Mukhtar: A Human Intermediary Solution for E-government in Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq?

Abstract

E-government is undergoing a dramatic change, especially in developed countries and in many parts of the developing world. Advancement in technology and pluralization of e-service provision are the driving forces behind these changes. This paper argues that developing countries need to embrace these changes selectively and draw on a range of models appropriate while putting the needs and interests of their citizens at the heart of the reform efforts. This study builds on a better solution for citizens for intermediation that shall extend the coverage to non-users of e-services. Thus, the paper suggests a human intermediary framework based on bibliometric analysis and literature review that aims to reduce the gap between e-government readiness and citizen's ability to use e-services. It also examines Mukhtar's case, a legitimate human intermediary in three developing countries, and how they can shape the public-sector reform agenda, highlighting the factors that might impact these reforms if implemented efficiently.

Full text

Mukhtar: A Human Intermediary Solution for E-government in Lebanon,
Jordan, and Iraq?
Rania Fakhoury1, Bilal Chebaro1
1Lebanese University, Beirut, Lebanon
Abstract. E-government is undergoing a dramatic change, especially in developed countries and in many parts of
the developing world. Advancement in technology and pluralization of e-service provision are the driving forces
behind these changes. This paper argues that developing countries need to embrace these changes selectively and
draw on a range of models appropriate while putting the needs and interests of their citizens at the heart of the
reform efforts. This study builds on a better solution for citizens for intermediation that shall extend the coverage
to non-users of e-services. Thus, the paper suggests a human intermediary framework based on bibliometric analysis
and literature review that aims to reduce the gap between e-government readiness and citizen's ability to use e-
services. It also examines Mukhtar's case, a legitimate human intermediary in three developing countries, and how
they can shape the public-sector reform agenda, highlighting the factors that might impact these reforms if
implemented efficiently.
Keywords: e-government, Mukhtar, e-services, intermediary, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan
1 Introduction
Disintermediation is the process of eliminating a middle person in service delivery [1]. E-government has relied on a
direct digital intermediary to boost individual citizen interaction [2], [3], and decrease corruption [4]. A few studies
show that disintermediation has visible changes after the deployment and implementation of e-services, but there is a
lack of empirical evidence to support this argument. Several studies indicate that the intermediary position cannot be
eliminated quickly in e-government [5][6]. Empirical research has shown that a public access outlet's role positively
impacts behavioral intention to adopt e-services in rural areas in India [7]. The disintermediation model did not work
well in developing countries where the citizen remains on the "wrong side of the digital divide" [6]. As such, the
author has proposed the "re-intermediation models that insert a human intermediary between the citizen and the
growing digital infrastructure of e-governance" [2, p. 11], specifically in developing countries. In this respect, it is
significant to consider these factors when investigating citizens' intention to use e-services through human
intermediaries in a developing country and emphasize the positive aspect.
Section 2 contains the methodology and materials used to obtain the analysis and findings and introduce the
bibliometric results and a literature review of the human intermediary role in e-government. In section 3, the authors
review vital findings and suggest a conceptual framework for an intermediary. Finally, they will give an example of a
local one, the Mukhtar, a community leader in Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq, and develop their roles and responsibilities
as an acting intermediary for e-government.
2 Bibliometric Analyses and Results
2.1 Methodology
This section describes the research method employed in this study to analyze the context, culture, social factors that
affect the citizens' usage of e-government services prompted by intermediaries.

The bibliometric approach enables the assessment and comprehensive mapping of scientific literature [8] . It provides
the status of a specific research field by analyzing not only various key performance indicators, including the most
influential authors, publications, journals, and countries and most frequent words.
The authors extracted the data from the google scholar database. It is a database that has much information about
journal articles and other papers. As a software, they used the bibliometrix® combined with package for R. This tool
provides network analysis such as co-occurrences, citations and co-citation on bibliographic data. The search string
"intermediary" AND "e-government/e-governance" to analyze all the relevant articles – 15,800 results as documents
were issued between 1982 and 2020 in September 2020. Five hundred thirty-two documents were used by bibliometric
analysis, and 40 documents include the most relevant articles. The below findings will include the analysis of these
articles.
