Janowski’s (2015) digital maturity model and to Heeks’ (2002) dimensions of the design-reality gap [2][4].

The analysis shows that Cameroonian communities remain mostly at stages 1 and 2 of digital maturity, limiting the transition towards citizen engagement and advanced contextualization.

•Republic of Cameroon (2010). Law No. 2010/012 of 21 December 2010 relating to cybersecurity and cybercrime.

•Republic of Cameroon (2010). Law No. 2010/013 of 21 December 2010 governing electronic communications (protection of personal data).

•Republic of Cameroon (2010). Law No. 2019/024 of 24 December 2019 establishing the general code for decentralized territorial authorities.

The theoretical framework of territorial digital transformation: This research is based primarily on a structured review of international literature and secondary data. It does not rely on in-depth empirical research with a representative sample of Cameroonian local authorities.

Therefore, the findings should be interpreted as structural trends and not as exhaustive diagnoses uniformly applicable to all municipalities. The heterogeneity of communities (urban, rural, metropolitan) limits the generalizability of the results; comparative field studies would be necessary to refine the analysis.

The first obstacle to digital transformation lies in the uneven coverage of the territory by telecommunications infrastructure. Donner (2015) demonstrated that the limited availability of broadband internet is a major impediment to the adoption of digital technologies in Africa [9]. In Cameroon, according to data from the International Telecommunication Union, internet penetration rates remain low in rural areas where the majority of municipalities are located.

Cariolle and Goujon (2019) demonstrated that the quality of internet connectivity directly impacts the ability of public administrations to deploy effective digital services [10]. This finding creates a paradox: the territories that would benefit most from digital administration are precisely those that lack the necessary infrastructure.

Avgerou (2008), in his analysis of technology transfers to developing countries, highlights the risks of technological dependence and the inadequacy of imported solutions [11]. Cameroonian local authorities often find themselves trapped by costly proprietary systems, without local control over the deployed technologies.

Kimaro and Nhampossa (2005) analyzed the sustainability challenges of information systems in developing countries, highlighting the crucial importance of developing local skills [12]. The absence of such skills condemns projects to structural fragility.

Boex and Martinez-Vazquez (2007) analyzed local government financing systems in Africa, revealing their excessive dependence on state transfers and their limited fiscal autonomy [13]. This budgetary constraint significantly limits investment in digital technologies, which appear to be relegated to a secondary priority compared to basic needs (Table 3).

Smoke (2015) expands on this analysis by demonstrating that, without effective fiscal decentralization, African local authorities struggle to mobilize the resources necessary for their modernization [14]. Cameroon perfectly illustrates this observation, with municipalities whose operating budgets leave little room for technological innovation.

Table 3.Budgetary structure of local authorities.

Weerakkody et al. (2011) pointed out that implementation costs represent only a fraction of the total cost of ownership of public information systems [15]. Maintenance, upgrade, and training expenses are often underestimated at the project launch (Table 4).

Gil-García and Pardo (2005) identify long-term financial viability as one of the main challenges of e-government projects, particularly relevant in a context of limited resources such as that of Cameroon [16].

Table 4.Total cost of ownership (TCO) of an information system.

Orlikowski (1996) theorized that technologies only transform organizations if they are accompanied by an evolution of practices and mindsets (Table 5) [17]. Pardo and Tayi (2007) apply this perspective to the public sector, demonstrating that resistance to change is particularly strong there due to the stability of bureaucratic structures [18].

In the Cameroonian context, Nchise (2017) demonstrated how administrative practices inherited from the colonial era persist and hinder the adoption of new working methods [19]. Digital transformation thus encounters deeply entrenched organizational inertia.

Table 5.Factors of resistance to organizational change.

Cordella and Bonina (2012) demonstrated the crucial role of political leadership in the success of public sector digital transformation initiatives [20]. However, as Schuppan (2009) points out, the public sector in developing countries often suffers from a lack of change agents capable of formulating a coherent digital vision [21].

Gil-García (2012) emphasizes the need for multi-level governance and coordination among stakeholders to successfully achieve digital transformation [22]. In Cameroon, the fragmentation of initiatives and the lack of an integrated strategic framework are major obstacles.

Siddiquee (2008) analyzed the difficulties associated with capacity building in Asian public administrations, highlighting the importance of training programs tailored to the specific needs of the public sector [23]. This problem is even more acute in Africa.

Yusuf (2019) demonstrates that the lack of digital skills among African civil servants is a major obstacle to digital transformation (Table 6) [24]. In Cameroon, local authorities struggle to attract and retain qualified IT professionals, facing competition from the private sector.

Table 6.Digital skills deficit.

Docquier and Rapoport (2012) documented the extent of the African brain drain, particularly in technical sectors [25]. Local authorities, which offer uncompetitive salaries, are especially affected by this phenomenon.

Baro and Endouware (2013) point out that the high turnover rate of qualified staff in African administrations compromises the continuity of digital projects and the capitalization of knowledge [26].

