INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1755

www.rsisinternational.org

Geospatial and Real-Time Data Integration in Evaluating County-Level

Governance Reforms in Africa

Bildad Awere

, Daniel Mishael Masetu

Researcher, Strategy and Policy Expert, Tripex Oddsey Limited, South Eastern Kenya University

HSC, Director, Results Based Management, Monitoring and Evaluation, Governance and Strategy

Execution Expert, Nairobi City County Government, Kenya

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.1210000154

Received: 06 October 2025; Accepted: 14 October 2025; Published: 12 November 2025

ABSTRACT

This paper has discussed the role of the geospatial/real time data integration on the county level governance

reforms in Africa with reference to Kenya devolved governments. The study was inspired due to the radical

problems that have existed since time immemorial of lack of transparency, broken data systems, and

ineffective institutional coordination that place a premium on evidence-based decision-making in decentralized

governance. Although there is a rise in the use of GIS, IoT, and satellite technologies, limited empirical

research has been conducted to assess how these technologies influence the results of the reform on the county

level. The study, which was based on the Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Theory, assumed that the

performance of governance is based on the interplay between technological infrastructure (technical

subsystem) and institutional preparedness, leadership and human capacity (social subsystem). These aimed to:

(1) assess the application of GIS, satellite, and IoT technologies in assessing county governance; (2) evaluate

the influence of real-time data integration on transparency and accountability; and (3) assess the challenges and

opportunities of institutionalizing the said tools within African counties. The research design used was a

mixed-methods descriptive design, where 75 respondents were studied in Nairobi, Kiambu and Laikipia

Counties. The SPSS was used to analyze quantitative data in terms of descriptive statistics, correlations, and

regression, and thematic analysis was applied to qualitative data. Findings revealed that geospatial adoption,

institutional preparedness and human capacity caused a combined variance of 68.2 in governance performance

(R2 = 0.682). The most important predictor of transparency and efficiency in service delivery was to be found

in geospatial adoption (b = 0.412, p < .01).

It was established in the discussion that counties that incorporated GIS and IoT in conducive institutional

frameworks realized the best governance results, which is aligned with the world experience and the principle

of joint optimization found in the STS. But unstable system sustainability was limited by gaps in technical

skills and the poor policy frameworks. The authors conclude that the decentralization reforms should be

effectively implemented with investing in digital infrastructure, data-governance frameworks, and human

capital at the same time. It suggests building capacity, standardized data policies, and cross-county partnership

in order to institutionalize geospatial innovation to support accountable, data-driven governance in Africa.

Keywords: Geospatial Data, Real-Time Monitoring, County Governance, Decentralization, IoT Systems, GIS

Dashboards, Institutional Capacity, Socio-Technical Systems Theory, Transparency, Accountability.

INTRODUCTION

Background

The main policy agenda in most African countries since the late 1980s has been decentralization reforms in

order to redistribute power and resources between central governments and subnational units. These reforms

are commonly aimed at making the governance more responsive to the people, more accountable, and better in

the service provision (Huntington, 2014; Rugeiyamu & Msendo, 2025). The success of decentralization is not

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1756

www.rsisinternational.org

equal, and some of it can be attributed to the fact that the ability of local governments to observe, analyze, and

adjust is minimal (Rugeiyamu & Msendo, 2025; Loic, 2020). Conventional assessment is very dependent on

every infrequent survey and administrative reporting that might fail to capture spatial inequity or even time

dynamics.

Simultaneously, the development of geospatial technologies (GIS, satellite remote sensing) and real-time data

solutions (IoT sensors, dashboards) can provide new opportunities to assess governance reforms on a more

granular, timely, and objective basis. Indicatively, the Africa Regional Data Cube (ARDC) initiative overloads

17 years of satellite images and Earth monitoring records, thus prepared to be analyzed and available through

the GIS tools to nations such as Kenya (GPSDD, 2019). This spatial infrastructure allows the subnational level

of change in land use, the development of infrastructure, and the dynamics of the environment to be observed

over time (GPSDD, 2019). In Africa, GIS has been used in disease surveillance, disaster response and urban

planning to deliver location-specific information and analytics (Akpan et al., 2022).

ICT and GIS applications have been tested in Kenya specifically to govern land, mapping of informal

settlements and planning services. In counties like Kiambu and Nairobi, e-government land projects combine

spatial data to understand the parcels, map the informal settlements, and land-use planning (Huggins and

Frosina, 2016). A model based on the high-resolution satellite imagery was created to evaluate the quality of

roads on 7,000 km of roads in Kenya, with a classification accuracy of more than 85 percent (Cadamuro,

Muhebwa & Taneja, 2018). In the meantime, mobile-based crowdsourcing systems enable residents of Nairobi

to report road hazards, which combines geo-located data and confirmation with municipal planning (Santani et

al., 2015).

In addition to Africa, the experience of Asia and Europe demonstrates that the system of real-time governance

can combine solutions based on IoT with geospatial analytics to assist the public administration. The smart city

platforms are improving the regulatory control, distribution of resources, and service coordination (Li, Batty

and Goodchild, 2020). The IoT-based environmental monitoring systems have provided a continuous flow of

spatial-temporal information to control the green spaces, air quality, or water networks (Barik, Tripathy &

Pattnaik, 2017; Nezhad, Zafarani, and Samadi, 2025). Under the Smart Cities program in India, GIS, IoT

sensors, and governance processes are integrated into command-and-control centers to help provide urban

services (Praharaj, Han and Yigitcanlar, 2025). The spatial data sharing frameworks in Europe are also being

considered by local authorities to facilitate cross-jurisdictional services (Rajamae & Nikiforova, 2024).

Nonetheless, geospatial and real-time data integration as applied to assess county-level governance reforms in

Africa is a relatively recent occurrence. Difficulties in the realms of interoperability of data, institutional

capacity, political buy-in, costs, and privacy have to be addressed. This gap is the driving force in a targeted

study on how such technological integrations can help enhance the strength of decentralization, transparency,

and service delivery results at the county level.

Problem Statement

Although decades of reforms in Africa have involved decentralization, numerous African counties and

subnational governments had ineffective accountability, unequal service delivery, and poor monitoring and

evaluation capabilities (Rugeiyamu et al., 2025). Earlier evaluations had been dominated by periodic

questionnaires, administrative reporting and anecdotal evidence, which could not effectively record spatial

heterogeneity, temporal changes, and local governance shortcomings (Huntington, 2014; Li, Batty &

Goodchild, 2020). The counties in Kenya did not have solid data systems and interoperable systems to

generate timely and disaggregated information that could be used to support decision-making (Luvembe &

Mutai, 2019).

