A., & Olariu, S. (2021). A survey of enabling technologies for smart communities. Smart Cities,4(1), 54–77. [CrossRef] Itair, M., Shahrour, I., & Hijazi, I. (2023). The use of the smart technology for creating an inclusive urban public space. Smart Cities,6(5), 2484–2498. [CrossRef] Khudeira, S. (n.d.). Best examples of municipal government websites. Intechnic. Available online: https://www.intechnic.com/blog/ best-examples-of-municipal-government-websites/ (accessed on 2 April 2023). Kleinberg, J. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Available online: https://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/ auth.pdf (accessed on 27 June 2023). Kolkman, D. (2020). The usefulness of algorithmic models in policy making. Government Information Quarterly,37(3), 101488. [CrossRef] Kosec, K., & Wantchekon, L. (2020). Can information improve rural governance and service delivery? World Development,125, 104376. [CrossRef] Latupeirissa, J. J., Dewi, N. L., Prayana, I. K., Srikandi, M. B., Ramadiansyah, S. A., & Pramana, I. B. (2024). Transforming public service delivery: A comprehensive review of digitization initiatives. Sustainability,16(7), 2818. [CrossRef] Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly,18(2), 122–136. [CrossRef] Madan, R., & Ashok, M. (2023). AI adoption and diffusion in public administration: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Government Information Quarterly,40(1), 101774. [CrossRef] Mallon, S. (2014, February 4). 5 ways to evaluate the quality of your website design. Straight North. Available online: https://www .straightnorth.com/insights/5-ways-evaluate-quality-your-website-design/ (accessed on 8 April 2023). Martinez-Caro, J.-M., Aledo-Hernandez, A.-J., Guillen-Perez, A., Sanchez-Iborra, R., & Cano, M.-D. (2018). A comparative study of web content management systems. Information,9(2), 27. [CrossRef] Masson, A. (2018, July 5). A website is more important than a business card. SUMY Designs. Available online: https://www.sumydesigns .com/website-business-card/ (accessed on 8 April 2023). Matthias, D., Axel, D., Abdulkader, L., & Frauke, R. (2020, July 15). Digital public services: How to achieve fast transformation at scale. McKinsey & Company. Available online: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/ digital-public-services-how-to-achieve-fast-transformation-at-scale (accessed on 23 April 2023). Medium. (2020, August 27). Community engagement and social media. Available online: https://medium.com/the-guide-to-remote -community-engagement/community-engagement-and-social-media-8b5164a8486f (accessed on 7 April 2023). MijnOverheid. (n.d.). Available online: https://mijn.overheid.nl/ (accessed on 11 April 2023). Muller-Torok, R., & Prosser, A. (2021). The corona warning app of the german federal government—How perceived data protection issues hindered any effectiveness. Smart Cities and Regional Development (SCRD) Journal,5(2), 23–31. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 22 of 23 Munshi, A., Mehra, A., & Choudhury, A. (2021). LexRank algorithm: Application in emails and comparative analysis. International Journal of New Technology and Research (IJNTR),7(5), 34–38. [CrossRef] Nature. (2022). Reining in the pandemic with smart city platforms. Nature Research. Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/ d42473-022-00042-z (accessed on 23 April 2023). Nielsen, J. (2002, May 11). Top 10 guidelines for homepage usability. Nielsen Norman Group. Available online: https://www.nngroup.com/ articles/top-ten-guidelines-for-homepage-usability/ (accessed on 8 April 2023). Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Available online: https://www.norway.no/ (accessed on 11 April 2023). Obi, T. (2007). E-governance—A global perspective on a new paradigm. IOS Press Ebooks. OECD. (2022). Digital transformation. OECD. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/digital-transformation.html (accessed on 22 February 2025). OECD. (2024, December 20). Digital public infrastructure for digital governments. OECD. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/en/ publications/digital-public-infrastructure-for-digital-governments_ff525dc8-en.html (accessed on 22 February 2025). Ojo, A., Janowski, T., Estevez, E., & Khan, I. K. (2007). Human capacity development for e-government. United Nation University. Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science,11(2), 404–428. [CrossRef] Orlikowski, W. J., & Barley, S. (2001). Technology and institutions: What can research on information technology and research on organizations learn from each other? Sociology, Computer Science,25, 145–165. [CrossRef] Pardo, T. (2000). Realizing the promise of digital government: It’s more than building a web site. Center for Technology in Government. ParseHub. (2023). ParseHub API. Available online: https://parsehub.com/ (accessed on 23 April 2023). Piaggesi, D. (2021). Hyper connectivity as a tool for the development of the majority. International Journal of Hyperconnectivity and the Internet of Things,5(1), 63–77. [CrossRef] Pislaru, M., Vlad, C. S., Ivascu, L., & Mircea, I. I. (2024). Citizen-centric governance: Enhancing citizen engagement through artificial intelligence tools. Sustainability,16(7), 2686. [CrossRef] Prisco, J. (2019, February 15). Waiting game: An extended look at how we queue. CNN. Available online: https://edition.cnn.com/style/ article/design-of-waiting-lines/index.html (accessed on 7 April 2023). Riigi Portal eesti.ee. (n.d.). Available online: https://www.eesti.ee/et (accessed on 11 April 2023). Romanian Parliament. (2013). LEGE nr. 52 din 21 ianuarie 2003 (republicată) privind transparen t , a decizionalăîn administra t , ia publică. Bucharest: MONITORUL OFICIAL nr. 749 din 3 decembrie 2013. Available online: https://legislatie.just.ro/public/detaliidocument/ 41571 (accessed on 9 April 2025). Schachtner, C. (2021). Smart government in local adoption—Authorities in strategic change through AI. SCRD Journal,5(3), 53–62. Song, C., & Lee, J. (2016). Citizens’ use of social media in government, perceived transparency, and trust in government. Public Performance & Management Review,39(2), 430–453. [CrossRef] Su, J., He, X., Qing, L., Niu, T., Cheng, Y., & Peng, Y. (2021). A novel social distancing analysis in urban public space: A new online spatio-temporal trajectory approach. Sustainable Cities and Society,68, 102765–102765. [CrossRef] Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. McGraw-Hill Education. Thakhathi, V. G., & Langa, R. D. (2022). The role of smart cities to promote smart governance in municipalities. SCRD Journal,6(2), 9–22. Timan, T., Veenstra, A. F., & Bodea, G. (2021). ArtificiaI intelligence and public services. European Parliament. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/662936/IPOL _ BRI(2021)662936 _ EN.pdf (accessed on 3 April 2023). TomGruber. (2008). Collective knowledge systems: Where the social web meets the semantic web. Journal of Web Semantics,6(1), 4–13. [CrossRef] United Nation. (2020). United nation e-government survey 2020. Digital government in the decade of action for sustainable development. United Nation. United Nations. (2025). E-government development index (EGDI). UN E-Government Knowledgebase. Available online: https:// publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/About/Overview/-E-Government-Development-Index (accessed on 22 February 2025). U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (n.d.). Regulations and laws that may apply during a pandemic. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/planning-preparedness/regulations-laws-during-pandemic.htm (accessed on 7 April 2023). Vangelov, N. (2023). Ambient advertising in metaverse smart cities. SCRD Journal,7(1), 43–55. Verma, S. (2022). Sentiment analysis of public services for smart society: Literature review and future research directions. Government Information Quarterly,39(3), 101708. [CrossRef] Vrabie, C. (2009a, May 14–16). Barriers in implementing e-government—Romanian study case. NISPAcee Conference, Budva, Montenegro. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 147 23 of 23 Vrabie, C. (2009b). Just do it—Spreading use of digital services. EGPA Conference. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2673743 (accessed on 3 April 2023). Vrabie, C. (2011, May 13–14). Digital governance (in Romanian municipalities). A longitudinal assessment of municipal web sites in Romania. European integration—Realities and perspectives, Galati, Romania. [CrossRef] Vrabie, C. (2014). Analiza orizontala a web site-urilor primariilor municipiilor din Romania—2014. Available online: https://www.smart -edu-hub.eu/publications (accessed on 30 April 2023). Vrabie, C. (2016). Elements of e-government. Pro Universitaria. Vrabie, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence promises to public organizations and smart cities. In Digital transformation. PLAIS EuroSymposium 2022. Lecture notes in business information processing (Vol. 465, pp. 3–14). Springer. [CrossRef] Vrabie, C. (2023). E-government 3.0: An AI model to use for enhanced local democracies. Sustainability,15(12), 9572. [CrossRef] Vrabie, C., & Dumitrascu, E. (2018). Smart cities: De la idee la implementare, sau, despre cum tehnologia poate da strălucire mediului urban [Smart cities, from idea to implementation; or how technology can make the urban environment shine]. Universul Academic. Webbiquity. (2011, October 25). The 4 critical elements of an effective business website. Available online: https://webbiquity.com/ copy-writing/the-4-critical-elements-of-an-effective-business-website/?doing _ wp _ cron=1633676803.3750240802764892578125 (accessed on 8 April 2023). WHO. (2023, April 1). Digital technology for COVID-19 response. WHO. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/03-04-2020 -digital-technology-for-covid-19-response (accessed on 23 April 2023). Xu, C. K., & Tang, T. (2020). Closing the gap or widening the divide: The impacts of technology-enabled coproduction on equity in public service delivery. Public Administration Review,80(6), 962–975. [CrossRef] Zalwert, M. (2021, May 5). LexRank algorithm explained: A step-by-step tutorial with examples. Available online: https://maciejzalwert .medium.com/lexrank-algorithm-explained-a-step-by-step-tutorial-with-examples-3d3aa0297c57 (accessed on 25 March 2023). Zamfir, M., Ciobanu, I., Marin, A. G., & Zamfir, M.-V. (2021). Smart dwellings. Architectural perspectives opened by COVID-19 pandemic. SCRD,5(2), 33–49. Zankova, B. (2021). Smart societies, gender and the 2030 spotlight—Are we prepared. SCRD Journal,5(3), 63–76. Zuhdy, A., & Fauzi, A. (2021). Surabaya towards a smart city constrained by COVID-19. SCRD,5(2), 59–71. Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.