Policy Direction for Strengthening Accountability and Transparency in the Management of Direct Grant Receipts at BMKG
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31629/jgbr.v2i3.7924Keywords:
Grant Governance, Good Governance, Accountability, SOP ComplianceAbstract
The Meteorology, Climatology, and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) increasingly relies on external grants both cash and in kind to strengthen early warning, forecasting, and service delivery, yet recurring administrative irregularities in grant receipt and management continue to generate audit exposure and weaken the reliability of institutional reporting. This study aims to examine why grant governance problems persist despite an established legal framework and organizational responsibility structure, and to identify policy options that can improve transparency, accountability, and rule-of-law compliance in BMKG’s grant governance. Methodologically, the research employs a qualitative, descriptive case-study approach with a policy and governance analysis orientation, drawing on a combination of document review (regulations, internal guidelines, and relevant administrative records) and stakeholder perspectives from organizational units involved in planning, finance, asset management, procurement, and internal oversight. Data were analyzed through thematic content analysis using good-governance principles as analytical benchmarks, complemented by a root-cause perspective and a SOAR-based evaluation to assess strengths, opportunities, aspirations, and results for reform implementation. The findings show that the most critical gaps are not merely normative but operational: fragmented workflows, delayed and uneven reporting practices, limited procedural literacy among implementers, and weak enforcement mechanisms often compounded by non-integrated systems and manual workarounds that reduce traceability and undermine documentation quality. The study further finds that isolated interventions are insufficient; improvements in socialization alone will not sustain compliance without standardized operational guidance and enforceable accountability.
Downloads
References
Bartlett, L., Kabir, M. A., & Han, J. (2025). The interplay of virtualisation, work design, and business process management: A mixed-methods study. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 5(2), 100345. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JJIMEI.2025.100345
Battilani, C., Galli, G., Arecco, S., Casarino, B., Granero, A., Lavagna, K., Varna, R., Ventura, M., Revetria, R., & Damiani, L. (2022). Business Process Re-engineering in Public Administration: The case study of Western Ligurian Sea Port Authority. Sustainable Futures, 4, 100065. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SFTR.2022.100065
Bharosa, N., Janssen, M., van Wijk, R., de Winne, N., van der Voort, H., Hulstijn, J., & Tan, Y. hua. (2013). Tapping into existing information flows: The transformation to compliance by design in business-to-government information exchange. Government Information Quarterly, 30(SUPPL. 1), S9–S18. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2012.08.006
Biswas, R., Jana, A., Arya, K., & Ramamritham, K. (2019). A good-governance framework for urban management. Journal of Urban Management, 8(2), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JUM.2018.12.009
Carter, L., Desouza, K. C., Dawson, G. S., & Pardo, T. (2024). Digital transformation of the public sector: Designing strategic information systems. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 33(3), 101853. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSIS.2024.101853
Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Brown, S. A., & Venkatesh, V. (2025). Design characteristics and service experience with e-government services: A public value perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 80, 102834. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJINFOMGT.2024.102834
Chang, M. Y., Hung, Y. C., Yen, D. C., & Tseng, P. T. Y. (2009). The research on the critical success factors of knowledge management and classification framework project in the Executive Yuan of Taiwan Government. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5376–5386. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2008.06.060
Chiumento, A., Rahman, A., & Frith, L. (2020). Writing to template: Researchers’ negotiation of procedural research ethics. Social Science & Medicine, 255, 112980. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SOCSCIMED.2020.112980
Copley, P. A. (1991). The association between municipal disclosure practices and audit quality. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10(4), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-4254(91)90001-Z
Dreher, A., Lang, V., & Reinsberg, B. (2024). Aid effectiveness and donor motives. World Development, 176, 106501. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WORLDDEV.2023.106501
Farrugia, L. (2019). WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): The ongoing process of ethical decision-making in qualitative research: Ethical principles and their application to the research process. Early Human Development, 133, 48–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EARLHUMDEV.2019.03.011
Heinzel, M., & Reinsberg, B. (2024). Trust funds and the sub-national effectiveness of development aid: Evidence from the World Bank. World Development, 179, 106609. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WORLDDEV.2024.106609
