EDITORIAL Enhancing Global IR Knowledge Production in Southeast Asia Through Quality Publications Moch Faisal Karim, Tirta Nugraha Mursitama, Lili Yulyadi Arnakim International Relations Department, Faculty of Humanities, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia, 11480. mkarim@binus.edu, tmursitama@binus.edu, lili.yulyadi@binus.edu How to Cite: Karim, M. F., Mursitama, T. N., & Arnakim, L.Y.& (2022). Enhancing global IR knowledge production in Southeast Asia through quality publications. Journal of ASEAN Studies, 10(2), https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9442 Keywords: knowledge production, Global IR, Southeast Asia, publication Introduction Since the call for Non-Western International Relations (IR) Theory (Acharya & Buzan, 2009), there has been a growing movement within the IR discipline to engage more non-western experiences to enhance debate within IR literature. This results in the advancement of Global IR aimed to transform IR into a genuinely global discipline engaging ideas, approaches, and experiences of both Western and non-Western societies (Hurrell, 2016; Jones, 2021). This movement is not only trying to voice non-western ideas but also breaking the hegemony of euro-centrism in analyzing global issues. However, almost a decade into the movement, such a premise to enhance the Global IR movement might still be limited. Wicaksana and Santoso (2022) show how Indonesian IR is primarily dominated by Western scholarship, especially constructivism and realism. Moreover, Indonesian IR Scholars tend to focus on empirically based and policy-oriented than conceptual ones. This resulted in the lack of Indonesian contributions towards debate in IR mailto:lili.yulyadi@binus.edu https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9442 literature. Not to mention that due to the neo-liberalization of education, IR courses tend to be designed to meet the demands of the job market rather than to address the debates in the discipline. In this editorial, we would like to examine further the knowledge production in International Relations as a field of study in Southeast Asia, especially Indonesia. As the only IR Journal based in Indonesia, we are interested in being part of the Global IR movement. Understanding the current state of the field in our region would allow us to focus our attention on how to energize the field in this region. To do so, a bibliometric analysis of the state of IR is conducted as a field of study. ASEAN in IR Knowledge Production: A bibliometric analysis Bibliometric analysis is conducted to understand the position of ASEAN in the field of IR. We utilize Scopus as our database, given its broad collections of scholarly publications. We need to reiterate, however, that this database is highly skewed toward English publications and might be biased toward English-speaking countries. However, Scopus has been used by many institutions both in the Global North and South as an instrument for evaluating research outcomes. Using keywords relevant to the study of International Relations in general, we gather around 61.687 articles from 2000 (See Table 1). Table 1 Keywords for IR and IPE Corpus Types Keywords Relevant keywords for IR Corpus (TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {International Relations} ) OR TITLE- ABS-KEY ( {foreign policy} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {global governance} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {international security} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {middle power} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {power transition} ) OR TITLE-ABS- KEY ( {cross-border regionalism} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {international political economy} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {global political economy} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {international institution} ) ) Relevant keywords for IPE Corpus (TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {international political economy} ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( {political economy} ) AND TITLE-ABS- KEY ( international ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( global ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( transnational ) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( globalization ) ) These lists can be a corpus for knowledge production in International Relations. As expected, the top four countries publishing about International Relations are all Anglo-Saxon countries such as the US, UK, Canada, and Australia, followed by the Russian Federation, Germany, and China, respectively. These Anglo-Saxon countries dominate IR studies with 31,436 or more than 50%. The US alone published around 25% of IR scholarships. Furthermore, the top twenty most productive countries in IR knowledge production are dominated by Western countries, with more than 70% of publications published in these countries. Non-western countries such as Russia, China, India, Japan, Brazil, and Turkey account for only 14% of IR publications. This suggests that the US and Western countries dominate IR scholarship (See Table 2). Table 2 IR Publication by Country from 2000-2022 No Country Number of publications 1 United States 15.689 2 United Kingdom 9.749 3 Canada 3.075 4 Australia 2.923 5 Russian Federation 2.897 6 Germany 2.887 7 China 1.694 8 Netherland 1.386 9 Italy 1.326 10 France 1.289 11 Turkey 1.248 12 India 1.038 13 Sweden 982 14 Brazil 924 15 Japan 897 16 Spain 895 17 Belgium 871 18 Switzerland 831 19 Norway 798 20 Denmark 789 Source: Scopus database Where is the position of Southeast Asia in general and Indonesia in particular in regard to this knowledge