The Influence of Policy Transparency, Public Participation, Bureaucratic Responsiveness, Service Quality, and Public Trust on Perceived Effectiveness of Local Economic Policy
DOI:
10.47353/ecbis.v4i5.505Published:
2026-07-21Downloads
Abstract
The effectiveness of local economic policy is essential for promoting sustainable regional development and improving community welfare. However, citizens' perceptions of policy effectiveness are influenced not only by policy outcomes but also by the quality of governance practices implemented by local governments. This study aimed to examine the influence of policy transparency, public participation, bureaucratic responsiveness, service quality, and public trust on the perceived effectiveness of local economic policy. A quantitative research approach with an explanatory research design was employed. Primary data were collected through a structured questionnaire distributed to 200 respondents selected using purposive sampling. The collected data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), including descriptive statistics, validity and reliability tests, classical assumption tests, multiple linear regression analysis, the coefficient of determination (R²), t-tests, and F-tests. The results revealed that all measurement instruments were valid and reliable, and the data satisfied the assumptions required for multiple linear regression analysis. The findings indicated that policy transparency, public participation, bureaucratic responsiveness, service quality, and public trust each have a positive and significant influence on the perceived effectiveness of local economic policy. Furthermore, the F-test demonstrated that all independent variables simultaneously have a significant effect on the dependent variable. Among the five predictors, public trust was identified as the strongest determinant of perceived policy effectiveness. The study concludes that strengthening good governance practices through transparency, citizen participation, responsive bureaucracy, high-quality public services, and institutional trust can substantially improve public perceptions of local economic policy effectiveness. These findings provide practical implications for local governments in designing and implementing more effective, accountable, and citizen-oriented economic policies
Keywords:
Policy Transparency Public Participation Bureaucratic Responsiveness Service Quality Public Trust Perceived Effectiveness Local Economic PolicyReferences
Aizawa, N., & Ko, A. (2025). Dynamic Pricing Regulation and Welfare in Insurance Markets. Journal of Political Economy, 133(8), 2371–2413. https://doi.org/10.1086/735512
Bartelet, H. A., Barnes, M. L., & Cumming, G. S. (2024). Estimating and comparing the direct economic contributions of reef fisheries and tourism in the Asia-Pacific. Marine Policy, 159, 105939.
Basu, A., Marsh, S., Rahman, M. S., & Kiyomoto, S. (2016). A model for personalised perception of policies. In H. S.M., M. M., V. J., & M. S. (Eds.), IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology (Vol. 473, pp. 52–62). Springer New York LLC. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41354-9_4
Bayked, E. M., Assfaw, A. K., Toleha, H. N., Zewdie, S., Biset, G., Ibirongbe, D. O., & Kahissay, M. H. (2024). Willingness to pay for National Health Insurance Services and Associated Factors in Africa and Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Public Health, 12, 1390937.
Doukas, J. A., & Li, M. (2009). Asymmetric Asset Price Reaction to News and Arbitrage Risk. Review of Behavioral Finance, 1(1–2), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1108/19405979200900002
Fuller, G. W. (2015). Who’s Borrowing? Credit Encouragement vs. Credit Mitigation in National Financial Systems. Politics and Society, 43(2), 241–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329215571288
Ibrahim, A. H. H. (n.d.). Decentralization and its Impact on Improving Public Services.
Judijanto, L., Basri, T. S., Yahya, A. S., & Hasibuan, K. (2024). Analysis of the Impact of Regulatory Change, Law Enforcement Effectiveness, and Bureaucratic Accountability on Public Service Quality. West Science Law and Human Rights, 2(01), 53–61.
Lakuma, C. P., Marty, R., & Muhumuza, F. (2019). Financial inclusion and micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) growth in Uganda. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-019-0110-2
Lee, J., & Slater, J. (2007). Dynamic capabilities, entrepreneurial rent-seeking and the investment development path: The case of Samsung. Journal of International Management, 13(3), 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2007.05.003
Mahmood, T., Kumar, R., Ali, T. M., Naeem, N., & Pongpanich, S. (2023). Determinants of the food insecurity at household level in Pakistan: A multilevel model approach. PLoS ONE, 18(10 October). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0291343
Mediawati, E. (2016). Internal Control and Quality of Financial Reporting in Zakat Management Organization. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research.
Pham, A. T. Q., Mukhopadhaya, P., & Vu, H. (2021). Estimating poverty and vulnerability to monetary and non-monetary poverty: the case of Vietnam. Empirical Economics, 61(6), 3125–3177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01991-4
Philp, M. (2001). Access, accountability and authority: Corruption and the democratic process. Crime, Law and Social Change, 36(4), 357–377. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012075027147
Setiawan, I. E., Zhang, Z., Corder, G., & Matsubae, K. (2021). Evaluation of environmental and economic benefits of land reclamation in the indonesian coal mining industry. Resources, 10(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/resources10060060
Simlai, P. (2019). Subprime credit, idiosyncratic risk, and foreclosures. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 74, 175–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2019.01.015
Suhardi, U. U., Pribadi, U., & Losi, Z. (2023). The Effects of Good Governance Principles: Accountability, Transparency, and Participation on Public Trust in Village Funds Management. International Journal of Social Science and Business, 7(4).
Sun, Y., Su, K., Cai, W., & Bai, M. (n.d.). Is transparency in sustainability the fruit of business trust: Evidence from sustainability disclosure? International Journal of Finance & Economics.
Tykvová, T., & Walz, U. (2007). How important is participation of different venture capitalists in German IPOs? Global Finance Journal, 17(3), 350–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2006.05.008
Uhl-Bien, M., & Marion, R. (2009). Complexity leadership in bureaucratic forms of organizing: A meso model. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(4), 631–650.
Yasaitis, L. C., Bubolz, T., Skinner, J. S., & Chandra, A. (2014). Local population characteristics and hemoglobin A1c testing rates among diabetic medicare beneficiaries. PLoS ONE, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111119
Yin, F., Cahan, S. F., & Chen, J. (2025). Positive and Negative Peer Effects of ESG Disclosure: Evidence from China’s Selective Mandatory Disclosure Regime. International Journal of Accounting. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1094406025410082
Zhao, D., Ngan, S. L., Jamil, A. H., Salleh, M. F. M., & Yusoff, W. S. (2025). Peer Effects on ESG Disclosure: Drivers and Implications for Sustainable Corporate Governance. Sustainability (Switzerland), 17(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su17104392
License
Copyright (c) 2026 May Vitha Rahmadhani, Fitri Melawati, Irfansyah, Aryo Prakoso
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Downloads
How to Cite
