International Journal of Current Science Research and Review

ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

Budget Transparency Nagan Raya Regency Government

Tesa Putri Purwati1, Mulia Saputra2, Syukriy Abdullah3
1,2,3
Master of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Syiah Kuala

ABSTRACT: This study aims to examine the effect of legislative oversight, regulation, technology utilization, and leadership style
on budget transparency. This research was conducted based on information obtained from questionnaires distributed to respondents.
This research sampling technique uses purposive sampling method. This research uses quantitative methods by distributing
questionnaires to 132 local officials who work in the Regional Apparatus Organization of Nagan Raya Regency. The data analysis
technique used is multiple linear regression with analysis tools using SPSS 26 software. The results of this study indicate that
legislative oversight and leadership style have a positive effect on budget transparency. While regulation and technology utilization
have a negative effect on budget transparency.

KEYWORDS: Budget Transparency, Leadership Style, Legislative Oversight, Regulation, Technology Utilization.

INTRODUCTION
Reforms in local government management aim to realize good governance. The implementation of good governance can be fulfilled
if it adheres to three basic principles, namely: transparent, accountable, and participatory (Harrison & Sayogo, 2014; Mesak, 2016).
These three principles can be used by the community as a means of control over local governments in organizing government functions
and public services. The principle of transparency in local government is more emphasized on aspects of local budget management
(Nurwanda & Badriah, 2022).
The obligation to submit local government information has been regulated in the Minister of Home Affairs Regulation No. 13 of 2006
concerning Regional Financial Management Guidelines, which states that transparency is the principle of openness that allows the
public to know and gain access to information more broadly about regional finances. Law No. 14/2008 on Public Information
Disclosure requires every public body to provide and serve requests for public information in a fast, timely, low-cost and simple
manner. Article 9 states that local governments are obliged to publish public information in the form of activities and performance as
well as information on financial reports on a regular basis. In addition, local governments are required to provide public information
that is accurate, correct and not misleading.
Government Regulation No. 71 of 2010 concerning Government Accounting Standards explains the concept of transparency is to
provide open and honest information to the public because the public has the right to know the efforts that have been made by the
government in managing the resources that have been entrusted. Followed by the Minister of Finance Regulation No. 74 of 2016
concerning the Implementation of Regional Financial Information Systems emphasizes that the government is obliged to manage
financial data to be presented to the public for consideration. The regulation explains that local governments must realize the
acquisition of financial information in order to create good governance. Transparency is defined as the disclosure of information by
an organization that allows outsiders to monitor and assess its internal work and performance (Bearfield & Bowman, 2017).
According to Government Regulation No. 71 of 2010 concerning Government Accounting Standards, transparency is providing open
and honest financial information to the public based on the consideration that the public has the right to know openly and thoroughly
about the government's accountability in managing the resources entrusted to it and its compliance with laws and regulations.
Nagan Raya Regent Regulation Number 11 of 2020 concerning Guidelines for Management of Information and Documentation
Services (MIDS) within the Government of Nagan Raya Regency Article 11 states that MIDS is tasked with providing and publishing
information on the Agency/Service Website to be accessed by the public, one of which is information regarding financial reports.
However, based on the results of observations of the website, each Agency/Service within the scope of Nagan Raya Regency mostly
does not have a website that can be accessed by the public. Each Agency/Service uses one website, namely the Nagan Raya Regency
website.
Based on observations of the Nagan Raya Regency website which can be accessed via the link https://www.naganrayakab.go.id/, it
can be seen that the budget information uploaded on the website is only financial reports for the last 2 years, namely 2020 and 2021.
2881 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