Table 1. Most relevant sources
Sources Types
Number
Journals
20
Conference proceedings
17
Book Section
2
Working Paper
1
Most Relevant Sources. From the set of 40 papers selected, 20 are journal papers, 17 are conference papers, two book
sections, and one working paper. Table 1 illustrates the number and type of documents for the four different types of
publication sources (journals, conference proceedings, books, and working papers). As can be observed, documents
published in journals are a bit more than those published in conference proceedings.
Table 2. Most relevant authors and impact (source Google Scholar)
Authors
Articles
h-index
Citations per author
Weerakkody, Vishanth
5
50
8677
Al-Sobhi, Faris
4
7
302
Janssen, Marijn
3
63
15870
Klievink, Bram
3
4
1578
Sharma, Rajesh
3
32
5439
El-Haddadeh, Ramzi
2
18
1588
Furuholt, Bjørn
2
12
660
Heeks, Richard
2
64
22853
Most Relevant Authors and Impact. Table 2 is about the most cited authors. The first relevant observation is that
only five authors have at least three papers published. From those, most of them have more than 1000 citations (except
for one). It is also worth mentioning that six authors with two or more papers published belong to only three co-
authorship networks, as shown in Figure 1.

Fig. 1. Co-authorship network
Most Relevant words. Figure 2 shows the world cloud of the most relevant words based on authors' keywords. Most
used words (apart from e-government and intermediary) are also thematic words into countries (with emphasis on
developing countries reference to a specific country such as China, India, and Saudi Arabia or categories such as
rural), social and cultural factors (trust, digital divide, digital literacy, civic engagement, citizen, collaboration) and
services (public-private partnership, ICT4D, open government, e-democracy, common service center, demand-driven
government, open innovation, data re-use). Most of these words are interrelated, as shown in Figure 3. Some of these
words will be the cornerstone for drafting the below framework.
Fig. 2. Most relevant words: WordCloud

Fig. 3. Most relevant words: Co-occurrence Network
2.2 Human Intermediary Literature
According to the analysis above and literature review of the mentioned documents, the intermediary classification
ranges from Internet applications (PayPal, Amazon, and eBay) to human intermediaries and organizations for end-
users, citizens, or the multipurpose community [4], [9]. The intermediary is a third party between the government and
citizen or a facilitating physical interaction between Government and Citizen [4] or "any public or private organization
facilitating the coordination between public services providers and their users." It is also a channel to provide and
transfer information to citizens and a facilitator to match citizens' needs to government offers [5], [10]. Intermediaries
play a significant role in the adoption of e-services in areas where the digital divide occurs or where users have limited
access to information and communication technology (ICT) [10]–[12].
Human intermediaries or "'intelligent intermediaries" add social skills and knowledge to the presence of ICTs [6]. The
human intermediary role in locating government information, accessing it, and helping citizens use it or use it on their
behalf. They also have a role in communicating and providing information to the most underserved—for example,
through community multimedia centers in rural areas [13]. They have mainly two objectives: "provide physical access
for the citizens to Government, and next to help the citizens use services and information offered by the government"
[4]. Several researchers suggest that intermediaries reduce corruption; few studies have shown that disintermediation
is also a useful tool to help citizens profit from them.
Trust in human intermediaries is also an essential and vital factor between two parties as "citizens are also more likely
to trust an intermediary than the government" [4]. Furthermore, they will respond rapidly and swiftly to the citizens'
demands and needs. When infrastructure is not available or non-existent, specifically in developing countries, they
will also provide help and support to access and explain e-services [10], thus impacting e-services usage.
As such, they help create a facilitating environment for citizens to adopt e-services. They enhance the usefulness and
accessibility of e-government by showing the "benefits offered, reduced service time, saving money, effort required
to contact government officials," and access to e-services to citizens[5]. Thus, they are a valuable marketing tool for
the government to explain the usefulness and improve the adoption of e-services to a wide range of citizens already
excluded from e-government. In that sense, re-intermediation can reach and serve all citizens who do not use or do
not want to use e-services and fulfill the objectives of e-government [14].

