EVALUATING THE DIGITAL BUREAUCRACY POLICY: POPULATION DOCUMENT DIGITALIZATION IN DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF POPULATION AND CIVIL REGISTRATION
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate government policies on public services, namely the Minister of Home Affairs Regulation Number 7 of 2019 concerning Online Population Administration Services. Policy evaluation needs to be carried out because to determine the extent to which policy implementation has been achieved, evaluation is needed so that improvements can be made in the future. Based on this, the focus of this research is how public services through digitizing population documents in population administration services are based on policy evaluation theory. To answer this problem, a descriptive qualitative research method with an interactive model from Miles and Heberman is used. Each policy evaluation criteria proposed by William N. Dunn is described based on the criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, adequacy, equity, responsiveness, and accuracy. The key informants selected are officials who make and implement policies, as well as the people who are the target of the policy. The result of the study shows that policies that have been running well and have received Population Administration Services Online can be assessed for their success and improvement records.
Downloads
References
Adriyanto, T., & Kismartini. (2016). Evaluasi Kebijakan Sistem Informasi Administrasi Kependudukan (SIAK) di Dinas Kependudukan dan Pencatatan Sipil Kabupaten Semarang. Journal Of Public Policy And Management Review, 5(3), 1–13.
Ahmad. (2019). Evaluasi Pelayanan Administrasi Kependudukan Di Kabupaten Wajo Ahmad. Jurnal Sosio Sains, 5(2), 115–127.
Andrews, E., Thornton, D., Owen, J., Bleasdale, A., Freeguard, G., & Stelk, I. (2016). Making a success of digital government. In Institute for Government.
Arisandy, Y., Ardiyanto, & Sasongko. (2018). Evaluasi Kebijakan Sistem Informasi Administrasi Kependudukan Dalam Mewujudkan Tertib Administrasi Kependudukan di Kota Probolinggo. Jurnal Dian Ilmu, 17(2), 16–33.
Barcevičius, E., Cibaitė, G., Gineikytė, V., Klimavičiūtė, L., Matulevič, L., Misuraca, G., & Vanini, I. (2019). Exploring Digital Government transformation in the EU. https://doi.org/10.2760/17207
Bounabat, B. (2017). From e-Government to Digital Government: Stakes and Evolution Models. Electronic Journal of Information Technology, 10(1), 1–20.
Clarke, A., & Craft, J. (2017). The vestiges and vanguards of policy design in a digital context. Canadian Public Administration, 60(4), 476–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/capa.12228
Delgado, D. C. de F. (2017). Governance Model for Digital Transformation (Issue November 2017).
Dienillah, A. F., & Dewi, A. O. P. (2018). Upaya Penyelamatan Informasi Melalui Proses Digitalisasi Arsip Akta Kelahiran Di Dinas Kependudukan Dan Pencatatan Sipil Kota Pekalongan. Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan, 7(3), 131–140.
Dunn, W. N. (2003). Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik. In Gadjah Mada University Press.
Fitriani, I. (2017). Evaluasi Kebijakan E-KTP Dalam Mewujudkan Mutu Pelayanan Masyarakat di Kelurahan Pela Mampang Kecamatan Mampang Prapatan Kota Administrasi Jakarta Selatan. Jurnal Renaissance, 2(1), 115–124.
Haas, P. (2004). When does power listen to truth? A constructivist approach to the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4), 569–592. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000248034
Horlacher, A., & Hess, T. (2016). What does a chief digital officer do? Managerial tasks and roles of a new C-level position in the context of digital transformation. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2016-March(January 2016), 5126–5135. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2016.634
Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1995). Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Sub-Systems.
IDC. (2017). Digital Transformation (DX), Strategic Business Imperative to Embrace Now (pp. 1–8).
Kokkinakos, P., Markaki, O., Koussouris, S., & Psarras, J. (2016). Digital Transformation: Is Public Sector Following the Enterprise 2.0 Paradigm? In Digital Transformation and Global Society (pp. 96–105). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49700-6
Liun, Kusuma, A. R., & Djumadi. (2014). Evaluasi Kebijakan Pelayanan Bidang Kependudukan Di Dinas Kependudukan Dan Catatan Sipil Kabupaten Malinau. Jurnal Administrative Reform, 2(4), 445–457.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (Third). SAGE Publications.
Moleong, L. J. (2018). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif (Revisi). Remaja Rosdakarya.
Moravcsik, A. (1999). “Is something rotten in the state of Denmark?” Constructivism and European integration. Journal of European Public Policy, 6(4), 669–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017699343531
OECD. (2014). Recommendation of the Council on Digital Government Strategies. In Public Governance and Territorial Development Directorate: Vol. July. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2
Papadopoulos, G. A., Kechagias, E., Legga, P., & Tatsiopoulos, I. (2018). Integrating Business Process Management with Public Sector. Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, 2018(JUL), 405–414.
Rochefort, D. A., & Cobb, R. W. (1993). Problem Definition, Agenda Access, and Policy Choice. Policy Studies Journal, 21(1), 56–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1993.tb01453.x
Rodriguez, V. (2007). Merton and Ziman’s modes of science: The case of biological and similar material transfer agreements. Science and Public Policy, 34(5), 355–363. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234207X228575
Rohman, D. F. (2013). Implementasi Kebijakan Pelayanan Administrasi Kependudukan Terpadu. Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 1(5), 962–971.
Saurugger, S. (2013). Constructivism and public policy approaches in the EU: From ideas to power games. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(6), 888–906. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.781826
Singh, A., & Hess, T. (2017). How Chief Digital Officers Promote the Digital Transformation of their Companies. MIS Quarterly Executive, 2017(March), 17.
Syed, R., Bandara, W., French, E., & Stewart, G. (2018). Getting it right! Critical success factors of BPM in the public sector: A systematic literature review. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 22, 1–39. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v22i0.1265
Yalia, M. (2013). Evaluasi Kebijakan Program Mobile Pusat Layanan Internet Kecamatan (MPLIK). Jurnal Penelitian Komunikasi, 16(2), 205–220. https://doi.org/10.20422/jpk.v16i2.143
