Abstract
This study examines bureaucratic responsiveness and communication in digitally based population administration services, and identifies how digitalisation simultaneously improves technical efficiency and generates new forms of exclusion. A descriptive-interpretive qualitative study was conducted at the Kemendukbangga/BKKBN Provincial Office of Bengkulu. Data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with sixteen informants (eight officials and eight service users), non-participant observation, and document analysis. Analysis used open, axial, and contrastive coding supported by qualitative analysis software. Three themes emerged. Bureaucratic responsiveness is constructed primarily around procedural speed and data accuracy rather than citizen-centred inclusivity. Digital systems accelerate data collection and cross-regional service but give rise to systemic vulnerabilities including server outages and inter-agency synchronisation failures. A responsiveness paradox appears in which digitisation enhances efficiency for digitally literate users while creating new exclusion for elderly, rural and low-literacy populations. Field facilitators and community cadres serve as critical intermediaries bridging the digital divide. A single provincial office limits generalisation, and the user sample cannot represent all excluded groups. The study offers pathways towards equitable digital public services through facilitator-based outreach. It extends the responsiveness framework by revealing the structural limits of hybrid bureaucratic transition.
References
Badan Pusat Statistik Provinsi Bengkulu. (2024). Provinsi Bengkulu dalam angka 2024. Badan Pusat Statistik Provinsi Bengkulu.
Grönlund, Å., & Horan, T. A. (2004). Introducing e-gov: History, definitions, and issues. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 15, 713-729. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.01539
Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional. (2019). Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional 2020-2024. Bappenas.
Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2012.06.003
Lindgren, I., Madsen, C. Ø., Hofmann, S., & Melin, U. (2019). Close encounters of the digital kind: A research agenda for the digitalization of public services. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 427-436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.03.002
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
Peeters, R. (2023). Digital administrative burdens: An agenda for analyzing the citizen experience of digital bureaucratic encounters. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 6(1), 7-13. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvac024
Peeters, R., & Widlak, A. (2018). The digital cage: Administrative exclusion through information architecture. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 175-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.02.003
Peraturan Presiden Nomor 180 Tahun 2024 tentang Kementerian Kependudukan dan Pembangunan Keluarga. (2024).
Peraturan Presiden Nomor 95 Tahun 2018 tentang Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik. (2018).
Salsabila, N., Pratama, A., & Wibowo, R. (2025). Digital divide and public service accessibility in Indonesia. Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 15(1), 44-58.
Schou, J., & Pors, A. S. (2019). Digital by default? A qualitative study of exclusion in digitalised welfare. Social Policy and Administration, 53(3), 464-477. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12470
Undang-Undang Nomor 52 Tahun 2009 tentang Perkembangan Kependudukan dan Pembangunan Keluarga. (2009).
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2002). From responsiveness to collaboration: Governance, citizens, and the next generation of public administration. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 527-540. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00235