3 A Framework for Intermediary
Since many researchers in the information systems field build their argument on the theoretical background, it is
essential to present a conceptual framework that helps understand the significance of the context, culture, social factors
that affect the citizens' usage of e-government services prompted by intermediaries. This framework builds on the
previous analysis in section 2.
3.1 Facilitating environment (Capabilities and Skills)
The digital divide dubbed as "the gap that appears between citizens that use technology, have access to the Internet
and have literacy skills, and those citizens who do not have access to the technology" [15]. It is classified into the
capability to access the internet and have the necessary physical equipment and the skills needed to use technologies
[15]. Thus, both these factors are needed for the intermediary. Bridging the digital divide is also a step further
to decrease the urban-rural divide [16]. Some authors discuss the "data divide" (socio-economical inequalities that
result from unequal access to data), the main concern in developing countries [17].
Human intermediaries will assist citizens in using e-services by creating a facilitating environment for users to adopt
e-government services [5] using these e-services on their behalf. They also locate and convey useful information and
service delivery for citizens [13], [18]. On many occasions, these intermediaries are the viable primary sources that
provide e-services to citizens in their community as they should close to them and locally connected [13].
First, they provide physical access (computers, networks, internet) and support to citizens to carry on access to e-
services on government websites [4].
Second, they also use these e-services on behalf of the citizens. As such, they access the e-government portal and
convey the proper information to citizens. They are also able to fill/update e-forms on behalf of citizens, thus providing
a mediation tool between non-digital users and the government. Third, they provide understandable information to
citizens and convey the essential ones to them.
In this case, these intermediaries should have technical capabilities and skills to provide such services to the citizens.
Of these essential skills is the "ability to operate hardware and software and the ability to recognize what kinds of
information can solve a problem" [19]. They must be "technically proficient" to help their communities [13].
The intermediaries act as "uplifting disadvantaged groups of citizens" that are "marginalized and socially excluded"
[4]. They also provide administrative and political support for the development of their community grounded in trust.
3.2 Trust of Intermediaries
These intermediaries are "crucial players in the e-government ecosystem, with a key role of bridging the gap between
citizens and e-government services" [19]. Some authors state that "the possible contribution of the intermediaries to
the (re)construction of relations of trust between government and citizens" is vital [9].
Previous research on intermediaries indicates that citizens' trust in an intermediary organization significantly impacts
e-government adoption [4], [10], [19]–[21]. The trust of the intermediary is also defined as "trust includes perceptions
of competency and professionalism" [19]. These intermediaries should create, build, and maintain trust with citizens
to pursue the activities cited above because it requires exchanging sensitive personal information with them [19].
Lack of trust is considered a barrier to the adoption of electronic services in several studies and is a factor for adopting
e-government [22], [23]. Citizens are reluctant to use e-government services, mainly for security, privacy, and
transparency issues. However, they may shift to adopt e-services if they use it through a trusted intermediary. These
intermediaries provide a secure, efficient, and trusted delivery channel where citizens interact with the government if
they lack a reliable infrastructure. For example, the intermediaries might provide a platform with the authentication
and security communication needed to pursue e-services access [10].
Second, they will ensure that e-services are processed and completed by trusted agents and delivered to the
government. They will also follow up on the transaction on behalf of the citizens and keep them updated about
transactions' outcomes.
The intermediary should have a legal context (aspect) to increase the legitimization of the e-administrative system and
enhance the quality and efficiency of e-services. Developing intermediary legitimacy would contribute to "less
corruption, increased transparency, greater convenience, revenue growth, and cost reductions" [24]. It provides

citizens with a legal and trusted structure to be better informed, supported, and guided throughout the e-service
process. It will also reduce the barriers to obtaining government information and make the government more open and
less complicated for citizens and primarily reduce the rationale for bribery in some developing countries.
Figure 4 summarizes the framework mentioned below and the role of human intermediaries in facilitating e-
government adoption and diffusion. The framework defines the roles and responsibilities of each entity and the
challenges facing them in the context of e-government.
