Open Access
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 34, 2017
The 17th Annual Conference of the Asian Academic Accounting Association (2016 FourA Conference)
Article Number 02003
Number of page(s) 9
Section Accounting Information Systems
Published online 14 February 2017
  1. World Bank. (2001). Indonesia country procurement assessment report: Reforming the public procurement system. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from [Google Scholar]
  2. Heeks, R. (2003). Reinventing government in the information age: International practice in IT-enabled public sector reform. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  3. Tolbert, C., and Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of e-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, May-June. [Google Scholar]
  4. Wahid, F. (2004) Lessons from e-government initiatives in Indonesia. Media Informatika, 2(2), 13–21. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Mirchadani, D., Johnson Jr, J., & Joshi, K. (2008). Perspectives of citizens towards e-government in Thailand and Indonesia: A multigroup analysis. Inf Sys Front, 10, 483–497. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. New York, Oxford university press. [Google Scholar]
  7. OECD. (2007). Snapshot assessment of Indonesia’s public procurement system. Retrieved March 21, 2011 from [Google Scholar]
  8. Ciborra, C. (2005). Interpreting e-government and development: Efficiency, transparency or governance at a distance? Inf Tech & People, 18(3), 260–279. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Allen, A., Juillet, L., Paquet, G. and Roy, J. (2001). E-governance and government online in Canada: Partnerships, People and Prospects, Gov Inf Quarterly, 18, 93–104. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Institution of Government Procurement Policy (IGPP). (2010) Profil LKPP. Retreived May 26 2011 from [Google Scholar]
  11. Bertot, J., Jaeger, P., & Grimes, J. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Gov Inf Quarterly, 27, 264–271. [Google Scholar]
  12. Shim, D., and Eom, T. (2008). E-government and anti-corruption: Empirical analysis of international data. Int Journal of Public Adm, 31, 298–316. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kumar, A. (2003). E-government and efficiency, accountability and transparency. EJISDZ, 12, 2, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  14. Bhatnagar, S. (2003). E-government and access to information. Global Corruption Report. Retreived June 6 2011 from [Google Scholar]
  15. Welsch, E., and Hinnant, C. (2002). Internet use, transparency, and interactivity effects on trust in government. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’03). [Google Scholar]
  16. Welsch, E., Hinnant, C., and Moon, M. (2005). Linking citizen satisfaction with e-government with trust in e-government. Journal of Public Adm Research and Theory, 15(1), 37–58. [Google Scholar]
  17. Elbanna, B. (2003). The implications of the local configuration of a standard e-procurement system on the organisation power circuits. Presented in the 16th Bled e-Commerce Conference e-Transformation, Bled, Slovenis, June 9-11. [Google Scholar]
  18. Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  19. Stanforth, C. (2007). Using actor-network theory to analyze e-government implementation in developing countries. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Information Technologies and International Development, 3(3), 35–60. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Callon, M. (1986). The sociology of an actor–network: the case of the electric vehicle. In: M Callon., J Law., & A. Rip. (Eds.), Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology, Sociology of Science in the Real World (pp. 19–34). London: The Macmillan Press. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Law, J. (1992). Notes on a theory of actor–network: ordering, strategy and heterogeneity. Sys Practice, 5(4), 379–393. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Bijker, W. E., and J. Law, eds. (1992). Shaping technology/Building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  23. Law, J. (1999) After ANT: Complexity, Naming and Topology. In J Law., & J Hassard. Actor Network Theory and After (pp. 1–14). Oxford: Blackwell. [Google Scholar]
  24. Bloomfield, B.P. (1995). Power, machines and social relations: Delegating to information technology in the National Health Service. Organization, 2, (3–4), 489–518. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Akrich, M. (1992). The De-Scription of technical Objects, in W. Bijker and J. Law (eds) Shaping technology/Building Society, 205–224, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  26. Latour, B. (1992). Where Are the Missing Massess?, in W. Bijker and J. Law (eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society, 225–258. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  27. Latour, B. (1991). Technology is Society Made Durable, in J. Law (ed.) A Sociology of Monsters: Essay on Power, Technology and Domination, 103–131. [Google Scholar]
  28. Eisendhardt, K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. [Google Scholar]
  29. Miles, M.B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  30. Yin, R. (1994) Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  31. Yulianto, A. (2010) Konsep Fungsi dan Implementasi Portal Pengadaan Nasional. Retreived August 6 2011 from [Google Scholar]
  32. Arifiyadi, T. (2010) Bab III Konsep pengadaan secara elektronik (e-procurement) instansi pemerintah. Retreived August 6 2011 from [Accessed August 6 2011]. [Google Scholar]
  33. Jaeger, P. T., & Matteson, M. (2009). E-government and technology acceptance: The implementation of Section 508 guidelines for e-government websites. Electronic Journal of E-Government, 7(1), 87−98. [Google Scholar]
  34. Heeks, R. (2005) E-government as a carrier of context. Journal of Public Policy, 25, 51−74. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.