Trends in Public Administration Research in Indonesia: A Bibliographic Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65150/EP-jsshrs/V2E7/2026-20Keywords:
Public Administration, Indonesia, Bibliometric Analysis, Digital Governance, Collaborative Governance, Public Service Innovation, Thematic Evolution, Research TrendsAbstract
Research on Public Administration in Indonesia has evolved substantially over the past two decades, driven by the increasing complexity of governance challenges, the digitalization of the public sector, and the increasing demand for evidence-based policymaking. This research aims to map the evolution, thematic structure, and intellectual landscape of Public Administration research in Indonesia through a comprehensive bibliographic analysis. Using publication data extracted from the Scopus database for the period 2000–2024, the study applied bibliometric techniques, including descriptive performance analysis, keyword co-occurrence mapping, co-authorship networks, and thematic evolution analysis. VOSviewer and Bibliometrix are used to visualize structural patterns and research clusters. The results reveal a significant increase in publication volumes starting in 2015, followed by a noticeable shift in research orientation towards digital governance, public service innovation, collaborative governance, and performance management. Four main thematic clusters are identified, reflecting growing scientific interests in policy governance and implementation, innovation and service delivery, digital transformation, and inter-organizational collaboration. Network visualizations show that research productivity is concentrated in a small number of Indonesian universities, despite the increasing international collaboration. This analysis also shows a transition from normative and descriptive research to a more empirical and data-driven approach. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the intellectual development of Public Administration in Indonesia and highlight some gaps in areas such as equity, evaluation frameworks, and evidence-based policies. Future research should expand methodological diversity and enhance interdisciplinary collaboration to strengthen the theoretical and practical impact of the field.
References
1) Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.
2) Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2014). ICT, public values and transformative government: A framework and programme for research. Government Information Quarterly, 31(1), 119–128.
3) Bolívar, M. P. R. (2018). Setting the basis for a conceptual framework for smart governance. Information Polity, 23(2), 143–164.
4) Bouckaert, G., Peters, B. G., & Verhoest, K. (2016). Coordination of Public Sector Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan.
5) Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456.
6) Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
7) Cuccurullo, C., Aria, M., & Sarto, F. (2016). Foundations and trends in performance management: A twenty-year bibliometric analysis. Public Management Review, 18(7), 957–989.
8) Dahlström, C., Lapuente, V., & Teorell, J. (2012). The merit of meritocratization: Politics, bureaucracy, and the institutional deterrents of corruption. Political Research Quarterly, 65(3), 656–668.
9) Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296.
10) Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2020). Digital Era Governance: IT Corporations, the State, and e-Government. Oxford University Press.
11) Estevez, E., & Janowski, T. (2013). Electronic governance for sustainable development. Government Information Quarterly, 30(S1), S94–S109.
12) Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change. Brookings Institution Press.
13) Gil-Garcia, J. R., Zhang, J., & Puron-Cid, G. (2016). Conceptualizing smartness in government: An integrative and multi-dimensional view. Government Information Quarterly, 33(3), 524–534.
14) Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.
15) Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015). A Government that Worked Better and Cost Less? Oxford University Press.
16) Howlett, M. (2019). Designing public policies. Routledge.
17) Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2012). Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management, 29(4), 258–268.
18) Kettunen, P., & Kallio, J. (2021). The tension between digitalization and public value: A systematic review. Public Integrity, 23(3), 328–346.
19) Kuhlmann, S., & Wollmann, H. (2019). Introduction to Comparative Public Administration. Edward Elgar.
20) Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen co-production in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454.
21) Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the smart city: A review of the literature. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(2), 392–408.
22) Mergel, I. (2019). Digital transformation of the public sector: A holistic view. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101–113.
23) Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management. Georgetown University Press.
24) Nabatchi, T., Sancino, A., & Sicilia, M. (2017). Varieties of participation in public services: The who, when, and what of coproduction. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 766–776.*
25) Osborne, S. P. (2018). From public service-dominant logic to public service logic: A new approach to co-creation in public services. Public Management Review, 20(3), 1–23.
26) Osborne, S. P., & Brown, K. (2011). Innovation, public policy and public services delivery. Public Management Review, 13(1), 1–10.
27) Peters, B. G. (2019). Institutional theory in political science: The new institutionalism (4th ed.). Edward Elgar.
28) Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
29) Priyono, A., & Imamura, S. (2023). Digital transformation and public sector innovation in Southeast Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 45(1), 22–40.
30) Roberts, N. (2000). Wicked problems and network approaches to resolution. International Public Management Review, 1(1), 1–19.
31) Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Sage.
32) Shergold, P., & Head, B. (2014). Lessons from the APS reform. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 73(4), 450–467.
33) Sicilia, M., Sancino, A., Nabatchi, T., & Guarini, E. (2019). Public service management and co-production. Public Management Review, 21(4), 605–612.
34) Suhardi, D., & Pratama, A. (2021). Innovation in public service delivery: Evidence from emerging economies. Government Information Quarterly, 38(4).
35) Torres, L., Pina, V., & Royo, S. (2005). E-government and the transformation of public administrations in EU countries. Online Information Review, 29(5), 531–553.
36) UNDP. (2022). E-Government Survey: The Future of Digital Government. United Nations.
37) Villeneuve, J.-P. (2014). Transparency in government: A bibliometric review. Information Polity, 19(3–4), 165–176.
38) Yoserizal, R., Nugroho, Y., & Cahyono, Y. (2022). Mapping public administration research in Indonesia: A bibliometric approach. Public Organization Review, 22(3), 451–468.
39) Zhang, N., & Chen, J. (2020). Public administration research in Asia: A systematic review. Public Administration and Development, 40(4), 175–188.
40) Zhao, J., Weng, Y., & Li, X. (2018). Mapping the field of e-government: A bibliometric analysis. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(3), 419–438.
41) Zuiderwijk, A., Janssen, M., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). Acceptance and use predictors of open data technologies. Government Information Quarterly, 32(4), 429–440.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dila Erlianti, E Maznah Hijeriah, Lilis Wahyuni (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