Fig. 4. Framework Model
3.3 Illustrative Cases: Mukhtar as a solution for e-government
To illustrate the framework presented here, the authors will describe e-government status in Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq
and draft an illustrative case of an intermediary, the Mukhtar, in each country.
E-government in Lebanon
Lebanon has undertaken a series of initiatives over the past fifteen years to develop a vision, policy, and strategy for
e-government based on administrative reform. This strategy's overall objective is to realize economic and social
benefits and quality-of-life improvements for all Lebanese citizens. In 2003, the Lebanese government, through the
United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the Office of the Minister of State for Administrative Reform
(OMSAR) has developed the "National e-Strategy." It aims at "moving the economy and society of Lebanon towards
a Knowledge-Based Society in the shortest possible time while at the same time addressing related challenges and
opportunities that Lebanon is facing" [25, p. 28]. In 2018, the e-government strategy was revised and adapted to the
current state [26].
One of the critical objectives of e-government is to decrease corruption as Lebanon is ranked 137th over 180 countries
in 2019 in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) (https://www.transparency.org/country). According to (Dixon,
Bhuiyan, and Üstüner, 2018, p. 4), the Lebanese public administration is considered a "sectarian politics, which brings
vices of governance including nepotism, patronage, and corruption." Citizens must pay bribes to government
employees to complete a transaction with any agency. E-government transactions limit both wasta and bribery [28].
As most of the Lebanese neither trust their government nor the public bureaucracy [22], [23], [29], "it is merely
impossible to implement the laws and regulations related to anti-corruption and bribery" [27, p. 4]. However, Lebanon
has made progress fighting corruption in 2017 with the passage of Access to Information Law. On 10 October 2018,
a new e-transaction and data protection law was enacted (Law No.81/2018). The new law sets forth legal aspects for
e-commerce and monetary guarantees and governs the legal rights and penal provisions for the misuse of data, privacy,
and modification. The United Nations' Electronic Government Readiness Index for 2020 ranked Lebanon in 127th
place globally [30].

E-government in Jordan
Efforts to enhance e-government and ICT initiatives in Jordan were initiated by His Majesty King Abdullah II, king
of Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, in 1999. In 2001, the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology
launched its first E-government Program to coordinate E-government projects [31] to contribute to social and
economic development [32]. Jordan continuously evaluates and regularly assesses its strategies. Several recent ones
include Digital Jordan Strategy 2018-2022 and REACH 2025. The REACH2025 initiative has been launched to re-
invigorate digital Jordan and particularly one of the growth engines of the Jordan economy – the ICT sector. Digital
Jordan strategy aims to launch 500 e-services by 2020.
As of April 2019, more than 239 e-services are offered to citizens and businesses on the website (www.jordan.gov.jo).
Jordan has enacted several laws to enhance e-services, including the E-Transactions Act (Law No. 15 of 2015) and by-
laws for licensing and e-authentication issued in 2014 (No. 11/2014) and a by-law for e-procurement (No. 1/2018)
issued in 2018. In 2020, the United Nations' Electronic Government Development Index ranked Jordan in 117 places
globally [30]. Jordan is ranked 60 over 180 countries in the 2019 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI).
Many challenges face the implementation of e-government strategy in Jordan, mainly "legislation and legal
framework; human resistance to change, security and privacy issues; culture issues; trust in E-government; usefulness
and complexity issues; website design issues; access and IT skill issues; operational cost; organizational issues;
technical infrastructure; usability, availability, and accessibility issues" [31], [33]
E-government in Iraq
Since 2003, Iraq suffers from weak public institutions, internal conflict, and profound instability [34]. Iraq is ranked
162 over 180 countries in 2019 in CPI. In 2010, a strategy of e-governance was formulated and approved. An e-
government portal was launched to provide information and services for citizens, the public, and the private sectors
[35]. In 2013, they implemented 76 e-services, and they are planning to implement an additional 20 e-services. The e-
signature and e-transactions law was issued in Iraq as Law No. 78 of 2012.
