Article Sidebar

Submitted
September 19, 2026
Accepted
October 16, 2026
Published
September 28, 2026
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 17 Download : 10

Main Article Content

Abstract

Kebijakan Satu Data Indonesia diarahkan untuk menstandardisasi, mengintegrasikan, dan membagipakaikan data publik lintas tingkat pemerintahan, tetapi keterlihatan pemerintah daerah pada portal nasional masih timpang. Penelitian ini mengidentifikasi kesenjangan kapasistas dalam literatur dan mengamplikasian komponen keluaran Local Government Data Integration Gap Framework (LGDIGF) pada audit jejak enam pemerintah daerah di Kepulauan Buton. Tinjauan yang mengikuti PRISMA 2020 ditelusuri menggunakan OpenAlex untuk artikel ilmiah periode 2016 sampai 31 Agustus 2026 dan menyintesis 26 studi dalam tujuh dimensi: kelembagaan, kepemimpinan, pembiayaan, sumber daya manusia, teknlogi, kualitas data, dan kolaborasi. Appraisal metodologis mengategorikan 21 studi berkualitas tinggi dan 5 studi berkualitas sedang, dengan rata-rata skor 8,96 dari 10; tidak ada studi inklusi yang berada di bawah ambang kelayakan. Karena pencarian dibatasi pada suatu basis data dan kueri judul, sintesis diposisikan sebagai bukti terbatas, bukan cakupan literatur exhaustif. Audit portal pada 10 September 2026 menemukan hanya Kabupaten Buton tercantum sebagai instansi dengan nol dataset; lima pemerintah daerah lainnya tidak ditemukan menggunakan nama resminya. Temuan ini menunjukkan kesenjangan keterlihatan integrasi pada portal nasional, bukan ketiadaan data administratif atau diagnosis terhadap tujuh kapasitas daerah. Penelitian ini menawarkan peta jalan lima tahap yang diturunkan secara interpretatif dari literatur dan kondisi portal, dengan penegasan bahwa dokumen daerah, APBD, serta bukti pemangku kepentingan diperlukan untuk menjelaskan penyebab lokal.

Keywords

Data Pemerintah Terbuka Pemerintah Daerah Satu Data Indonesia Tata Kelola Data Tinjauan Sistematis

