skip to main content

Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development (P-ISSN: 2087-9733 and E-ISSN: 2442-983X) is a journal devoted to planning and development issues in Indonesia and worldwide. While maintaining both theoretical and empirical explorations, IJPD encourages new scholarly discoveries in cross-boundary and cross-cutting fields relevant to the designated topics. Specifically, IJPD highlights sustainability concerns on social, economic, environmental, and institutional developments. The topics may cover – but not limited to – the following sub-topics:

  • urbanization and peri-urbanization;
  • human settlement and livelihood;
  • rural-urban linkages;
  • climate change and community resilience;
  • urban and regional governance;
  • public infrastructure and investment;
  • development finance and public-private partnership;
  • migration, smart mobility, and transportation;
  • growth, equity, and development institutionalization.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions
Checked Indexed
Checked Peer Reviewed

The 4th International Conference on Regional Development 2019

Checked Open Submissions
Checked Indexed
Checked Peer Reviewed

The 2nd International Conference on Urban Design and Planning 2022

Checked Open Submissions
Checked Indexed
Checked Peer Reviewed

 

Peer Review Process / Policy

All manuscripts submitted to The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development (IJPD) should follow focus and scope, and author guidelines of this journal. When a manuscript is submitted, it is given a submission ID number. Always refer to this number in communications with the editor. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to inform the co-authors of the manuscript’s status throughout the review and publication processes.

All manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking before submitting the draft. Editors check all manuscripts to see if there are any similarities with other articles. The Editor reviews the manuscript for scope and assigns reviewers.

All manuscripts are considered to be confidential and undergo a double-blind review. The manuscript will be made anonym both for the reviewers and the authors(s). The decision for publication, amendment, or rejection is based upon their reports/recommendation and made solely by Editor. If reviewers consider a manuscript unsuitable for publication in this journal, a statement explaining the basis for the decision will be sent to the authors after the submission date.

Plagiarism is strictly prohibited in The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development. Plagiarism screening in this journal is completed through Turnitin, Google search, and Google Scholar 

 

Publication Frequency

The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development published two times per year in February and October.

 

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.

All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download.  We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows:
• Creative Commons-Non Ceomercial-Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA)

 

Archiving

The journal uses the archiver services to create distributed filing systems among participating libraries and enables them to create journal archives for conservation and restoration purposes. 

 

Article Processing Fee

The submitted paper will not be charged for article processing (Rp 0.00).

 

Indexing and Abstracting

The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development has been indexed in:

  1. Google Scholar
  2. Sinta
  3. Garuda
  4. Indonesian Publication Index (IPI Portal Garuda)
  5. Crossref
  6. Scilit
  7. BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine)
  8. Dimensions

 

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development (P-ISSN: 2087-9733 and E-ISSN: 2442-983X) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Research Group in Regional Development and Environmental Management, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Diponegoro University. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society. 

Research Group of Regional Development and Environmental Management as publisher of The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Diponegoro University and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and
necessary.

Publication Decisions

The editor of the The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

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.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

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.

Promptness

Any selected referee 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 excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal 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 papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

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.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

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 significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Content License

 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

You are free to:

  • Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

  • Attribution — 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.
  • NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
  • ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
  • No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
 Notices:
  • You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
  • No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.

 

Plagiarism Screening

Manuscripts submitted to The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development will be screened for plagiarism and self-plagiarism using Turnitin and Google-based search engines. Depending on the level of originality and similarities with other documents, the managing editor will decide on whether to immediately reject the manuscripts, contact authors for further clarifications, or to proceed to the peer-review process.

 

CrossMark Applying on IJPD

Crossmark

Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development to maintain the content published and alert readers to changes if and when they occur.

What is Crossmark?

CrossMark, a multi-publisher initiative from CrossRef, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of a document. The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive. Clicking on the CrossMark icon will inform the reader of the current status of a document and may also provide additional publication record information about the document.

 

Notes for Usage of Generative AI in Scientific Writing

This policy sets out how authors submitting to this journal may use Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Large Language Models (LLMs), when preparing scholarly manuscripts. Any use of such tools should remain consistent with academic integrity, openness about methods, original work, and the authors' accountability for what they submit.

  • Authors may turn to Generative AI and AI-assisted tools to make a manuscript easier to read, for example by refining grammar, organization, and wording. Such support never takes over the authors' own duty to build the argument, interpret the findings, and make sure the scientific content is correct.
  • Authors must state clearly, at the time of first submission, whether and how Generative AI or AI-assisted tools were used while preparing the manuscript. The statement should explain the nature of the use, especially where AI helped produce or rewrite any part of the text.
  • The accuracy, originality, and scientific integrity of the manuscript rest entirely with the authors. Every fact, citation, data point, or claim produced with AI support has to be checked by the authors themselves before it appears in the manuscript.
  • AI must never be employed to invent or alter data, findings, maps, spatial analysis results, figures, tables, or other evidence in ways that could deceive readers. Where AI supports data processing or analysis, that use must be reported openly, and the authors stay answerable for the results.
  • Because AI tools cannot be held responsible for the content, originality, or integrity of a work, they may not be named as authors or contributors.

When AI is used to produce or modify figures and other visual materials, this must be openly acknowledged, and the visuals must not give readers a false picture of the research. Additional journal rules may apply to AI-generated visual content.

Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

  • Manuscripts under review are confidential. Reviewers must not upload any part of a manuscript, including its text, data, or figures, to Generative AI tools.
  • Peer review depends on the reviewer's own expertise and judgment. Evaluations and review reports must not be generated by AI.
  • AI may be used only to polish the language of a reviewer's own comments, and only if no manuscript content is entered into the tool.
  • Reviewers who suspect undisclosed AI use, fabricated references, or manipulated content should report it confidentially to the editor.