Currently, the United Nations' Electronic Government Development Index for 2020 ranked Iraq in 143 places globally
[24]. Many challenges and barriers face the implementation of e-government strategy in Iraq; mainly challenges and
barriers: political instability, ICT skill, ICT infrastructure, privacy, and weak institutions, digital skills, lack of trust,
lack of understanding of citizen and business needs, electricity and connectivity [36], [37].
The three developing countries face similar challenges and barriers while implementing e-services. Mainly,
corruption, political instability, refugee crisis, poor ICT skills, poor ICT infrastructure, lack of trust, security, privacy
and COVID-19 are among the most important.
Mukhtar: History, laws, and regulation in Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq
Mukhtar meaning "chosen" in Arabic, refers to the head of a village in Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. He/she is the local
community leader, the local elected (in Lebanon only), and officially represents its constituency in relations with the
authorities. In Lebanon, the Mukhtar is currently elected by voters from each neighborhood or village for six years
and by direct universal suffrage, which runs parallel to municipal elections. In 2016, the Lebanese elected 2922
Mukhtars. In Jordan, Mukhtar is assigned by Muhafez, a governor for the first-level administrative division of
many Arab countries (governorate). He/she is elected by the local council and assigned by Muhafez in Iraq. Table 3
summarizes Mukhtar laws and issues for the three countries.
Table 3. Summary of Laws and Issues
Country
Laws and Issues
Lebanon
• Election every six years per caza (district)
• Law enacted in 1947
• A tangible figure is known by generations of local citizens within
their neighborhood
• Has high esteem and well respected in the community
• Key informants in 64 % in the village instead of religious leaders
and elders

Country
Laws and Issues
• No salary
• Conflictual responsibilities with a notary
• The only government officials available at a village level,
particularly in villages without municipal governments (village with
less than fifty residents)
Jordan
• Law enacted in 1958
• No election
• Assigned by Muhafez
• Salary assigned by the minister of internal affairs
Iraq
• Law enacted in 2011
• Four years' assignment
• The monthly bonus of 250,000 Iraqi dinars (around $250)
• Elected by the local council and Assigned by Muhafez
In Lebanon, the Mukhtar Law was written in 1947 and updated in 1997. The law requires that every inhabited place
such as a town, village, or neighborhood with more than fifty residents shall be managed by a Mukhtar assisted by a
board of local representatives [38].
In the three countries, elected or assigned Mukhtar to enjoy various powers and responsibilities on administration,
public security, the civil registry, justice, cadastre, water management, and financial, agricultural, public hygiene
issues. For example, in Lebanon, he/she facilitates and processes (and sign) the Registry Office's administrative
procedures such as birth and death certificate, residency certificate, and the paperwork required for the passport. In
Jordan and Iraq, they enjoy the duties of judicial control officer. In Iraq, they maintain the records such registration of
expatriate or displaced families within their area of work, register non-Iraqi families within their work area, a record
of births, deaths, a register of the population within the area of work that includes the number of the neighborhood,
the alley, the house and the occupation for each member of the family.
Mainly, they represent the centralized administrations to the citizens of the village due to their proximity and detailed
knowledge of the inhabitants of neighborhoods and villages, and such they have legitimacy from the government.
However, Mukhtars exercises a small proportion of these powers and responsibilities, which fall under administrations
dependent upon the central authority via the Muhafez, the District Administrator, or the municipalities. During the
Mamluk government in Lebanon, villages were managed by a person the citizens trusted and held in esteem. Over
time, this position evolved to become that of "village chief" and later the Mukhtar, which is still used today. Thus, the
Mukhtar is a tangible and dignitary figure known by generations of local citizens within their neighborhood. They
operate a small office and are open and available 24/7 for the resolution of various problems. Due to his many roles
and responsibilities, the Mukhtar can act as a legitimate intermediary for e-government in Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq.
Ultimately, they link citizens to government.
Table 4. Summary of the roles and responsibilities
Country
Roles and Responsibilities
Lebanon
• Administration, public security, the civil registry, justice, cadastre, water
management and financial, agricultural, public hygiene, and artistic issues
• Facilitates and processes (and sign) the administrative procedures related to the
Registry Office such as birth and death certificate, residency certificate as well as
the paperwork required for the passport
• Represent all the centralized administrations to the village's citizens due to their
proximity and detailed knowledge of the inhabitants of neighborhoods and villages.
