Evaluating the quality of publicly available construction technology data in Indonesia
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study evaluated the quality of construction technology data across four categories—intrinsic, contextual, representation, and accessibility—and examined how these factors influence potential data use. The research adopted a qualitative approach, systematically identifying and assessing publicly available data sources on construction technology from government, academia, industry, and society. Government sources include research databases, technical reports, and patents; academic sources comprise Scopus and the local repository Science and Technology Index; and industry sources encompass annual reports and social media. The evaluation revealed that government data demonstrate the highest credibility and the most complete metadata, but were updated infrequently. Despite limited metadata, industry data remain reliable due to consistent annual publication schedules. Academic data show moderate quality, offering substantial datasets but with irregular update frequencies. Most data sources are available in English or Indonesian and are predominantly open access, except for subscription-based academic journals. In summary, the vast majority of construction technology data sources in Indonesia are either unstructured with limited information or semi-structured large databases from credible institutions with unpredictable or irregular updates, presenting challenges for technology landscape mapping. Government and Scopus databases show significant potential but require greater standardisation and, in the case of Scopus, advanced natural language processing-based extraction methods to maximise their utility for construction technology landscape development.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Open Access Citation Advantage Service). Where authors include such a work in an institutional repository or on their website (ie. a copy of a work which has been published in a UTS ePRESS journal, or a pre-print or post-print version of that work), we request that they include a statement that acknowledges the UTS ePRESS publication including the name of the journal, the volume number and a web-link to the journal item.
d) Authors should be aware that the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) License permits readers to share (copy and redistribute the work in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the work) for any purpose, even commercially, provided they also give appropriate credit to the work, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. They may do these things in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests you or your publisher endorses their use.
How to Cite
References
Adaptive Group, 2021. Technology Landscape Assessment. https://adaptivesag.com/en/130-technology-landscape-assessment.html
Adila, N., 2022. Implementation of Web Scraping for Journal Data Collection on the SINTA Website. Sinkron. 7(4), pp.2478–2485. https://doi.org/10.33395/sinkron.v7i4.11576
Aldrich, H. E. and Fiol, C. M., 2007. Fools rush in? the institutional context of industry creation. Entrepreneurship: Concepts, Theory and Perspective. 19(4), pp.105–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-48543-8_5
Antara, 2024. Disruption at National Data Center caused by Brain Cipher ransomware, 24 June 2024. Available from https://en.antaranews.com/news/316773/disruption-at-national-data-center-caused-by-brain-cipher-ransomware accessed on 23 January 2025.
Batini, C., Cappiello, C., Francalanci, C. and Maurino, A., 2009. Methodologies for data quality assessment and improvement. ACM Computing Surveys. 41(3). https://doi.org/10.1145/1541880.1541883
Bilal, M., Oyedele, L. O., Qadir, J., Munir, K., Ajayi, S. O., Akinade, O. O., Owolabi, H. A., Alaka, H. A. and Pasha, M., 2016. Big Data in the construction industry: A review of present status, opportunities, and future trends. Advanced Engineering Informatics. 30(3), pp.500–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2016.07.001
Braunschweig, K., Eberius, J., Thiele, M. and Lehner, W., 2012. The State of Open Data Limits of Current Open Data Platforms. Proceedings of the 21st World Wide Web Conference 2012, Web Science Track at WWW’12. 1–6. http://wwwdb.inf.tu-dresden.de/opendatasurvey/
Budde, B., Alkemade, F. and Weber, K. M., 2012. Expectations as a key to understanding actor strategies in the field of fuel cell and hydrogen vehicles. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 79(6), pp.1072–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.12.012
Castillo, C., Mendoza, M. and Poblete, B., 2013. Predicting information credibility in time-sensitive social media. Internet Research. 23(5), pp.560–588. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-05-2012-0095
Ceolin, D., Moreau, L., O’Hara, K., Schreiber, G., Sackley, A., Fokkink, W., Van Hage, W. R. and Shadbolt, N., 2013. Reliability analyses of open government data. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. 1073, pp.34–39.
Chen, C. C. and Tseng, Y. D., 2011. Quality evaluation of product reviews using an information quality framework. Decision Support Systems. 50(4), pp.755–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.08.023
Chen, X., Chang-Richards, A. Y., Pelosi, A., Jia, Y., Shen, X., Siddiqui, M. K. and Yang, N., 2022. Implementation of technologies in the construction industry: a systematic review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 29(8), pp.3181–3209. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-02-2021-0172
Cho, S., Weng, C., Kahn, M. G. and Natarajan, K., 2021. Identifying Data Quality Dimensions for Person-Generated Wearable Device Data: Multi-Method Study. JMIR MHealth and UHealth. 9(12), pp.1–15. https://doi.org/10.2196/31618
Eken, G., Bilgin, G., Dikmen, I. and Birgonul, M. T., 2015. A Lessons Learned Database Structure for Construction Companies. Procedia Engineering. 123, pp.135–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.10.070
Fisher, C. W. and Kingma, B. R., 2001. Criticality of data quality as exemplified in two disasters. Information and Management. 39(2), pp.109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00083-0
Indonesia, P. R., 2019. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2019 tentang Sistem Nasional Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Teknologi. Negara Republik Indonesia, 1–83. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/117023/uu-no-11-tahun-2019
Innovation Partner for Impact, 2022. Technology Landscape. https://www.ipi-singapore.org/technology-landscape-study
Jonathan and Abduh, M., 2021. Identifikasi Peran dan Kebutuhan Informasi Stakeholders Utama dalam Pengembangan SITIKI. Konferensi Nasional Teknik Sipil 15.
