RUANG (p-ISSN: 1852-3881;e-ISSN:2356-0088; http://ejournal2.undip.ac.id/index.php/ruang) is peer-reviewed journal that publishing scientific articles planning subjects. This journal published by Universitas Diponegoro Publishing Group. All articles with subject related to the studies, planning and design of regional, cities and communities including their physical, economic, social, and political environments from national and international researchers are welcome to be submitted to this journal. All published articles were peer-reviewed by reputable reviewers. Final decision of manuscript acceptance is solely decided by Editor according to reviewers' comment.
RUANG is peer-reviewed journal that publishing scientific articles planning subjects. This journal published by Universitas Diponegoro Publishing Group. All articles with subject related to the studies, planning and design of regional, cities and communities including their physical, economic, social, and political environments from national and international researchers are welcome to be submitted to this journal. All published articles were peer-reviewed by reputable reviewers. Final decision of manuscript acceptance is solely decided by Editor according to reviewers' comment. The process of review by a team of Ruang. Examination of plagiarism Elements Of articles using Turnitin software .
RUANG
April and Oktober are scheduled for publication.
Ruang is electronically published via journal website (http://ejournal2.undip.ac.id/index.php/ruang/).
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)
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...
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
RUANG (p-ISSN: 1858-3881; e-ISSN: 2356-0088) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Engineering, 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 RUANG 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.
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University as publisher of RUANG 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, Faculty of Engineering 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 RUANG 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.
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.
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.
Duplicate, Multiple, and Redundant Submission Policy
FREE OF CHARGE for Submitting, Processing, and Publishing the Article in Ruang. Authors will be informed on the decision on their manuscript(s) within 1-2 month of submission following the acceptance of their manuscript.
Manuscripts submitted to Ruang will be screened for plagiarism and self-plagiarism using TURNITIN. 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 the CrossMark icon is a commitment by RUANG journal 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. RUANG journal recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians. It 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.
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.
Ruang 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
Ruang 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. Ruang 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, Ruang reaffirms its commitment to ethical peer review, responsible editorial practice, and the preservation of academic integrity in scholarly communication.
Ruang 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.
Visitor Number:
Visitor Statistic
RUANGDepartment of Urban and Regional PlanningBuilding A, 3rd Floor. Faculty of Engineering - Diponegoro UniversityCampus UNDIP Tembalang 50275Telp. (024) 7460054, Ext. 105
Email: ruang@live.undip.ac.id
