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

Digital Pilkada

Have Local Elections (Pilkada) been Affected by Digitalization? Attainment, Challenges, and Policy Solutions

Authors

  • Research and Development Agency, Ministry of Home Affairs
DOI
10.21787/jbp.12.2020.287-299
Published & Pages
16 December 2020 · pp. 287-299
Manuscript History
Received5 Nov 2020 Accepted24 Nov 2020 Published16 Dec 2020
License
CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
Read PDF 182 KB Cite

1,738 Views 1,161 Downloads

Abstract

The advancement of digital technology forces humans to make adjustments in all aspects of life, likewise, with the local elections' holding (Pilkada). However, the conditions for each region in the Indonesian archipelago have different problems. Availability of telecommunication facilities, local elections (Pilkada) organizers, level of difficulty in Frontier, Outermost, and Disadvantaged Region (3T), community digital literacy level, and accuracy of results. Have the local elections (Pilkada) been digitalized? How far has it been achieved? What challenges are faced, and what are the solutions? Several studies on e-voting, even the local elections (Pilkada) digitization, have been carried out. This study is novel because it looks at the 2020 local elections (Pilkada) implementation from digitalization that was carried out in line with the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to data limitations and availability, this study only focuses on implementing local elections (Pilkada) in nine provinces. This study uses a qualitative method based on a literature review with a systematic review method. The study aims to reveal the achievements and challenges of digitalization in the implementation of local elections (Pilkada) along with policy solutions so that digitalization is more completed. Through analysis, it was found that the organizers of the local elections (Pilkada) have made efforts to realize digitalization. Various Subscriber Identity Modules (SIM) and applications have been created by the General Election Commission (KPU), the General Election Supervisory Board (Bawaslu), and the General Election Organizer Honorary Council (DKPP). It is hoped that digitalization will further increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of service. Besides, the data shows that there are obstacles in the field, especially the availability of telecommunication infrastructure, which is very diverse in the nine provinces. Fundamentally, it is necessary to formulate regulations/policies that synergize the implementation of local elections (Pilkada) through the adoption of digital technology based on the internet of things (IoT), big data analysis, and artificial intelligence (AI). The local elections (Pilkada) digitization brings several benefits - more transparent, accountable, credible, practical, and economical. On the other hand, the community feels more of its services because the digital local elections (Pilkada) procession educates the public to elect local leaders with integrity.

Keywords:

Read the Full Text

The full text of this article is available as PDF. Version of record published in Vol. 12 No. 2 (2020).

