Republic of Mauritius. Findings would encourage wider e-participation and e-inclusion into policy-making from all segments of the population.

Methodology: A stratified random sample of 310 users and non-users of e-government was used. Logistic regression was estimated. The non-significant Hosmer-Lemeshow test and the Nagelkerke R2 of 0.538 imply that the logit model is useful in predicting the e-government divide.

Main Findings: The classification table shows 81% correct classification. All Wald Chi-Square statistics are reported. This research reveals that marital status and gender do not predict the e-government divide. Age (p<0.01), education (p<0.001), middle income range (p<0.05), dwellership (p<0.01) and public sector employment (p<0.05) affect a citizen’s decision to adopt e-government. The massive investments in e-government initiatives cannot be justified as these have not catered for universal coverage. Young citizens are 20 times more likely than old citizens to adopt e-government.

Implications/Applications: The tendency to use e-government increases as more education is acquired. Rural dwellership almost triples the odds of e-government adoption although these citizens are less educated than their urban counterparts. Public sector employees are 3.6 times more likely to use government websites than the self-employed. Monthly income earners of Rs 20001 to Rs 35000 are 3.3 times more likely to use e-government services than those earning up to Rs 10000. This study is ground-breaking and challenges the belief that rural dwellers are marginalized and reinforces the importance of education within the theoretical framework of the e-government divide.


  1. Akman, I., Yazici, A., Mishra, A., & Arifoglu, A. (2005). E-Government: A global view and an empirical evaluation of some attributes of citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 239-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2004.12.001
  2. Al Athmay, A. A. A. R. A. (2015). Demographic factors as determinants of e-governance adoption: a field study in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 9(2), 159-180. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-07-2014-0028
  3. AL Athmay, A. A. A., Fantazy, K., & Kumar, V. (2016). E-government adoption and user’s satisfaction: an empirical investigation. EuroMed Journal of Business, 11(1), 57-83. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-05-2014-0016
  4. Ali, M. A., Tazilah, M. D., & Kamaruzaini, K. I. (2016). A study on the determinants of taxpayer's intention towards manual tax system: A case study in Klang Valley. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 10(1), 14-22.
  5. Almahamid, S. O. U. D., Mcadams, A. C., Al Kalaldeh, T. A. H. E. R., & MO'TAZ, A. S. E. (2010). The relationship between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived information quality, and intention to use e-government. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, 11.
  6. Almarabeh, T., & AbuAli, A. (2010). A general framework for e-government: definition maturity challenges, opportunities, and success. European Journal of Scientific Research, 39(1), 29-42.
  7. Almuwil, A., Weerakkody, V., & El-Haddadeh, R. (2011). A conceptual study of the factors influencing e-inclusion. Paper Presented at the European Mediterranean & Middle Eastern Conference on Information Systems, Athens, Greece.
  8. Alomari, M. K. (2014). Discovering citizens reaction toward e-government: factors in e-government adoption. JISTEM-Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 11(1), 5-20. https://doi.org/10.4301/S1807-17752014000100001
  9. Al-Shafi, S., & Weerakkody, V. (2010). Factors affecting e-government adoption in the state of Qatar. Paper Presented at the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Abu Dhabi UAE.
  10. Avgerou, C. (2003). The link between ICT and economic growth in the discourse of development. In Organizational information systems in the context of globalization (pp. 373-386). Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35695-2_23
  11. Belanger, F., & Carter, L. (2006). The effects of the digital divide on e-government: An empirical evaluation. Paper presented at the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, HI, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.464
  12. Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2009). The impact of the digital divide on e-government use. Communications of the ACM, 52(4), 132-135. https://doi.org/10.1145/1498765.1498801
  13. Biju, A. V. (2016). Social connectivity of local governments: A social network analysis basedon Kerala local governments. Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(2), 44-54. https://doi.org/10.20474/jahss2.1.5
  14. Bizon, W. (2016). Stimulating entrepreneurship by introducing behavioural incentives, propensity to use financial instruments in the context of decision makers' personal characteristics and their financial knowledge in Polish SMEs.” Journal of Administrative and Business Studies, 2(6), 270-279. https://doi.org/10.20474/jabs-2.6.2
  15. Carveth, R., & Kretchmer, S. B. (2002). The digital divide in Western Europe: problems and prospects. Informing Science, 5(3), 239-249. https://doi.org/10.28945/2456
  16. Cecchini, S., & Raina, M. (2004). Electronic government and the rural poor: The case of Gyandoot. Information Technologies and International Development, 2(2), 65-75. https://doi.org/10.1162/1544752044193434
  17. Choudrie, J., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2005). The demographics of broadband residential consumers in a British local community: The London borough of Hillingdon. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 45(4), 93-101.
