Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

JHI is the leading journal and an indispensable source for research and teaching on Indonesian politics and international relation studies. It has two major purposes; provide readers with a wide range of knowledge and analysis of Indonesian engagement with the world, by looking at different perspective (such as politics, economics, culture, security, society etc) and by considering the roles of various actors. JHI focuses on three themes: the relationship between Indonesian and major partner countries; the importance of Indonesia in regional and global politics; and the larger issues and theoretical disclosure of international relations that have impacted Indonesian domestic politics. Here are some of the topics that the journal focuses on:

  • Islam and Indonesian foreign policy
  • Indonesian intervention in Myanmar humanitarian crisis
  • Korea – Indonesia economic relations under “New Southern Policy”
  • The Indonesia-Malaysia disputes over shared cultural heritage
  • Indonesia's war on illegal fishing and its implication to regional cooperation
  • Indonesian perspective on conflict in South China Sea
  • The implementation of China belt and road initiative in Indonesia
  • Ecological impacts of palm oil expansion in Indonesia
  • Indonesia in the time of Covid-19
  • Foreign aid to Indonesia and its political implications
  • Indonesian contributions to promote sustainable development goals
  • Paradiplomacy and Indonesian public diplomacy
  • The rise of radicalism and terrorism in Indonesia
  • Transnational organizations and development in Indonesia
  • Indonesia in ASEAN: foreign policy and regionalism
  • Papua New Guinea-Indonesia relations: a new perspective on the border conflict
  • The social impact of a WTO agreement in Indonesia
  • Indonesian relations with various international organizations (UNSC, G20, WTO etc)

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review Article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

  1. Registration needs to be completed by the author(s) before the submission of their manuscript.
  2. Editor in chief would conduct initial reviews with these points as major considerations, (1) Conformity of manuscript with focus and scope; (2) Significance and novelty of manuscript; (3) Conformity to guidelines of the manuscript; (4) Similarity check of the manuscript; (5) Copyright transfer agreement and statement of originality form availability.
  3. A decision is made by the editor in chief in initial review with some of these decision types, (1) A rejected to peer-review process: here, the manuscript would be sent back to the author(s) with attached comments; (2) A revision to the peer-review process: here, the manuscript is sent back to the author(s) with attached comments. The comments would direct the author(s) on what they need to before they re-upload to the system; (3) Accepted to peer-review process: here, the manuscript would be sent to the section editor for reviewers' selection.
  4. Section editor would take out time to select the best reviewers for the manuscript. Once they are done, the manuscripts would be external reviewers for the double-blind peer-review process.
  5. The external reviewer gives insightful comments for the manuscript with the following recommendations, (1) Accepted as it is; (2) Minor revision; (3) Major revision; (4) Completely rejected.
  6. From this point, section editor and editor in chief would consider reviewers’ recommendations and comments before making the following decisions, (1) Completely rejected: manuscript failed the consideration process for publication; (2) Accepted as it is: there are no revisions to the manuscript, and everything has been accepted the way it is; (3) Minor revisions: the manuscript has to be revised concerning the minor comments of the reviewer; (4) Major revision: the manuscript has to be revised based on the major comments of the reviewer.
  7. If the section editor and editor in chief accept the manuscript, then the manuscript would be sent to the copyeditor for typesetting and copyediting before it is sent back to the author(s) for a final overall check.
  8. If the necessary changes needed by author(s) having major and minor revisions are made before resubmission back into the system, then the section editor would determine whether would go to the next round of revision or not.
  9. If the manuscript is rejected by the section editor and editor in chief, the author(s) would be notified that the manuscript failed to be considered for publication. This decision is followed with detailed comments.
  10. Once the layout is completed, the letter of acceptance is sent to the author(s) alongside the manuscript version.

 

Publication Frequency

Jurnal Hubungan Internasional publishes issue twice a year in March and September. Every edition contains 5 - 7 peer-reviewed research articles.

In addition, Jurnal Hubungan Internasional publishes individual articles if they are ready to be published as advanced online publications and in press articles. An advanced online publication means that the article has been proofread by the author but the final version is still in the process while an article in-press means an article has been through the peer-review process, has a final version but has not been scheduled to an issue. Both can be cited using the DOI number.

 

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. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits the use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative.

Budapest Open Access Initiative

An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While  the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies. 

I.  Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.


Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, they are within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Guédon: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists 
István Rév: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant 
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

 

Archiving

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. More...

 

Plagiarism Issue

At Jurnal Hubungan Internasional, there is zero-tolerance for plagiarism. The Turnitin plagiarism checker is used to evaluate the similarity index. The editor uses the result to decide the case of possible plagiarism – the similarity report would be provided to the author. Here are some of the actions passed by the Editorial board:

  1. A similarity index above 40%: in this case, the article is rejected due to poor paraphrasing or citation leading to an outright rejection – NO RESUBMISSION accepted.
  2. A similarity index within 10-40%: in this case, the publication is sent to the author for correction and improvement. There is a need for the author to provide a correct citation to similar places and proper paraphrasing for citations.
  3. A similarity index less than 10%: here, accepted or citation improvements might be needed – all outsourced texts must be given a proper citation.

In the second and third case, there is a need for careful revision of the article from the author(s). The author(s) need to add citation and paraphrasing to outsourced texts. At the time of examining the submitted article, there should be a Turnitin report showing NO PLAGIARISM or plagiarism of less than 10%.

 

Complaints and Appeals from Authors

Jurnal Hubungan Internasional is open for appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer review process.

Editor Decisions

Any appeals to the editor decisions are welcomed. However, the author needs to provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments.

If you wish to appeal a journal editor’s decision, please send an appeal letter to our email (jurnalhi@umy.ac.id). Please address this to the editor and explain clearly the reason. Why the author disagrees with the decision with a specific reason; new information or data that you would like the journal to take into consideration; evidence if you believe a reviewer has made technical errors in their assessment of your manuscript. Please include evidence if you believe a reviewer may have a conflict of interest. 

Complaints to editorial management

Contact us if you have any appeals or comments to help us to work better.