Therefore, the use of the budget cannot be compared every year. This is not in accordance with Nagan Raya Regent Regulation
Number 11 of 2020 concerning Guidelines for Management of Information and Documentation Services within the Government of
Nagan Raya Regency Article 11. In addition, the uploaded financial report documents are incomplete such as the lack of notes on
financial statements in the local government financial report section. The components that must be reported at least consist of budget
realization reports, balance sheets, cash flow statements, and notes to financial statements. These components are contained in
Government Regulation Number 8 of 2006 concerning Financial and Performance Reporting of Government Agencies Article 5.
Then the local government of Nagan Raya Regency does not have guidelines for budget transparency like those of other local
governments, one of which is the local government of East Belitung Regency.
Budget transparency is considered a necessary condition for a sustainable economy, good governance, and honesty in budget
management in general (Montes & Luna, 2021). More transparent budgets are associated with increased government effectiveness,
so higher levels of fiscal transparency have lower inflation rates (Montes et al., 2019; Montes & da Cunha Lima, 2018). The
importance of transparency to integrate public value into the budgeting process can help balance democratic demands with efficiency
needs (Bracci et al., 2019). The results of research by Bisogno & Cuadrado-Ballesteros (2021) state that the implementation of reforms
to embrace the "openness" movement is intended to increase budget transparency, politicians and managers must consider not only
the effects of public trust and participation but must also pay attention to the link between budget transparency and government
financial sustainability.
Based on previous research, there are a number of variables that can affect Budget Transparency such as Legislative Oversight (Ríos
et al., 2016), Regulation (Fajri et al., 2021), Technology Utilization (Chen et al., 2018), and leadership style (Andriyani, 2016). The
first factor that affects Budget Transparency is Legislative Oversight. The legislature is a government agency that has the authority
to make regulations and oversee the implementation of approved regulations. In the supervisory function, the budget that has been
prepared by the executive will be supervised by the legislature which is useful to avoid misuse of the budget and show the public how
the legislature supervises the executive. The Legislative Oversight instrument is used to account for the authority delegated to the
executive in an appropriate manner and can contribute to the prevention of corruption. Research results show that Legislative
Oversight affects Budget Transparency, as stronger Legislative Oversight results in greater Budget Transparency (Dikmen & Çiçek,
2019; Ríos et al., 2016, 2018).
The second factor affecting Budget Transparency is Regulation. In managing the budget, the legislature has approved the stipulation
of laws, government regulations and local regulations that must be implemented by local governments as budget users. The regulations
are outlined in the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 14 of 2008 concerning Public Information Disclosure, followed by
Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 16 of 2010 concerning the Implementation of Law of the Republic of
Indonesia Number 14 of 2008 concerning Public Information Disclosure, then Regulation of the Minister of Home Affairs Number
35 of 2010 concerning Guidelines for Management of Information and Documentation Services within the Ministry of Home Affairs
and Local Governments, then Information Commission Regulation Number 1 of 2010 concerning Public Information Service
Standards, in the following year issued Information Commission Regulation Number 1 of 2013 concerning Procedures for Resolving
Public Information Disputes. This was followed by Regulations from each Region on the Guidelines for Public Information Services
and Documentation within the Government, on Governance of Public Information Disclosure in the Implementation of Government,
on the Determination of Information Management and Documentation Officers within the Provincial Government, on Guidelines for
Public Information Services and Documentation within the Local Government.
Regulations are used as guidelines or guidelines in the implementation of budget management. Local governments are required to
carry out budget management as written in the regulations that have been set, if the government violates or does not carry out the
budget according to the regulations, it will be subject to penalties in the form of sanctions or fines in accordance with what is written
and determined. The budget is used to measure government policies as seen from the goals and efforts made by the government in
serving the community (Dikmen & Çiçek, 2019). Regulations set by the government are a tool to fulfill the achievement of future
goals as a form of policy implementation. Political competition can increase transparency, but governments with high levels of
political competition can also inhibit changes in regulations and thus hinder transparency (Caamaño-Alegre et al., 2013).
In Latin America, the Organization of American States (OAS) has called for the adoption of disclosure laws, but research by García-
Tabuyo et al. (2015) states that many local managers still maintain the use of traditional policies in secret and ignore information

2882 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

disclosure regulations, resulting in many cases of corruption in local governments. This means that better application of regulations
will increase budget transparency.
The third factor affecting Budget Transparency is Technology Utilization. Technology is a tool created to facilitate human work
(Lantu et al., 2023). Not infrequently, the use of technology replaces human labor as the times progress. Technology utilization is
also felt by the government as a form of making it easier to complete a job. Forms of technology use in local government through
applications or software in budget preparation, dissemination of budget information, for example through websites, social media,
email, and others. Utilization of existing technology in government is accompanied by knowledge of the use of technology. One of
the government activities is to take part in training on the use of technology that will be used by local governments. The transparency
law requires the government to be more transparent in delivering government programs through the use of technology that can be
seen by the wider community, commonly referred to as e-government.
E-government is a technology used by government agencies to improve transparency in both performance and finance. The use of e-
government provides many benefits to the government and society such as: the public can oversee the course of budget absorption
being carried out by the Regional Apparatus Organization (RAO), information is received more quickly, information is accurate and
more reliable. Public accountability and transparency are getting better if they utilize information technology (Nasution & Rizqy
Ramadhan, 2019). The public can participate and oversee regional finances with the existence of Budget Transparency through the
use of information technology. Several studies show that Technology Utilization affects Budget Transparency, for example Chen et
al. (2018), Nasution & Rizqy Ramadhan (2019), and Puron-Cid & Bolívar (2018). Conversely, there are several studies that find that
Technology Utilization has no effect on Budget Transparency, for example Mourao et al. (2020) and Mutmainnah et al. (2023).
The fourth factor that can affect Budget Transparency is Leadership Style. A leader is someone who has a role or position that in
making decisions will influence others in their actions in an organization. Whether or not an organization's goals are achieved depends
on the decisions made by a leader. Research by Amelia (2015) and Andriyani (2016) found that Leadership Style has an effect on
Budget Transparency. Meanwhile, Sari (2017) found that Leadership Style has no effect on Budget Transparency.
Based on the sequence of phenomena that occur in local governments and the inconsistencies in the results of previous research on
how the influence of legislative oversight, regulation, technology utilization, and leadership style on budget transparency. The
limitations of previous research in this area have become an interesting trigger for researchers to conduct further exploration. To
bridge the gap of previous research, this study takes an innovative approach by integrating the regulation variable as an independent
variable. The use of regulatory variables as independent variables is a novelty in research, thus providing a unique aspect in this study.
Therefore, this study re-examines how legislative oversight, regulation, technology utilization, and leadership style affect budget
transparency with budget transparency regulation as a new variable used in the study.
Furthermore, to extend the reach of the research, this study adopts a comprehensive approach by investigating each element in budget
transparency partially. The ultimate goal is to provide a deeper understanding of the impact of legislative oversight, regulation,
technology use, and leadership style on budget transparency, especially in the context of local government. Therefore, a rigorous
analysis of each of these elements aims to reveal how legislative oversight, regulation, technology use, and leadership style affect the
level of budget transparency. Using this approach, researchers hope to make an important contribution to scientific knowledge by
providing more detailed and contextualized insights into the complex relationships between legislative oversight, regulation,
technology use, and leadership style with budget transparency.