  18. Choudrie, J., & Lee, H. (2004). Broadband development in South Korea: institutional and cultural factors. European Journal of Information Systems, 13(2), 103-114. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000494
  19. Colesca, S. E., & Dobrica, L. (2008). Adoption and use of e-government services: The case of Romania. Journal of applied research and technology, 6(3), 204-217. https://doi.org/10.22201/icat.16656423.2008.6.03.526
  20. Dianita, M. (2015). Role of the internal auditor influence and good corporate governance in banking financial performance against state owned corporation. International Journal of Business and Administrative, 1(4), 176- 179. https://doi.org/10.20469/ijbas.10006-4
  21. Dwivedi, Y. K., & Lal, B. (2007). Socio-economic determinants of broadband adoption. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107(5), 654-671. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570710750417
  22. Dwivedi, Y. K., Choudrie, J., & Brinkman, W. P. (2006). Consumer usage of broadband in British households. International Journal of Services and Standards, 2(4), 400-416. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSS.2006.010472
  23. Evans, D., & Yen, D. C. (2006). E-Government: Evolving relationship of citizens and government, domestic, and international development. Government information quarterly, 23(2), 207-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2005.11.004
  24. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (and sex and drugs and rock'n'roll) (Third edition.). London, UK: SAGE Publications.
  25. Gefen, D., & Straub, D. W. (1997). Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: An extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS quarterly, 389-400. https://doi.org/10.2307/249720
  26. Hung, S. Y., Chang, C. M., & Yu, T. J. (2006). Determinants of user acceptance of the e-Government services: The case of online tax filing and payment system. Government Information Quarterly, 23(1), 97-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2005.11.005
  27. Ibrahim, & Pope, J. (2011). Compliance costs of electronic tax filing for personal taxpayers in Malaysia. Paper Presented at the International Conference on Management, Austria.
  28. Islam, M. A., Yusuf, D. H. M., & Bhuiyan, A. B. (2015). Taxpayers’ Satisfaction in Using E—Fih ‘ng System in Malaysia: Demographic Perspective. The Social Sciences, 10(2), 160-165.
  29. Jun, K. N., & Wang, F. (2012). E-government and citizen attitude towards local government in China: Transperency and capacity in service delivery.Paper Presented at the International Conference at Fudan University,Shanghai, China.
  30. Komba, M. M., & Ngulube, P. (2014). Socioeconomic determinants of e-government adoption in selected districts of Tanzania. ESARBICA Journal, 33, 71.
  31. Kumar, V., Mukerji, B., Butt, I., & Persaud, A. (2007). Factors for successful e-government adoption: A conceptual framework. Electronic Journal of E-government, 5(1).
  32. Lenhart, A., Madden, M., & Hitlin, P. (2005). Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
  33. Luo, X. H. (2009). New perspective for e-governance performance. Paper Presented at the International Conference on Management of E-commerce and E-government, Beijing: China.
  34. Mason, S. M., & Hacker, K. L. (2003). Applying communication theory to digital divide research. It & Society, 1(5), 40-55.
