Published date: Oct 02 2023

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: 1st Doctoral International Conference 2023

Pages: 21–31

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v8i17.14100

Ahmad Taufikahmad.taufik@unismuh.ac.idDoctoral Student of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Hasanuddin University

Integrated digitization services are efforts to develop public services by utilizing information and communication technologies in an integrated manner. This study aims to analyze how the government of Makassar City adopts a digital approach to maximize public services. This study relies on Online Research Methods (ORMs) to collect data and information via the Internet and other digital technologies. The ORMs in this study include the results of the data retrieval available from the official website and the application of the Makassar City government (Anrong). The findings indicate that the government has adapted to implement integrated web-based services and applications that make it easier for citizens to access information and public services online. The transformation of integrated digital public services promises great benefits to society and the government, but its implementation also has challenges and obstacles that must be overcome. The perfection of the three elements of process, support, capacity, and value, results in an imbalance because the support element does not yet have the legal force of the mayor’s regulation, but the success of the capacity element shows the activeness of the two websites and mobile apps. Some commonly found challenges are infrastructure and technology problems, limited human resources, changes in organizational culture, data security and privacy, and the level of community participation.

Keywords: public service, digital services, government app, government transformation

[1] Cheng Y, Yang L. Providing public services without relying heavily on government funding: how do non-profits respond to government budget cuts? Am Rev Public Adm. 2019;49(6):675–688.

[2] Ramasamy R. Sri Lanka’s plantation communities: Public service delivery, ethnic minorities and citizenshiprights. South Asia Research. 2018;38:43-60.

[3] Hou X, Wu S, Chen D, Cheng M, Yu X, Yan D, et al. Can urban public and ecosystem services achieve positive synergies? Ecological Indicators. 2021;124:107433.

[4] Lapuente V, Van de Walle S. Effects of new public management on the quality of public services. Governance (Oxford). 2020;33(3):461–467.

[5] Engen M, Fransson M, Quist J, Skålén P. Continuing the development of public service logic: A study of value co-destruction in public services. Public Manage Review. 2021;23(6):886–905.

[6] Ha LT. Socioeconomic and resource efficiency impacts of digital public services. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022 Nov;29(55):83839–83859.

[7] Safarov N. Personal experiences of digital public service access and use: Older migrants’ digital choices. Technology in Society. 2021;66:101627.

[8] Styrin E, Mossberger K, Zhulin A. Government as a platform: Intergovernmental participation in public services in the Russian Federation. Government Information Quarterly. 2022;39(1):101627.

[9] Twizeyimana JD, Andersson A. Public value of e-government: A literature review. Government Information Quarterly. 2019;36(2):167–178.

[10] Mazanderani F, Kirkpatrick SF, Ziebland S, Locock L, Powell J. Caring for care: Online feedback in the context of public healthcare services. Social Science & Medicine. 2021 Sep;285:114280.

[11] Sapru Y. Augmentation of public service delivery through online feedback systems. Indian Jornal of Public Administration. 2020;66(3):297–311.

[12] Utami AN, Baharuddin T, Khaerah N, Fariaty CN. Public health services: Makassar government’s response in the early phase of the COVID-19. KEMUDI: Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan. 2022;7(1):66–76.

[13] L. government. [Mobile Application Software]. Anrong Apps. 2023.

[14] Indrajit RE. Electronic government strategi Pembangunan dan Pembangunan Sistem Pelayanan Publik Berbasis Teknologi Digital.(cetakan ke-3). Yogyakarta: Andi; 2006.

[15] Bwalya KJ. Factors affecting the adoption of e-government in Zambia. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries. 2009;38(1):1–13.

[16] Irani Z, Love PE, Elliman T, Jones S, Themistocleous M. Evaluating e-government: learning from the experiences of two UK local authorities. Information Systems Journal. 2005;15(1):61–82.

[17] Rowley J. e-Government stakeholders: Who are they and what do they want? International Journal of Information Management. 2011;31(1):53–62.

[18] Asmara AY. Pentingnya Riset Kebijakan dalam Pembuatan Kebijakan Publik Unggul di Indonesia [ Journal of Public Sector Innovations]. JPSI. 2016;1(1):37–46.

[19] Black J, Kingsford Smith D. Critical reflections on regulation [plus a reply by Dimity Kingsford Smith.]. Asian Journal of Legal Philosophy. 2002;27:1–46.

[20] Suwitri S. Konsep dasar kebijakan publik. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro; 2008.