THEORETICAL BASE
Agency Theory
Agency theory describes an agreement (contract) between a principal and an agent, where the principal authorizes the agent to make
decisions on their behalf (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). According to the literature, transparency can be defined from the principal-
agent theory, considering it as the ability to know what is happening within public sector organizations through various means such
as open meetings, access to records or proactive posting of information on Web sites (Piotrowski & Ryzin, 2007). Other scholars
have framed the determinants of transparency within the confines of agency theory (Alt & Lassen, 2006; Archidona & Gandı, 2008).
By increasing budget transparency, local governments can address potential moral issues in budget management. Online information
can reduce uncertainty about agent behavior, thus making principals more confident in delegating power to agents (Holmstrom, 1979).

2883 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

Budget Transparency
Florini (2000) defines transparency as the release of information by institutions that is relevant for evaluating those institutions. This
approach emphasizes two fundamental pillars on which transparency is based (Cucciniello et al., 2017). The first pillar is the
availability of information that is investigated with various issues such as political or budgetary issues, administrative procedures
(Meijer et al., 2012; Pina et al., 2010), operational issues (Tejedo-Romero & de Araujo, 2018), or the performance of public sector
entities (Cuadrado-Ballesteros, 2014). The meaning in transparency after testing results emphasizes that it is not just the information
itself that matters, but the fact that it can be found (Williams, 2015). Therefore, transparency must rely on the quality and quantity of
information disclosed in order to build trust and accountability (Porumbescu et al., 2017; Wang & Niu, 2020). Budget transparency
is measured using 4 indicators, namely: 1) availability and accessibility; 2) need and completeness of information; 3) process
openness; 4) regulatory framework that ensures transparency (Nurhadianto & Khamisah, 2019; Ritonga & Syahrir, 2016).
Legislative Oversight
According to Article 20A paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution, the House of Representatives (DPR) has a legislative function, a
budgetary function, and a supervisory function. The legislature has a role in making policies and overseeing the course of policies
that have been agreed upon and approved. Legislative oversight can be done before, after, or during law enforcement and can be done
internally or externally to the legislature (Pelizzo & Stapenhurst, 2013). Although legislators in developing countries approve
government budgets and policies, they tend to be weak in monitoring and evaluating the implementation and effectiveness of these
policies. There is no guarantee that legislative committees will have control over policy making (Clinton et al., 2012). Higher
legislative involvement in the budget process will lead to fiscal discipline and budget transparency (Ríos et al., 2018). Further, strong
legislative power over budget decisions is not only associated with fiscal indiscipline but also with budget transparency. This means
that legislative oversight affects budget transparency. The results of this study are supported by the research of Ríos et al. (2016)
which also states that legislative oversight affects budget transparency. Legislative oversight is measured using 3 indicators, namely:
1) legislative oversight before budget execution (leg.pre); 2) legislative oversight during budget execution (leg.dur); 3) legislative
oversight after budget execution (leg.post) (Ríos et al., 2016). So it can be concluded that the hypothesis in this study is as follows.
H1: Legislative oversight affects budget transparency.
Regulation
Regulations on budget transparency refer to policies, regulations, or frameworks implemented by governments or other entities to
ensure that information relating to public budgets or public funds is presented in a transparent, open, clear, and easily accessible
manner to the public. Strict regulations are more likely to enforce the transparent presentation of financial statements (Costello et al.,
2019). This suggests that regulation is an important role in enforcing budget transparency. The implementation of stronger regulations
will improve financial information (Watanabe et al., 2019). Lack of transparency regulations and regulatory inconsistencies can hinder
the implementation of the budget transparency process to be ineffective and efficient (Nurunnabi, 2014). Nurdiansyah's research
(2016) states that regulation affects budget transparency. This research is supported by Baharuddin's research (2020) which states that
regulation affects transparency in the form of successful implementation of regulations to realize more transparent information
disclosure. Regulation is measured using 3 indicators, namely: 1) availability, socialization and understanding of regulations; 2)
consistency and ease of implementation; 3) response and linkages between regulations (Fajri et al., 2021). Therefore, it can be
concluded that the second hypothesis in this study is as follows.
H2: Regulation affects Budget Transparency.
Technology Utilization
The development of the times that requires an organization to use technology in every job, one of which is in information transparency.
Many local government organizations use the web to provide information transparency through e-government. The ease of using e-
government in obtaining information about budget transparency in a complete, accurate, timely, and understandable manner is the
government's added value to the public (Cohen et al., 2022) norn (Nor et al., 2021). Governments that want to improve effectiveness
and efficiency must improve fiscal transparency supported by adopting technology and information (Chen et al., 2018; Montes et al.,
2019). Governments that have smooth internet access can easily use technology to disseminate information and people who have
internet access can easily search for government financial information (Mourao et al., 2020). Technology utilization is measured using

