JURNAL TRIAS POLITIKA

 

ISSN

2597-7431 (Print) | 2597-7423 (Online)

Focus and Scope

Aims

Trias Politika Journal aims to advance interdisciplinary research on politics, governance, and public policy with a particular emphasis on emerging issues in the Global South. The journal provides a platform for high-quality empirical, theoretical, and methodological contributions that deepen understanding of political institutions, policy processes, democratic practices, and governance innovations.
The journal welcomes studies that offer comparative insights, novel conceptual frameworks, and evidence-based policy implications relevant to scholars, practitioners, and decision-makers.

Scope

The journal publishes original research articles, reviews, and policy-focused analyses in the following areas:
1. Political Science & Democratic Studies
• Political institutions and institutional change
• Electoral politics, political behaviour, and political communication
• Democracy, authoritarianism, and hybrid regimes
• Civil society, social movements, and citizen engagement
2. Public Policy & Governance
• Policy processes, formulation, and implementation
• Bureaucratic politics and administrative reform
• Multi-level governance, decentralization, and local governance
• Regulatory governance, public sector innovation, and digital governance
3. Comparative Politics & Global Governance
• Comparative public policy and political systems
• Governance challenges in the Global South
• Transnational politics, regionalism, and international cooperation
4. Political Economy & Development
• Political economy of development, inequality, and welfare
• Natural resource governance, energy transition, and environmental politics
• Public finance, budgeting, and governance of economic institutions
5. Security, Conflict, and Human Rights
• Conflict resolution, peacebuilding, and security governance
• Human rights, justice systems, and rule of law

Manuscript Orientation

We particularly encourage submissions that:
• Reveal empirical findings using qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods
• Employ contemporary theories in political science and public policy
• Offer comparative or cross-country perspectives
• Present policy-relevant insights for national and global audiences

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Government Sience

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Trias Politika (JTP) will undergo a selection and assessment process by the Board of Editors to ensure their accordance with the writing guideline, focus, and scope, and that they are of excellent academic quality. The manuscripts will be reviewed using the double blind peer review method in which case neither authors nor reviewers know each other’s identities.

Desk Review
At the desk review stage, manuscripts will be examined to ensure that they have met the writing guideline, focus, and scope with excellent academic quality. If they do not meet the conditions, the author will be given the opportunity to revise their manuscript according to the given criteria. However, there is also the possibility that the manuscript will be directly rejected.

Peer review
When the manuscript has passed the desk review stage, it will then be delivered to two reviewers who are experts in the field of the submitted manuscript. The review process will be done within 3 weeks. Manuscripts that did not successfully pass the desk review process will not proceed to this stage.

Reviewer’s decision
The reviewers will provide the following recommendations:
1. Accepted; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication
2. Accepted with minor revisions; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication once it is revised in response to the reviewers’ concerns
3. Accepted with major revisions; means that substantive inadequacies in the manuscript, such as data analysis, the main theory used, and rewriting of paragraphs, need to be revised
4. Rejected; means that the manuscript is not acceptable for publication or the given reviews relate to very basic issues
The reviewer’s decision will be considered by the Board of Editors to determine the ensuing process of the manuscript.

Revision Stage
Once the manuscript has been received with notations of minor or major revisions, it will be returned to the author with a review summary form. For manuscripts accepted with major revisions, authors are allotted 3 weeks to revise. Whereas for manuscripts accepted with minor revisions, 1 week is allotted for revision. When returning the revised manuscript, the author is required to fill in and attach the review summary form.

Final decision
At this stage, the manuscript will be re-evaluated by the Board of Editors to ensure that the author has revised in response to the reviewers’ concerns. In this final decision, the manuscript may still be rejected if the author did not seriously conduct the revisions necessary.
Proofread. Once the manuscript has been deemed acceptable by the Board of Editors, it will undergo a proofreading process to maintain linguistic quality.

Publication Confirmation
At this stage, the final layout of the manuscript will be resent to the author to ensure that the content is in accordance with the author’s writing. At this stage, the author may revise any typographical error found in the final manuscript. Once confirmation from the author is given, the Editorial Secretary will process the manuscript for online publication on the website as well as print publication.

