Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal focus and scope of Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan is to publish a research article within the field of an advanced understanding of how politics and political management intersects in smart government way with policy processes, program development, and resource management in a sustainable way. Smart Government or smart e-governance as the “use of technology and innovation to facilitate and support enhanced decision-making and planning within governing bodies” (IGI Global).

The paper topics focus on 

1) about using technology to facilitate and support better planning and decision making. It is about improving democratic processes and transforming the ways that public services are delivered. It is a new way of governance relying on information and communication technologies and it is citizen-centric, data-driven and performance-focused. 

2. The use of innovative policies, business models, and technology to address the financial, environmental, and service challenges facing public sector organizations. The concept of Smart Government relies on consolidated information systems and communication networks
Journal welcome original research or review paper with following topics
  • ICT impact on economic growth
  • Evident based policy making
  • Citizen engagement
  • Smart services
  • Interoperability
  • Government efficiency and effectiveness
  • Smart city government

 

Section Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal focus and scope of Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan is to publish a research article within the field of an advanced understanding of how politics and political management intersects in smart government way with policy processes, program development, and resource management in a sustainable way. Smart Government or smart e-governance as the “use of technology and innovation to facilitate and support enhanced decision-making and planning within governing bodies” (IGI Global).

The paper topics focus on 

1) about using technology to facilitate and support better planning and decision making. It is about improving democratic processes and transforming the ways that public services are delivered. It is a new way of governance relying on information and communication technologies and it is citizen- centric, data-driven and performance-focused. 

2. The use of innovative policies, business models, and technology to address the financial, environmental, and service challenges facing public sector organizations. The concept of Smart Government relies on consolidated information systems and communication networks

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

We use a double-blind system for peer-review; both reviewers' and authors’ identities remain anonymous. The paper will be peer-reviewed by three experts; two external reviewers and one editor from the journal typically involve in reviewing a manuscript. The review process may take 2-14 weeks. Here is the flow chart of how we evaluate your article.

 


Pre-check

Immediately upon submission, the journal's Managing Editor will conduct an initial review to determine:

  • The manuscript's overall suitability for the journal/section/Special Issue;
  • The manuscript's adherence to high-quality research and ethical standards; and
  • The manuscript's rigour in order to qualify for further review.

Academic editors, i.e., the Editor-in-Chief for regular submissions, the Guest Editor for Special Issue submissions, or an Editorial Board member of Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan-JSP in the case of a conflict of interest and for regular submissions if the Editor-in-Chief permits, will be notified of the submission and invited to conduct a check and recommend reviewers. Academic editors have the option of proceeding with peer review, rejecting a paper, or requesting amendments prior to peer review.

Special Issue Guest Editors are not permitted to make choices on their own manuscripts submitted to their Special Issue, since this would represent a conflict of interest. Rather than that, an Editorial Board member will be in charge of decision-making. Except in their capacity as author, the Guest Editor will be unable to participate in the review process. Similarly, Editors-in-Chief and other Editorial Board members do not have access to their manuscript's review process except in their capacity as author.

Peer-review

From submission to final decision or publishing, a dedicated member of the editorial board organizes the review process and acts as the primary point of contact for authors, academic editors, and reviewers.

For the majority of journals, the review process is double-blind, which means that the author is unaware of the reviewer's identity, and the reviewer is unaware of the author's identity as well. Certain the journals use double-blind peer review, in which the author is ignorant of the reviewer's identity and the reviewer is unaware of the author's identity.

Each submitted paper receives at least two review reports. The academic editor may provide reviewer suggestions during pre-check. Alternatively, the editorial team will consult with qualified members of the Editorial Board, qualified reviewers from our database, and fresh reviewers discovered via online searches for similar papers.

If the journal has a reviewer board, these reviewers may apply to evaluate a paper if the authors agree during submission.

All reviewers are subjected to the following checks:

  • They must not have a conflict of interest with the authors, including if they have published together in the last five years;
  • They must have a PhD;
  • They must have recent publications in the field of the submitted paper; and Reviewers who agree to review an article are required to meet the following criteria:
    • Have the appropriate competence to evaluate the manuscript's quality;
    • Provide high-quality review reports and maintain responsiveness during peer review; and
    • Adhere to professional and ethical standards.

Reviewers who accept an offer to submit a review have 2–10 weeks to complete it using our online platform.