2884 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

2 indicators, namely: 1) technology suitability and 2) technology complexity (Gil-García & Pardo, 2005; Puron-Cid, 2014; Zhang &
Hsieh, 2010). So it can be concluded that the third hypothesis in this study is as follows.
H3: Technology Utilization affects Budget Transparency.
Leadership Style
Leadership is a person's action to influence others in understanding the tasks that must be carried out in order to improve performance,
the greater the leadership style, the more member performance increases (Mukmin & Prasetyo, 2021). According to Aris (2020), the
characteristics of this leadership are characterized by upholding moral values such as honesty, justice, loyalty and responsibility so
that their rights and responsibilities are achieved. Leadership style in government organizations can help in implementing financial
reporting transparency, because a leader will influence the planning, implementation, and success in achieving the goals of the
government organization he leads (Andriyani, 2016). Leaders who have a commitment in their leadership style to follow compliance
with penalties and regulations will realize the goals of government organizations (Amelia, 2015). Leadership style is measured using
4 indicators, namely: 1) telling style (directing style); 2) selling style (offering style); 3) participating style (participation style); 4)
delegating style (delegation style) (Henkel & Bourdeau, 2018). So it can be concluded that the fourth hypothesis in this study is as
follows.
H4: Leadership style affects budget transparency.

RESEARCH METHOD
In this study, the population used was all officials who worked in the regional work unit of Nagan Raya Regency. The sampling
technique used in this study was purposive sampling. The sampling criteria used in this study are only government officials who act
directly in budget management, namely the head of the OPD, Secretary of the OPD, Head of the finance subdivision, so that there are
132 respondents used as samples. The primary data collected in this study will be analyzed with the help of the SPSS program which
aims to predict the population average and the average value of the dependent variable. To see the effect of the variables studied on
budget transparency, the study used multiple linear regression analysis with the following regression equation:
Y = α + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + e
Where:
Y = Budget Transparency (dependent variable)
α = Constant
β1 = Legislative Oversight regression coefficient
β2 = Regulatory regression coefficient
β3 = Technology Utilization regression coefficient
β4 = Regression coefficient Leadership style
X1 = Legislative Oversight (independent variable)
X2 = Regulation (independent variable)
X3 = Technology Utilization (independent variable)
X4 = Leadership Style (independent variable)
e = Standard error

RESEARCH RESULTS
The research sample obtained the results of the number of questionnaires totaling 132 questionnaires. The variable descriptions in
this study include mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum.

2885 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

Descriptive Statistical Analysis

Table 1. Results of Descriptive Statistics
Std.
Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation
Legislative Oversight 37.00 55.00 47.1439 4.92405
Regulation 16.00 30.00 25.5909 3.23614
Technology Utilization 12.00 20.00 16.8258 2.10233
Leadership Style 22.00 35.00 30.1894 3.19621
Budget Transparency 26.00 40.00 33.8788 3.99815

Normality Test Results

The following are the results of the normality test as shown in table 2:
Table 2. Normality Test Results
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .200c,d

In this study, the normality test results show that the significance value (Asymp.sig. 2-tailed) is 0.200. Because the significance value
is greater than 0.05 (Sig. > α) it can be said that the research data is normally distributed.

Multicollinearity Test Results

The following are the results of the multicollinearity test as shown in table 3:
Table 3. Multicollinearity Test Results
Variables Tolerance VIF
Legislative Oversight .385 2.600
Regulation .321 3.113
Technology Utilization .501 1.997
Leadership Style .357 2.802

Based on the results of the multicollinearity test, it can be seen that below the tolerance value is greater than 0.1 and the VIF value is
less than 10, so the four variables do not occur multicollinearity.

Heteroscedasticity Test Results

The following are the results of the heteroscedasticity test shown in table 4:
Table 4. Heteroscedasticity Test Results

Model Sig.
1 (Constant) .837
Legislative Oversight .413
Regulation .973
Technology Utilization .275
Leadership Style .429
a. Dependent Variable: Abs_RES

Based on the heteroscedasticity test, it shows that the significance value is greater than 0.05, so the four variables do not occur
heteroscedasticity in the regression model. So that regression can be continued after passing the classical assumption test.

2886 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

Hypothesis Test Results

The following are the results of the hypothesis test shown in table 5:
Table 5. Hypothesis Test Results
Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 13.513 2.680 5.041 .000
Legislative Oversight (X1) .580 .083 .714 6.963 .000
Regulation (X2) -.690 .139 -.558 -4.978 .000
Technology Utilization (X3) -.741 .171 -.390 -4.336 .000
Leadership Style (X4) .767 .133 .613 5.763 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Budget Transparency

Based on the results of multiple linear regression tests, legislative oversight has a significance value smaller than 0.05, this means that
the legislative oversight variable has a significant effect on the budget transparency variable. Regulation has a significance value l
than 0.05, this means that the regulation variable has a significant effect on the budget transparency variable. Technology utilization
has a significance value of less than 0.05, this means that the technology utilization variable has a significant effect on the budget
transparency variable. Leadership style has a significance value of less than 0.05, this means that the leadership style variable has a
significant effect on the budget transparency variable.

