Article Sidebar

Download
Download Article

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines the policy strategies implemented by the Communications, Informatics, Statistics, and Cryptography Agency (Diskominfostandi) of Mahakam Ulu Regency in addressing the digital divide and promoting equitable access to telecommunications and internet services in border regions. As one of Indonesia’s frontier, outermost, and underdeveloped (3T) regions, Mahakam Ulu faces persistent challenges related to geographical isolation, limited infrastructure, and unequal digital connectivity. Employing a descriptive qualitative approach, this study collected data through in-depth interviews with seven key informants, field observations, and document analysis conducted between March and April 2026. Data were analyzed thematically to identify policy strategies, implementation patterns, and institutional challenges in telecommunications governance. The findings reveal that significant disparities in digital connectivity persist across the region. Of the 49 BTS towers available, 15 (30.6%) remain inactive, while 35 of 50 villages continue to depend on satellite-based V-Sat connectivity. Diskominfostandi’s policy strategy is structured around three key dimensions: collaborative infrastructure development, digital human resource capacity building, and regulatory governance strengthening. However, policy implementation remains constrained by systemic challenges, including fragmented intergovernmental coordination, dependence on the central government agency BAKTI, a regional funding gap exceeding IDR 70 billion, and limited institutional capacity. This study contributes to the growing literature on digital divide reduction, telecommunications governance, and place-based digital policy by demonstrating that standardized national approaches are insufficient to address the unique conditions of 3T border regions. The study recommends an integrated policy model combining Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite technology, strengthened inter-agency coordination mechanisms, and community-centered digital empowerment programs to achieve sustainable digital inclusion and equitable regional development.

Keywords

Digital Divide Telecommunications Governance Digital Inclusion

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Gunawan, A., Noor, M., Idris, A., & Nurmiyati, N. (2026). Evaluating the Strategy of Diskominfostandi Mahakam Ulu in Bridging the Digital Divide in Border Areas: A Study of Telecommunications Policy in Indonesia’s 3T Regions. Golden Ratio of Social Science and Education, 6(2), 364–378. https://doi.org/10.52970/grsse.v6i2.2250
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Afriyanti, R., Aripin, S., & Budiman, R. (2026). Improving Government Effectiveness: Analysis of the Implementation of the Electronic-Based Government System (SPBE) in Sarolangun Regency. Golden Ratio of Social Science and Education, 6(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.52970/grsse.v6i1.1359
  2. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
  3. Aspers, P., & Corte, U. (2019). What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology, 42(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7
  4. Aziz, T., & Hikmawan, M. D. (2023). Analisis Networked Governance dalam Kebijakan P4GN di Kota Cilegon Tahun 2020. Ijd-Demos, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.37950/ijd.v5i3.443
  5. Barca, F. (2009). AN AGENDA FOR A REFORMED COHESION POLICY A place-based approach to meeting European Union challenges and expectations. Independent Report by Fabrizio Barca, April.
  6. BPS Kab. Mahakam Hulu. (2023). Kabupaten Mahakam Ulu dalam Angka 2023.
  7. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The Whole‐of‐Government Approach to Public Sector Reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059–1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00797.x
  8. Dimas, M., & Fahlevvi, M. R. (2024). Pengentasan Digital Divide dalam Penerapan E-Government di Kabupaten Sumbawa. Jurnal Teknologi Dan Komunikasi Pemerintahan, 6(2), 194–215.
  9. Duffett, R. G., Edu, T., & Negricea, I. C. (2019). YouTube marketing communication demographic and usage variables influence on Gen Y’s cognitive attitudes in South Africa and Romania. THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, 85(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/isd2.12094
  10. Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011
  11. Harun, S. (2025). Policy Implementation and Regulatory Challenges in Managing Civil Service Resources in the Era of Digital Governance. Golden Ratio of Social Science and Education, 6(1), 01–17. https://doi.org/10.52970/grsse.v6i1.1893
  12. Juanda, & Izzulhaq, A. (2023). Strategi Diskominfo dalam Pemerataan Jaringan Internet di Kabupaten Parigi Moutong Provinsi Sulawesi Tengah. Jurnal Terapan Pemerintahan Minangkabau Vol., 3(2), 176–196.
  13. Kartiasih, F., Djalal Nachrowi, N., Wisana, I. D. G. K., & Handayani, D. (2023). Inequalities of Indonesia’s regional digital development and its association with socioeconomic characteristics: a spatial and multivariate analysis. Information Technology for Development, 29(2–3), 299–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2022.2110556
  14. Klijn, E.-H., & Koppenjan, J. (2012). Governance network theory: past, present and future. Policy & Politics, 40(4), 587–606. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557312X655431
  15. Ningtias, K., Sudagung, A., & Darajati, M. (2018). Society Security Vulnerability In Indonesia-Malaysia Border, Sajingan Besar District, Sambas Regency. Indonesian Journal of International Law, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.17304/ijil.vol15.3.733
  16. Prasodjo, T. (2025). Public Trust Reloaded: The Impact of Data Transparency and Digital Participation on Government Legitimacy in the Era of Open Government. Golden Ratio of Social Science and Education, 6(1), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.52970/grsse.v6i1.1894
  17. Rikardus, E. (2026). Digital-Governance dan Efektivitas Pelayanan Publik di Desa Perbatasan : Studi Kasus Kabupaten Merauke. Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin, 2(1), 115–130.
  18. Rizal, Y., Nalle, A. A., Roen, Y. A., & Pradana, I. P. Y. B. (2026). Telecommunication Accessibility and Local Economic Dynamics in Indonesia’s 3T Regions. Journal of Political and Governance Studies, 2(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.64670/jpgs.v2i1.56
  19. Schumann, S. (2013). The Network Society. Journal of Media and Communication Research, 189–192.
  20. Sugiyono. (2021). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R& D. Alfabeta. https://inlislite.ipdn.ac.id/opac/detail-opac?id=22635&utm
  21. Visvizi, A., & Lytras, M. D. (2018). Rescaling and refocusing smart cities research: from mega cities to smart villages. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 9(2), 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-02-2018-0020
  22. Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and Social Inclusion. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6699.001.0001
  23. Wulandari, D., Rahawarin, M. A., & Sakir, A. R. (2025). The influence of e-government system implementation on the accessibility of public health services. Tamalanrea: Journal of Government and Development (JGD), 2(2), 118–131. https://doi.org/10.69816/jgd.v2i2.45269