A study on impacts of e-participation system

on public values at the local level:

A case study of the Jakarta Kini mobile application

Kufner Ferdinan

The Graduate School

Yonsei University
Department of Public Administration
 A study on impacts of e-participation system
on public values at the local level:
A case study of the Jakarta Kini mobile application

A Master’s Thesis
Submitted to the Department of Public Administration
and the Graduate School of Yonsei University
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of e-Government and Public Management

Kufner Ferdinan
October 2021
Yonsei University
October 2021

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures ............................................................................................................... 5

List of Table .................................................................................................................. 5
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 10
1.1. Background of the Study ................................................................................. 10
1.1.1. Context of Jakarta ......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.1.2. Jakarta Kini (JAKI) Mobile Application ...Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.2. Research Problem ............................................................................................ 18
1.3. Objectives of the Study ................................................................................... 21
1.4. Delimitation ..................................................................................................... 21
1.5. Outline ............................................................................................................. 22
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................... 24
2.1. The development of e-government .................................................................. 24
2.2. The concept of mobile government ................................................................. 26
2.3. Development Stages in E-Government and M-Government ........................... 30
2.4. E-participation and m-participation ................................................................. 34
2.5. E-participation for the local government ......................................................... 36
2.6. Public Value..................................................................................................... 38
2.7. Theoretical Background................................................................................... 40
2.7.2. Validation of the D&M ISS Revised Model............................................. 43
2.7.3. Net Benefit on Public Value Perspective .................................................. 44
2.7.4. Public value in e-government ................................................................... 47
2.7.5. Public value in e-participation .................................................................. 52
2.8. Hypotheses Development ................................................................................ 57
2.9. Research Model ............................................................................................... 65

3
CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................... 67
3.1. Data Collection ................................................................................................ 67
3.1.2 Population and Sample .............................................................................. 67
3.2. Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 68
3.3. Operational definitions and measurement items .............................................. 69
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS.............................................................................................. 72
4.1. Demographic information ................................................................................ 77
4.2. Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................................... 82
4.3. Measurement Model Assessment .................................................................... 84
4.4. Structural Model Assessment .......................................................................... 91
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................... 98
5.1. Discussion ........................................................................................................ 98
5.3. Possible Policy implications .......................................................................... 103
5.2. Limitations ..................................................................................................... 105
5.4. Conclusions.................................................................................................... 107

4
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. JAKI screenshots highlighting the JAKLapor and JAKRespons services

.....................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 2. The favorite channels of public feedback in Jakarta during covid-19. Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3. The DM & ISS Initial Model (1992) ........................................................... 41
Figure 4. The D&M ISS Revised Model (2003) ........................................................ 43
Figure 5. The strategic triangle and the three main of component ............................. 45
Figure 6. eGovernment Success Model (Scott et al., 2011) ....................................... 51
Figure 7. Research design ........................................................................................... 65
Figure 8. The construct of net benefit (public value) for e-participation system ....... 66
Figure 9. Types of service feedback ........................................................................... 80
Figure 10. Types of feedback channel ........................................................................ 81
Figure 11. The structural model analysis .................................................................... 92

LIST OF TABLE

Table 1 Operational definitions and measurement items............................................ 69

Table 2 Distribution of demographic profile of the respondent ................................. 78
Table 3 Descriptive statistics ...................................................................................... 82
Table 4. Reliability and convergent validity results ................................................... 86
Table 5. Cross loading results ..................................................................................... 89
Table 6. The Fornell and Larcker’s criterion .............................................................. 90
Table 7. Path coefficient result (direct effect) ............................................................ 94

5
Table 8. Effect size result ........................................................................................... 96
Table 9. Predictive relevance result ............................................................................ 97
1. Background of the study
1.1. Research problem
1.3. Objective of the study
1.4. Delimitation
1.5. Outline
2. Literature Review
2.1.1 e-government development to m-government
Maturity model
2.1.2. e-participation and m-participation
2.1.3. participation in local government (benefit and challenges)
2.2.1. Public value concept
2.2.2. Public value effect and impact (PV is important)
2.2.3. public value determinant (several factors)

3.Theoretical Background
3.1. DeLone and McLean ISS Revised Model
3.2. Validation of the revised Model
3.3. Net Benefit on public value Perspective
3.4. Public value in e-government
3.5. Trust in e-government

4. Selection Case

6
4.1. Context of Jakarta
4.2. Exploration of Jakarta city
4.3. Regulation
4.3. Mobile citizen sourcing application > Jakarta Kini
4.4. JAKLapor – JAKI
5. Results
5.1. Discussion
5.2. Possible policy implications
5.3. Limitations and future study
5.4. Conclusions

7
 ABSTRACT

Through innovative information and communication technologies, e-participation have

become indispensable platform for addressing public issues within citizen involvement.
The quality of the e-participation can be generated the public value from the citizen
evaluation. Most local governments in Indonesia provide this two-way communication
with citizens feedbacks and reports. Mobile technologies add the values of the platform
to be access in anywhere and at any time. While e-participation promised greater access
for the citizen exercising their voices in improving public services, it remains an
empirical question whether this platform eventually influences the creation of public
values at the local level.

This study examined the implementation of mobile city-based services promoted by

the Jakarta government, namely Jakarta Kini (JAKI). As a part of the citizen sourcing
application, JAKLapor-JAKI allow the citizen to request services, share information,
and express their concerns about public issues in their community. Moreover, the
platform is gaining popularity among numerous channels inside the Jakarta complaint
management system. Thus, it is possible to evaluate how/what the public value types
generated trough this platform

A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 296

respondents and test the nine hypotheses to determine the impact of an e-participation
system. The DeLone and McLean Information System Success Revised Model was
used to develop the hypotheses because it considers ICT quality attributes (system,

8
information, and service), user satisfaction, trust in government and net benefit. The
concept of public value aided in constructing the component of net benefit obtained by
the citizens. Applying multivariate statistical analysis (PLS-SEM), this study finds that
most of the hypotheses are significantly or partially supported. Service quality has
emerged as the most critical factor influencing use and user satisfaction, while user
satisfaction has a substantial impact on net benefit (public value).

Thus, this study contributes to a better understanding of public value creation in the
mobile citizen sourcing application, as well as the factors that influence use and user
satisfaction in generating public value, which include convenience, control,
communication, well-informedness, trust, and participation in decision-making. These
findings can help the Jakarta government maintain the functioning of the e-
participation system in order to generate and nurture public value. In this sense, the
government might assure the six-public value by encouraging the use of mobile citizen
sourcing applications.

9
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background of the Study

- Perkembangan ICT in general (selama bbrp decade), Kegunaan ICT
- E-government
o E-government and ICT
- Public value (traditional public adm > new public management >
public value paradigm), benefit
- ICT, Public value, and e-government
o Peran ICT ke public value
Perbaikan penciptaan public value
o Peran public value and e-government, e-participation
- Satisfaction and trust
- Research gap
- Penelitian secara garis besar

10
2 model yang diminta kerjakan

11
12
(reduce public value discussion)

The idea of public value is used to improve understanding of government

performance, reshape decision making, and provide better public service outcomes.
This notion is not partly to concerns about new public management (NPM), but also
provides an intriguing framework into public organizations accomplishments. The
NPM paradigm is a departure from traditional public administration, in which the role
of government agencies and public managers is limited to achieving political goals
(O’Flynn, 2007; Stoker, 2006). A strong emphasis was placed on the transition from
passive to active management under the NPM. The empowerment of public manager
aims to increase efficiency and effectiveness of government performance through
privatization and a business-like approach. Some scholars such as Bryson, et al. (2014)
highlights that a new public administration is constantly moving forward from the
traditional public administration and the NPM, which not only prevail effectiveness
and efficiency but also the democratic values. In the public value management
paradigm, the government saw citizens as collaborators and problem solvers who
directly engage in shaping public values and define what is beneficial value to societies.

The government requires strong legitimacy and support, as well as operational

capabilities to generate public value (Moore, 1995). The public value also can create
when the government decides on the needs that must be satisfied, design a strategy that
will be used to satisfy those needs, and assess the procedure for producing and
delivering the services (Spano, 2009). This assistance can be obtained through the

13
citizen's experience with public services. As the first stage of Kelly’s (2002) public
value framework, services become critical tasks to accomplish before achieving the
outcome and trust. The evaluation of services determines by the citizen satisfaction and
it always in relation to their expectations of government performance (Ryzin, 2004).

On the other hand, the difficulty that frequently arises is how to reconcile citizen
expectations with the services that they usually obtained through private sector services.
There is always a possibilities that the government may not meet citizen expectations.
Inability to meet citizen expectations might cause a negative perception of government
performance, which makes citizens hesitant to seek government assistance (Shareef et
al., 2014). In Bozeman's (2007) view, public value failure occurred when there was no
public organization able to provide the services required to produce public values. The
citizens, organizations, and society have an interest agenda in advancing public values,
and therefore public values should be seen as an important agenda in the government
(Jørgensen & Bozeman, 2016; Nabatchi, 2012)

The public value is created when certain requirements are satisfied, and the
benefits outweigh the sacrifices (Spano, 2009). Satisfaction measurement is an
effective tool to understand the citizen’s experience about the public services. However,
increasing satisfaction on public services is not an easy task for the government and
challenging in today's digital age. The 2018 Public Sector Journal Benchmark Survey
indicate several countries such as France, Germany, Canada, the United States, the
United Kingdom, and Mexico were experiencing deterioration of performance to meet
public satisfaction. On a scale of 1 to 10, most countries fall more than one point short

14
of the top performing industries, which scored an 8. The report highlighted the
importance of most governments taking a more proactive approach to extending service
delivery to meet citizens demand (D'emidio et al., 2019).

The private sector demonstrates how to enhance services by meet the basic
customer demands and exceed their expectations. High intensity of competitive rivalry
to maintain customer loyalty took the private sector to focus on their satisfaction level.
Deloitte (2018) analysis provides an example to understand user needs with the hotel
guest experience (GX) report. Trough the data-driven strategies, the hotel services is
more oriented to the needs of customers. This report assists in evaluating guest
activities during their stay, start from the room reservations to checkout process in order
to improve service on their subsequent visit. This strategy expected to increase the
return rate of customers by 12%, and 21% provide positive feedback. The guest
satisfaction score further helps the hotel management to reshape their strategies.

Concerning the satisfaction level in public service, the government is urged to

abandon the old concept of providing technology-based public services. D`emidio et
al. (2019) points out that a range of obstacles of the government for improving citizen
satisfaction as the customer, client, and collaborator. The public organizations appear
to enjoy a monopoly business and was not under competitive pressure to improve
efficiency and effectiveness (Shareef, et al 2014). The responsibility to serve all
segments of society does not imply provides one-size-fits all services. The government
also lacks experts in human-centered design and analytical skills to bridge the gap
between citizens' expectations and their experiences with public services. Finally,

15
because the user experience reports and data are frequently incomplete and fragmented,
the comprehensive method is required to have better data.

The satisfaction with e-government is the extent of citizens' expectations about

what e-government has achieved in their perceptions (Welch et al., 2005). Citizens
demand interaction while adopting e-government, and the implementation of e-
participation facilitates those expectations. E-participation contributes to increasing the
level of citizen satisfaction by facilitating interactivity channels between citizens and
their government (Kim & Lee, 2012). It allows citizens to express their aspirations,
opinions, or even dissatisfaction, while it also provides a greater source of information
for the government to improve its performance. Analyzing citizen satisfaction allows
the government to determine the success or failure of program initiatives or
organizations (Morgesson, 2014 p. 42).

For this reason, the government strives to increase public satisfaction by using
the latest technology to provide innovative services and promote two-way
communication between citizens and the government. Following the portal website's
use to provide government information and services, mobile applications enable more
efficient and transparent service delivery, increased access to services, inclusiveness,
and citizen participation (Chen, et. al, 2016). According to the 2020 India Electronic
Association, high-growth mobile applications and services increase Indian government
efficiency by up to 80 percent and significantly reduce the time required to complete
tasks. Indonesia's government also owns this enormous opportunity, as the country

16
ranks fourth for the total population in the world behind China, India, and the United
States.

The number of Internet users in Indonesia increased by 15.5% in January 2021,

reaching 202.6 million, representing 73.7% of the total population. Indonesia's global
digital report in 2021 find that the number of mobile connections reached 125.6% of
the total population. The percentages greater than 100% are understandable due most
people own more than one mobile device. The report further shows that most mobile
users can spend more than five hours per day using the mobile internet. According to
the Indonesian Internet Service Provider Association (APJII), Jakarta, as the city of
central government and business, has an internet penetration rate 85% higher than the
national average of 73.7% in 2019. The survey further found that 8,928,485 people, or
above 90% of the population, access the internet through mobile devices. This number
demonstrates the tremendous potential for the local government in Indonesia to develop
mobile applications to provide government information and services, particularly in
big cities such as Jakarta.

The emergence of mobile applications in local governments is very diverse,

ranging from providing information on parks and recreational schedules, traffic and
transportation, public participation applications, and third-party applications (Ganapati,
2015). The mobile application aims to improve the efficacy of public services and
information. In terms of public engagement apps, the local government developed this
mobile application to receive non-emergency service requests and become crucial one-
stop service centers. When it comes to Jakarta, the local government developed the

17
Jakata Kini (JAKI) mobile app, which enables citizens to easily access government
information, request services, and submit online feedback to the government. This
form of e-participation system contributes to increased citizen satisfaction and effective
communication, and wide range of positive impacts. The impact of the mobile
application from a citizen standpoint is to supposedly generate public value.

1.2. Research Problem

E-government has been broadly developed for citizens in the forms of

information, transactions, and participation. The introduction of internet
communication technologies (ICTs) in public services is the government's effort to
supply public value by improving the quality of citizen needs (UNDESA, 2003).

Besides providing a seamless way to access government services, mobile

technologies add value to traditional e-government services and contribute to citizen-
initiated contacts and participation in public services (Bertot, Jaeger & McClure, 2008;
Reddick, 2005). In communicating with local governments, various categories of e-
participation initiatives can be carried out, starting with polling surveys, public
hearings, e-voting, e-consultation, etc. (Reddick, 2013). Each category has a different
delivery, as discussed by Chadwick and May (2003). Managerial models, interactions
to improve public service delivery, consultative models allow the community to
provide input with final decision making by the government, and finally a participatory
model of community involvement in policy-decision making by prioritizing democratic
values. Furthermore, they contend that the managerial model of engagement has taken
precedence over the "consultative" and "participatory" models of engagement.

18
 In the local government of Indonesia, citizen feedback and public complaints
are the major areas for initiating e-participation (le Blanc 2020). Most local
governments introduced this e-participation into mobile applications, while the
challenges to engaging the public to participate are hampered by such issues as privacy
and security, trust (Sari et al., 2018) and strong leadership support and government
commitment (Wahid & Sæbø, 2014). Furthermore, local governments would have a
significant impact on citizens' daily lives as they are in direct contact with and
responsible for a variety of basic services. Some advantages of e-participation
conducted at the local level are that it is taken more seriously, it provides effective
analysis, and it fulfills the grassroot demand (Reddick, 2003). Driven by those benefits,
the evaluation of the e-government process is required to capture current conditions as
well as enable government agencies to justify their capabilities in carrying out and
delivering public services as citizens expect.

Public value is the foundational concern of the government which can be

generated from citizen experiences of public service delivery. The knowledge of public
value in greater detail helps the government evaluate the performance and improve the
quality of decision making. The implementation of JAKI established by Indonesia's
local government, Jakarta, showed tremendous potential in these concerns. JakLapor
provides opportunities for online citizen-initiated contact with government agencies
about problems encountered in the city, while the JakResponse allows citizens to
monitor the progress and locate other feedback. JAKI is widely adopted by citizens
with different levels of satisfaction with public service sectors. Furthermore, the public

19
value that is generated from participating in the platform is invaluable information to
understand. The value received from the cost of consumption and the resources to
produce the services would determine public value (Scott, et. al., 2015). Therefore,
when it comes to public value creation, citizens and governments may have a similar
view of intangibles and tangible benefits when evaluating e-government success.

Past studies have discussed the positive impact of mobile government from the
citizen perspective in general or specific types of services. Chen et al. (2016), for
example, examined the relationship between task-technology fit in mobile government
and citizen satisfaction. The study finds that the characteristics of mobile government
services, including transparency, information accuracy, and voice opportunities,
influence citizen satisfaction with mobile government. Next, Wang & Teo (2020)
studied the impact of the quality of mobile police services in China on public value.
The study indicates the creation of public value as a dependent variable such as time,
cost, well-informedness, convenience, and participation. Adapting the three quality
dimension of the DeLone and McLean (2003) model (system, information, and service
quality), the study validate the significant impact of information and services quality
on citizen satisfaction but not without system quality. Recently, Andriyanto et al. (2021)
evaluate the Jakarta Kini Mobile application and find that three quality supported the
positive hypothesis, including the net benefit. They measure the indicators of net
benefit such as saving time, problem solving, and paper reduction. On the other hand,
we focus on the creation of public value by using a similar model. Moreover, this study
highlights specific services that are provided for handling citizen complaints,
JAKLapor and JAKRespons provided by JAKI. JAKI has been receiving international

20
and local awards and acknowledgement. Recently, the application became runner-up
at the World Summit on the Information Society 2021 held by ITU. The question that
arises is whether this positive impact and benefits of mobile applications contribute to
the creation of public value in societies.

1.3. Objectives of the Study

Given the context of the background and the problem, this study seeks to answer
the following general research question:
Is it conceivable for the success of an e-participation system to influence the
creation of public value at the local level?
The following provide further information on how the problem was defined in this
study:
1. What are the categories of public value in the e-participation system?
2. How does the quality of the e-participation system impact use and user satisfaction?
in turn influence the net benefit (public value) in e-participation system?

1.4. Delimitation

E-participation is generally defined as the ICTs-mediated approach to provide

interactivity channel among citizens, public officials, and politicians (Saebø, Rose and
Flak, 2008), However, the current study merely focuses on the relationship between
citizen and the government. Along with giving access to information, e-participation
allows the citizens to evaluate public services delivery and influence policy decision-
making. This mechanism will shorten the bureaucratic chain and promote greater

21
opportunities for citizen-initiated contact with the government officials to obtain better
public service.
The e-participation system being studied is the mobile public engagement
application for citizens to give feedback at public services. Each type of e-
participaction has a similar sounding word with web-based co-production (Moon,
2018). In the citizen sourcing application context, individuals take an active role to
submit any inputs, such as a report or complaint for the government to review and take
any necessary actions.
The quality of mobile e-participation is expected to provide satisfaction to the
community as users and have an impact on the creation of public value. Moreover, this
study put emphasize on the citizen's perspective with the criterion of public value has
been selected in this study to be examine.