DISCUSSION
The Effect of Legislative Oversight on Budget Transparency
Legislative oversight has a positive and significant effect on budget transparency. This means that if legislative members supervise
more frequently the running of the budget to SKPK, the more transparent the budget used by SKPK will be. This is in line with agency
theory, namely the conflict of interest between the principal and the agent. The legislature as a representative of the community plays
an important role in monitoring and evaluating the actions of the government as an agent. Legislative oversight can serve as a control
mechanism to ensure that policies implemented by the government are in line with the public interest and in accordance with the
mandate given by the principal. This study is in line with the results of research conducted by Costello et al. (2019), Dikmen & Çiçek
(2019), Keyifli (2021),and Ríos et al. (2016, 2018) which state that legislative oversight has an effect on budget transparency, where
the role of legislative institutions can help reduce the obscurity of budgets used by government agencies through their supervision.
Effect of Regulation on Budget Transparency
Regulation has a negative and significant effect on budget transparency. These results indicate that regulatory aspects such as certain
rules or policies can have an impact that hinders transparency in budget management. This can happen if the interval between changing
one regulation to the next is so fast, thus slowing down the transparency process. The results of this study are inversely proportional
to agency theory because the results of the study state that regulations can reduce the level of budget transparency. This can happen
if the application of complex regulations is not accompanied by the quantity and quality of human resources and the utilization of
technology so that it is difficult to carry out processes in budget transparency. This research is not in line with the research of Montero
et al. (2020) which states that regulation has a positive effect on transparency so that the application of regulations can increase budget
transparency.
Effect of Technology Utilization on Budget Transparency
Technology utilization has a negative and significant effect on budget transparency. This negative effect indicates that constraints or
challenges related to technology utilization in the budget process can hinder the level of openness and accountability in the
management of public funds. The results of this study are inversely proportional to agency theory because the results of the study
2887 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

state that technology utilization can reduce the level of budget transparency. This could happen if government officials do not want
to disclose the entire budget. The results of this study are in line with previous research which states that technology utilization affects
budget transparency (Chen et al., 2018; Mutmainnah et al., 2023; Nasution & Ramadhan, 2019; Nugraha & Wibowo, 2020; Valle-
Cruz et al., 2015). This research is also supported by Pratolo & Fadilah's research (2022) which states that technology utilization has
a significant and negative effect on transparency.
Effect of Leadership Style on Budget Transparency
Leadership style has a positive and significant effect on budget transparency. This finding indicates that an effective leadership style
can have a positive impact on increasing openness and accountability in the management of public funds. This is in line with agency
theory, namely the existence of conflicts of interest when a leader who understands the principles of agency theory will realize the
importance of minimizing the risk of conflicts of interest through concrete actions that increase transparency. Applying the principles
of accountability, clearly communicating budget decisions, and opening an open dialog with stakeholders are leadership strategies
that support budget transparency efforts. Leaders who are able to lead with integrity, promote accountability, and open up to
information exchange with stakeholders can create an environment that supports budget transparency, reduces the risk of agency
conflicts, and builds trust in government financial management. The results of this study are in line with previous research which
states that leadership style affects budget transparency (Andriyani, 2016; Basri et al., 2021; Mensah & Qi, 2016). However, this
research is not in line with the research of Puspitasari et al. (2022) and Sari (2017) which state that leadership style has no effect on
budget transparency.

CONCLUSION
This study aims to examine the effect of legislative oversight, regulation, technology utilization, and leadership style on budget
transparency. Based on the test results from primary data, it can be concluded that legislative oversight has a positive effect on budget
transparency in the local government of Nagan Raya Regency, regulation has a negative effect on budget transparency in the local
government of Nagan Raya Regency, technology utilization has a negative effect on budget transparency in the local government of
Nagan Raya Regency, and leadership style has a positive effect on budget transparency in the local government of Nagan Raya
Regency.

IMPLICATIONS
Taking into account the research findings, it is hoped that local governments can increase transparency in budget disclosure by
involving legislative institutions in overseeing and ensuring budget management. In addition, it needs to be accompanied by the
procurement of appropriate technology and the need for re-evaluation of existing regulations so as not to hinder the course of budget
transparency. Finally, local officials can implement a leadership style that prioritizes transparency values in public budget
management. To achieve the success of this research, it should be recognized that this study has several limitations that need to be
considered, namely, this research only focuses on one region so that it cannot be a picture that can represent other regions. For future
researchers, this research can be developed by expanding the object of research such as taking objects throughout Indonesia. Then,
the selection of respondents should use officials who are not financial managers to avoid sampling bias in the research results.

