Classification, Prediction, and Prescription of Digital Government Governance Maturity Levels: Leveraging SPBE Index Data (2019–2024) for Evidence-Based Regional Digital Government Architecture Planning in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66472/bdas.v1i2.409Keywords:
Classification, Digital Government Maturity, Machine Learning, Pemdi Index, SPBE IndexAbstract
Indonesia's transition from the SPBE evaluation framework to the 2025–2029 Pemdi (Digital Government) Index marks a strategic shift toward comprehensive governance maturity. However, regional governments face significant challenges in strategic planning due to the absence of empirical models linking historical SPBE performance to future Pemdi trajectories and a lack of data-driven guidance for prioritizing governance interventions. This research aims to develop an integrated Classification-Prediction-Prescription (CPP) framework to classify, forecast, and prescribe regional digital government governance maturity levels. The proposed methodology employs machine learning algorithms (Random Forest and Gradient Boosting) to conduct multi-class classification (five maturity levels) and regression (continuous score prediction) using longitudinal SPBE data (2019–2024) from 548 Indonesian regional governments. This quantitative approach is complemented by feature importance analysis and scenario-based simulations to generate actionable insights. The models are projected to achieve over 85% classification accuracy and a regression RMSE of under 0.5. The synthesis of main findings reveals that indicators within the policy and architecture planning domains are the strongest predictors driving maturity progression. Furthermore, the study segments regional governments into four distinct trajectory clusters and formulates a tailored prescriptive recommendation matrix across multiple planning horizons. In conclusion, the CPP framework effectively translates national evaluation data into actionable intelligence, empowering regional governments to optimize resource allocation, prioritize high-impact interventions, and systematically align their digital transformation pathways with formal planning documents such as the RPJMD and Regional Action Plans.
References
[1] Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform of Indonesia. (2023). Circular Letter on Preparation for Pemdi Index Evaluation 2025. Jakarta: Kementerian PANRB.
[2] Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform of Indonesia. (2024). Technical Guidelines for Digital Government (Pemdi) Index Evaluation 2025 [Lampiran II: Petunjuk Teknis Evaluasi Indeks Pemerintah Digital (Pemdi) 2025]. Jakarta: Kementerian PANRB.
[3] Sun, Y., & Medaglia, R. (2019). Mapping the challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the public sector: Evidence from public healthcare. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.008
[4] Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., & Geyer, C. (2019). Artificial Intelligence and the public sector—Applications and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(7), 596-615.
[5] Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101385.
[6] Janowski, T. (2015). Digital government evolution: From transformation to contextualization. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 221-236.
[7] Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
[8] Pöppelbuß, J., & Röglinger, M. (2011). What makes a useful maturity model? A framework of general design principles for maturity models and its demonstration in business process management. Proceedings of ECIS 2011, Paper 28.
[9] UAE Government. (2021). Digital Government Maturity Model. Dubai: Smart Dubai.
[10] OECD. (2020). Digital Government Index: 2019 Results. OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 03. Paris: OECD Publishing.
[11] AlMurtadha, Y. M. (2024). Predicting GovTech maturity levels using machine learning based on World Bank data. Applied Data Science and Analysis, 2024, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.58496/ADSA/2024/001
[12] Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform of Indonesia. (2018). Presidential Regulation No. 95 of 2018 on Electronic-Based Government Systems (SPBE). Jakarta: Kementerian PANRB.
[13] Alonso, I. A., Verdún, J. C. L., & Caro, E. T. (2020). Digital transformation maturity models: A systematic literature review. Proceedings of the 13th IADIS International Conference Information Systems, 137-144.
[14] Gong, C., & Ribiere, V. (2021). Developing a unified definition of digital transformation. Technovation, 102, 102217.
[15] Brandt, T., Feuerriegel, S., & Schwabe, G. (2021). Prescriptive analytics in the public sector: A framework for assessment and recommendations. Government Information Quarterly, 38(4), 101602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101602
[16] Ojo, A., Curry, E., & Zeleti, F. A. (2015). A tale of open data innovations in five smart cities. Proceedings of the 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2326-2335.
[17] Chatfield, A. T., & Reddick, C. G. (2019). A framework for Internet of Things-enabled smart government: A case of IoT cybersecurity policies and use cases in U.S. federal government. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 346-357.
[18] Gil-Garcia, J. R., Dawes, S. S., & Pardo, T. A. (2018). Digital government and public management research: Finding the crossroads. Public Management Review, 20(5), 633-646.
[19] Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., & Sturm, B. J. (2020). The dark sides of artificial intelligence: An integrated AI governance framework for public administration. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(9), 818-829.
[20] Kassen, M. (2022). Adoptability of blockchain technology for managing land records: A comparative analysis of developed and developing countries. Land Use Policy, 111, 105743.
[21] Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.
[22] Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (1993). Capability maturity model for software, Version 1.1. IEEE Software, 10(4), 18-27.
[23] Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional E-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122-136.
[24] Andersen, K. V., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2006). E-government maturity models: Extension of the Layne and Lee model. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 236-248.
[25] Lee, G. (2010). Open government maturity model for social media-based public engagement. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 492-503.
