The Role of Transparency in Mediating the Determinants of Government Accountability in.pdf

Journal of Namibian Studies, 34 S2(2023): 84–102 ISSN: 2197-5523 (online)
84
The Role of Transparency in Mediating the
Determinants of Government Accountability in
Indonesia
Jamaluddin Majid1*
, Memen Suwandi2
,Sanunggarah Talaohu3
1
State Islamic University Alauddin Makassar, South Sulawesi-Indonesia,
Jamaluddin.majid@uin-alauddin.ac.id
2
msuwandi19@yahoo.com,
3
Sanunggarahh15@gmail.com
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the effect of the human development
index and financial performance on accountability through
transparency of the Indonesian government. The main theory
used in this research is Institutional Theory, supported by
Stakeholder Theory, and Agency Theory. A purposive sampling
technique was used in this study, then the final sample was 330
from the number of provinces in Indonesia for the category
Indonesian open budget transparency within 10 years, data was
obtained by grouping through a method of Internet search from
government websites and the Central Bureau of Statistics in
Indonesia. Collected data were processed with the use of tool
analysis descriptive quantitatively using the SEM method. The
results of this study found that Human Development Index and
General Allocation Fund had a significant effect, while Original
Local Government Revenue did not have a significant effect on
accountability through transparency, this research became a
reference for further researchers, and as a reference material for
provincial governments in determining policy.
Keywords: Accountability; Transparency; Human Development
Index; Financial Performance Regional Government.
Introduction
Management of public organizations by the government is required to
be accountable and transparent for all actions that have been carried
out starting from the input, process, and results, as well as the benefits
to the community as a form of public accountability public [1]. This

85
phenomenon shows that the accountability of public organizations in
Indonesia is still not optimal, the development of regional government
performance accountability in Indonesia for districts/cities is still low,
which reaches 63.74% then the province 61.57%, and ministries or
agencies only reach 59.31% [2]. This data shows the lack of leadership
commitment to involving subordinates in the implementation of
bureaucratic reform and the lack of public service. Meanwhile, based on
[3] the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) data obtained a score of 40
and was ranked 85th out of 180 countries assessed, this shows that the
level of public transparency in Indonesia is still relatively low, therefore
accountability and transparency is a must in the process of public sector
services, transparency has not been built based on free information by
public institutions, where the information available is not yet accessible
and difficult for the public to understand. Problems that occur in the
accountability of the Indonesian government due to the lack of
fulfillment of public rights, namely the right to know, the right to be
informed, and the right to have their aspirations heard which are based
on the accountability demands of the Government both central and
regional [4], as the subject of public financial management information
must be managed properly so as not to cause harm [5]. Good
governance carried out by public institutions and the private sector is a
form of public accountability that functions to oversee and direct
administrative behavior to provide answers (answerability) to several
external authorities regarding the expected performance [6], [7].
Regarding the disclosure of financial transparency and local government
performance in 490 cities/districts in Indonesia, it is reported that the
level of transparency of local government financial performance
information only reaches 15% in the form of news and information in
figures in the form of regional budgets and financial performance
reports, the disclosure of which is still below 10% [8]. Overall, the results
of this study provide information that the level of transparency in
regional financial management is still low. Apart from that accountability
must be able to be realized by the government to improve the quality of
Human Development. The Human Development Index (IPM) is an
important indicator for measuring the success of a region to build the
quality of human life because the higher the Human Development Index
in an area indicates that the better the quality of life of the people in it
[9].
High human development greatly determines the ability of the
population to absorb and manage economic resources [10].
Furthermore, the financial performance variable is part of economic
activity. Financial activity is summarized in Original Local Government
Revenue which is one of the indicators that can be used to measure
regional revenue in financing economic activities and activities. In
addition, there is also the General Allocation Fund from the central
government to the regions, which is an appropriate indicator used to

86
finance local government expenditure allocations [11], [12]. In another
research say the accountability variable does not affect the General
Allocation Fund [13]. The availability of public information in
government institutions is closely related to transparency because it is
considered representative and comprehensive [14]. Government
accountability can be assessed through financial performance indicators
through good management and control to serve stakeholders optimally
[15]. Another problem is the management of government finances that
is not economical, effective, and efficient as well as the low
professionalism of government officials in managing public budgets and
weak law enforcement resulting in corruption which results in state
losses, there are still many government institutions that have not been
able to realize the accountability of government financial management
properly[16].
The financial information must be presented openly and honestly to the
public with the consideration that the public has the right to know
openly and thoroughly the accountability of the Government [17], then
supported by Law concerning Transparency Public Information and
various derivative regulations reinforce the importance of fulfilling
transparency by public institutions [18]. Therefore, The law of
concerning the performance accountability system for government
agencies requires that each government agency conduct an individual
performance appraisal [19]. Supported by a government agency
performance accountability system, it becomes a medium for knowing
the success or failure of implementing organizational goals and
objectives [20]. Reflected in that the values of honesty, information
openness, and intelligence are a form of transparency internalization
that leads to the realization of local government financial accountability
[21]. In addition, the reliability of financial reporting, security of state
assets, and public services, and compliance with applicable laws and
regulations, so that it becomes a demand to support performance
improvement in accountability and transparency [22]. This is in line with
Darmayanti's research (2018) which obliges the accountability of the
party who is given the mandate to the one who gives the mandate
(agency theory) [23]. The accountability of government financial reports
must meet the quality of four qualitative characteristics, namely
relevant, reliable, comparable and easy to understand, as normative
prerequisites that need to be realized in accounting information so that
it can fulfill its objectives [24].
Based on these problems, this study focuses on local government,
namely the Human Development Index, and Financial Performance in
influencing the accountability of public organizations through
transparency. This research contributes to thinking by analyzing data
from various provinces in Indonesia, with this research will reveal
transparency and accountability in local government by analyzing
provincial data that has never been researched before. Where

