Main Article Content


In the government sector, E-Government has become part of innovation. The use of E-Government is necessary to maintain government transparency. In Banda Aceh City, Aceh Province, Indonesia, this study tries to capture the phenomenon of the factors that influence trust and use of E-Government. The purpose of this research is to learn about the elements that influence trust and adoption of E-Government in the Banda Aceh region through quantitative research. This research is included in the category of survey research.  This study found that two variables have positive and significant implications for other variables, namely the benefit variable has significant implications for trust in e-government, and the trust variable in e-government has significant implications for the use of e-government. Meanwhile, three other variables that have no significant implications are organizational factors, technological factors, and risk factors for public trust in the use of E-Government by the government. This study also has limitations, such as considering the positive impact on the use of e-government in the Banda Aceh Region, rather than the problem of only using e-government in the Banda Aceh Region of Aceh Province. The time limit associated with data collection is another weakness of this study.


Citizenship E-Government Perceptionm

Article Details

How to Cite
Syahroni, F., Ardiansyah, Pribadi, U., Rafi, M., & Amri, P. (2023). Factor Affecting Trust and Use of E-Government: The Case of Banda Aceh City, Aceh Province . JIP (Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan) : Kajian Ilmu Pemerintahan Dan Politik Daerah, 8(2), 72-85.


