Article Sidebar

Submitted
July 10, 2021
Accepted
October 15, 2021
Published
October 31, 2021
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 894 Download : 1173

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This article explores public governance impact on the corruption’s probability in Indonesian local government practices. The research employs data of Indonesian local governments in 2012. Data were analyzed using logistic regression. The study results found that good public governance has a negative effect on corruptio’s probability. The results of this research conclude that the greater public governance index, the less the local government’s engagement in corruption. The results are rugged when area type is added as control variable. Area type do not affect the corruption’s probability in Indonesian local governments. This study found good public governance decreases the asymmetry of information between agents and principals, so that the opportunity to commit corruption are reduced. Improvement of public governance can be done by implementing e-Government to supervise the implementation of government activities and public services in local government, Indonesia.

Keywords

agency theory corruption e-Government local governments public governance

Article Details

License

Author retains the copyright and grants the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal

Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book) with the acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Author is permitted and encouraged to post his/her work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)

Creative Commons License

Jurnal Akuntansi is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

How to Cite
Maria, E., & Halim, A. (2021). PUBLIC GOVERNANCE DAN KORUPSI: BUKTI PENGUJIAN DARI INDONESIA MENGGUNAKAN PERSPEKTIF TEORI KEAGENAN. Jurnal Akuntansi, 11(3), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.33369/j.akuntansi.11.3.223-234
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdullah, Syukriy. (2012). Perilaku Oportunistik Legislatif Dan Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhinya: Bukti Empiris Dari Penganggaran Pemerintah Daerah Di Indonesia. Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta.
  2. Baiman, Stanley. (1990). Agency Research in Managerial Accounting: A Second Look Accounting. Organizations and Society 15(4):341–71.
  3. BPK. (2014a). Ikhtisar Hasil Pemeriksaan BPK Semester I Tahun 2014. Jakarta.
  4. BPK. (2014b). Ikhtisar Hasil Pemeriksaan BPK Semester II Tahun 2014. Jakarta.
  5. Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. The Academy of Management Review 14(1):57–74.
  6. Elbahnasawy, Nasr G. (2014). E-Government, Internet Adoption, and Corruption: An Empirical Investigation.World Development 57:114–26.
  7. Gudono. (2012). Analisis Data Multivariat. 2nd ed. Yogyakarta: BPFE.
  8. Hair, J., W. Black, B. Babin, and R. Anderson. (2011). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. 7th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Limited.
  9. Heuer, Larry, Steven Penrod, and Ayelet Kattan. (2007). The Role of Societal Benefits and Fairness Concerns Among Decision Makers and Decision Recipients. Law and Human Behavior 31:573–610.
  10. Hofheimer, Kerry L. (2006). The Good Governance Agenda of International Development Institutions.Old Dominion University.
  11. Isnadiva, Safira Marsha, and Haryanto. (2021). Hasil Pemeriksaan Dan Kasus Korupsi Pada Pemerintah Studi Pada Pemerintah Daerah Provinsi Di Indonesia Tahun 2015-2018. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Keuangan 9(1):83–100.
  12. Jensen, Michael C., and William H. Meckling. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3(4):305–60.
  13. Kemitraan (The Partnership for Governance Reform). (2013). Indonesian Governance Index 2012. Jakarta.
  14. Khan, Mushtaq H. (2006). Determinants of Corruption in Developing Countries: The Limits of Conventional Economic Analysis. Pp. 219–44 in International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  15. Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling Corruption. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  16. Klitgaard, Robert. (1998). International Cooperation Against Corruption. Finance and Development 35(1):3–6.
  17. Kolstad, Ivar, and Arne Wiig. (2011). Natural Resources, Corruption and Trust: A Complex Relationship. Vol. December.
  18. Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. (2019). Statistik Penindakan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan Profesi Dan Jabatan. Retrieved January 8, 2020 (https://www.kpk.go.id/id/statistik/penindakan/tpk-berdasarkan-profesi-jabatan).
  19. Komite Nasional Kebijakan Governance. (2008). Pedoman Umum Good Public Governance Indonesia.
