DIGITAL GOVERNANCE THROUGH SUPER APP: EVALUATION OF SERVICE QUALITY, BUREAUCRATIC INTEGRATION, AND USER WELFARE IN JAKI (JAKARTA KINI)
Keywords:
Digital Governance, Bureaucratic Reform, Super Apps, User Satisfaction, Service Quality, Well-Being MethodologyAbstract
This study examines the effectiveness of super app–based digital governance through the case of JAKI (Jakarta Kini) as an integrated one-stop public service platform in addressing service fragmentation and enhancing public well-being. Amid the acceleration of digital transformation, the existence of more than 27,000 government applications in Indonesia has led to systemic inefficiencies, weak interoperability, and limited service integration. Prior studies have predominantly focused on service quality or user satisfaction in isolation, without comprehensively examining the interrelationships among digital service performance, bureaucratic integration, and public well-being. This study aims to develop and empirically test an integrated model linking digital service quality (system quality, information quality, and service quality), user satisfaction, and public well-being, while considering the moderating role of bureaucratic integration. The research employs a secondary data analysis method using data obtained from various sources, such as the JAKI service database, official government documents, mass media reports, and relevant scientific publications. An in-depth analysis was conducted to identify institutional patterns and the dynamics of digital governance. The findings indicate that system quality, information quality, and service quality significantly influence user satisfaction, which in turn positively affects public well-being, measured through the dimensions of perception, participation, and acceptability (PPA). However, bureaucratic fragmentation, regulatory inconsistencies, and the lack of a uniform system or governance framework for integrating databases across work units are major obstacles to optimizing digital service integration, thereby limiting the inclusivity and utility of these services. These findings underscore that the quality of digital services is insufficient without institutional alignment and coherent governance. This study contributes theoretically by integrating the Information Systems Success Model with a well-being approach in the context of digital governance, while highlighting the critical role of bureaucratic integration within super app ecosystems. Practically, the study recommends strengthening one-data policy integration, enhancing cross-sectoral governance harmonization, and promoting inclusive digital literacy strategies to maximize the impact of digital public services.
References
Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Georgetown University Press.
Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia (APJII). (2023). Survei penetrasi dan profil perilaku pengguna internet Indonesia 2022–2023. APJII.
Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS) Provinsi DKI Jakarta. (2023). Statistik telekomunikasi DKI Jakarta 2023. BPS Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Digital Government Development Agency Thailand. (2024). The Department of Land Transport, in collaboration with DGA, has made the Thang Rath Super App available. DGA Thailand. https://www.dga.or.th/en/document-sharing/en-dga-news/118865/
Dinas Komunikasi, Informatika, dan Statistik (Diskominfotik) Provinsi DKI Jakarta. (2023). Laporan tahunan Diskominfotik Provinsi DKI Jakarta 2023. Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Dinas Kesehatan Provinsi DKI Jakarta. (2023). Laporan kinerja layanan kesehatan digital Provinsi DKI Jakarta tahun 2023. Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
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.
Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2019). Re-examining the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(3), 719–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y
East Ventures. (2020). Digital Competitiveness Index 2020: Peluang dan Tantangan Ekonomi Digital di 34 Provinsi dan 24 Kota di Indonesia. East Ventures.
East Ventures. (2021). Digital Competitiveness Index 2021: Momentum Akselerasi Transformasi Ekonomi Digital. East Ventures.
East Ventures. (2022). Digital Competitiveness Index 2022: Menuju Era Keemasan Digital Indonesia. East Ventures.
East Ventures. (2023). Digital Competitiveness Index 2023: Keadilan Digital Bagi Seluruh Rakyat Indonesia. East Ventures.
East Ventures. (2024). Digital Competitiveness Index 2024: Mewujudkan Kedaulatan Digital Indonesia. East Ventures.
East Ventures. (2025). Digital Competitiveness Index 2025: Mendorong Inovasi dan Kecerdasan Buatan untuk Meningkatkan Daya Saing Digital Indonesia. East Ventures.
Gao, S., Krogstie, J., & Siau, K. (2020). Adoption of mobile services for government services: A survey in China. Government Information Quarterly, 37(4), 101437.