They have thus a legitimacy from the government.
Jordan
• Duties of judicial control officer
• Maintain the security within the neighborhood to which he was appointed
• Provide information to authorities on any criminal or any suspect determined to
commit a crime
• Assist government employees in the performance of their duties and the collection
of revenues

Country
Roles and Responsibilities
• Publish any official documents
• Maintain telegraph, telephone, public roads, and public parks and inform
government officials for any damage to it and within the district
• Maintain the records and statistics managed by the administrative officer
Iraq
• The duties of judicial control officer
• Support the efforts of the administration and the council to reduce violations that
harm citizens regardless of their nature
• Provide information to authorities on any criminal or any suspect determined to
commit a crime
• Inform government official on public funds, diseases, diseases, epidemics, natural
disasters, and others
• Maintain the following records (Registration of expatriate or displaced families
within their area of work, register non-Iraqi families within their work area, A record
of births, deaths, A register of the population within the area of work that includes
the number of the neighborhood, the alley, the house and the occupation for each
member of the family)
Citizens held the Mukhtar in high esteem and were well respected in the community. In Lebanon, they are vital
informants in 64% of cases in the village instead of religious leaders and elders (UNDP). They can resolve conflicts
quickly in both Lebanon and Iraq. As such, citizens trust the Mukhtar and their ability to process the governmental
transaction. Knowing that they have already legitimacy from the government, they also enjoy a trust relationship with
the citizens.
However, the Mukhtar faces many challenges if they want to act as a legitimate intermediary. In Lebanon, they do
not enjoy a civil servant's status as they do not have a salary, although they have access to social security for the
duration of the employment. The law did not provide any fees that the Mukhtar should get from a ny transactions or
signed for a citizen. Each one chooses a fee for each transaction, and some Mukhtar in villages do not accept any.
Most of them have expenses (office, transportation, and others). Both Mukhtars in Jordan and Iraq are assigned a
salary by the government.
Mukhtar is not trained on their primary functions. Some intermittent capacity building programs are developed locally
without real support from the central government. They enjoy a lot of conflictual responsibilities with other members
of the central government, such as notary for the fulfillment of contracts for the sale of goods for Lebanon or the
Muhafaz in Jordan and Iraq. The notary can ratify these contracts immediately while the Mukhtar cannot do it in case
of conflicts. According to the rules, the Mukhtar should have more than 25 years, live in the village or district, and
knows how to read and write Arabic. Thus, most of them are not able to use technology tools such as PC/laptop. Some
training has been conducted in Iraq after war data entry for a booklet on citizens' housing and in Lebanon.
In the case of applying the concept of an intermediary framework, the three governments are facing several challenges
and opportunities. It has an essential role in Mukhtar's capacity building on both their roles and responsibilities and
ICT training. Mukhtar's roles and responsibilities should be clarified; thus, the law should be amended to facilitate
their mission. However, Mukhtar, a legitimate intermediary, is a representative of centralized administration, have
knowledge of inhabitants of neighborhood and villages and have experience in many roles and responsibilities that
can facilitate the usage of e-service. Thus, it offers an opportunity to empower this local representative with digital
skills and proper training to boost e-services in villages and mainly rural areas.
Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic further highlights the lack of intermediary support and empowerment of
Mukhtar in all these countries. Being at the front line of the response at the local level, Mukthar should maintain a
high level of public services for its residents despite the emerging restrictions, weather future emergencies, and avoid
a complete breakdown of services and functionality. As a local authority, they can assist their residents in coordinating
with the municipalities and the centralized authority regarding public e-services. Figure 5 illustrates the practical
dimensions of Mukhtar's conceptual framework.

Fig. 5. Mukhtar illustration for the Framework Model
4 Conclusion
The ultimate benefit of an intermediary is to improve citizens' engagement and usage of e-services. A set of priorities
shall be adopted to improve this sector. The study develops a framework for intermediary and an illustration in
Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq.