87
transparency is an intervening variable that will explain the direct or
indirect relationship between variables in decision making.
Literature Review
Institutional Theory
The main Theory used in the study is Institutional theory. Scott & Meyer
say state element institutional theory is institutions, organizations, and
actors. Institutions also influence the behavior and views of individuals
in the organization [25]. However, members can too influence
institutions with do transformation in institutions that have there is
Becomes shape institution new. According to Meyer & Scott (1983) who
claims that various existing organizations under pressure strength social
must complete structure organization, and meetings as well as look after
cooperate with other organizations to get legitimacy, effectiveness, and
rationality society [26].
Stakeholder Theory
The purpose main entity that is for prosperity owner. Stakeholders have
the right to obtain information about the activity entity influencing the
public them [27]. However Stakeholder Theory explain that an
organization no entity public only operates for interest alone, however,
must give benefit whole stakeholders as holders, shareholders,
creditors, consumers, government, and society [28].
Agency Theory
Agency concept is something connection where one person or more
(principal) orders others (agents) to do something service on name
principal as well as give authority to the agent to make the best decision
for the principal [29]. According to Jensen & Meckling's Theory agency is
one method for more understanding information economy by expanding
one individual into two individual agents and principals. In agency
theory, accountability public could be interpreted with existing
obligation party holder trust (agents) for give accountability, presenting,
reporting, and disclosing all activities and activities that become a
responsibility to party giver trust (principal) who owns rights and powers
for request the accountability [30].
Variable Human Development Index on Accountability
The Human Development Index formulated in 1990 by the United
Nations Development Program revealed that human development is an
expansion of choices for residents, who want to improve the quality of
life of their people both physically, mentally, and spiritually. Another
research revealed that the influence of government spending on the
education sector affects the Human Development Index, with the
assumption that the government allocates large amounts of funds each
year to the education sector so that the Human Development Index

88
always increases. Meanwhile, government spending on the health sector
does not affect the Human Development Index. Due to a large amount
of government spending on the health sector, it has not been able to
help the growth of the Human Development Index, and the construction
of hospitals in North Sulawesi eats up a lot of the budget [31]. In the
context of a country's economic development, of course, the needs of
the most vulnerable people, such as population density and decent living
are very important, because they are vulnerable to political issues in
certain cultural contexts, stated that population density and decent
living have a positive effect on government transparency [32]. Another
argued that a dense population requires health care and a higher level of
education, so they ask for information assistance [33], [34]. This is
following the Stakeholder Theory that stakeholders have the right to
obtain information on every activity of public institutions that affect
them and must provide benefits to all stakeholders. previous researcher
say concluded that citizens have the right to obtain complete
information in a transparent and accountable manner in making public
decisions and evaluating government regulations [35]–[37]. This is
following the institutional theory that various organizations under
pressure from social forces must complete the organizational structure,
must hold meetings, and maintain separate organizational performance,
because the form of an organization is determined by the legitimacy,
effectiveness, and rationality of society. The research hypothesis is:
H1: Variable Human Development Index has a positive effect on
Accountability
Financial Performance Variables on Accountability
Accountability of government financial performance is very important in
the regional financial management process. Regional financial
accountability is manifested in the form of regional annual financial
reports (APBD), which are accounted for by the regional government.
The independence area, performance government, and systems of
internal control have an effect on accountability reporting finance area.
The research results say that the independence area and the
performance government are influential and positive to reporting
accountability finance [38]. The accountability organization sector public
in Indonesia is still not optimal. dimensions accountability could make
footing for the organization public in managing various activities carried
out starting from input, process, output, and result, as well how
response community environment to results accountability [39].
Some research revealed that the general allocation fund and original
local government revenue variables simultaneously affect positive
regional capital expenditures, that is with autonomy areas require Local
Government for more independence [40]–[42]. Another research
revealed that public governance and original local government revenue
have a positive effect on local government performance [43]. The