1.5. Outline

Chapter 1 consists of the background of the study, the research problems, and
objectives of the study, including the research questions and delimitation. Chapter 2
provides the literature review and theoretical background. Based on discussion of the
literature and theories, the study will develop the proposed research design and discuss
the hypotheses for the research framework. Chapter 3 describes the research
methodology, including data collection, sampling and population, and research setting.
Chapter 4 presents the data analysis and research results, including demographic
information, descriptive statistics, multivariate analysis using partial least square-
structural equation modeling, and hypothesis testing. Chapter 5 reports the conclusion

22
of the survey findings, discusses the results, and the limitations of the study.
Furthermore, the study will end with policy implications for the DKI Jakarta
administration about the link between the quality of the e-participation system and
citizens' usage and satisfaction with the platform, which is led to affect the component
of net benefit (public value).

23
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter begins by presenting background information on the research area,

which spans the transition from electronic government to mobile government. The
implementation of e-participation and its classification further captured the relationship
between citizens and government at the local level. Last, it discusses the importance of
public value in evaluating the e-participation system impact. Furthermore, the
following two sub-chapters will explore the research framework and the hypotheses
developed in this study.

2.1. The development of e-government

Governments all over the world have embraced information and

communication technology (ICTs) to reinvent how they deliver services (Fang, 2002;
Heeks, 2001). The term ‘E-government’ was then introduced, referring to efforts to
incorporate ICTs into the delivery of public services to eliminate the physical constraint.
This concept entered public administration in the 1990s, but scholars and practitioners
have yet to come up with a comprehensive definition of it (Moon, 2002) and none has
gained widespread acceptance (Hu et al., 2009; Yildiz, 2007).

In a nutshell, e-government is the process of utilizing IT applications to produce

and deliver public services (Moon, 2002). According to Fang (2002), e-government is
a practice in which the government uses ICT, primarily the web-based internet, to
provide convenient access, improve service quality, and stimulate citizen engagement

24
in decision-making. Another definition of e-government comes from Fountain (2001,
p.4), which states that "e-government is a kind of government that is increasingly
organized around virtual agencies, cross-agency networks, and public-private
partnerships whose structure and capability are dependent on the internet and web".
These definitions demonstrate that while e-government encompasses the use of ICT, it
was initially limited to government-created websites serving the public. E-government
is about much more than developing web technologies; it is also about using technology
to revolutionize how governments provide and manage public services (Pardo, 2000).

According to its stated objectives of improving public services and information

for government agencies, employees, citizens, and businesses (Carter & Belanger,
2004; Silcock, 2001), e-government may result in a variety of stakeholder interactions.
Numerous scholars have attempted to categorize these interactions as "government to
government" (G2G), "government to employee" (G2E), "government to citizen" (G2C),
and "government to business" (Hiller & Belanger 2001; Moon, 2002; Ndou 2004). The
degree of proximity between the public and the government using e-government may
also establish causal relationships with business to government (B2G) by focusing on
profit motives with the sale of goods and services, as well as citizen to government
(C2G) by highlighting individuals' desire to influence decision making for better public
services (Fang, 2002). Moreover, these B2G and C2G relationships widely occur at the
local government level.

Ndou (2004) emphasized that fully exploiting and implementing those e-

government interactions needs three primary categories of e-government services, as

25
Heeks classified them (2001). To begin with, e-Administration is utilized to enhance
the internal processes, functions, and performance of the government. Second, e-
Citizens and e-Services have the potential to enhance public services and strengthen
citizen-government interaction. Third, e-Society may foster external contact between
public institutions, communities, and non-governmental organizations. These three
areas are the main e-government services that must be completely implemented to
increase government capacity, cost efficiency, service delivery quality, and decision-
making quality (Heeks, 2001; Fang, 2002; Ndou, 2004). E-government provides a wide
range of services at various levels, such as city planning, social services administration,
or emergency and non-emergency management. The objective of e-government
development is to design public services more citizen-centric (Carbo et al. 2004). The
emergence of e-government has aided in shifting the previous bureaucratic paradigm,
which was first focused on cost efficiency, to include public satisfaction and control,
service delivery flexibility, network development, and greater collaboration (Ho, 2002).

2.2. The concept of mobile government

Rapid advancements in ICT have urged governments to have more efficient and
effective services. Mobile devices and the mobile internet are becoming an increasingly
important element of citizens’ daily and professional lives. People spend more time
using mobile devices to support their daily tasks more swiftly. While mobile devices
have wireless connectivity to eliminate physical attachments to desktop computers
(Trimi & Sheng, 2008), mobile technology enables services and information to be
available anywhere and at any time (Kuschu & Kuscu, 2003; Sharma & Gupta, 2004).

26
Therefore, the adoption of new technologies in the public sector allows the government
to provide online services not only through wired-internet technology and the use of
web applications but also via mobile technologies, accelerating the shift from e-
government to mobile government (Kuschu & Kuscu, 2003; Trimi & Sheng, 2008).

Mobile government is not a distinct component of e-government (Mengistu &

Rho, 2009). Moon (2004) defines m-government specifically as "the government
strategy for delivering government information and services to employees, citizens,
businesses, and nonprofit organizations via wireless communication networks and
mobile devices, such as personal digital assistants, cellular phones, and their supporting
systems". In other words, mobile government places stress on the process of integrating
wireless network and mobile technologies, applications, services, and devices with the
purpose of maximizing the advantages for all stakeholders involved in e-government
(Ishmatova & Obi, 2009; Kuschu & Kuscu, 2003; OECD/ITU 2011). The mobile
government is a mechanism for authorities to share data via information technology
systems, ensuring that citizens, the private sector, and government agencies all operate
under the same standards and do not require specific interfaces (Antovski & Gusev,
2005). As a result, an increasing number of governments, both national and local, are
launching ICT programs based on mobile platforms. The introduction of mobile
government aims to add value to e-government and citizen (Ishmatova & Obi, 2009).

Mobile government strengthens the way for governments to provide citizens

with better, faster, and more on-time information and transactional services as citizens'
demands for better public services. Owing to mobile technologies, governments can

27
give services to the public at any time and from any location. People who previously
lacked access to the digital world now enjoy a higher quality of life because of mobile
government (OECD/ITU, 2011). As an example, rural residents can utilize their mobile
phones to access educational resources, health assistance, medical information, etc.
The usability and lower cost of infrastructure have been cited as factors for introducing
mobile government (Fasanghari & Samimi, 2009). The following are amongst the
reasons why mobile government provides better solutions than e-government for
providing government information and services
1. The mobile government offers more convenience, accessibility, and availability
(Kuscu, Kushchu, & Yu, 2008). It is designed with mobility, allowing the service
to be accessed all day and all night without interruption due to the service being
always on. The mobile services also provide on-time information and support fast
access to communicate with citizens (Mengistu & Rho, 2009).
2. Targeting users and delivering content is more precise and personalized. A mobile
device is intended for a single user to receive personal information on a single
device. Mobile technologies have the potential to increase the use of mobile
government by providing more personal, familiar, and friendly devices (Kuscu,
Kushchu, & Yu, 2008).
3. Facilitate a wider and more diverse user base. It can reach more users without the
usage of a wired cable, as well as people who have less expertise with the internet
and computers yet frequently use mobile communication (Kuscu, Kushchu, and
Yu 2008). Mobile devices can also provide inclusion because they can reach
remote areas where ICT infrastructure is still difficult to establish (Mengistu &
Rho, 2009, Trimin & Sheng, 2008).

28
4. Enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of government employees. Mobile
technology enables them to access information in real-time while also updating
tasks, assisting them in decision-making and action (Trimi & Sheng, 2008).
5. Mobile government encourages citizen participation by extending options for
residents to contact government officials, politicians, and community leaders
(Trimi & Sheng, 2008). As a result, it will improve the image of government
performance, such as trust and responsiveness (OECD/ITU, 2011).

However, the benefits of mobile government are not without drawbacks. Based
on an evaluation of mobile government applications in developing countries, Mengistu
and Rho (2009) identified several issues that may be compelled to implement mobile
services, including security risk, privacy threat, user readiness, legal issues,
compatibility, limited power with battery life, low bandwidth data transfer rate and
download speeds, and high cost of mobile internet. Security and privacy have been
identified as the citizens' top concerns in the mobile government (Ganapati, 2015;
Kuscu et al., 2008; Mengistu & Rho 2009). Wireless technology may expose data and
information to hackers or to the loss or theft of mobile devices (Kiki & Lawrence,
2006). Citizens also have more privacy concerns about disclosing personal information
in the wireless and location-based services environment (Trimi & Sheng, 2008).
Responding to this, the government is urged to regulate the data and privacy
information in online services to ensure the responsibilities of the government as data
controller and the citizens as data subjects in a wireless environment (Mengistu & Rho,
2009). There are further requirements for the government to improve the
implementation of mobile government, including strong support from political

29
leadership, adequate financial resources, and intergovernmental, interagency, and
intersectoral collaboration (Moon, 2004).

Similar to e-government, block relationships exist in the delivery of public

services via mobile technology. It includes mGovernment-to-Government (mG2G)
services, mGovernment-to-Employee (mG2E) services, mGovernment-to-Citizen
(mG2C) services, and mGovernment-to-Business (mG2B) services (OECD/ITU,
2011). mG2G and mG2E are back-office systems aimed at increasing government
productivity and reducing the cost of services, while m2GC and mG2B are front-office
platforms that aim to provide citizen and businesses with government information and
services (Mengistu & Rho, 2009). Ganapati (2015) emphasized that the government at
all levels is developing two distinct sorts of mobile applications. First, the enterprise-
focused application (internal services) and second, the citizen-oriented applications
(external services). Moreover, mobile applications for citizens have been widely
developed with different types of services. OECD/ITU (2011) classified the services
into four categories: information and educational, interactive, transactional and
governance and public engagement services. These applications enable citizens to
receive seamless services that include access to government information, the ability to
request services, complete transactions, submit feedback, and support for emergency
assistance and data access.

2.3. Development Stages in E-Government and M-Government

Previous scholars attempted to illustrate the evolution of e-government by

segmenting the process of e-government development into different stages. (Hiller and

30
Bélanger, 2001; Layne and Lee, 2001; Lee, 2010; Moon, 2002;). As e-government
proceeds toward later stages marked by citizen-centric participation, it becomes
increasingly important to analyze these stages of development. It was Layne and Lee
(2001) who initially published the stage model (or known as maturity model) in e-
government research. They established the first concept of e-government as a four-
stage process that progressed from one stage to the next. The first stage, Cataloguing,
involves the establishment of government presence as well as providing information
about their services on the Internet. The second stage, Transaction, entails digitizing
government data and allows citizens to interface with the government through services
like licenses, forms, and tax or fee payment. The third stage, vertical stages, is
concerned with the connection of local systems to higher levels of government, while
the fourth stage, horizontal stages, is concerned with information exchange between
local government levels. The first two stages only cover communication in one
direction, while the final two stages facilitate two-way communication for citizen
interaction with the government.

Furthermore, there are five different stages of the e-government maturity model,
according to Hiller and Bélanger (2001). These five stages are information
dissemination, two-way communication, transaction capability, horizontal and vertical
integration, as well as participation. The fundamentals of citizen participation take root
in the fifth stage of this approach, defining the most advanced degree of e-government
that is feasible. They further note that as e-government advances through the stages,
data gathering, and associated privacy problems increase. Moon (2002) suggested a
similar five-stage model of e-government development, with the first to fourth stages

31
focusing on online public services given by governments as part of their administrative
duties and the last stage focusing on online political activities conducted by the public.
According to him, the fifth stage of political participation entails online voting, public
forums, and opinion polls that allow for a more immediate and broad interaction with
people. The ongoing existence of new technologies has expanded the role of e-
government beyond the website, both in terms of functionality, amount of collaboration,
and public participation. Lee (2010) created a new stage model of e-government
consisting of the stages of presentation, assimilation, reforming, morphing, and e-
governance. The fifth stage, e-governance, incorporates technological, organizational,
and citizen perspectives.

Scholars have been done on e-government maturity models, as previously

mentioned. Meanwhile, there has only been a limited amount of study into mobile
government maturity models. Refiloe & Noluntu (2018) identified only four studies
that have been conducted related to mobile government maturity models (Tozsa &
Budai, 2005; Sandy & McMilan, 2005; Fasanghari & Samimi, 2009; Alijerban and
Sahafi, 2010). The m-government maturity model developed by Tozsa and Budai (2005)
refers to the growth of mobile technology from the use of text messaging for
information dissemination at the first stage to the use of back-end applications at the
fourth level. Sandy & McMilan (2005) define their maturity model for electronic
service delivery as a series of five functional phases in both online and mobile contexts.
Further, Fasanghari & Samimi's (2010) six-stage m-government maturity model is built
on a broad view of technology, security, and infrastructure. Alijerban & Saghafi (2010)
allude to the advancement of technology from simple web technologies at the first stage

32
to complicated technologies such as public key infrastructure and interoperable
standards at the e-participation stage in their mobile government development stage
model.

The e-government and m-government development is intricately bound to

citizens' expectations regarding how they interact with government and have equitable
access to decision-making processes that impact their lives, as well as influence the
process to improve their conditions and quality of life (UNPA & ASPA, 2001 p. 54).
OECD (2001) categorizes citizen interaction into three types. The first type is
information, which the government actively produces and distributes. The second type
is consultation, or two-way communication, in which citizen can express their views
on specific issues. The third form is active participation, where citizens work with the
government to actively participate in decision-making. This categorization is
supplemented in the degree of e-participation developed by Macintosh (2004). The
third stages of "e-enabling", "e-engaging", and "e-empowering" relate to information,
consultation, and active engagement, respectively. UN DESA 2005 further utilized
these three levels to design e-participation framework in similar meaning with "e-
information", "e-consultation", and "e-decision-making". In response to citizen
involvement, Riley (2000) highlighted that the dispensing of information without
substantial input from individuals is not a real interactive interaction. Engaging citizens
with ICT allow for greater participation, better information and understanding about
programs and policies, improved decision-making quality, and increased trust and
confidence in government (OECD, 2003 p.33).

33
2.4. E-participation and m-participation

E-government has facilitated different types of citizen participation, and the

nexus of the two is known as e-participation (Ho, 2002; le Blanc, 2020) Participation
means being involved, having access to certain tasks, and sharing the responsibility,
while e-participation is an e-government toolbox that empowers citizens to be involved
in digital governance. Peristeras et al. (2009) distinguish between e-participation and
e-government domains. E-participation is concerned with the interactions during the
analysis, formulation, and selection of public policies, whereas e-government focuses
on administrative system interface. Moreover, e-participation has different
characteristics than other e-government services due to its nature of being voluntary
(Medaglia, 2012). It is primarily adapted when the public is aware of such situations
that compel them to seek government assistance via the platform.

E-participation serves as an effective tool to get public information, monitor the

political process, evaluate government performance, and link with each other's
opinions (Kearns et al., 2002). Macintosh (2004) points out that e-participation is a
knowledge-intensive activity requiring the extraction of meaningful messages from
massive assemblages of information produced over time by various stakeholders.
Another definition of e-participation provided by Macintosh & Whyte (2008) shows
both government and citizen approaches facilitated by ICT, from "top-down" initiatives
to "bottom-up" efforts, or citizen-led initiatives, empowering them to obtain
government support. Moreover, Wirtz et al. (2016) define e-participation as a
"participatory process that is enabled by modern information and communication

34
technologies, includes stakeholders in the public decision-making processes through
active information exchange, and thus fosters fair and representative policymaking".

E-participation has many different activities to facilitate the interaction, for

instance e-consultation, e-voting, e-petitions, online decision-making, and e-
campaigning (Sæbø, Rose, & Flak, 2008; Medaglia, 2012; Reddick 2013). Each
classification of e-participation has special interests and viewpoints. E-consultation, e-
ssuggestion or e-complaint provided by the government has aim to obtain input from
the citizens. The interaction between government and citizens generates innovative and
modernized public management practices. Along with the new ideas, the citizens play
important roles in building constructive feedback to assess the quality of public service
improvement (Burby, 2003). E-participation and grassroots digital democracy are
frequently used interchangeably. Stressing the concept, public engagement embrace
democratic values for the government to be responsive and accountable (Fung, 2006).

Many governments are already incorporating e-participation features into their

mobile government platforms. One of the main reasons is because mobile government
services is not requiring cable internet (Kuschu & Kuscu, 2003). The government
provides citizens with broad access in the evaluation and production of public services
through mobile participation (Trimi & Sheng, 2008). Citizen would be satisfied if the
mobile services have high quality in terms of technology and facilitation (Wang & Teo,
2020). A well-designed in online service is aligned with the good e-participation
(Gronlund 2006, as cited in Islam, 2008).

35
 E-participation on mobile technologies such as mobile citizen sourcing
application enables citizens to be involved in public decision- regardless of their
location. (Kushchu & Kuscu, 2003, Wimmer, et al., 2013). According to Höffken &
Streich (2013) the mobile e-participation is the practice of utilizing mobile devices to
increase citizen and other stakeholder engagement by facilitating them to interact,
collect and share information, give feedback, and vote. Consequently, the mobile
devices help reduce operational cost, provide greater convenience, increase
transparency, and even contribute to less corruption (Kiki & Lawrence, 2006). Due to
the integration of web-based capabilities into mobile phones, mobile participation is
exptected to improve citizen engagement, particularly among younger generations,
who have been classified as the least engaged group (Lara & Naval, 2012). At the local
level, this form of mobile application may encourage citizens to involve more with
local communities.

Many times, the achievements to provide e-participation are not successfully

assessed or measured. Engaging residents to speak out about neighborhood issues may
involve the creation of public value. On the other hand, they will be hesitant to
participate if the design of e-participation does not give the advantage for them.
Therefore, evaluating the implementation of e-participation is necessary, as is
understanding what has been completed or not (Macintosh, 2004).

2.5. E-participation for the local government

The innovation in e-participation largely occurred and comes from the local
level (le Blanc, 2020). Sumra & Bing (2016) highlight that such citizen participation

36
has a continuous impact on the local government sevices. The interactive channel
provides effective problem-solving tools, allowing the public to use their knowledge
and expertise to address local concerns with local knowledge (Linders, 2012). Citizen
engagement through e-participation makes them more responsible on social problems,
educates them to listen to diverse opinions, and increases the legitimacy of decision
making (Michels & De Graaf, 2010). Another positive outcome of e-participation at
the local level is to improve the ability of the government in detecting early society
problems, increase accessibility and transparency, and create higher levels of citizen
satisfaction (Olmstead et al., 2007). This feedback mechanism assists the government
in promoting the value of increased citizen participation.

E-consultation or e-reporting is the form of online co-production that combines

crowdsourcing design by citizens and will be produced solely by the government
(Moon, 2018). Citizen roles are envisioned as street-level bureaucrats identifying broad
public service needs and communicating them to governments so that relevant public
actions can be undertaken. Active participation in this type is not restricted to certain
policy initiatives or on an annual basis. As a result, poor government performance
based on citizen feedback would have an impact on their willingness to use those
platforms. The government is being pushed to deliver a better response to the public
report and the advantages of mobile technologies can help with the support services.