  35. Mutula, S. M. (2008). Comparison of sub-Saharan Africa's e-government status with developed and transitional nations. Information Management & Computer Security, 16(3), 235-250. https://doi.org/10.1108/0 9685220810893199
  36. Mwangakala, H. A. (2012). The effect of demographic characteristics on citizens' usage of government websites. Dodoma, Tanzania. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2146597
  37. Niehaves, B., Gorbacheva, E., & Plattfaut, R. (2013). The digital divide vs. the e-government divide. In R. J. Gil-Garcia, (Eds.,), E-government success factors and Measures: Theories, concepts, and methodologies (pp. 52-65). Mexico: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-4058-0.ch004
  38. Olaitan, A. W. (2015). The contributory effects of socio-cultural factors on e-government adoption among Nigerians. Global journal of politics and law research, 3(1), 91-104.
  39. Omigie, N. O., Zo, H., & Rho, J. J. (2015). User acceptance of mobile broadband in Nigeria. In Information and Knowledge Management (Vol. 5, No. 7, pp. 62-78).
  40. Owolabi, S. (2013). Socio-demographic factors as determinants of access and use of ICT by staff of university libraries in Oyo State. LIbrary Philosopht and Practice, 947, 1-18.
  41. Rehman, M., Kamal, M., & Esichaikul, V. (2012). Determinants of trust in e-government adoption: A case study of Pakistan. Paper Presented at the American Conference on Information Systems, Washington, USA.
  42. Rodrigues, G., Sarabdeen, J., & Balasubramanian, S. (2016). Factors that influence consumer adoption of e-government services in the UAE: A UTAUT model perspective. Journal of Internet Commerce, 15(1), 18-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2015.1121460
  43. Rorissa, A., & Demissie, D. (2010). An analysis of African e-Government service websites. Government Information Quarterly, 27(2), 161-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2009.12.003
  44. Sanmukhiya, C. (2017). E-governance dimensions in the Republic of Mauritius. Paper Presented at the 7th International Conference on Recent Developments in Social Sciences and Business Studies, Aqueen Hotel, Paya Labar, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7532
  45. Santhanamery, T., & Ramayah, T. (2015). Understanding the effect of demographic and personality traits on the e-filing continuance usage intention in Malaysia. Global Business Review, 16(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150914553459
  46. Saxena, K. B. (2005). Towards excellence in e-governance. Management Development Institute, Centre for Excellence in Information Management. Gurgaon India: CEXIM Working Paper Series. https://doi.org/10.1108/0 9513550510616733
  47. Schuppan, T. (2009). E-Government in developing countries: Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 118-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.01.006
  48. Shalini, R. T. (2009). Are Mauritians ready for e-Government services?. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 536-539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2008.12.016
  49. Statistics Mauritius. (2016). Economic and social indicators.” Available from: statsmauritius.govmu.or g/English/Publications/Pages/ICT-Statistics-Year-2015.aspx
  50. Susanto, T. D. (2013). Individual acceptance of e-government: A literature review. Paper Presented at the Second International Conference on Informatics Engineering and Information Science), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
  51. Taipale, S. (2013). The use of e-government services and the Internet: The role of socio-demographic, economic and geographical predictors. Telecommunications Policy, 37(4-5), 413-422. https://doi.org/10.101 6/j.telpol.2012.05.005
  52. Van der Meer, A., & Van Winden, W. (2003). E-governance in cities: a comparison of urban information and communication technology policies. Regional Studies, 37(4), 407-419. https://doi.org/10.108 0/0034340032000074433
  53. Van Dijk, J. A., Peters, O., & Ebbers, W. (2008). Explaining the acceptance and use of government Internet services: A multivariate analysis of 2006 survey data in the Netherlands. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3), 379-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2007.09.006
  54. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., & Ackerman, P. L. (2000). A longitudinal field investigation of gender differences in individual technology adoption decision-making processes. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 83(1), 33-60. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2896
  55. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  56. Venkatesh, V., Sykes, T. A., & Venkatraman, S. (2014). Understanding e‐Government portal use in rural India: role of demographic and personality characteristics. Information Systems Journal, 24(3), 249-269. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12008
  57. Verma, J. P. (2013). Chi-Square Test and Its Application. In Data Analysis in Management with SPSS Software (pp. 69-101). Springer, India. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-0786-3_3
  58. Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012). Digital differences. Washington: PEW Research Center.