In these countries, the challenge of developing appropriate e-government strategies for communities is compounded
by different local governance structures. Some citizens are already using e-services while others have an opportunity
to retained traditional leadership structures centered on traditional community leaders such as Mukhtar to provide
these public services. The strength of using Mukhtar, a trusted figure and a legitimate intermediary, to access and
provide e-services is likely to have an impact on individual citizen' ability to get help for administration issues as well
as on government strategies to work with local communities, improve government services and to make them more
responsive to user needs.
However, it may pose challenges for the government and Mukhtar alike to share a common baseline of information
about citizens. A joint effort includes a formal mechanism for e-services, a common platform for e-service, and
provides digital skills for Mukhtar to work with beneficiaries in inconsistent ways and overcome obstacles, mainly
lack resources.
A potential limitation for this study is the lack of proper empirical study on the influence of using a human
intermediary. However, some criteria have been suggested relevant to the intermediation. A second potential limitation
is the lack of studies on re-intermediation and their relationship with public services.
The authors identify several areas where the need for future and similar research is apparent. The first approach is to
overcome the limitations presented above. It could consist of a test based on the criteria set above in a country and
validate the model. Finally, the authors consider it necessary to validate this model in developing countries where e-
government failure is the most relevant.
References
[1] D. Kettani and A. El Mahidi, “Fez e-Government Project: An initiative transforming scientific research to value in
Morocco,” in Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Government, ECEG, 2009, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 389–397.
[2] R. Heeks, “Understanding e-Government for Development,” Developing, 2001.
[3] S. S. Nawaz, “University Academics ’ Behavioural Intention to Use E-Government Services in Sri Lanka,” Inf. Knowl.
Manag., vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 51–59, 2015.
[4] M. K. Sein, “the ‘I’ Between G and C: E-Government Intermediaries in Developing Countries,” Electron. J. Inf. Syst.
Dev. Ctries., vol. 48, no. March 2009, pp. 1–14, 2011.
[5] V. Weerakkody, R. El-Haddadeh, and F. Al-Sobhi, “Examining the influence of intermediaries in facilitating e-
government adoption : An empirical investigation,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 716–725, 2013.
[6] M. of I. and C. T. and I. A. of Jordan, “Reach2025 from vision to action.”
[7] R. Sharma and R. Mishra, “Investigating the role of intermediaries in adoption of public access outlets for delivery of e-

Government services in developing countries: An empirical study,” Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 658–679, 2017.
[8] R. Flowers et al., “What is effective consumer education? A literature review,” 2001.
[9] M. Sorrentino, “Intermediaries in E-Inclusion : A Literature Review,” in Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, 2010, pp. 1–10.
[10] F. Al-Sobhi and V. Weerakkody, “The role of intermediaries in facilitating e-government diffusion in Saudi Arabia,” in
European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2010, 2009, pp. 1–17.
[11] F. Al-Sobhi and V. Weerakkody, “The Roles of Intermediaries in E-Government Diffusion and Adoption: A Case Study
of Madinah City in Saudi Arabia,” in Stakeholder Adoption of E-Government Services: Driving and Resisting Factors, 1
edition., Madinah, KSA, KSA: Information Science Reference, 2011, pp. 103–115.
[12] J. Berryman, “E-government: Issues and implications for public libraries,” Aust. Libr. J., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 349–359,
2004.
[13] S. Bailur and S. Masiero, “The Complex Position of the Intermediary in Telecenters and Community Multimedia
Centers,” Inf. Technol. Int. Dev., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 27–42, 2012.
[14] B. Klievink and M. Janssen, “Integrating Public and Private Services: Intermediaries as a Channel for Public Service
Delivery,” Appl. Technol. Integr. Gov. Organ. New E-Government Res., no. January 2011, pp. 215–226, 2011.
[15] F. Al-Sobhi, M. Kamal, and V. Weerakkody, “Current state of e-Services in Saudi Arabia: The case of intermediaries in
facilitating government services in Madinah city,” in Proceedings of the European and Mediterranean Conference on
Information Systems, EMCIS 2009, 2009, vol. 2009, pp. 1–15.