89
pressure of fiscal increasing influence information regional finance,
because must tax demand and want to know how tax payments they
have spent by the state [44]–[46]. In Tagesson research said tax areas
have a relationship positive with social information [47]. However, there
are another research said that when fiscal pressure increases, the level
of transparency for general and social information decreases [48].
governance good public absolute must be implemented by the
government area province. Enhancement in governance mechanism
public could repair performance government area. So the hypothesis in
this study is:
H2: Financial performance variables positively influence accountability.
Variable Human Development Index on Accountability Through
Transparency
Index development man is something possible indicator that describe
development man in a manner measurable and representative. In
setyowati studies shows that development human index influential and
positive to the level of transparency finance government area meanings
taller developed society and the quality of human resources will raise
demands and societal wishes to the government to provide information
more finances complete and detailed [49]. Research in several countries
shows one shape transparency and accountability government area
conducted with published report finance on the internet,the result of
the research said state disclosure of volunteer reports to finance
government areas on the website is very effective for increasing control
device government areas [50]. Human Development Index got
determined by the ranking or development level of a region/country,
the more tall development human, then the more diverse desire human
wants fulfilled, which finally will raise demands for the Public to the
government to results report good finances [51]. According the variable
Human Development Index is capable explain how the population could
access results development in obtaining income, health, education, and
so on [52]. The dense population requires more health care and when
education levels are low, people need information and government
assistance, but the results obtained by the population on accountability
must be viewed with caution, due to low levels of transparency [33]. it is
less able to access more accurate information. So the hypothesis in this
study is:
H3: Variable Human Development Index affects in a manner positive to
accountability through transparency.
Financial Performance Variables on Accountability through transparency
Financial performance is an analysis carried out to see the extent to
which an organization has carried out by using the laws and regulations
of financial implementation properly and correctly [53]. That means that
the level of achievement of regional capabilities in running, managing,

90
and controlling regional resources is properly and oriented to the
interests of the community. [54] state that Regional Original Income
(PAD) has a positive effect on Regional Government Expenditure, while
DAU also has a positive but not significant effect. While based on the
results of model testing, [55] that Original Local Government Revenue,
General Allocation Fund, and Special Allocation Fund do not have a
significant influence on the availability of regional financial information
via the website. Financial management could affect transparency and
accountability because s err one thing to the attention of society,
namely transparency in deciding on government and implementation of
public policy could reduce uncertainty and help prevent corruption by
the authorities government [56]. The tax revenue has a relationship with
the information society [47]. Temporary, that information on
government finances is not significant to the condition of the general
public according to agency theory [37]. However, another research said
that when pressure fiscal increases, then the level of transparency, for
information general and social, is reduced [48]. So the hypothesis in this
study is:
H4: Variable financial performance affects in a manner negative
accountability through transparency.
Hypotheses are constructed for research, structured within the following
conceptual framework:
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Research Methodology
The population of this study was all provincial government areas in
Indonesia including Jakarta, the islands of Java, Sumatra, Sulawesi,
Kalimantan, Maluku, Bali, and Irian Jaya in 2010-2019. The number of
provincial governments over the last 10 years has experienced an
expansion of several regions, where in 2019 There are 340 provinces in
Indonesia which are led by a governor and deputy governor. The
election sample study uses the method of purposive sampling, by
Human
Development
Index (X1)
Original Local
Government
Revenue (X2)
General
Allocation Fund
(X3)
Transparency
(Y1)
Accountability
(Y2)

91
collecting data through internet searching. The sample consists of
several provincial governments that have official and reputable websites
in Indonesian open budget transparency because not all provincial areas
including in those categories, then Sample fulfilling the ending criteria
consists of 33 provinces for a period of observation of 10 years. With
this, the total observations were used as 330.
Table 3.1 Variables, Dimensions, Indicators, and measurements
Variable Dimensions Indicator
Data Measurement and
Analysis
1.Human
Development
Index variable
(X1)
a.Age long and alive
healthy
b.Knowledge
c. Standard life
worthy
[57].
Indicators :
a. education
(Expectation of old
school)
b. Health (healthy life
and longevity)
c. Economy (Gross
National Product)
[57].
Measuring achievements
development man with
component base quality
life which built through
approach three
dimensions basic. By using
secondary data obtained
from BPS and government
websites with percentages.
then the data is processed
with an analysis SEM
method
2.Financial
performance
variable (X2)
Knowledge general
about report finance,
regional income, and
expenditure as well
as investment and
central balancing
funds
[58].
a. Original Local
Government
Revenue Indicator:
Regional Financial
Independence are
taxes, levies, other
income
b. General Allocation
Fund indicator:
Regional revenue
sharing from the
center (APBN) :
DAU location based on:
Basic and based
allocation Gap Fiscal
[59]
Measurement via ;
a. Regional financial
independence,
effectiveness and
efficiency, activities,
and budget targets.
b. Potency regional
revenue Regional needs
(salary regional
employee, total
population, area, index
price building, number
of poor people,
development human).
Obtained from secondary
data from BPS with SEM
analysis.
3.Transparency
(Y1)
The freedom I get
information,
Informative Giving
current information,
news, explanation
mechanisms,
procedures, data,
Indicators :
Informativeness,
openness, and
disclosure, this matter
corresponding open
budget transparency
concept
Measuring through: timely,
according to accounting
principles, easy to
understand, accurate,
easily accessible,
comparable, open, and LK
disclosure with using