On the other hand, the implementation of e-participation frequently under-

performs and fails to provide any benefits for citizens (Falco & Kleinhans, 2018;
Reddick, 2013; Royo et al. 2014; Toots, 2019). It is necessary to obtain a deeper

37
knowledge of the barriers that may prevent citizens and local governments from having
effective collaboration (Falco & Kleinhans, 2018). Several challenges have emerged in
the e-participation between citizens and government, covering structural and cultural
contexts (Meijer, 2015). The structural barrier covers the lack of technology, funding,
skills, and so on, while the cultural barrier emphasizes the drawbacks of technology
itself. To achieve meaningful engagement and collaboration through ICT, Meijer (2015)
further suggested that in addressing e-participation, both citizens and governments are
driven by frames that connect technological opportunities with the creation of public
value.

2.6. Public Value

The theory of public value was initially used in public administration to

differentiate public organizations from profit-driven in the private companies. While
private sectors use the term ‘customer value’, governments more use “public value” to
refer to values created by their services. Derived from the work of Moore (1995), these
concept refers to the collective expectations of the public towards the government and
the delivery of services. Some studies propose definitions of public value from citizen
centric approach. Talbot (2011) simply defines public value as the public perception of
what they value, while Nabatchi (2012) regards it as the evaluation of what is produced
by the government on behalf of the public. Thus, it is essential to consider several
dimensions of public value that exist.

Benington (2009) argues that public value should be redefined by considering

not only “what does the public most value” but also “what adds value to the public

38
sphere.” The first question is asked about shifting from government to consumer led
initiative, while the second question balances the first by focusing on the greater public
interest and not just emphasize on current demands, but also take consideration for the
future generation. From this redefinition of public value, Benington (2009) further
contends that public value is way more than commercial economic concerns, it includes
ecological, political, social, and cultural values. Those dimensions contribute to the
value in the “public sphere”, addressing collective concerns in the public domain,
where individual desire must be maintained.

The focus of public sector management has shifted from providing public
services to better satisfying citizens and creation of public value. The public value
provides normative and practical method that considers public value as a motivation
for improving public service delivery (Williams & Shearer, 2011). As a result of the
progress of technology, providing public value has become an objective of government
performance. Cordella and Bonina (2012) stated that public value has gained increasing
attention in relation to digital governance as a response to the failure of the NPM to
meet public expectations. Among the shortcomings of NPMs is that the public officials
place too much focus on efficiency, specifically the average cost of processed output
instead of possible outcomes favored by the public (Raus et al., 2010). For instance,
the performance of the government website demonstrates a preference for the quantity
of information over the value and relevancy of the information to the public. Further,
because NPM strategy is more concerned with production than with outcome,
government are often unable to grasp the larger context outside the service they provide,
which potentially contributing to inconsistency in public services delivery (Coats,

39
2008). Considering this reason, the public value was established to provide a more
comprehensive assessment of government performance while also addressing the
drawbacks of NPM. The NPM regarded digital technology as administrative
instruments, while public value management involves the challenging shift from
service delivery to public expectations and desires.

2.7. Theoretical Background

Through this section, the related concept about the study will be elaborate more
to give understanding in building the hypotheses and research framework of the study.
The theories will be regarded to construct variables which are related to this study,
covered the information system success and public value theory, particularly in e-
participation.

2.7.1. DeLone & McLean Information System Success Model

E-government and e-participation performance evaluation has been the

intruguing subject of academic topic. Among the several theories in inform, DeLone
and McLean Information Systems Success has been extensively cited in numerous
publications (DeLone & McLean, 2016). The model provides comprehensive
framework to monitor and evaluate the impact of the information systems (Teo et al.,
2008; Wang & Liao, 2008). The model was first published in 1992 and revised a ten-
year later.

40
 Initially, the construction of a comprehensive taxonomy for the D&M ISS intial
Model is based on Mason's adaptation model (1978) of Shannon and Weavers' (1949)
communication theory (Petter & McLean 2009; Urbach et al., 2009). Shanon & Weaver
categorized communications on the technical level as the accuracy and efficiency of
the communication system to produce information; on the semantic level the
information has success in transmiting the intended meaning; and on the effectiveness
level, the information gave impact on the receiver. Based on the concept above, the
first D&M ISS initial Model (1992) is developed with six attributes. As seen in the
figure 3 System quality is an indicator of technical success while the information
quality on semantic success. Morover use, user satisfaction, individual impacts, and
organizational impacts are the indicators of the effectiveness success.

Figure 1. The DM & ISS Initial Model (1992)

Previous scholars have validated and expanded the original model by applying
it to a variety of contexts and objects of study since the first publication published (e.g.,
Myers et al., 1997; Pitt et al., 1995; Rai et al., 2002; Seddon, 1997). Pitt et al. (1995)

41
suggested that service quality is important part and should be added to measure the
information system success. Their study identified service quality derived from 22
measurements of the service quality model developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985).
Myers et al. (1997) further added that the information system in the original D&M ISS
initial Model is not only affects the individual and organizational but also workgroup,
industry, and even society. Moreover, Seddon (1997) supplemented the initial D&M
ISS initial Model by redefining "use" as "perceived usefulness" and to include user
involvement. Seddon (1997) indicated that an appropriate variable to measure
information system mandatory is "Perceived Usefulness." To validate the proposed
model, Rai et al., (2002) investigate the D&M ISS initial model (1992) and the Seddon
model (1997) in terms of mandatory and voluntary use of information systems. The
study revealed that both models fit the obtained data and held up reasonably well under
the validation process.

DeLone and McLean improved their model in 2003 after reviewing the previous
literature. They added intention to (use) as an alternative retain the measurement of use.
The new model is claimed to be used for both IS mandatory and voluntary, as shown
in the figure 4 Furthermore. the model added the service quality as the attribute to affect
user satisfaction (Petter et al., 2008) as well as insert net benefits to subsume individual
and organizational impact (Urbach, & Müller, 2012; Wu & Wang, 2006). The arrows
in the model reflect the relationship among the variables. The three elements of quality
dimenssions (System, Information and Services) will bring positive affect on use or
intention to use as well as user satisfaction. The construct of net benefit further will
determine user satisfaction and the user attitude to re-use the information system.

42
 Figure 2. The D&M ISS Revised Model (2003)

2.7.2. Validation of the D&M ISS Revised Model

Following the publication of the revised D&M ISS revised model and in
response to the authors' call for model validation and extension, previous literature has
utilized the model in a variety of fields such as e-commerce, e-government, and e-
participation. Focused on citizen perspective, Wang & Liao (2008) applied the revised
D&M ISS Model to investigate the Taiwanese e-government system which focuses on
six available dimensions. 119 valid respondents revealed that all attributes have
significant effects on user satisfaction unless service quality to use. Next, Teo et al.
(2008) further used the framework to investigate the role of trust in e-government
success. The proposed model consists of 8 variables covering three antecendents of
trust, three quality dimensions, user satisfaction and intention to re-use. Analyzing with
Partial Least Square based on 214 of e-government website users in Singapore, the
study found that the quality dimensions are important for the success of e-government
services. In the e-participation context, Rana et al. (2013) and Rana, et al. (2015) further
examine the validity of the D&M ISS revised model in online public feedback in India.

43
Both studies discovered that the three qualities of dimension have have a substantial
effect on user satisfaction and are very useful for measuring the success of e-
participation initiatives. Recently, Wang & Teo (2020) found that information quality
and service quality in mobile police applications in China affect the citizen satisfaction
that leads to perceived net benefit (public value).

The body of research has contributed to enrich the relationship among variables
inside the model. Moreover, Delone and McLean (2003, p.23) appealed to scholars to
identify explicitly and precisely the stakeholders and context in which net benefits are
to be measured in the revised model. The section below describes the literature on
public value as the underlying background for the recent update of e-government
system evaluation (Scott, et al. 2011) which incorporates the net benefit on public value
derived from Moore’s (1985) public value theory.

2.7.3. Net Benefit on Public Value Perspective

Public value is a strategic goal of the public sector, and it establishes a complete
framework for evaluating public service performance (Kelly et al., 2002; O'flynn, 2007;
Alford & O'flynn, 2009). The definition of public value is elusive and contextual, but
most literature relies on Moore’s (1995) work that describes it as the values or beliefs
of citizens derived from their experiences with public services and government policies.
An understanding of public value in greater detail, helps to assist the government
performance evaluation, improve the quality of policy decisions, and strengthen
relationships with citizens (Kelly, et al., 2002: p.35). As a reflection of communal

44
expression, public value is developed not only through the results in public services,
but also during the process which potentially builds trust and equity (O'Flynn, 2007).
The evaluation of public value is necessary to be a bridge between technology and the
wider policy community when transforming public services delivery with ICTs
(Kearns, 2004). Therefore, the e-government initiatives would provide better impact
on public value added along with the achievement of its goals and subsequent strategies
(Mkude & Wimmer, 2013).

Figure 3. The strategic triangle and the three main of component

Sources: (Omar et al. 2011)

Many scholars have studied the concept of public value as part of the public
service reform. Moore (1985), followed by Kelly et al. (2002), are the beginning
scholars in this field to develop the public value framework. As can be seen in figure
5, both frameworks are important in understanding the expansion of the public value

45
paradigm. Moore (1995) proposed the “strategic triangle” framework to assist the
government's officials in identifying and quantifying the public value they created, as
well as the requirements to generate public value. The analytical framework is
composed of three components: 1) Creating public value entails defining and
specifying the outcomes of public value in a specific context 2) Establishing legitimacy
and gaining support for sustainable action. 3) Developing operational capacity through
coordination and mobilization within and outside the organization in order to achieve
desired outcomes (Omar, et al, 2011; Bennington & Moore, 2011).

Kelly et al. (2002) further developed the three primary components of public
value based on Moores’ framework. The framework refers to the practical implications
strategy by identifying the public value with services, outcomes, and trust. Services are
closely related to the benefits when citizens purchase services from the private sector,
and the citizen satisfaction will shape the value in the services. Kelly et al. (2002)
further emphasizes the citizen satisfaction is salient factor to determine and shape value
in services. The citizen satisfaction is established by several factors such as, customer
service, information, choice, and use of services and advocacy. 2). outcomes as the
realization of expected results of the citizen with higher aspirations. Public safety,
poverty reduction, public health, waste collection, and street cleanliness, and low
crimes are examples of outcomes in public value (Moore, 1995; Kelly et al., 2002;
O'flynn, 2007). Moore (1995) illustrated the distinction between private and public
values. For instance, the waste collection management serve the citizens in terms of
convenience and aesthetics (private value), besides that the outcome provides greater
impact for public health in the communities (public value) 3). Trust, including

46
legitimacy and confidence in government as the crucial component of public value and
determine the relationship between citizens and government. (Kearns, 2004 p.37; Omar
et al, 2011). Kelly et al. (2002, p.17) contended that even if public service and outcome
goals are achieved, a decline in trust effectively would negates public value.

2.7.4. Public value in e-government

Moore’s (1995) initial work does not explicitly account public value for e-
government but establishes a strong foundation to understand the changes mediated by
ICTs in the public sector. Numerous studies have been done to establish a new
framework for evaluating e-government with the public value perspective (e.g., eGEP
framework, 2006; Golubeva, 2007; Grimsley & Meehan, 2007; Kearns, 2004; Omar,
2011; and Scott et al., 2011). Kearns (2004) began to illustrate the notion of public
value in e-government. He highlighted the creation of public value would build 1) high
quality services, 2) improve delivery of outcomes, and 3) increase the level of trust
between citizens and the government. He further emphasizes the quality of high
services can be classified with a) establish provision of services; b) increase user
satisfaction with services; c) increase information and choice availability; d) greater
focus on the important services for the citizens; e) develop new and innovative services;
and f) reduce service delivery cost. In relation to the outcomes, the implementation of
e-government in public services helps the public sector in achieving key service goals
such as health, education, and transportation (Kearns, 2004). To strengthen citizen trust
in government, he further indicated that the citizens heavily focus on issues about
security and privacy of information, hence, the government should spread e-democracy
and e-participation activities.

47
 Moreover, eGep frameworks offer different alternatives with Kearns due to the
previous model having less indicator to measure outcome and trust. The impact of e-
government is classified with the three main categories including efficiency:
organizational value; effectiveness: user value; and democracy: political value (Heeks,
2008). The three classifications contribute to generating valuable indicators to measure
specific e-government users such as taxpayers (efficiency), consumers (effectiveness)
and citizens or voters (social value). The model acknowledges that e-government types
like e-participation systems require indicators such as openness, transparency, and
accountability. However, the model neglects the user impact relating to improved
decision making or empowering communities (Heeks, 2008). When considered, the
public value approach of e-government is not only considered cost-efficiency and
effectiveness but also the impact on socio-political dimensions as a crucial part to be
evaluated comprehensively (Cordella, & Bonina 2012).

Golubeva (2007) evaluated the web portal services provided by local

government in the Rusia and three significant of public value namely public service
quality, public policy outcomes, and public trust. Five indicators were identified as
contributing to the development of public value indicators. Three indicators (openness,
citizen-centricity, and usability) are proposed to quantify the public value of public
service quality, while indicators of transparency and interactivity are proposed to
influence public trust. According to Golubeva (2007), providing high-quality services
through government portals fosters public trust. Moreover, the findings on the

48
relationship among public value is based on pilot research and requires additional
empirical investigation.

Grimsley and Meehan (2007) conceptualized the framework of e-government

initiatives that refers to Moore’s public value theory. The study examines the user's
experience of services and outcome contributes to build public trust and satisfaction.
The framework highlights the citizen’s experience and involvement in e-government
service and outcome will improve their senses of being well-informed, provide greater
personal control, and sense of influence. The social value is highlighted the strategic
goal of e-government system go beyond efficiency, effectiveness economic benefits to
account for political and social objectives, for instance, trust in government, social
inclusion, community well-being, and equal treatment (Cordella & Bonina, 2012).
Moreover, the study revealed trust and satisfaction is related to which people perceive
the e-government service enhances their sense of overall well-informedness, greater
personal control, and provides them with a sense of influence (Grimsley & Meehan
2007, p. 134). While the three public values in their study are highly important in the
public sector, Scott et. al., (2011) highlight the efficiency and effectiveness in public
value should be covered to evaluate the impact of e-government performance.

Omar et al. (2011) proposed an initial framework to measure e-government

service quality through a public value lens. From the standpoint of citizens, the study
captures the role of e-government service quality in the development of public value.
They developed three antencendents derived from the revised D&M ISS Model, while
the output is public value refer to Moore’s (1995) work. Moreover, similarly the

49
indicators on public value need further description, and the conceptual model requires
empirical examination for validation.

On the other hand, Scott et al. (2011) takes further steps in clarifying the
indicators of public value in e-government. The better understanding of success and
the impact of e-government quality through citizen perspective provide the government
an invaluable framework to estimate the eGovernment projects and plan for future
strategies (Scott et al., 2009). Consideration of public value as part of net benefits is
also a response to several scholars when validated D&M ISSM in e-government
literature (e.g., Gable et al., 2008; Prybutok., 2008; Teo et al. 2008; and Wang & Liao,
2008). Public value has significantly shaped a new way of government action by
incorporating efficiency, effectiveness, and the establishment of social values as a new
concept of public sector interest (Stoker, 2006). Scott et al. (2011) classified the public
value into nine-key benefits: cost, time, personalisation, communication, ease of
information retrieval, convenience, trust, well informedness and participate in decision
making, as well as eliminate avoid personal interaction and control. This indicator has
been proposed to evaluate the e-government performance.

50
 Figure 4. eGovernment Success Model (Scott et al., 2011)

As shown in the figure 6, the quality dimensions (system, information, and

service) were not only having a positive correlation on use and user satisfaction, but it
also has direct effect on the net benefits (public value). Scott et al. (2011) justified the
net benefits of public value approach into the D&M ISS revised Model. The study
offers strategic framework to measure e-government performance from a citizen
perspective. Scott et al. (2015) continued their work in finding the key benefit of public
values which are grouped under three main categories of effectiveness, efficiency, and
social impact. In the early stage, they also examined the key benefits of public value
which consist of eleven indicators, while control and avoid personal interaction should
have been incorporated and leave 9 dimensions with 30 key measurement items.

51
Furthermore, they divide the respondent based on the participation level using e-
governemt. Passive, Active, and Participatory user types demonstrate strong results
between multidimensional categories of net benefits, particularly on time, convenience,
trust, well-informedness, and participation in decision-making. while the study is
conduct in the context of web 2.0 system, the authors further called other studies to
validate the construction of net benefit in local government that introduce the new
emerging technologies such as mobile application.

2.7.5. Public value in e-participation

Scott et al. (2015) suggests nine categories to help define the measures of public
value in e-government, such dimensions serve the purpose to provide a useful
framework for evaluating e-government initiatives and planning future projects. Rose
et al. (2018) expands on Scott's arguments by classifying the value traditions of public
administration in relation to digital governance into three broad dimensions:
administrative efficiency, service improvement, and citizen engagement. The first
dimension is based on the cost-effectiveness logics promoted by New Public
Management, while service improvement, stemming from the history of public service,
focuses on how to deliver better service to the people. Citizen engagement as the third
dimension, rooted in liberal democracy principles, encourages responsiveness,
consultation, cooperation, and participation. Align with these categories, Twizeyimana
& Andersson (2019) futher expand the public value in e-government into six dimension
which consists of the public services improvement; administrative efficiency
improvement; government capability improvement; enhanced ethical behavior and

52
professionalism; enhanced trust and confidence in government; and enhanced social
value and well-being.

The development of new information and communication technologies (ICTs)

provides a variety of additional chances for citizens to participate in ways that are
flexible, appealing to them, and do not require too much effort (Stoker, 2006). Among
the numerous types of e-government, e-participation allows the public to participate
and increase public value creation. After several benefits are acquired in evaluating the
effectiveness of e-government quality, O’Brien et al. (2016) offered a new component
for measuring public value in e-participation. In general, the purpose of this study is to
introduce the concept of Sense of Community (SoC), which is a quality that influences
public value and is mediated by user satisfaction. Moreover, the study indicated that
trust, participation in decision making; transparency, legitimacy, internal and external
efficacy, and effectiveness as the indicators of public value in e-participation. While
this is only a conceptual framework, the study demonstrates the importance of a distinct
component in determining public values that are compatible with the characteristics of
the e-participation system. Mobile technology has created new channels for
communication and civic participation. As a result, it should investigate the impact on
mobile applications that provide similar benefits for individuals to interact with the
government. More research is needed to understand how collaborative innovation
between governments and citizens can generate public value.

53
 After discussing about the theory background, the section below briefly
discusses the indicators of public value in the e-participation system as been discussed
Scott et al. (2009; 2011).