production? All Southeast Asian countries combined have only produced 2% of IR scholarships since 2000. Singapore is ranked number 1 as a country that has made IR scholarship in ASEAN with 635 publications. Despite being the largest country in ASEAN and a supposedly important player, Indonesia has produced only 240 publications since 2000 and placed second, followed by Malaysia and Thailand in third and fourth place with 217 and 105 publications, respectively. Arguably, Singapore has become a hub in knowledge production in IR. Singapore’s two leading institutions, Nanyang Technological University and the National University of Singapore, arguably have become hub for IR knowledge production in ASEAN, publishing 426 and 352 publications, respectively, higher than all Indonesian academic institutions’ productivity combined (See Table 3). Singapore is also superior in terms of the quality of the publication. Most of the publications are published in highly-ranked journals. Other than Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia followed. There are six Indonesian institutions, six Malaysian institutions, two Philippines institutions, two Thai institutions, and one Vietnam institution in the top twenty most productive institutions in IR knowledge production (See Table 4). Table 3 IR Publications in Southeast Asia from 2000-2022 No Country World Ranking Number of Publications 1 Singapore 23 635 2 Indonesia 37 240 3 Malaysia 40 217 4 Thailand 55 105 5 Philippines 56 103 6 Vietnam 58 90 7 Cambodia 108 9 8 Brunei 112 7 9 Laos 128 4 10 Myanmar 129 4 Source: Scopus database Table 4 Publications by University in Southeast Asia from 2000-2022 No Institutions Number of Publication Country 1 Nanyang Technological University 426 Singapore 2 National University of Singapore 352 Singapore 3 Universiti Malaya 50 Malaysia 4 De La Salle University 44 Philippines 5 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 41 Malaysia 6 Thammasat University 32 Thailand Singapore Management University 29 Singapore 7 Bina Nusantara University 29 Indonesia 8 Universitas Indonesia 27 Indonesia 9 University of the Philippines Diliman 26 Philippines 10 Universiti Sains Malaysia 20 Malaysia 11 Chulalongkorn University 19 Thailand 12 Universitas Airlangga 19 Indonesia 13 Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam 18 Vietnam 14 International Islamic University Malaysia 17 Malaysia 15 Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta 16 Indonesia 16 Universitas Diponegoro 14 Indonesia 17 Universitas Padjadjaran 14 Indonesia 18 Universitas Putra Malaysia 12 Malaysia 19 Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin 12 Malaysia 20 Universiti Utara Malaysia 11 Malaysia Source: Scopus database For Indonesia, knowledge production is highly diversified. Bina Nusantara University has become the most productive in terms of IR knowledge production with 29 publications (12%), followed by Universitas Indonesia with 27 (11%), Universitas Airlangga with 19 publications (7,8%), and Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta with 16 publications (6,6%). Unlike Indonesia, Philippines IR knowledge production is primarily dominated by two universities, De La Salle University and the University of the Philippines Diliman, representing almost 70% of the total publications (See Table 5). Table 5 Publications by Universities in Indonesia from 2000-2022 No Institutions Number of Publication 1 Bina Nusantara University 29 2 Universitas Indonesia 28 3 Universitas Airlangga 19 4 Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta 16 5 Universitas Diponegoro 14 6 Universitas Padjajaran 14 7 Hasanuddin University 11 8 Universitas Gajah Mada 9 9 LIPI 9 10 Centre for Strategic and International Studies 6 Source: Scopus Database The fate of the IR subfield, Indonesian knowledge production in International Political Economy, an IR subfield is even worse. From 12.470 documents with relevant IPE keywords, Indonesian-based scholars only produced 51 publications. Only one article published by Indonesian-based scholars was published in Review of International Political Economy, the most prominent journal in the field of International Political Economy. Overall, Southeast Asian-based scholars produce only 308 journal publications or 2,25%. Singaporean-based institutions dominate knowledge production with 141 publications, or more than 45% of all publications from Southeast Asian institutions. The United States still dominates most knowledge production in the field of International Political Economy with 3.660 publications, the United Kingdom with 2.879 publications, Canada with 949 publications, Australia with 817 publications, and Germany with 621 publications. In Southeast Asia, Singapore ranked first with 141 publications followed by Indonesia in second place with 51 publication, Malaysia with 48 publications, Thailand with 35 publications, and the Philippines with 22 publications (See Table 6). The question, then, is where Indonesian IR academic scholars publish. Building upon available data of Indonesian IR scholars in the Scopus database, we can gather around 149 Indonesian IR scholars. These 149 scholars have generated 697 publications or 4,6 publications on average per scholar. However, the prevalence of Indonesian IR scholars published in proceedings is higher than average. For instance, there were only 792 publications in proceeding out of 61.687 publications in IR or about 1,2%. In the case of Indonesia, there are 118 publications in proceedings or almost 17% of all total publications by Indonesian scholars. Publishing in proceedings indicates a low-quality paper, given the nature of proceeding, that has weak or no peer review (See Table 7). Table 6 IPE