  1. Abu-Shanab, E. A. (2017). E-government familiarity influence on Jordanians’ perceptions. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 103–113.
  2. Adiputra, I. M. P., Utama, S., & Rossieta, H. (2018). Transparency of local government in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 3(1), 123–138.
  3. Adiyarta, K., Napitupulu, D., Nurdianto, H., Rahim, R., & Ahmar, A. (2018). User acceptance of E-Government Services Based on TRAM model. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 352(1).
  4. Ahn, M. J., & Bretschneider, S. (2011). Recent Trends in Public Sector Technological Innovations. Public Administration Review, 71(3), 414–424.
  5. Al-Sai, Z. A., & Abualigah, L. M. (2017). Big data and E-government: A review. ICIT 2017 - 8th International Conference on Information Technology, Proceedings, 580–587.
  6. Aljazzaf, Z. M. (2019). Evaluating trust in E-government: The case of Kuwait. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, Part F1482, 140–144.
  7. Alzahrani, L., Al-Karaghouli, W., & Weerakkody, V. (2017). Analysing the critical factors influencing trust in e-government adoption from citizens’ perspective: A systematic review and a conceptual framework. International Business Review, 26(1), 164–175.
  8. Alzahrani, L., Al-Karaghouli, W., & Weerakkody, V. (2018). Investigating the impact of citizens’ trust toward the successful adoption of e-government: A multigroup analysis of gender, age, and internet experience. Information Systems Management, 35(2), 124–146.
  10. Basahel, A., & Yamin, M. (2017). Measuring success of e-government of Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Information Technology (Singapore), 9(3), 287–293.
  11. Batara, E., Nurmandi, A., Warsito, T., & Pribadi, U. (2017). Are government employees adopting local e-government transformation?: The need for having the right attitude, facilitating conditions and performance expectations. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 11(4), 612–638.
  12. Belanger, F., & Hiller, J. S. (2006). A framework for e-government: Privacy implications. Business Process Management Journal, 12(1 SPEC. ISS.), 48–60.
  13. Bhagat, C., Sharma, B., & Kumar Mishra, A. (2021). Assessment of E Governance for National Development–A Case Study of Province 1 Nepal. Chandan Bhagat et Al, 46–52.
  14. BPS Kota Banda Aceh, 2020). (2020). Kota Banda Aceh Dalam angka 2019. In BPS Kota Banda Aceh.
  15. Chen, Y. C., Hu, L. T., Tseng, K. C., Juang, W. J., & Chang, C. K. (2019). Cross-boundary e-government systems: Determinants of performance. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3), 449–459.
  16. Choi, T., & Chandler, S. M. (2020). Knowledge vacuum: An organizational learning dynamic of how e-government innovations fail. Government Information Quarterly, 37(1), 101416.
  17. Das, A., Singh, H., & Joseph, D. (2017). A longitudinal study of e-government maturity. Information and Management, 54(4), 415–426.
  18. Draheim, D., McBride, K., Misnikov, Y., Hartleb, F., Lauk, M., Lemke, F., Nagumo, T., & Pappel, I. (2020). On the narratives and background narratives of e-government. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2020-Janua, 2114–2122.
  19. Fan, B., & Zhao, Y. (2017). The moderating effect of external pressure on the relationship between internal organizational factors and the quality of open government data. Government Information Quarterly, 34(3), 396–405.
  20. Firmansyah, A., Halimah, M., & Dai, R. M. (2021). Implementation of E-procurement policy in Bandung District. Technium Soc. Sci. J., 18, 12.
  21. Glyptis, L., Christofi, M., Vrontis, D., Giudice, M. Del, Dimitriou, S., & Michael, P. (2020). E-Government implementation challenges in small countries: The project manager’s perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 152(September 2019).
  22. Henseler, J. (2007). A new and simple approach to multi-group analysis in partial least squares path modeling.
  23. Hwang, K., & Choi, M. (2017). Effects of innovation-supportive culture and organizational citizenship behavior on e-government information system security stemming from mimetic isomorphism. Government Information Quarterly, 34(2), 183–198.
  24. Hwang, M.-S., Li, C.-T., Shen, J.-J., & Chu, Y.-P. (2004). Challenges in E-Government and Security of Information. Information & Security: An International Journal, 15(1), 9–20.
  25. Jacob, D. W., Md Fudzee, M. F., Salamat, M. A., Kasim, S., Mahdin, H., & Ramli, A. A. (2017). Modelling End-User of Electronic-Government Service: The Role of Information quality, System Quality and Trust. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 226(1).
  26. Janita, M. S., & Miranda, F. J. (2018). Quality in e-Government services: A proposal of dimensions from the perspective of public sector employees. Telematics and Informatics, 35(2), 457–469.
  27. Jhonson, R. B. C. L. (2014). Educational Research Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Approach. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data.
  28. Juell-Skielse, G., Lönn, C. M., & Päivärinta, T. (2017). Modes of collaboration and expected benefits of inter-organizational E-government initiatives: A multi-case study. Government Information Quarterly, 34(4), 578–590.
  29. Kane, S. N., Mishra, A., & Dutta, A. K. (2016). Preface: International Conference on Recent Trends in Physics (ICRTP 2016). Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 755(1).
  30. Khan, S., Rahim, N. Z. A., & Maarop, N. (2020). A systematic literature review and a proposed model on antecedents of trust to use social media for e-government services. International Journal of ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES, 7(2), 44–56.
  31. Krishnan, S., Teo, T. S. H., & Lymm, J. (2017). Determinants of electronic participation and electronic government maturity: Insights from cross-country data. International Journal of Information Management, 37(4), 297–312.
  32. Lallmahomed, M. Z. I., Lallmahomed, N., & Lallmahomed, G. M. (2017). Factors influencing the adoption of e-Government services in Mauritius. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 57–72.
  33. Li, A., Liu, Y., Zhu, X., Sun, X., Feng, X., Li, D., Zhang, J., Zhu, M., & Zhao, Z. (2019). Corrigendum to “Methylallyl sulfone attenuates inflammation, oxidative stress and lung injury induced by cigarette smoke extract in mice and RAW264.7 cells” Int Immunopharmacol, volume 59, 2018, 369–374 (International Immunopharmacology (2018) 59 (369–374. International Immunopharmacology, 72(March), 522.
  34. Liang, Y., Qi, G., Wei, K., & Chen, J. (2017). Exploring the determinant and influence mechanism of e-Government cloud adoption in government agencies in China. Government Information Quarterly, 34(3), 481–495.
  35. López-López, V., Iglesias-Antelo, S., Vázquez-Sanmartín, A., Connolly, R., & Bannister, F. (2018). e-Government, Transparency & Reputation: An Empirical Study of Spanish Local Government. Information Systems Management, 35(4), 276–293.
  36. Mensah, I. K., & Adams, S. (2020). A Comparative Analysis of the Impact of Political Trust on the Adoption of E-Government Services. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(8), 682–696.
  37. Nam, T. (2018). Examining the anti-corruption effect of e-government and the moderating effect of national culture: A cross-country study. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 273–282.
  38. Obaid, T., Abu Mdallalah, S., Jouda, H., & Abu Jarad, A. (2020). Factors for Successful E-Government Adoption in Palestine: A Conceptual Framework. SSRN Electronic Journal, 5(1), 63–76.
  39. Okunola, O. M., Rowley, J., & Johnson, F. (2017). The multi-dimensional digital divide: Perspectives from an e-government portal in Nigeria. Government Information Quarterly, 34(2), 329–339.
  40. Pritchard, T. A. (2017). Trust and e-Government Success in Central Virginia: An Empirical Analysis.
  41. Sabani, A., Deng, H., & Thai, V. V. (2018). A Conceptual Framework for the Adoption of E-Government in Indonesia Australasian Conference on Information Systems A Conceptual Framework for the Adoption of E- Government in Indonesia Alvedi Sabani. Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 6(December), 1–13.
  42. Sagarik, D., Chansukree, P., Cho, W., & Berman, E. (2018). E-government 4.0 in Thailand: The role of central agencies. Information Polity, 23, 343–353.
  43. Santa, R., MacDonald, J. B., & Ferrer, M. (2019). The role of trust in e-Government effectiveness, operational effectiveness and user satisfaction: Lessons from Saudi Arabia in e-G2B. Government Information Quarterly, 36(1), 39–50.
  44. Santamaría-Philco, A., & Wimmer, M. A. (2018). Trust in e-participation: An empirical research on the influencing factors. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series.
  45. Scholta, H., Mertens, W., Kowalkiewicz, M., & Becker, J. (2019). From one-stop shop to no-stop shop: An e-government stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 36(1), 11–26.
  46. Sundberg, L. (2019). Electronic government: Towards e-democracy or democracy at risk? Safety Science, 118(September 2018), 22–32.
  47. Twizeyimana, J. D., & Andersson, A. (2019). The public value of E-Government – A literature review. Government Information Quarterly, 36(2), 167–178.
  48. Verkijika, S. F., & De Wet, L. (2018). E-government adoption in sub-Saharan Africa. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 30(February), 83–93.
  49. Xie, Q., Song, W., Peng, X., & Shabbir, M. (2017). Predictors for e-government adoption: Integrating TAM, TPB, trust and perceived risk. Electronic Library, 35(1), 2–20.