Strengthening Village Information Governance: An Integrated Community Engagement Programme
Keywords:
village information governance; accountability; village-owned enterprise; rural digitalisation; participatory action researchAbstract
Indonesian villages now administer substantial public funds and operate their own enterprises, yet the information on which accountability depends is often missing, fragmented or inaccessible. Community engagement responses typically address a single domain and report what was delivered rather than what changed. This programme took the opposite approach in Allakuang, a village in Sidenreng Rappang Regency, South Sulawesi, between December 2025 and February 2026. Its purpose was to test whether several linked interventions, delivered to one village within a single cycle, could shift the village from an information-poor to an information-legible condition. A participatory action design moved from a household-level needs assessment across five hamlets to five interventions: legal literacy on village fund governance; financial accounting training and mentoring for the village-owned enterprise; household organic waste composting; an integrated village profile published on a public website; and digital tourism information with printed QR access points. Attainment was evaluated as verified change in information status rather than as test scores, with physical artefacts and photographic records as evidence. The clearest result came from the village-owned enterprise, whose accounts had not been compiled for a year and were reconstructed in full for 2024 and 2025, after which officers prepared a monthly report without assistance. Legal literacy reached 32 participants and composting 20. The programme shows that bounded partners with defined duties change faster than diffuse audiences, and that information artefacts outlast the engagement that produced them.
References
Anatan, L., & Nur. (2023). Micro, small, and medium enterprises’ readiness for digital transformation in Indonesia. Economies, 11(6), 156. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11060156
Antlöv, H., Wetterberg, A., & Dharmawan, L. (2016). Village governance, community life, and the 2014 Village Law in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 52(2), 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2015.1129047
Ayilara, M. S., Olanrewaju, O. S., Babalola, O. O., & Odeyemi, O. (2020). Waste management through composting: Challenges and potentials. Sustainability, 12(11), 4456. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114456
Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(10), 854–857. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028662
Bhattacharyya, J. (2004). Theorizing community development. Community Development, 34(2), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330409490110
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
Chambers, R. (2013). Rural development: Putting the last first. Routledge.
Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum.
Gretzel, U., Sigala, M., Xiang, Z., & Koo, C. (2015). Smart tourism: Foundations and developments. Electronic Markets, 25(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0196-8
Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., & Meijer, A. J. (2014). Effects of transparency on the perceived trustworthiness of a government organization: Evidence from an online experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), 137–157. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus048
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173–202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173
Kase, P., Foeh, Y., Fallo, A. R., Tawa, M., & Kariam, J. S. (2024). Struggles of village-owned enterprise to improve performance: A case in Kupang Regency, Indonesia. Journal of Accounting and Investment, 25(2), 413–435. https://doi.org/10.18196/jai.v25i2.17124
Lewis, B. D. (2015). Decentralising to villages in Indonesia: Money (and other) mistakes. Public Administration and Development, 35(5), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1741
Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(96)00023-X
Sihotang, D. M., Purwandari, B., Eitiveni, I., Putri, M. F., & Hidayanto, A. N. (2023). Factors influencing village information systems adoption in Indonesia: A qualitative study. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 89(5), e12271. https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12271
Silfiani, M., Fitria, I., Irawan, H., Padli, R., Sari, D. L., Annisa, N., Raaph, N. A., Zahra, K. S., Darwis, M. D. R., Lastiur, S. K., & Patricia, M. (2026). Empowering local MSMEs through branding, product design, and digital marketing: A community engagement program at Pringgondani Market, Balikpapan. Jurnal Pengabdian UNDIKMA, 7(1), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.33394/jpu.v7i1.18166
van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082
Walsham, G. (2017). ICT4D research: Reflections on history and future agenda. Information Technology for Development, 23(1), 18–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2016.1246406
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Indonesia
Malaysia
Thailand