92
Variable Dimensions Indicator
Data Measurement and
Analysis
facts, to stakeholders
and disclosure to
public
[4].
Indonesia
[60].
secondary data obtained
by the percentage that is
in thought with an analysis
SEM method
4.Accountability
(Y2)
use of the regional
government budget
dimensions
accountability
namely:
Accountability law
and honesty
Accountability
managerial, Program
accountability,
Accountability
policies, and
Accountability
finance [61].
Indicators :
a. Explanation and
justification to action
government (law)
b. Explanation must be
conducted in an
open forum (annual
report)
c. Access accountability
report openly.
d. Report Annual
[62].
Measurement through: LK
Opinion, follow carry-on
recommendations from
BPK, LAKIP, PMPRB,
Reward and Punishment,
budget management,
awards, LHKPN, and
National procurement
awards. By using index
data percentage processed
with SEM Analysis
Results
Descriptive Statistics
Based on Table 4.1 shows the human development index variable for the
provincial government, a sample with a minimum value of 57.19 and a
maximum value of 80.76 with an average of 68,131 and a standard
deviation of 3,922, meaning The provincial government that has a high
coefficient value means that it has a high quality of human
development. On the other hand, the provincial government which has a
low coefficient value indicates that human life expectancy is still low.
Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistical Analysis
Variable
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Statistics
Maximum
Statistics
Statistical
Means
Standard
Deviation
Statistics
Human Development Index (X1) 330 57,19 80.76 68,131 3,922
Original Local Government (X2) 330 0.02 36,541 50,874 62,991
General Allocation Fund (X3) 330 0.06 68,66 26,369 16,184
transparency (Y1) 330 0.63 0.88 0.764 0.061
Accountability (Y2) 330 27.00 98.33 87,129 12,956
(Source: Author's Analysis)

93
The average value of the human development index is 68,131, which
illustrates that the standard deviation value is 3, 922 smaller than the
average value of 67,131 indicating the distribution of research data is
not distorted. The standard deviation of the original regional income
variable is 62.991 greater than the average value of 50.874 indicating
the distribution of research data tends to deviate. The general allocation
fund variable for the provincial government shows a standard deviation
value of 16.184. The transparency variable for the provincial
government shows a standard deviation value of 0.061. Accountability
variable for the provincial government, the standard deviation is 12.956
smaller in comparison with an average value of 87.129 showing the
distribution of research data does not deviate.
Multicollinearity Assumption Testing
The cut-off value is often used to indicate there is no multicollinearity
with a tolerance value ≥ 0.10 and VIF ≤ 10 [63]. The results of testing the
multicollinearity assumption are presented in the following table:
Table 4.2 Multicollinearity Assumption Test Results
Structural Equation Collinearity Statistics
Dependent Variable Independent Variable tolerance VIF
Transparency (Y 1 )
Human Development Index (X1) 0.626 1,599
Original Local Government
Revenue (X2)
0.899 1.112
General Allocation Fund (X3) 0.650 1,539
Accountability (Y 2 )
Human Development Index (X1) 0.500 1, 794
Original Local Government
Revenue (X2)
0.889
3,414
General Allocation Fund (X3) 0.623 1,204
Transparency (Y1) 0.602 1,659
Table 4.2 shows that the independent variables in the first sub-structure
consisting of the human development index, original local government
revenue, and general allocation fund has a tolerance value greater than
0.10 and VIF less than 10, means Multicollinearity Test The Variance
Inflation Factor (VIF) values are all smaller than 5 so that between
exogenous or independent variables there is no multicollinearity.
Model Fitment Assessment
Model suitability assessment aims to measure the suitability between
data or observations with predictions from models that have been made

94
[64]. This assessment shows the strength of the model in explaining the
research phenomenon. The test results are presented in the table
below:
Table 4.3 Conformity Assessment Results
Index Model Fit Cut-off values Analysis Results
Model
Evaluation
Chi-square
X 2
≤ 3.8414 with
DF = 1 and level
significance = 5%
0.323 Well
Probability >0.05 0.570 Well
CMIN/DF < 2 0.323 Well
RMSEA < 0.08 0.000 Well
TLI >0.95 1,030 Well
NFIs >0.90 0.999 Well
Causality Testing with Path Analysis
Hypothesis testing using the regression model in path analysis to predict
the relationship between the independent and dependent variables.
Table 4.5 Standardized Path Coefficient
Variable Relations
Hypothesis
Direction
Estimates SE P Information
Human Development Index (X1)
 Transparency (Y1)
+ 0.008 0.0 01 *** Significant
Original Local Government Revenue
(X2)  Transparency (Y1)
+ 0.0001 0.00 0 0.049 Significant
General Allocation Fund (X3) 
Transparency (Y1)
- -0.001 0.00 0 *** Significant
Human Development Index (X1) 
Accountability (Y2)
+ 0.939 0.206 *** Significant
Original Local Government Revenue
(X2)  Accountability (Y2)
- - 0.0 02 0.0 10 0.800
Not
Significant
General Allocation Fund ( X3) 
Accountability (Y2)
+ 0.149 0.045 *** Significant
Transparency (Y1) 
Accountability (Y2)
+ 87,477 12,041 *** Significant