Convenience, the e-participation enabled by mobile technologies allows citizens to

provide input from anywhere and at any time, empowered the citizen to interact with
the government (Kuscu 2003; Sharma & Gupta (2004). Because of the convenient
accessibility and availability provided by its mobile value, it has the potential to
increase the number of people who engage in e-participation. Furthermore, e-
participation is designed to save time and reduce cost for the citizen when
communicating with the government officials (Phang & Kankanhalli, 2008). Of these
two benefits, time savings dominate over low costs for users to adopt and engage in e-
participation systems (Zheng & Schachter 2017). However, cost is also important a
determinant to take part online is to save a fee for sending the feedback. The e-
participation offers seamless service and carries more advantages compared to the
traditional way. In the e-commerce context, Kim, Ferin & Rao (2008) incorporated
convenience, money, time, and the advantage of online channels into a perceived
advantage. This study applies this measurement to construct the convenience
dimenssion. The mobile government facilicate the citizen accesebility to government
information and services at anytime, anywhere, saving time, effort, and reduce cost
(Kiki & Lawrence, 2006).

Control, the motivation to involve in e-participation is to have the control for the
public service delivery. In terms of information, a person perceived control by

54
improving their understanding about what they are doing or what is going to happen in
the future. The empirical study revealed that an increased control gave the positive
effect such as satisfaction (Pacheco, Lunardo, & Santos, 2013); and trust (Fledderus,
2015). Grimsley and Meehan (2007) argued that citizens need personal control over
their interactions with services in order to meet the diverse demands of work, family,
and social life. The e-government service and information quality determine the
citizen’s personal control, and it would establish satisfaction and trust. In the e-
participation context, Kim & Lee (2012) found that the active citizen developed a sense
of control by having influence on the public decision-making from experiencing as e-
participants. The authors further identified the satisfaction with the government
responsiveness from the e-participation services that contribute to develop e-
participants’ perceived control. Moreover, the e-participation system broadens
opportunities for the citizen to affect and control public service delivery.

Communication, the internet has undoubtedly altered the communication way

between governments and citizens. Numerous e-government projects have been
established not just to facilitate government-to-citizen communication, but also to
facilitate citizen-to-government interaction (Reddick, 2013). Individuals no longer
need to leave their homes in order to communicate with their governments, since this
can be accomplished through innovative communication means (Gonzales et al, 2007).
These new modes of communication may be viewed as a seamless approach for
governments to engage individuals in constructive conversation and foster good
impressions of governments (Kolsaker & Lee-Kelley, 2008; Scott et al, 2016). As a

55
result, it is fair to assert that communication is an important indication of the value of
e-participation or e-government.

Well-Informedness, E-participation is changing the landscape in which the public

sector communicates and delivers their services and the way in which these services
are valued (Linders, 2012). E-participation is a government further step that not only
provides information and opens opportunities to citizens to interact with the
government but also encourages the active citizenry in improving the quality of public
services delivery. Moreover, people who are involved through e-participation will
increase their knowledge about government and public services (Grimsley & Meehan,
2007). Scott et al. (2015) highlighted that being well-informed is a key factor for
improving democratic processes and a critical aspect of public value.

Trust, satisfaction with e-participation leads to transparency and trust in government

(Kim & Lee, 2012), and achieving the public values requires the effectiveness and high
use of the e-participation system (Lee & Shi, 2020). It is because e-participation
initiatives allow two-way communication between government and citizens, the mutual
learning during the process create public value and legitimize government action.
Moreover, trusting beliefs is an important element which can lessen the sense of
uncertainty when the citizens participate and interact through the e-participation
systems (Teo, et al 2008). Trust in government is frequently measured in terms of
citizens' subjective evaluations based on their own experiences, with the assumption
that a competent, reliable, and honest government or its public service, while meeting
citizens' demands, will increase citizen trust (Park & Blenkinsopp, 2011).

56
Participate in decision-making, e-participation and citizen involvement is regarded
to be the final step in e-government and m-government maturity model (e.g. Moon,
2002; Lee, 2010; Alijerban & Saghafi, 2010). The citizen involvement should become
the main agenda for the government to nurture the legitimacy of government action.
The ICT mediated the participatory process improve the implementation of e-
participation. Public now have the capacity to convey their concerns or opinions to the
public sector via the online platform that is provided by the government. By raising
complaints about local issues via the e-participation platform, individuals may gain the
perception that they are involved in or have control over community policymaking
(Coleman, 2004; Grimsley & Mehan, 2007). Additionally, they are recognized for their
active democracy involvement, which fosters self-esteem and self-fulfillment.
Participation is critical for increasing government accountability, transparency, and
responsiveness (Tolbert, & Mossberger, K, 2006).

2.8. Hypotheses Development

1. System Quality
System quality is the desirable requirement of the information system that meets
user perception in terms of ease of use, system flexibility, reliability, and response time
(DeLone & McLean, 2003; Petter, et al, 2013). The ICT provider, including the
government agency maintains the system quality has adequate resources to manage the
information and services to citizens. DeLone & McLean (2016 p. 55) emphasized
availability and security are the system quality dimension, which is also the best

57
measurement for evaluating mobile applications. Santamaría-Philco & Wimmer (2018)
further indicate that data security, protection, and usability are the attributes of e-
participation systems. The secured system protects the data and information of user and
positively engage citizen to use it.
Based on the key measurement discussion, e-participation is a bottom-up
strategy that focuses on citizen views. evaluating the quality of the e-participation
system is to ensure the surrounding technology has been used to facilitate citizen
feedback. The data protection embedded on the security system and integrated with the
Citizen Relationship Management are value added for the user to use. However, there
is always the possibility that the citizens avoid using the e-participation when the
system fails to perform appropriately in facilitating their input and managing their data.
Considering the empirical study and the discussion mentioned, the study hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1a. System quality has a positive effect on the use in the context of e-
participation system

Many literatures revealed that the system quality had positive influence on
citizen satisfaction in several types of e-government system (e.g., Wang and Liao 2008,
Rana et al 2013, Rana, et al., 2015, Teo et al., 2008, Zaidi, Siva, & Marir 2014).
Similarly, the prior experience of high quality in the mobile application affects citizens'
satisfaction in using the e-participation system (Al-Hubaishi, Ahmad, & Hussain,
2017). E-participation in mobile application demands low technology knowledge and
fewer costs to the citizen, making e-government services more easily available and
accessible (Trimi & Sheng, 2008). Moreover, the feature of mobile technologies

58
reduces time-space constraint, offers easy access to public services everywhere and
anytime, as well as increasing the government flexibility and responsiveness
(Ishmatova & Obi, 2009). The study also considers the high system quality of mobile
applications will lead to improved citizen satisfaction in e-participation. Therefore, the
following hypothesis can be proposed as follows:

Hypothesis 1b. System quality has a positive effect on the user satisfaction in
the context of e-participation

2. Information Quality

Information quality is desirable characteristics of the system outputs, including

content provided on the platform, management reports, and information display which
meet the user requirement (Petter, et al. 2013). A recent study by Delone & McLean
(2016) suggested the key success measurement for the information quality is usefulness,
understandability, reliability, and completeness, while emphasizing relevance,
information accuracy, currency, and timeliness as the key measurement to evaluate
mobile application. Information quality shows user valued whether the information
provided on e-government is accurate, valid, and timely (Teo, et al, 2008). Petter &
McLean's (2009) meta-analysis of the D&M ISS model revealed that system quality
and information quality are the salient factors on use and user satisfaction. Some studies
also found that significant impact of the information quality on the use of e-government
services (Stefanovic, 2016; Edress & Mahmod, 2014; Xinli, 2015). In the e-
participation context, the information quality will affect user willingness to use the

59
platform. For instance, when users submit feedback online, they expect that reports
which include a registration code may be easily tracked and that new information is
constantly monitored in the application. On the other side, the mobile applications that
frequently present flawed information can persuade users to shift to different channels.
The aforementioned discussion led to the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2a. Information quality has a positive effect on the use in the
context of e- participation system

The bundle of literature revealed the positive influence of the information

quality on citizen satisfaction in general and several types of e-government services
(e.g., Rana et al 2013, Rana, et al., 2015, Teo et al., 2008, Wang & Liao, 2008; Zaidi,
Siva, & Marir, 2014; Floropoulos et al 2010; Weerakkody, et. al 2016). A recent
systematic review by Rasool & Warraich (2018) also concluded that information
quality has a significant impact on users' satisfaction with the e-government system.
Wang & Liao (2008) indicated that the information quality is a salient factor on citizen
satisfaction in assessing e-government system success in Taiwan. Weerakkody, et. al
(2016) also obtained similar findings for e-government services in the United Kingdom
context. Moreover, Rana, Dwivedi, & Williams (2013) and Rana, Dwivedi, Williams,
& Weerakkody (2015) highlighted that the Information quality has a significant
influence on user satisfaction in assessing online feedback systems in India. Chae et al
(2002) suggested that the information quality dimensions (connection, content,
interaction, contextual) contribute to enhancing user satisfaction in mobile internet
services. Recently, Wang & Teo (2020) also revealed that information is a salient factor

60
affecting citizen satisfaction in using mobile police applications in China. The literature
above indicated the information quality had a significant impact on e-participation in
mobile application provided by local government, hence, the study proposed the
following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 2b. Information quality has a positive effect on the user

satisfaction in the context of e-participation

3. Service Quality
Service quality is a set of specialized organizational capabilities for providing
values to the user in the forms of services within key success for measuring system
quality is responsiveness, reliability, empathy, contact and interactivity (DeLone and
Mclean, 2016). Service quality is a crucial dimension to capture the overall information
system successfully (Pitt, et. al 1995 p. 175). Previous studies found the significant
impact of services quality on use (Abdulkareem et al, 2021; Edress & Mahmod, 2014);
In voluntary services such as e-participation system, the user expect the government
provide online service to become more transparent and responsive. The mobile
technologies help the citizens on co-production in the public service delivery. The
citizen can interact with the government, to report and to identify the local problem
with their mobile devices. However, if the service quality provided by the government
has low performance on the feedback it possibly affects user motivation to use.
Considering the discussions above, it is hypothesized that:

61
 Hypothesis 3a. Service quality has a positive effect on the use in the context
of e-participation

Service quality contributes to influencing citizen satisfaction in adopting the e-

government system. Several studies validated the significant impact of service quality
on the user satisfaction in e-government, for instance in electronic tax service
(Floropoulos, 2010; Zaidi, Siva & Marir, 2014) and online feedback systems in India
(Rana, et al, 2013; Rana, et al., 2015). Wang & Teo (2020) further showed that the
online service quality in mobile police applications has been affected to the citizens
satisfaction. Sharing similar features with online public feedback and mobile police
application, the quality dimension in using e-participation through mobile application
will positively influence the user satisfaction. This study considers the high service
quality in the mobile e-participation improved the user satisfaction. Premised on the
empirical findings from the mentioned studies, it is hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 3b. Service quality has a positive effect on the user satifaction in
the context of e- participation system

4. System Use
Use is identified as the degree and manner in which the employees and users
utilize the capabilities of an information system (Petter, et al., 2013 p.11). Delone &
McLean (2016) recommended various indicator to measure use in evaluating
information system success such as the frequency of use, number of functions or
features used (extent of use), attitude toward use, and intention to reuse. Delone &
McLean (2003: p.23) highlighted that he relationship use and user satisfaction are

62
inextricably linked. In this sense, use should precede user satisfaction, yet a positive
experience precede user satisfaction, yet a positive experience with use improve user
satisfaction in a causal sense. DeLone & McLean (2016; p.57) added that use is a
critical indicator of the effectiveness of numerous information systems, including e-
government and e-participation. In validating the D&M ISS Revised Model, Wang &
Liao (2008) implied that the citizen’s use of e-government systems such as e-
participation is entirely voluntary, therefore use has more closer meaning on e-
participation initiatives success than behavioral intention to use. Their study also
validated the impact of use on user satisfaction and perceived net benefit, where use
shows strongest direct effect on the net benefit. Similarly, the e-participation provided
by the local government being under study is voluntary since the citizens have different
channels to deliver the feedback. Derived from the D&M ISS Model, the study
expected the frequency, dependency, and nature of use in the e-participation system
led to increased user satisfaction and net benefit (public value). Thus, it is hypothesized
that:
Hypothesis 4a. use has a positive effect on the user satisfaction in the context
of e-participation

Hypothesis 4b. Use has a positive effect on the net benefit (public value) in
the context of e-participation

5. User satisfaction and Net Benefit (PublicValue)

As an important success variable in the information system fields, user
satisfaction is measured based on the user experience using the information system.

63
DeLone and McLean (2003) argued that to portrays user value about satisfaction
comprehensively, the study needs to cover entire process of user experience since the
first access to obtain the services. The local government who had e-participation
applications increased the public satisfaction with the government performance (Ahn
& Bretschneider, 2011). The user satisfaction can be measured by their overall
satisfaction and expectation. Chen et al. (2016) showed that the impact of mobile and
wireless technology on user satisfaction. The empirical study indicated mobile
government services increase the procedural fairness of public services (transparency,
information correctness, and voice opportunity), which in turn affect citizen
satisfaction

The fourteen studies reviewed by Petter et al. (2008) also showed if there was
strong support for the relationship between user satisfaction and net benefit. The net
benefits are the most important success measures as they capture the balance of positive
and negative impacts of the information system on the citizen and government. Net
benefit is the extent to which e-government systems contribute to the success of
individuals or organizations using the information system such as improved efficiency
and effectiveness, and legitimacy on decision-making. To identify public value from
the net benefit perspective, the measurement of user satisfaction is important (Kelly, et.
al, 2002). Citizens who are satisfied with the e-government generate public value,
which becomes a decisive component in whether the application is used in the future
or not. The satisfaction of citizens as the end-user is a key indicator to measure the
impact of the government initiatives such as social learning development, transparency,
and trust in local government (Kim & Lee, 2012). The component of public value is

64
what the user perceived significantly after being satisfied with online public feedback.
Thus, the following hypotheses are proposed:

Hypothesis 5. User satisfaction has a positive effect on the net benefit

(public value) in the context of e-participation.

2.9. Research Model

Applying the D&M ISS revised Model (2003) and Moore’s (1995) public value,
the study considers information quality, system quality, service quality, use, citizen
satisfaction, and net benefit (public value) to have positive correlation. The research
framework is slightly different from the D&M ISS revised Model, by using Use rather
than Intention to use to measure voluntary information systems. Next, he model focus
on the relationship of use to user satisfaction as wel as is not included the feedback
links from the net benefit (public values) to use and user satisfaction due to avoiding
complexity. The conceptual framework of the study can be illustrated as follows.

Figure 5. Research design

65
This study tries to validate the attributes and the quality dimension of e-participation
system in the mobile participation and see the positive impact for the creation public
value. The D&M ISS revised model is widely adopted to evaluate the information
system success, even so additional research is needed to validate it in the context of
mobile application provided by the government (Scott et al. 2015). Wang & Teo (2020)
indicated that not many studies apply those theory in the context of mobile government
in the recent years. By examining the research model constructs and their positive
relationships, the following can be deduced: The quality of an e-participation system
can be assessed in terms of the system, the information, and the service; these features
have an effect on subsequent use and user satisfaction. Certain net benefits (public
value), as described previously, will be realized through the use of the e-participation
system. Moreover, the study also wants to analyze the construct of public value from
the quality dimension of e-participation system, as the shown in the figure below.

Figure 6. The construct of net benefit (public value) for e-participation system

66
 CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the research methodology with the framework using the
Revised D&M ISS Model and Public value approach, descriptions on how data
gathering method, population and sample, data analysis, as well as the statistical
analysis technique with the validity and reliability of the research.

3.1. Data Collection

Based on the time dimensions, the current study applies cross-sectional method.
The cross-sectional is a research method that collected data at one point in time
(Creswell & Creswell, 2017). The study collected the primary data through online
survey start from 18 to 27 September 2021. The survey utilized in this study is self-
administered and sent by using google form. The main measurement item used the five-
point Likert scale questionnaire, with 1 indicating strongly disagree and 5 stating
strongly agree. Respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement with the
measurement item based on the recent feedback experiences to the Jakarta government.

3.1.2 Population and Sample

The target population of this study is not strictly for the Jakarta citizens who
have experiences using JAKLapor to submit their feedbacks to the DKI Jakarta
government. Those who live in outer Jakarta may use the application and participate to
send feedbacks while they are in the Jakarta region. The mobile application is available
on google play store and/or app store for users to download. It shows that users have

67
been exceeded one million users. However, this number is not supposedly indicated
the active users for sending reports or feedbacks. While the growing number of mobile
users is large, 300 is adequate number to represent the population of users and conduct
the multivariate analysis.

3.2. Data Analysis

The fundamental elements of this study are applying the theories with
validation of the hypotheses using instruments and observations that produce statistical
data. In the beginning the study use KMO, communalities, and bartlett’s test on for
indicate each measurement items as we put on the appendix A. This study was used
SPSS version 25 for the descriptive statistic. The data collection will be analyzed
through Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). SEM is a multivariate analysis
technique that simultaneously analyzes several variables at once (Hair et al., 2011).
This study uses Partial-Least-Square SEM on SmartPLS version 3.3.3. PLS-SEM
which has been often applied in businesses, social science and information system
literatures. Some scholars view that the PLS-SEM approach has more robust estimation
of the structural model. Henseler et al. (2009) stated that PLS-SEM is an alternative
method of CB-SEM when distributional assumption cannot be met, the structural
model has many constructs or indicators and has limited sample size.

The decision to use the PLS-SEM confirmed during the calculation of data
skewness and kurtosis value, the result showed that the measurement item and variable
meet the requirement of kurtosis value (-1.5 – 1.5) but the distribution highly skewed
(greater than 1.0). Hair et al. (2011) suggests to use PLS-SEM in carrying out a study

68
 that to evaluate measurement and structural model. The measurement model
covers reflective indicator loadings, internal consistency reliability, convergent validity,
and discriminant validity. Moreover, the study applied the coefficient of determination
(R2), the blindfolding-based crossvalidated redundancy measure Q2, path coefficients
and F2 (effect size) to evaluate structural model. The hypothesis testing will be tested
with the critical values at the 0.05 level of significance (t value greater than 1.96).
Moreover, this study would also present the model fit of the model on the Appendix B.

3.3. Operational definitions and measurement items

The measurement item for the questionnaire present in the table 3.1, to provide
dimension being measured within the D&M ISS revised model and public value theory.
Each construct was taken from the information system theory and literature review
discuss about the public value.