REFERENCES
1. Alt, J. E., & Lassen, D. D. (2006). Fiscal transparency, political parties, and debt in OECD countries. European Economic
Review, 50(6), 1403–1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2005.04.001
2. Amelia, R. (2015). Pengaruh Pengendalian Internal, Akuntabilitas, Tekanan Eksternal dan Komitmen Pimpinan Terhadap
Penerapan Transparansi Pelaporan Keuangan. JOM Fekon, 2(2), 2010–2012.
3. Andriyani, L. (2016). Pengaruh Tekanan Eksternal, Ketidakpastian Lingkungan, Komitmen Manajemen, Dan Aksesibilitas
Laporan Keuangan Terhadap Penerapan Transparansi Pelaporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah (Studi Pada Satuan Kerja
Perangkat Daerah Kabupaten Kampar). Jurnal Online Mahasiswa Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Riau, 3(1), 1520–1534.
4. Archidona, M. C., & Gandı, J. L. (2008). Determinants of web site information by Spanish city councils. Online Information
Review, 32(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520810865976

2888 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

5. Aris, M. (2020). Analisis Kepemimpinan Transaksional Pada PT.Ardan Masogi Telkomsel Sengkang Kabupaten Wajo.
Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi Publik Dan Bisnis, 2(1), 64–72.
https://www.academia.edu/29279509/Analisis_Kepemimpinan_Soeharto
6. Baharuddin, T. (2020). Keterbukaan Informasi Publik: Studi Pada Keberhasilan Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten Luwu Utara
2019. Journal of Governance and Local Politics, 2(2), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.47650/jglp.v2i2.13
7. Basri, Y. M., Zenita, V., & Rofika, R. (2021). Tekanan Eksternal, Faktor Politik, Pengendalian Internal Dan Gaya
Kepemimpinan Dalam Meningkatkan Transparansi Pelaporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah. Kajian Akuntansi, 22(1), 88–
108. https://doi.org/10.29313/ka.v22i1.6954
8. Bearfield, D. A., & Bowman, A. O. M. (2017). Can You Find It on the Web? An Assessment of Municipal E-Government
Transparency. American Review of Public Administration, 47(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074015627694
9. Bisogno, M., & Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B. (2021). Budget transparency and governance quality: a cross-country analysis.
Public Management Review, 00(00), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1916064
10. Bracci, E., Papi, P., Bigoni, M., Gagliardo, E. D., & Bruns, H. J. (2019). Public value and public sector accounting research:
a structured literature review. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 31(1), 103–136.
11. Caamaño-Alegre, J., Lago-Peñas, S., Reyes-Santias, F., & Santiago-Boubeta, A. (2013). Budget Transparency in Local
Governments: An Empirical Analysis. Local Government Studies, 39(2), 182–207.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2012.693075
12. Chen, G., Kang, H., & Luna-reyes, L. F. (2018). Key Determinants of Online Fiscal Transparency: A Technology-
Organization-Environment Framework. Public Performance & Management Review, 0(0), 1–25.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2018.148621
13. Clinton, J. D., Bertelli, A., Grose, C. R., Lewis, D. E., & Nixon, D. C. (2012). Separated Powers in the United States: The
Ideology of Agencies, Presidents, and Congress. American Journal of Political Science, 56(2), 341–354.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00559.x
14. Cohen, S., Rossi, F. M., & Brusca, I. (2022). Public sector accounting harmonization in the European Union through thelens
of the garbage can model. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 10(3), 252–280. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550710772521
15. Costello, A. M., Granja, J., & Weber, J. (2019). Do Strict Regulators Increase the Transparency of Banks? Journal of
Accounting Research, 57(3), 603–637. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12255
16. Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B. (2014). The impact of functional decentralization and externalization on local government
transparency. Government Information Quarterly, 31(2), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.01
17. Cucciniello, M., Porumbescu, G. A., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2017). 25 Years of Transparency Research: Evidence and
Future Directions. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12685
18. Dikmen, S., & Çiçek, H. G. (2019). Yasama Organının Bütçe Gözetim İşlevi ve Mali Saydamlık Arasındaki İlişkinin
Ekonometrik Bir Analizi. Journal of Political Sciences, 28(2), 181–205. https://doi.org/10.26650/siyasal.2019.28.2.0003
19. Fajri, R., Agusti, R., & Julita, J. (2021). Pengaruh Transparansi, Partisipasi Masyarakat, Kompetensi Aparatur Desa, dan
Pemahaman Regulasi Terhadap Akuntabilitas Pengelolaan Dana Desa. Jurnal Al-Iqtishad, 17(2), 209–227.
20. Florini, A. (2000). Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Does the invisible hand need a transparent
glove ? ” Research Collection School of Social Sciences, Paper 2092. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/2092
21. García-Tabuyo, M., Sáez-Martín, A., & Caba-Pérez, M. C. (2015). Proactive transparency policy in the mercosur local
governments: Regulation vs. self-regulation. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 2015(46E), 71–90.
22. Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations.
Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 187–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2005.02.001
23. Harrison, T. M., & Sayogo, D. S. (2014). Transparency, participation, and accountability practices in open government: A
comparative study. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 513–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.08.002
24. Henkel, T., & Bourdeau, D. (2018). A Field Study: An Examination Of Managers’ Situational Leadership Styles. Journal of
Diversity Management (JDM), 13(2), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.19030/jdm.v13i2.10218
25. Holmstrom, B. (1979). Moral Hazard and Observability. The Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1), 74.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3003320

