Peer Review Process

Likuid: Jurnal Ekonomi Industri Halal

All submissions to Likuid: Jurnal Ekonomi Industri Halal undergo a rigorous and structured peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, and scholarly integrity of the published research. The journal implements a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process. Manuscripts are reviewed by experts in relevant fields of halal industry and Islamic economics based on scientific merit, methodological soundness, contribution to the discipline, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

  1. Initial Evaluation

Upon submission, the editorial board conducts an initial screening to ensure the manuscript:

  • fits the journal’s aims and scope,
  • follows the author guidelines and formatting rules,
  • is written in proper academic English,
  • involves required international collaboration (at least one foreign co-author), and
  • meets publication ethics standards.

A similarity check is performed using plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with similarity above 20% (excluding references) are rejected at this stage.

If formatting requirements and citation style (APA 7th edition) are not met, the manuscript will be returned to the authors for revision before entering the peer review stage.

Only manuscripts that pass this screening move forward to reviewer assignment.

  1. Assignment of Reviewers

The editorial board assigns two independent reviewers who are experts in the subject area of the manuscript.

Key principles include:

  • Reviewers and authors remain anonymous (double-blind).
  • Reviewer and author affiliations must differ to prevent conflicts of interest.
  • Potential reviewers are invited based on expertise, scientific track record, and absence of conflicts of interest.
  • The journal aims to assign reviewers within two weeks after initial screening.

All identifying information (author names, acknowledgments, funding details) must be removed from the review manuscript and placed only on the title page.

  1. Review Process

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • scientific rigor and methodological validity,
  • originality and novelty,
  • clarity and coherence of presentation,
  • contribution to the field of halal economics and industry,
  • relevance to the journal’s scope.

Reviewers are generally given two weeks to complete the evaluation.
Their feedback includes constructive comments and recommendations such as:

  • Accept,
  • Minor Revision,
  • Major Revision, or
  • Reject.
  1. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on acceptance, rejection, or revision. If reviewer comments differ significantly, a third reviewer may be invited for additional assessment.

Authors receive the decision letter along with anonymized reviewer comments through the Online Journal System (OJS).

Average timelines:

  • One month from submission to first decision,
  • 4–12 weeks from acceptance to publication.
  1. Revision Process

If revisions are requested:

  • Authors must submit a revised manuscript with tracked changes and
  • a detailed response/rebuttal letter addressing each reviewer comment.

Deadlines:

  • Minor revisions: 2 weeks
  • Major revisions: 4 weeks

Major revised manuscripts are usually sent back to the same reviewers to ensure all concerns are addressed. Minor revisions may be evaluated solely by the editors.

Failure to submit revisions on time may result in automatic withdrawal.

  1. Final Acceptance and Publication

Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to:

  • professional copyediting,
  • layout and formatting,
  • proofreading,
  • final author approval.

The article is then published online in the upcoming issue of Likuid: Jurnal Ekonomi Industri Halal.

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT (Peer Review Section)

Likuid: Jurnal Ekonomi Industri Halal is committed to the highest ethical standards and adheres to the guidelines of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

  1. Confidentiality

All manuscript information is confidential. Editors, reviewers, and staff must not disclose any details regarding submissions during or after the review process.

  1. Objectivity and Impartiality

Manuscripts are evaluated solely based on academic merit, originality, and relevance—free from personal bias or discrimination. Reviewers must provide fair, constructive, and reasoned feedback.

  1. Timeliness

Editors and reviewers must handle manuscripts promptly and adhere to review timelines. Authors will be informed of manuscript progress in a timely manner.

  1. Transparency and Accountability

Editorial decisions must be transparent and justified. Reviewers must provide clear and accountable reasoning for their evaluations.

  1. Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest. Individuals with conflicts (academic, financial, institutional, or personal) will be removed from the review process.

  1. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct

Reviewers and editors must be vigilant for possible signs of plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, or unethical research practices. Any suspected misconduct will be investigated following COPE procedures.

  1. Reviewer Recognition

The journal values and acknowledges the essential role of reviewers. While identities remain anonymous, reviewers may receive certificates or acknowledgment for their service (if permitted).