Guidelines for Editors

  • Editors must keep submissions, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence confidential and must not enter them into Generative AI tools.
  • Editorial decisions, including screening, reviewer assessment, and acceptance or rejection, must be made by humans and not delegated to AI.
  • AI-based tools may support administrative checks, such as similarity screening or formatting, only if they are secure and do not compromise confidentiality. AI-detection results must not be the sole basis for a decision.
  • When AI misuse is suspected, editors should handle the case fairly and in line with COPE guidelines, giving the authors a chance to respond before any action is taken.

 

Post Publication Discussion and Corrections

The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development accepts discussions and corrections of published articles from readers. Readers who wish to submit a discussion or correction should contact the Editor-in-Chief via email, clearly explaining their comments. If accepted by the Editor-in-Chief, the discussion or correction will be published in the next issue as a Letter to the Editor. Authors may respond to such discussions or corrections by sending a reply to the Editor-in-Chief, which may be published as a Reply to the Letter to the Editor.

Post-publication corrections and amendments will be conducted with appropriate reference and careful scientific consideration. Once an article has been published, making replacements or issuing retractions requires significant effort and must be accompanied by proper explanations for the indexing databases. Therefore, authors are strongly advised to carefully check the final draft of their manuscript before publication.

 

Misconduct, Correction, & Retraction Policy

Referee Misconduct

Referee misconduct refers to any inappropriate, unethical, or unprofessional conduct committed by reviewers during the peer-review process. Such misconduct may range from relatively minor concerns, such as rude, biased, delayed, or unconstructive reviews, to more serious violations, including the misuse of confidential information, breach of anonymity, undeclared conflicts of interest, or the appropriation of an author’s ideas, data, arguments, or research findings.

Geoplanning recognizes that reviewers hold a position of considerable trust and responsibility within the scholarly publication process. Reviewers are granted access to privileged and unpublished research materials, and their assessments may significantly influence editorial decisions. Therefore, the journal expects all reviewers to uphold the highest standards of confidentiality, integrity, objectivity, fairness, and professionalism.

The journal maintains a clear complaint-handling procedure for addressing allegations of reviewer misconduct. Complaints may be submitted by authors, editors, or other parties who identify possible misconduct during or after the review process. All complaints will be considered carefully and handled in accordance with the principles of fairness, confidentiality, and due process.

For minor forms of misconduct, such as inappropriate language, discourteous comments, excessive delays, or reviews that lack constructive academic value, the editorial team may remove offensive or irrelevant comments from the review report before forwarding it to the author. Reviewers who repeatedly submit poor-quality, late, biased, or unprofessional reviews may be removed from the journal’s reviewer database and will not be invited to review future manuscripts.

For serious allegations, including the suspected misuse of unpublished data, plagiarism of ideas, breach of confidentiality, or conflicts of interest that were not disclosed, the Editor-in-Chief may initiate a formal investigation. This may involve reviewing the relevant correspondence, consulting associate editors, requesting clarification from the reviewer concerned, and, where necessary, referring the matter to the reviewer’s institution or relevant ethical body. Appropriate actions will be taken based on the severity of the misconduct and the evidence available.

Corrections to Published Articles

Geoplanning acknowledges that honest errors may occur in scientific research and scholarly publishing. When such errors are identified after publication, and when they do not invalidate the overall findings or conclusions of the article, the journal may issue a correction notice.

Authors are expected to promptly inform the Editor-in-Chief if they discover or are informed of factual errors, inaccuracies, or omissions in their published article. Corrections may also be initiated by editors, readers, or other parties when a substantive error is identified. The decision to publish a correction rests with the editorial team, based on the nature and significance of the error.

A correction notice will be published in the next available online issue of the journal. The online version of the article will be linked to the correction notice, and the correction notice will likewise be linked to the original article. Where applicable, correction notices will be indexed and connected to the original publication record in relevant indexing databases and repositories.

Retractions

Retractions are issued when there is clear evidence that the findings or conclusions of a published article are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct or honest error. geoplanning may consider retraction in cases involving, but not limited to, fabricated or falsified data, plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, unethical research practices, serious methodological flaws, unauthorized use of data, or other violations of publication ethics.

When concerns about an article are under investigation, but the evidence is not yet conclusive, the journal may publish an expression of concern. This notice informs readers that the integrity or reliability of the article is being examined while the investigation is ongoing.

All retraction notices will clearly state the reason for the retraction and, where appropriate, identify who is initiating it. Retraction notices will be published online and linked to the original article. When an article has already been included in a journal issue, the original article record will be retained to preserve the scholarly record. However, the article will be clearly marked as retracted. The PDF version may be replaced or watermarked with the phrase “Retracted Version” to ensure that readers are aware of its status.

In exceptional cases, such as those involving legal concerns, privacy violations, defamatory content, or risks of serious harm, the journal may remove the full text of the article from public access. In such circumstances, the article metadata, including the title and author information, will normally remain available, accompanied by a notice explaining that the article has been removed for legal or ethical reasons.

Retraction notices will be indexed, where possible, and linked to the original publication record in relevant databases, repositories, and indexing services. The purpose of retraction is not to punish authors, but to correct the scholarly record and maintain the integrity, transparency, and reliability of academic publishing.

Through these procedures, Geoplanning reaffirms its commitment to ethical peer review, responsible editorial practice, and the preservation of academic integrity in scholarly communication.