TheQualityofIndonesianLocalGovernmentWebsites asInteractiveCommunicationMedia PuguhP.

UtomoiandAmbarWidaningrumii DepartmentofPublicPolicyandManagement, GadjahMadaUniversity,INDONESIA

ABSTRACT Almost all governments in the world are now looking to use information technology as a tool for strategically enhancing their performance in public services delivery and creating public value. The presence of internetbased communication media (new media) could uncover barriers that have been limiting the interaction between institutions and actors from government and nongovernment. Moreover, the power of new media has increased thechancetoimproveinteractionspacesbeyondtheboundaries ofregionsandcountries. But,therearesomerequirementsthatmustbemetfirst.Oneofthemistheavailabilityof internetbased communication media that must be open, interactive, dynamic, and professionally managed. The ownership of that ideal communication media could be the basicindicatorofgovernment'sreadinesstoopenup,interact,andnetworkingwithoutside world. This paper discusses the quality of websites of several local governments in Indonesia, especially viewed from its existence as a media supporter of open and participatory governance.Itisbasedontheresultsofthestudyconductedin2009inwhichthe28local governmentwebsitesinIndonesiaastheobjectofanalysis.Theywerechosenastheobject ofanalysisbasedontwocriteria.First,websitesaremanagedbythelocalgovernmentsthat have ever considered having achievements in the development of egovernment. Second, websitesaremanagedbylocalgovernmentsthatfirsthavelocalregulationsongovernance transparency. The results indicate that most of local governments websites have not been utilized optimally as a supporting media to improve governmental transparency and public participation.Theconclusionwasbasedontheresultoftheuseofsomemeasurementsto assess the availability of interaction facilities, the quality of interaction, and the quality of public participation development. When the communication network between local governmentsandtheircitizenshavenotdevelopedwell,theinternationalnetworkingand cooperationwouldbealeapthatverydifficulttoberealized.Ifitcouldberealized,almost certainlytheelementsofnongovernmentandcitizenscouldnotactivelyparticipateandact as the controller. If those conditions happened, website development ironically would perpetuatetheclosure,lowparticipation,andweakaccountabilityofgovernance.Itwillbe very ironic because those are denial forms of the promises of the egovernance development. KeyWords:electronicgovernance,webbasedegovernance,interactivemedia
1

Introduction The governance must be effective and accountable in mainstreaming the fulfillment of public needs and interest. This rationale is in line with the modern public administration principle of governance(Frederickson,1997andPeters,2001)characterizedwiththepresenceofnetworks,either vertically or horizontally, among various elements of the community including government organizations, nongovernment organizations, quasigovernment organizations, profit and nonprofit orientedprivateorganizations,andvoluntaryorganizations.Theelementsthatcontroleachotherand havemore orlessthesamedegree ofaccessand powerthen establish acollaboration tobuildsocial orderandtoaddressdifferentpublicinterests. Effectiveandaccountablegovernanceisimpossibletoberealizedifthegovernmentwerestill the main or single actor. The core concern of governance is to build networks, consensus of similar interestsasthebasisforbuildingsynergies.Interdependenceisthekeywordinnetworkgovernance,in whicheachactorcannotachievetheirowngoalswithoutusingresourcesfromotheractors.Eachactor perceivesthatitsowngoalscanbeachievedmosteffectivelywiththeassistanceoftheresourcesofthe others. Information, goals and resources are exchanged in the interaction between these actors. The governance, at least, must be open and possible for the government and nongovernment actors to interactindefinitely.Openandinteractivegovernance,therefore,becomesanimportantrequirementin realizingborderlessgovernanceaswellasmarkoftheexistenceofborderlessgovernance(ILO,2004). Theuseofinternettechnologytofurthercitizenparticipationisbelievedtoholdgreatpromise to enhance citizen participation and democratic governance by allowing citizens to access public information and interact with government officials, by promoting better accountability of public officials to citizens through efficient and convenient delivery of services, and by producing fertile groundforreinvigoratedcivilsociety(AikinandKrane,2010).Theavailabilityofopenandinteractive communicatingmediahasbecomeaneedthatisveryfundamentaltosupporttherealizingofopenand interactive governance. New media, or internetbased information and communication technology, in this matter, is mostly able to adapt and fulfill this need (Lee, 2009; Kogut, 2003). Website has been beingchosenandusedassupportingmediumtorealizethetransparentandparticipativegovernance (Im & Jung, 2001, UN, 2008). Crossborder communication that previously is always needed time to processthemessageexchange,recently,withtheinternetavailability,canbedoneinteractively,online, andrealtime.Thus,itcanbesaidthatthemediumavailability,inthiscaseiswebsite,thatis able to provideopeninformationandtofacilitateinteractiveandrealtimecommunication,isoneofthebasic requirementsindevelopinginteractiveandparticipativegovernance. The stronger demand and need to realize the interactive and participative governance, the moreimportanttofindoutthelevelofreadinessofgovernancesystemtobeopened.Indonesiasurely cannotescapefromthosedemandandneed.Relatedtotheexistenceandtheadvantagethatownedby websiteasapotentialmediumtosupportinrealizinginteractiveandparticipativegovernance,thereis an important question that is needed to be answered, is that how the quality of Indonesian governments websites as communicating media between actors and stakeholders? This paper will focus more on the quality of local governments websites. The consideration is the scheme of decentralization and local autonomy causing local government as the central player in governance, includingindevelopingcooperationwithgovernmental,private,andnongovernmentalinstitutionsin otherareasorevenothercountries.
2

