Dhea Junestya Pradipta, Septi Ariani, Dana Indra Sensuse, Sofian Lusa, Pudy Prima


Open Government Data (OGD) implementation provides benefits for government performance and public services. Based on the Indonesian government's openness action plan 2018-2020, the importance of monitoring and evaluation of OGD implementation for sustainable development is emphasized. This study aims to prioritize criteria and provide recommendations for OGD evaluations at the Jakarta Open Data. Through the mix method approach, expert interviews have been conducted to test the validity of the criteria which then carried out the distribution of questionnaires to eleven expert respondents from five departments. The data is processed using the fuzzy-Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to determine each weight on twenty criteria in four dimensions. The results of this study indicate that in the short term, OGD internal evaluations in the DKI Jakarta provincial government can be done by assessing eight main priority criteria, namely accuracy, completeness, compliance, understandability, timeliness, openness, functionality, and reliability which are then based on overall criteria. These results are the basis for discussion in the Data Forum and the establishment of Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to assist and accelerate the process of collecting, processing, verifying and validating data from 51 regional work units. Externally, the Jakarta Open Data team can pay attention to the conditions of citizen engagement in the OGD and the existence of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between relevant ministries or agencies that does not yet have data officers or information and documentation management officers for effective and efficient data processing


open government data, Jakarta Open Data, fuzzy-AHP, accuracy, completeness

Full Text:

PDF Remote


Albano, C. S. (2013). Open government data: A value chain model proposal. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 285–286.

Attard, J., Orlandi, F., & Auer, S. (2016). Data Driven Governments : Creating Value Through Open Government Data. 84–110.

Aulia, G., & Kurniawan, T. (2018). The Implementation of Open Data Program in the Special Capital Region (DKI) of Jakarta Province. 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Information Engineering and Technology, SIET 2018 - Proceedings, 96–100.

Craveiro, G. S., Alcazar, J. P., & M R Martano, A. (2016). Collaborative Construction of an Open Official Gazette. 111–128.

Fath-allah, A., Cheikhi, L., Idri, A., & Al-qutaish, R. E. (2018). Towards an E-Government Portals Quality Framework Based on ISO 25010. (October), 25–27.

Ferney, M. M. J., Beltran Nicolas Estefan, L., & Alexander, V. V. J. (2018). Assessing data quality in open data: A case study. 2017 Congreso Internacional de Innovacion y Tendencias En Ingenieria, CONIITI 2017 - Conference Proceedings, 2018-Janua, 1–5.

Fitriani, W. R., Hidayanto, A. N., Purwandari, B., Nazief, B. A. A., & Hardian, B. (2017). Evaluating the implementation of open data principles on government websites in Indonesia. 2017 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems, ICACSIS 2017, 2018-Janua, 190–196.

Giacobbe, M., Di Pietro, R., Longo Minnolo, A., & Puliafito, A. (2018). Evaluating information quality in delivering IoT-As-A-Service. Proceedings - 2018 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing, SMARTCOMP 2018, 405–410.

Gubernur Provinsi DKI Jakarta. (2014). Peraturan Gubernur Provinsi Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta Nomor 181 Tahun 2014 tentang Sistem dan Prosedur Pengelolaan Data dan Informasi Pembangunan (pp. 1–19). pp. 1–19. Retrieved from

Guide: The Open Data Handbook. (2009). Retrieved from website:

Gunawan, D., & Amalia, A. (2016). The Implementation of Open Data in Indonesia. 2016 International Conference on Data and Software Engineering (ICoDSE), 1–6.

ISO/IEC 25012. (2019). Retrieved July 1, 2020, from ISO 25000 Software and Data Quality website:

Kai, H., Sun, X., & Chung, S. (2019). When should fuzzy analytic hierarchy process be used instead of analytic hierarchy process ? Decision Support Systems, 125(January), 113114.

Komisi Informasi Pusat. (2019). Laporan Implementasi Keterbukaan Informasi Publik dan Penganugerahan Keterbukaaan Informasi Badan Publik Tahun 2019. Retrieved from

Kubler, S., Robert, J., Neumaier, S., Umbrich, J., & Le Traon, Y. (2018). Comparison of metadata quality in open data portals using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Government Information Quarterly, 35(1), 13–29.

Kubler, S., Robert, J., Traon, Y. Le, Umbrich, J., & Neumaier, S. (2016). Open data portal quality comparison using AHP. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 08-10-June, 397–407.

Lee, J. K., Rha, H. D., Kim, J. T., Jang, H. H., & Gim, G. Y. (2018). A study on public open data service using linked open data(Lod) technology. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 119, 1–12.

Li, X. T., Zhai, J., Zheng, G. F., & Yuan, C. F. (2018). Quality assessment for open government data in China. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 110–114.