Article Details

References

  1. Ali, M., Papageorgiou, G., Aziz, A., Loukis, E., Charalabidis, Y., Alexopoulos, C., & Pellicer, F. J. L. (2024). A Framework for the Multi-Dimensional Assessment of Interoperability for Open Data Ecosystems Development. Information Polity, 29(4), 439–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/15701255241297172
  2. Ardani, I., & Cahyani, H. S. H. (2022). Tantangan Kebijakan Satu Data Indonesia. Buletin Penelitian Sistem Kesehatan, 25(1), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.22435/hsr.v25i1.4167
  3. Bankuoru Egala, S., & Afful-Dadzie, E. (2022). Performance of open government data in a developing economy: a multi-stakeholder case analysis of Ghana. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 16(3), 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-10-2021-0158
  4. Bernot, A., Tjondronegoro, D., Rifai, B., Hasan, R., Liew, A. W.-C., Verhelst, T., & Tiwari, M. (2024). Institutional Dimensions in Open Government Data: A Deep Dive Into Indonesia’s Satu Data Initiative and Its Implications for Developing Countries. Public Performance & Management Review, 47(6), 1399–1429. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2024.2377609
  5. Chorley, K. M. (2017). The challenges presented to records management by open government data in the public sector in England. Records Management Journal, 27(2), 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-09-2016-0034
  6. Dawes, S. S., Vidiasova, L., & Parkhimovich, O. (2016). Planning and designing open government data programs: An ecosystem approach. Government Information Quarterly, 33(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.01.003
  7. Fajar, M. N. (2023). Tantangan Tata Kelola Interoperabilitas Dalam Sistem Informasi Profil Desa dan Kelurahan Sebagai Upaya Mendukung Program Satu Data Indonesia. Jurnal Analis Kebijakan, 7(1), 48–68. https://doi.org/10.37145/yvrf2p49
  8. Gündem, F. (2022). Open Government Data Practices of Municipalities as a Local Public Service: Evidence from Metropolitan Municipalities in Turkey. Kent Akademisi, 15(2), 832–847. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.1057886
  9. Hakim, L., Adiarsa, S. R., & Ema, E. (2024). Structuration in implementing Satu Data Indonesia policy in local government. BIS Humanities and Social Science, 1, V124015–V124015. https://doi.org/10.31603/BISHSS.105
  10. Hein, A., Engert, M., Ryu, S., Schaffer, N., Hermes, S., & Krcmar, H. (2023). Building open government data platform ecosystems: A dynamic development approach that engages users from the start. Government Information Quarterly, 40(4), 101878. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2023.101878
  11. Jacob, D. W. (2019). Analyzing the Barrier to Open Government Data (OGD) in Indonesia. International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 8(1.3), 136–139. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2019/2681.32019
  12. Linåker, J., & Runeson, P. (2021). How to Enable Collaboration in Open Government Data Ecosystems: A Public Platform Provider’s Perspective. JeDEM - EJournal of EDemocracy and Open Government, 13(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.29379/jedem.v13i1.634
  13. Lnenicka, M., Nikiforova, A., Luterek, M., Milic, P., Rudmark, D., Neumaier, S., Santoro, C., Casiano Flores, C., Janssen, M., & Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P. (2024). Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives: A benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries. Government Information Quarterly, 41(1), 101898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101898
  14. Lodato, T., French, E., & Clark, J. (2021). Open government data in the smart city: Interoperability, urban knowledge, and linking legacy systems. Journal of Urban Affairs, 43(4), 586–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2018.1511798
  15. Mo, F., Zhang, X., & Feng, C. (2025). Improving Open Government Data Performance of Local Governments: A Configurational Analysis Based on TOE Framework. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 28(2), 86–105. https://doi.org/10.3233/JID-230037
  16. Mu, R., & Zhao, X. (2026). How do institutional dimensions of open government data affect innovation? Evidence from research institutes in China. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 78(1), 237–259. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-07-2023-0243
  17. Mungai, P. W. (2018). Causal mechanisms and institutionalisation of open government data in Kenya. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 84(6), e12056. https://doi.org/10.1002/ISD2.12056
  18. Mustapa, M. N., Hamid, S., & Md Nasaruddin, F. H. (2022). Factors influencing open government data post-adoption in the public sector: The perspective of data providers. PLOS ONE, 17(11), e0276860. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276860
  19. Mustapa, M. N., Hamid, S., & Nasaruddin, F. H. M. (2019). Exploring the Issues of Open Government Data Implementation in Malaysian Public Sectors. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 9(4), 1466–1473. https://doi.org/10.18517/IJASEIT.9.4.8850
  20. Mutambik, I., Nikiforova, A., Almuqrin, A., Liu, Y. D., Floos, A. Y. M., & Omar, T. (2022). Benefits of Open Government Data Initiatives in Saudi Arabia and Barriers to Their Implementation. Journal of Global Information Management, 29(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4018/JGIM.295975
  21. Oliveira, L. F. de, & Santos, C. D. dos. (2019). Intended and unintended consequences of innovation adoption: Open government data adoption by the Federal District of Brazil. REAd. Revista Eletrônica de Administração (Porto Alegre), 25(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.214.80559
  22. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  23. Parung, G. A., Hidayanto, A. N., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., Ulo, K. L. M., & Phusavat, K. (2018). Barriers and strategies of open government data adoption using fuzzy AHP-TOPSISA case of Indonesia. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 12(3–4), 210–243. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-09-2017-0055
  24. Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 39 Tahun 2019 Tentang Satu Data Indonesia (2019). https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/108813/perpres-no-39-tahun-2019
  25. Quarati, A. (2023). Open Government Data: Usage trends and metadata quality. Journal of Information Science, 49(4), 887–910. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515211027775
  26. Reggi, L., & Dawes, S. S. (2022). Creating Open Government Data ecosystems: Network relations among governments, user communities, NGOs and the media. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101675
  27. Safarov, I. (2019). Institutional Dimensions of Open Government Data Implementation: Evidence from the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(2), 305–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.1438296
  28. Safarov, I. (2020). Institutional Dimensions of Open Government Data Implementation: Evidence from Transition Countries. Public Performance & Management Review, 43(6), 1359–1389. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1805336
  29. Sanchez-Nielsen, E., Morales, A., Mendo, O., & Chavez-Gutierrez, F. (2021). SuDaMa: Sustainable Open Government Data Management Framework for Long-Term Publishing and Consumption. IEEE Access, 9, 151841–151863. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3127472
  30. Saxena, S. (2018). Drivers and barriers to re-use Open Government Data (OGD): a case study of open data initiative in Philippines. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 20(4), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-08-2017-0045
  31. Zhang, H., Bi, Y., Kang, F., & Wang, Z. (2022). Incentive mechanisms for government officials’ implementing open government data in China. Online Information Review, 46(2), 224–243. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-05-2020-0154
  32. Zhao, Y., Liang, Y., Yao, C., & Han, X. (2022). Key factors and generation mechanisms of open government data performance: A mixed methods study in the case of China. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4), 101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101717
  33. Zuiderwijk, A., & Reuver, M. de. (2021). Why open government data initiatives fail to achieve their objectives: categorizing and prioritizing barriers through a global survey. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(4), 377–395. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-09-2020-0271