  20. Kristiansen, Stein, Agus Dwiyanto, Agus Pramusinto, and Erwan Agus Putranto. (2009). “Public Sector Reforms and Financial Transparency: Experiences from Indonesian Districts.” Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs 31(1):64–87.
  21. Kurnia, Titon Slamet, Umbu Rauta, and Arie Siswanto. (2017). E-Government Dalam Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan Daerah Di Indonesia. Masalah-Masalah Hukum 46(2):170–81.
  22. Lio, Mon Chi, Meng Chun Liu, and Yi Pey Ou. (2011.) Can the Internet Reduce Corruption? A Cross-Country Study Based on Dynamic Panel Data Models. Government Information Quarterly 28(1):47–53.
  23. Maria, E., and Gudono. (2017). Empirical Test of Fraud Triangle Theory on Local Government (Evidence from Indonesia). International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research 15(4):233–48.
  24. Maria, Evi, and Abdul Halim. (2021). E-Government Dan Korupsi: Studi Di Pemerintah Daerah, Indonesia Dari Perspektif Teori Keagenan. EKUITAS (Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Keuangan) 5(1):40–58.
  25. Maria, Evi, Abdul Halim, Eko Suwardi, and Setiyono Miharjo. (2019a). Desentralisasi Fiskal Dan Probabilitas Terjadinya Korupsi: Sebuah Bukti Empiris Dari Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis 22(1):1–22.
  26. Maria, Evi, Abdul Halim, Eko Suwardi, and Setiyono Miharjo. (2019b). Eksplorasi Kesempatan Untuk Melakukan Fraud Di Pemerintah Daerah, Indonesia (Exploration Opportunities To Commit Fraud in Local Governments, Indonesia). Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia 16(1):216–32.
  27. Masyitoh, Rizki Diyah, Ratna Wardhani, and Dyah Setyanigrum. (2015). Pengaruh Opini Audit, Temuan Audit, Dan Tindak Lanjut Hasil Audit Terhadap Persepsi Korupsi Pada Pemerintah Daerah Tingkat II Tahun 2008-2010. Pp. 1–26 in Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XVIII. Medan: Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia.
  28. Nguyen, Thang V, Thang Ngoc Bach, Thanh Le, and Canh Quang Le. (2017). Local Governance, Corruption, and Public Service Quality: Evidence from a National Survey in Vietnam. International Journal of Public Sector Management 30(2):137-153.
  29. Nugroho, Edi. (2014). Pemanfaatan Teknologi Informasi Dalam Rangka Memberantas Tindak Pidana Korupsi Secara Elektronik. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum 14(3):539–46.
  30. Otusanya, Julius Olantunde. (2011). Corruption as an Obstacle to Development in Developing Countries: A Review of Literature. Journal of Money Laundering Control 14(4):387–422.
  31. Peraturan Presiden Nomor 81. (2010). Grand Design Reformasi Birokrasi Tahun 2010-2025. Indonesia.
  32. Presiden Republik Indonesia. (1999). Undang-Undang Republk Indonesianomor 28 Tahun 1999Tentang Penyelenggaraan Negara Yang Bersih Dan Bebasdari Korupsi, Kolusi, Dan Nepotisme.
  33. Rahmawati, A. (2015). Effect on Performance Audit Implementation of Good Corporate Governance in Kab.Luwu (Case Study Inspectorate Kab. Luwu). Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies 7(1):13–19.
  34. Rose-Ackerman, Susan. (1978). Corruption: A Study in Political Economy. New York: Academic Press.
  35. Rothstein, Bo, and Aiysha Varraich. (2017). Making Sense of Corruption. Cambridge University Press.
  36. Saputra, Bambang. (2012). Dampak Desentralisasi Fiskal Terhadap Korupsi Di Indonesia. Jurnal Borneo Administrator 8(3):293–309.
  37. Setyaningrum, Dyah, Ratna Wardhani, and Akhmad Syakhroza. (2017). Good Public Governance, Corruption and Public Service Quality: Indonesia Evidence. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research 15(19):327–38.
  38. Setyobudi, Christan RA, and Dyah Setyaningrum. (2019). E-Government and Corruption Perception Index: A Cross-Country Study. Jurnal Akuntansi & Auditing Indonesia 23(1):11–20.
  39. Sikka, Prem. (2008). Enterprise Culture and Accountancy Firms: New
  40. Masters of the Universe. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 21(2):268–95.
  41. Simarmata, Markus H. (2017). Dan Media Sosial Untuk Mewujudkan Budaya Transparansi Dan Pemberantasan Korupsi. INTEGRASI 3(2):203–29.
  42. The Partnership for Governance Reform (Kemitraan). (2014). Menata Indonesia Dari Daerah. Jakarta.
  43. Ullah, Atta, Chen Pinglu, Saif Ullah, Hafiz Syed Mohsin Abbas, and Saba Khan. (2021). The Role of E-Governance in Combating COVID-19 and Promoting Sustainable Development: A Comparative Study of China and Pakistan. Chinese Political Science Review 6:86–118.
  44. Undang-Undang Nomor 20. (2001). Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 Tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Indonesia.
  45. Undang-Undang Nomor 31. (1999). Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Indonesia.
  46. Zhang, Z. 2016. Public Governance and Corporate Fraud: Evidence from the Recent Anti-Corruption in China. Journal of Business Ethics 1–22.
  47. Zimmerman, Jerold L. (1977). The Municipal Accounting Maze: An Analysis of Political Incentives. Journal of Accounting Research 15:107–44.