Open PDF

References

46 references
  1. APJII. (2019). Laporan Survei Internet APJII 2019—2020 [Q2]. Apjii.or.id. https://apjii.or.id/survei
  2. Bican, P. M., & Brem, A. (2020). Digital Business Model, Digital Transformation, Digital Entrepreneurship: Is There A Sustainable “Digital”? Sustainability, 12(13), 5239. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135239
  3. BPS. (2019a). Indeks Pembangunan Teknologi, Informasi, dan Komunikasi 2018. BPS.
  4. BPS. (2019b). Statistik Telekomunikasi Indonesia 2018. BPS.
  5. BPS. (2020). Indeks Pembangunan Manusia 2019. BPS.
  6. Brennen, J. S., & Kreiss, D. (2016). Digitalization. In The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy (pp. 1–11). American Cancer Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect111
  7. Christensen, C. (1997). Disruptive Innovations. Christensen Institute.
  8. Doesburg, J. J. J. (2020). Using IRMA for small scale digital elections [Bachelor Thesis]. Radboud University.
  9. Gartner. (2016). Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies 2016. Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/document/3383817?ref=ddrec
  10. Gartner. (2020). Definition of Digitalization—Gartner Information Technology Glossary. Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/en/information-technology/glossary/digitalization
  11. Gimpel, H., Hosseini, S., Huber, R., Probst, L., Röglinger, M., & Faisst, U. (2018). Structuring Digital Transformation: A Framework of Action Fields and its Application at ZEISS. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 19(1). https://aisel.aisnet.org/jitta/vol19/iss1/3
  12. Gobble, M. M. (2018). Digitalization, Digitization, and Innovation. Research-Technology Management, 61(4), 56–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2018.1471280
  13. Hadiana, A. (2011). Perancangan Sistem Pemilihan Digital. Media Informatika, 10(1), 10–17.
  14. IEA. (2017). Digitalization and Energy. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/digitalisation-and-energy
  15. Khan, K. M., Arshad, J., & Khan, M. M. (2020). Investigating performance constraints for blockchain based secure e-voting system. Future Generation Computer Systems, 105, 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2019.11.005
  16. Kirchmer, M., Franz, P., & Gusain, R. (2017). Digitalization of the Process of Process Management—The BPM-D® Application. Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD, 89–98. https://doi.org/10.5220/0006527800890098
  17. Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Keele University & National ICT Australia Ltd.
  18. Kshetri, N., & Voas, J. (2018). Blockchain-Enabled E-Voting. IEEE Software, 35(4), 95–99. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2018.2801546
  19. 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
  20. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), e1000100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
  21. Lukhanyu, M. (2013, March 26). Why It Pays To Learn From The Seven M’s’ Of Management. TechMoran. https://techmoran.com/2013/03/26/why-it-pays-to-learn-from-the-seven-ms-of-management/
  22. Matzler, K., Bailom, F., von den Eichen, S. F., & Anschober, M. (2016). Digital Disruption: Wie Sie Ihr Unternehmen auf das digitale Zeitalter vorbereiten. Vahlen.
  23. McDonald, M. P. (2012, November 19). Digital Strategy Does Not Equal IT Strategy. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2012/11/digital-strategy-does-not-equa
  24. Neyman, S. N., Isnaini, M. F., & Nurdiati, S. (2013). Penerapan Sistem E-Voting pada Pemilihan Kepala Daerah di Indonesia (The Application of E-Voting Systems in the Local Elections in Indonesia). Jurnal Sains Terapan, 3(1), 35–49. https://journal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/jstsv/article/view/28397
  25. OECD. (2016). OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2016. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_in_outlook-2016-en
  26. OECD. (2017). Economic Outlook for Southeast Asia, China and India 2018—Fostering Growth through Digitalisation. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/regional/economic-outlook-for-southeast-asia-china-and-india-2018-9789264286184-en.htm
  27. Perez, C. (2015). From Long Waves to Great Surges. European Journal of Economic and Social Systems, 27(1–2), 70–80. https://econpapers.repec.org/article/risejessy/0005.htm
  28. Purwati, N. (2015). Perancangan Sistem E-Voting untuk Pemilihan Kepala Daerah (Pilkada). Bianglala Informatika, 3(1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.31294/bi.v3i1.573
  29. Rachinger, M., Rauter, R., Müller, C., Vorraber, W., & Schirgi, E. (2019). Digitalization and its influence on business model innovation. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 30(8), 1143–1160. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-01-2018-0020
  30. Raj, R., Rathore, N., Singh, A., Khan, M., & Hanchate, R. (2020). A Step Towards Digital Voting System Using BCT. International Journal of Computer Engineering & Applications, XIII(II). http://www.ijcea.com/a-step-towards-digital-voting-system-using-bct/
  31. Risnanto, S. (2013). Merubah Sistem Pemilihan Kepala Daerah dari Konvensional ke Digital (e-Pilkada). Jurnal Online Sekolah Tinggi Teknologi Mandala, 6(1), 103–107. https://www.ejournal.sttmandalabdg.ac.id/index.php/JIT/article/view/76
  32. Saksono, H. (2012). Ekonomi Kreatif: Talenta Baru Pemicu Daya Saing Daerah. Jurnal Bina Praja: Journal of Home Affairs Governance, 4(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.04.2012.93-104
  33. Saksono, H. (2013). Ekonomi Biru: Solusi Pembangunan Daerah Berciri Kepulauan Studi Kasus Kabupaten Kepulauan Anambas. Jurnal Bina Praja, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.05.2013.01-12
  34. Saksono, H. (2016). Wajah Baru Otonomi Daerah: Status Kinerja versus Kondisi Realistis di Wilayah Provinsi Kalimantan Selatan. Jurnal Kebijakan Pembangunan, 11, 63–75.
  35. Saksono, H. (2018). Kelurahan Silalas sebagai Innovation Hub: Strategi Kompetitif Pemerintah Kota Medan melalui Perangkat Kewilayahannya. Inovasi, 15(2), 105–124. https://doi.org/10.33626/inovasi.v15i2.77
  36. Saksono, H. (2019). ASN Milenial: Transformasi Birokrasi Menuju Humanokrasi (Studi Kasus Pemda Kabupaten Wajo). FRIMA, 362–367. http://www.prosidingfrima.stembi.ac.id/index.php/prosidingfrima/article/view/55
  37. Saksono, H. (2020a). Literacy Hub (L-hub): Studi Strategi Literasi Pemerintah Daerah (Studi Kasus di Kota Baubau). Jurnal Kebijakan Pembangunan, 15(1), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.47441/jkp.v15i1.124
  38. Saksono, H. (2020b). Innovation Hub: Media Kolaborasi Menuju Pemerintahan Daerah Inovatif. Nakhoda: Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, 19(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.35967/jipn.v19i1.7854
  39. Schaal, G. S., Helbig, K., & Fleuß, D. (2017). Measuring Democracy in the Age of Digitalization. Theoretical Issues, Methodological Concerns, and Exemplary Solutions.
  40. Scheer, A.-W. (1999). ARIS — Business Process Frameworks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-58529-6
  41. Sussan, F., & Acs, Z. J. (2017). The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9867-5
  42. Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Research Commentary—Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 748–759. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0318
  43. Unruh, G., & Kiron, D. (2017, November 6). Digital Transformation on Purpose. MIT Sloan Management Review. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/digital-transformation-on-purpose/
  44. Urbach, N., & Röglinger, M. (2019). Introduction to Digitalization Cases: How Organizations Rethink Their Business for the Digital Age. In N. Urbach & M. Röglinger (Eds.), Digitalization Cases: How Organizations Rethink Their Business for the Digital Age (pp. 1–12). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95273-4_1
  45. Valenduc, G., & Vendramin, P. (2017). Digitalisation, between disruption and evolution. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 23(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258917701379
  46. Wuryantai, A. E. W. (2004). Digitalisasi Masyarakat: Menilik Kekuatan dan Kelemahan Dinamika Era Informasi Digital dan Masyarakat Informasi. Jurnal ILMU KOMUNIKASI, 1(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.24002/jik.v1i2.163

Copyright & Open Access License

Copyright (c) 2020 The Author(s). This article is licensed under CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>