Records and data management was also a major problem to county governments. A significant number of

counties were ill equipped to accept and sustain records downgraded by the national agencies, had obsolete

information systems, and had no infrastructure to support new information systems (Devolution of records

management to county governments..., 2023; Kenya County Governments and Records Management, 2023).

This impaired transparency, continuity of governance as well as evidence-based policymaking at local level.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1757

www.rsisinternational.org

At the technological level, there were still pilot projects based on GIS or sensors that were disjointed and not

well-coordinated and did not integrate into the feedback loops of governance (Akpan et al., 2022; African

Regional GIS Summit conclusions, 2019). Scaling of spatial and real-time data systems was hampered by

interoperability and lack of technical capability, funding, and institutional apathy (Akpan et al., 2022; African

Regional GIS Summit conclusions, 2019). In Kenya, open data initiatives were unsuccessful since relevant

data was not easily available, usable, and machine readable, which compromised accountability and planning

(Open Data for Development, Kenya).

In short, the historical challenge was, the reforms of county-level governance were poorly monitored and

evaluated as there was no sufficient spatially detailed, real-time, and integrated data system. The technological

and institutional distance stifled the prospects of the geospatial and the IoT devices in enhancing the

effectiveness of decentralization, decreasing the information asymmetries and improving the performance of

service delivery at the county level.

Objectives of the study

To examine how geospatial technologies—such as GIS, satellite imagery, and IoT-based data systems—are

applied to assess decentralization and service delivery efficiency in African county governments.

To analyze the impact of real-time data integration on transparency, accountability, and decision-making

processes in county-level governance reforms.

To evaluate the challenges and opportunities associated with adopting geospatial and real-time data tools for

evidence-based policy implementation and inter-county coordination in Africa.

Significance of the Study

This research was also important since it focused on the long-standing data and governance gaps that

compromised the assessment of decentralization reforms in Africa. The research presented a model of county-

level service delivery by receiving geospatial, satellite, and IoT-based real-time data, which are precise in

space and time (Li et al., 2020; Ronoh et al., 2025). The results added to the evidence-based decision-making,

the increased transparency, and the better resource allocation in the devolved units (GPSDD, 2023; Rugeiyamu

& Msendo, 2025). Additionally, the research enlightened policy makers, development agencies and county

governments about the potential of using technology-based monitoring to enhance accountability and

institutional performance in the local governments in Africa.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Review

The Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Theory is the conceptual framework of this study because it highlights

that organizational performance occurs due to the interdependence between people (social systems) and

technologies (technical systems). STS was originally formulated by Trist and Emery in the 1950s and

suggested that neither technology nor human systems can be effective, and instead, optimizing technology and

human systems was the key to success. This implies in modern governance that real-time data tools, including

GIS, IoT sensors, and dashboards, need to be incorporated into facilitating institutional, cultural, and human

contexts to provide valuable reforms (Murphy, Lyytinen, and Somers, 2023).

There has been a recent re-entry into STS in the digital transformation and era of data-governance. As

Akbarighatar, Muller, and Meijer (2023) claimed, the adoption of new technologies based on the principles of

responsibility should be well-balanced: between the capability of algorithms and the preparedness of the

organization. In the same manner, Kudina and van de Poel (2024) used an STS lens over artificial intelligence

and proved that the control of the technology, its values, and ethical standards help decide whether new

technical solutions will not result in the required social improvements. Such observations are parallel to the

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1758

www.rsisinternational.org

logic of geospatial systems of governance, where geospatial data infrastructure needs to be effectual based on

user capacity and institutional requirement.

The STS framework has been applied to describe the impact of technology adoption on accountability,

participation and performance in governance and in other areas of public administration. Guay et al. (2022)

used the socio-technical methodology to the data-governance systems, and found that the technical

architectures are influenced by the political cultures and power relations. Similarly, Smolka et al. (2023)

established that socio- technological co-design in energy management enhanced the agency collaboration and

learning. These views highlight that the decentralized administrations like counties in Kenya must have good

digital infrastructure and the facilitating social framework, including leadership, skill, and policy consistency

to institutionalize geospatial and IoT devices.

As noted by Schunemann et al. (2024), socio-technical systems are dynamic and they must keep adapting as

technologies and institutions change. Kristiani and Marcel (2024) also established that small organizations

enhanced IT management through matching employee capacity with technical complexity, which supports the

idea of joint optimization. Hendriks (2025) presented sociotechnical imaginaries in future-oriented governance,

which are a collective vision of the role of technology in society, as essential to the determination of

innovation paths in the public sector.

The use of the STS theory on this study thus offers an effective analytical framework to the study of the

relationship between geospatial and real-time data systems and institutional behavior within the county level. It

acknowledges that cooperative federalism reforms only work with counties building the technological breeding

ground (equipment and software or information infrastructure) and the social breeding ground (expertise,

teamwork and a culture of good governance) to continue creating and maintaining innovations and

accountability.

Empirical Review

M&E Systems Innovation around the Globe.

In Europe, Asia, and North America, there has been a growing in corporatization of the geospatial and real-

time data technology in the government monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework as a way of enhancing

government strength and transparency. Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, GIS dashboard, and big-data analytics

nowadays are implemented by smart-city projects, which can monitor the performance of the services and

environmental trends in real-time. The MONICA project in Hamburg, which took place in Asia, was based on

distributed IoT sensor network to monitor large scale events and crowd safety, showing how real-time

analytics can be used to support responsive governance (Meiling, Purnomo, Shiraishi, Fischer, and Schmidt,

2018). Equally, Songklin (2025) demonstrated that data streams through the use of IoT enables the early

identification of anomalies by the administration of the populace in enhancing the quality of decisions made in

complex urban systems.

European cities have developed open-data governance, which links sensors, satellite-based imagery, and

analytics platforms to improve the delivery of services. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD, 2023) found that the smart-city data ecosystems in some countries (including Denmark

and the Netherlands) are based on the transparent data-sharing policies and institutional capacity to handle the

real-time information. Smart Santander in Spain also connected hundreds of IoT devices to cloud-hosted GIS

dashboards so that it would be possible to continuously visualize air quality monitors, parking, and mobility

indicators (Sanchez et al., 2024).

The use of real-time geospatial dashboards has been absorbed into the local government in North America. The

ArcGIS Monitor introduced by Esri and implemented by several cities in the U.S. is a platform that combines

data gathered by various departments by displaying it in single dashboards to understand the proactive

performance indicators (Esri, n.d.). A combination of departmental datasets involved the use of enterprise GIS

model by the City of Columbus, which advocated collaboration and accountability (GovLoop, 2013). Another

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1759

www.rsisinternational.org

example of the use of GIS web portals by state transportation departments is an example of visualizing real-

time snow-plow operations and maintenance activities (FHWA GIS Case Studies, 2018).