Dawes (2009) theorized the challenges of integrating information systems in the public sector, highlighting the difficulties of coordination between different levels of government (Table 7) [27]. Luna-Reyes and Gil-García (2014) extend this analysis, demonstrating how essential yet difficult to implement inter-organizational collaboration is [28].

In Cameroon, the lack of coordination between the central government and local authorities, as well as between the municipalities themselves, leads to a proliferation of isolated and incompatible projects, compromising any systemic vision.

Table 7.Levels of governance of digital transformation.

Bailur and Walsham (2008) analyzed how corruption and a lack of transparency undermine administrative modernization efforts in developing countries [29]. Lio, Liu, and Ou (2011) empirically demonstrate that corruption slows the adoption of information technologies in the public sector [30].

This reality is particularly widespread in Cameroonian communities, where the processes of acquiring digital technologies often lack transparency, promoting suboptimal choices guided by extra-technical considerations.

Van Dijk (2006) developed a multidimensional theory of the digital divide, which goes beyond access to include skills, uses, and tangible benefits (Table 8) [7]. Warschauer (2003) emphasizes that digital inclusion is a social process, not simply a matter of equipment [31].

In Cameroon, Tchinda et al. (2018) observed a low level of digital skills among the population, particularly among the elderly and in rural areas [32]. This situation significantly limits the potential use of digital services offered by communities.

Table 8.The dimensions of the digital divide [7].

Roy (2005) theorized the importance of the informal sector in African cities, a sector that largely escapes formal management systems [33]. Simone (2004) developed the concept of “people as infrastructure” to describe how, in urban Africa, informal social networks compensate for institutional failures [34].

This predominance of the informal sector constitutes a major challenge for the digitization of local public services, which requires a formalization of transactions and interactions that Cameroonian social reality does not always validate.

Savoldelli, Codagnone and Misuraca (2014) highlighted the importance of a suitable legal framework to support the digital transformation of the public sector [35]. Saxena (2005) shows that the lack of legislation on data protection, electronic signatures, and digital transactions constitutes a major obstacle to e-government [36].

Although Cameroon has laws on cybersecurity and electronic transactions, their application remains limited to the level of local authorities, creating legal uncertainty that discourages innovation.

Hood (1991), in his analysis of new public management, highlights the tension between the flexibility necessary for innovation and bureaucratic constraints [37]. Dunleavy et al. (2006) develop the concept of governance in the digital age, which requires an overhaul of administrative processes [38].

Cameroonian communities remain trapped by cumbersome administrative procedures, inherited from a bureaucratic model that is poorly compatible with the agility required by digital transformation.

Walsham (2017) warns against the indiscriminate importation of Western models of digital transformation into developing countries [39]. Miscione (2007) analyzes how telemedicine projects in Ethiopia failed due to a lack of consideration for local realities [40].

Njihia and Merali (2013) propose an approach based on “institutional bricolage”—the creative adaptation of technologies to local contexts rather than their direct transposition [41]. This perspective suggests that Cameroonian communities would benefit from developing endogenous solutions rather than copying external models.

Choudrie and Dwivedi (2005) analyzed the success factors of e-government projects, emphasizing the importance of citizen participation and adaptation to the context (Table 9) [42]. African experiences such as M-Pesa in Kenya [43] or community multimedia centers in Mali [44] demonstrate that strong local ownership can compensate for infrastructural limitations.

Deen-Swarray, Moyo and Stork (2013) demonstrate that mobile solutions can offer alternative pathways for digital development in Africa, compensating for the lack of fixed infrastructure [45]. This avenue deserves further exploration by Cameroonian communities.

Table 9.Success factors for e-government projects in Africa.

Sein et al. (2011) propose an “action-driven design” methodology for ICT projects in developing countries, favoring iterative experimentation over exhaustive planning [46]. Thompson and Walsham (2010) advocate pragmatic approaches, accepting initial imperfection and gradual improvement [47].

Cameroonian communities would benefit from abandoning large technocratic projects in favor of pilot initiatives that can be evaluated and adjusted, as suggested by Heeks and Stanforth (2014) in their analysis of effective e-government strategies [48].

Unwin (2009) emphasizes the need for holistic ICT development strategies, including education, training, and the development of a local entrepreneurial ecosystem [8]. Hellström (2008) demonstrates that well-designed public-private partnerships can accelerate digital transformation [49].

Krauss (2013) demonstrates the importance of communities of practice and the sharing of experiences between communities to foster mutual learning [50]. The creation of networks of Cameroonian digital cities could catalyze this process.

Janssen and Estevez (2013) advocate for interoperable and collaborative governance frameworks [51]. Pardo, Nam, and Burke (2012) emphasize the importance of explicit coordination structures between different levels of government [52].

Cameroon would benefit from creating a national agency dedicated to supporting territorial digital transformation, as several African countries (Rwanda, Tunisia) have successfully done, thus ensuring strategic coordination and pooling of resources (Table 10).

Table 10.Strategic framework for territorial digital transformation.