[26] United Nations. (2022). UN E-Government Survey 2022: The Future of Digital Government. New York: UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
[27] European Commission. (2019). eGovernment Benchmark 2019: Trust in Government. Brussels: European Commission.
[28] Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., & Moon, M. J. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government and trust in government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3), 371-391.
[29] Prasojo, E., Kurniawan, T., & Holidin, D. (2020). Local government innovation in Indonesia: Lessons from decentralization. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer.
[30] Ross, J. W., Weill, P., & Robertson, D. C. (2006). Enterprise Architecture as Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
[31] The Open Group. (2018). TOGAF® Standard, Version 9.2. Reading, UK: The Open Group.
[32] Höchtl, J., Parycek, P., & Schöllhammer, R. (2016). Big data in the policy cycle: Policy decision making in the digital era. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 26(1-2), 147-169.
[33] Breiman, L. (2001). Random forests. Machine Learning, 45(1), 5-32.
[34] Fernández-Delgado, M., Cernadas, E., Barro, S., & Amorim, D. (2014). Do we need hundreds of classifiers to solve real world classification problems? Journal of Machine Learning Research, 15(1), 3133-3181.
[35] Choi, H. S., Kim, J. H., Kim, D. W., Kim, J. Y., Kim, B. H., & Kim, H. S. (2021). Application of machine learning techniques to predict harmful algal blooms (HABs) for government policy decision support. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 8723.
[36] Chen, T., & Guestrin, C. (2016). XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 785-794.
[37] Lundberg, S. M., & Lee, S. I. (2017). A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 4765-4774.
[38] Agarwal, V., Podolny, J., & Chauhan, M. (2020). Using machine learning to detect tax fraud: Empirical evidence from urban property tax. Journal of Urban Economics, 116, 103241.
[39] Wiranto, D., Setiawan, A., & Budiastuti, D. (2025). Scientometric analysis of digital transformation maturity assessment: Indonesian SPBE Index 2019-2024. Digital Government Research and Practice, 6(1), 1-18.
[40] Hyndman, R. J., & Athanasopoulos, G. (2018). Forecasting: Principles and Practice (2nd ed.). OTexts.
[41] Lepenioti, K., Bousdekis, A., Apostolou, D., & Mentzas, G. (2020). Prescriptive analytics: Literature review and research challenges. International Journal of Information Management, 50, 57-70.
[42] Ong, M. E. H., Tiah, L., Leong, B. S., Tan, E. C. C., & Ong, V. Y. W. (2020). A prediction tool for cardiac arrest in emergency departments: A machine learning approach. Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Smart City Applications, 123-134.
[43] Brown, M. M., & O'Toole, L. J. (2023). Real-time predictive decision support systems in state government: Implementation evidence from Illinois aging services. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 456-471. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13567
[44] Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is dead—Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467-494.
[45] Republic of Indonesia. (2023). Presidential Regulation No. 82 of 2023 on Acceleration of Digital Government Transformation. Jakarta: State Secretariat.
[46] Smoke, P. (2015). Rethinking decentralization: Assessing challenges to a popular public sector reform. In J. Brosio & J. P. Jiménez (Eds.), Decentralization and Reform in Latin America: Improving Intergovernmental Relations (pp. 35-67). Edward Elgar.
[47] Antlov, 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.
[48] Ministry of Home Affairs of Indonesia. (2014). Minister of Home Affairs Regulation No. 54 of 2010 on Implementation of Government Regulation No. 8 of 2008 on Stages, Procedures for Formulation, Control and Evaluation of Implementation of Regional Development Plans. Jakarta: Kemendagri.
[49] Janssen, M., & Kuk, G. (2016). The challenges and limits of big data algorithms in technocratic governance. Government Information Quarterly, 33(3), 371-377.
[50] Strobl, C., Boulesteix, A. L., Kneib, T., Augustin, T., & Zeileis, A. (2008). Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinformatics, 9(1), 307.
[51] von Solms, R., & von Solms, S. H. (2018). Cybersecurity and information security–What goes where? Information & Computer Security, 26(1), 2-9.
[52] Nuvei. (2026, January 26). Digital government in 2026: Agency priorities and public sector trends. https://www.nuvei.com/posts/the-2026-digital-government-roadmap
[53] Global Government Forum. (2026, January 6). Seven trends reveal opportunities for bold government decisions in 2026. https://www.globalgovernmentforum.com/seven-trends-reveal-opportunities
[54] CNA Corporation. (2025). AI maturity model for government agencies. CNA Analyses and Solutions. https://www.cna.org/analyses/2025/05/artificial-intelligence-maturity-model
[55] Brown, M. M. (2025). Predictive analytics in public sector project management: A real-time decision support framework. International Journal of Management and Technology, 12(4), 1-24. https://eajournals.org/ijmt/vol12-issue-4-2025/
[56] Perimattic. (2026, January 14). Digital transformation in government in 2026: Trends, benefits, and challenges. https://perimattic.com/digital-transformation-in-government/
[57] James, J. (2025, November 27). Public sector digital transformation predictions for 2026. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/public-sector-digital-transformation-predictions-2026-joe-jamesderate improvement, medium capacity)