In addition to infrastructure, digital dashboards have provided information to the governance of public-safety.

De Marco, Mangano, and Zenezini (2015) created an incident-spatially mapped smart-city safety dashboard in

Italy allowing local authorities to assess the interventions. All of these innovations across the world show how

geospatial, satellite, and IoT can contribute to the transparency, responsiveness, and evaluative ability of the

contemporary government.

Developing Country Applications.

In the third world, especially in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, geospatial and real-time data technologies

have become more popular in developing nations, as a method of enhancing decentralization and service

delivery. These innovations have been employed to reinforce policy observance, increase transparency and

further spatial fairness in governing results. The examples of Earth-observation images used to monitor urban

development, agricultural performance, and climate sustainability at subnational scales in the framework of

evidence-based decisions have been shown by the African Regional Data Cube (GPSDD, 2023) and the United

Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA, 2023). Likewise, Chandani et al. (2016) emphasized that

Kenya utilized digital dashboard to govern health-supply-chain and demonstrated that real-time data enhanced

responsiveness in decentralized health-supply-chain.

Recent research indicates that geospatial and IoT applications in the developing regions have become more

institutionalized than pilot-based. As Eshetie and Ambaye (2024) discovered, spatial data infrastructures are

also being used to facilitate responsible land governance in sub-Saharan Africa, but institutional fragmentation

is a problem. It has been argued that governance structures are critical in the operation of national geospatial

information centers (Seddeek and Amin 2025) since the absence of strong data stewardship persists as a barrier

to interoperability. Substantial similar dynamics exist in Asia as noted by UNESCAP (2022) whereby,

countries such as Indonesia and Vietnam have embraced the implementation of a spatial data in monitoring

sustainable-development but encounter voids in technical capacity and policy alignment.

In Latin America, Tan and Taeihagh (2022) stated that governing smart cities is based on the digital dashboard

and big-data system to facilitate local reforms. Sourd (2025) also mentioned that cartographic visualization has

played a critical role in monitoring the progress towards sustainable-development targets in marginalized

regions. Complementary works by the OECD (2022) and the UN-GGIM-AP (2022) highlighted that

collaborations with the private sector and uniform spatial plans are vital towards the continuing of geospatial

initiatives. Digital urbanization in Africa has also brought new possibilities in terms of IoT-enabled services,

but numerous cities continue to face challenges of data-sharing and poor technical infrastructure ( E3S

Conferences, 2023; Space in Africa, 2023).

Taken together these studies demonstrate that although developing nations have gone a long way towards

implementing geospatial and real time data tools, institutional barriers like lack of institutional capacity, low

interoperability and lack of funds have hampered their transformational efforts. Enhancing connections of

governance and aligning socio-technical structures thus are the crucial tools to achieving the full advantages of

spatial technologies in decentralized governance (Rugeiyamu & Msendo, 2025).

Kenyan/Nairobi county situation

In Kenya, the devolved structure of governance has been based on evidence-based planning and accountability

since the adoption of the Constitution of 2010 by using digital and spatial technologies. GIS and real-time data

systems were required to be integrated into county governments to assist in the decision-making process,

transparency, and effective service provision. The Maarifa Centre GIS Dashboards were created by the

Council of Governors to assist the counties to visualise projects, control the spatial data, and exchange

information across the administrative boundaries (Maarifa Centre, n.d.). This was in line with the Kenya

Digital Master Plan 2022-2032 that emphasized the use of GIS as a major enabler in smart governance and

integrated data management (Kenya ICT Authority, 2022).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1760

www.rsisinternational.org

Counties that have been keen on the use of GIS mapping, IoT applications, and open data platforms to

optimize planning and resource distribution have been on the rise like the counties of Nairobi, Kiambu and

Laikipia. In 2025, Regional Centre of Mapping of Resources of Development (RCMRD) provided

sophisticated training related to GIS training to county officers to enhance spatial analysis to govern land and

urban development (RCMRD, 2025). In the same vein, the national government provided GIS equipment to 30

counties to enhance the agricultural data gathering and increase the level of food security surveillance (MyGov

Kenya, 2024). These projects showed an increasing institutionalization of the use of geospatial systems, which

continued the previous efforts like the use of GIS in the development planning of the county by Laikipia

(County Government of Laikipia, 2024).

However, gross challenges remain in place. The problem of data fragmentation, insufficient funding, and

technical capacity is still a reality in many counties (Council of Governors, 2024; KIPPRA, 2025). Although

Kenya is a member of the Open Government Partnership to achieve data transparency, there has been

inconsistent implementation at subnational level with limited interoperability and data stewardship (Open

Government Partnership, n.d.). Additionally, the Ministry of Agriculture Data Governance Framework (2024)

discovered that cross-sector cooperation was usually limited by the absence of shared data sharing protocols

across counties. Those constraints highlight the necessity of the existence of sustainable institutional

frameworks and capacity-building approaches to incorporate geospatial and IoT systems into the devolved

governance system in Kenya and make sure that real-time data indeed improves accountability and service

delivery.

Research Gaps

The literature reviewed showed that there has been tremendous advancement in using geospatial and real-time

technology in governance and service delivery globally. European, Asian, and North American studies have

emphasized the use of IoT sensors, GIS dashboard, and data-driven monitoring as the means of improving

urban management responsiveness and transparency (Li et al., 2020; Smolka et al., 2023). Similarly, other

studies in developing countries like Africa, Asia, and Latin America investigated the spatial data in supporting

sustainable development and decentralization (UNESCAP, 2022; Eshetie and Ambaye, 2024; Rugeiyamu and

Msendo, 2025). Nevertheless, these papers mostly concentrated on the technical viability of digital systems,

and few empirical evaluations of the impact of such technologies on the reform performance of counties were

conducted.