TheRoleofWebbasedICTinDevelopingParticipativeGovernance Transparency and participation are becoming more important value along with the idea that governanceisnotonlyadomainofgovernmentalinstitution.Governmentasanactorthatthelongest playsitsroleingovernancehastobeopentopublicandotherstakeholders.Citizenshavetherightto know many activities that will be, are being, or even have been conducted by government, especially the one related to the public need fulfillment. The resource management to support governance also mustbecontroledeasilybycitizensandotherstakeholders.Citizenshavetherighttoknow,sonotonly thegovernmentbutalsootheractorsingovernancehavetheobligationtofulfillthecitizensright.The citizeninvolvement,thatisthespaceallocationforcitizentoparticipateingovernance,besideasthe means of the citizens right fulfillment to take part in managing public importance also becomes the arenaoffulfillmentfortherighttoknow. Whenthefulfillmentofrightandobligationisoccupyingwell,sothegovernancewouldbeopen and participative, then public governance becomes the arena that is inclusive and borderless. There would be no obstacles for actors and stakeholders to communicate, interact, collaborate, or control eachother.Theeffectivegovernanceisexpectedtoberealizedmoreeasilywhentheconditionisbuilt. If the governance runs effectively and accountably, then governmental and nongovernmental institutions have prepared more to interact, collaborate, integrate, and struggle with the regional or globalsocialeconomicentity.Itisinlinewiththeideaofborderlessgovernance,whereasborderless governancecanbeinterpretedasaninclusive,transparentandparticipativegovernanceastheactors andstakeholders.Thereareotherkeysthataremoreessentialtocharacterizeborderlessgovernance, that are collaborative and integrative. However, collaboration and integration can be done when the foundation of inclusivity, transparency, and participation is firmly built first. The interpretation of borderless governance sets off from the assumption that a fair globalization, which is a scheme and condition of globalization that has caused each person, institution, and state can get the benefit from globalization,oratleast, tobeprotectedfromits negativeeffect,canonly berealized whenthegood governanceineachstateisrealizedfirst(ILO,2004).Atleast,eachstatehastoshowaseriouseffortin realizing governance that is more effective, transparent, participative, accountable, and also empoweringcommunity,especiallymarginalgroup,sotherights ingovernanceisfulfilled,andsocial equityisrealized(Beardon,2006). Website is a media that could facilitate information exchange and communicating network in newformsandcharacteristics.Informationprovidedinwebsiteisdigitalinformation,whichiseasilyto bechangedandadjustedinallstagesofcreating,storing,publishing,andusing,anditcanbeusedby manyuserssimultaneous,unlimitedbydistance(networkable),efficient,andcompressible(Hastjarjo, 2007). Whereas, involved communication is computer mediated communication through internet network that enables to the existence of virtual community that communicates intensively in virtual world(Menon,2007).Thus,theexistenceandstrongpointofwebsitecanbeusedtofacilitatecitizen rights fulfillment in holding governance. In this case, website can used to provide information about various activities of governance that will be, are, and have been done, and to provide facilities for citizensinconductingsomething,suchasparticipatingindeliveringaspirationandtoaccessservices (LaPorte,etal,2002;UN,2008;Ferber,Foltz,&Pugliese,2005) Throughwebsite,citizensandotherstakeholdersareabletofindouthowgovernmentswork, what procedures required to access services from government, and even how to mean in changing policyandregulationthataffectcitizenlife(LaPorte,etal,2002;Norris,2000).Togiveeasinessforits
3