Reviewers are requested to provide their report on a revised manuscript within three days of receiving it. Extensions are also available upon request.

The administrative staff assists academic editors by managing all correspondence with reviewers, authors, and the external editor. Academic editors may check the progress of articles and the identities of reviewers at any time, and can communicate with The staff at any step of the review process.

Revision

When only minor or substantial adjustments are needed, THE staff will ask the author to modify the manuscript prior to forwarding it to the academic editor. When contradictory review reports are received, or when one or more recommendations for rejection are made, the academic editor's judgement will be sought before communicating a modification decision to the authors.

Revised versions of manuscripts may or may not be supplied to reviewers, depending on the reviewer's request. Reviewers who seek significant adjustments or suggest rejection will automatically be provided the amended paper. The Editor allows all reviewers to examine the most current version of the paper.

Normally, a maximum of two rounds of substantial revision are included with each paper. If more rounds are deemed necessary by the reviewers, THE staff will consult with the academic editor.

Editor's Choice

After receiving a minimum of two review reports, the academic editor may make acceptance judgments on papers. An academic editor makes acceptance choices (the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, a Guest Editor, or another suitable Editorial Board member). Guest Editors are unable to make judgments on their own articles, which will be allocated to an appropriate member of the Editorial Board. When making a choice, we want the academic editor to consider the following factors:

  • Reviewer appropriateness;
  • Adequacy of reviewer remarks and author response; and
  • Overall scientific quality of the manuscript.

Accept in its existing form, accept with minor adjustments, reject and deny resubmission, reject but encourage resubmission, request revision from the author, or request an additional reviewer.

Reviewers provide suggestions, and the Editors-in-Chief or academic editors have the right to disagree. They should defend their judgement for the benefit of the writers and reviewers if they do so.

Occasionally, an academic editor may support a paper acceptance decision notwithstanding a reviewer recommendation to reject. Before expressing a final judgement to the authors, THE staff will seek a second independent view from a member of the Editorial Board or the Editor-in-Chief.

Only an academic editor may accept an article for publication. Employed THE personnel, who then tell the writers. THE STAFF NEVER MAKES APPROVAL DECISIONS BASED ON DOCUMENTS.

THE STAFF OR MEMBERS OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD (INCLUDING THE EDITORS-IN-CHIEF) DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESSING OF THEIR OWN ACADEMIC WORK. At least two impartial reviewers are appointed to to modify their contributions. Other Editorial Board members who do not have a conflict of interest with the writers make decisions.

This journal is a signatory to the 2012 San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) (DORA). We seek to publish all scientifically sound submissions and to avoid artificially inflating journal rejection rates, so enabling the reader community to determine impact.

Production

JSP's in-house staff edit and copyedit all manuscripts, as well as convert them to XML. Language editing is performed by English editing professionals. In the few instances when considerable editing or formatting is necessary, we provide writers an English editing service for an extra price (with prior consent from the authors). Additionally, writers may consult alternative English editing services or a native English-speaking colleague—the latter of which is our recommended choice.

Publication Etiquette

JSP is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and adheres to its Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing Principles. Our journals adhere to COPE's guidelines for dealing with authors, reviewers, and editors who engage in potentially unethical activity. Every member of THE's editorial team is educated in identifying and resolving ethical dilemmas.

The ethical issues for submitting manuscripts are detailed in the journal's directions for authors (see here, for example). Please refer to our policy on Updating Published Papers for further information.

The editorial office will consider ethical concerns reported by readers of the publication in accordance with COPE's guidelines. The Editorial Board may resolve disagreements about the validity of research described in published publications. Where required, we will submit disagreements about authorship, data ownership, and author misbehavior to other entities such as a university ethics commission. Authors are invited to reply to any complaints made against them that are proven.

We adhere to COPE rules for resolving authorship disputes, most notably How to identify authorship issues. Authorship may often be altered using a Correction if all writers agree. If not, we need an authorized declaration indicating who qualifies for authorship from the authors' institution(s).

Standards and Guidelines for Publication

JSP adheres to the following criteria and standards for publishing its journals:

ICMJE: Associated with medicine THE JOURNALS FOLLOW THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MEDICAL JOURNAL EDITORS' RECOMMENDATIONS. The standards address every area of editing in depth, from journal management to peer review and managing complaints. The bulk of guidelines are generic and apply to all this papers journal.

