From fragmentation to convergence: theoretical architecture of transitive digital statehood in the digital era
Abstract
The article argues for the necessity of developing a transitive model of digital statehood as a comprehensive theoretical framework for the systematic study of the digital transformation of public administration. A retrospective analysis of the evolution of digital governance theories-from descriptive case studies to multidimensional analytical models-reveals that traditional approaches (e-government, smart governance, and platform governance) are limited in their capacity to conceptualize the integration of artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies into state institutions.
The study substantiates the synthesis of the systems-synergetic, institutional-cognitive, and network-platform approaches, enabling the elucidation of the nonlinear dynamics of emergent phenomena, the transformation of decision-making cognitive processes, and the mechanisms of distributed intelligence within digital public-administration ecosystems.
At the theoretical level, four core organizing principles are delineated: vertical sequentiality, which ensures a logical progression from ontological assumptions to operational indicators; horizontal coherence, which guarantees internal consistency among elements at each level; recursive feedback, which creates a mechanism of self-adaptation through the integration of empirical experience; and conceptual convergence, which facilitates the identification of common points of intersection and synergistic effects among the approaches.
A key instrument for visualizing the interaction of these three approaches is the proposed matrix of conceptual integration, which illustrates specific zones of intersection, areas of collaboration, and the nature of the resulting synergistic outcomes.
The article also highlights priority directions for future research that arise from the identified theoretical gaps: empirical investigation of AI and blockchain integration in public administration; development of methods for studying the emergent properties of hybrid human-machine systems; and assessment of the ethical and social implications of algorithmic governance.
Thus, the developed transitive model of digital statehood lays the groundwork for further interdisciplinary work aimed at establishing a holistic scholarly approach to analyzing complex sociotechnical processes in the field of public administration
Downloads
References
Arthur, W. B. (1999). Complexity and the economy. Science, 284(5411), 107–109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5411.107
Baykurt, B. (2022). Algorithmic accountability in U.S. cities: Transparency, impact, and political economy. Big Data & Society, 9(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951722111542
Bhaskar, R. (1998). The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. Routledge.
Bovens, M., & Zouridis, S. (2002). From street‐level to system‐level bureaucracies: How information and communication technology is transforming administrative discretion and constitutional control. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 174–184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00168
Chen, X., Xing, L., Wang, K., & Lu, J. (2023). How does digital governance affect the level of domestic waste separation for rural residents? Empirical evidence from rural areas in Jiangsu Province, China. Frontiers in Public Health, 11, Article 1122705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1122705
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3328150
Dunleavy, P., & Margetts, H. (2006). New public management is dead–long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467–494. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057
Engin, Z., & Parycek, P. (2024). The algorithmic state architecture: A framework for understanding AI in government. Government Information Quarterly, 41(2), 101847. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.08725
Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press. URL: https://www.academia.edu/646758/Building_the_ virtual_state_Information_technology_and_institutional_change
Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31(8-9), 1257–1274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8 (accessed on July 27, 2025)
Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Martinez-Moyano, I. J. (2007). Understanding the evolution of e-government: The influence of systems of rules on public sector dynamics. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 266-290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2006.04.005
Gritsenko, D., & Wood, M. (2022). Algorithmic governance: A modes of governance approach. Regulation & Governance, 16(1), 45–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12367 (
Hanisch, M., Goldsby, C., & Fabian, N. (2023). Digital governance: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 158, 113678. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113777
Haug, N., Dan, S., & Mergel, I. (2023). Digitally-induced change in the public sector:
A systematic review and research agenda. Public Management Review, 26(7), 1963–1987.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2234917
Heeks, R., & Bailur, S. (2007). Analyzing e-government research: Perspectives, philosophies, theories, methods, and practice. Government Information Quarterly, 24(2), 243–265.
Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Perseus Publishing. URL: https://archive.org/details/hiddenorderhowad0000holl
Holland, J. H. (2014). Complexity: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221–236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001
Janssen, M., & van der Voort, H. (2016). Adaptive governance: Towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 1–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.02.003
Janssen, M., & van der Voort, H. (2020). Agile and adaptive governance in crisis response: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Government Information Quarterly, 37(4), 101479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102180
Kaiser, A. Z. R. (2024). Smart governance for smart cities and nations. Journal of Economy and Technology, 2, 216–234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ject.2024.07.003
Karamyshev D. (2023). Digital mechanisms for public participation in crisis management of post-war recovery based on digital technologies. Pressing Problems of Public Administration, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1684-8489-2024-2-01
Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programmes. Cambridge University Press.
Margetts, H., & Naumann, A. (2017). Government as a platform: What can Estonia show the world? Research Report, University of Oxford. URL: https://www.ospi.es/export/sites/ ospi/documents/documentos/Government-as-a-platform_Estonia.pdf
Meijer, A., & Thaens, M. (2018). Urban technological innovation: Developing and testing a sociotechnical framework. Cities, 79, 125–134. URL: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/381067/1078087416670274.pdf?sequence=1
Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
Nielsen, S. B., Elmholdt, K. T., & Noesgaard, M. S. (2024). Leading digital transformation: A narrative perspective. Public Administration Review, 84(3), 567–581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13721
Ølnes, S., Ubacht, J., & Janssen, M. (2017). Blockchain in government: Benefits and implications of distributed ledger technology for information sharing. Government Information Quarterly, 34(3), 355–364. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.09.007
O’Reilly, T. (2011). Government as a platform. Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 6(1), 13–40.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404–428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
Parker, G. G., Van Alstyne, M. W., & Choudary, S. P. (2016). Platform revolution: How networked markets are transforming the economy and how to make them work for you.
W. W. Norton & Company.
Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295–336.
Puron‐Cid, G., & Villaseñor‐García, E. (2023). Applying neural networks analysis to assess digital government evolution. Government Information Quarterly, 40(3), 101811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101811
Thomas, G. (2024). Digitally transforming the organization through knowledge management: A socio-technical system (STS) perspective. European Journal of Innovation Management, 27(3), 782–801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2024-0114
van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018). The platform society. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001
Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and ways forward. Government Information Quarterly, 24(3), 646–665. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.01.002
Zhang, S., & Cao, X. (2025). How does digital governance improve natural resource utilization efficiency? Configuration analysis based on the TOE framework. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 47–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04970-1
Gibadullin, O.V. (2025). Ideological Adaptation of the Sustainability Concept: Unlocking Potential Through System Patterns? Pressing Problems of Public Administration, 1 (66), 37–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1684-8489-2025-1-02 [in Ukrainian].
Yelagin, V.P. (2025). Digital Adaptability of the Social Protection System under Military Aggression: Has the Path from Imbalance to Institutional Resilience Been Traversed? Pressing Problems of Public Administration, 1 (66), 383–400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1684-8489-2025-1-18 [in Ukrainian].
Kud, A.А., Basiuk, O.Р. (2025). A New Approach to Implementing State Target Programs Based on Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence Technologies: From Centralized Will to Distributed Logics. Pressing Problems of Public Administration, 1 (66), 297–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1684-8489-2025-1-14 [in Ukrainian].