95
The structural equation can be written as follows.
Y 1 = 0.008 X 1 + 0.0001 X 2 - 0.001 X 3
Y 2 = 0.939 X 1 - 0.002 X 2 + 0.149 X 3 + 87.477 Y 1
Information
X 1 = Human Development Index
X 2 = Original Local Government Revenue
X 3 = General Allocation Fund
Y 1 = Transparency
Y 2 = Accountability
Table 4.6 Total Influence
Variable Relations Calculation Results
Human Development Index (X1)  Transparency
(Y1)  Accountability (Y2)
0.939 + 0.699
1,638
Original Local Government Revenue (X2) 
Transparency (Y1)  Accountability (Y2)
-0.002 + 0.008
0.006
General Allocation Fund (X3)  Transparency
(Y1)  Accountability (Y2)
0.149 - 0.087
0.062
Based on calculations in table 4.6, variables Human Development Index
own the highest coefficient in affect accountability in a manner whole
compared with various other.
Next, Testing using AMOS software could not give score significance in
influence no direct. Score significance from influence no directly
(mediation) determined with the use Sobel test. The results of the Sobel
test are presented in the table below.
Table 4.7 Sobel test
Variable Relations Estimated Value Standard Error P-Value
Human Development Index (X1)
 Transparency (Y1)  Accountability (Y2)
0.008 ; 87,477 0.0 01; 12,041 0.0008
Original Local Government Revenue (X 2 ) 
Transparency (Y1) Accountability (Y2)
0.0001; 87,477 0.001; 12,041 1,000
General Allocation Fund (X3) 
Transparency (Y1)  Accountability (Y2)
-0.001 ; 87,477 0.000; 12,041 0.0001
* P-Value < 0.05 = able to mediate the relationship between X and Y

96
Table 4.8 Hypothesis Testing Results
Hypothesis Variable Results
H1a Human Development Index (X1)  Transparency (Y1) Be accepted
H1b Human Development Index (X1)  Accountability (Y2) Be accepted
H1c
Human Development Index (X1)  Transparency (Y1)
 Accountability (Y2)
Be accepted
H2a
Transparency (Y1)
Be accepted
H2b
Accountability (Y2)
refused
H2c
Transparency (Y1)
Rejected
H3a General Allocation Fund (X3)  Transparency (Y1) Be accepted
H3b General Allocation Fund (X3)  Accountability (Y2) Received
H3c
General Allocation Fund (X3)  Transparency (Y1)
Be accepted
H4 Transparency (Y1)  Accountability (Y2) Be accepted
*P-Value < 0.05 = H 0 Rejected
**P-Value > 0.05 = H a Accepted
Discussion
The results of this study indicate that the Human Development Index has
a positive and significant effect on transparency. This means that the
quality of people with education (life expectancy of schooling) health
(life expectancy and longevity) economy (per capita income) increases,
so access to information on provincial regional financial management is
more transparent through the website. Regional Own Revenue has a
positive and significant impact on transparency. This means that if local
tax revenues, levies, and other legitimate income increase, the level of
transparency increases or vice versa. The General Allocation Fund has a
negative and significant effect on transparency. These results indicate
that the greater the provincial government's General Allocation Fund,
the lower the transparency of financial information. The Human
Development Index has a positive and significant effect on
accountability. These results show that every high increase in the
Human Development Index will be followed by an increase in the
financial accountability of the provincial government. Original Local
Government Revenue has a negative and insignificant effect on
accountability. This shows that the lower the level of Original Local

97
Government Revenue, the higher the level of regional government
financial accountability, or vice versa. The General Allocation Fund has a
positive and significant effect on accountability. This means that the
higher the general allocation fund, the higher the financial accountability
of the provincial government so that the general allocation fund can
increase the financial accountability of the provincial area. Transparency
has a positive and significant effect on accountability. This means that
every increase in the level of transparency is followed by an increase in
regional government financial accountability so that transparency can
increase regional financial accountability. so more transparency of
government financial management will increasingly realize regional
government financial accountability. The human development index has
a positive and significant effect on accountability through transparency.
This means that every increase in the human development index is
followed by an increase in local government financial accountability
through transparency so that increased transparency can increase
regional financial accountability. local revenue has no significant effect
on accountability through transparency. This means that the size of the
original local government revenue obtained is a form of regional
government independence in meeting regional needs by using the
Regional Expenditure Revenue mechanism as a form of accountability.
The General Allocation Fund has a significant effect on accountability
through transparency. This means that an increase in general allocation
fund revenue is followed by a decrease in regional government financial
accountability through transparency so increased transparency has not
been able to increase regional financial accountability.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the statistical regression, it can be concluded
that the variable Human Development Index own the highest coefficient
in affect accountability in a manner whole compared with various other.
The provincial government has resources and finance as information for
that stakeholder management provincial government finances have
walked with ok. Besides that, the provincial government's Human
Development Index high and also give trust to stakeholders about the
ability internal provincial government to manage local finances.
Ascension a high Human Development Index will be followed by an
increase in the financial accountability of the provincial government.
This means that local governments must be able to realize regional
expenditure allocations through development spending in the
education, health, and economic sectors to produce better quality
human resources. Human Development Index quality can determine
priorities, formulate policies and determine programs for good public
governance so that it can spur economic growth. In addition, Original
Local Government Revenue which is managed accountably and
transparently by the regional government will encourage taxpayer
compliance in paying taxes, the size of the Original Local Government

