Peran Tingkat Maturitas SPIP dan Kapabilitas Teknologi Informasi dalam Pencapaian SDGs1: Bukti Empiris Pemerintah Daerah di Sulawesi

Authors

  • Andi Puput Febrianti Syahid Universitas Tadulako, Indonesia
  • Sri Puspita Wulandari
  • Nina Yusnita Yamin
  • Selmita Paranoan
  • Betty Betty

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30863/akunsyah.v6i1.6164

Keywords:

Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah, Kapabilitas Teknologi Informasi, SDGs 1, Kemiskinan

Abstract

Penelitian ini menguji pengaruh tingkat maturitas Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah (SPIP) dan kapabilitas teknologi informasi terhadap pencapaian Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 1 yang diproksikan melalui tingkat kemiskinan pada pemerintah daerah di Pulau Sulawesi. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dengan data sekunder periode 2018–2024 sebanyak 308 observasi. Analisis data dilakukan menggunakan Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) dengan bantuan WarpPLS versi 8.0. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa maturitas SPIP berpengaruh signifikan terhadap pencapaian SDGs 1, sedangkan kapabilitas teknologi informasi tidak berpengaruh signifikan terhadap pencapaian SDGs 1.

References

Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan. (2021). Pedoman penilaian maturitas Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah (SPIP). BPKP.

Badan Pusat Statistik. (2025). Persentase penduduk miskin September 2024 turun menjadi 8,57 persen. Badan Pusat Statistik.

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147-160.

Hidayatul, A., Din, M., Abdullah, M. I., & Karim, F. (2025). APIP capabilities, SPIP maturity, audit opinions, and follow-up on audit recommendations for corruption prevention. Journal of Economics and Management Scientist.

Indonesia, P. R. (2008). Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 60 Tahun 2008 tentang Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah.

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (2019). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. In Corporate governance (pp. 77-132). Gower.

Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (ijec), 11(4), 1-10.

Lane, J. E. (2006). Public administration & public management: The principal-agent perspective. Routledge.

Madon, S., & Masiero, S. (2025). Digital connectivity and the SDGs: Conceptualising the link through an institutional resilience lens. Telecommunications Policy, 49(1), 102879.

Morita, K., Okitasari, M., & Masuda, H. (2020). Analysis of national and local governance systems to achieve the sustainable development goals: case studies of Japan and Indonesia. Sustainability Science, 15(1), 179-202.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). Digital government index 2019 results. OECD Publishing.

Rosaline, S. F., & Syarief, A. (2021). Analisis Tingkat Maturitas Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah (SPIP). Indonesian Accounting Research Journal, 1(2), 349-358.

Sugiyono. (2022). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D (Edisi ke-2). Alfabeta.

Teece, D. J. (2023). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management: Organizing for innovation and growth. Strategic Management Review, 4(1), 1–35.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.

Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2021). Economic development (13th ed.). Pearson Education.

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. (2023). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2023: Mapping Resilience for the Sustainable Development Goals. Stylus Publishing, LLC.

World Bank. (2021). GovTech Maturity Index 2020: The State of Public Sector Digital Transformation. Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank. (2022). Poverty and shared prosperity 2022: Correcting course. World Bank.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

Citation Check