E-GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC TRUST: EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF DIGITAL TRANSPARENCY ON CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT IN SOUTHEAST ASIA

Puteri Anindya  Maulan; Nining Fitriani

doi:10.51903/shq0s821

Authors

Puteri Anindya Maulan Universitas Sains Dan Teknologi Komputer
Nining Fitriani Universitas Sains dan Teknologi Komputer

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51903/shq0s821

Keywords:

E-government, Digital transparency, Public trust, Digital divide, Southeast Asia

Abstract

Digital transformation in the public sector through the implementation of e-government offers significant opportunities to enhance transparency and citizen engagement. This study analyzes the impact of digital transparency on public trust and citizen participation in Southeast Asia, focusing on Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. A conceptual model was developed based on three main theories: Digital Transparency Theory, Institutional Trust Theory, and Digital Divide Theory. The research adopts a Design Science Research approach, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods. Data were collected through a survey of 600 respondents and in-depth interviews with 15 key stakeholders. The analysis was conducted using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM-PLS) with SmartPLS 4.0. The results indicate that digital transparency has a significant effect on public trust (β = 0.624), which in turn increases citizen participation (β = 0.538). Government reputation serves as a positive mediator (β = 0.293), while the digital divide acts as a negative moderator (β = -0.146), hindering the effectiveness of transparency in areas with limited digital access. These findings underscore the need for digital literacy strategies and the design of more inclusive e-government systems. The study provides both theoretical and practical contributions to understanding the dynamics of e-government in developing countries and promotes sustainable citizen engagement through equitable digital transparency approaches.

References

[1] Zhongming Song et al, “AIPE-Active Heteroleptic Iridium Complexes Showing Piezochromic Luminescence,” pp. 1–39, 2023.

[2] R. M. Mushi, “Assessing the factors influencing intention to use e-government in Tanzania: the perspective of trust, participation and transparency,” J. Electron. Bus. Digit. Econ., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 156–169, 2024, doi: 10.1108/jebde-08-2023-0017.

[3] G. P. Herrera, M. Constantino, J. J. Su, and A. Naranpanawa, “The use of ICTs and income distribution in Brazil: A machine learning explanation using SHAP values,” Telecomm. Policy, vol. 47, no. 8, p. 102598, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102598.

[4] S. C. Chuah, A. A. Mohamad Arshad, and A. Mohd Arifin, “Adoption intention of e-government application for public health risk communication: Risk information, social media competence and trust in the government,” J. Public health Res., vol. 13, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.1177/22799036231217804.

[5] S. Nookhao and S. Kiattisin, “Achieving a successful e-government: Determinants of behavioral intention from Thai citizens’ perspective,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 8, p. e18944, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18944.

[6] S. Donio and E. Toch, “Neighborhood Disparities in Smart City Service Adoption,” no. 2021, 2025.

[7] K. J. Schiff, “Version of Record: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1773224724000935,” pp. 0–55, 2024.

[8] E. Papagianni, A. Evgenidis, A. Tsagkanos, and V. Megalooikonomou, “Tourism Demand in the Face of Geopolitical Risk: Insights From a Cross-Country Analysis,” J. Travel Res., 2023, doi: 10.1177/00472875231206539.

[9] D. Adade and W. T. de Vries, “An extended TOE framework for local government technology adoption for citizen participation: insights for city digital twins for collaborative planning,” Transform. Gov. People, Process Policy, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 53–73, 2024, doi: 10.1108/TG-01-2024-0025.

[10] M. I. Gariba, E. E. Arthur, and S. A. Odei, “Assessing the impact of public digitalization on sustainability: the mediating role of technological innovation in the context of the EU,” Discov. Sustain., vol. 5, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s43621-024-00397-x.

[11] R. Matheus, R. Faber, E. Ismagilova, and M. Janssen, “Digital transparency and the usefulness for open government,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 73, no. August, p. 102690, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102690.

[12] K. E. Burns et al., “Development and validation of the Trust in Government measure (TGM),” BMC Public Health, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-16974-0.

[13] K. S. Ali and A. R. Faroque, “Addressing the complexity of the digital divide and the role of government in addressing it: Role of government in bridging the digital divide,” Foster. Sustain. Businesses Emerg. Econ. Impact Technol., pp. 127–145, 2023, doi: 10.1108/978-1-80455-640-520231009.

[14] A. Almuqrin, I. Mutambik, A. Alomran, J. Gauthier, and M. Abusharhah, “Factors Influencing Public Trust in Open Government Data,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 15, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14159765.

[15] J. P. Ripamonti, “Does being informed about government transparency boost trust? Exploring an overlooked mechanism,” Gov. Inf. Q., vol. 41, no. 3, p. 101960, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2024.101960.

[16] M. López-Aguado, L. Gutiérrez-Provecho, J. Quintanal Díaz, and J. L. García Llamas, “Social exclusion and the digital divide,” J. E-Learning Knowl. Soc., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 74–82, 2022, doi: 10.20368/1971-8829/1135660.

[17] B. Roxas, “E-governance and sustainable human development in Asia: a dynamic institutional path perspective,” J. Asian Bus. Econ. Stud., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 15–27, 2024, doi: 10.1108/JABES-02-2024-0076.

[18] J. Villodre, “A three-model approach to understand social media-mediated transparency in public administrations,” Int. Rev. Adm. Sci., 2024, doi: 10.1177/00208523241261896.

[19] Z. Wang, H. Liu, T. Li, L. Zhou, and M. Zhou, “The Impact of Internet Use on Citizens’ Trust in Government: The Mediating Role of Sense of Security,” Systems, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2023, doi: 10.3390/systems11010047.

[20] J. Jopang, S. Aryatama, M. Muazzinah, Q. Qamal, and A. Ansar, “Exploring the Relationship Between E-Government, Transparency, and Citizen Trust in Government Services,” Glob. Int. J. Innov. Res., vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 1354–1363, 2024, doi: 10.59613/global.v2i6.206.

[21] M. Lounsbury, “The Problem of Institutional Trust,” Organ. Stud., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 308–310, 2023, doi: 10.1177/01708406221131415.

[22] S. Nosratabadi, T. Atobishi, and S. Hegedűs, “Social Sustainability of Digital Transformation: Empirical Evidence from EU-27 Countries,” Adm. Sci., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1–18, 2023, doi: 10.3390/admsci13050126.

[23] T. T. Ting et al., “Digital government: Social media as a mediator in technology acceptance with political knowledge, interest, and participation,” Online J. Commun. Media Technol., vol. 14, no. 4, p. e202454, 2024, doi: 10.30935/ojcmt/15145.

[24] F. Glaser, F. Hawlitschek, and B. Notheisen, “Blockchain As a Platform For Artificial Intelligence (AI) Transparency,” Bus. Transform. through Blockchain, pp. 121–143, 2025, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-98911-2_4.

[25] D. Bruch et al., “Second opinion programmes in Germany: a mixed-methods study protocol,” BMJ Open, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1–8, 2021, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045264.