Main Article Content

Abstract

Background: Algorithmic governance is reshaping social protection, but the distributive consequences of automated welfare targeting in the Global South remain poorly understood.


Objective: To examine whether digital transaction visibility and employment informality predict false-negative welfare exclusion, whether perceived algorithmic misclassification mediates these effects, and whether algorithmic procedural justice moderates them.


Methods: An explanatory-sequential mixed-methods design combined an audit of 2,500 automated eligibility decisions, a cross-sectional survey of 640 household heads in Palembang, Indonesia, and phenomenological interviews with false-negative cases.


Results: The audit found 72.3% accuracy and a 23.4% false-negative rate. Informality, misclassification, and digital visibility predicted exclusion, while procedural justice was protective; the model explained 52% of variance. Misclassification partially mediated the association, and non-digital informal workers had 4.27 times higher odds of exclusion.


Conclusion: Algorithmic unfairness reflected parameterization bias against informal livelihoods, supporting conditional human oversight and accessible appeal mechanisms.

Keywords

Algorithmic governance Informal economy Procedural justice Street-level bureaucracy Welfare exclusion

Article Details

How to Cite
Urrashid, H., & Fitriyanti, F. (2026). Digital Visibility, Algorithmic Misclassification, and Welfare Exclusion Among Informal Workers: A Mixed-Methods Study in Indonesia. Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences, 9(3), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.37275/oaijss.v9i3.325