Focus and Scope

Forecasting: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan publishes papers covering all aspects of forecasting. Its objective is to unify the field, and to bridge the gap between theory and practice, making forecasting useful and relevant for decision and policy makers. The journal places strong emphasis on empirical studies, evaluation activities, implementation research and ways of improving the practice of forecasting. It is open to many points of view and encourages debate to find solutions for problems facing the field.

Topics covered in the International Journal of Forecasting:

• Economic and econometric forecasting
• Marketing forecasting
• New products forecasting
• Financial forecasting
• Production forecasting
• Technological forecasting
• Forecasting applications in business, government, and the military
• Demographic forecasting
• Energy forecasting
• Climate forecasting
• Crime forecasting
• Seasonal adjustments and forecasting
• Time series forecasting
• Legal and political aspects of forecasting
• Implementation of forecasting
• Judgmental/psychological aspects of forecasting
• Impact of forecast uncertainty on decision making
• Organizational aspects of forecasting
• Sport forecasting
• Machine Learning forecasting
• Forecasting methodology
• Election forecasting
• Big data forecasting

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to the Forecasting: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan are evaluated by the editors. The manuscripts are critically evaluated based on the journal’s submission criteria:

• scope of the journal and appropriateness to the field of study
• evaluation of the similarity with Turnitin
• appropriateness to the writing rules
• Publication language

All manuscripts that have passed from pre-assessment of editors are subjected to peer-review at least two anonymous reviewers with double-blind review format who are specialized in the field concerned for contribution, originality, relevance, and presentation.

The handling editor sends invitations to individuals who he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers based on expertise, the closeness of research interest, and no conflict of interest consideration.

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or decline. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for the suggestion of an alternative reviewer, when he or she declines to review.

The reviewers allocate time to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely between both reviewers, the handling editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to obtain an extra opinion before making a decision.

The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Reviewer comments are sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses. At this point, reviewers are also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review.

Publication Frequency

FORECASTING Journal is published biannually (issued in March and September).

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.

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: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)

Authors and readers can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as well as remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, but they must give appropriate credit (cite to the article or content), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

The Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, copyright of the article shall be assigned to Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni and Department of Physics Education of Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung as publisher of the journal.

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. More...

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Forecasting : Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the  Forecasting : Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Section A: Publication and authorship

All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper. Review process are blind peer review. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Forecasting : Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan adheres to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged—see Section II.A.3 below. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. We encourage collaboration and co-authorship with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. The criteria used to determine the order in which authors are listed on the byline may vary, and are to be decided collectively by the author group and not by editors. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.

The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer-review, and publication process. The corresponding author typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and disclosures of relationships and activities are properly completed and reported, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer-review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, the ICMJE recommends that editors send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.

When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.

Some large multi-author groups designate authorship by a group name, with or without the names of individuals. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should specify the group name if one exists, and clearly identify the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as authors. The byline of the article identifies who is directly responsible for the manuscript, and MEDLINE lists as authors whichever names appear on the byline. If the byline includes a group name, MEDLINE will list the names of individual group members who are authors or who are collaborators, sometimes called non-author contributors, if there is a note associated with the byline clearly stating that the individual names are elsewhere in the paper and whether those names are authors or collaborators.

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
Authors must participate in the peer review process.
Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers should not review 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.

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication’s scope.
Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board

Research ethics

Research involving humans

Research studies on humans (individuals, samples, or data) must have been performed in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for research involving children, adolescents, and vulnerable or incapacitated study participants

Written informed consent must be obtained from the parent or guardian of any participants who are not able to provide full informed consent themselves. Age of legal adulthood is determined by the country in which study participants are based, which is typically between ages 16-18. A statement to confirm informed consent has been obtained must be included within the manuscript.

In settings where verbal informed consent has been obtained rather than written informed consent, this must be explained and stated within the manuscript.

In accordance with the principles outlined in the Nuremberg Code and the Belmont Report, informed consent must have been given with free will, under no coercion or bribery of any kind.

Retrospective studies

Researchers must confirm they have obtained ethical approval to conduct the study, as well as permission from the dataset owner to use the information in databases/repositories for the purposes of the research they are conducting. Where permission to use information from a database/repository is not required (e.g. where it is publicly available and unrestricted re-use is permitted via an open license), a statement to explain this must be included within the manuscript.

Data acquired must be kept anonymized unless otherwise advised by the owners of the content in the database. Where participants’ details are not required to be anonymized, authors must be able to provide evidence that written informed consent, including consent to publish, was obtained from participants. A statement to confirm this must be included within the manuscript.

Survey studies

Research on indigenous communities

Authors should be aware of any specific research ethics approval and informed consent procedures which need to be followed in order to conduct research in communities where special processes for permissions may exist. Authors should also be aware of cultural sensitivities or any restrictions associated with the publication of content, including images included in their manuscripts. In many indigenous communities, additional permissions may need to be sought from community leaders or an Elder.

Authors working with indigenous communities are advised to consult appropriate guidelines for ethical research and publishing (including requirements for authorship) such as the AIATSIS Guidelines for ethical publishing, the National Inuit Strategy on Research and Interviewing Elders: Guidelines from the National Aboriginal Health Organization. Authors conducting research using media tools are advised to consult appropriate guidelines such as the On Screen Protocols & Pathways: A Media Production Guide to Working With First Nations, Metis, and Inuit Communities, Cultures, Concepts & Stories.

Indexing

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

FORCASTING Journal does not charge any submission or publication fees, and no fees are incurred for article processing or for the review process.

Revenue Sources, Advertising, and Direct Marketing

Plagiarism Screening

The Plagiarism Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan declares that plagiarism is unacceptable for all authors and therefore establishes the following policy stating certain actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified by Jurnal Ekonomi dan Perencanaan Pembangunan detected by anti-plagiarism software in articles submitted for publication. Articles must be under 25% of plagiarism.

“Plagiarism is copying someone else's text or ideas and passing on the copied material as your own. You must both describe (i.e., separate and identify) the copied text from yours and give credit to (i.e., cite the source) the source of the copied text to avoid accusations of plagiarism. Plagiarism is considered fraudulent and has potentially harsh consequences including job loss, loss of reputation, and reduced grades or failing a course."

This definition of plagiarism applies to copied text and ideas:

1. Regardless of the source of the copied text or idea.
2. Regardless of whether the author of the text or idea you copied the text or idea from another source.
3. Regardless of whether the author of the text or idea you are copying is known or not
4. Regardless of the nature of your text (journal papers/articles, web pages, book chapters, papers submitted for college courses, etc.)
5. Regardless of whether or not the author of the source of the copied material permits for the material to be copied; and
6. Regardless of whether or not you are the author of the source of the copied text or idea (self-plagiarism).

When plagiarism is identified by the Plagiarism Checker software, the Editorial Board is responsible for reviewing this paper and will approve action according to the level of plagiarism detected in the article according to the following guidelines:

Minor Plagiarism

1. A small sentence or short paragraph from another manuscript is plagiarized without any important data or ideas taken from other papers or publications.
2. Penalty: A warning is given to the author and a request to change the manuscript and properly cite the source.

Medium Plagiarism

1. Important data, paragraphs, or sentences from an article are plagiarized without proper citation of the source.
2. Penalty: Articles submitted are automatically rejected.

Heavy Plagiarism

1. Most of the articles are plagiarism which involves many aspects such as reproducing original results (data, formulas, equations, laws, statements, etc.), ideas, and methods presented in other publications.
2. Penalty: Papers are automatically rejected and authors are prohibited from submitting further articles to the journal.