Table 1 Operational definitions and measurement items

Variables Construct Definition Sources
System quality Ease of use The system is easy to use Teo, et al., (2008);
Seddon and Kiew
Friendliness The system is user friendly (1996)
System The dependability of Wixom & Todd
Reliability system operation (2005)
Response time How quick the system Livari (2005)
responds to requests or
action (e.g., download
time)
System Security The system has good Teo, et al., (2008);
security setting Wang & Teo (2020)
Relevance The information is precise

69
Information Reliable The output of information Doll & Torkazdesh
quality is reliable (1988); Teo. et al,
(2008)
Accuracy The information is correct Doll & Torkazdesh
(1988); Teo et al
(2008)
Currency The information is up to Wixom & Todd,
date (2005)
Service quality Reliability The ability to perform the Pitt, et. al, 1995; Teo,
promised service et al., (2008)
dependably and accurately
Responsiveness The willingness of to help
users and provide prompt
services
Assurance The knowledge and
courtesy of service staff
Empathy The system is designed Wang & Liao, 2008
with the user in mind.
Use Frequency of use The high of frequency use Wang & Liao, 2008
Dependency The dependency to use
voluntary The nature of use DeLone and McLean
(2003)
User Expectation The information system Seddon & Kiew,
Satisfaction meets the user’s 1996);
expectation
Repeat use The satisfaction with the DeLone and McLean
information system (2003)
affected the user to reuse
Satisfaction Overall satisfaction with Wang & Liao, 2008
the quality dimension
Net benefit Convenience The ability to receive the
(public value) service how and when the Gilbert et al (2004),
individual wants. The Norris & Reddick
convenience including time (2013), Kim, Ferin,
and cost saving saved by Rao (2008)
using the online channel

70
Control The ability to exert
personal control over the
service
Communication Efficient method of
communicating with
central/local government
Trust Increase in trust and
confidence in Government
Well- Better informed,
informedness knowledgeable about
government policy
Citizen Involved, exert influence in
participation the democratic process
71
Kolsaker & Lee-
Kelley (2008), Gilbert
et al (2004)
Gilbert et al (2004),
Norris & Reddick
(2013)
Scott et al, (2015),
Welch, et al (2005)
Kolsaker & Lee-
Kelley (2008),
Scott et al, (2015)
 CHAPTER 4. SELECTION CASE

The focus of this chapter is to look at a mobile public participation app that
established by an Indonesian local government, specifically the DKI Jakarta. The
following two sub-chapters will explore Jakarta's social context as well as provide a
brief description of JAKI, the mobile platform that is the subject of this research.

1.1.1. Context of Jakarta

Exploration of Jakarta city.

Jakarta Special Capital Region or DKI Jakarta is one of the most densely
populated and largest cities in Southeast Asia, with 15.633 people per square kilometer.
As of September 2020, Jakarta's total population was 10.56 million (Jakarta Statistical
Bureau, 2020). This number will increase threefold when the Greater Jakarta Area,
locally referred as Jabodetabek (an acronym of Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-
Bekasi) is included. Notable, but not surprising, Jakarta's fast urbanization brings
several urban environmental challenges, including transportation issues, waste
management collection, and flood risk (Edelman & Gunawan 2020). The entire number
of automobiles in Jakarta has surpassed the total population, resulting in heavy traffic
congestion, particularly during peak hours. The 2019 Jakarta Statistical Bureau showed
the number of private vehicles and public transit vehicles, including cars, buses, trucks,
and motorbikes, was around 11,8 million units. The city also produces 7.100 tons of
waste in a single day (Nugraha, 2020). It is critical to emphasize that waste

72
management collection is essential, starting from household waste to landfills.
Furthermore, the city's challenges are aggravated by its geographical location, which
has been impacted by rising water levels as a result of climate change and population
growth that overexploits groundwater reserves (Edelman & Gunawan 2020). The
confluence of 13 rivers, increased population pressure, and land subsidence below sea
level are factors contributing to Jakarta experiencing flood disasters during every rainy
season (Sagala & Luo, 2015).

To address the city's problems and promote effective tools for citizen
participation in co-production, the local government established 14 official channels
for citizens to communicate their urban concerns and classified into the three categories
are geo-tagging-based channels, social media-based channels, and physical visit to the
local offices. (Jakarta Smart City, 2019). While the geo-tagging feature technology is
applied for mobile applications such as LAPOR, Qlue, and JAKI, the purpose of other
feedback channels is to provide equal access for the community to initiate contact with
the local government. The citizen non-emergency report will be processed via the
Citizen Relationship Management (CiRM) tool, which will be used by the municipal
administration to accept, coordinate, and follow up on public complaints more
effectively. In this regard, the DKI Jakarta Provincial Government has set up ample
opportunities for the citizens to participate actively through all the various channels
accessible.

1.1.2. Jakarta Kini (JAKI) Mobile Application

73
 Technology helps citizens to be more adaptable and mobile, which is crucial
for public empowerment (Linders, 2012). JAKI is a campaign run by the Jakarta local
government to encourage residents to use and engage in the city's numerous public
services, as well as to acquire accurate information in a timely manner. The mobile
application was launched in September 2019 as the implementation of the Smart City
program, and it includes a variety of services for the citizens to access, including
JakWarta (official news), JakCorona (Covid-19 information), JakSiaga (emergency
contacts, such as ambulance, police, or disaster management agency), Jejak (contact
tracing and checkpoint monitoring), JakISPU (air condition monitoring), and so forth
(https://jaki.jakarta.go.id). New digital service is also continually developed by taking
advantage of mobile technology such as chatbot (JAVA), personal digital identity
(JAKI ID) or mobile cash payment (JakPay). Moreover, to facilitate citizens to share
feedback or complaints about the issues in their surrounding environment, the local
government established the application as a supplement to the complaint management
system, dubbed 'JakLapor and JakRespons'. The figure 1 illustrates the images of the
online feedback services as the case study.

74
 Figure 7. JAKI screenshots highlighting the JAKLapor and JAKRespons services

JAKLapor (the left image) enables citizens to make complaints and suggestions
on the common issues including the traffic congestion, waste management collection,
code violation, pothole, or public service failures. By submitting the report within the
picture and writing a description, they can verify the feedback and locate other’s reports
on JAKRespons (right image). The online feedback is recorded with a tracking number
for the citizens to monitor the status in real-time and it effectively holds the local
government officials accountable for a timely response (Linders, 2012). The geo-
tagging-based technology facilitates public officials to easily identify the report area
and take appropriate action to address the problem. Moreover, the government is
assuring the citizen personal data is secured and the information may be disclosed to
the third parties.
JAKI is gaining traction among several channels inside the Jakarta complaint
management system. The figure 2 below depicts citizens' preferences for public input

75
channels. According to a 2020 survey conducted by Jakarta Smart City, citizens chose
the application as a means of communicating with the local government during the
COVID-19 pandemic. However, a different poll done in 2021 by Ruang Waktu
indicates that increased awareness of JAKI usage resulted in conflicting findings about
citizen satisfaction with the performance of public service delivery (Merdeka, 2021).
Most respondents indicate satisfaction with the government's performance in specific
areas, including health, clean water, and administrative services, but not in areas such
as poverty, flooding, air pollution, waste management, and budget transparency. In this
sense, the e-participation provided by local governments improves individuals' access
to exercising their voice, while the satisfaction levels of the citizens are varied among
sectors. Furthermore, the widespread usage of JAKI has obscured the extent to which
public value has been generated by citizen engagement in the e-participation system.

Figure 8. The favorite channels of public feedback in Jakarta during covid-19.

Source (Jakarta Smart City, 2020)

76
 CHAPTER 5. RESULTS

4.1. Demographic information

The initial question of whether to submit a feedback report using JAKLapor is

the screening to the next questionnaire page. The pilot test is conducted on a small
sample and is limited to individuals who have used similar sorts of mobile applications
provided by the government. During the pilot test, the respondent delivers positive
feedback on the measurement items in the survey. The data collection began with the
target sample of 320 respondents. However, 24 respondents who provided extreme
responses to the survey were deleted, leaving 296 respondents who met the standard.
The respondents are diverse in terms of gender, age, education, occupation, monthly
income, and the domicile.
In general, the respondents have different characteristics such as gender, age,
education, occupation, monthly income, duration of use of JAKI, and location of origin.
The following table describe the detail characteristics of the respondents. In addition,
the demographic information section also presents the reported public issues and other
feedback channels used by the respondents.

77
 Table 2 Distribution of demographic profile of the respondent
Frequency
Category Items Percentage
n-296
Gender Male 161 54.4
Female 135 45.6
Age Less than 17 8 2.7
18-25 69 23.3
26-35 92 31.1
36-45 49 16.6
46-55 42 14.2
56 or more 36 12.2
Educational Less than high school 9 3.0
attainment Senior high school 72 24.3
Associate degree 72 24.3
Bachelors’ degree 136 45.9
Master’s degree 7 2.4
Occupation Government employee 72 24.3
Private employee 94 31.8
Entrepreneur 74 25.0
Freelance 30 10.1
Student 14 4.7
Housewife 12 4.1
Monthly income Less than 5.000.000 116 39.2
(IDR) 5.000.001-10.000.000 109 36.8
10.000.001-20.000.000 33 11.1
20.000.001 or more 31 10.5
Not applicable 7 2.4
Location West Jakarta 59 19.9
Central Jakarta 52 17.6
South Jakarta 75 25.3
East Jakarta 71 24.0
North Jakarta 25 8.4
Outside Jakarta 14 4.7

78
 The percentage of gender does not create large gap between male and female.
54.4% of respondents were male comprising 161 respondents, and 45.6% were female
consisting of 135 respondents. From a total of 296 respondents, it is adequate to
describe the distribution of most people in Jakarta. According to the Central Statistics
Agency of DKI Jakarta Province, the ratio between male and female has a percentage
of 50.5% of 5.3 million and 49.5% of 5.2 million in 2020.

The area of origin of the respondents yields different results. The respondents
were drawn from the five administration cities in Jakarta, with South Jakarta
accounting for 25.3 percent, followed by East Jakarta (24%), West Jakarta (19.9%),
Central Jakarta (17.6 percent%), and North Jakarta (8.4%). Furthermore, the
respondents are not only from the Jakarta region, but also from the surrounding areas
of Jakarta. 14 respondents (4.7 percent) from outside Jakarta took part in sending
feedback which is offered by the mobile application. The location-based services
enable the respondents while in Jakarta area to initiate the contact with government
authorities using their mobile devices.

The various age groups represented among the respondents who took part in
the study. 8 respondents are under the age of 17 years, contributing for 2.7 percent of
the total responses gathered. Next, 23.3 percent of respondents are between the ages of
18 and 25 years old, followed by 92 percent of respondents between the ages of 26 and
35 years old (31.1 percent). Further, 49 percent of respondents are between the ages of
36 and 45 years old (16.6 percent), and 42 percent of respondents are between the ages

79
of 46 and 55 years old (46-55). Finally, 36 percent of respondents are between the ages
of 56 and more than 56 years old.

Furthermore, respondents with a bachelor's degree dominate the distribution of

education levels. 45.9 percent of the 136 responders were undergraduates. Furthermore,
the same number is found at the senior high school levels and associate degree, with
72 and 24.3 percent of respondents, respectively. 9 out of 3 respondents had less than
a high school diploma. Last but not least, 7 respondents have a master's degree,
accounting for 2.2 percent.

welfare services 10%

85
Traffic and transportation 17%
145
education services 6%
53
public facilities 16%
142
administrative services 8%
73
health services 18%
161
environment 14%
123
Code violation 11%
95
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Figure 9. Types of service feedback

The respondents were also asked about societal problems or urban challenges
they have been reported. Through the type of multiple-choice questions, they are
allowed to choose more than one answers. In general, most of the respondents have

80
submitted the report more than once. Health services rank first (18%), followed by
traffic and transportation (17%), public facilities (16%), environment (14%),
disturbance of public order comfort (11%) welfare services (10%), service
administration (8%), and education services (6%). The citizen feedback in in health
services is understandable considering that survey was taken in pandemic condition.
207

104

94
51
40.4%

32
25
20%

18%
10%

5%

6%
SOCIAL MEDIA MOBILE APP WEBSITE SMS OFFLINE EMAIL
CHANNEL

Figure 10. Types of feedback channel

Furthermore, respondents were asked different channel they have been used to
send the report. A multiple-choice type of question was used to facilitate respondent
choose more than one answer. In the survey, the three main services facilitate by the
government (geo-tagging, social media, and offline channel) categorized into six
different areas, as shown in the type 4.3 Social media account of the Jakarta
government and the Governor were the first alternative for the respondent, with 40%.
Following that, the website and email with 20% and 18%, respectively. Next, the
alternative mobile applications (i.e., Qlue and LAPOR) of 10 %, local visit of 6%, and
Short Messaging Service (SMS) of 5 %. This profile depicts all the channel feedbacks
have been used for the respondent with the social media dominated the respondent’s

81
answer and used SMS in the last positon, followed by offline channels. SMS-based
services have been most popular method for the citizen to intiate contact to the
government due to simple, low cost, and has not require the internet access, however
the limited function such as images or the number of text characters might affect the
citizen to use the services (Goodwin, 2010). Moreover, the rich function of the mobile
services has been facilitated by the mobile application and social media.

4.2. Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistical analysis techniques are statistics used to analyze data has been
collected without further intention to make general conclusions or generalizations of
the findings from an online survey. Descriptive statistics in this study use the mean,
minimum, maximum, and standard deviation (SD) values.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics

Variable Item Mean Median Min Max SD
System Quality SYSQ1 4.108 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.107
SYSQ2 3.946 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.132
SYSQ3 3.824 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.083
SYSQ4 3.774 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.109
SYSQ5 3.902 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.142
SYSQ6 3.831 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.185
Information INFQ1 3.993 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.036
Quality INFQ2 3.986 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.053
INFQ3 3.970 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.070
INFQ4 4.057 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.053

82
Service Quality SEVQ1 3.895 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.046
SEVQ2 3.932 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.113
SEVQ3 3.892 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.110
SEVQ4 3.966 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.090
Use USE1 4.034 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.102
USE2 3.919 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.084
USE3 3.926 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.236
User USER_SAT1 3.946 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.032
Satisfaction USER_SAT2 3.973 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.118
USER_SAT3 3.899 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.131
Convenience CONVEN1 4.037 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.155
CONVEN2 4.071 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.114
CONVEN3 4.027 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.068
CONVEN4 3.848 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.097
Control CONTROL1 4.041 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.052
CONTROL2 3.993 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.020
CONTROL3 3.953 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.179
Communication COMM1 3.970 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.082
COMM2 3.926 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.100
COMM3 3.990 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.086
Well- WI_1 4.000 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.136
Informedness WI_2 3.946 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.120
WI_3 3.949 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.118
Trust TRUST1 3.953 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.080
TRUST2 3.899 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.113

83
 TRUST3 3.868 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.115
TRUST4 3.959 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.117
Participation in PART_1 3.956 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.034
decision making PART_2 3.912 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.147
PART_3 3.939 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.119
PART_4 3.936 4.000 1.000 5.000 1.150

The descriptive statistics results show the distribution of respondents' responses to each
of the variables diverse in this study. Table 3.1 above show the highest response on the
system quality dimension, specifically SYSQ1 (ease of use), with mean of 4.108 and
standard deviation of 1.107. Meanwhile, the lowest response found in the system
quality, on the measurement item of SYSQ4 (response time) which account mean of
3.77 and standard deviation of 1.101. On the other hand, from the construct of net
benefit (public value) that perceived by the citizen, user CONTROL_1 contribute for
the highest response, with mean of 4.041 and standard deviation 1.052, while
CONVEN4 is the lowest response with mean of 3.848 and standard deviation of 1.097.

4.3. Measurement Model Assessment

Validity and reliability have been suggested to conduct quantitative approach,

which related with the instruments or measurement item was taken from the past.
validity refers to the ability to draw meaningful and useful conclusions from the
specific instrument scores (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). Reliability can state the extent
to which result or measurements is reliable and can provide relative consistent or
repeatable measurement results.

84
 To carry out statistical analysis using PLS-SEM and test the hypotheses, a two-
step procedure was applied, the assessment on measurement model (outer model) and
structural model (inner model). For the reflective model whereas the constructs cause
the measurement of the variables, the evaluation was taken with the indicator reliability,
internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity (Hair et
al., 2011; Henseler et al., 2009; Wong, 2019). For the two validity subtypes, the
convergent validity signifies that a set of indicators represents one and the same
underlying construct. On the other hand, the discriminant validity is the level of
correlation between one construct and other unrelated construct, which implies both
constructs should not be correlated to each other.

4.3.1. Indicator reliability, consistency reliability and convergent validity

There are rules of thumb to evaluate measurement model, consist of reliability

and validity (Hair et al, 2011). Reliability can be measure with indicator and
consistency reliability. Indicator reliability is acquired from squaring outer loadings of
reflective constructs, and it describes the link between the indicators and the variables.
The minimum acceptance level for the outer loading is higher than 0.7 (Hair, et al 2011;
Henseler et al., 2009). The internal consistency measures the degree to which the
indicator loads simultaneously when the construct or variable increases (Urbach &
Ahlemann, 2010). The internal consistency reliability tested using Cronbach’s alpha
and composite reliability. Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.7 or higher indicate the
acceptable internal consistency. while the composite reliability as second test must not
be lower than 0.6 and above 0.90 are regarded as satisfactory. (Henseler et al., 2009;

85
Nunannly and Bernstein, 1994). Convergent validity is the extent to which a measure
correlates positively with alternative measures of the same construct. The measurement
item of a certain reflective construct should share a high proportion of variance (Hair
et al., 2017) Simply mean, convergent validity is used to measure the level of accuracy
of an item with average variance extracted (AVE). AVE has range between 0 and 1,
and the general acceptance an AVE value should be higher than 0.50. The table 4 show
the result for indicator reliability, internal reliability, and convergent validity.

Table 4. Reliability and convergent validity results

Cronbach Composite Indicator

Construct Measurement item AVE
‘s Alpha Reliability reliability
System SYSQ1 0.787 0.946 0.957 0.906
Quality SYSQ2 0.880
SYSQ3 0.898
SYSQ4 0.872
SYSQ5 0.905
SYSQ6 0.862
Information INFQ1 0.810 0.922 0.945 0.884
Quality INFQ2 0.907
INFQ3 0.900
INFQ4 0.910
Service SEVQ1 0.812 0.923 0.945 0.906
Quality SEVQ2 0.900
SEVQ3 0.899
SEVQ4 0.900
Use USE1 0.769 0.849 0.909 0.913
USE2 0.896
USE3 0.818
User USER_SAT1 0.846 0.909 0.909 0.912
Satisfaction USER_SAT2 0.925
USER_SAT3 0.923

86
 Cronbach Composite Indicator
Construct Measurement item AVE
‘s Alpha Reliability reliability
Net CONVEN1 0.744 0.983 0.984 0.888
Benefit/ CONVEN2 0.841
Public CONVEN3 0.812
value CONVEN4 0.806
CONTROL1 0.825
CONTROL2 0.867
CONTROL3 0.873
COMM1 0.868
COMM2 0.890
COMM3 0.869
WELL_INFORM1 0.886
WELL_INFORM2 0.866
WELL_INFORM3 0.877
TRUST1 0.846
TRUST2 0.890
TRUST3 0.857
TRUST4 0.832
PART_DEC_MAK1 0.869
PART_DEC_MAK2 0.874
PART_DEC_MAK3 0.885
PART_DEC_MAK4 0.884

As shown in the table above, the reliability and convergent validity test have been met
the rules of thumb that discuss earlier. The reliability value of individual indicators
passes the standard and is higher than 0.70. Thus, no measurement items need to be
discarded on the reliability of the indicator. The second test is the reliability of internal
consistency. This study shows that most of the constructs have Cronbach's Alpha and
Composite reliability values greater than 0.9. and only CA value in Use with a record
score of 0.86. Furthermore, the convergent validity valued achieve the minimum limit

87
of AVE. Most construct has value greater than 0.5. (0.787, 0.810, 0,812, 0.769, 0.864,
0.744). The result of AVE values reflects the constructs were able to describe more
than half of the variances of its indicator on average. The results of the reliability test
and convergent validity shown that the indicator passed the standard, thus it can be
analyzed further with discriminant validity.
4.3.2. Discriminant Validity
Discriminant validity refers to the degree to which an empirically defined
construct is truly distinct from other constructs. There are two steps for the traditional
discriminant validity testing, first the cross loading and the Fornell-Larcker criterion
(Hair et al., 2011; Henseler et al., 2009). The cross loading refers to an indicator’s outer
loadings on the associated construct should be greater than any other constructs. The
table 5 below show the result of the cross-loading for each indicator.