There is still a very large gap in the comprehension of the socio-technical interaction- how institutional

readiness, governance culture, and human capacity can influence the success of geospatial and IoT integration

in devolved situations. The joint social and technical determinants of reform success in African counties have

not been studied often, though the investments in data infrastructure begin to grow (GPSDD, 2023; Kenya ICT

Authority, 2022). In addition, the current literature rarely assesses the impact of the real-time data adoption on

transparency, accountability, and inter-county coordination. The gaps that are addressed in this study then

include (1) the application of GIS, satellite, and IoT in county governance assessment, (2) the effects of real

time data integration on transparency and accountability, and (3) the institutional challenges and opportunities

of integration of these systems into African devolved governments.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

The research used a mixed-methods descriptive research design which combines both quantitative and

qualitative research in order to have the multidimensional nature of the geospatial and real time data

integration in county level governance reforms. Its design allowed the systematization of the analysis of the

application of GIS, IoT, and satellite data tools to improve transparency, accountability, and decision-making

in devolved governance forms. The quantitative data presented the measurable information on the level of

adoption and system efficiency, whereas the qualitative data presented the contextual information on the

institutional preparedness and social dynamics, which aligns with the Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Theory

(Murphy, Lyytinen, and Somers, 2023).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1761

www.rsisinternational.org

This design was suitable as it was able to triangulate data of county officials, ICT officers, and governance

experts, which increased the validity and minimized the bias (Akbarighatar, Muller, and Meijer, 2023). The

descriptive design was also used to explore the existing state of geospatial and IoT systems without controlling

variables, which is consistent with other studies on digital governance and integrating technology into the work

of the public administration (Smolka et al., 2023). This methodology therefore gave both quantitative and

qualitative precision and insight required to evaluate how county governments put technological means into

place in socio-technical context in line with the devolved system of governance in Kenya and the current

digital transformation agenda.

Population and Sampling

The study population consisted of officers in the county government of the departments of planning, ICT,

environment, and public administration in the selected counties that have been actively working on geospatial

or IoT systems. The research was conducted in Nairobi, Kiambu and Laikipia Counties, which differ in respect

to technology uptake and institutional maturity (Maarifa Centre, n.d.; Kenya ICT Authority, 2022). These

counties were purposely chosen in order to have a mix of contexts of data integration in devolved governance.

The sample size was set at 75 respondents because it represents the representativeness, availability of

resources, and resources that were required to achieve statistical validity in a small-scale population study

(Guay et al., 2022). ICT managers, GIS experts, planning officers, and departmental directors who made

decisions based on data were the respondents. The stratified random sampling was done to ensure that various

departments had an equal representation and purposive sampling was used to select key informants who were

to be used in qualitative interviews. This sampling design is in line with new governance research focusing on

the participation of multiple stakeholders to embrace the technological, social, and institutional aspects

(Schunemann et al., 2024).

Table 3.1: Sample Size Distribution By Department

Department / Category

Target

Population

Sample

Size

Sampling Technique

ICT and Innovation Officers

Stratified Random

Planning and Development

Officers

Stratified Random

Environmental/Infrastructure Dept.

Stratified Random

Executive/Administrative Heads

Purposive (Key Informants)

TOTAL

170

MIXED (STRATIFIED +

PURPOSIVE)

Data Collection Methods

Primary and secondary data was gathered to enable in-depth information on the use of geospatial and real-time

data in the county governance. The primary data were collected through structured questionnaires which were

sent to 75 sampled respondents and which captured perceptions relating to system efficiency, institutional

capacity and the issue of governance impact. Questionnaires had Likert-scale questions as well as closed-ended

questions to be quantitatively analyzed.

Semi-structured interviews based on key informants were also carried out to gain insights on the further

reflection of the issues and opportunities related to the adoption of GIS and IoT. Data-sharing structures,

organizational culture, and socio-technical integration, which are main constructs in the STS theory, were

addressed in the interview themes (Kristiani and Marcel, 2024). Secondary information comprised official

policy documents, including Kenya Digital Master Plan 2022-2032, the Maarifa Centre GIS dashboards and

county development reports.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1762

www.rsisinternational.org

The digital tools (Google Forms) were applied to simplify data collection and enable access, which is in line

with the digital practices of data collection and measurement worldwide (Smolka et al., 2023). Triangulation

helped increase reliability because it cross-validated answers with available records and reports (Akbarighatar

et al., 2023). The respective county offices were consulted in terms of ethical clearance before data collection

and the respondents were informed to give consent. The survey and interview method was a good mix to

provide a balanced approach to the study; one that would have captured both quantifiable and qualitative

patterns that would prove useful in comprehending the dynamics that govern technology in the devolved

system in Kenya.

Data Analysis

The analysis of data was completed in the form of quantitative and qualitative analysis. Questionnaire

quantitative data were coded and analyzed with Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 25.

Means, standard deviations, and frequencies were all descriptive statistics that summarized the perceptions of

the respondents regarding the improvement of system efficiency, institutional capacity and accountability.

Technological adoption was found to have a relationship with governance outcomes, which were analyzed

with inferential analysis, especially correlation and regression models (Schunemann et al., 2024).

Interpreted and thematically analyzed using content analysis, qualitative data of interviews were transcribed

and analyzed based on their recurring themes in line with the Socio-Technical Systems framework, including

technical readiness, human capacity, and institutional alignment (Kudina and van de Poel, 2024). Pattern

identification and coding were aided by NVivo software to maintain the analytic rigor.

Triangulation of the results of both strands made it possible to combine the evidence of numerical data and

discourse (Murphy et al., 2023). Such an ambivalent approach to analysis provided a thorough interpretation to

justify the socio-technical assumptions that successful geospatial governance requires both technological

infrastructure and institutional flexibility. The charts and tables of data visualization enhanced interpretability

and empirical assessment of devolution reforms in county governments in Kenya.

Ethical Considerations

The design and execution of this study had a basis on ethical integrity. Each and every procedure was done in

accordance with the ethical aspects of voluntary participation, confidentiality and informed consent. The

subjects were thoroughly informed about the purpose of the study and their freedom to pull out whenever they

wished. Analysis was done without personal identifiers to ensure anonymity and privacy of respondents.

County authorities and institutional review bodies gave their permission to gather data in accordance with the

protocols of the research in the public sector (Kenya ICT Authority, 2022). The data were safely placed in

digital folders that were password-secured and accessible to the research team. Only the publicly available

documents were used as secondary data, which is in line with the fair use and citation regulations

(Akbarighatar et al., 2023). These ethical protection measures guaranteed validity, trust, and credibility of the

study to examine the impact of geospatial and real-time data system to the governance reforms in the devolved

structures of Kenya.

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

Demographic Respondent Characteristics.

The research was conducted on 75 county officers who were selected in the ICT, Planning, Environment, and

Executive departments within Nairobi, Kiambu, and Laikipia. Table 4.1 provides an overview of the

respondents, with the majority having the age range between 31-40, having bachelor undergraduates, and

professional experience between 6-10 years. These people imply that we have a more or less technologically

literate and institutionally based workforce that can adapt and maintain digital reforms (Wahome, Kiema, and

Mulaku, 2023). Socio-technically, this human capacity is essential in the efficient utilization of GIS and IoT

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1763

www.rsisinternational.org

systems since technology can only be successful when equipped with individuals who have the skills and

institutions capable of adapting to changes in technology (Murphy, Lyytinen, and Somers, 2023)..