98
Revenue obtained is a form of regional government independence in
meeting regional needs by using the Regional Expenditure Revenue
mechanism . as a shape its accountability. Furthermore, the general
allocation fund harms central government transfers because the higher
the general allocation fund, the less financial transparency, the regional
independence is not getting better, and the distribution of general
allocation funds is large. from the central government will increase the
risk for local governments, especially if the budget regional expenditure,
is spent without using the principle of prudence following Government
Accounting Standards. Therefore, it is necessary to convey good financial
information in public welfare services, more transparency in the
management of government finances will further realize the
accountability of local government finances. This shows that the
community together with public institutions such as universities, non-
governmental organizations, mass organizations, and the press can
optimize their role in supervising the regional expenditure budget
(APBD), financial reports that are open, available, and easily accessible
to the public. the community will increase the accountability of regional
financial management.
Limitations and Future Research
This study cannot only measure the human development index and
economic performance in general for the provincial level, therefore
future researchers are expected not only to use economic aspects to
measure accountability and transparency but also to include non-
economic aspects which are studied with a more detailed theory. the
depth and use the mixed method so that the results obtained are more
in-depth and perfect and useful.
It is suggested that in future research in the field of public sector
organizations, the city/district level can be included as the object of
research, it can also examine the influence of other variables that might
influence transparency and accountability, such as demographic data,
administrative culture, socio-cultural and political pressure. As well as
being able to examine more deeply the variables of transparency and
accountability of local government finances using other methodologies
and approaches.
Bibliography
1. A. Iswahyudi, I. Triyuwono, and M. Achsin, “Hubungan Pemahaman
Akuntabilitas, Transparansi, Partisipasi, Value for Money, dan Good
Governance,” J. Ilm. Akunt., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 151–166, 2017, doi:
10.23887/jia.v1i2.9992.
2. S. D. RI, Laporan Kinerja. Sekretariat Jenderal DPR RI, 2019.

99
3. W. Suyatmiko, “Corruption Perceptions Index 2019,” Transparency
International, 2020. https://riset.ti.or.id/corruption-perceptions-index-
2019/ (accessed Jan. 25, 2023).
4. Mardiasmo, Akuntansi Sektor Publik. Yogyakarta: ANDI, 2009.
5. N. Nagendrakumar, Public Sector Accounting : Sri Lanka Perspectives.
2019.
6. Jamaluddin, R. Salam, H. Yunus, and H. Akib, “Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi
terhadap Kinerja Pegawai pada Dinas Pendidikan Provinsi Sulawesi
Selatan,” J. Adm., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 25–34, 2017.
7. S. Sayuti, J. Majid, and M. S. S. Juardi, “Perwujudan Nilai Transparansi,
Akuntabilitas dan Konsep Value For Money dalam Pengelolaan Akuntansi
Keuangan Sektor Publik (Studi Pada Kantor BAPPEDA Sulawesi Selatan),”
ATESTASI J. Ilm. Akunt., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 16–28, 2018, doi:
10.33096/atestasi.v1i1.39.
8. A. H. Adzani and D. Martani, “Pengaruh Kesejahteraan Masyarakat, Faktor
Politik Dan Ketidakpatuhan Regulasi Terhadap Opini Audit Laporan
Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah,” 2014.
9. A. Christy and F. Adi, “Hubungan antara Dana Alokasi Umum, Belanja
Modal dan Kualitas Pembangunan Manusia,” 2009.
10. N. L. S. Dewi and I. K. Sutrisna, “Pengaruh Komponen Indeks Pembangunan
Manusia Terhadap Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Provinsi Bali,” E-Jurnal EP Unud,
vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 106–114, 2014.
11. N. I. Rahmawati and A. Rohman, “Pengaruh Pendapatan Asli Daerah (PAD)
dan Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) Terhadap Alokasi Belanja Daerah (Studi
pada Pemerintah Kabupaten/Kota di Jawa Tengah),” Universitas
Diponegoro, 2010.
12. F. R. Kurniawati, “Pengaruh Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) dan Pendapatan
Asli Daerah (PAD) Terhadap Belanja Pemerintah Daerah Provinsi, Kota, dan
Kabupaten di Indonesia,” Universitas Sebelas Maret, 2010.
13. B. L. Nugroho, “Pengaruh Akuntabilitas Dalam Formulasi Dana Alokasi
Umum (DAU) dan Dampak Dana Perimbangan Terhadap Pembangunan
Manusia di Indonesia,” Universitas Airlangga, 2017.
14. L. Saleh, “Keterbukaan Informasi Publik: Perangkat Baru Menciptakan
Good Governance dalam Pemerintahan Lokal,” J. Konstitusi, vol. 3, p. 1,
2010.
15. M. Ahyaruddin and R. Akbar, “Indonesian Local Government’s
Accountability and Performance: The Isomorphism Institutional
Perspective,” J. Akunt. dan Investasi, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 102–125, 2018, doi:
10.18196/jai.190187.
16. L. M. Y. Gayatri and W. N. L. Sari, “Transparansi dan Akuntabilitas
Pengelolaan Keuangan Dana Desa untuk Mendorong Kemandirian
Masyarakat Pedesaan,” J. Ekon. Kuantitatif Terap., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 175–
182, 2017.
17. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 2005 Tentang Standar Akuntansi
Pemerintahan (SAP).
18. Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2008 Tentang Keterbukaan Informasi
Publik.
19. Peraturan Presiden Nomor 29 Tahun 2014 Tentang Sistem Akuntabilitas
Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah.