Máchová, Renáta, Hub, M., & Lnenicka, M. (2018). Usability evaluation of open data portals: Evaluating data discoverability, accessibility, and reusability from a stakeholders’ perspective. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(3), 252–268.

Máchová, Renata, & Lněnička, M. (2017). Evaluating the quality of open data portals on the national level. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 12(1).

Manocha, P., Som, S., Chanana, L., Hudson, S., Roth, M. S., & Madden, T. J. (2018). Technological Trends , Impact and Analysis of Social Media Quality Parameters on e-Governance Applications. 2018 International Conference on System Modeling & Advancement in Research Trends (SMART), 280–285.

Martín, A. S., Rosario, A. H. De, & Pérez, M. D. C. C. (2015). An International Analysis of the Quality of Open Government Data Portals. Social Science Computer Review, 34(3), 298–311.

Mishra, A., Misra, D. P., Kar, A. K., Babbar, S., & Biswas, S. (2017). Assessment of Open Government Data Initiative - A Perception Driven Approach. 3, 159–171.

Neumaier, S., Umbrich, J., & Polleres, A. (2016). Automated quality assessment of metadata across open data portals. Journal of Data and Information Quality, 8(1).

OGI. (2015). Rencana Aksi Open Government Indonesia Tahun 2016-2017.

OGI. (2018). Indonesia Open Government Partnership National Action Plan OPEN GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP 2018-2020. In Open Government Partnership.

Parung, G. A., Hidayanto, A. N., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., Ulo, K. L. M., & Phusavat, K. (2018). Barriers and strategies of open government data adoption using fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS: A case of Indonesia. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 12(3–4), 210–243.

Pawełoszek, I., & Wieczorkowski, J. (2018). Open government data and linked data in the practice of selected countries. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Government, ECEG, 2018-Octob, 152–159.

Presiden Republik Indonesia. (2003). Instruksi Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 3 Tahun 2003 tentang Kebijakan dan Strategi Nasional Pengembangan E-Government.

Presiden Republik Indonesia. (2008a). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik.

Presiden Republik Indonesia. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 14 Tahun 2008 tentang Keterbukaan Informasi Publik. , (2008).

Presiden Republik Indonesia. (2018). Peraturan Presiden Nomor 95 Tahun 2018 tentang Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik (p. 199). p. 199.

Presiden Republik Indonesia. (2019). Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 39 Tahun 2019 tentang Satu Data Indonesia.

Purwanto, A., Janssen, M., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2017). Towards an open government data success model: A case study from Indonesia. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Government, ECEG, Part F1294, 154–162.

Purwanto, A., Zuiderwijk, A., & Janssen, M. (2020). Citizen engagement with open government data: Lessons learned from Indonesia’s presidential election. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 14(1), 1–30.

Sá, F., Rocha, Á., & Pérez, M. (2016). From the quality of traditional services to the quality of local e-Government online services : A literature review. 33, 149–160.

Saxena, S. (2018a). Asymmetric Open Government Data (OGD) framework in India. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 20(5), 434–448.

Saxena, S. (2018b). Drivers and barriers towards re-using open government data ( OGD ): a case study of open data initiative in Oman. 20(2), 206–218.

Saxena, S., & Janssen, M. (2017). Examining open government data ( OGD ) usage in India through UTAUT framework. 19(4), 421–436.

Umbrich, J., Neumaier, S., & Polleres, A. (2015). Quality assessment and evolution of Open Data portals. Proceedings - 2015 International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud, FiCloud 2015 and 2015 International Conference on Open and Big Data, OBD 2015, 404–411.

Utamachant, P., & Anutariya, C. (2018). An Analysis of High-Value Datasets: A Case Study of Thailand’s Open Government Data. Proceeding of 2018 15th International Joint Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, JCSSE 2018, 1–6.

Veljkovic, N., Bogdanovi-Dinic, S., & Stoimenov, L. (2014). Benchmarking open government : An open data perspective. 31, 278–290.

Vetrò, A., Canova, L., Torchiano, M., Minotas, C. O., Iemma, R., & Morando, F. (2016). Open data quality measurement framework: Definition and application to Open Government Data. Government Information Quarterly, 33(2), 325–337.

Wen, Y., & Hwang, Y.-T. (2019). The associativity evaluation between open data and country characteristics. 37(2), 337–364.

Widyaningrum, T. (2017). Penilaian tingkat kematangan open government data: studi kasus pemerintah provinsi DKI Jakarta. Universitas Indonesia.

Yi, M. (2019). Exploring the quality of government open data: Comparison study of the UK, the USA and Korea. Electronic Library, 37(1), 35–48.

Zhang, H., & Xiao, J. (2020). Quality assessment framework for open government data. 38(2), 209–222.


  • There are currently no refbacks.