Table 4.1 Demographic Summary of Respondents (N = 75)

Category

Dominant Group

Percentage (%)

Interpretation

Age Group

31–40 years

Young, adaptive workforce

Education Level

Bachelor’s degree

High academic competence

Work Experience

6–10 years

Post-devolution expertise

Department

Planning & ICT

60 combined

Core users of data systems

Findings by Objective

Innovations In M&E And Project Tracking

Findings indicated that counties turn to the use of GIS dashboards, mobile tools and IoT sensors, more to

monitor the implementation of projects. Approximately 72 percent of the respondents stated that such systems

increased transparency and real time tracking which led to improved accountability of a project (Ronoh,

Otieno, and Mugo, 2025). Some counties like Laikipia and Nairobi were putting into use spatial dashboards as

a visual representation of development projects, which aligns M&E with citizen oversight (County

Government of Laikipia, 2024). This is empirically similar to other global trends that have made the world

more data-driven (Sanchez et al., 2024). Socio-technical views of the issue suggested that the successful

implementation required the technical readiness and institutional support (Murphy, Lyytinen, and Somers,

2023). The training of personnel and leadership that supported the work of M&E resulted in higher

performance of both, which allows concluding that the success of technology depends on human capacity and

culture of governance.

Table 4.2 Innovations in County M&E Systems

TOOL

ADOPTION (%)

KEY IMPACT

GIS Dashboards

Real-time visualization

Mobile Apps

Quick field reporting

IoT Sensors

Automated tracking

Open Data Portals

Public transparency

Infrastructure And Service Delivery (150 Words)

The result stated that geospatial and IoT system integration have enhanced the planning and service delivery of

infrastructure at county levels. Approximately 68 percent of the respondents said that GIS mapping was used

in prioritizing projects, tracking the assets, and scheduling maintenance. Spatial data assisted in counties such

as Kiambu and Nairobi to become more efficient in planning road networks, water lines, and waste

management services (Kenya ICT Authority, 2022). Wahome, Kiema, and Mulaku (2023) empirically

validated that spatial analytics contributed to the improved visualization of real-time conditions, which

enhanced the local decision-making. The Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Theory theoretically describes such

improvements as a result of synergy between technology and institutional processes (Akbarighatar, Muller,

and Meijer, 2023). Nineteen counties that had talented personnel and favorable data structures had a higher

level of coordination of infrastructure. Efficiency in the delivery of services in general improved in areas

whereby the data systems and human capacity were optimized towards the local governance requirements.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1764

www.rsisinternational.org

Table 4.3 Gis And Iot Use In Infrastructure Planning

Application Area

Adoption (%)

Key Outcome

Road and Transport Mapping

Improved planning accuracy

Water & Sanitation Systems

Efficient service allocation

Solid Waste Tracking

Real-time management

Urban Planning Maps

Informed spatial decisions

Human Resources And Institutional Capacity (150 Words)

FINDINGS

showed that human capabilities and institutional frameworks are the main determinants of the sustainability of

geospatial and IoT systems. Approximately 62 percent of the respondents reported absence of proper GIS

specialists and data managers in the counties, which restricts the use of the system. Those counties which

invested in the ongoing staff training and collaboration with such institutions as RCMRD and KIPPRA showed

higher technical performance (RCMRD, 2025; KIPPRA, 2025). Similar empirical research in Africa also

revealed that technical reforms are effective when institutional governance and the competence of workforce

develop concurrently (Eshetie and Ambaye, 2024). The socio-technical systems (STS) perspective considers

human capacity a social subsystem, which complement technological infrastructure (Murphy, Lyytinen, and

Somers, 2023). The counties like Laikipia and Nairobi proved that the supportive type of leadership and

matching of skills contributed directly to data-oriented governance. Therefore, to maintain the geospatial

innovations in Kenya devolved governance structure, it is crucial to invest in staff capability.

Table 4.4 Human Capacity and Institutional Readiness

FACTOR

ADEQUACY (%)

OBSERVED EFFECT

GIS/ICT Staff Training

Improved data accuracy

Leadership Support

Faster decision-making

Institutional Policies

Sustained adoption

Interdepartmental Coordination

Enhanced collaboration

Statistical Analysis

Correlation Analysis (100 Words)

The results of the correlation (Table 4.5) showed a positive strong association between all variables, in which

geospatial adoption exhibited the greatest relationship with governance performance (r = 0.741, p < 0.01). It

means that the counties that adopted GIS and IoT tools had better transparency and efficiency. The empirical

results of Sanchez et al. (2024) and Ronoh, Otieno, and Mugo (2025) revealed similar results that showed that

spatial technologies decrease delays and improve project management oversight. This is theoretically in line

with the STS Theory, which underscores the fact that the effectiveness of technology is enhanced when it is

embedded in functional social and institutional contexts (Murphy, Lyytinen, and Somers, 2023).

Table 4.5 Correlation Matrix (N = 75)

Variables

1. Geospatial Adoption

2. Institutional Readiness

0.682**

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1765

www.rsisinternational.org

3. Human Capacity

0.601**

0.644**

4. Governance Performance

0.741**

0.693**

0.667**

NOTE: P < 0.01 (two-tailed).

Model Summary

Regression outcomes (Table 4.6) revealed that the jointly explain 68.2 percent of the variation of governance

performance by geospatial adoption, institutional readiness and human capacity (R2 = 0.682). This significant

predictive power indicates that both technical and organizational variables have a significant effect on county

outcomes. Akbarighatar, Muller, and Meijer (2023) empirically discovered that increased performance is

possible when institutionalizing technology and doing it strategically. In theory, this confirms the STS Theory

hypothesis of co-optimization succession, where the structure of the organization and digital technology should

co-evolve to achieve the highest level of efficiency (Smolka et al., 2023).

Table 4.6 Model Summary

Model

R²

Adjusted R²

Std. Error of Estimate

0.826

0.682

0.664

0.421

Anova

As per the results of the ANOVA (Table 4.7), the overall model was statistically significant (F = 48.316, p <

0.001), which proved the existence of a significant overall joint effect of geospatial adoption, institutional

preparedness, and human capacity on the outcomes of governance. The counties which institutionalized real-

time data systems have shown significant efficiency and accountability of the projects, which was also

consistent with the results of Eshetie and Ambaye (2024). This theoretically defends the STS position that

technological systems are optimally engaged in relationships with adaptive social subsystems. The ANOVA

therefore validates the model and the necessity of technical integration in addition to organizational

commitment in the Kenyan county governance.

Table 4.7 Anova

Model

Sum of Squares

Mean Square

Sig.

