{"title":"Innovation or reinvention? A systematic and bibliometric review of public sector digital infrastructure","authors":"Josephine Lusi , Birgy Lorenz , Ingrid Pappel","doi":"10.1016/j.joitmc.2025.100593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) has emerged as a foundational enabler of modern digital governance, yet scholarly understanding of its scope, design, and impact remains fragmented. This study addresses this gap by conducting a comprehensive systematic review and bibliometric analysis of 1153 scholarly and grey literature sources published between 1998 and April 2025. Our dual-method approach traces the conceptual evolution of DPI, maps key thematic trajectories, and critically examines whether DPI constitutes a genuine innovation or a reconfiguration of prior digital government paradigms. The analysis reveals a predominant focus on exploratory and practice-oriented studies, with limited empirical and longitudinal research. Notably, current framings position DPI in techno-solutionist terms, while overlooking crucial socio-technical elements, including legal and institutional infrastructures, digital readiness, and regional interoperability. In response to these gaps, we propose a more nuanced and multidimensional definition of DPI that integrates overlooked non-technical components. We further posit that DPI should not be reduced to technical artefacts but recognised as a dynamic socio-technical construct with profound implications for inclusivity, public value, and sustainable digital transformation. Our findings contribute to clarifying the conceptual boundaries of DPI and advancing a more grounded understanding that can inform both academic research and institutional practice. We conclude with a forward-looking research agenda, calling for interdisciplinary research, participatory policy design, and context-sensitive evaluation frameworks for DPI implementation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16678,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity","volume":"11 3","pages":"Article 100593"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2199853125001283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) has emerged as a foundational enabler of modern digital governance, yet scholarly understanding of its scope, design, and impact remains fragmented. This study addresses this gap by conducting a comprehensive systematic review and bibliometric analysis of 1153 scholarly and grey literature sources published between 1998 and April 2025. Our dual-method approach traces the conceptual evolution of DPI, maps key thematic trajectories, and critically examines whether DPI constitutes a genuine innovation or a reconfiguration of prior digital government paradigms. The analysis reveals a predominant focus on exploratory and practice-oriented studies, with limited empirical and longitudinal research. Notably, current framings position DPI in techno-solutionist terms, while overlooking crucial socio-technical elements, including legal and institutional infrastructures, digital readiness, and regional interoperability. In response to these gaps, we propose a more nuanced and multidimensional definition of DPI that integrates overlooked non-technical components. We further posit that DPI should not be reduced to technical artefacts but recognised as a dynamic socio-technical construct with profound implications for inclusivity, public value, and sustainable digital transformation. Our findings contribute to clarifying the conceptual boundaries of DPI and advancing a more grounded understanding that can inform both academic research and institutional practice. We conclude with a forward-looking research agenda, calling for interdisciplinary research, participatory policy design, and context-sensitive evaluation frameworks for DPI implementation.