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.

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. This journal also utilizes Indonesia one search and Garuda (Garba Rujukan Digital) to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries. More...

Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Duties of Authors
1. 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 behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Data Access and Retention:
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide such data within a reasonable time.
3. 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.
4. 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 behavior and is unacceptable.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.

Duties of Editors
1. Fair Play:
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Publication Decisions:
The editor board journal 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.
5. Review of Manuscripts:
The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers
1. 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.
2. 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
3. Standards of Objectivity:
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.

Review Guidelines

Manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Trias Politika (JTP) will blind review process. The reviewers are tasked to carry out reviews that include analyses and assessments of manuscripts’ acceptability to be published. Reviewers should consider the following points prior to conducting their review:
1. Does the manuscript you are being asked to review match your expertise?
If the article does not sufficiently match your area of expertise, please notify the Editorial.
2. Do you have time to review the manuscript?
The review process should be completed within 2 weeks after a manuscript has been sent. If you do not agree with this condition and need more time to review, please contact the Editorial.
3. Are there any conflicts of interests with the manuscript?
If you have any conflicts of interests with the manuscript, please contact the Editorial
4. Are there any indications of plagiarism in the manuscript?
If you suspect any indications of plagiarism in the manuscript, please contact the Editorial immediately.

Review Process:
1. Title: Does it clearly describe the manuscript?
2. Abstract: Does it reflect the content of the manuscript?
3. Introduction: The introduction should contain the general background and research questions or hypotheses. Literature review should be included in the introduction.
4. Has the manuscript met the required journal writing guideline?

Content:
1. If the issue relating to the reviewed manuscript has previously been published, is the manuscript sufficient to warrant publication?
2. Does the manuscript contain novelty, profound knowledge, and interesting points to warrant publication?
3. Does the manuscript contribute to the development of science and knowledge?
4. Are the main theories or references used in line with the study?

Method:
1. Does the author accurately describe how the data was collected?
2. Does the article answer the questions posed in the study?
3. Are new methods used? If there are new methods, are they explained in detail?

Results and Discussion:
The results should explain the findings of the author. This section should be written clearly in a logical sequence. Reviewers need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted.

Conclusion:
The conclusion should contain recommendations and summary of the research. The summary should have examples of answers corresponding to the research objective or the acquired findings. The summary should not contain repetitions of research results or discussions. The recommendations provided should correlate with the concept of the conducted research or suggestions for improving the study.

Table and Figures:
The tables and figures presented should correlate with the article’s content and they should have clear sources of reference (such as books, journals, website, or other references)

References:
Please ensure that every reference cited in the text is written in the reference list using the American Psychological Association (APA) style. The references used should be published within the last 10 years, consisting of 80% from journal articles and 20% from books, theses, or other relevant publications.

Writing Style:
Please write your text in good English that is interesting to read and easy to understand.

Final Review:
1. Assessment of the manuscript review should be written in the Review Form sent by the Editorial.
2. Reviewers are required to fill in the table marked with asterisks.
3. At the end of the review, reviewers are required to give one of the following recommendations:
a. Accepted; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication
b. Accepted with minor revisions; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication once it is revised in response to the reviewers concerns
c. Accepted with major revisions; means that substantive inadequacies in the manuscript, such as data analysis, the main theory used, and rewriting of paragraphs, need to be revised
d. Rejected; means that the manuscript is not acceptable for publication or the given reviews relate to very basic issues
4. Upon completion of the review form, please fill in the reviewer’s identity in the corresponding columns.

Conflicts of Interest

The policy for conflicts of interest or competing interests in Jurnal Trias Politika is based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). A conflict of interest (also known as a competing interest) can occur when authors, reviewers, or editors have financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationships that could influence (or be perceived to influence) their work.

For Authors
When submitting a manuscript, authors are required to provide full disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest. This information will be used by the Editor-in-Chief to inform the initial editorial decision and, if the manuscript is accepted, a disclosure statement will be published to assist readers in evaluating the article. Authors can declare conflicts of interest in the cover letter or on the manuscript submission form in the journal’s Open Journal System.