users,websitecanbesupportedwithsearchenginesandlink.Providinginformationthatisneededfor citizensthroughwebsitewouldbemoreefficientcomparedtoservingthecitizenneedofinformation throughconventionalmedia,suchastelephoneorprintedmediasuchasleaflet,report,andmagazines (UN, 2008). Providing governance information is aimed for empowering citizens. By the existence of proper information, community would be able to participate in giving advice, as well as controlling governance. The important information of governance such as public service arrangements, budget plananduse,procurementofgoods/services,programandprojectmanagement,localpolicymaking, responsibility, and so on, can be acknowledged through online. By the transparent process, the opportunityofdeviantpracticessuchascorruptionandmanipulationwouldbenarrowed(Im&Jung, 2001). Governmentswebsitesthatare moremature arenotonlyforprovidinginformation,butalso forfacilitatingcitizensandstakeholderstoparticipateingovernance.Citizensarenotonlyabletolook forandreadinformationthroughgovernmentswebsite,butalsoabletoresponsethem.Citizenscould deliver their aspiration or voice (critics, advice, alternatives point of view) to response governments actions or plans that are informed through websites. These could be facilitated through various featuresprovidedinwebsites,suchasemail,chatrooms,onlinepolls/surveys,mailinglist,andonline forum(Thomas&Streib,2003;Ferber,Foltz,&Pugliese,2005). TheQualityoftheMediumortheCommitmentandCapacityoftheActor? To develop transparent and participative governance, which one needs to rearrange first: the availability and quality of medium to interact or the capacity and commitment of governance actors? Onotherwords,doestheaspectofmediaandtechnologyortheaspectofinstitutions? Surely, expected medium should be provided well. Further, capacity of governance and commitmentofactorsisalsoappropriate.However,therealityisusuallymuchdifferentfromtheideal. Theproblemsthatoftenoccurarethelowawarenessandempowermentofnongovernmentalactors tofulfillitsrightsingovernance,theresistanceofgovernmentintheinvolvementofnongovernmental actors, or both. The quality of medium that is created and used as the arena of interaction among governanceactorsisalsoimportant.Itistruethatwhentheawarenessandempowermentofactorsare still are problematic, then the existance of communication and interaction media that have a good quality become less useful. When there is gap in awareness and empowerment among actors and stakeholders, then, the communication and interaction between governmental actors and non governmental actors are not balanced. The quality of interactivity is not as expected, which can take place:thedominanceofgovernment,whiletheparticipationofnongovernmentalactorsislow,oreven thesilenceofgovernment,whiletheparticipationofnongovernmentalactorsismoreactive.However, when the governmental and nongovernmental actors have had the awareness and readiness to interactand eventocollaborate,thentheexistenceinteractivitymediumwouldbeveryimportantto optimizethebenefitofinclusivityandborderlessingovernance.Therefore,thequalityofinteractivity mediumingovernanceisnecessarilytobeobserved.
4

ActorsCapacityand Commitment Good

QualityofMedia Good Themostexpectedcondition Bad

Bad

Alternativesolution:The developmentofinternetbased mediaisnecessarilyneeded,so someactorscaninteractandcontrol eachotherthroughmedia;andits useisnotforsubstituting(butfor supporting/asacomplement)the existanceofmediaandarenaof convensionaltransparencyand participation. Alternativesolution: The Alternativesolution:The existanceofmedia,atleast, developmentandtheuseofmedia supportsthetransparency,so optimallyrequirereshuffleof actorscancontroleachother;can actorscapacityandcommitment increaseordecreasethecitizens first.However,toreshufflethe trustongovernance,soitcan capacityandcommitment,thereis forceactorstokeeptheir noharmtostartbytransparenting accountability. variousofgovernanceactivities throughinternetbasedmediaas wellasconventionalmediaorarena. Bypubliccontrol,automatically,itis created,sothegovernancehasno otheroptionstoimproveits capacityandcommitment,including inusingmedia.