88
 Table 5. Cross loading results
Indicator SYSQ INFQ SERVQ USE USS NBPV
SYSQ1 0.906 0.828 0.838 0.762 0.818 0.860
SYSQ2 0.880 0.811 0.837 0.758 0.789 0.835
SYSQ3 0.898 0.785 0.823 0.720 0.780 0.842
SYSQ4 0.872 0.756 0.794 0.725 0.760 0.800
SYSQ5 0.905 0.787 0.838 0.753 0.811 0.845
SYSQ6 0.862 0.730 0.789 0.738 0.755 0.797
INFQ1 0.758 0.884 0.758 0.709 0.749 0.784
INFQ2 0.827 0.907 0.802 0.763 0.795 0.839
INFQ3 0.806 0.900 0.806 0.771 0.789 0.836
INFQ4 0.785 0.910 0.798 0.766 0.774 0.816
SEVQ1 0.831 0.826 0.906 0.769 0.811 0.825
SEVQ2 0.837 0.778 0.898 0.776 0.797 0.841
SEVQ3 0.839 0.772 0.899 0.761 0.790 0.813
SEVQ4 0.824 0.792 0.900 0.754 0.819 0.845
USE1 0.813 0.789 0.806 0.913 0.799 0.845
USE2 0.743 0.733 0.738 0.896 0.750 0.777
USE3 0.634 0.673 0.682 0.818 0.658 0.690
USER_SAT1 0.798 0.768 0.816 0.760 0.912 0.830
USER_SAT2 0.810 0.795 0.812 0.774 0.925 0.835
USER_SAT3 0.835 0.819 0.836 0.789 0.923 0.850
CONV_1 0.860 0.824 0.856 0.792 0.833 0.888
CONV_2 0.787 0.789 0.786 0.754 0.745 0.841
CONV_3 0.726 0.772 0.715 0.683 0.720 0.812
CONV_4 0.790 0.692 0.755 0.719 0.736 0.806
CONT_1 0.742 0.806 0.759 0.732 0.727 0.825
CONT_2 0.802 0.789 0.808 0.766 0.779 0.867
CONT_3 0.829 0.796 0.796 0.790 0.823 0.873
COMM_1 0.794 0.771 0.787 0.768 0.775 0.868
COMM_2 0.808 0.784 0.807 0.764 0.780 0.890
COMM_3 0.821 0.773 0.801 0.763 0.783 0.869
WL_1 0.827 0.819 0.837 0.788 0.801 0.886
WL_2 0.806 0.846 0.794 0.749 0.823 0.866
WL_3 0.808 0.798 0.797 0.764 0.804 0.877
TRU_1 0.797 0.748 0.788 0.770 0.794 0.846
TRU_2 0.849 0.784 0.826 0.813 0.828 0.890
TRU_3 0.802 0.737 0.786 0.741 0.781 0.857
TRU_4 0.804 0.779 0.764 0.744 0.756 0.832
PARTDC_1 0.807 0.806 0.809 0.761 0.808 0.869
PARTDC_2 0.817 0.787 0.800 0.760 0.809 0.874
PARTDC_3 0.831 0.785 0.814 0.769 0.791 0.885
PARTDC_4 0.824 0.792 0.814 0.779 0.800 0.884

89
The results of the discriminant validity with cross loading show that each indicator has
largest cross loading value. The indicator such as communication, control,
communication, trust, good information, and participation in decision making are the
constructs for the net benefit (public value). Furthermore, the second test to establish
discriminant validity with Fornell and Larkcer’s criterion. The Fornell–Larcker
principle stipulates that a variable is perceived to have a discriminate validity if the
square root of the AVE is greater than the paired intercorrelation between the constructs
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The table 6 below show the result using Fornell and
Larcker’s criterion.
Table 6. The Fornell and Larcker’s criterion

Construct SYSQ SYSQ SEVQ USE USER_SAT NBPV

SYSQ 0.887
INFQ 0.883 0.900
SEVQ 0.924** 0.879 0.901
USE 0.837 0.837 0.849 0.877
USER_SAT 0.886 0.863 0.893 0.842 0.920
NBPV 0.936** 0.910** 0.923** 0.882 0.912 0.862
* The square root of AVE (bold) of the latent variable is indicate the highest in any column row.
** The red font indicate the fornell-larcker test has not met the standard.

The discriminant validity with Fornell-Larcker show different findings for each
construct, particularly the quality dimension (system, information, service). The square
root of AVE in the quality dimension is not larger compare to Net Benefit (Public
Value). For those, the study applied two steps to continue the structural model. First,
the assessment structural model retains all the current for the construct since the square
root of the AVE is greater than 0.7. Moreover, this study might consider the second

90
approach to re-modify the research model but might dropping a plenty of construct and
dimension to meet the threshold of the Fornell-Larcker criterion (i.e., SYSQ6, SEVQ2,
SEVQ3, USE1, USER_SAT2, USER_SAT3, CONV1, CONV2, COMM3, CONT3,
WI1-3, TRUST1, 2, 3, 4, and PART_DEC_MAK1,2, 3, 4.

4.4. Structural Model Assessment

The structural model is the second approach after conduct the measurement
model to evaluate the relationship between the different variables. The process of
structural model assessment included coefficients of determination (R2), estimation of
the path coefficients, f2 (effect size) and Q2 (the prediction relevance) (Urbach &
Ahlemann, 2010).

4.4.1. Coefficient of determination (R2)

R2 values determine how much influence the endogenous or dependent variables have

on other variables, thus it only has effect on dependent variable. It has range from 0 to
1, with the higher number means has greater explanatory power. The results of R2
values of > 0.670 in the structural model show the effect of independent variables on
dependent variables was substantial. Moreover, the R2 values of 0.333 and 0.190, can
be considered moderate and weak, respectively (Chin 1998; Hair, et al., 2011; Urbach
& Ahlemann, 2010).

91
 Figure 11. The structural model analysis

Figure 11 above shown the result of structural model analysis with R2 values in the
blue circle. R2 values for use, user satisfaction and net benefit (public value). R2 value
for the use was 0.761 which can be categorized in the substantial category. 76.1% is
the contribution of system quality, information quality and service quality to use.
Furthermore, the R2 value for user satisfaction was 0.843 which also in the substantial
category. 84.3% is the result of the contribution of system quality, information quality,
service quality and use to user satisfaction. Last, the results of R2 value for the net
benefit (public value) of 0.876 are in the substantial category. The result shows that
87.6% of the contribution from system quality, information quality service quality, use
and user satisfaction.

92
 R2 test results

Constructs R2 Adjusted R2
User Satisfaction 0.843 0.841
Use 0.761 0.759
Net Benefit (Public Value) 0.876 0.876

R2 need to incorporate with the to illustrate the Q2 goodness of model

4.4.2. Path coefficient

The path coefficient proves the hypothesis of the relationship between the variables
that have been defined previously. The standard value is applied to the path coefficient
measurement ranges between -1 and +1. In terms of the critical values for the two-
tailed test there were 1.65 (significance level = 10%), 1.96 (significance level = 5%)
and 2.57 (significance level = 1%). This study sets the confidence intervals based on a
two-tailed test at 1.96 with significance level of 5%, which means the hypothesis can
be accepted if the findings show the t statistic value higher than 1.96 (Hair et al., 2017).
The structural path coefficient in bootstrapping runs with 5.000 subsamples without
further changes. The result of bootstrap closely resembles the normality of data. The
following table summarized the patch coefficient resul.t

93
 Table 7. Path coefficient result (direct effect)

Original T-statistics
Hypotheses P -values
Sample (β) (t)

H1 System Quality -> Use 0.198 1.911 0.056

H2 System Quality -> User Satisfaction 0.256 2.484 0.013
H3 Information Quality -> Use 0.336 4.227 0.000
H4 Information Quality -> User Satisfaction 0.191 2.738 0.006
H5 Service Quality -> Use 0.371 4.083 0.000
H6 Service Quality -> User Satisfaction 0.326 4.439 0.000
H7 Use -> User Satisfaction 0.191 2.483 0.017
H8 Use -> Net Benefit_Public Value 0.394 8.758 0.000
H9 User Satisfaction -> Net Benefit_Public Value 0.580 12.151 0.000

** P<0.05

According to the path coefficient results in table 7, the proposed nine

hypotheses indicates positive relationship. The findings on the Hypothesis 1a shown
the system quality has a positive impact on use (β = 0.198) However, the t value 1.909
< 1.968 and p value 0.056 > 0.05 was obtained do not meet the threshold for the
significance level of 5%, hence the hypothesis is only partially significant or supported.
Meanwhile, Hypothesis 1b results demonstrate a positive and significant relationship
between system quality and user satisfaction ( β = 0.256, t = 2.338, and p = 0.020).
Hypothesis 2a, which states that there is a positive relationship between system quality
and use is supported ( β = 0.336, t = 4.227, P = 0.000), as is hypothesis 2b, which states
that there is a positive association between system quality and user satisfaction ( β =

94
0.191, t =2.738, P0.006). Similarly, the test results of Hypothesis 3a and Hypothesis 3b
has positive and significant influence. Hypothesis 3a asserts xthat service quality on
use obtained (β =0.371, t = 4.083, P 0.006), while results showed a high influence on
service quality on user satisfaction ( β = 0.326, t = 4.439, P 0.000), therefore it can be
stated that Hypothesis 3a and Hypothesis 3b are supported.

The findings of hypothesis 4a, which states that use has an effect on user
satisfaction reveal positive and significant results ( β = 0.191, t = 2.483, and p = 0.017),
indicate that hypothesis 4a is supported. The similar impact is derived from hypothesis
4b, which is the link between use and net benefit (public value) ( β = 0.394, t = 8.758,
and p = 0.000). Finally, Hypothesis 5 on the effect of user satisfaction on net benefits
(public value), demonstrates a significant positive relationship (β = 0.580 t = 12,151
and p = 0.000), which indicates that hypothesis 5 is supported. As a result, the study
found that the majority of the hypotheses had positive relationships and substantial
The findings of hypothesis 4a, which states that use has an effect on user
satisfaction reveal positive and significant results ( β = 0.191, t = 2.483, and p = 0.017),
indicate that hypothesis 4a is supported. The similar impact is derived from hypothesis
4b, which is the link between use and net benefit (public value) ( β = 0.394, t = 8.758,
and p = 0.000). Finally, Hypothesis 5 on the effect of user satisfaction on net benefits
(public value), demonstrates a significant positive relationship (β = 0.580 t = 12,151
and p = 0.000), which indicates that hypothesis 5 is supported. As a result, the study
found that the majority of the hypotheses had positive relationships and substantial
influence. Furthermore, Hypothesis 2a, Hypothesis 3a, Hypothesis 3b, Hypothesis 4b,
and Hypothesis had t values greater than 3.33 with significance level of P< .001.

95
4.4.3. Effect size (f2)

Effect size assesses the magnitude or strength of relationship between the latent
variables (Wong, 2019). This parameter should be applied and reported when the
model has moderating and mediating variables. f2 value range between 0.020 and
0.150, 0.150 and 0.350, and exceeding 0.350 indicate that the effect size in predictor
variable is weak, medium, or large (Hair et al., 2011). Table 8 depict that use and user
satisfaction as the mediating variable has large effect on the net benefit (public value).
Table 8. Effect size result

Hypothesis Correlation Relationship f2 Effect size

H1a System Quality -> Use 0.020 weak
H1b System Quality -> User Satisfaction 0.051 weak
H2a Information Quality -> Use 0.092 weak
H2b Information Quality -> User Satisfaction 0.041 weak
H3a Service Quality -> Use 0.074 weak
H3b Service Quality -> User Satisfaction 0.081 weak
H4a Use -> User Satisfaction 0.056 weak
H4b Use -> Net Benefit Public Value 0.366 large
H5 User Satisfaction -> Net Benefit_Public Value 0.793 large

4.4.4. Predictive relevance (Q2)

The Q2 test within blindfolding procedure in the SEM-PLS is used to determine

whether the observed values are well reconstructed. Q2 value higher than 0 indicates

96
that the independent variable has predictive relevance to the dependent variable in the
model (Hair et al., 2011). The obtained value considered in different categories which
are 0.02 (small), 0.15 (medium), and 0.35 (large). In addition to the predictive
relevance could only be generated using the reflective model. The table 7 show the
result of the predictive relevance in the study.

Table 9. Predictive relevance result

Construct SSO SSE Q2=1-SSE/SSO

System Quality 1776.000 1176.000
Information Quality 1184.000 1184.000
Service Quality 1184.000 1184.000
Use 888.000 376.923 0.576
User Satisfaction 888.000 259.041 0.708
Net Benefit (Public Value) 6216.000 2197.545 0.646

The predictive relevance results show that the constructs of use, user
satisfaction, and net benefit (public value) are categorized in the large predictive
relevance with a score of 0.576. 0.708, and 0.646 respectively. In this sense, the quality
dimension provides great relevance to user satisfaction and use as well as user
satisfaction and use on the net benefits (public value).

97
 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION

The chapter discusses the results of the hypotheses proposed in this study with both
significant and insignificant impact. The chapter further provide some limitation that
might be developed in the future and policy implications for the Jakarta government.
Last the conclusion part would recap the research questions and the findings or the
study.

5.1. Discussion

Impacts of System Quality on Use and User Satisfaction.

The study proposed a positive relationship and significant impact between

system quality and use due to characteristic of mobile application such as ease of use.
While the hypothesis testing shown the positive relationship, the t-statistics value was
not met at the significance level of 95%. or greater than 1.968. As a result, this study
indicated that system quality in use is only marginally significant or supported. The
findings could be represented by the citizen's preference to provide feedback or reports
via various channels such as social media, websites, or offline services. The Jakarta
government facilitates these many channels to provide citizens with better access and
managed in the citizen relationship management. Furthermore, the impact of system
quality on use in this study has similar finding with Wang and Liao's (2008) studies,
but different with previous research (e.g., Stefanovic, 2016; Xinli, 2015). The different
result might cause by the respondent's characteristics, the object of the study, and the
cultural setting.

98
 In terms of the impact of system quality on user satisfaction, the findings of this
study support the model developed by DeLone and McLean (1992, 2003), and are
consistent with previous studies arguing that system quality had a positive influence on
citizen satisfaction in a variety of e-government initiatives (Rana et al. 2013, Rana, et
al., 2015, Teo et al., 2008). This finding corroborated the studies of Al-Hubaishi,
Ahmad, and Hussain (2017) and Wang and Teo (2020), who found that the high quality
of mobile applications influences public satisfaction with e-participation systems. Ease
of use, user friendliness, response time, dependability, system security, and
personalization are important indicator to develop and maintain system quality in the
mobile application, which provides a feedback channel for citizens to express
themselves. In this view, if users are satisfied with the indicators of system quality, it
will lead the user satisfaction in using mobile e-participation.

Impacts of Information Quality on Use and User Satisfaction.

The results of this study found that the information quality of the mobile application
(JAKI) has a direct and significant relationship on use. The better quality of information
system had positive and significant impact to increase the mobile application usage.
The positive impact of the information quality on use also similar with the previous
studies (Wang & Liao, 2008, Stefanovic et al, 2016; Ojo, 2007). The findings indicate
that the high quality of information provided by the mobile application contribute to
influence their actual behavior to increase the usage of the online feedback.
On the other hand, this study shown that the information quality of mobile
application shown that has a positive and significant effect on increasing user

99
satisfaction. The characteristics of mobile applications to provide accurate information
contribute to procedural fairness and citizen satisfaction (Chen et al., 2016). As the
hypothesis proposed, the information quality contributes to citizen satisfaction as
mobile application users, which also supports previous research (Wang & Teo, 2020).
Location-based mobility and services help governments improve services or
information with users in specific locations through a combination of global
positioning systems and wireless signals.
The implication of this hypothesis is that e-participants who use JAKLapor to
send feedback feel that the quality of information provided by local governments is up-
to-date, relevant, reliable, and accurate. This also shows that the better the quality of
information received by users, the higher the satisfaction level of the user and their
actual behavior in using mobile applications to provide feedback.

Impacts of Service Quality on Use and User Satisfaction

This study found that the service quality of mobile application has significant
effect on use the mobile application to send their feedback. The positive impact of
service quality on use also validated the model developed by DeLone and McLean
(2003), Moreover, this study also shows that the service quality has most positive
impact on use when it compared with the information and service quality. User
satisfaction arises after two-way communication with the government occurs so that
good quality information will significantly increase the use of mobile applications.
Regarding the user satisfaction, the service quality also shown positively
influence on user satisfaction. This finding supported several studies to investigate the
impact of service quality on the citizen satisfaction in e-participation system (Rana et

100
al., 2013; Rana, et al., 2015), particulary on mobile government services (Wang & Teo.,
2020). Beside the high significance level on use, service quality is also become the
strong indicator on the user satisfaction in this study. The citizen feedback is
necessitated for the government to response their input and feedback.
The advantage of mobile application to enhance government services contribute
positively on use and user satisfaction to initiate the contact with the government. The
public views that the quality of e-participation provided by the Jakarta government was
able facilitate them while make a request or lodge the complaint. Facilities from mobile
applications offer features such as track and monitor the report affect the level of
satisfaction and users in participating online. In this study, service reliability,
responsiveness, assurance, and empathy become the indicator to construct the service
quality on the mobile application. While service quality is the most significant
dimension in this study, the improvement by these indicators is require since it will
lead to greater usage and affect their level of user satisfaction.