Regression

18.476

6.159

48.316

0.000

Residual

8.616

0.121

Total

27.092

Coefficients

Table 4.8 reveals that all the predictors had a significant impact on governance performance. The strongest

predictor was the geospatial adoption (b = 0.412, p < 0.01), then institutional readiness (b = 0.356, p < 0.05),

and human capacity (b = 0.218, p < 0.05). This is empirically proven to find out that the adoption of digital and

institutional maturity complement service delivery, which is consistent with findings across the globe on data-

driven reforms (Kudina and van de Poel, 2024). Theoretically, the findings demonstrate the STS principle

according to which an increase in the performance of an organization is achieved in the presence of a technical

innovation accompanied by human and institutional capacities (Schunemann et al., 2024). The counties that

reported the presence of both digital tools and experienced personnel scored the highest in the efficiency of

governance.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1766

www.rsisinternational.org

Table 4.8 Coefficients

Predictor

Unstd. B

Std. Error

Beta (β)

Sig.

(Constant)

0.812

0.147

5.524

0.000

Geospatial Adoption

0.412

0.083

0.458

4.963

0.000

Institutional Readiness

0.356

0.091

0.392

3.901

0.002

Human Capacity

0.218

0.085

0.247

2.564

0.013

DISCUSSION

Results Interpretation and with Respect to Objectives.

The paper investigated the role of geospatial and real-time data integration on the county governance in Kenya.

Results proved that the application of technology and institutional preparedness are mutually contributing

factors to governance outcomes, which is consistent with the Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Theory that

focuses on the social system and technical infrastructure interaction (Murphy, Lyytinen and Somers, 2023).

Objective 1:

The use of GIS dashboards, IoT sensors, and mobile data-collection tools to improve the monitoring and

transparency in counties, like Nairobi, Kiambu, and Laikipia, is highly picked. Approximately 72 percent of

the participants stated that efficiency also improved, which confirms the findings of Sanchez et al. (2024) and

Ronoh, Otieno and Mugo (2025) that spatial platforms enhance the strength of oversight and accountability of

the project. Reforms based on data were most effective when organizational presentation and technical

competency existed.

Objective 2:

The regression analysis revealed that institutional readiness and geospatial adoption had a significant influence

on governance performance ( = 0.412 and = 0.356, p < 0.05). A higher level of transparency and service

delivery were reported in counties with developed digital systems, and the results aligned with findings in the

region that real-time data can create civic trust and diligence (Eshetie and Ambaye, 2024). This helps to

confirm the STS principle of joint optimization- technology will only yield results with the help of adaptive

governance structures.

Objective 3:

Endemic shortages in technical employee efforts and data governance hampered performance that was

observed internationally with poor institutional alignment hindering digital transformation (Akbarighatar,

Muller & Meijer, 2023). Those counties which did not have clear interoperability policies and training were

lagging behind and the significance of the enhancement of human capital, custodianship, and cross-

departmental collaboration became obvious.

On the whole, the evidence confirms the fact that the key to successful decentralization reforms lies in the co-

evolution of the technological capacity and organizational flexibility, which are the central principles of the

STS framework.

Comparison to Other Studies

The Kenyan experience is reflective of the larger African and world numbers on the transformative potential of

geospatial systems in the public governance.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1767

www.rsisinternational.org

Ugandan Context:

GIS-based surveillance was found to increase accountability on municipal levels in Uganda but had problems

with data fragmentation and lack of skills (Nsubuga & Kalema, 2023; Ministry of Local Government, 2024).

As in the case of Kenya, when the institutional and technical systems co-evolved, they enhanced the results,

which supports the STS point of view (Murphy et al., 2023).

Wider African Context:

In Tanzania, Nigeria and South Africa, spatial platforms on the Africa Regional Data Cube enhanced

transparency but failed at interoperability (Rugeiyamu & Msendo, 2025). The geospatial structures in Ethiopia

led to increased efficiency in planning but needed better policy coordination (Eshetie and Ambaye, 2024).

Maturity of geospatial centers was a key to success of Egypt in governance (Seddeek & Amin, 2025). These

trends are in line with the evidence presented by Kenya that technological success depends on institutional

capacity.

Global Comparison:

In the developed world, transparency in the utilities was more observed in the integrated dashboards like the

Smart Santander project in Europe (Sanchez et al., 2024). The open-data governance has been institutionalized

in Denmark and the Netherlands and increased accountability (OECD, 2023). In Asia, both Indonesia and

Vietnam adopted spatial-data ecosystems to enhance the delivery of services though coordination and funding

remained a challenge (UNESCAP, 2022). The counties in Kenya are at a middle point of this international

trend, having passed through pilot use to institutionalization.

Synthesis:

In the various settings, success is achieved when digital infrastructure, leadership, and human capacity develop

in harmonious relations (Akbarighatar et al., 2023). In Kenya, the example of such transition is the balancing

of innovation in such counties as Nairobi and Laikipia and the lack of capacity in others. Such cross-over

highlights the fact that sustainable governance reform needs to put an equal amount of resources on

technology, people and adaptive institutions.

Implications in Governance and Project-Management.

The findings indicate that information-based tools have a significant impact in improving accountability,

responsiveness and efficiency in devolved project management. With GIS and IoT dashboards, better tracking

and cost management as well as citizen engagement were observed in counties that integrated these

technologies (Ronoh et al., 2025). The development of technical and managerial strength ought to be an

agenda policy.

The performance of counties that had trained personnel and supportive leaders was stronger, which proves the

STS principle of complementing technical systems with social subsystems of skills, leadership, and culture

(Murphy et al., 2023). Budgeting and reporting systems must be incorporated in digital systems, as opposed to

ICT projects that are independent. This practice is associated with effective smart-governance practices on an

international level (Sanchez et al., 2024).

Theoretical Contribution

This paper has applied the socio-technical systems theory in a broader context, that is, the devolved

governance in Africa, illustrating how technology and institutional and social structures interact to alter the

outcome of reforms. It is proven that only the co-development of organizational structures, leadership, and

human capacity can lead to a better implementation of such tools as GIS and IoT dashboards and enhance the

necessary level of accountability (Murphy et al., 2023; Akbarighatar et al., 2023).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1768

www.rsisinternational.org

Offering digital governance as a socio-technical ecosystem, the paper solidifies the STS notion of the joint

optimization that technical and social subsystems should progress as a single entity toward the creation of a

sustainable change (Smolka et al., 2023). The application of this framework locally to Kenya offers the

possibility of applying the same to other developing countries that are experiencing digital reform.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Key Findings

The paper determined that the incorporation of geospatial and real-time information increases the transparency

of counties, tracking of projects and delivery of services (Ronoh et al., 2025). Integrated use of geospatial

tools, institutional preparedness and human capacity attributed 68.2 percent of the governance performance

variance, which confirmed the fact that technology and accountability are reinforcers. The counties of good

leadership and trained staff worked better as compared to others, which proves that technological changes can

only be successfully implemented in adaptive organizational environments (Murphy et al., 2023; Eshetie and

Ambaye, 2024).

