George Towar Ikbal Tawakkal


Many countries have democratized by utilizing information and communication technology as e-government. Conceptually, e-government should increase participation which is equally called e-participation. Several studies confirm and reject this assumption. Some claim that there is no causal relationship between e-government development and e-participation progress. Continuing the debate, this article addresses how often the development of e-government is in line with the progress of e-participation. What pattern appears in the relationship between the two variables? Based on data provided by UNDP in EDGI and EPI scores, this article looks at Indonesia and other Southeast Asian countries that directly border Indonesia; Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei Darussalam, and Timor Leste. A series of categories are defined to facilitate analysis, such as low, moderate, and high fluctuations for EDGI and EPI respectively, then low, moderate, and high consistency and inconsistency for the confluence of EDGI and EPI. Taking into account the national income per capita of these countries, it is known that the potential for causality is more likely to occur in developed countries that have high national income per capita.


e-government; e-participation; causality; development

Full Text:



Benton, J. E. 2005. An Assessment Of Research On American Counties. Public Administration Review, 65, 462–74.

Cole, A. 2004. Decentralization in Franch: Central Steering, Capacity Building And Identity Construction. France Politics, 4. 31-57.

Grönlund, Å. 2009. ICT Is Not Participation Is Not Democracy - eParticipation Development Models Revisited. ePart. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03781-8_2.

Held, D. 1996. Models Of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press. h. 119.

Huda, M., & Yunas, N. S. 2016. The Development Of E-Government System In Indonesia. Jurnal Bina Praja, 8(1), 97-108.

Kurniawan, T. 2018. E-Musrenbang as a Means In Increasing Community Participation In Development Planning In Indonesia: Its Challenges and Obstacles. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 191. 12-18.

LAPOR. Layanan Aspirasi dan Pengaduan Online Rakyat. https://lapor.go.id/

eMasyarakat. https://m.apkpure.com/id/emasyarakat-binjai/smartcity.aplikasi

Lapor Hendi. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.semarang.laporhendi&hl=en.

Manoharan, A. P. 2013. A Three Dimensional Assessment Of US County E-Government. State and Local Government Review, 45, 153–162.

Manoharan. A. P., & Ingrams, A. 2018. Conceptualizing E-Government From Local Government Perspectives. State and Local Government Review, 50(1), 56–66.

Manoharan, A. P., & Holzer, M. 2012. Active Citizen Participation In E-Government: A Global Perspective. USA: IGI Global.

Manoharan, A. P. & Carrizales, T. J. 2010. Technological Equity: An International Perspective Of E-Government and Societal Divides. Electronic Government: An International Journal, 8, 73–84.

Napitupulu, D., Adiyarta, K., & Albar, A. 2019. Public Participation Readiness Toward E-Gov 2.0: Lessons From Two Countries. Proceedings Of The 12th International Conference On Theory And Practice Of Electronic Governance. Melbourne, Australia, April 03 - 05, 2019, h. 240-243. Accessed On: October, 25, 2019. [Online]. Available: ACM Digital Library.

Norris, D. F., & Reddick, C. G. 2013. Local E-Government In The United States: Transformation Or Incremental Change?. Public Administration Review, 73, 165–175.

Reddick, C. G. 2004. A Two-Stage Model Of E-Government Growth: Theories And Empirical Evidence For US Cities. Government Information Quarterly, 21, 51–64.

Sprecher, M. H. 2000. Racing To E-Government: Using The Internet For Citizen Service Delivery. Government Finance Review, 16. 21–22.

Stratu-Strelet, D., & Gil-Gómez, H., Oltra-Badenes, R., & Oltra-Gutierrez, J. V. 2021. Critical factors in the institutionalization of e-participation in e-government in Europe: Technology or leadership?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164:120489.

UN E-Government Survey 2020. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2020.

UN E-Government Survey 2018. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2018.

UN E-Government Survey 2016. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2016.

UN E-Government Survey 2014. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2014.

UN E-Government Survey 2012. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2012.

UN E-Government Survey 2010. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2010.

UN E-Government Survey 2008. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2008.

UN E-Government Survey 2005. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2005.

UN E-Government Survey 2004. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2004.

UN E-Government Survey 2003. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2003.

World Bank (n.d.). National Income per Capita. Accessed 9 July 2022. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.ADJ.NNTY.PC.CD

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32528/politico.v22i2.8176


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2022 POLITICO

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View My Stats