Editorial to the EGOV-CeDEM-Epart 2025

to the EGOV-CeDEM-Epart 2025 CEUR proceedings The EGOV-CeDEM-ePart 2025 conference, for short EGOV2025, was organized by the IFIP WG 8.5 Information Systems in Public Administration. The conference is dedicated to digital or electronic government, open government, local government (smart cities), smart governance, artificial intelligence (AI), e-democracy, policy informatics, and electronic participation. With a long tradition along its various branches, the EGOV-CeDEM-ePart conference has gained its reputation of being the key and leading conference worldwide in the research domains of digital/electronic, open, and smart government, as well as electronic participation. The call for papers attracted completed research papers, work-in-progress papers on ongoing research (including doctoral papers), posters, as well as workshops and practitioner papers. This volume contains 31 full research papers, 6 workshop descriptions, and 17 posters. All submissions were assessed through a double-blind peer-review process, with at least three reviewers per submission. The submitted papers were of high quality, and many reviewers indicated that the topic of the papers they reviewed were novel. The review process was based on a double-blind reviewing process and conflicts of interest were actively avoided. Authors of papers submitted their papers to a track. The track chairs had only access to the papers within their own track and could assign reviewers and propose acceptance decisions. The lead track chairs of each chair were editors of the proceedings, in addition to the general chairs. Track chairs were not allowed to submit to their own track, nor were their close collaborators, to avoid any conflict of interest. Track chairs could either submit to another track or to the 'track chairs' track. The latter was handled by one of the general chairs, and these submissions were reviewed in the same way as all other submissions. The general chairs checked after the submission deadline if there was any conflict of interest among the papers submitted to tracks, and if so, the respective paper was moved to another track. The track chairs checked that all papers were submitted anonymously. If not, the authors were asked to resubmit within a couple of days. Track chairs assigned the reviewers and selected the program committee members in such a way that experts in this area reviewed the papers and there were no conflicts of interest. After at least three reviews were received, the track chairs made a proposal for a decision per paper. The decisions were discussed in a meeting with the general and track chairs to ensure that the decisions were made in a consistent manner across tracks.