The good quality of egovernance media can support governance to preserve the trust from citizens by holding commitment and improving its capacity in managing egovernance media. These qualities are needed to provide governance information transparently and to facilitate interactivity amongactorsandstakeholdersofgovernance.Thereasonis,whattheyhavedoneorhavenotdoneis observed by citizen. The citizen can deliver complaint or protest when they do not fulfill citizen expectations.Thecitizenandotherstakeholderscanalsoknowwhetherthegovernanceisresponsive ornotagainstaspirationthattheyhavedelivered.Whenthecitizensandstakeholderscandelivertheir complaints through open media or chanel, so the citizens can also know whether the governance is alwaysresponsiveoneverycomplaintthatisdeliveredornot. Withit,then,thecitizencandecideto trustornottotrustthegovernancebasedontheirexperienceininteractingorobservinggovernancein respondingeverycomplaintorinputthatisdeliveredbycitizensthroughegovernancemedia.Which means, the development of egovernance that is qualified can encourage government to hold commitmentandtokeepgovernanceaccountability. Althoughegovernancemediaisnottheonlyimportantrequirementtorealizethetransparent and participative governance, it is still appropriate to be considered its existence and development.

Therefore,thispaperfocusesmoretoinvestigatethequalityofegovernancemedia,inthiscaseisweb basedegovernance. Howtoevaluatethequalityofwebsiteasinteractivecommunicationmedia? Websitesinthispaperareviewedasmediaofinteractivity.Therefore,qualityofwebsiteshere is evaluated from the quality of management of interactivity. The method used in this research was content analysis. Content analysis was conducted to draw conclusion by identifying certain characteristicsfromunitofanalysisobjectivelyandsystematically.Byusingcodingsheet,observation onlocalgovernmentswebsitesthatbeingobjectoftheresearchwereconducted. To evaluate websites quality as media of interactivity, this study developed a number of categoriesthatarerelevanttotheprovisionofinteractivecommunicationfacilitiesandtheirutilization. Those three variables are (1) availability and kind of communication facilities, (2) quality of interactivity, and (3) quality of public participation development. Availability and kind of communicationfacilitiesviewedthreeaspects,whicharekindoffacilities(onlineoroffline),varietyof facilities,andavailabilityofspecialfacilitiesforinteractwiththepolicymaker.Qualityofinteractivity viewedtheintensityofuseofcommunicationfacilities,intensityofwebsiteadministratortoresponse message or aspiration from citizens who were website users, and newness of discussion process in interactive facilities (Table 1). Interactive facilities covered open web forum, mailing list, and guest book. Table1Variable,Subvariable,andIndicatorofWebsiteasMediaofInteractivity Variable Availabilityand kindsof communication facilities Subvariable Facilitiesavailability Indicatorsanditsscore Notavailable(0); Availableonlyofflineoronline(1); Availablebothofflineandonline(2) Scorebasedonthenumberofavailablefacilities suchasemail,polls,mailinglist,openwebforum, andchatroom Eachwasscored0ifitisnotavailableand1if itisavailable

Varietyofavailable communicatingfacilities

TheQualityof Interactivity

Availabilityofspecial facilitiestointeractwith policymaker(eachwith bupati/gubernurandpublic official) Intensityofinteractive Seldom/ new messages approximately once in facilitiesuse morethan3days(1) Fair/new messages approximately once within 23days(2) Often/newmessagesineveryday(3) Intensityoftheweb Never(0) managertorespondto Responseonlyfewofthem(1) everymessagesor Alwaysresponseeveryincomingmessage(2) aspirationsfromwebsite users
6

Newnessofdiscussion processininteractive facilities

Thequalityof Relevanceofdeveloped publicparticipation communicationin development interactivefacilities

Availabilityofdiscussion topicdirectory Availabilityofinvitationto publictodeliveraspiration onpolicyissuesorcertain publicproblems Availabilityofopportunity forpublictochoose alternativepolicythat wouldbeconductedby government

Newestmessagepostedmorethanamonthago (0) Newest message posted within more than a weektolessthanamonthago(1) Newestmessagepostedwithin36daysago(2) Newest message posted less than 3 days ago (3) > 50% content of communication is not relevanttogovernanceissues(1) composition between relevant and irrelevant communication material to governance issues arebalanced(2) >50%contentofcommunication is relevantto governanceissues(3) Notavailable(0) Available(1) Notavailable(0) Available(1) Notavailable(0) Available(1)