Huang, Z., & Benyoucef, M. (2014). Usability and credibility of e-government websites. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 584–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2014.07.002
Islam, M. M., Hasan, M., Mia, M. S., Al Masud, A., & Islam, A. R. M. T. (2025). Early warning systems in climate risk management: Roles and implementations in eradicating barriers and overcoming challenges. Natural Hazards Research, 5(3), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NHRES.2025.01.007
Jaeger, L., Eckhardt, A., & Kroenung, J. (2021). The role of deterrability for the effect of multi-level sanctions on information security policy compliance: Results of a multigroup analysis. Information & Management, 58(3), 103318. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IM.2020.103318
Kayesa, N. K., & Shung-King, M. (2021). The role of document analysis in health policy analysis studies in low and middle-income countries: Lessons for HPA researchers from a qualitative systematic review. Health Policy OPEN, 2, 100024. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HPOPEN.2020.100024
Krause, U. M., Stark, R., & Mandl, H. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 158–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2008.03.003
Kuruppu, C., Adhikari, P., Gunarathna, V., Ambalangodage, D., Perera, P., & Karunarathna, C. (2016). Participatory budgeting in a Sri Lankan urban council: A practice of power and domination. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 41, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CPA.2016.01.002
Liu, J., & Lin, B. (2012). Government auditing and corruption control: Evidence from China’s provincial panel data. China Journal of Accounting Research, 5(2), 163–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CJAR.2012.01.002
Mahon, R., Greene, C., Cox, S. A., Guido, Z., Gerlak, A. K., Petrie, J. A., Trotman, A., Liverman, D., Van Meerbeeck, C. J., Scott, W., & Farrell, D. (2019). Fit for purpose? Transforming National Meteorological and Hydrological Services into National Climate Service Centers. Climate Services, 13, 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLISER.2019.01.002
Muraina, S. A., & Dandago, K. I. (2020). Effects of implementation of International Public Sector Accounting Standards on Nigeria’s financial reporting quality. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 33(23), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-12-2018-0277
Murphy, K. (2008). Enforcing Tax Compliance: To Punish or Persuade? Economic Analysis and Policy, 38(1), 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0313-5926(08)50009-9
Nakpodia, F., Sakariyahu, R., Fagbemi, T., Adigun, R., & Dosumu, O. (2024). Sustainable development goals, accounting practices and public financial management: A pre and post COVID-19 assessment. The British Accounting Review, 101466. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BAR.2024.101466
Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2014). The changing face of a city government: A case study of Philly311. Government Information Quarterly, 31(SUPPL.1), S1–S9. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2014.01.002
Paterson, A. S., Changwony, F., & Miller, P. B. (2019). Accounting control, governance and anti-corruption initiatives in public sector organisations. The British Accounting Review, 51(5), 100844. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BAR.2019.100844
Payne, J. L., & Jensen, K. L. (2002). An examination of municipal audit delay. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 21(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4254(02)00035-2
Strojny, P., & Dużmańska-Misiarczyk, N. (2023). Measuring the effectiveness of virtual training: A systematic review. Computers & Education: X Reality, 2, 100006. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEXR.2022.100006
Nguyen, T. T. U., Nguyen, P. Van, Huynh, H. T. N., Truong, G. Q., & Do, L. (2024). Unlocking e-government adoption: Exploring the role of perceived usefulness, ease of use, trust, and social media engagement in Vietnam. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10(2), 100291. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOITMC.2024.100291
Tran, Y. T., Nguyen, N. P., & Hoang, T. C. (2021). The role of accountability in determining the relationship between financial reporting quality and the performance of public organizations: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 40(1), 106801. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JACCPUBPOL.2020.106801
Wagner, E. L., Scott, S. V., & Galliers, R. D. (2006). The creation of ‘best practice’ software: Myth, reality and ethics. Information and Organization, 16(3), 251–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INFOANDORG.2006.04.001
Weigl, L., Roth, T., Amard, A., & Zavolokina, L. (2024). When public values and user-centricity in e-government collide – A systematic review. Government Information Quarterly, 41(3), 101956. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GIQ.2024.101956
Zhen Li, O., Wu, W., Xia, L., & Zhang, Q. (2023). Fiscal-audit separation and government disclosure quality. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 42(4), 107100. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JACCPUBPOL.2023.107100
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Syafridawati Syafridawati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
