About This Journal
Policies
Submissions
Scopus Citedness
Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan is a scientific journal specializing in state-of-the-art theory and empirical studies in economics and development studies. The journal aims to facilitate the exchange of ideas and knowledge among academics, researchers, governments, and practitioners in the fields of economics and development studies. The journal also accepts manuscripts containing conceptual ideas and policy discussions, provided they are relevant to current issues and make significant contributions to the body of knowledge.
Manuscripts published in Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan are expected to encourage open discussion on new ideas and their applications, including interdisciplinary approaches to economic development that address contemporary challenges.
The journal is adaptable to advancements in scientific and research methodologies. Its fields of study include microeconomics, macroeconomics, public economics, monetary economics, environmental and resource economics, labor economics, regional and urban economics, industrial economics, international economics (trade and finance), development issues, sustainable development, and related areas.
The article is reviewed in a blind review by reviewers. The review is done for a maximum of 4-8 weeks.
Every manuscript submitted to Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan is read by the editorial staff. Those manuscripts evaluated by editors to be inappropriate to journal criteria are rejected promptly without external review (desk rejection). Manuscripts evaluated to be of potential interest to our readership are sent to double blind reviewers. Every manuscript is independently reviewed by at least two reviewers in the form of "double-blind review". The editors then make a decision for publication based on the reviewer's recommendation from among several posibilities: Accept Submission, Revision Required, Resubmit for Review, and Decline Submission.
In certain cases, the editor may submit an article for review to another third reviewer before making a decision, if necessary.
The Editor-in-Chief of Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.
Review Process:
Important Revision Requirements:
Point-by-Point Responses: Authors must address all editor and reviewer comments point-by-point, providing a detailed response using a response matrix (rejoinder) that clearly indicates how and where each comment was addressed in the revised manuscript.
Track Changes: All revisions made directly to the manuscript file must be completed using the Track Changes feature in Microsoft Word so that all additions, deletions, and edits are clearly visible to the editorial team.
Corresponding authors will receive an e-mail with a link to log into our online proofing system. Through this system, authors can annotate, make corrections, comment on, and answer questions from the Copy Editor, as well as upload the final edited PDF version.
The Average Time for Review
1. Originality: Does the paper provide new and meaningful insights that warrant publication?
2. Connection to Existing Literature: Does the paper reflect a sufficient understanding of relevant literature in the field? Are appropriate sources cited, and is any critical work overlooked?
3. Methodology: Is the paper's argument grounded in a solid theoretical framework, relevant concepts, or other foundational ideas? Is the research or intellectual work well-structured, and are the methods employed suitable for the study?
4. Results: Are the findings presented clearly and analyzed effectively? Do the conclusions logically connect with the rest of the paper?
5. Implications for Research, Practice, and Society: Does the paper clearly outline the implications of its findings for research, practical applications, or societal impact? Does it successfully bridge the gap between theory and practice? How might the research influence policy, education, or public attitudes? Are these implications consistent with the paper's findings and conclusions?
6. Communication Quality: Is the paper effectively written, using language appropriate for the field and the audience of the journal? Does it convey its arguments clearly?
Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan published three times a year (April, August, December)
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.
This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher (Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Indonesia), and the society.
This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors .
Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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 methods. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher, and the society.
As the publisher of Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Diponegoro take their duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and it recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Diponegoro committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
Publication Decisions
The editors of Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan is responsible for deciding which 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 their decisions.
Plagiarism Screening
The submitted manuscript would be check for plagiarism using Turnitin.
Non-Discrimination
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.
Confidentiality
The editors 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 by any of the editorial board members and reviewers in their own research.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the authors may also assist the author in improving the quality of the paper.
Promptness
The journal editors are committed to provide timely review to the authors. If a reviewer does not submit his/her report in a timely manner, the paper is immediately sent to another qualified reviewer.
Manuscript content is treated with at most confidentiality. The journal uses double blind process. Except for the editor-in-chief, the editors and reviewers cannot discuss paper with any other person, including the authors.
Standards of Objectivity
The editors and reviewers are required to evaluate papers based on the content. The review comment must be respectful of authors. The reviewers are required to justify their decision and recommendation.
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 a proper 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 with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers.
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 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 reasonable time.
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. Papers found with such problems are automatically rejected and authors are so advised.
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 research reported in the manuscript. The corresponding author has a responsibility to keep co-authors posted with the review process. If accepted, all authors are required to give a signed statement that the research work is their original research work.
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.