Whilethreesubvariablestoevaluatequalityofpublicparticipationdevelopmentcoveredthe relevancyofcommunicationthatdevelopedoninteractivefacilities,theavailabilityofdiscussiontopics directory, the availability of invitation or stimulus for public to give aspiration about policy issues or certainpublicproblems,andtheavailabilityofopportunityforpublictochoosealternativepolicythat wouldbedonebygovernment. The evaluation in each websites was done by adding obtained score from each variables. The accumulation of scores of those variables was done by considering a predetermined weight value of each variable. The analysis was conducted to determine the general tendency of the quality of local government websites in Indonesia as media that facilitate interactivity between governments and its stakeholders.Comparativeanalysisamonglocalgovernmentsasthemanagerofthewebsitewasdone tofindoutwhichlocalgovernmentishigherinrank,theformoftheirexcellence,andalsotoinvestigate the characteristics of the excellent local government. The recommendations were formulated to promotetheenhancingoflocalgovernmentscommitmentandseriousnessindevelopingandmanaging itswebsitesasasupportingmediaforstrengtheningdemocraticgovernance. This research has determined two criterias in determining local governments websites that were relevant to be evaluated through this research. First criteria was websites that owned by local governments that have become first runner in having local regulation on transparency and participation of local governance (before and in 2006). They were assumed having relatively high commitment in realizing transparent governance. By first criteria, there were 19 local governments thattheirwebsiteswerethestudyobjects(here inafterreferredascategoryAoflocalgovernment).
7

Whereas,secondcriteriawasthewebsiteoflocalgovernmenthaseverassessedachievementsinthe development of egovernment. Warta Ekonomi has conducted evaluation on egovernment practice development every year. During the year of 20042008, there were 17 local governments that according to Warta Ekonomi have shown achievements in developing egovernment (here in after referredascategoryBoflocalgovernment).However,among36websites,only28websitesthatcould beopenedwhenthisresearchwasbeingconductedinDecember2009. ResultsandDiscussion As a medium of interactivity, overall, the quality of most of the websites managed by local governments that have been known as a role model of developing egovernment (category A) were better compared to websites managed by local governments that have had local regulation on transparencyforthefirsttime(categoryB).SomewebsitesownedbycategoryAoflocalgovernments were more mature in providing communicating facilities, that is by giving access to citizens and stakeholders to deliver their aspiration directly through chat rooms or instant messaging facilities. Besides, they have shown better willingness and readiness to facilitate citizens as website users who wanttocommunicatedirectlywithlocalleaderorbureaucracyofficialsthroughanumberoffacilities suchaspersonalblog,personalemail,andsmscentre. The intensity of aspiration delivery through local governments websites was relatively rare, eveninareasthathavedevelopingegovernmentpracticesabovetheaverage.Somelocalgovernments, thathavehaddevelopingegovernmentpracticethatwerebetterthanotherlocalgovernments,have shown the willingness in managing discussion facilities that seen from the intensity in responding citizens aspiration. However, the quality of public participation development in all of evaluated websites was not maximal because it has not reached the level of public involvement in policy formulation,suchaspublicconsultationonalternativeactionsorpoliciesthatwouldbechosenbylocal governmentstoimplement. Table2showsthatwebsitesmanagedbyMunicipalcityofMalangexceededotherwebsitesin facilitating citizens and stakeholders to deliver their aspirations. It can be seen from the score, the quality of Municipal city of Malang website included in category adequate (67.5). Available communicationfacilitieswereadequate,includingtheavailablecommunicationfacilitiesonlineandthe facilitiestocommunicatewiththemayor.Facilitytosubmitcomplaintsthroughthewebsitehasbeen welldevelopedandusedwellbycitizens.Therehasbeeninvitationforcitizenstodeliveraspirations completedbyavailabilityofaspirationdirectory,suchasthemattersofeducation,publichealth,public transportation, public facilities, security, and other categories. Each message from the citizens was alwaysrespondedbywebadminorwebmanager,sothisfacilitybecamefrequentlyusedbyusers.All of these have enabled Municipal city of Malang website having a good quality of interactivity and adequatedevelopmentofpublicparticipation. The second place was Municipal city of Yogyakarta website with score of 64. The rank of Municipal city of Yogyakarta website was below Municipal city of Malang because of the quality of interactivity in Municipal city of Yogyakarta website was lower. The UPIK (Web and SMSbased complaint channel) has been developed well. Each complaints and requests for information from citizens always respond so that makes this service quite often utilized by citizens. But, the positive
8