Impacts of Use on User Satisfaction and Net Benefit (Public Value)

This study also shows that system use has a positive and significant effect on
user satisfaction in using mobile applications. This study validated the D&M ISS
revised model which was also followed by several previous researchers in the context
of e-government (Wang & Liao, 2008, Stefanovic, 2016; Abdulkareem & Ramli, 2021).
This study applied one-way relationship and showed that the indicators of the mobile
system use contribute to improving the user satisfaction. Perceived satisfaction is a
feeling or attitude that occurs during the interaction with the mobile application. This

101
study shown that the frequency, dependency, and nature of use through a mobile
application will have a positive impact on their actual behavior to use the mobile e-
participation system. In other words, the increasing use of mobile applications will
contribute to the level of user satisfaction.
Moreover, this study also found that use has positive and significant influence
on the net benefit (public value) in the context of e-participation system. This finding
implies that particular benefit will be occurred from the user experience using the
mobile application. Moreover, this finding is also supported by previous studies
(Abdulkareem & Ramli, 2021) which prove that the use of e-government system
provides a positive and significant impact on the net benefits (public value). In this
study the public value is measured by the convenience, communication, control, well-
informedness, trust and participate in decision-making as proposed by the previous
studies (Scott et al, 2009; 2011). The usage of mobile application by the government
to send the feedback has a positive influence on the dimensions of public value. In
other words, the decrease in usage can also affect the contribution to the creation of
public value, and the lack of dependence on mobile applications can indicate that the
system has no impact on users.

Impacts of User Satisfaction on Net Benefit (Public Value)

This study found that the user satisfaction has a positive and significant impact on the
net benefit (public value). The findings of the hypothesis further validated the D&M
ISS revised model which shows that user satisfaction with the e-government system is
the most significant determinant for the net benefit (public value). The significant

102
impact of user satisfaction on the public value was also found in the several studies
(Abdulkareem & Ramli, 2021; Mellouli et. al, 2020). Wang & Teo (2020) further
shown that the impact of mobile government system influence citizen satisfaction, in
turn lead to perceived public value. This study validated those findings in the context
of mobile citizen sourcing provided by the local government. The construction of net
benefit (public value) in this study indicates that the impact of e-participation system
contributes to influence user satisfaction and has an impact on the creation of public
value. The perceived public value received by the user provide convenient access to
send the feedback, user control in using e-participation system, effective and efficient
communication, improved well informedness, build trust, and greater opportunity to
participate in influencing the government in the decision-making process. Thus, it can
also be concluded that the local government's mobile application is an important
channel for delivering online input and generating public value.

5.3. Possible Policy implications

This study examines how providing space for public aspirations contributes
to enhancing public performance and services as well as yields public value in the
context of e-participation. The DKI Jakarta Provincial Government's commitment to
responding to public feedback is demonstrated by the existence of a mobile application
that enables good interaction about deficiencies or problems with public facilities (e.g.
street lighting, road infrastructure), waste management, health services, and education
services, among others.

103
 The findings indicate that the quality dimension of mobile applications
(systems, information, and services) have a substantial impact on user satisfaction and
increased usage of the system to give feedback. The most major factor affecting system
use and user satisfaction with mobile applications is service quality. The advancement
of technology and the increasing need for dependable, responsive, assurance, and
empathy of public services are strong requirement that need to maintained by the DKI
Jakarta Provincial Government. Moreover, the public agencies should keep their
pivotal role in enhancing the quality of service since the aim of the mobile application
is to build strong relationship with the citizen and facilitate their engagement to
influence public decision making.
Indicators forming the quality of information such as accuracy, relevance,
reliability and timeliness show that the quality of information in mobile applications
that can be accessed anytime and anywhere has an important effect on increasing public
knowledge in participating. While the main indicators of system quality such as ease
of use, response time, and the influence of the security system partially have a
significant effect on usage, the Jakarta Government can improve the system quality of
on this mobile application, and it would increase public interest in using mobile.
application.
This study also proves that the development of mobile government helps the
government to be faster and more responsive in responding to the aspirations and
demands of citizens, which in turn leads to the creation of public value. Citizen
sourcing mobile applications contribute to public value creation, transparency,
participation, and service quality improvement (Hilgers & Ihl, 2010). The impact of
system use and user satisfaction on the construct of six public value shows the

104
importance of mobile applications to nurture and sustain citizen satisfaction to engage
with the government. Convenience, control, communication, well-informedness, trust,
and participation in decision making are important elements for citizens to reuse and
adopt services. The positive impact on the net benefits means the government should
focus on these psychological and behavioural process. The government must maintain
and improve the quality dimensions of its e-participation system by considering various
important elements such as tasks, users, projects, and organizational characteristics.
The evaluation of the impact of the mobile application on perceived public
value provides evidence that the quality of the existing system in the mobile application
is able to create public value that is important to maintain. Anonymous feature for
submitting feedback is need to be aligned during the implementation in the field. Hence,
the level of public trust to use the mobile application keep their personal information
secured can be improve, which is also the important dimension of public value.
Furthermore, the facility for monitoring citizen reports to maintain government
accountability can be continuously improved in terms of strategy management and
implementation. In addition to the standard procedure for each citizen report, the
followed up cased can be continuously monitored by street-officer, thus avoid repeated
report in the similar case from the citizen.

5.2. Limitations

This study measured the impact of e-participation system on the creation of

public value. The findings shown that most hypothesis is supported with the positive
and significant impact, except the system quality which had partially significant on use.

105
This study merely applied one way direction which is relation of use on user
satisfaction to avoid the complexity, while in the D&M ISS original M there is causal
relationship between both variables. Moreover, there are limitations and potential
development for the study.
First, the focus of this research only takes JAKLapor as a selection case in
citizen-sourcing applications where the JAKI mobile application has various services
such as m-services or m-administration so the study might evaluate the quality of the
mobile application can be measured. Second, the selection of respondents is only taken
from users who have used the JAKLapor service, hence the study cannot describe the
quality of the JAKI mobile application from users who use different services. Third,
the indicators used to measure the dimensions of quality (systems, information,
services) need to be enriched to see the potential of mobile applications. Fourth, this
study has not seen the most influential impact on the 6 constructs of public value used
in the study and their effect on control variable (such as demographic number). While
the net benefit (public value) captured in the study only focus on the six dimensions,
the perceived public value might also measure such as openness, responsiveness,
environmental impact, self-development and so on (Karunasena et al, 2011, Deng et al,
2018). Fifth, the future study also might investigate the different types of mobile
application provided by the local governemnt (eg, mobile payment, mobile health,
mobile police) as suggested by Wang & Teo (2020) or different type of e-participation
such as participatory budgeting, online petition, or crowdsourcing which are also
widely provided by local governments.

106
5.4. Conclusions

This research is motivated by previous studies which carried out related the
evaluation of different types of e-government on the citizen perspective. The purpose
of the research is to evaluate the impact of e-participation system from the user
perspective by applying the D&M ISS revised model (DeLone & McLean, 2003) and
public value theory (Moore, 1995). This model is developed by Scott et al. (2009) and
applied in this study to test the primary data obtained through a survey as many as 296
respondents who have been experienced to send their feedback. The Jakarta
government facilitate this opportunity through mobile application provided by JAKI,
particularly JAKLapor and monitored their report on JAKResponse.
There are nine hypotheses built in this study to validate the relationships of
quality dimension, system use, user satisfaction and incorporating public value
construct into net benefit as suggested by Scott et al (2009). While there are 30 key
benefits to evaluate the impact of e-participation system, this study attempt to
incorporate the convenience, time, money, and avoid personal interaction into one
dimension namely, convenience. Hence, the study able to cover six public value
dimensions such as convenience, communication, control, well-informedness, trust,
and participation in decision making.
After testing the hypotheses, this study finds most of the hypotheses is
supported and partially supported, several conclusions were drawn as follows:
a. There is positive relation between quality of e-participation application with the
creation of public value. The quality dimension (system, information, and service
quality) that provided by the mobile application has positive impact with the

107
 creation of public value mediated by system usage and user satisfaction.
Therefore, the e-participation system in the context of a mobile application is
indirectly able to have a positive and significant impact on the creation of public
value
b. There are six public value constructs to measure the net benefits of using an e-
participation system. The results of this study prove that the influence of the e-
participation system contributes to comfort, communication, control, well-
informedness, trust, and participation in decision making.
c. Furthermore, the quality dimension of the e-participation system has a major
impact on system usage and user satisfaction. Service quality is the most influential
construct in influencing user usage and satisfaction, followed by information
quality and system quality. The R2 value associated with the variable of use has a
large influence and exceeds 76.1%. While the value of R2 with the user satisfaction
variable is very acceptable and close to 84.3%. Finally, the R2 value associated
with the net benefit variable (public value) is quite large, namely 87.6%. That said,
the research model in this study can explain more than 87.6% of the variability of
the main dependent variable: net benefits (public value)

These findings provide information for governments to improve the quality of

their e-participation system. A significant influence on the creation of public value
helps the government to maintain their mobile application system so that public values
can be maintained properly. The level of success and ability of the DKI Jakarta
Provincial Government in responding to public news plays crucial role to generate
public values at the local level.

108
 References

Alford, J., & O'flynn, J. (2009). Making sense of public value: Concepts, critiques and
emergent meanings. Intl Journal of Public Administration, 32(3-4), 171-
191.

Alijerban, M., & Saghafi, F. (2010, May). M-government maturity model with
technological approach. In 4th International Conference on New Trends in
Information Science and Service Science (pp. 164-169). IEEE.

Andriyanto, D., Said, F., Titiani, F., & Erni, E. (2021). Analisis Kesuksesan Aplikasi
Jakarta Kini (JAKI) Menggunakan Model Delone and McLean.
Paradigma-Jurnal Komputer dan Informatika, 23(1), 41-46.

Antovski, L., & Gusev, M. (2005, July). M-government framework. In Proceedings of

the First European Conference on Mobile Government (pp. 10-12).

Ahn, M. J., & Bretschneider, S. (2011). Politics of e‐government: E‐government and

the political control of bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 71(3),
414-424.

Alijerban, M., & Saghafi, F. (2010, May). M-government maturity model with
technological approach. In 4th International Conference on New Trends in
Information Science and Service Science (pp. 164-169). IEEE.

Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2011). The trouble with transparency: a critical review
of openness in e‐government. Policy & Internet, 3(1), 1-30.

Bélanger, F. and Carter, L., 2008. Trust and risk in e-government adoption. The Journal
of Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), pp.165-176.

Benington, J., & Moore, M. H. (2011). Public value in complex and changing times.
Public value: Theory and practice, 1.

109
Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & McClure, C. R. (2008, May). Citizen-centered e-
government services: benefits, costs, and research needs. In Proceedings of
the 2008 international conference on Digital government research (pp. 137-
142).

Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance:
Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public
management.

Carbo, T., Williams, J. G., & Emeritus, P. (2004). Models and metrics for evaluating
local electronic government systems and services. Electronic Journal of E-
government, 2(2), 95-104.

Chadwick, A., & May, C. (2003). Interaction between States and Citizens in the Age
of the Internet:“e‐Government” in the United States, Britain, and the
European Union. Governance, 16(2), 271-300.

Chen, Z. J., Vogel, D., & Wang, Z. H. (2016). How to satisfy citizens? Using mobile
government to reengineer fair government processes. Decision Support
Systems, 82, 47-57.

Cordella, A., & Bonina, C. M. (2012). A public value perspective for ICT enabled
public sector reforms: A theoretical reflection. Government information
quarterly, 29(4), 512-520.

Colven, E. (2020). Subterranean infrastructures in a sinking city: the politics of

visibility in Jakarta. Critical Asian Studies, 52(3), 311-331.

Coats, D., & Passmore, E. (2008). Public value: The next steps in public service reform.
London: Work Foundation.

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for
the dependent variable. Information systems research, 3(1), 60-95.

110
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of
information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal of management
information systems, 19(4), 9-30.

Edelman, D. J., & Gunawan, D. S. (2020). Managing the Urban Environment of Jakarta,
Indonesia. Current Urban Studies, 8(01), 57.

El-Kiki, T., & Lawrence, E. (2006). Mobile user satisfaction & usage anlysis model of
MGovernment services. In Verified OK. Consortium International.

Fang, Z. (2002). E-government in digital era: concept, practice, and development.

International journal of the Computer, the Internet and management, 10(2),
1-22.

Fasanghari, M., & Samimi, H. (2009, April). A novel framework for m-government
implementation. In 2009 International Conference on Future Computer and
Communication (pp. 627-631). IEEE.

Fledderus, J. (2015). Building trust through public service co-production. International

Journal of Public Sector Management.

Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public

administration review, 66, 66-75.

Falco, E., & Kleinhans, R. (2018). Beyond technology: Identifying local government
challenges for using digital platforms for citizen engagement. International
Journal of Information Management, 40, 17-20.

Gable, G. G., Sedera, D., & Chan, T. (2008). Re-conceptualizing information system
success: The IS-impact measurement model. Journal of the association for
information systems, 9(7), 18.

Grönlund, Ä. (2006). E-Participation and eGovernment, EGov’06 PhD Colloquium,

DEMO-net, European Commission, Krakow, Poland.

111
Ganapati, S. (2015). Using mobile apps in government. Washington DC: IBM Center
for The Business of Government.

Golubeva, A. A. (2007, December). Evaluation of regional government portals on the

basis of public value concept: Case study from Russian federation. In
Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Theory and practice of
electronic governance (pp. 394-397).

Grimsley, M., & Meehan, A. (2007). e-Government information systems: Evaluation-

led design for public value and client trust. European Journal of
Information Systems, 16(2), 134-148.

Heeks, R. (2001). Understanding e-governance for development

Hiller, J. S., & Bélanger, F. (2001). Privacy strategies for electronic government. E-
government, 200(2001), 162-198.

Heeks, R. (2008). Benchmarking e-government: Improving the national and

international measurement, evaluation and comparison of e-government. In
Evaluating information systems (pp. 293-337). Routledge.

Hu, G., Pan, W., Lu, M., & Wang, J. (2009). The widely shared definition of e‐
Government: An exploratory study. The Electronic Library.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares
path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to
international marketing. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Höffken, S., & Streich, B. (2013). Mobile participation: Citizen engagement in urban
planning via smartphones. In Citizen E-Participation in urban governance:
crowdsourcing and collaborative creativity (pp. 199-225). IGI Global.

Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet.
Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.

112
Hiller, J. S., & Bélanger, F. (2001). Privacy strategies for electronic government. E-
government, 200(2001), 162-198.

Islam, M. S. (2008). Towards a sustainable e-Participation implementation model.

European journal of ePractice, 5(10).

Ishmatova, D., & Obi, T. (2009). M-government services: user needs and value. I-
WAYS, Digest of Electronic Commerce Policy and Regulation, 32(1), 39-
46.

ITU, O. (2011). M-Government-Mobile Technologies for Responsive Governments

and Connected Societies.

Jørgensen, T. B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values: An inventory. Administration

& society, 39(3), 354-381.

Kearns, I., Bend, J., & Stern, B. (2002). E-participation in local government. Institute
for Public Policy Research.

Kearns, I., Bend, J., & Stern, B. (2002). E-participation in local government. Institute
for Public Policy Research.

Kearns, I. (2004). Public value and e-government. London: Institute for Public Policy
Research.

Kelly, G., Mulgan, G., & Muers, S. (2002). Creating public value: An analytical
framework for public service reform. London: Strategy Unit, Cabinet
Office.

Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making
model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their
antecedents. Decision support systems, 44(2), 544-564.

113
Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2012). E‐participation, transparency, and trust in local government.
Public administration review, 72(6), 819-828.

Kushchu, I., & Kuscu, H. (2003, July). From E-government to M-government: Facing
the Inevitable. In the 3rd European Conference on e-Government (pp. 253-
260). MCIL Trinity College Dublin Ireland.

Kuscu, M. H., Kushchu, I., & Yu, B. (2008). Introducing mobile government. In
Electronic Government: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and
Applications (pp. 227-235). IGI Global.

Lara, S., & Naval, C. (2012). Social networks, civic participation, and young people:
A literature review and summary of the educational challenges. Active
citizen participation in e-government: A global perspective, 187-205.

Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage
model. Government information quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.

Lee, J. (2010). 10 year retrospect on stage models of e-Government: A qualitative meta-

synthesis. Government information quarterly, 27(3), 220-230.

Le Blanc, D. (2020). E-participation: a quick overview of recent qualitative trends.

Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for

citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government information
quarterly, 29(4), 446-454.

Macintosh, Ann, Anna Malina, and Angus Whyte. 2002. Designing E-Democracy in
Scotland. Communications 27:261-278.

Macintosh, A. (2004, January). Characterizing e-participation in policy-making. In

37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004.
Proceedings of the (pp. 10-pp). IEEE.

114
Mengistu, D., Zo, H., & Rho, J. J. (2009, November). M-government: opportunities
and challenges to deliver mobile government services in developing
countries. In 2009 Fourth International Conference on Computer Sciences
and Convergence Information Technology (pp. 1445-1450). IEEE.
Michels, A., & De Graaf, L. (2010). Examining citizen participation: Local
participatory policy making and democracy. Local Government Studies,
36(4), 477-491.

Macintosh, A. (2004, January). Characterizing e-participation in policy-making. In

37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004.
Proceedings of the (pp. 10-pp). IEEE.

Macintosh, A., & Whyte, A. (2008). Towards an evaluation framework for

eParticipation. Transforming government: People, process and policy.

Moon, M. J. (2002). The evolution of e‐government among municipalities: rhetoric or

reality?. Public administration review, 62(4), 424-433.

(2004). From E-Government to M-Government?: Emerging Practices in

the Use of Mobile Technology by State Government. IBM Center for the
Business of Government.

(2018). Evolution of co-production in the information age: crowdsourcing as a model

of web-based co-production in Korea. Policy and Society, 37(3), 294-309.

Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government.

Harvard university press.

Morgeson, F. (2014). Citizen satisfaction: Improving government performance,

efficiency, and citizen trust. Sprin

Mengistu, D., Zo, H., & Rho, J. J. (2009, November). M-government: opportunities
and challenges to deliver mobile government services in developing
countries. In 2009 Fourth International Conference on Computer Sciences
and Convergence Information Technology (pp. 1445-1450). IEEE.

115
Medaglia, R. (2012). eParticipation research: Moving characterization forward (2006–
2011). Government Information Quarterly, 29(3), 346-360.

Meijer, A. (2015). E-governance innovation: Barriers and strategies. Government

Information Quarterly, 32(2), 198-206.

Myers, B. L., Kappelman, L. A., & Prybutok, V. R. (1997). A comprehensive model

for assessing the quality and productivity of the information systems
function: toward a theory for information systems assessment. Information
Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), 10(1), 6-26.

Nabatchi, T. (2012). Putting the “public” back in public values research: Designing
participation to identify and respond to values. Public Administration
Review, 72(5), 699-708.

Ndou, V. (2004). E–Government for developing countries: opportunities and

challenges. The electronic journal of information systems in developing
countries, 18(1), 1-24.

