A scale for measuring perceived bureaucratic readiness for smart cities in Indonesia

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a scale for measuring perceived bureaucratic readiness for smart city initiatives. Design/methodology/approach The present study employs a mixed method approach to achieve its research objectives. An exploratory study, consisting of literature review and qualitative interviews with key informants, was conducted to develop an initial instrument for measuring bureaucratic readiness. An online survey of 40 civil servants involved in smart city programmes in the Yogyakarta City government was then administered to test the instrument’s validity and reliability. Findings Perceived bureaucratic readiness can be measured through four dimensions: commitment of the upper echelons, legal support, information technology resources and governance. Research limitations/implications The proposed scale provides an alternative instrument for measuring perceived bureaucratic readiness for smart city initiatives. However, as data were only derived from one city government, they are relatively small in scope. Future research can be conducted for generalisation by replicating this study in other cities, thereby measuring its effectiveness in other contexts and settings. Practical implications This study not only provides a better understanding of bureaucratic readiness for smart city initiatives, but also proposes an assessment tool as a practical means of assessing bureaucratic readiness. The quantification of readiness is beneficial to putting smart city programmes into practice, as it allows smart city managers to assess the internal bureaucracy’s level of readiness. It also allows managers to mitigate and further policy agendas and thereby improve the bureaucracy’s support for smart city programmes. Originality/value Literature sometimes underestimates the role of bureaucracy in smart city implementation while overly stressing stakeholders, vendors and technology. This paper attempts to contribute to smart city research by reaching beyond the technological perspective and focusing on local government bureaucracy. None of the extant literature provides a scale for measuring bureaucratic readiness. The study thus proposes a systematic way to develop a means of measuring perceived bureaucratic readiness for smart city programmes.

Governance and administrative process of the Light Rail Train project in Palembang, Indonesia

“…To understand the Palembang LRT, as smart urban transportation, it is useful to investigate the key drivers of and administrative governance processes for the project from a localexperience perspective. In smart cities, it is critical to study governance public policy from the perspective of different countries (such as Indonesia's) implementation experiences (Pratama and Imawan, 2019).…”

The government of Indonesia’s smart city development: Fiscal capacity, cognitive models in decision making, excessive caution about future accrual of benefits, and null regulatory leadership

“…Furthermore, the details of the questions on the dexterous strategy are related to the attachment of the multiple strategies carried out by the regions to ensure the success of all cities' development (Shelton et al, 2015;Pettit et al, 2018;Appio et al, 2019). Furthermore, the concept of this strategy relates to the symptoms and consequences of the political economy (Purwanto, 2018;Pratama and Imawan, 2019;Suartika and Cuthbert, 2020) or is it just an IST development project? Finally, this study integrates the answers from all participants on the four constructs to condense them into research analysis and discussions.…”

“…On the other hand, the authors analysed the central GoI's political economy to accrue the future potential benefits of smart cities to be capitalised on as an initial investment (Appio et al, 2019;Israilidis et al, 2021;Kusumastuti et al, 2022). The authors also identify that the central GoI enables this smart city development to have a welfare function for society (Shelton et al, 2015;Pratama and Imawan, 2019;Pratama, 2021) or just a societarian investment. Then, this article argues that when the GoI dares to capitalise on the future economic benefits of smart city development, the GoI takes political economy action correctly because it is really for the communities' prosperity in the future with low processing costs for each living activity.…”

The Impact of Citizens’ Participation Level on Smart Sustainable Cities Outcomes: Evidence from Saudi Arabia

“…An online questionnaire survey was conducted to establish a robust point of view of the stakeholders [45]. It also helps to identify the SSCO and investigate their relationships with CPL within the context of Saudi Arabia [46].…”