[21] Bok D. The cost of talent: How are executives and professionals paid and how does it affect America? Simon and Schuster; 2002.

[22] Liamputtong P. Research vulnerability: A guide to sensitive research methods. SAGE Publications. 2006.

[23] Shapiro M. Globalization of the law. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies. 1993;:37–64.

[24] Felt AP, Ha E, Egelman S, Haney A, Chin E, Wagner D. Android permissions: User attention, comprehension, and behavior. Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security. https://doi.org/10.1145/2335356.2335360

[25] Suo H, Wan J, Zou C, Liu J. Security in the internet of things: A review. 2012 International Conference on Computer Science and Electronics Engineering. 2012;3:648-651.

[26] Andersen KV, Henriksen HZ. E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee models. Government Information Quarterly. 2006;23(2):236–248.

[27] Ebrahim Z, Irani Z. E-government adoption: Architecture and barriers. Bus Process Management Journal. 2005;11(5):589–611.

[28] Kadushin C, Lindholm M, Ryan D, Brodsky A, Saxe L. Why is it difficult to form effective community coalitions? City Community. 2005;4(3):255–275.

[29] Keane J. Monitory democracy. The Future of Representative Democracy. 2011:212- 235. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511770883.010

[30] Yang G. The power of the internet in China: Citizen activism online. Columbia University Press; 2009.

[31] Agostino D, Arnaboldi M, Lema M. New development: COVID-19 as an accelerator of digital transformation in public service delivery. Public Money Management. 2021;41(1):69–72.

[32] Baharuddin T, Qodir Z, Loilatu MJ. Government website performance during Covid- 19 : Comparative Study of Yogyakarta and South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Journal of Governance and Public Policy. 2022;9(2):109–123.

[33] Machmud M, Masmuh A, Nasirin C, Salahudin, Baharuddin T, Musma AEZ. Artificial intelligence. The public health sector : The use of telemedicine in Indonesia during Covid-19. Palarch, Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology; 2020.

[34] Wirtz B, Weyerer JC, Geyer C. Artificial intelligence and public sector applications and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration. 2019;42(7):596–615.

[35] Janssen M, Rana NP, Slade EL, Dwivedi YK. Trustworthiness of digital government services: Deriving a comprehensive theory through interpretive structural modelling. Public Management Review. 2018;20(5):647–671.

[36] Mergel I, Edelmann N, Haug N. Defining digital transformation: results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly. 2019;36(4):101385.

[37] Guenduez AA, Mettler T, Schedler K. Citizen participation in smart government: A conceptual model and two IoT case studies. Beyond Smart and Connected Governments. 2020:189– https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37464-8_9

[38] Bertot J, Estevez E, Janowski T. Universal and contextualized public services: A digital public service innovation framework. Government Information Quarterly. 2016;33(2):211–222.

[39] Mergel I. Open innovation in the public sector: drivers and barriers to the adoption of Challenge. Public Management Review. 2018;20(5):726–45.

[40] Busch PA, Henriksen HZ, Sæbø Ø. Opportunities and challenges of digitized discretionary practices: A public service worker perspective. Government Information Quarterly. 2018;35(4):547–56.

[41] Trischler J, Westman Trischler J. Design for experience: A public service design approach in the age of digitalization. Public Management Review. 2022;24(8):1251– 1270.

[42] Reggi L, Gil-Garcia JR. Addressing territorial digital divide through ICT strategies: Are investment decisions consistent with local needs? Government Information Quarterly. 2021;38(2):101562.

[43] ElMassah S, Mohieldin M. Digital transformation and localizing sustainable development goals (SDGs). Ecological Economics. 2020;169:106490.

[44] Kulkarni M. Digital accessibility: Challenges and opportunities. IIMB Management Review. 2019;31(1):91–8.

[45] Ullah A, Pinglu C, Ullah S, Abbas HS, Khan S. The role of e-governance in combating COVID-19 and promoting sustainable development: A comparative study of China and Pakistan. The Chinese Political Science Review. 2021;6(1):86–118.

[46] Alvarenga A, Matos F, Godina R, Matias JC. Digital transformation and knowledge management in the public sector. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2020;12(14):5824.

[47] Reis J, Santo PE, Melão N. Artificial intelligence in government services: A systematic literature review. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2019;930:241–52.

[48] Túñez-lópez M, Vaz-álvarez M, Fieiras-ceide C. Covid-19 and public service media : The impact of the pandemic on public television in Europe. Prof Inf. 2020;29(5):1–16.