value was reduced because other available interaction facilities, such as open web forum and guess book,werenotmanagedwell.Guestbookwasrarelyusedandforalongtimewasnotused.Theweb adminwhoneverrespondedcomplaints,questions,andinformationfromcitizensmightbethecauseof citizenshesitationandreluctanceindeliveringmessagethroughtheguestbook.Openwebforuminthe website was also rarely used and more widely used for personal business promotion, personal blogs promotion,orotherthingsthatarenotrelevanttothegovernance.Bothwerestillbeingused,butnot managedandusedwell.Thisreducedthequalityofinteractivityandpublicparticipationdevelopment inMunicipalcityofYogyakartawebsite. Table2 RankingofWebsitesasMediaofInteractivity
Communication TotalScore (A+B+C) withweightof 20:30:50 67.5 64 58 56.5 54.8 50.5 50 46.5 46 44 43 42 42 41 34 33 32.5 30 30 25 25 23 20 10 10 7 7 7 Availabilityand kindsof communication facilities A 77.5 65 70 42.5 70 42.5 35 57.5 35 50 35 50 50 70 50 35 42.5 70 35 35 35 65 50 50 50 35 35 35 Qualityof Interactivity B 73.33 70 46.67 60 52.67 56.67 60 33.33 63.33 46.67 53.33 73.33 73.33 40 46.67 53.33 46.67 53.33 26.67 60 60 33.33 33.33 . . . . . QualityofPublic Participation Development C 60 60 60 60 50 50 50 50 40 40 40 20 20 30 20 20 20 0 30 0 0 0 0 . . . . .
9

ListoftheOfficial WebsitesOwner

1 MunicipalcityofMalang Municipalcityof 2 Yogyakarta 3 DistrictofBogor 4 DKIJakartaProvince 5 DistrictofSleman 6 DistrictofBantul Municipalcityof 7 Surabaya 8 JawaBaratProvince 9 DistrictofTakalar 10 DistrictofKebumen 11 DistrictofMajalengka 12 DistrictofMagelang 13 DistrictofBulukumba 14 YogyakartaProvince 15 DistrictofBandung 16 DistrictofLebak 17 Kep.RiauProvince 18 JawaTimurProvince Municipalcityof 19 Kendari 20 DistrictofJembrana 21 DistrictofJombang 22 DistrictofLamongan 23 DistrictofBolmong Municipalcityof 24 Pontianak 25 DistrictofNgawi 26 DistrictofSragen 27 DistrictofTanahDatar Municipalcityof 28 Gorontalo

 Information:
Localgovernmentsthathavebecomearolemodelindevelopinge governmentinIndonesia(versionofWartaEkonomi) Localgovernmentsthathaveregulationontransparency

130 :inadequate 3170 :adequate >70 :good

Localgovernmentsthathavebecomearolemodelindevelopinge governmentandhaveregulationontransparency

As shown on table 2, the low quality of interactivity was often happened among other local governments websites. Furthermore, websites that have had good quality on development of public participation were not able to raise their rank because they have had low score on quality of interactivity.Websitesownedby DistrictofBogorandJawa BaratProvincewereincludedinwebsite category that had good quality on development of public participation. But, their quality on interactivity was still inadequate. Those websites mostly have provided open web forum facilities or similarfacilities,butwerenotmanagedwell,forinstance,thewebadminormanagerneverresponded message or aspiration from users. This was likely to be the cause of citizens hesitation in delivering aspiration,soattheend,thisfacilitywasrarelyused. On the other hand, the websites belonged to District of Magelang, District of Bulukumba, and DistrictofTakalarwereassessedhavinghighscoreonthequalityofinteractivity,butlowscoreonthe qualityofpublicparticipation.Thishasindicatedthattherewereinterestandenthusiasmfromusersto deliver their aspiration through websites. It was shown from the frequency of users in using this facility.Webadministratorsormanagersalsorespondtomessagesfromusers,althoughnotalloronly some messages. Citizens enthusiasm in delivering aspirations on the one side and the willingness of websitesadministratorinrespondingmessagefromusersontheothersidearesufficientprerequisite indevelopingpublicparticipationthroughwebsites,sowebsiteswouldhavebetterquality.Itcouldbe doneinawaytofixfacilitiesmanagement.Therefore,itsexistencearemorefunctionalasamediumfor citizenstodelivertheiraspirationsandcommunicatewithgovernmentactorsaboutgovernance,notas aforumforopencommunication. Therewerefivewebsitesthatdidnothavescoreonpublicparticipationdevelopment.Theyare websites belonged to Jawa Timur Province, District of Jembrana, District of Jombang, District of Lamongan, and District of Bolmong. This was because the interactive forum facilities in these five websites were not managed well in inviting and facilitating public to participate. There were no notificationsorinvitationstodiscussaboutspecificpolicyissues,soitwouldbecomefreeforum.The discussion or aspiration directory were not available, even the use of forum as media for public consultation over policy alternatives from government. Management of the forums were not done seriously, and the message that delivered by the users was mostly irrelevant with governance. This kind of condition enabling five local governments websites have not been considered qualified in developingactiveparticipationfrompublicthroughwebsites. There were 17 local governments websites included in category good. 70% were websites managedbylocalgovernmentsthatknownasarolemodelindevelopingegovernmentinIndonesia. Meanwhile, among websites managed by local governments that have become the leading runners in having local regulation on transparency, there were four websites that have had score above the
10

