Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 0

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose: This study examines the effects of fixed asset planning and safeguarding on the effectiveness of regional asset management while evaluating the moderating role of information technology utilization.


Research Method: Using a quantitative explanatory design, empirical data were gathered via purposive sampling from 95 public officials in Tana Toraja Regency and analyzed using multiple linear regression, specifically Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA).


Results and Discussion: The findings revealed that both asset planning and safeguarding significantly enhanced management effectiveness. Information technology utilization strengthened the relationship between planning and effectiveness but showed no significant interaction in the safeguarding pathway.


Implications: These insights suggest that local governments should prioritize digital integration during planning phases while independently reinforcing physical security protocols.


Originality: This research provides unique empirical evidence regarding the asymmetric capability of digital governance tools across different operational stages of public asset administration.

Keywords

fixed asset planning fixed asset safeguarding information technology utilization regional asset management

Article Details

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite
Anjelina, M. ., & Tikupadang, W. K. (2026). Fixed Asset Planning and Safeguarding in Regional Asset Management: The Moderating Role of Information Technology Utilization. Advances: Jurnal Ekonomi & Bisnis, 4(4), 1306–1318. https://doi.org/10.60079/ajeb.v4i4.953
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdillah, A., Widianingsih, I., Buchari, R. A., Mustari, N., & Saleh, S. (2022). Governance and Quintuple Helix innovation model: Insights from the local government of Tana Toraja Regency, Indonesia. Frontiers in Climate, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.1012108
  2. Aguiar, M., Kiderman, J., Shekar, H. C., & Schilke, O. (2024). Safeguarding trust in a digital ecosystem. Journal of Business Strategy, 45(5), 356–362. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-08-2023-0157
  3. Alquraidi, A., & Awad, M. (2024). Physical Asset Management for Critical Utilities— A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Access, 12, 90644–90659. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3421335
  4. Asif, Z., Chinzara, Z., & Lahiri, R. (2023). The role of risk and institutions in the adoption and diffusion of technologies: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Economic Analysis and Policy, 77, 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2022.10.015
  5. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  6. Kaganova, O., & Telgarsky, J. (2018). Management of Capital Assets by Local Governments: An Assessment and Benchmarking Survey. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 22(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.3846/ijspm.2018.445
  7. Katina, P. F., Pyne, J. C., Keating, C. B., & Komljenovic, D. (2021). Complex System Governance as a Framework for Asset Management. Sustainability, 13(15), 8502. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158502
  8. Kementerian Dalam Negeri RI. (2021). Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 47 Tahun 2021 tentang Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Pembukuan, Inventarisasi, dan Pelaporan Barang Milik Daerah. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/196220/permendagri-no-47-tahun-2021
  9. Khoir, M. N., & Priyono, N. (2023). Analisis Implementasi Prosedur Pengamanan Dan Pemeliharaan Aset Tetap Di Bppkad Kabupaten Magelang. Transekonomika: Akuntansi, Bisnis Dan Keuangan, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.55047/transekonomika.v3i3.416
  10. Krah, R. D. Y., & Mertens, G. (2020). Transparency in Local Governments: Patterns and Practices of Twenty-first Century. State and Local Government Review, 52(3), 200–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X20970245
  11. Kumar, D., Singh, R. B., & Kaur, R. (2019). Conclusion: Spatial Information Technology for Sustainable Development Goals (hal. 219–224). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58039-5_15
  12. Latupeirissa, J. J. P., Dewi, N. L. Y., Prayana, I. K. R., Srikandi, M. B., Ramadiansyah, S. A., & Pramana, I. B. G. A. Y. (2024). Transforming Public Service Delivery: A Comprehensive Review of Digitization Initiatives. Sustainability, 16(7), 2818. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072818
  13. Misuraca, G., Ferro, E., & Caroleo, B. (2010). Assessing Emerging ICT-Enabled Governance Models in European Cities: Results from a Mapping Survey (hal. 168–179). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14799-9_15
  14. Monalika, H. P. (2024). Analisis Opini Tidak Memberikan Pendapat BPK RI terhadap Laporan Keuangan Kabupaten Kepulauan Meranti. Reviu Akuntansi, Manajemen, dan Bisnis, 4(2), 265–273. https://doi.org/10.35912/rambis.v4i2.4276
  15. Neonbasu, G. S., Hidayat, S., & Yulianti, E. (2024). Analysis of Asset Management (Land and Building) At Belu Regency Dams in East Nusa Tenggara Province-Indonesia. Journal of Architecture and Civil Engineering, 9(8), 12–24. https://doi.org/10.35629/8193-09081224
  16. Nielsen, M. M., & Jordanoski, Z. (2020). Digital transformation, governance and coordination models: A comparative study of Australia, Denmark and the Republic of Korea. The 21st Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, 285–293. https://doi.org/10.1145/3396956.3396987
  17. Nübel, K., Bühler, M. M., & Jelinek, T. (2021). Federated Digital Platforms: Value Chain Integration for Sustainable Infrastructure Planning and Delivery. Sustainability, 13(16), 8996. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168996
  18. Park, J., Choi, W., Jeong, T., & Seo, J. (2023). Digital twins and land management in South Korea. Land Use Policy, 124, 106442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106442
  19. Pemerintah Kabupaten Tana Toraja. (2015). Peraturan Daerah (Perda) Kabupaten Tana Toraja Nomor 4 Tahun 2015 Tentang Pengelolaan Barang Milik Daerah. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/113154/perda-kab-tana-toraja-no-4-tahun-2015
  20. Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. (2003). Instruksi Presiden (Inpres) Nomor 3 Tahun 2003 tentang Kebijakan dan Strategi Nasional Pengembangan E-Government. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/147277/inpres-no-3-tahun-2003
  21. Pethe, A., Gandhi, S., Tandel, V., & Libeiro, S. (2012). Anatomy of Ownership and Management of Public Land in Mumbai. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 3(1), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/097542531200300111
  22. Pinargote, J. H. L., López, T. E. H., Velasco, C. A. S., & Carrillo, C. B. Z. (2025). Decentralization and Governance in Local Governments: Challenges for Efficient Resource Management Oriented to Regional Business Development. Journal of Posthumanism, 5(5), 5021–5028. https://doi.org/10.63332/joph.v5i5.2084
  23. Republik Indonesia. (2014). Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) Nomor 27 Tahun 2014 tentang Pengelolaan Barang Milik Negara / Daerah. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/5464/pp-no-27-tahun-2014
  24. Waskita, F. A., & Cahyo, W. N. (2024). Optimizing Asset Management: Comprehensive Analysis and Innovative Strategy Design to Increase the Effectiveness of Life Cycle Delivery at PT Pembangkitan Jawa-Bali Services. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, 07(08). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr/V7-i8-81
  25. White, A. D. (2011). A review of UK public sector real estate asset management. Journal of Corporate Real Estate, 13(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/14630011111120314