Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Journal of Economics and Business (JEBA) accepts original manuscripts in the field of economy and business, including research reports, review articles, and short communication articles. The spread of economics and business fields include, but not limited to:

  • Accounting, reporting and taxation
  • Economics, monetary, economic development, and environmental economic
  • Islamic economics, Islamic finance and banking, and Islamic social finance
  • Management, marketing management, financial management, operational management, human capital management, e-business, and entrepreneurship


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff. Manuscripts which is evaluated meet to the journal criteria and appropriate to our potential readers are sent to double blind review, otherwise are rejected promptly without external review. Three weeks tipically will be needed for the reviewers to complete one round of the reviewing process.

The Editors then make a decision based on the reviewer’s recommendation from among several possibilities: rejected, require major revision, need minor revision, or accepted. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to decide which of the submitted articles should be published.

The article review process usually takes average 12 weeksThis review period depends on the editors and reviewers duration in reviewing the manuscript.

All of the reviewing process is managed by the Editors through Open Journal Systems.


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 utilizes the LOCKSS system 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.



Publication Frequency

(JEBA) Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Airlangga is published by University of Airlangga two times a year in Mei and November.


Publication Ethics

This statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in Journal of Economics and Business Airlangga (JEBA), including the Publisher, Authors, Editors and Reviewers.

These code of ethics largely based upon the principles upheld by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), outlining standards for good behavior and proposing solutions to ethical dilemmas facing parties involved has been designed to improve the journal’s reputation. 

Code of Ethics for Publisher

Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Airlangga (FEB Unair) as publisher of this Journal seriously takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing, respect privacy of all involved parties, protect intelectual property and copyright, and  other responsibilities of publishing. The publisher committed to ensuring that advertising, sponsorship, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, FEB Unair and Editorial Board of JEBA commited to set appropriate journal policies, maintain the integrity of the academic record, publish content on a timely basis, and assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Code of Ethics for Authors

Originality and Plagiarism

Author(s) should ensure that the submitted manuscript must be an original work. If the author(s) have used the work and/or words of others, it must be appropriately cited or quoted. All work in the manuscript should be free of any plagiarism, self-plagiarism, falsification, fabrication, or omission of significant material. Plagiarism is scientific misconduct and in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior which is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Author(s) should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same work, in whole or in part, to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. However, to encourage interdisciplinary contributions, JEBA may consider unpublished work that has been submitted or presented in a conference but it has not been published in full text in a conference proceeding. The author(s) however must specify and acknowledge the dual submission and certifies that the journal submission contains significant material that is not included in the proceeding.

Reporting Standards

Author(s) should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work wherever possible. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. Author(s) may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide such data within reasonable time.


Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the research reported in the manuscript. The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal and managing communication between co-authors. The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done.

Conflict of Interest and Disclosure

Author(s) should avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest throughout the research process. Author(s) should disclose in the manuscript any conflict of interest, such as personal, commercial, financial or other substansive conflict of interest, that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Intellectual Property and Copyright Law

Author(s) should check their manuscripts for possible breaches of intellectual property and copyright law and secure the necessary permissions before submission to the journal.


Author(s) must confirm that all experiments which involving human or animal subjects were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations and the necessary ethics clearance has been obtained from the relevant body.

Code of Ethics for Editors 


Editors has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for intellectual content and its quality without regard to race, gender, religious belief,  ethnicity, nationality, political philosophy, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. They should decline their assignment when there is a potential of conflict of interest.

Blind Peer-Review Quality

Editors chose the Reviewers based on their expertise to provide written assessment on the manuscript, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for the journal. Editors should guarantee the confidentiality of the blind peer-review process. Editors should ensure the document sent to the reviewer does not contain information of the author(s), vice versa.


Editors should guarantee the confidentiality of the manuscript. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used for personal or profesional advantage.

Decision Quality

Editors should make an editorial decision based on the reviewers' recommendation. The Editor may communicate with other editors or reviewers in making the editorial decision. The Editor has a responsibility to provide the Author with an explanation of the editorial decision on a manuscript. Editors should write high-quality editorial letters that integrate reviewers' comments.

Code of Ethics for Reviewers

Review Quality

Reviewers are expected to be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive in reviewing the manuscript. The desired major elements of a high quality review should be as follows: (a) The Reviewer should comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation of the study; (b) The review comment must be respectful of authors and provide constructive or useful suggestions for improvement of the manuscript; (c) the Reviewer should notify the Editor if suspect misconduct; (d) The review should provide the Editor the proper context, perspective and advise in making the editorial decission.


Reviewers should be prompt with their reviews. If a Reviewer cannot meet the deadline given, the Reviewer should contact the Editor as soon as possible to determine whether a longer time period is granted or a new Reviewer should be chosen. Typically, the time to complete one round review is three weeks.


Reviewers must treat the manuscript as confidential. It must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor. 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal or profesional advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript. 


Plagiarism Screening

Scanning of plagiarism on the manuscripts will be conducted by using Turnitin software.


Abstracting & Indexing

Google Scholar