**3. Adoption of biometric technology**

With the advantage of reliable authentication of biometric technology, many security applications around the world have adopted and implemented biometric technology. Currently, biometric technology has been adopted in many applications such as access control, national identity, immigration, proving attendance, military identification, egovernment, and e-commerce applications.

With the application of biometric technology, e-government aims to give its citizens improved services and better access to information as it can provide reliable identification of individuals as well as the ability for controlling and protecting the integrity of sensitive data stored in information systems. Many researchers such as Ashbourn (2004), Bonsor and Johnson (2008), Scott et al. (2005), and Wayman et al. (2005) argue that a wider use of biometric technology can be applied to e-government projects. With variations on attendance registration mentioned above, biometric technology is used for e-voting to ensure that voters do not vote twice. With biometric technology, governments prevent fraud during elections. Moreover, biometric technology can be used to ensure correct working times are recorded and that only authorized personnel have access to government property and resources.

Biometric technology can also be used by e-governments for business. For instance, many banks use facial recognition systems to minimise chances of theft. For example, photos are taken on the bank slips which are stored on computer software. As a result, this has avoided the issue of fraudulent bank slips when withdrawing money, since ATMs are a quick method of withdrawing money. This has helped the government to conduct its activities effectively (Bonsor and Johnson 2008).

In business, there is frequently the need for full identification of employees to ensure that, in case of any problem in that firm, the management is in a position to identify the person responsible for that act. Commercial applications may also require full identification capability, digital certificates, human interface, and one or more authentication devices to ensure that the business can run well. People are also in a position to do their business

Integrating biometric authentication into mobile devices can be done in two different ways. The first technique is to store the biometric template in an external database (Giarimi and Magnusson 2002). In this case, the biometric data have to be sent over the network every time the user wants to be verified and, during that process, the data are encrypted, which forms the external database for storage rather than security. The problem is that the users have no control over their own biometric pattern once it leaves the device. Furthermore, it can potentially take a long time to perform verification when data are being sent over the mobile network due to traffic overload and the number and size of the files in transit. However, it does not take up much memory in the mobile device. The second technique is to store the biometric template in the device or particularly on the smart card which will enable users to control their biometric pattern (Giarimi and Magnusson 2002). The biometric verification should take place when the users want to log in to their mobile device and when they want to perform a government service. Moreover, this can be integrated with the Public Key Infrastructure, as mentioned earlier, to provide a more secure authentication system.

With the advantage of reliable authentication of biometric technology, many security applications around the world have adopted and implemented biometric technology. Currently, biometric technology has been adopted in many applications such as access control, national identity, immigration, proving attendance, military identification, e-

With the application of biometric technology, e-government aims to give its citizens improved services and better access to information as it can provide reliable identification of individuals as well as the ability for controlling and protecting the integrity of sensitive data stored in information systems. Many researchers such as Ashbourn (2004), Bonsor and Johnson (2008), Scott et al. (2005), and Wayman et al. (2005) argue that a wider use of biometric technology can be applied to e-government projects. With variations on attendance registration mentioned above, biometric technology is used for e-voting to ensure that voters do not vote twice. With biometric technology, governments prevent fraud during elections. Moreover, biometric technology can be used to ensure correct working times are recorded and that only authorized personnel have access to government property

Biometric technology can also be used by e-governments for business. For instance, many banks use facial recognition systems to minimise chances of theft. For example, photos are taken on the bank slips which are stored on computer software. As a result, this has avoided the issue of fraudulent bank slips when withdrawing money, since ATMs are a quick method of withdrawing money. This has helped the government to conduct its activities

In business, there is frequently the need for full identification of employees to ensure that, in case of any problem in that firm, the management is in a position to identify the person responsible for that act. Commercial applications may also require full identification capability, digital certificates, human interface, and one or more authentication devices to ensure that the business can run well. People are also in a position to do their business

**2.3 Biometrics and m-government** 

**3. Adoption of biometric technology** 

government, and e-commerce applications.

effectively (Bonsor and Johnson 2008).

and resources.

properly and invest in any organisation as long as that organisation has an identity as an effective company (Ashbourn 2004).

Biometric technology is also used in the identification of citizens by e-governments. If they choose, every nation should ethically be able to identify its citizens and non-citizens by using national identification cards, visas, and passports. As a result, e-governments are in a position to identify its citizens in the production of these documents, hence reducing the issue of illegal immigration. A good example is the United States whereby, since the events of September 11 2001, it has widely adopted biometric technology. Two laws, relating to identification of transport workers and to immigrants, were made in the United States triggering a mass deployment of biometrics. Now, seven million transportation employees in the United States have biometrics incorporated into their ID cards. Moreover, in order to closely control visitors who enter and leave the country, all foreign visitors are required to present valid passports with biometric data; consequently, over 500 million U.S. visitors have to carry border-crossing documents which incorporate biometrics (Ashbourn 2004). Several European governments have also started to implement the use of biometrics. The U.K. government has established issuing asylum seekers with identification smart cards storing two fingerprints. General plans have also been made to extend the use of biometric technology throughout the visa system in the U.K. as well as in France, Germany and Italy (Scott et al. 2005).