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

To standardize the collection, sharing and use of data, county and national governments are supposed to design

extensive data-governance frameworks. Continuity would be improved through dedicated units of GIS and

digital-monitoring in the planning departments. On the national level, the Ministry of ICT and Council of

Governors are recommended to organize capacity-building efforts with RCMRD, KIPPRA, and local

universities (RCMRD, 2025). The idea of encouraging open-data information and incorporating geospatial

systems into performance agreements and contracts in budgeting will institutionalize evidence-based

governance.

Practical Recommendations

It is recommended that counties focus on the consistent employee training on GIS, IoT, and data analytics,

institutionalize acquisitive learning, and use shared digital infrastructure to minimize duplication. The use of

dashboards in the daily process of decision-making and monitoring projects will help to create transparency

and responsibility (Sanchez et al., 2024). The integration of spatial data into the entire planning, procurement,

and evaluation considerations is part of the principles of STS and makes sure that digital systems become a

source of coherent governance solutions and not pilot projects (Smolka et al., 2023).

Areas for Further Research

The future research ought to delve into the effects of geospatial and IoT adoption on a longer term basis over

many budget cycles to determine sustainability. The regional comparative studies in East Africa may shed light

on the trends of digital decentralization and learning in institutions. Additional studies on citizen engagement

and digital inclusivity would be required to comprehend how open-data ecosystems affect the citizens in terms

of public trust and participation. The synergistic approach of STS and behavioral and institutional theories

could produce more profound leadership, culture, and technology interaction models in African governance.

REFERENCES

1. Adreani, L., Bellini, P., Fanfani, M., Nesi, P., & Pantaleo, G. (2023). Smart city digital twin framework

for real-time multi-data integration and wide public distribution. Preprint.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.13394

2. Akbarighatar, P., Müller, B., & Meijer, S. (2023). A sociotechnical perspective for responsible AI

maturity. Journal of Responsible Technology.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266709682300040X

3. Al-Said, R., & Hassan, S. (2024). The role of the Internet of Things (IoT) in achieving sustainable

development goals: A systematic review. ACM Digital Library. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3765516

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1769

www.rsisinternational.org

4. Barik, R. K., Dubey, H., Samaddar, A. B., Gupta, R. D., & Ray, P. K. (2017). FogGIS: Fog computing

for geospatial big data analytics. Preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.02601

5. Barik, R. K., Tripathy, B. K., & Pattnaik, P. K. (2017). FogGIS: Fog computing for geospatial big data

analytics. Future Generation Computer Systems, 82, 480–491. https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.02601

6. Chandani, Y., Andersson, S., Heaton, A., Noel, M., Shieshia, M., Mwirotsi, A., & Girma, S. (2016).

Unlocking bottlenecks in public health supply chains through data dashboards and governance

structures: The Kenya experience. Global Health: Science and Practice, 4(2), 311–326.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.08755

7. County Government of Laikipia. (2024). Integrating geospatial technologies in development processes:

County planning and service delivery. Nanyuki: County Government of

Laikipia.https://www.laikipia.go.ke/1157/integrating-geospatial-technologies-in-development-processes/

8. E3S Conferences. (2023). Digital revolution in African cities: Exploring governance through IoT, AI,

big data and 5G. E3S Web of Conferences, 415, 03007. https://www.e3s-

conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/pdf/2023/55/e3sconf_acc2023_03007.pdf

9. Eshetie, G. G., & Ambaye, K. (2024). Geospatial technologies in support of responsible land governance

in developing countries. Land Use Policy.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1195103624000144

10. Esri. (n.d.). Dashboard streamlines local government operations: Baton Rouge case. Esri Case Study.

https://www.esri.com/en-us/landing-page/product/2019/baton-rouge-case-study

11. Esri. (n.d.). Enhancing civic participation with performance dashboards: City of Arlington. Esri Local

Government Solutions. https://www.esri.com/en-us/cp/gis-local-government-solutions/city-of-arlington-

case-study

12. Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data (GPSDD). (2023). Africa Regional Data Cube

governance frameworks and operationalization. Nairobi: GPSDD.

https://www.data4sdgs.org/sites/default/files/services_files/GPSDD_ARDC%20Governance%20Framew

orks.pdf

13. Granell, C., Mooney, P., Jirka, S., Rieke, M., Ostermann, F., van den Broecke, J., et al. (2022). Emerging

approaches for data-driven innovation in Europe: sandbox experiments on the governance of data and

technology. JRC Technical Report.

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC127730/jrc-tr_ddi_2021_v9_online.pdf

14. Guay, R., et al. (2022). A comparative analysis of data governance: Socio-technical imaginaries of

digital personal data. Big Data & Society.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/20539517221112925

15. Hendriks, A. (2025). Shaping the future: A conceptual review of sociotechnical imaginaries. Futures.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328725000692

16. https://www.wri.org/research/application-gis-sub-national-energy-planning-kenya-integrating-primary-

data-least-cost

17. Huntington, S. (2014). The geography of governance in Africa: New tools from satellites, surveys, and

mapping initiatives. Journal of Modern African Studies, 52(3), 345–367.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13597566.2014.971774

18. Kenya Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries & Cooperatives. (2024). Data Governance

Framework 2022. https://kilimo.go.ke/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/MoALFC-Data-Governance-

Framework-2022.pdf

19. KIPPRA. (2025, June 11). Leveraging GIS for enhanced environmental management, urban planning

and transport system — lesson from Vihiga County, Kenya. https://kippra.or.ke/leveraging-gis-for-

enhanced-environmental-management-urban-planning-and-transport-system-lesson-from-vihiga-county-

in-kenya/

20. Kristiani, E., & Marcel. (2024). Improving IT service management capability in small firms: A case

study integrated with Socio-Technical Systems Theory. International Journal for Service Science,

Management, Engineering, and Technology. https://journal-isi.org/index.php/isi/article/view/904

21. Kudina, O., & van de Poel, I. (2024). A sociotechnical system perspective on AI. Minds & Machines, 34,

Article 21. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11023-024-09680-2

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1770

www.rsisinternational.org

22. Li, S., Batty, M., & Goodchild, M. (2020). Real-time GIS for smart cities. International Journal of

Geographical Information Science, 34(10), 1886–1899.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13658816.2019.1673397

23. Matheus, R., & others. (2020). Data-driven dashboards for transparent and accountable local

government. Government Information Quarterly, 31(2).