average (>35.69), they were websites owned by District of Takalar, District of Majalengka, District of Bulukumba, and District of Magelang. While District of Bantul and District of Kebumen were local governmentsthatknownasarolemodelindevelopingegovernmentandnotedaspioneersinhaving local regulation on transparency. The quality of websites that owned by both District of Bantul and DistrictofKebumenwasalsoincludedincategorygood. However,theachievementoflocalgovernmentsindevelopingegovernmenthasnotbecomea guarantee for the quality of websites that they had been managed. It was shown in the quality of websitesthatmanagedbyDistrictofSragenandDistrictofJembranathatwereplacedinthelowrank amongthegroupofgovernmentsthatknownasarolemodelindevelopingegovernment,evenbelow average of local governments websites that reviewed in this research (<35.69). The improvement of both local governments in developing egovernment has acknowledged by many realms and often becamebenchmarkingobject.However,theICTdevelopmentthatwasdonebySragenandJembrana wasmorerelevantwiththeinformationsystemandinternalcommunication,forinstance,developing teleconferenceforinternalpublicofficials.Whilewebsitesthatweremediatointeractwithcitizensor stakeholdershasnotdevelopedwell,thatwascharacterizedbytheabsenceofinteractivefacilitiessuch as open web forum (District of Sragen website) and development of public participation through the website(DistrictofSragenandJembranawebsites). ConclusionandImplication Fromtheresultofthestudy,itcouldbeconcludedthatmostoflocalgovernmentswebsitesin Indonesiahavenotbeenoptimallyutilizedassupportingmediaofopenandparticipatorygovernance. Localgovernmentsneedtohaveadequatecommitmentandcapacityinordertodevelopwebsitesthat qualified as media transparency and participatory governance. Some of local governments that have been known as a role model in developing egovernment in Indonesia, seen to have more adequate capacityfacilitatingcitizensandstakeholderstodeliveraspirationthroughtheirwebsites. When the communication network between local governments and their citizens has not developedwell,theideatorealizetheinteractiveandparticipativegovernancewouldbeIfitcouldbe realized, since almost certainly the elements of nongovernment and citizens could not actively participate and act as the controller. If those conditions happened, website development ironically wouldperpetuatetheclosure,lowparticipation,andweakaccountabilityofgovernance.Itwillbevery ironicbecausethosearedenialformsofthepromisesoftheegovernancedevelopment. An evaluating system and benchmarking website quality substantively are able to measure government performance in proving governance information and facilitating citizens to deliver aspirationadequately.Thisevaluatingsystemisnecessarilysupportedbyastandardofwebsitequality thathavemorespiritindevelopingwebsitesthatareabletobeamediaofpoliticalrightsfulfillmentfor their citizens. This standard could be developed together by Ministry of Communication and Information, Commission of Information, and Local Government Association. The development of standard and evaluating system could be formalized as derivative rules of UU Keterbukaan Informasi Publik(FreedomofInformationLaw)thatspeciallyarrangestheuseofwebsitesasmediatoprovide anddistributegovernanceinformation.Thissystem,then,needstobeusedtoevaluategovernments websites regularly. The conduct of websites evaluation could be done by developing cooperation between government (The Ministry of Communication and Information Affairs and The Ministry of
11