2889 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

26. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. (1976). THEORY OF THE FIRM: MANAGERIAL BEHAVIOR, AGENCY COSTS AND
OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9257-3_8
27. Keyifli, N. (2021). The Impact Of Budget Oversight Of The Legislature On Budget Transparency: An Empirical Analysis
On Developing Countries. Journal Of Turkish Court Of Accounts, 32(120), 59–87.
28. Lantu, F. T., Pangkey, R., & Sumampouw, O. (2023). Pengaruh Penerapan Standar Akuntansi Pemerintahan Dan
Pemanfaatan Teknologi Informasi Terhadap Kualitas Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten Minahasa Utara.
Jurnal Akuntansi Manado (JAIM), 4(1), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.53682/jaim.vi.4255
29. Meijer, A. J., Curtin, D., & Hillebrandt, M. (2012). Open government: Connecting vision and voice. International Review of
Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 10–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852311429533
30. Mensah, Y. M., & Qi, Y. (2016). Preferred Leadership Styles, Culture, and Government Fiscal Transparency: An
International Analysis. Advances in Economics and Business, 4(6), 273–290. https://doi.org/10.13189/aeb.2016.040602
31. Mesak, I. (2016). A Study of Participation Rate, Transparency and Accountability of Special Autonomy Funds Management
in Jayapura IEK,. Journal of Social and Development Sciences, 7(1), 2016.
32. Montero, P. M., Calderón, E. P., & Dias, A. I. L. (2020). Transparency of financial reporting on greenhouse gas emission
allowances: The influence of regulation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030893
33. Montes, G. C., Bastos, J. C. A., & de Oliveira, A. J. (2019). Fiscal transparency, government effectiveness and government
spending efficiency: Some international evidence based on panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 79(October 2018),
211–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.10.013
34. Montes, G. C., & da Cunha Lima, L. L. (2018). Effects of fiscal transparency on inflation and inflation expectations:
Empirical evidence from developed and developing countries. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 70, 26–37.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2018.06.002
35. Montes, G. C., & Luna, P. H. (2021). Fiscal transparency, legal system and perception of the control on corruption:empirical
evidence from panel data. In Empirical Economics (Vol. 60, Issue 4). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01849-9
36. Mourao, P. R., Bronić, M., & Stanić, B. (2020). Discussing the determinants of online budget transparency based on a spatial
regression analysis of Croatian cities and municipalities: Do good neighbours make you better? International Area Studies
Review, 23(3), 268–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/2233865919895854
37. Mukmin, S., & Prasetyo, I. (2021). Pengaruh Gaya Kepemimpinan Dan Budaya Organisasi Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan
Melalui Kepuasan Kerja Karyawan Sebagai Variabel Intervening. Jurnal Manajerial Bisnis, 4(2), 123–136.
https://doi.org/10.37504/jmb.v4i2.297
38. Mutmainnah, S., Nor, W., & Helmina, M. R. A. (2023). Determinan tingkat transparansi anggaran melalui website
pemerintah provinsi di Indonesia. Proceeding of National Conference on Accounting & Finance, 5, 191–199.
https://doi.org/10.20885/ncaf.vol5.art22
39. Nasution, D. A. D., & Ramadhan, P. R. (2019). Pengaruh Implementasi E-Budgeting Terhadap Transparansi Keuangan
Daerah Di Indonesia. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 27(2), 58–66.
40. Nasution, D. A. D., & Rizqy Ramadhan, P. (2019). Pengaruh Implementasi E-Budgeting Terhadap Transparansi Keuangan
Daerah Di Indonesia. E-Jurnal Akuntansi, 28, 669. https://doi.org/10.24843/eja.2019.v28.i01.p26
41. Nor, W., Safrida, L., Rizani, F., & Fitriaty, D. (2021). Transaparansi Anggaran Pada Website Resmi Pemerintah Provinsi Di
Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 4(5), 1605–1624.
42. Nugraha, A. Y., & Wibowo, U. B. (2020). Analysis of Benefits and Obstacles From E-Budgeting Implementation in
Educational Organizations. International Conference on Educational Research and Innovation (ICERI 2019), 401(65), 1–5.
43. Nurdiansyah, E. (2016). Keterbukaan Informasi Publik Sebagai Upaya Mewujudkan Transparansi Bagi Masyarakat. Jurnal
Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, 3(2), 147–151. https://ejournal.unsri.ac.id/index.php/jbti/article/view/4593/pdf
44. Nurhadianto, T., & Khamisah, N. (2019). Analisis Transparansi Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah: Studi Empiris Pada
Pemerintah Daerah Kabupaten/Kota Di Provinsi Lampung. TECHNOBIZ : International Journal of Business, 2(2), 70.
https://doi.org/10.33365/tb.v3i2.453