Publication by Country from 2000-2022 No Country World Ranking Number of Publications 1 United States 1 3,660 2 United Kingdom 2 2,879 3 Canada 3 949 4 Australia 4 821 5 Germany 5 626 6 Netherland 6 367 7 Italy 7 294 8 South Africa 8 278 9 China 9 271 10 France 10 264 11 Singapore 21 141 12 Indonesia 38 51 13 Malaysia 39 48 14 Thailand 43 35 15 Philippines 50 22 Source: Scopus Database Table 7 Top ten journal outlets by Indonesia-based IR Scholars No Name Type Focus Number 1 IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science Proceeding/ Discontinued Non-IR Journal 73 2 Review of International Geographical Education Online Journal/ Discontinued Non-IR Journal 31 3 International Journal of Innovation Creativity and Change Journal/ Discontinued Non-IR Journal 26 4 Central European Journal of International and Security Studies Journal IR Journal 21 5 Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems Journal/ Discontinued Non-IR Journal 17 6 International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy Journal Non-IR Journal 13 7 International Journal of Supply Chain Management Journal/ Discontinued Non-IR Journal 12 8 Revista Unisci Journal IR Journal 12 9 Journal Of Physics Conference Series Proceeding Non-IR Journal 11 10 International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research Journal/ Discontinued Non-IR Journal 9 Source: Scopus Database Furthermore, Indonesian IR scholars do not publish in IR or Political Science specific journals. The top ten outlets where Indonesian IR scholars publish were primarily dominated by science and management-related journals. This indicates that Indonesian IR scholars tend to publish in predatory journals or low-rank journals even though it is not part of the scholarly field. This also shows the academic environment in Indonesia seems to prioritize quantity and fast publication where proceedings can cater for such needs. As a comparison, around 59 academics based in Singapore has generated about 977 publications or 16 publications on average per person. Singapore academics published only seven conference proceedings. Most of the academics in Singapore published in reputable IR journals focusing on the Asia Pacific (See Table 8). Indeed the low-quality publication by Indonesian scholars by no means indicates the lower quality of Indonesian scholars. Many variables explain the seemingly low-quality publications by Indonesian scholars. Many IR academics in Indonesia or some in Southeast Asia are busy and occupied with administrative or structural activities (Rakhmani, 2021). This is considering the condition of the higher education environment in Indonesia, which focuses on bureaucratic jobs. Second, the process of neoliberalization of education keeps lecturers busy in the teaching process with a large number of classes and a lot of workloads so that lecturers do not have time to do research. This, of course, really depends on each institution’s policy (Rosser, 2023). Third, given the unique position of academics in Indonesia, many lecturers enjoy the role of activists or observers. The phenomenon of academic pragmatism, where lecturers interact more often with the public, makes publication activities irrelevant to some academics. Table 8 Top Ten Journal Outlets by Singapore-Based IR Scholars No Name Number of Publication 1 Pacific Review 32 2 Contemporary Southeast Asia 14 3 Asian Survey 12 4 Intellectual Discourse 12 5 Asia Policy 11 6 Asian Security 11 7 Review of International Studies 11 8 Asian Journal of Political Science 10 9 Australian Journal of International Affairs 10 10 Asian Journal of Comparative Politics 8 11 Cambridge Review of International Affairs 8 12 European Journal of International Relations 8 13 International Affairs 8 14 Journal of Strategic Studies 8 Source: Scopus Database Our bibliometric analysis shows that the West primarily dominates International Relations knowledge production. In the case of Southeast Asia, the hub for knowledge production is Singapore. Specifically for Indonesia, the picture is even grimmer when we look at the quality of publications by Indonesian IR scholars. Not only is there a gender gap in terms of publication by Indonesian IR scholars (Prihatini & Prajuli, 2022), but there is a quality gap in publications. It is then challenging to contribute for Indonesian IR to have a distinct view that allows them to contribute toward Global IR. There is a need for further enhancement of the Indonesian IR epistemic community. Enhancing IR in Southeast Asia This current JAS issue aims to address such limitations in enhancing how Indonesian scholars, in particular, and Southeast Asian scholars, in general, can contribute towards the Global IR. This edition is special because it marks the tenth anniversary of the Journal of ASEAN Studies. Seven articles in this issue, in some ways, address the concern on how Southeast Asian-based scholars can contribute to the IR debate. To do so, we examine the trajectories and trends of research that engage Southeast Asia as empirical grounds. The first article by Andrew Rosser, titled “Beyond the Crisis: Re-energizing Southeast Asian Studies”, discusses the decline of Southeast Asia as area studies. Rosser (2022) suggests several strategies to enhance Southeast Asian studies to be more relevant to debates in the disciplines. This is important because JAS, although it claims to be an IR journal, focuses on Southeast Asia and ASEAN as its empirical issues. We publish articles that engage in the issue of transnational environmental governance in Southeast Asia (Varkkey, 2021), domestic issues of particular ASEAN member countries such as the president public speech (Tyson & Apresian, 2021), to comparative analysis