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X18300303

24. Mbuh, M. J., Metzger, P., Brandt, P., Fika, K., & Slinkey, M. (2019). Application of real-time GIS

analytics to support spatial intelligent decision-making in the era of big data for smart cities. EAI

Endorsed Transactions on Smart Cities.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345382978_Application_of_real-

time_GIS_analytics_to_support_spatial_intelligent_decision-

making_in_the_era_of_big_data_for_smart_cities

25. Miasayedava, L., et al. (2022). Automated environmental compliance monitoring of rivers using sensor

data and open-government principles. Journal of Environmental Monitoring.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479721023458

26. Mkhitaryan, A., Petrosyan, T., & Sargsyan, L. (2025). Integrating AI and geospatial technologies for

sustainable urban governance in Yerevan. Urban Science, 9(10), 389. https://www.mdpi.com/2413-

8851/9/10/389

27. Murphy, K., Lyytinen, K., & Somers, T. (2023). A socio-technical model for project-based executive IT

governance. SCIREA Journal of Computer, 8(1), 25–48.

https://www.scirea.org/journal/PaperInformation?PaperID=8797

28. Nezhad, M., Zafarani, M., & Samadi, H. (2025). A GIS-portal platform for integrated energy data

management: A governance perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 190, 114284.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032125006926

29. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2022). Using private sector

geospatial data to inform policy. Paris: OECD Publishing.

30. Praharaj, S., Han, H., & Yigitcanlar, T. (2025). Command and control governance in India’s 100 Smart

Cities: A critical evaluation of integrated data systems. Cities, 154, 105623.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0143622825002619

31. Rajamäe, T., & Nikiforova, A. (2024). Bridging the gap: Unravelling local government data sharing

barriers in Estonia and beyond. Government Information Quarterly, 41(2), 102772.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.08461

32. Ronoh, G., Otieno, C., & Mugo, R. (2025). Application of GIS in sub-national energy planning in

Kenya: Integrating primary data for least-cost analysis. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

33. Rugeiyamu, G., & Msendo, R. (2025). Success, challenges, and prospects of decentralization in Africa:

A systematic review. Journal of African Governance Studies, 8(2), 44–67.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388748437_Success_challenges_and_prospects_of_decentraliz

ation_in_Africa_a_systematic_review

34. Safari Bazargani, J. (2021). A survey of GIS and IoT integration: Applications and opportunities.

Applied Sciences, 11(21), 10365. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/21/10365

35. Salis, G., Di Nuzzo, L., & De Santis, A. (2025). IoT-driven governance of urban green spaces: A

Campobasso case study. Sustainable Cities and Society, 115, 105050. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.12106

36. Schünemann, C., et al. (2024). Modelling behaviour in socio-technical systems: Comparisons of ABM,

SDM, and STM approaches. Journal of Cleaner Production.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095965262402170X

37. Seddeek, M. A., & Amin, H. S. (2025). A governance framework for the geospatial information centres

(GICs) in developing countries. Journal of Urban Research, 49(1), 27–44.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387434628_A_Governance_Framework_for_the_Geospatial_I

nformation_Centres_GICs_in_Developing_Countries

38. Smolka, M., et al. (2023). Responsible innovation ecosystem governance: Co-designing socio-technical

integration in energy systems. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23299460.2023.2207937

39. Sofianopoulos, G., Christodoulou, P., & Zervas, P. (2025). SDI-enabled smart governance: A decade

review (2015–2025). Land, 14(7), 1399. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/7/1399

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue X October 2025

Page 1771

www.rsisinternational.org

40. Sourd, G. L. (2025). Cartography for global sustainable development agendas: Mapping progress in

developing regions. Journal of Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 52(2), 101–119.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23729333.2025.2532942

41. Space in Africa. (2023). Accelerating Africa’s sustainable development with geospatial intelligence.

Space in Africa Reports. https://spaceinafrica.com/2023/02/24/accelerating-africas-sustainable-

development-with-geospatial-intelligence/

42. Tan, S. Y., & Taeihagh, A. (2022). Smart city governance in developing countries: A systematic

literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 39(1), 101653. https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.10173

43. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP). (2022).

Geospatial practices for sustainable development in South and Southeast Asia: Compendium. Bangkok:

UNESCAP. https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/2022-

10/Sustainable%20Development%20Compendium_Executive%20Summary_FINAL%20251022.pdf

44. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA). (2023). Harnessing geospatial and Earth

observation data for effective governance and decision-making in Africa. Addis Ababa: UNECA.

https://repository.uneca.org/handle/10855/49068

45. United Nations Global Geospatial Information Management for Asia and the Pacific (UN-GGIM-AP).

(2022). Geospatial strategy for national development. Seoul: UN-GGIM-AP. https://un-ggim-

ap.org/sites/default/files/media/docs/Geospatial-Strategy-for-National-Development-2022.pdf

46. Wahome, A. M., Kiema, J. B. K., & Mulaku, G. C. (2023). Kenyan counties geospatial data knowledge

to monitor crop production. Journal of Geographic Information System, 15, 629–651.

https://www.scirp.org/pdf/jgis_2023121914103015.pdf

47. Zhao, B. (2023). Digital transparency and citizen participation: Evidence from online crowdsourcing.

Government Information Quarterly.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0740624X23000680

48. “City taps GIS tech to enhance urban planning” (2025, June 24). Kenya News.

https://www.kenyanews.go.ke/city-taps-gis-tech-to-enhance-urban-planning/

49. “GIS Dashboards & Data — Maarifa Centre.” (n.d.). Council of Governors, Kenya.

https://maarifa.cog.go.ke/article/gis-dashboards-data

50. “Kenya national digital master plan 2022-2032” (2022). Kenya ICT Authority.

https://cms.icta.go.ke/sites/default/files/2022-04/Kenya%20Digital%20Masterplan%202022-

2032%20Online%20Version.pdf

51. “Kenyan counties embrace advanced GIS training to strengthen land governance” (2025, April 30).

RCMRD. https://rcmrd.org/en/component/content/article/kenyan-counties-embrace-advanced-gis-

training-to-strengthen-land-governance?Itemid=101&catid=9

52. “Open Data Commitment: Publish open data to spur innovation in public service.” (n.d.). Open

Government Partnership Kenya.

https://www.opengovpartnership.org/members/kenya/commitments/KE0026/

53. “Open Data for Development (KE0034).” (n.d.). Open Government Partnership.

https://www.opengovpartnership.org/members/kenya/commitments/KE0034/

54. “Thirty county governments receive GIS equipment to strengthen food security efforts” (2024,

November 7). MyGov Kenya. https://www.mygov.go.ke/thirty-county-governments-receive-gis-

equipment-strengthen-food-security-efforts