Focus and Scope
Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economic and finance (AIJIEF) publishes qualified and in-depth analysis of current issues within Islamic finance and Islamic economics. The journal welcomes robust evidence-based empirical studies and results-focused case studies.
The central theme of the manuscripts received in Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance (AIJIEF) is the study of international Islamic economics and international Islamic finance. AIJIEF’s theme focuses on case studies of Islamic economics and Islamic finance in various parts of the worlds, especially countries of Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
The spread of Islamic finance and Islamic economics themes include:
- Islamic finance:
- Fundamentals, trends, and opportunities in Islamic finance
- Islamic banking and financial markets
- Risk Management
- Corporate finance
- Investment strategy
- Islamic Sosial Finance
- Financial Planning
- Housing Finance
- Legal and regulatory issues
- Islamic economics:
- Islamic Microeconomy
- Islamic Macroeconomy
- Islamic Monetary Economy
- Zakah, Waqf and Sadaqoh
- Economics of Natural Resource and Environment in Islamic Economics
|Open Submissions||Indexed||Peer Reviewed|
Peer Review Process
All received manuscripts will be peer reviewed by the double-blind policy by at least 2 reviewers. The final decision of manuscripts will be made by the editor in chief, according to reviewers' comments in a forum of the editorial board meeting. Scanning of plagiarism on the manuscripts will be transmitted by using Turnitin software.
- Manuscripts that have been selected by the editor will be sent to reviewers via OJS with the condition of a double-blind review, that is, without displaying the name and affiliation of both the author and the reviewer.
- Manuscript review process took out in a predetermined time period (a maximum of 4 weeks), the reviewer may request additional time if necessary.
- Manuscripts that require revision will be returned to the author via OJS and e-mail for correction. the author must resubmit the revised manuscript within the specified time.
- The author cannot carry out major revisions such as changing the entire theme of the manuscript during the review process
- The final decision of manuscript acceptance is solely made by Editor in Chief/Regional (Handling) Editor (together with Editorial Board if required) according to reviewers' critical comments. The final decision of the manuscript is solely based on the Editor's final review which considering peer-reviewers’ comments (but not solely by Reviewer).
- The journal manager will always provide updates regarding manuscripts to authors via e-mail, including information regarding whether manuscripts are declared accepted/rejected
- All parties involved in the review process must comply with the existing code of ethics.
Open Access Policy
This Journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
This journal (p-ISSN:2579-9169; e-ISSN:2615-8205) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal utilizes the PKP PN, LOCKSS and CLOCKSS systems to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.
AIJIEF Publication Ethics
Publication of articles in scientific journals is an important part of the development of science. The publication is a direct reflection on the quality of the works of authors and institutions that shelter. This article supports and embodies the scientific approach. Therefore, we need a standard of ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publication: journal editors, reviewers, and authors.
This publication ethics was adopted by the ethics policy of the publication of Elsevier.
Author’s Code of Ethics
The author's code of ethics aims to produce original work, not plagiarism. And to maintain the originality of the work.
A. Writing Standard and Originality
Authors should ensure that they have written original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, it has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.
Data that supports research must also be presented accurately and included in the paper. Papers must contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Professional published reviews and articles must also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works must be clearly identified.
In parliamentary law, to uphold truth and benefit, as well as the meaning of the information shared, so as not to mislead, the writer must be able to:
- Write carefully, thoroughly, and precisely.
- Academically responsible for his writing.
- Creating works that give benefits to the user community.
- Uphold the rights, opinions, or findings of others.
- Fully aware of the violations in writing.
It is expected that the writing conforms to the rules of AIJIEF. Scientific literature must accompany the scientific literature writings' rules and be different from popular writing or other compositions. The measures of scientific writing should be:
- Objective: based on actual conditions,
- Up to date: writing is the development of cutting-edge science,
- Rational: serves as a vehicle for the delivery of mutual critique,
- Reserved: not overcoming, honest, straight, and not personally moved,
- Effective and Efficient: writing is a high-powered communication medium
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
The author is suspected of violating the scientific research code of ethics if it contains elements of falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism.
Falsification of data can be interpreted as modifying data according to the author’s interests, especially to conform to the 'desired' conclusions drawn from a sketch.
- Data Fabrication
Data fabrication is plagiarism by 'trumping up' data or creating data that doesn't actually exist or more commonly creating fictitious data that supports the research.
Plagiarism is taking someone else's words or sentences or text without giving sufficient credit (in quotations). Plagiarism is considered to be deliberately committing 'persecution' because there is coercion in taking other people's words/ideas without permission. Classification of plagiarism can be obtained depending on various aspects of view and in terms of the stolen substance.
- From the objective level
- In terms of volume/proportion
- Mild plagiarism: <30%
- Moderate plagiarism: 30-70%
- Heavy plagiarism: > 70%
- In the form of theft, plagiarism can be done verbatim or can be sourced from various informants and in their own words (mosaic).