The CONSORT statement is a standard for reporting randomised controlled trials. We strongly urge writers to cross-check their work against the checklist and flow diagram and to include them with their submission.

TOP is concerned with the transparency and openness of research reporting. Our publications strive to be level 1 or level 2 in all facets of TOP. Individual journal criteria differ and may be obtained from the editorial office.

The FAIR Principles provide standards for enhancing data's discoverability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability.

PRISMA is a framework for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. It is suggested that authors complete the checklist and flow diagram and submit these with their submission.

ARRIVE offers reporting criteria for in vivo research. It is advised that authors cross-check their work against the checklist and submit it with their submission.

Turnitin is an industry-standard plagiarism detection program. Employed during the first screening or pre-check of a manuscript, it may also be used at any point of the peer-review process, most notably before a paper is accepted for publication.

Compliance with the aforementioned criteria and principles will be considered in making the final judgement, and any inconsistencies should be addressed properly by the authors. We propose that writers make a point of emphasising pertinent instructions in their cover letter.

Independence of the Editor

All papers published by JSP undergo peer review and are evaluated by our independent Editorial Boards; THE staff is not engaged in decision-making on manuscript acceptance. When making a choice, we want the academic editor to base it only on the following criteria:

  • Reviewer appropriateness;
  • Adequacy of reviewer remarks and author response; and
  • Overall scientific quality of the manuscript.

JSP policies are guided by the objective to make scientific and research discoveries as broadly and speedily available as feasible.

 

Publication Frequency

In the previous schedule publication, Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan publishes fourth times a year. Starting in 2019, Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan will focus to publish three times a year to maintain the quality of papers and reviewer which are published in February, July, November

 

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 is an open-access publication, which implies that all content is available to individuals and institutions for free. Users may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full-text articles in this journal without contacting the publisher or author for permission first.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institutions. 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 uses Open Journal Systems 2.4.6.0, which is open source journal management and publishing software developed, supported, and freely distributed by the Public Knowledge Project under License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License.

 

Publication Ethics

Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality research publications, public trust in research findings, and that people receive credit for their ideas.

Plagiarism

All journals published are committed to publishing only original material, i.e. material that has neither been published elsewhere nor is under review elsewhere. Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized from a manuscript by other authors, whether published or unpublished, will incur plagiarism sanctions.

Duplicate Submission

Manuscripts that are found to have been published elsewhere, or to be under review elsewhere, will incur duplicate submission/publication sanctions. If authors have used their own previously published work or work that is currently under review, as the basis for a submitted manuscript, they are required to cite the previous work and indicate how their submitted manuscript offers novel contributions beyond those of the previous work.

Citation Manipulation

Submitted manuscripts that are found to include citations whose primary purpose is to increase the number of citations to a given author’s work, or to articles published in a particular journal, will incur citation manipulation sanctions.

Data Fabrication and Falsification

Submitted manuscripts that are found to have either fabricated or falsified experimental results, including the manipulation of images, will incur data fabrication and falsification sanctions.

Improper Author Contribution or Attribution

All listed authors must have made a significant research contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims. It is important to list everyone who made a significant research contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

Redundant Publications

Redundant publications involve the inappropriate division of study outcomes into several articles.

Sanctions

In the event that there are documented violations of any of the above-mentioned policies in any journal, regardless of whether or not the violations occurred in a journal published by ASIA PACIFIC  SOCIETY FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS, the following sanctions will be applied:

Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript.

That any information that may be the reason for the rejection of publication of a manuscript must be communicated to the Editor.

Plagiarism Policy

Regarding plagiarism, all the authors submitting papers to the Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan (Journal of Government and Politics)  should ensure that their paper is free from PLAGIARISM. The publisher and journal have a policy of “Zero Tolerance on Plagiarism”. We check the plagiarism issue through two methods: reviewer check and plagiarism prevention tool. All submissions will be checked by TURNITIN before being sent to reviewers. The editor will check all papers by using the plagiarism tool http://smallseotools.com/plagiarism-checker.

Copyright Form

Submission of a paper in any journal of JGP will be taken to imply that it presents original unpublished work, not under consideration elsewhere. A copyright assignment form will be sent to the authors of accepted papers. This publishing agreement should be completed and returned to the editorial office.

 

Plagiarism Issue

At Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan, 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 cases, 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%