100
20. A. Zulfiandri, “Faktor-Faktor Yang Memengaruhi Akuntabilitas Kinerja
Instansi Pemerintah,” urnal Ris. Akunt. Tirtayasa, vol. 2, 2017.
21. Y. Trisaptya, H. D. Perdana, and Sulardi, “Evaluasi Akuntabilitas Laporan
Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah di Indonesia (Studi Empiris Pada Pemerintah
Kabupaten/Kota Di Provinsi Jawa Tengah),” J. Akunt. dan Bisnis, vol. 16,
no. 1, pp. 75–86, 2016.
22. I. Ratna and H. Nasrah, “Pengaruh Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah
Terhadap Penerapan Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Instansi Pemerintah di
Lingkungan Pemerintah Provinsi Riau,” Kutubkhanah, vol. 19, no. 1, pp.
56–79, 2016.
23. N. Darmayanti, “Pengaruh Laba Akuntansi, Komponen Arus Kas dan Size
Perusahaan Terhadap Return Saham (Study Kasus Perusahaan LQ-45 di BEI
Tahun 2013-2017),” J-Macc J. Manag. Account., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 139–152,
2018.
24. M. Soverchia, “Central Government Accounting and Financial Reporting: A
Comparison Between France, Italy and The European Union,” Econ.
Aziend. Online, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 213–228, 2012.
25. W. R. Scott and J. W. Meyer, Institutional Environments and Organizations:
Structural Complexity and Individualism. ThousandOaks, California: Sage
Publications, Inc., 1994.
26. J. W. Meyer and W. R. Scott, Organization and Environments: Ritual and
Rationality. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1983.
27. Majid, Jamaluddin. et. all. Public Control Accountability: Efforts to Prepent
Fraud Sustainability Budget Government Indonesia. Relações
Internacionaisdo Mundo Atual Unicuritiba. Março 10, 2022;
Accepted/Aceito Junho 26, 2022] DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21902/
Revrima.v3i36.6004
28. M. Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago, United States: University
of Chicago Press, 1962.
29. Ghozali and Chariri, Teori Akuntansi. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Undip,
2007.
30. C. Jensen, M. and W. Meckling, “Theory of The Firm: Managerial Behavior,
Agency Cost and Ownership Structure,” J. Financ. Econ., vol. 3, pp. 305–
360, 1976.
31. S. Septiana, V. Rumate, and H. Siwu, “Pengaruh Pengeluaran Pemerintah
di Sektor Pendidikan dan Kesehatan terhadap Indeks Pembangunan
Manusia di Sulawesi Utara,” J. Berk. Ilm. Efisiensi, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1–11,
2015.
32. D. Ortiz-Rodríguez, A. Navarro-Galera, and F. J. Alcaraz-Quiles, “The
Influence of Administrative Culture on Sustainability Transparency in
European Local Governments,” Adm. Soc., vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 555–594,
2018.
33. J. R. Dunn and I. Dyck, “Social Determinants of Health in Canada’s
Immigrant Population: Results from The National Population Health
Survey,” Soc. Sci. Med., vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 1573–1593, 2000.
34. N. J. T. Cruz, Á. G. R. Lezana, I. M. B. S. P. Paulo da Cruz Freire dos Santos,
C. Zancan, and G. H. S. de Souza, “Environmental Impacts Caused by
Cemeteries and Crematoria, New Funeral Technologies, and Preferences
of The Northeastern and Southern Brazilian Population as for The Funeral
Process,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 24, no. 31, pp. 24121–24134, 2017.

