Next Article in Journal
Empowering the Community in the Use of Livestock Waste Biogas as a Sustainable Energy Source
Previous Article in Journal
An Intensified Marine Predator Algorithm (MPA) for Designing a Solar-Powered BLDC Motor Used in EV Systems
 
 
Systematic Review
Peer-Review Record

Sustainable Development, Regional Planning, and Information Management as an Evolving Theme in Waqf Research: A Bibliometric Analysis

Sustainability 2022, 14(21), 14126; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114126
by Hanim Misbah *, Fuadah Johari, Fauzias Mat Nor, Hasnah Haron, Syahidawati Shahwan and Zurina Shafii
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sustainability 2022, 14(21), 14126; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142114126
Submission received: 20 September 2022 / Revised: 13 October 2022 / Accepted: 21 October 2022 / Published: 29 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Economic and Business Aspects of Sustainability)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review this article. My review aims to make your article more perfect and reach the standard criteria requested by the journal.

This article is very interesting because it examines Waqf Research. However, the theoretical basis used is still very weak because it only takes from one religious perspective. The author should use a more general and robust theory to explain the urgency of the theme being researched.

In addition, there are some sources that cannot be traced, the author must correct them. In the methodology section, the author should explain in detail the procedures used and refer to established procedures developed by previous researchers.

In the discussion section, there is no critical analysis that should be delivered by the author. Therefore, the author needs to provide critical analysis of the results of his research, so that readers get new insights from his research.

The author also has not provided theoretical and practical recommendations based on his research. The limitations of the study have also not been discussed in detail.

The latest relevant references need to be updated. The irrelevant references should be removed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is clear and well structured. However, its form must be reviewed (lines 93, 411, 465, etc.).

Furthermore, it is possible to deepen two aspects:

- The need of the research and the goal. Do the results guide future research in some way? Are there any gaps that you feel need to be filled?

- The broader context within which the issue can be contextualized. The topic, while interesting, is very specific on the Islamic context. It would be useful, in the introduction, to include the case in a broader framework (e.g. with regard to the management of commons or other cases).

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper. It is an interesting toping and I consider it fits to the journal. very well organized, in conceptual and methodological terms, and presents very relevant results

2.1.1. Sustainable development I think can become 2.1. Sustainable development. Same for 2.1.2. Waqf Regional Planning, 2.1.3. Information management,

 

The following error often appears in the text: Error! Reference source not found. It has to be eliminated.

 

Within the limits of the possibilities, the following mapping can be done:

  • Mapping of articles co-citations
  • Mapping of journal co-citations
  • Mapping of institutions’ co-citations
  • Mapping of countries co-authorships
  • Mapping of countries bibliographic coupling

 

The bibliography is up to date, but a possible source can be:

Radu, V.; Radu, F.; Tabirca, A.I.; Saplacan, S.I.; Lile, R. Bibliometric Analysis of Fuzzy Logic Research in International Scientific Databases. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 2021, 16, 1–20.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The author has made the article very interesting and strong argument. Now, I think this article is accepted in this journal. Thank you for the author's hard work to make the article interesting and provide a lot of insight.

Back to TopTop