Government Technology Agency of Singapore. (2024). LifeSG: Product overview and services. Govtech Singapore. https://www.tech.gov.sg/products-and-services/for-citizens/digital-services/lifesg/
Heaton, J. (2004). Reworking qualitative data. Sage Publications.
Heeks, R. (2020). ICT4D 3.0? Part 1—The components of an emerging "digital for development" paradigm. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 86(3), e12124. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12124
Jakarta Smart City. (2020). Kaleidoskop Laporan kinerja JAKI (Jakarta Kini) 2020. Jakarta Smart City Unit, Diskominfotik Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Jakarta Smart City. (2021). Kaleidoskop Laporan kinerja JAKI (Jakarta Kini) 2021. Jakarta Smart City Unit, Diskominfotik Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Jakarta Smart City. (2022). Kaleidoskop Laporan kinerja JAKI (Jakarta Kini) 2022. Jakarta Smart City Unit, Diskominfotik Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Jakarta Smart City. (2023). Kaleidoskop Laporan kinerja JAKI (Jakarta Kini) 2023. Jakarta Smart City Unit, Diskominfotik Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Jakarta Smart City. (2024). Statistik penggunaan aplikasi JAKI: Ikhtisar tahunan 2024. Jakarta Smart City Unit, Diskominfotik Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001
Kementerian Digital Malaysia. (2025). MyGOV Malaysia: Aplikasi Pusat Sehenti Digital Perkhidmatan Kerajaan. Jabatan Digital Negara (JDN). https://www.mygov.gov.my/ms-MY
Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika (Kominfo) & Katadata Insight Center (KIC). (2022). Indeks literasi digital Indonesia 2022. Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika RI.
Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika (Kominfo) & Katadata Insight Center (KIC). (2023). Indeks literasi digital Indonesia 2023. Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika RI.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi (KemenPAN-RB). (2022). Laporan hasil evaluasi SPBE tahun 2022. KemenPAN-RB RI.
Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi Birokrasi
(KemenPAN-RB). (2023). Laporan hasil evaluasi SPBE tahun 2023. KemenPAN-RB RI.
Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-624X(01)00066-1
Liang, Lu-Hai. (2025). Malaysia’s national government ‘super-app’ to launch imminently. Biometric Update. https://www.biometricupdate.com/202508/malaysias-national-government-super-app-to-launch-imminently
Luna-Reyes, L. F., Zhang, J., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Cresswell, A. M. (2021). From e-government to digital government transformation: Challenges and opportunities. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(4), 599–614.
Muktiono, Ayub, & Suriadi, Jadi. (2021). Implementasi Wellbeing Methodology dalam Kajian Akademis. Widina Bhakti Persada.
Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(2), 392–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314564308
Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002
OECD. (2020). The OECD digital government policy framework: Six dimensions of a digital government (OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 35). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f64fed2a-en
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.
Peraturan Gubernur DKI Jakarta Nomor 2 Tahun 2020 tentang Satu Data Jakarta.
Peraturan Gubernur DKI Jakarta Nomor 95 Tahun 2021 tentang Penyelenggaraan Layanan Ekosistem Digital.
Peraturan Presiden Nomor 95 Tahun 2018 tentang Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik (SPBE).
Sharon, Alita. (2025). Singapore: Enhanced Digital Service Standards Advance Inclusivity. OpenGov Asia. https://archive.opengovasia.com/2025/05/13/singapore-enhanced-digital-service-standards-advance-inclusivity/
Thian, Si Ying. (2025). Thailand pursues AI innovation, while concurrently dealing with legacy. GovInsider Asia. https://govinsider.asia/intl-en/article/thailand-pursues-ai-innovation-while-concurrently-dealing-with-legacy
Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of e-government: A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.01.001
Undang-Undang Nomor 27 Tahun 2022 tentang Perlindungan Data Pribadi.
United Nations. (2022). UN e-government survey 2022: The future of digital government. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2022
Van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford University Press.
Vartanian, T. P. (2011). Secondary data analysis. Oxford University Press.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press.
Wickham RJ. Secondary Analysis Research. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2019 May-Jun;10(4):395-400. doi: 10.6004/jadpro.2019.10.4.7. Epub 2019 Mar 1. PMID: 33343987; PMCID: PMC7520737.
Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., & Geyer, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence and the public sector: Applications and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(7), 596–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.1498103
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery through web sites: A critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 362–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/009207002236911