Khalil, T., 2000. Management of technology The key to competitiveness and wealth creation (E. M. Munson (Ed.)). McGraw-Hill.
Kusuma, B., Soemardi, B. W., Pribadi, K. S. and Yuliar, S., 2019. Indonesian contractor technological learning mechanism and its considerations. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 650(1), pp.0–10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/650/1/012001
Lee, Y. W., Strong, D. M., Kahn, B. K. and Wang, R. Y., 2002. AIMQ: A methodology for information quality assessment. Information and Management. 40(2), pp.133–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00043-5
Moges, H. T., Dejaeger, K., Lemahieu, W. and Baesens, B., 2013. A multidimensional analysis of data quality for credit risk management: New insights and challenges. Information and Management. 50(1), pp.43–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2012.10.001
Newman, C., Edwards, D., Martek, I., Lai, J., Thwala, W. D. and Rillie, I., 2021. Industry 4.0 deployment in the construction industry: a bibliometric literature review and UK-based case study. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment. 10(4), pp.557–580. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-02-2020-0016
Nine Sigma, 2014. Technology Landscaping. http://www.edgef.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/NineSigma-Technology-Landscaping-Overview.pdf
Ozgun, B. and Broekel, T., 2021. The geography of innovation and technology news - An empirical study of the German news media. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 167(March), pp.120692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120692
Paap, J., 2020. Mapping the technological landscape to accelerate innovation. Foresight and STI Governance. 14(3), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.17323/2500-2597.2020.3.41.54
Scannapieco, M. and Catarci, T., 2002. Data Quality under the Computer Science perspective. Computer Engineering, 2(2), pp.1–12. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tiziana_Catarci2/publication/228597426_Data_quality_under_a_computer_science_perspective/links/0fcfd51169a156b61a000000.pdf
Sepasgozar, S. M. E. and Davis, S., 2018. Construction technology adoption cube: An investigation on process, factors, barriers, drivers and decision makers using NVivo and AHP analysis. Buildings. 8(6), pp.12–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings8060074
Shu, K., Mahudeswaran, D., Wang, S., Lee, D. and Liu, H., 2020. FakeNewsNet: A Data Repository with News Content, Social Context, and Spatiotemporal Information for Studying Fake News on Social Media. Big Data. 8(3), pp.171–188. https://doi.org/10.1089/big.2020.0062
Šlibar, B., Oreški, D. and Begičević Ređep, N., 2021. Importance of the Open Data Assessment: An Insight Into the (Meta) Data Quality Dimensions. SAGE Open, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211023178
Spitsberg, I., Brahmandam, S., Verti, M. J. and Coulston, G. W., 2013. Technology landscape mapping: At the heart of Open innovation: Technology landscape maps can help organizations build awareness of strategic technologies and identify opportunities at the intersection of emerging technologies and customer needs. Research Technology Management. 56(4), pp.27–35. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5604107
StartUs insights, 2022. Technology Landscape: Your Window into the Future | StartUs Insights. https://www.startus-insights.com/innovators-guide/technology-landscape/
Swajati, W. G., 2021. Kajian Kebijakan Dan Sistem Pengelolaan Data Penelitian Indonesia. Knowledge Sector Initiative Journal. 1(1), pp.1–46.
Teshome, M. B., Podrecca, M. and Orzes, G., 2024. Technological trends in mountain logistics: A patent analysis. Research in Transportation Business and Management. 57(September), pp.101202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2024.101202.
Van Ryzin, G. and Lavena, C., 2013. The credibility of government performance reporting. Public Performance and Management Review. 37(1), pp.87–103. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576370104.
Wang, J., Liu, Y., Li, P., Lin, Z., Sindakis, S. and Aggarwal, S., 2024. Overview of Data Quality: Examining the Dimensions, Antecedents, and Impacts of Data Quality. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. 15(1), pp.1159–1178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-022-01096-6.
Wang, R. Y. and Strong, D. M., 1996. Beyond Accuracy: What Data Quality Means to Data Consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems. 12(4), pp.5–33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40398176.
Yan, H., Yang, N., Peng, Y., and Ren, Y., 2020. Data mining in the construction industry: Present status, opportunities, and future trends. Automation in Construction, 119(May), pp.103331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103331.