- Based on individual sources of ideas, there is also what is known as Auto-plagiarism / self-plagiarism: If a work has been published before, then when we get the idea, it must include a citation or quote. Differently, this can be considered auto-plagiarism or self-plagiarism. This is a concern because if it is intended or later implemented to increase academic credit, it can be seen as a serious violation of the academic moral philosophy.
C. Term of Manuscript Submitted
The author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a paper that has been previously published, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis, or as an electronic preprint.
The author must be able to ensure that the submitted manuscript is not being submitted to another journal at the same time. if the submitted manuscript has been published or is in the process of being published in another journal, the author must immediately inform the journal editor.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are included in the paper, have seen and approved the final version of the paper, and have agreed to its submission for publication. Authors are expected to take collective responsibility for the work.
E. The Use of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies
Authors that use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, should only use it to improve readability and language of the work. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control. Authors should carefully review and edit the result because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.
F. Fundamental Error in Published Article
If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, they have the obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor. If the error is discovered by a third party, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.
Editor’s Code of Ethics
A. The Decision of Publication
Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision is based on the validation of an article, article contributions for researchers and readers, and suitability with the scope and theme of the journal. Editors should ensure a thorough, transparent, objective, honest, and prudent review of the manuscript. It becomes the groundwork of the editor in deciding on a script, rejected or accepted.
B. Objective and Neutral Assessment
The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content objectively, impartially, and honestly without regard to gender, business position, ethnicity, religious belief, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship.
Journal editors should keep every piece of information well, especially with respect to the author's privacy and distribution of the holograph. The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional cases and under the publisher’s consultation, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals, institutions, and other organizations that investigate cases of research misconduct that were deemed necessary to investigate suspected ethical breaches.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
D. Fair Peer Review
The journal editor should ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers. Journal editors could seek additional opinions for the review process if it is necessary.
The journal editor shall select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field, taking account of the need for appropriate, inclusive, and diverse representation. The editor shall follow best practices in avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers. The editor shall review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation made by reviewers in order to determine whether there is any potential for bias.
E. The Use of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies
A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript including any notification or decision letters as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors should not upload their letters to an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.
F. Disclosure of Conflict of Interest
Journal editors should understand the moral philosophy of scientific publications to avoid any conflict of interest with others so that the cognitive operation of text publishing could run smoothly and safely. Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher in writing prior to the appointment of the editor and should be updated if there is new conflicts arise.
The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers that s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups.
Reviewer’s Code of Ethics
A. Contribution to Editorial Decision
Blind peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.
B. Objectivity and Neutrality
The reviewer must be fair, objective, unbiased, independent, and exclusively in favor of scientific accuracy. The process of critiquing the manuscript is done professionally regardless of sex, business side, tribe, religious belief, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
D. Clarity of Reference Sources
The reviewer should ensure that the reference resource/quotation is appropriate and credible (accountable). If mistakes or irregularities are found in the reference source/quotation writing, the reviewer should promptly inform the editor to be recreated by the generator according to the reviewer's note.
E. Peer-Reviewed Effectiveness
The reviewer should respond to the manuscript submitted by the editor and work in accordance with the specified peer-review period (maximum 2 weeks). If additional time is necessitated in the review the manuscript should promptly report (confirm) to the editorial secretariat.
F. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should understand the ethical publications above to avoid any conflict of interest with others, hence the process of putting out the manuscript runs smoothly and safely. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Journal Manager’s Code of Ethics
A. Publication Information
Journal managers should ensure that scriptwriting guidelines for authors and other concerned parties can be accessed and read clearly, both printed and electronic.
The manager of the journal/editorial board should describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to the determination of policy and decision of journal publishing without any particular interest.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Journal managers must not share the information about the paper with anyone without permission. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a journal manager’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through journal management must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Journal managers should give the reviewers and editors the freedom to produce a comfortable working atmosphere and respect the privacy of the author.
E. Warranties and Promotions
Journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyright), as well as transparency in managing funds received from third parties. In addition, journal organizers should put out and further publish results to the public by assuring usefulness in the purpose of the holograph.
F. Disclosure of Conflict of Interest
Journal managers must see the moral philosophy of scientific publications above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties, hence the process of putting out the manuscript runs smoothly and safely.
Article Proccessing Charge
Every article submitted to AIJIEF is charged FREE. This includes peer-reviewing, editing, publishing, maintaining and archiving, and allows quick access to the full-text versions of the articles.
Plagiarism check aims to maintain the quality of originality and novelty. Every article sent to the Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance will be checked for plagiarism using Turnitin prior to publication with the maximum number of 20% originality report
- Every manuscript submitted to Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance must obey to the policy and terms set by Airlangga International Journal of Islamic Economics and Finance
- Publication rights on the contents of manuscript published by owned by author(s).
- Full text of electronic publication of manuscripts can be accessed free if used for the purpose of education and research according to copyright regulation.
- Share — copy and redistribute the stuff in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
- You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- If you do a remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.