There are 2 ways to get an account:a. Registered by Journal Managerb. Register yourself (on the main menu "Register" link)
How to register yourself:a. On the Main menu, click "Register"b. Fill in the registration form, with an asterisk (*) must be filled in like username, password, repeat password, validation, first name, last name, and emailc. Click Register when it's finished
Create Submission:a. Step 1. Start submission: check all submission checklists, then fill in the comment form for editor (to order editor so the article sent can be published)b. Step 2. Upload Submission: please upload the word filec. Step 3. Entering the Submission's Metadata: please complete the metadata including author, title, abstract, and keywordd. Step 4. Uploading Supplementary Files if necessary (supporting files from articles sent)e. Step 5. Confirming the Submissionf. Click Finish & Active Submission
Here are the steps to do reviews:
1. Log in as reviewer
2. Select the article sent by clicking "1 active": number 1 shows the number of articles handled
3. Choose the article’s title
4. Follow the review instructions, there are 5 steps :
5. Give recommendation
6. Send an email after done the review process
7. Done
To support the costs of editorial management, double-anonymous peer review, typesetting, online hosting, and long-term digital archiving, Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan charges an Article Processing Charge (APC) for manuscripts accepted for publication.
Fee StructureArticle Submission Fee: IDR 0 (Free)Article Processing Charge (APC): IDR 750,000Effective Date: This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted on or after September 1, 2025.
The APC applies exclusively to accepted articles. Manuscripts that are rejected or withdrawn prior to formal acceptance will not incur any charges.
Editorial Independence & Payment Timing
Payment MethodOfficial APC payments are processed through an official Virtual Account (VA) issued by Universitas Diponegoro.Client: Universitas Diponegoro (UNDIP)VA Number: 8027002012610007Billing ID: APC JDEP FEB UNDIPName: APC JDEP FEB UNDIP
Waiver and Discount PolicyJurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan is committed to equitable publishing opportunities. Authors facing severe financial hardship, unfunded independent researchers, or scholars who demonstrate exceptional need may request an APC waiver or discount prior to manuscript submission or during the initial review stage. Waiver requests should be sent directly to the editorial team with supporting details. Requests will not impact the peer-review process or editorial outcome.
Article Withdrawal PolicyAuthors are encouraged to ensure their manuscript is in its final form before submission to minimize unnecessary burdens on reviewer and editorial resources.
you can download manual guidance for a author and reviewer here
Any further information, do not hestitate to contact us.
Crossmark
Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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. Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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.
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.
Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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
Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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. Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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, Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan reaffirms its commitment to ethical peer review, responsible editorial practice, and the preservation of academic integrity in scholarly communication.
Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan 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.
This policy establishes guidelines for the responsible use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI-assisted tools, in scholarly publishing. The use of these tools must be consistent with the principles of academic integrity, transparency, originality, confidentiality, and research ethics.
Authors, peer reviewers, and editors are responsible for ensuring that AI is used appropriately within their respective roles. Generative AI may support specific tasks where permitted, but it must not replace human judgment, intellectual contributions, or accountability for scholarly work. All parties must adhere to the following guidelines to maintain the quality, credibility, and integrity of the scholarly publication process.
1. Guidelines for Authors
Permitted Use: Authors may use Generative AI and AI-assisted tools to improve language, grammar, clarity, organization, and wording. However, AI must not replace authors' intellectual contributions, including developing arguments, interpreting findings, and ensuring scientific accuracy.
Disclosure: Authors must disclose whether and how Generative AI was used during manuscript preparation at the initial submission. The disclosure must describe the nature of its use, particularly for generating or rewriting text.
Authors' Responsibility: Authors remain fully responsible for the manuscript's accuracy, originality, and scientific integrity. All AI-assisted facts, citations, data, and claims must be verified before submission.
Research Integrity: AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, or deceptively alter data, findings, maps, spatial analyses, figures, tables, or other research evidence. Any AI-assisted data processing or analysis must be transparently disclosed, and authors remain accountable for the results.
Authorship: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or contributors because they cannot assume responsibility for the work.
Visual Content: The use of AI to generate or modify figures and other visual materials must be disclosed. Such materials must accurately represent the research, and additional journal-specific requirements may apply
Confidentiality: Reviewers must not upload manuscripts, data, figures, or any other confidential review materials to Generative AI tools.
Independent Assessment: Peer review evaluations and reports must reflect reviewers' own expertise and judgment and must not be generated by AI.
Language Assistance: AI may be used solely to improve the language of reviewers' own comments, provided that no manuscript content is entered into the tool.
Reporting Concerns: Suspected undisclosed AI use, fabricated references, or manipulated content must be reported confidentially to the editor.
Confidentiality: Editors must protect the confidentiality of submissions, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence and must not enter these materials into Generative AI tools.
Editorial Independence: Editorial decisions, including initial screening, reviewer assessment, and acceptance or rejection, must be made by humans and must not be delegated to AI.
Administrative Assistance: Secure AI-assisted tools may support administrative tasks, such as similarity screening and formatting checks, provided that confidentiality is maintained. AI-detection results must never serve as the sole basis for editorial decisions.
Handling Suspected Misconduct: Suspected AI misuse must be handled fairly and in accordance with COPE guidelines, allowing authors an opportunity to respond before any action is taken.