[16] M. Herdon and M. Csótó, “The role of intermediaries in the success of electronic claiming for farm subsidies in
Hungary,” in 7th World Congress on Computers in Agriculture Conference Proceedings, 2009, pp. 110–113.
[17] F. González-Zapata and R. Heeks, “Understanding Multiple Roles of Intermediaries in Open Government Data,” in 13th
International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, 2015, no. May 2015, pp. 1–10.
[18] S. Chopra and P. Rajan, “Modeling Intermediary Satisfaction with Mandatory Adoption of E-government,” Inf. Technol.
Int. Dev., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 15–34, 2016.
[19] L. Dombrowski, G. R. Hayes, M. Mazmanian, and A. Voida, “E-Government Intermediaries and the Challenges of
Access and Trust,” ACM Trans. Comput. Interact., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1–22, 2014.
[20] S. Sukrat, B. Papasratorn, and V. Chongsuphajaisiddhi, “Impact of Customer Trust on Purchase Intention in Organic
Rice through Facebook : A Pilot Study,” in The 10th International Conference on e-Business (iNCEB2015), 2015.
[21] K. Gopakumar, “E-Governance Services Through Telecenters : The Role of Human intermediary and issues of trust,”
Inf. Technol. Int. Dev., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 19–35, 2007.
[22] R. Fakhoury and D. S. Baker, “Governmental Trust , Active Citizenship , and E-Government Acceptance in Lebanon,”
J. Leadership, Account. Ethics, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 36–52, 2016.
[23] R. Fakhoury and B. Aubert, “Citizenship, trust, and behavioural intentions to use public e-services: The case of
Lebanon,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 346–351, 2015.
[24] World Bank, “e-Government - Definition of E-Government,” World Bank, 2003. [Online]. Available:
http://go.worldbank.org/M1JHE0Z280.
[25] OMSAR, “Annual Report 2003,” 2003.
[26] OMSAR, “Digital Transformation Strategy 2018,” 2018.
[27] J. Dixon, S. Bhuiyan, and Y. Üstüner, “Public Administration in the Middle East and North Africa,” Int. J. Public Adm.,
vol. 00, no. 00, pp. 1–6, 2018.
[28] S. Alawadhi and A. Morris, “Factors Influencing the Adoption of E-government Services,” J. Softw., vol. 4, no. 6, pp.
584–590, 2009.
[29] R. Fakhoury and B. Chebaro, “Mukhtar : a solution for i-government in a developing country,” in AIB 2017 Annual
Meeting, 2017.
[30] United Nations, “E-Government Survey 2020,” 2020.
[31] Y. K. Majdalawi, T. Almarabeh, H. Mohammad, and W. Quteshate, “E-Government Strategy and Plans in Jordan,” J.
Softw. Eng. Appl., vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 211–223, 2015.
[32] N. Q. Al-Jamal and E. Abu-Shanab, “E-Government Adoption in Jordan: The Influence of Age,” in The 7th
International Conference on Information Technology, 2015, vol. 2015, pp. 345–350.
[33] A. S. Mujali Al-rawahna, S.-C. Chen, and C.-W. Hung, “The Barriers of E-Government Success : An Empirical Study
from Jordan,” Int. J. Manag. Public Sect. Inf. Commun. Technol., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 01–18, 2018.
[34] Transparency.org, “Rampant corruption in arab states,” 2018.
[35] Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, “National Profile of the Information Society in Iraq in 2013,” 2013.
[36] N. N. Qader and M. Q. Kheder, “Challenges and Factors Affecting the Implementation of E-Government in Iraq,” J.
Univ. Hum. Dev., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 476–481, 2016.
[37] H. A. Riyadh, S. A. Alfaiza, and A. A. Sultan, “The effects of technology, organizational, behavioural factors towards
utilization of e-government adoption model by moderating cultural factors,” J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 97, no. 8,
pp. 2142–2165, 2019.
[38] Government of Lebanon, “Mukhtar Law in Lebanon,” 1947.