Conflicts of interest can be financial or non-financial. To maintain transparency, any associations that could be perceived as a conflict of interest must also be declared.

Examples of financial conflicts of interest include:
* Employment or voluntary involvement.

* Collaborations with advocacy groups relating to the content of the article.

* Grants from an entity, paid to the author or organization.

* Personal fees received by the authors as honoraria, royalties, consulting fees, lecture fees, or testimonies.

* Patents held or pending by the authors, their institutions, funding organizations, or licensed to an entity, whether earning royalties or not.

* Royalties being received by the authors or their institutions.

* Stock or share ownership.

* Benefits related to the development of products as an outcome of the work.


Examples of non-financial conflicts of interest include:
* Receipt of drugs, specialist equipment, tools, computer programs, or digital applications.

* Access to data repositories, archival resources, or museum collections by an entity that might benefit or be at a disadvantage from the published findings.

* Holding a position on the boards of industry bodies or private companies that might benefit or be at a disadvantage from the published findings.

* Writing assistance or administrative support from a person or organization that might benefit or be at a disadvantage from the published findings.

* Personal, political, religious, ideological, academic, and intellectual competing interests perceived to be relevant to the published content.

* Involvement in legal action related to the work.


If there are no competing interests to declare, authors should include a statement in the article to confirm that there are no relevant financial or non-financial competing interests to report.
For Reviewers
Reviewers are asked to exclude themselves from the review process if they have a significant conflict of interest, whether financial or otherwise. Financial interests do not automatically disqualify someone from evaluating an article, but reviewers must inform the handling editor if they have any competing interests that could be perceived as relevant. Editors will take this into account when deciding whether to assign the manuscript to the reviewer and while considering their feedback.
For Editors
All editorial board members and guest editors are required to declare any conflicts of interest that could prevent them from performing their editorial work impartially. They must also recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

Ownership and Management Information

Jurnal Trias Politika is committed to transparency and accountability in its ownership, management, and editorial operations. This page provides clear information about the journal’s ownership, publishing body, editorial structure, and governance principles.

1. Journal Ownership
Jurnal Trias Politika is owned and published by:

Department of Government Science
Faculty of Social and Political Sciences
Universitas Riau Kepulauan (UNRIKA)
Batam, Riau Islands, Indonesia

The journal operates under the institutional auspices of Universitas Riau Kepulauan and is managed by the editorial team appointed by the Department of Government Science.

2. Publisher
The journal is published by the Department of Government Science, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Riau Kepulauan. The publisher provides the necessary infrastructure, administrative support, and operational funding to ensure the journal’s sustainability and adherence to international publication standards.

3. Editorial Management
The journal’s editorial management is led by an Editor-in-Chief and supported by an Editorial Board and Peer Reviewers. The full list of editorial board members and reviewers is available on the journal’s Editorial Team page.

The editorial team is responsible for:

Managing the submission and peer-review process.

Ensuring the quality and integrity of published content.

Maintaining the journal’s compliance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

Overseeing the production and dissemination of articles.

Handling post-publication discussions and corrections.

4. Editorial Independence
Jurnal Trias Politika upholds the principle of editorial independence. Editorial decisions—including the acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts—are made solely on the basis of academic merit and the outcome of the peer-review process. These decisions are not influenced by the publisher, the owning institution, funding bodies, or any other external party.

The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial content of the journal. The publisher and the owning institution do not interfere with the evaluation, selection, or editing of manuscripts.

5. Funding and Support
The journal is supported by:

Institutional funding from Universitas Riau Kepulauan.

Article Processing Charges (APC) from accepted manuscripts.

All financial support is managed transparently and does not influence editorial decisions.

6. Contact
For questions regarding ownership, management, or editorial policies, please contact:

Editorial Office of Jurnal Trias Politika
Department of Government Science
Faculty of Social and Political Sciences
Universitas Riau Kepulauan
Batam, Riau Islands, Indonesia

Email: jurnaltriaspolitika2017@gmail.com
Website: https://www.journal.unrika.ac.id/index.php/jurnaltriaspolitika