Review Policy of Archive Management at Cintajaya Village Office

Agung Febriansyah; Arip Budiman

doi:10.31629/juan.v14i1.8358

Authors

Agung Febriansyah Politeknik LP3I Tasikmalaya
Arip Budiman Politeknik LP3I Tasikmalaya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31629/juan.v14i1.8358

Keywords:

Village Governance, Public Accountability, Digital Archives

Abstract

Archive management is an essential element of public administration because it supports administrative order, service effectiveness, institutional accountability, and public trust. At the village government level, archives function not only as administrative files but also as legal evidence, institutional memory, and a basis for transparent decision-making. This study aims to review the archive management policy at Cintajaya Village Office by examining the existing conditions, identifying policy gaps, and formulating an improvement direction for more systematic archive governance. The study employed a qualitative descriptive approach using secondary data through literature review and document analysis. The data sources consisted of academic literature, government regulations, policy documents, institutional reports, and relevant studies on records management, public accountability, digital archives, and village administration. The findings show that archive management at Cintajaya Village Office is still characterized by conventional administrative practices, incomplete indexing, fragmented physical and digital storage, delayed retrieval, weak retention control, and limited monitoring. These conditions indicate that archive management has not yet been fully integrated into a clear records lifecycle framework. The study also found that policy gaps occur in classification, storage, retention, access control, human resource capacity, and digital readiness. Therefore, archive management reform requires an integrated and adaptive policy model that combines policy standardization, lifecycle-based records management, hybrid physical-digital archive integration, staff capacity development, accountability mechanisms, and periodic monitoring. This study concludes that strengthening archive management policy at Cintajaya Village Office is necessary to improve public service responsiveness, reduce administrative risks, support evidence-based governance, and build a more accountable village administration system.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barata, K., & Cain, P. (2001). Information, not technology, is essential to accountability: Electronic records and public-sector financial management. The Information Society, 17(4), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/019722401753330841

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027

Casadesús de Mingo, A., & Cerrillo-i-Martínez, A. (2018). Improving records management to promote transparency and prevent corruption. International Journal of Information Management, 38(1), 256–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.09.005

Chigariro, D., & Khumalo, N. B. (2018). Electronic records management research in ESARBICA: A bibliometric study. Records Management Journal, 28(2), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-12-2016-0045

Dikopoulou, A., & Mihiotis, A. (2010). Records management: A key element for effectiveness, accountability and development in the Greek public administration. International Journal of Public Administration, 33(5), 262–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690903449673

Dorner, D. G., Gorman, G. E., & Calvert, P. J. (2009). Information needs analysis: Principles and practice in information organizations. Facet Publishing.

Harisanty, D., & Anugrah, E. P. (2022). Legality of electronic archive management in realizing Indonesia E-government. Digital Library Perspectives, 38(1), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-12-2020-0123

Johnston, M. P. (2014). Secondary data analysis: A method of which the time has come. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 3(3), 619–626.

Kautto, T., & Henttonen, P. (2020). Records management as invisible work: A study of Finnish municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 37(4), 101460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101460

Kiyabo, H. K. (2012). Managing presidential records and archives in Tanzania. Archives and Manuscripts, 40(2), 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/01576895.2012.712828

Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Lawan, A. A. (2025). Leveraging records management to enhance governance: Insights from anti-corruption practitioners. Journal of Contemporary African Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/02589001.2025.2581308

Lee, K. (2009). The electronic records management in e-government strategy: Case studies and implications. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 5(4), 64–78.

Lojonon, B. G., & Alfred, R. (2025). Factors influencing digital adoption of data and information management methods in the public sector. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 21(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEGR.389245

Lowry, J. (2013). Displaced archives. Routledge.

Makwae, E. N. (2021). The role of records management in accountability and public service delivery. Records Management Journal, 31(2), 176–196.

Manaf, H. A., & Ismail, M. (2023). Public accountability and administrative integrity in public sector governance. Public Integrity, 25(4), 403–419.

Matlala, M. E., & Ncube, T. R. (2024). Electronic records management amidst the seismic shift in the dynamic infosphere. Records Management Journal, 35(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-04-2023-0022

Meijer, A. (2001). Electronic records management and public accountability: Beyond an instrumental approach. The Information Society, 17(4), 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/019722401753330850

Modiba, M. (2024). Adoption of artificial intelligence to enhance records management. Collection and Curation, 44(1), 9–17.

Mojapelo, M., & Ngoepe, M. (2021). Contribution of Auditor-General South Africa to records management in the public sector in South Africa. New Review of Information Networking, 26(1–2), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614576.2019.1608573

Mokhtar, U. A., & Yusof, Z. M. (2009). Electronic records management in the Malaysian public sector: The existence of policy. Records Management Journal, 19(3), 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1108/09565690910999101

Mokhtar, U. A., Yusof, Z. M., & Ismail, A. (2016). Records management practice: The issues and models for classification. International Journal of Information Management, 36(6), 1265–1273.

Mutula, S. M., & Wamukoya, J. M. (2009). Public sector information management in East and Southern Africa: Implications for FOI, democracy and integrity in government. International Journal of Information Management, 29(5), 333–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.04.004

Ngoepe, M. (2016). Records management models in the public sector in South Africa: Is there a flicker of light at the end of the dark tunnel? Information Development, 32(3), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666914550492

Ngulube, P. (2006). The management of public records and archives in the member countries of ESARBICA. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 27(1), 57–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00039810600691288

Odhiambo, B. O. (2018). Institutional readiness for digital archives management at United States International University-Africa. Archives and Manuscripts, 46(3), 345–366.

Padoni, R. A., Chipeta, G. T., & Chawinga, W. D. (2024). Hybrid records management practices at M’mbelwa District Council in Malawi. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 10, 101130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101130

Pratolo, S., Sofyani, H., & Anwar, M. (2022). Performance-based accountability and public sector governance. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), 2034231.

Rebuglio, M., Ottaviani, F. M., & De Marco, A. (2025). Recordkeeping for project management information system in public procurement: An action research. Records Management Journal, 36(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-10-2023-0052

Saldanha, D. M. F., Dias, C. N., & Guillaumon, S. (2022). Transparency and accountability in digital public services: Learning from the Brazilian cases. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101680

Shepherd, E., Stevenson, A., & Flinn, A. (2010). Information governance, records management, and freedom of information: A study of local government authorities in England. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 337–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.02.008

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Svärd, P. (2022). The implementation of an e-archive to facilitate open data publication and the use of common specifications. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4), 101726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101726

Szedmák, B., Varga, L., & Szabó, R. Z. (2025). Digital transformation of public services: The case of the document management application. International Journal of Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2025.2520522

Tsabedze, V. (2024). Managing records in the age of artificial intelligence: How prepared are archives and records management professionals in Eswatini? Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 28(1), 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2023.2284898

Worthy, B. (2024). Accountability, transparency, and information governance in public administration. Records Management Journal, 34(2–3), 190–205.

Yusof, M. Y. (2023). The record management: Upcoming challenges and key components to enhancing better public services. Jurnal Manajemen Pelayanan Publik, 7(1), 1–15.