2890 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

45. Nurunnabi, M. (2014). “Does accounting regulation matter?”: An experience of international financial reporting standards
implementation in an emerging country. Research in Accounting Regulation, 26(2), 230–238.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.racreg.2014.09.012
46. Nurwanda, A., & Badriah, E. (2022). Implementasi Kebijakan Pemerintahan ; Perspektif Jaringan ( Network Perspective )
Pada Era Keterbukaan Informasi Publik. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Program Studi Ilmu Pemerintahan Universitas Galuh,
65–72.
47. Pelizzo, R., & Stapenhurst, F. (2013). Government accountability and legislative oversight. In Routledge (Issue November).
48. Pina, V., Torres, L., & Royo, S. (2010). Is e-government promoting convergence towards more accountable local
governments? International Public Management Journal, 13(4), 350–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2010.524834
49. Piotrowski, S. J., & Ryzin, G. G. V. (2007). Citizen Attitudes Toward Transparency in Local Government. The American
Review of Public Administration, 37(3), 306–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180120081616
50. Porumbescu, G. A., Lindeman, M. I. H., Ceka, E., & Cucciniello, M. (2017). Can Transparency Foster More Understanding
and Compliant Citizens? Public Administration Review, 77(6), 840–850. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12790
51. Pratolo, S., & Fadilah, A. G. (2022). The Effects of Human Resources and Information Technology Utilization toward
Transparency of Village Financial Management with Organizational Commitment as a Moderated Variable (Empirical Study
in Bantul Regency). Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Innovation Track Accounting and
Management Sciences (ICOSIAMS 2021), 201(Icosiams 2021), 276–283. https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.211225.038
52. Puron-Cid, G. (2014). Factors for a successful adoption of budgetary transparency innovations: A questionnaire report of an
open government initiative in Mexico. Government Information Quarterly, 31(SUPPL.1), S49–S62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.01.007
53. Puron-Cid, G., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2018). The effects of contextual factors into different features of financial transparency
at the municipal level. Government Information Quarterly, 35(1), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.10.005
54. Puspitasari, M., Ardiyansyah, C., & Hapsari, A. N. S. (2022). Mampukah Gaya Kepemimpinan Mendorong Pengelolaan
Keuangan BUMDes yang Akuntabel dan Transparan? Perspektif Akuntansi, 5(3), 273–295.
https://doi.org/10.24246/persi.v5i3.p273-295
55. Ríos, A. M., Bastida, F., & Benito, B. (2016). Budget Transparency and Legislative Budgetary Oversight: An International
Approach. American Review of Public Administration, 46(5), 546–568. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014565020
56. Ríos, A. M., Bastida, F., & Benito, B. (2018). Risks and Benefits of Legislative Budgetary Oversight. Administration and
Society, 50(6), 856–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399715602733
57. Ritonga, I. T., & Syahrir, S. (2016). Mengukur transparansi pengelolaan keuangan daerah di Indonesia: berbasis website.
Jurnal Akuntansi & Auditing Indonesia, 20(2), 110–126. https://doi.org/10.20885/jaai.vol20.iss2.art4
58. Sari, E. W. (2017). Pengaruh Sistem Pengendalian Intern, Penyajian Laporan Keuangan, Aksesibilitas Laporan Keuangan
Dan Gaya Kepemimpinan Terhadap Transparansi Dan Akuntabilitas Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah Di Kabupaten Indragiri
Hulu. Jurnal Online Mahasiswa Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Riau, 4(1), 571–586.
https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/125589-ID-analisis-dampak-pemekaran-daerah-ditinja.pdf
59. Tejedo-Romero, F., & de Araujo, J. F. F. E. (2018). Determinants of Local Governments’ Transparency in Times of Crisis:
Evidence From Municipality-Level Panel Data. Administration and Society, 50(4), 527–554.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399715607288
60. Valle-Cruz, D., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Ramon Gil-Garcia, J. (2015). The effects of technology use on efficiency,
transparency, and corruption in municipal governments: Preliminary results from a citizen perspective. ACM International
Conference Proceeding Series, 27-30-May-(May), 289–294. https://doi.org/10.1145/2757401.2757412
61. Wang, Q., & Niu, M. (2020). Exploring the relationship between government budget information and citizens’ perceptions
of public service performance in China. Public Management Review, 22(3), 317–340.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1584234
62. Watanabe, O. V., Imhof, M. J., & Tartaroglu, S. (2019). Transparency regulation and stock price informativeness: Evidence
from the european union’s transparency directive. Journal of International Accounting Research, 18(2), 89–113.
https://doi.org/10.2308/jiar-52383

2891 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892
International Journal of Current Science Research and Review
ISSN: 2581-8341
Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024
DOI: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i5-48, Impact Factor: 7.943
IJCSRR @ 2024 www.ijcsrr.org

63. Williams, A. (2015). A global index of information transparency and accountability. Journal of Comparative Economics,
43(3), 804–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2014.10.004
64. Zhang, Y. J., & Hsieh, C. T. (2010). Chinese citizens? Opinions on e-government benefits, issues and critical success factors.
Electronic Government, 7(2), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1504/EG.2010.030924

Cite this Article: Tesa Putri Purwati, Mulia Saputra, Syukriy Abdullah (2024). Budget Transparency Nagan Raya Regency
Government. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, 7(5), 2881-2892

2892 *Corresponding Author: Syukriy Abdullah Volume 07 Issue 05 May 2024

Available at: www.ijcsrr.org
Page No. 2881-2892