Nugraha, Y. (2020, November). Building a smart city 4.0 ecosystem platform: an

overview and case study. In 2020 International Conference on ICT for
Smart Society (ICISS) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.

O'Brien, A., Scott, M., & Golden, W. (2016, August). The Public Value of Sense of
Community in eParticipation. In Electronic Government and Electronic
Participation: Joint Proceedings of Ongoing Research, Ph. D Papers,
Posters and Workshops of IFIP EGOV and EPart (Vol. 23, p. 39).

OECD, P. (2003). Problems of E-Democracy: Challenges of online citizen engagement.

O'flynn, J. (2007). From new public management to public value: Paradigmatic change
and managerial implications. Australian journal of public administration,
66(3), 353-366.

116
Omar, K., Scheepers, H., & Stockdale, R. (2011, August). eGovernment service quality
assessed through the public value lens. In International Conference on
Electronic Government (pp. 431-440). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of

service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of
marketing, 49(4), 41-50.

Pardo, Theresa. "Realizing the promise of digital government: It’s more than building
a web site." Albany, NY: Center for Technology in Government (2000).

Pacheco, N. A., Lunardo, R., & Santos, C. P. D. (2013). A perceived-control based

model to understanding the effects of co-production on satisfaction. BAR-
Brazilian Administration Review, 10, 219-238.

Phang, C. W., & Kankanhalli, A. (2008). A framework of ICT exploitation for e-

participation initiatives. Communications of the ACM, 51(12), 128-132.

Peristeras, V., Mentzas, G., Tarabanis, K. A., & Abecker, A. (2009). Transforming E-
government and E-participation through IT. IEEE Intelligent Systems,
24(5), 14-19.

Petter, S., & McLean, E. R. (2009). A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and
McLean IS success model: An examination of IS success at the individual
level. Information & Management, 46(3), 159-166.

Pitt, L. F., Watson, R. T., & Kavan, C. B. (1995). Service quality: a measure of
information systems effectiveness. MIS quarterly, 173-187.

Rana, Nripendra P., Yogesh K. Dwivedi, and Michael D. Williams. "Evaluating the
validity of IS success models for the electronic government research: An
empirical test and integrated model." International Journal of Electronic
Government Research (IJEGR) 9, no. 3 (2013): 1-22.

117
Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Williams, M. D., & Weerakkody, V. (2015). Investigating
success of an e-government initiative: Validation of an integrated IS
success model. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(1), 127-142

Rai, A., Lang, S. S., & Welker, R. B. (2002). Assessing the validity of IS success
models: An empirical test and theoretical analysis. Information systems
research, 13(1), 50-69.

Refiloe, D. D., & Noluntu, M. A. (2018). Review of m-Government Maturity Models.

Int. J. Multimed Image Process, 8, 389-397.

Riley, C. G. (2003). The Changing Role of the Citizen in the E-governance and E-
democracy equation. Commonwealth centre for e-governance.

Reddick, C. G. (2005). Citizen interaction with e-government: From the streets to

servers?. Government Information Quarterly, 22(1), 38-57.

Reddick, C., & Norris, D. F. (2013). E-participation in local governments: An

examination of political-managerial support and impacts. Transforming
Government: People, Process and Policy.

Rose, J., Flak, L. S., & Sæbø, Ø. (2018). Stakeholder theory for the E-government
context: Framing a value-oriented normative core. Government
Information Quarterly, 35(3), 362-374.

Sæbø, Ø., Rose, J., & Flak, L. S. (2008). The shape of eParticipation: Characterizing
an emerging research area. Government information quarterly, 25(3), 400-
428.

Sagala, S. A., & Luo, P. (2015). Overview of Jakarta water-related environmental

challenges.

Sandy, G. A., & McMillan, S. (2005, July). A success factors model for m-government.
In Euro mGov (Vol. 2005, pp. 349-358).

118
Seddon, P. B. (1997). A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean
model of IS success. Information systems research, 8(3), 240-253.

Scott, M., DeLone, W., & Golden, W. (2011). IT quality and egovernment net benefits:
a citizen perspective.

Shareef, M. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Stamati, T., & Williams, M. D. (2014). SQ mGov: a
comprehensive service-quality paradigm for mobile government.
Information Systems Management, 31(2), 126-142.

Silcock, R. (2001). What is e-government. Parliamentary affairs, 54(1), 88-101

Sumra, K. B., & Bing, W. (2016). Crowdsourcing in local public administration:

importance of online platforms. International Journal of Public
Administration in the Digital Age (IJPADA), 3(4), 28-42.

Spano, A. (2009). Public value creation and management control systems. Intl Journal
of Public Administration, 32(3-4), 328-348.

Scott, M., DeLone, W., & Golden, W. (2016). Measuring eGovernment success: a
public value approach. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(3),
187-208.

Sharma, S. K., & Gupta, J. N. (2004). Web services architecture for m-government:
issues and challenges. Electronic Government, an International Journal,
1(4), 462-474.

Stoker, G. (2006). Public value management: A new narrative for networked

governance?. The American review of public administration, 36(1), 41-57.

Tat‐Kei Ho, A. (2002). Reinventing local governments and the e‐government initiative.
Public administration review, 62(4), 434-444.

Trimi, S., & Sheng, H. (2008). Emerging trends in M-government. Communications of

the ACM, 51(5), 53-58.

119
Tozsa, I., & Budai, B. (2005). M-government in Hungary. In European Mobile
Government Conference. Brighton, UK. Mobile Government Consortium
International LLC.

Toots, M. (2019). Why E-participation systems fail: The case of Estonia's Osale. ee.
Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 546-559.

Talbot, C. (2011). Paradoxes and prospects of ‘public value’. Public Money &
Management, 31(1), 27-34.

Teo, Thompson SH, Shirish C. Srivastava, and L. I. Jiang. "Trust and electronic
government success: An empirical study." Journal of management
information systems 25, no. 3 (2008): 99-132.

Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of E-Government–A

literature review. Government information quarterly, 36(2), 167-178.

Urbach, N., & Müller, B. (2012). The updated DeLone and McLean model of
information systems success. In Information systems theory (pp. 1-18).
Springer, New York, NY.

Van Ryzin, G. G. (2004). Expectations, performance, and citizen satisfaction with

urban services. Journal of policy analysis and management, 23(3), 433-448.

Wahid, F., & Sæbø, Ø. (2014, April). Understanding eParticipation services in

indonesian local government. In Information and Communication
Technology-EurAsia Conference (pp. 328-337). Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg.

Wang, Y. S., & Liao, Y. W. (2008). Assessing eGovernment systems success: A

validation of the DeLone and McLean model of information systems
success. Government information quarterly, 25(4), 717-733.

120
Wang, C., & Teo, T. S. (2020). Online service quality and perceived value in mobile
government success: An empirical study of mobile police in China.
International Journal of Information Management, 52, 102076.

Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with
e-government and trust in government. Journal of public administration
research and theory, 15(3), 371-391.

Wimmer, M. A., Grimm, R., Jahn, N., & Hampe, J. F. (2013, September). Mobile
participation: exploring mobile tools in e-participation. In International
Conference on Electronic Participation (pp. 1-13). Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg.

Williams, I., & Shearer, H. (2011). Appraising public value: Past, present and futures.
Public administration, 89(4), 1367-1384.

Wu, J. H., & Wang, Y. M. (2006). Measuring KMS success: A respecification of the
DeLone and McLean's model. Information & management, 43(6), 728-739.

Wirtz, B. W., Daiser, P., & Binkowska, B. (2018). E-participation: A strategic

framework. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(1), 1-12.

Yildiz, M. (2007). E-government research: Reviewing the literature, limitations, and

ways forward. Government information quarterly, 24(3), 646-665.

Zheng, Y., & Schachter, H. L. (2017). Explaining citizens’ E-participation use: The
role of perceived advantages. Public Organization Review, 17(3), 409-428.

The 2020 Jakarta Statistical Bureau

The 2019 Jakarta Statistical Bureau

https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-indonesia

Indonesian Internet Service Provider Association (APJII) 2019

121
https://icea.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Contribution-of-Smartphones-to-
Digital-Governance-in-India-09072020.pdf

https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/hotel-guest-
experience-strategy.html

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/the-
public-sector-gets-serious-about-customer-experience

https://jakarta.go.id/14-kanal-pengaduan-balai-warga#

https://www.merdeka.com/jakarta/survei-publik-belum-puas-dengan-kinerja-
pemprov-dki.html

https://statistik.jakarta.go.id/jaki-kanal-aduan-favorit-di-masa-pandemi-covid-19/

https://smartcity.jakarta.go.id/blog/721/jaki-aplikasi-jakarta-raih-runner-up-wsis-
prizes-2021

https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/portals/egovkb/documents/un/english.pdf

122
 Appendix A

KMO and Bartlett’s test result

Measurement items KMO BTS MSA Communalities Factor

>0.50 <0.05 ≥ 0.50 ≥ 0.50 Loading
≥ 0.70
SYQ1. JAKI is easy to use. 0.929 0.000 0.912 0.821 0.906
SYQ2. JAKI is user friendly 0.932 0.772 0.879
SYQ3. JAKI can easily operate the way 0.928 0.810 0.900
I want it to.
SYQ4. JAKI has quick response time 0.938 0.762 0.873
(e.g., loading time)
SYQ5. JAKI has good system security 0.922 0.819 0.905
SYQ6. I am able to personalize the 0.943 0.742 0.861
online service feedback provided by
JAKI
INQ1. JAKI provides the precise 0.854 0.000 0.872 0.768 0.887
information that I need for sending
feedback
INQ2. Information provided by JAKI is 0.843 0.820 0.905
reliable
INQ3. Information provided by JAKI is 0.861 0.807 0.898
accurate
INQ4. JAKI provides up to date 0.841 0.828 0.910
information
SEQ1. Citizen service feedback 0.854 0.000 0.848 0.820 0.906
provided on the JAKI is dependable
SEQ2. Citizen service feedback 0.855 0.808 0.899
provided on the JAKI is responsive to
my report
SEQ3. Citizen service feedback 0.857 0.810 0.900
provided on the JAKI has the ability to
respond to my needs

123
SEQ4. JAKI is designed in the best 0.857 0.808 0.899
interest of the citizens
U1. I am dependent in using JAKI to 0.704 0.000 0.660 0.822 0.907
send feedback to the DKI Jakarta
Government
U2. I frequently use JAKI to send my 0.675 0.801 0.895
feedback
U3. I use JAKI voluntarily 0.819 0.684 0.827
US1. I will use JAKI again 0.756 0.000 0.781 0.832 0.912

US2. JAKI has met my expectations to 0.737 0.858 0.926

interact with the Jakarta government
US3. Overall, I am satisfied with JAKI. 0.752 0.849 0.921
CONV1. Using JAKI is convenient way 0.832 0.000 0.837 0.797 0.893
for my feedback
CONV2. Using JAKI saves me money 0.802 0.823 0.907
CONV3. Using JAKI saves me time 0.830 0.762 0.873
CONV4. Using JAKI provides me 0.869 0.708 0.842
quicker response to my feedback
compares to face-to-face interaction
CON1. JAKI allow me that I am not 0.744 0.000 0.758 0.810 0.900
restricted from doing other activities.
CON2. JAKI enables me to locate my 0.713 0.844 0.919
feedback status with the DKI Jakarta
government
CON3. I felt that I had plenty of control 0.767 0.804 0.897
with my experience to use JAKI
COMM1. JAKI is an efficient means to 0.749 0.000 0.768 0.838 0.915
communicate with the DKI Jakarta
government
COMM2 JAKI is a valuable way of 0.706 0.878 0.937
communicating with the DKI Jakarta
government

124
COMM3. JAKI is the effective way to 0.781 0.831 0.911
communicate with the DKI Jakarta
government
WI1. JAKI increases my understanding 0.759 0.000 0.773 0.844 0.919
of the Jakarta city issues
WI2. JAKI enables me to build up 0.748 0.858 0.926
knowledge about that are important to
me.
WI3. In general, I feel better informed 0.756 0.853 0.924
because of JAKI.
Trus1. I feel that JAKI acts in citizen best 0.853 0.000 0.867 0.780 0.883
interest
Trust2. I feel comfortable interacting 0.7829 0.835 0.914
with JAKI since it typically handles my
feedback efficiently.
Trust3. I always feel confident that I can 0.853 0.806 0.898
rely on JAKI to handle online feedback
Trust4. I feel my personal identity are 0.865 0.795 0.892
secure with JAKI
CPART1. JAKI allows me to raise my 0.855 0.000 0.874 0.793 0.890
opinion about issues important to me
CPART2. JAKI makes me feel that 0.862 0.820 0.906
decision-makers listen to me
CPART3. JAKI makes me feel that I am 0.848 0.820 0.905
being consulted about important issues.
CPART4 JAKI improves my sense that I 0.837 0.820 0.917
am part of an active democracy.

125
Appendix B
Model Fit result
Saturated Model Estimated Model
SRMR 0.029 0.047
d_ULS 0.724 1.912
d_G 1.050 1.195
Chi-Square 1614.627 1739.358
NFI 0.895 0.887

According to (Hensellar et al, 2016) there are three different approaches to evaluate the
model’s goodness of fit in the SEM-PLS: 1) SRMR (Standardized root media square
residual), d_ULS (The unweighted least squares discrepancy), and d_G the geodesic
discrepanc. For the SRMR value below 0.080 indicate the model has better fit. From
the table above, the SRMR value of 0.047, which is met the criteria. Furthermore, the
model fit can be seen from the NFI value is 0.887 or 89%, meaning that the model
studied is 89.5% fit. The suitability of indicators in the study has represented as much
as 89.5%. The NFI value of 0.895 was accepted because the value was close to 0.9.
(Raj-Koziak et al., 2018)

126
 General Questionnaire

Do you have JAKI ¨ No ¨ Yes

account
When do you install ¨ Less than 1 month ¨ 6 months to 1 years
JAKI? ¨ 1 to 3 months ¨ More than 1 years
¨ 3 to 6 months
How often do you use the ¨ Everyday ¨ 2 to 3 times a month
JAKI? ¨ 2 to 3 times a week ¨ Once in a several months
¨ Once a week
Have you ever used the ¨ Environment (cleanliness, garbage, flood, pollution, etc.)
JakLapor and ¨ Public facilities (roads, trash cans, parks, sidewalks, etc.)
JakRespons? ¨ Transportation and traffic (JakLingko, TransJakarta,
congestion, illegal parking)
If so, what issues have ¨ Health (Covid-19 handling, General Medical Handling,
you raised through this Emergency, etc.)
feature? (Answers can be ¨ Education (school facilities, KJP, Curriculum, etc.)
more than one) ¨ Local government administration (making ID cards or other
documents)
¨ Welfare (distribution of social assistance, unemployment, etc.)
¨ General offenses (street vendors, illegal advertising, etc.)
From those services type ¨ Less than 1 times ¨ 7 – 9 times
(categories), how many ¨ 2 – 3 times ¨ More than 9 times
times do you send your ¨ 4 – 6 times
feedback
What channel do you use ¨ mobile apps (Qlue, LAPOR 1708)
to raise your concern ¨ Social media (DKI Jakarta’s social media (Twitter or
besides JAKI? Facebook),
or the Governor’s social media)
¨ Email dki@jakarta.go.id
¨ Short Messaging Service (08111272206, 1708)
¨ Face to face interactions (Urban village office, Sub-district
office. Mayor’s office, the City Hall, Inspectorate office)
¨ Governor’s social media

127
 Measurement Item
System Quality
Ease of use JAKI is easy to use.
User friendly JAKI is user friendly
System Reliability JAKI can easily operate the way I want it to.
Response time JAKI has quick response time (e.g., sending feedback)
System Security JAKI has good security settings
Personalization I am able to personalise the online service feedback provided by
JAKI
Information Quality
Relevance JAKI provides the precise information that I need for sending
feedback
Reliable Information provided by JAKI is reliable
Accuracy Information provided by JAKI is accurate
Currency JAKI provides up to date information
Service Quality
Service Reliability Citizen service feedback provided on the JAKI is dependable
Responsiveness Citizen service feedback provided on the JAKI is responsive to
my report
Assurance Citizen service feedback provided on the JAKI has the ability to
respond to my needs
Empathy JAKI is designed in the best interest of the citizens
Use
Dependency I am dependent in using JAKI to send feedback to the DKI
Jakarta Government

128
Frequency of use I frequently use JAKI to send my feedback
Nature of use I use JAKI voluntarily
User Satisfaction
Expectaction JAKI has met my expectations to interact the DKI Jakarta
government
Repeat use I will use JAKI again
Overall satisfaction Overall, I am satisfied with JAKI
Net Benefit (Public Value)

Convenience Using JAKI is convenient way for my feedback

Using JAKI saves me money
Using JAKI saves me time
Using JAKI provides me quicker response to my feedback
compare to other channel
Control JAKI allow me that I am not restricted from doing other
activities.
JAKI enables me to locate my feedback status with the DKI
Jakarta government
JAKI enables me to locate my feedback status with the DKI
Jakarta government
Communication JAKI is an effecient means to communicate with the DKI
Jakarta government
JAKI is an valuable means to communicate with the DKI
Jakarta government
JAKI is an effective means to communicate with the DKI
Jakarta government

JAKI increases my understanding of the Jakarta city issues

129
Well-informedness JAKI enables me to build up knowledge about that are
important to me.
In general, I feel better informed because of JAKI.
Trust I feel that JAKI acts in citizen best interest
I feel comfortable interacting with JAKI since it typically handle
my feedback
Efficiently
I always feel confident that I can rely on JAKI to handle online
feedback
I feel my personal identity are secure with JAKI
Participation in decision JAKI allows me to raise my opinion about issues
important to me
making
JAKI makes me feel that decision-makers listen to me
JAKI makes me feel that I am being consulted about important
issues.
JAKI improves my sense that I am part of an active democracy.

130
 Demographic Questionnaire

What is your gender? ¨ Male ¨ Female

Which of these groups ¨ Less than 17 ¨ 35-45
are you in (years old)? ¨ 18-25 ¨ 46-55
¨ 26-35 ¨ 55 or more
What is your educational ¨ Less than a high school ¨ Bachelor’s degree
level? ¨ Senior High school ¨ Masters’ degree
¨ Associate degree ¨ Doctorate degree

Which category does ¨ Government employee ¨ Housewives

your job belong to? ¨ Private employee ¨ Student
¨ Entrepreneur ¨ Others

Which of these describes ¨ Less than Rp. 5.000.000 ¨ 20.000.000 or more

your monthly income? ¨ 5.000.001 to 10.000.000 ¨ Not applicable
¨ 10.000.000 to 20.000.000
Where do you come ¨ Central Jakarta ¨ East Jakarta
from? ¨ North Jakarta ¨ South Jakarta
¨ West Jakarta ¨ Outside Jakarta

Closing statement

Would you like to provide any additional information based on your experience of using
JakLapor and JakRespons services in JAKI?

Thank you for filling out the form.

Your response has been recorded.

131