101
35. B. J. M, B. C. Crosby, and L. Bloomberg, “Public Value Governance: Moving
Beyond Traditional Public Administration and The New Public
Management,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 445–456, 2014.
36. G. Giulio, N. Sciulli, and G. D’Onza, “The Influence of Stakeholder
Engagement on Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from Italian Local
Councils,” Public Manag. Rev., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 465–488, 2015.
37. B. Isabel and F. M. R. N. Aversano, “Online Sustainability Information in
Local Governments in an Austerity Context: an Empirical Analysis in Italy
and Spain,” Online Inf. Rev., 2016.
38. O. Agnes and D. P. Sari, “Pengaruh Kemandirian Daerah, Kinerja
Pemerintah Daerah, dan Sistem Pengendalian Intern terhadap
Akuntabilitas Pelaporan Keuangan Matilde,” J. Akunt. dan Pajak, vol. 21,
no. 1, pp. 186–193, 2020.
39. K. W. Wicaksono, “Akuntabilitas Organisasi Sektor Publik,” J. Kebijak. Dan
Adm. Publik, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 17–26, 2015.
40. T. Yawa, Herman and Runtu, “Pengaruh Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) Dan
Pendapatan Asli Daerah (PAD) terhadap Belanja Modal di Kota Manado,” J.
Berk. Ilm. Efisiensi, vol. 15, no. 4, 2015.
41. Mayasari and L. P. Rani, “Pengaruh Pertumbuhan Ekonomi, Pendapatan
Asli Daerah dan Dana Alokasi Umum terhadap Pengalokasian Anggaran
Belanja Modal pada Pemerintah Kabupaten Buleleng,” J. Ilm. Mhs. Akunt.,
vol. 2, no. 1, 2014.
42. F. R. Kurniawati, “Pengaruh Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU) dan Pendapatan
Asli Daerah (PAD) terhadap Belanja Pemerintah Daerah Provinsi, Kota, dan
Kabupaten di Indonesia,” Sebel. Maret Univ., 2010.
43. B. S. Puspitasari, Dewi, “Pengaruh Tata Kelola Publik, Pendapatan Asli
Daerah dan Total Aset terhadap Kinerja Pemerintah Daerah,” Al Tijarah,
vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 12–29, 2020.
44. S. J. P. and G. G. Van Ryzin, “Citizen Attitudes Toward Transparency in
Local Government,” Am. Rev. Public Adm., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 306–323,
2007.
45. M.-D. Guillamón, F. Bastida, and B. Benito, “The Determinants of Local
Government’s Financial Transparency,” Local Gov. Stud., vol. 37, no. 4, pp.
391–406, 2011.
46. F. J. Alcaraz-Quiles, A. Navarro-Galera, and D. Ortiz-Rodríguez, “Factors
Influencing The Transparency of Sustainability Information in Regional
Governments: an Empirical Study,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 82, pp. 179–191,
2014.
47. T. Tagesson, M. Klugman, and M. L. Ekström, “What Explains The Extent
and Content of Social Disclosures in Swedish Municipalities Annual
Reports,” J. Manag. Gov., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 217–235, 2013.
48. F. J. Alcaraz-Quiles, A. N. Galera, and D. Ortiz-Rodríguez, “Factors
Determining Online Sustainability Reporting by Local Governments,” Rev.
Int. des Sci. Adm., vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 85–115, 2015.
49. L. Setyowati, “Determinan yang Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan Laporan
Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah,” Esensi J. Bisnis dan Manaj., vol. 6, no. 1,
pp. 45–62, 2016.
50. D. C. Shim and T. H. Eom, “E-government and Anti-Corruption: Empirical
Analysis of International Data,” Intl J. Public Adm., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 298–
316, 2008.

102
51. M. A. Liqoana, “Pengaruh Karakteristik Daerah terhadap Pengungkapan
Sukarela dalam Website Pemda di Indonesia (Studi Empiris pada
Kabupaten/Kota di Indonesia),” 2016.
52. F. Medina, “Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Transparansi Informasi
Keuangan pada Situs Resmi Pemerintah Daerah Di Indonesia,” 2012.
53. I. Fahmi, “Analisis Kinerja Keuangan: Panduan bagi Akademisi, Manajer,
dan Investor untuk Menilai dan Menganalisis Bisnis dari Aspek Keuangan,”
2012.
54. A. G. Kolinug, Ferly Christian, Kumenaung and D. C. Rotinsulu, “Analisis
Pengaruh Dana Alokasi Umum dan Pendapatan Asli Daerah terhadap
Belanja Pemerintah Daerah Kota Manado,” J. Pembang. Ekon. dan Keuang.
Drh., vol. 17, no. 2, 2019.
55. and F. I. A. Fawziah, Intan Nurbaiti, “Pengaruh Pendapatan Asli Daerah,
Dana Alokasi Umum, Dana Alokasi Khusus, dan Rasio Pembiayaan Utang
terhadap Transparansi Informasi Keuangan Daerah Via Website,” J.
Eksplor. Akunt., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 2200–2213, 2020.
56. A. D. Bank, Reducing Poverty: Major Findings and Implementation, A
Report Based on Consultations in Selected Developing Member Countries
of the Asian Development Bank. Asian Development Bank, 1999.
57. BPS, “Indeks Pembangunan Manusia,” Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020.
https://www.bps.go.id/subject/26/indeks-pembangunan-manusia.html
58. H. Chen and R. Volpe, “An Analysis of Personal Financial Literacy Among
College Students,” Financ. Serv. Rev., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 107–128, 1998.
59. Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 58 Tahun 2005 Tentang Pengelolaan
Keuangan Daerah
60. Kristianten, Transparansi Anggaran Pemerintah. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta,
2006.
61. S. Rasul, Pengintegrasian Sistem Akuntabilitas Kinerja Dan Anggaran.
Jakarta: Detail Rekod, 2002.
62. L. L. Krina, Indikator & Alat Ukur Prinsip Akuntabilitas, Transparansi &
Partisipasi. Jakarta: Sekretariat Good Public Governance Badan
Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional, 2003.
63. I. Ghozali, Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program IBM SPSS 25.
Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, 2018.
64. I. Ghozali, Model Persamaan Struktural Konsep Dan Aplikasi Program
AMOS 24. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, 2017.

The Role of Transparency in Mediating the Determinants of Government Accountability in.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The Role of Transparency in Mediating the Determinants of Government Accountability in.pdf

Similar to The Role of Transparency in Mediating the Determinants of Government Accountability in.pdf (20)

More from State Islamic University Alauddin Makassar

More from State Islamic University Alauddin Makassar (15)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Role of Transparency in Mediating the Determinants of Government Accountability in.pdf