of two ASEAN member states focusing on how states policing cyberspace (Talamayan, 2020). However, we expect that such area studies could contribute to the particular debate. We hope JAS could be a platform for linking area studies with debates in disciplines. The second article written by I Gede Wahyu Wicaksana and Moch Faisal Karim, titled “Approaches to Indonesia’s Foreign Policy: Area Studies, FPA Theory, and Global IR”, examines the evolution of Indonesia’s foreign policy studies, highlighting the major theoretical and methodological trends that have shaped their current form. Wicaksana and Karim (2022) show that Indonesian scholars focusing on foreign policy analysis (FPA) has engaged in more diverse theory-driven inquiries. Many recent studies on Indonesia’s foreign policy engage in role theory (Karim, 2021) and family state (Wicaksana, 2019). This could be an important trend for Indonesia to contribute to the Global IR, specifically in the sub-field of FPA. JAS has also published a variety study on Indonesia’s foreign policy, especially on Indonesia’s international leadership (Jemadu & Lantang, 2021), Indonesia’s foreign policy toward ASEAN, and the interaction between domestic politics and Indonesia’s foreign policy toward South Pacific (Lantang & Tambunan, 2020). We hope that JAS could produce more theory-driven FPA focusing on Indonesia and comparative studies of ASEAN member states. The third and fourth articles focus on Southeast Asia’s International Political Economy (IPE) trends. Miranda Tahalele et al. (2022), in their article titled “The Trajectory and Trend of International Political Economy in Southeast Asia Authors”, explores the studies of Southeast Asia’s political economy that have stimulated the debate over the past years and its future trends. They show how issues on climate change and the environment, the importance of sub- regional in ASEAN integration, and digitalization and technological advancement could be a trend that emerged within the policy discussion and academic forums. Hence, we encourage Southeast Asian-based scholars to engage in these issues to contribute to conceptual development that enriches IPE in Southeast Asia. The fourth article is by Kyunghoon Kim, titled “Key Features of Indonesia’s State Capitalism Under Jokowi”. In this article, Kim (2022) analyses how state capitalism has expanded rapidly since President Joko Widodo came into power in 2014. He shows, however, state capitalism’s resurgence has not translated into the government decidedly turning its back on the market. This type of study is important for the growing study of IPE in Southeast Asia, given the distinct nature of state-market relations that might shed light on general debates in IPE. The fifth and sixth articles focus on trends in contemporary media issues of Southeast Asia, especially the debate regarding democratization and the rise of authoritarianism. The article by Athiqah Nur Alami et al. (2022) examines how the digital sphere may or may not support inclusive and deliberative democracy in the region. They find that digital space has created different outcomes for democratization in Southeast Asia. Digital space can be instrumental in harassing dissent or jailing opposition members in countries like the Philippines and Vietnam. At the same time, using technology offers an opportunity that has prospects for nurturing deliberative and more inclusive democracy in Indonesia and Malaysia. In their article titled “Journalism in the Age of Digital Autocracy: A Comparative ASEAN Perspective”, Aim Sinpeng and Youngjoon Koh (2022) survey how digital news organizations survive and thrive in this increasingly repressive environment where governments are seeking innovative ways to monitor, surveil, censor and persecute government critics, activists and journalists. They find that digital authoritarianism does not exert downward pressure on critical journalism. Last but not least, our seventh article is written by Tangguh Chairil et al., titled “Road to ASEAN Political-Security Community Vision 2025: Understanding Convergence and Divergence in ASEAN Voting Behaviors in the UNGA”. Chairil et al. (2022) examine ASEAN cohesion and how it aligns with the institution’s community-building project by looking at the pattern of divergence and convergence in ASEAN voting behaviour across security issues discussed in the UN General Assembly. They find that ASEAN member states’ voting highly converges on colonialism, the law of the sea, the Mediterranean region, military expenditures, outer space, peace, and transnational crimes. Editorial Team, Moch Faisal Karim Tirta Nugraha Mursitama Lili Yulyadi Arnakim References Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2009). Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives On and Beyond Asia. Routledge. Alami, A. N., Luong, D. N. A., Prihatini, E., Ramadhani, E., Go, J. R. R., Hafidzah, N., & Atiyah, U. (2022). Democratization in the digital era: Experience from Southeast Asia. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 227-246. https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/ jas/article/view/9361 Chairil, T., Putri, R. A. A. K., & Pertiwi, S. B. (2022). Road to ASEAN political security community vision 2025: Understanding convergence and divergence in ASEAN voting behaviors in the UNGA. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 263-284. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.8175 Hurrell, A. (2016). Beyond critique: How to study Global IR? International Studies Review, 18(1), 149–151. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv022 Jemadu, A., & Lantang, F. (2021). Contested interpretations of Indonesia’s international leadership in the foreign policy of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Joko Widodo. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 9(2), 199-217. https://doi.org/10.21512/ jas.v9i2.7478 Jones, C. (2021). Western centric research methods?: Exposing international practices. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 9(1), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i1.7380 Karim, M. F. (2021). When trade and foreign policy collide: Indonesia in Doha development round. The Pacific Review, 34(4), 605–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748. 2020.1724189 Kim, K. (2022). Key features of Indonesia’s state capitalism under Jokowi. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 207-226. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9075 Lantang, F., & Tambunan, E. M. B. (2020). The internationalization of “West Papua” issue and its impact on Indonesia’s policy to the South Pacific region. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 8(1), 41-59. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v8i1.6447 Prihatini, E., & Prajuli, W. (2022). Gender in academic journals: Experience from Indonesia. Advances in Southeast Asian Studies, 15(1), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS- 0068 Rakhmani, I. (2021). Reproducing academic insularity in a time of neo-liberal markets: The case of social science research in Indonesian State Universities. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 51(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2019.1627389 Rosser, A. (2022). Beyond the crisis: Re-energizing Southeast Asian Studies. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 151-159. https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/ view/9350 https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/view/9361 https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/view/9361 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.8175 https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv022 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i2.7478 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i2.7478 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i1.7380 https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2020.1724189 https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2020.1724189 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9075 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v8i1.6447 https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-0068 https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-0068 https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2019.1627389 https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/view/9350 https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/view/9350 Rosser, A. (2023). Higher education in Indonesia: The political economy of institution-level governance. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 53(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00472336.2021.2010120 Sinpeng, A., & Koh, Y. (2022). Journalism in the age of digital autocracy: A comparative ASEAN perspective. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 247-262. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9162 Tahalele, M. P., Dhiaulhaq, A., Putra, R. A., Affandi, R. A., Arnakim, L. Y., & Mursitama, T. N. (2022). The trajectory and trend of International political economy in Southeast Asia. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 181-206. https://journal.binus.ac.id/index. php/jas/article/view/9184 Talamayan, F. (2020). Policing cyberspace: Understanding online repression in Thailand and the Philippines. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 8(2), 129-145. https://doi.org/ 10.21512/jas.v8i2.6769 Tyson, A., & Apresian, S. (2021). What’s wrong with us? An analysis of Indonesian President Joko Widodo’s public speeches from 2017 to 2018. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 9(2), 219-239. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i2.7318 Varkkey, H. (2021). Transboundary environmental governance in the EU and Southeast Asia: Contesting hybridity in the biofuels and palm oil regimes. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 9(2), 139-158. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i2.7757 Wicaksana, I. G. W. (2019). The family state: A non-realist approach to understanding Indonesia’s foreign policy. Asian Journal of Political Science, 27(3), 308–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2019.1686997 Wicaksana, I. G. W., & Karim, M. F. (2022). Approaches to Indonesia’s foreign policy: Area studies, FPA theory, and global IR. JAS (Journal of ASEAN Studies), 10(2), 161-180. https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9059 Wicaksana, I. G. W., & Santoso, Y. W. (2022). Promoting global IR under the dominance of mainstream theories and the liberalization of universities: Reflections from Indonesia. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 44(2), 207– 229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2021.2010120 https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2021.2010120 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9162 https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/view/9184 https://journal.binus.ac.id/index.php/jas/article/view/9184 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v8i2.6769 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v8i2.6769 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i2.7318 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v9i2.7757 https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2019.1686997 https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v10i2.9059