E-governments use the various types of biometric identification in order to control certain illegal behaviour. For example, the Japanese government plans to use biometric technology in passports to tackle illegal immigration and to enable tighter controls on terrorists. This will be applied within a computer chip which can store biometric features like fingerprints and facial recognition data (Scott et al. 2005).

Other e-governments are using the biometric technology to secure access to certain defence bases and similarly secure areas. Biometrics can also provide potential for security cost savings. For instance, hand recognition has been used at the Scott Air Force Base to save more than \$400,000 in manpower costs through their metro-link biometric access gate (Frees 2008).

#### **3.1 Technology adoption factors among empirical studies**

Empirical studies related to the acceptance and adoption of mobile phones and electronic services via the Internet have mostly applied models based on the use of Diffusion of Innovation (Rogers 1995), the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis 1989), or the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al. 2003). For instance, Jahangir and Begum (2008) introduced a conceptual framework that considered perceived usefulness, ease of use, as well as security and privacy as important factors that influence users' acceptance and adoption of electronic banking services. Another study by Tassabehji and Elliman (2006) highlighted trust and security as major factors affecting e-government adoption. Moreover, AlShihi (2007) indicated that trust has a wide impact on m-government acceptance. Lee et al. (2002) found that social influence and self-efficacy variables significantly affect perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use for user acceptance of the mobile Internet. Moreover, Teo and Pok (2003) found that social factors including perceptions of relative advantage play a significant role in influencing intentions for the adoption of Wireless Application Protocol WAP-enabled mobile phones amongst Internet

Developing a Theoretical Framework

**4.1 Grounded theory methodology** 

social research" (p. 2).

biometric authentication in m-government in Saudi Arabia.

for the Adoption of Biometrics in M-Government Applications Using Grounded Theory 189

The investigation part of this study was carried out by the use of questionnaire and semistructured interviews for the data collection. By conducting the interviews and questionnaires, we explored the factors influencing the adoption of biometrics in mgovernment through the concerns and perceptions of mobile communication users', service providers', and network operators' about applying biometric authentication into mobile devices for government services. Data were analysed following Strauss and Corbin's (1990) approach of Grounded Theory. The use of Grounded Theory helped to develop a substantive theory that identifies and describes the factors influencing the adoption of

Grounded Theory is one of the most widely used methodologies in qualitative research (McLeod 1999). It originated in nursing research by Glaser and Strauss (1967) and then has been adopted in several areas of research such as sociology, business, management, and information systems (Mansourian 2006). More specifically, Grounded Theory was first developed by Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss in 1967 in their book "The Discovery of Grounded Theory". They defined Grounded Theory as "the discovery of theory from data – systematically obtained and analysed in social research" (Glaser and Strauss 1967, p. 1).

In subsequent years two different approaches of Grounded Theory have emerged, one by Glaser and the other by Strauss and Corbin. These two approaches became more visible by the publication of Strauss and Corbin's book in 1990. The Grounded Theory approach, according to Strauss and Corbin (1990), is a "qualitative research method that uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived Grounded Theory about a phenomenon" (p. 24). However, Glaser (1992) clarified that "Grounded Theory is based on the systematic generating of theory from data, that itself is systematically obtained from

Glaser (1992) thought that the research should allow the theory to emerge during the observation of the codes and data analysis. Glaser's approach concerns with a classic philosophy emphasizing an inductive emergence of the theory as well as the researcher's role within that process (Heath and Cowley, 2004). Glaser (1992) focuses on the importance of letting the theory emerge from the data by allowing the data to speak for itself and avoiding imprinting preconceived ideas onto the theory (Creswell 2008). By contrast, Strauss and Corbin's (1990) perspective emphasised more on a systematic approach involving validity and verification (Heath and Cowley, 2004). Strauss and Corbin's (1990) approach indicated that Grounded Theory should be inductively derived from the study of the phenomenon it represents. It should be discovered, developed, and verified through systematic data collection and analysis of the data that pertaining to the phenomenon.

It emerges that the Strauss and Corbin (1990) approach is significantly more prescriptive in specifying the steps to be done during the coding and data analysis. More specifically, Strauss and Corbin (1994) identified Grounded Theory as "a general methodology for developing theory that is grounded in data systematically gathered and analysed. Theory evolves during actual research, and it does this through continuous interplay between

analysis and data collection" (Strauss and Corbin 1994, p. 273).

users. Kaasinen (2007) found that perceived value, ease of use, trust and ease of adoption are important factors that influence user acceptance of mobile Internet services. AlGhamdi et al. (2011) pointed out that the provision of trustworthy and secure online payment options is a critical key determining the decision for online customers to accept/reject buying online from a specific retailer.

Thus, highly similar acceptance factors appear under various theories and models covering innovation acceptance and adoption. Moreover, the set of factors that proposed in TAM variants and UTAUT correspond closely with factors identified in DOI theory. For instance, Moore and Benbasat (1991) indicated that while developing an instrument based on DOI concepts to determine an individual's perceptions regarding the acceptance and adoption of an information technology innovation recognised the similarity between the construct of perceived usefulness with perceived relative advantage, and between perceived ease of use with perceived complexity.
