Skip to main content
Original Research Article Open Access SINTA 2 Accredited

Challenges in Implementing Digital Democracy

A Case Study of Sinjai Regency

DOI
10.21787/jbp.17.2025-2873
Published & Pages
31 August 2025

268 Views 202 Downloads

Abstract

This study explores the dynamics of digital democracy in Sinjai Regency by examining the factors that shape public participation, particularly access to information, digital literacy, and technological infrastructure. This study used a qualitative method with a phenomenological approach; data were collected through in-depth interviews, observations, focus group discussions, and documentation involving citizens, youth, government officials, and local digital media practitioners. The findings reveal five dominant factors influencing digital democracy: (1) limited and unequal internet access across regions, particularly in rural areas; (2) low digital literacy which reduces the ability of citizens to filter accurate political information; (3) the strong role of young people as digital actors in political engagement; (4) government digital initiatives-though available-remain underutilized due to limited public capability and uneven dissemination; and (5) local digital media serving as an important intermediary in delivering political information. These factors collectively contribute to the low level of digital participation in Sinjai. The study proposes several solutions, including expanding internet infrastructure through cross-sector collaboration, strengthening community-based digital literacy training, enhancing government digital services, and establishing an independent body to oversee digital democracy implementation. The results highlight the need for inclusive policies that consider geographical and socio-economic disparities. This research contributes novelty by focusing on digital democracy gaps at the local scale and emphasizing community capacity as a key determinant in achieving inclusive digital participation.

Read the Full Text

The full text of this article is available as PDF. Version of record published in Vol. 17 No. 2 (2025).

Open PDF

References

23 references
  1. Best, K. (2010). Living in the Control Society. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 13(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877909348536
  2. Congge, U., Guillamón, M.-D., Nurmandi, A., Salahudin, & Sihidi, I. T. (2023). Digital Democracy: A Systematic Literature Review. Frontiers in Political Science, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.972802
  3. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications.
  4. Elliott, K., Price, R., Shaw, P., Spiliotopoulos, T., Ng, M., Coopamootoo, K., & van Moorsel, A. (2021). Towards an Equitable Digital Society: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR). Society, 58(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-021-00594-8
  5. Hilbert, M. (2020). Digital Technology and Social Change: The Digital Transformation of Society From a Historical Perspective. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 22(2), 189–194. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.2/mhilbert
  6. Komisi Pemilihan Umum. (2024). Keputusan Komisi Pemilihan Umum Nomor 1105 Tahun 2024 tentang Sistem Informasi Data Pemilih dalam Penyelenggaraan Pemilihan Gubernur dan Wakil Gubernur, Bupati dan Wakil Bupati, serta Walikota dan Wakil Walikota [Decision of the General Elections Commission Number 1105 of 2024 regarding the Voters Data Information System in the Election of Governors and Vice Governors, Regents and Vice Regents, and Mayors and Vice Mayors]. KPU RI.
  7. Korupp, S. E., & Szydlik, M. (2005). Causes and Trends of the Digital Divide. European Sociological Review, 21(4), 409–422. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jci030
  8. Legner, C., Eymann, T., Hess, T., Matt, C., Böhmann, T., Drews, P., Mädche, A., Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2017). Digitalization: Opportunity and Challenge for the Business and Information Systems Engineering Community. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 59(4), 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0484-2
  9. Levin, I., & Mamlok, D. (2021). Culture and Society in the Digital Age. Information, 12(2), 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12020068
  10. Milner, H. V. (2006). The Digital Divide: The Role of Political Institutions in Technology Diffusion. Comparative Political Studies, 39(2), 176–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005282983
  11. Min, S.-J. (2010). From the Digital Divide to the Democratic Divide: Internet Skills, Political Interest, and the Second-Level Digital Divide in Political Internet Use. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331680903109402
  12. Murdock, G. (2002). Review Article: Debating Digital Divides. European Journal of Communication, 17(3), 385–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323102017003695
  13. Nam, T. (2011). Whose E-democracy? The Democratic Divide in American Electoral Campaigns. Information Polity, 16(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-2011-0220
  14. Nurhakim, F., & Lestari, S. (2025). Economics and Digital Business Review Bureaucratic Transformation in the Digital Era: Analysis of the Impact of E-Government on the Quality of Public Services. Economics and Digital Business Review, 567–576. https://ojs.stieamkop.ac.id/index.php/ecotal/article/view/2134
  15. Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten Sinjai. (2023). Peraturan Bupati Sinjai Nomor 48 Tahun 2023 tentang Penyelenggaraan Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik [Regulation of the Regent of Sinjai Number 48 of 2023 on the Implementation of Electronic-Based Government System]. Berita Daerah Kabupaten Sinjai Tahun 2023 Nomor 48. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/292492/perbup-kab-sinjai-no-48-tahun-2023
  16. Riggins, F., & Dewan, S. (2005). The Digital Divide: Current and Future Research Directions. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 6(12), 298–337. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00074
  17. Rusdi, & Febriansyah, R. (2023). Kewenangan KPU dalam Menetapkan Regulasi Pemilu Studi Pemutakhiran Data dan Penyusunan Daftar Pemilih Pemilu Serentak 2024. Prosiding Seminar Hukum Aktual Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia, 207–217. https://journal.uii.ac.id/psha/article/view/32509
  18. Salemink, K., Strijker, D., & Bosworth, G. (2017). Rural Development in the Digital Age: A Systematic Literature Review on Unequal ICT Availability, Adoption, and Use in Rural Areas. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 360–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.09.001
  19. Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering Political and Popular Understandings of the Digital Divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804042519
  20. Shirazi, F., Ngwenyama, O., & Morawczynski, O. (2010). ICT Expansion and the Digital Divide in Democratic Freedoms: An Analysis of the Impact of ICT Expansion, Education and ICT Filtering on Democracy. Telematics and Informatics, 27(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2009.05.001
  21. Thomas, Y., Toumpis, S., & Smyrnioudis, N. (2024). Digital Twin Approach to Estimating and Utilizing the Capacity Region of Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. Computer Networks, 241, 110213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2024.110213
  22. van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2002). A Framework for Digital Divide Research. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 12(1 & 2). https://cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/012/1/01211.html
  23. van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital Divide Research, Achievements and Shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4–5), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004

Copyright & Open Access License

Copyright (c) 2025 Author(s). This article is licensed under CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0.