Home Affairs),TheCommissionofInformation,and Warta Ekonomias a privateinstitutionthathave beenregularlyconductingevaluationongovernmentswebsites. Inthepresenceofevaluatingsystem,therefore,localgovernmentswouldbemoreencouraged tobemoreseriousinmanaginganddevelopingtheirwebsites.Bythepresenceofregulationsandclear standardofwebsitequality,thestakeholders,suchasNGO,politicalparties,entrepreneurassociations, collegestudents,andothercomponentsofcivilsocietyespeciallygovernmentswebsitesusers,areable toknowandcontributeincontrollinggovernmentswebsites.Thiscouldcreategreaterencouragement forgovernmentstokeepimprovingtheirwebsites. References Aikins, Stephen Kwamena Aikins and Dale Krane. 2010. Are Public Officials Obstacles to Citizen Centered EGovernment? An Examination of Municipal Administrators' Motivations and Actions,StateandLocalGovernmentReview201042:87. Beardon, H. 2006. ICTs, Empowerment, and Development: Articulating Grassroots Analysis through Participatory Approaches, in Rahman, H. (Ed.), Empowering Marginal Communities with InformationNetworking.HersheyPA:IdeaGroupPublishing. Frederickson, H. George. The Spirit of Public Administration. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass Publishers, 1997. Ferber,P.,Foltz,F.,&Pugliese,R.2005."InteractivityversusInteraction:WhatReallyMattersforState LegislatureWebSites?BulletinofScienceTechnologySociety,25(5):402411. Hastjarjo,S.2007.TeknologiDigitaldanDuniaPenyiaran,JurnalKomunikasiMassa,1(1):3541. ILO.2004.AFairGlobalization:CreatingOpportunitiesforAll.Geneva:ILOPublications. Im, B. & Jung, J. (2001). "Using ICTs to Strengthen Government Transparency and Relations with Citizens in Korea", the case study contributes to the work undertaken by the PUMA Working GrouponStrengtheningGovernmentCitizenConnections,OECD. Kogut,B.2003.TheGlobalInternetEconomy.Cambridge:TheMITPress. LaPorte,T.M.,Demchak,C.C.,Jong,M.,&Friis,C.(2002)."DemocracyandBureaucracyintheAgeofthe Web:EmpiricalFindingsandTheoreticalSpeculations", Administration & Society,34(4):411 446. Lee, L.L. 2009. IT Governance in a Networked World: MultiSourcing Strategies and Social Capital for Corporate.Hershey,PA:InformationScienceReference. Menon, S. 2007. "A Participation Observation Analysis of the Once & Again Internet Message Bulletin Boards",TelevisionNewMedia,8(4):341374. Norris,P.2000.DemocraticDivide:TheImpactoftheInternetonParliamentsWorldwide, Presented Paper at Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington DC, 31 August3rdSeptember2000. Peter,GuyB.TheFutureofGoverning.SecondEdition.Kansas:UniversityPressofKansas,2001. Singh, P. and Verma, S. (Eds.). 2010. Organizing and Managing in the Era of Globalization. Thousand Oaks,CA:SagePublications.

12

Siau,K.andLong,Y.(2005)."Synthesizingegovernmentstagemodels;ametasynthesisbasedonmeta ethnographyapproach",IndustrialManagement&DataSystems,105(4):443458. Thomas,J.C.andStreib,G.2003."TheNewFaceofGovernment:CitizenInitiatedContactsintheEraof EGovernment",JournalofPublicAdministrationResearchandTheory,13(1):83102. United Nations. 2008. From eGovernment to Connected Governance, United Nations eGovernment SurveyReport2008.TheUnitedNationsPublication. i (Mr) Puguh P. Utomo, Master in Public Administration (MPA), Gadjah Mada University, Researcher at the Department of
Public Policy and Management, Faculty of Social & Political Sciences, Gadjah Mada University (www.pa.fisipol.ugm.ac.id). Email:puguh.prasetya@ugm.ac.id;puguh.prasetya@gmail.com (Ms) Ambar Widaningrum, Dr. (in Public Administration) from Gadjah Mada University. Head of the Department of Public Policy and Management, Faculty of Social & Political Sciences, Gadjah Mada University (www.pa.fisipol.ugm.ac.id). Email: ambarwid@ugm.ac.id;ambarwid@yahoo.com
ii

13