Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Spirit Publik: Jurnal Administrasi Publik is published by Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS). This journal presents findings of researches and articles in public policy and management study scope. The editor invites academician and practitioner’s writing to be published in this journal with the study focusing on:

1. Public Policy
2. Public Management
3. Local Autonomy Policy
4. Public Service
5. Gender Perspective Public Policy
6. E-Government
7. Village and Village Development Policy
8. Strategic Management
9. Public Sector Corporation Management
10. State Administration Law
11. Bureaucracy and Public Governance



Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The articles submitted to Spirit Publik : Jurnal Administrasi Publik will be processed through format review by editor and substantial review by reviewer. The reviewing process will be conducted by single blind review. The reviewer will be selected by section editor. The decision of article publication will be based on the result of reviews. Editor applies plagiarism scanning with Turnitin and Google Cendekia before the article undertakes substantial reviewing process.



Publication Frequency

Spirit Publik: Jurnal Administrasi Publik is a peer-review journal published twice a year, April and October.


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.



Author Guidelines

1. Manuscript is the result of conceptual idea research in state administration and public administration study scope as the subject of study and service article that must be original, authentic, and does not plagiarize others or other institutions’ work. The work has not been published yet before. 

2. The article is written in Indonesian or English, 15-20 pages, typed with Times New Romans, one columns justify, spacing 1.15, and normal margins on A4 paper.   

3. Title is written in Indonesian and English.

4. Abstract should be 200-250 words with 3 – 5 keywords, and written in Indonesian and English. 

5. The procedure of article writing is as follows: Title is written in Indonesian and English, title and subtitle is bold and should be no more than 15 words. Name of authors is written without degree and institution, and email address of corresponding author is written below the title. Abstract is written in Indonesian and English with 200-250 words, with 3 – 5 keywords. Introduction is an elaboration without subchapters containing: background of study, problem statement, and theoretical foundation used. Research method contains method/approach used in the research. Result and Discussion is presented in subchapters with appropriate title. Conclusion is the reflection of problem becoming the focus of Research/study/finding and recommendation. References referred to in the article should be included into references.      

6. Foreign word or term not changed into Indonesian word or term or not been technical term is written in italic.

7. Direct citation consisting of 5 lines or more is written with single spacing and in new line. Direct citation consisting of less than 5 lines is written as the continuation of sentence and included into text between two quotation marks. Indirect citation is written without quotation mark.

8. Title of table is written on the table and title of figure below the figure.

9. References are written alphabetically and referring to APA Style.

Editor is entitled to change the manuscript without reducing the basic content without the author’s permission. The decision of accepting the manuscript to be published without revision/ accepting the manuscript with revision and/or reorganization corresponding to the regulation of manuscript publication is absolutely the editor’s right. The decision of being accepted or declined will be informed via email.



Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Spirit Publik : Jurnal Administrasi Publik (p-ISSN: 1907-0489; e-ISSN: 2580-3875) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Public Administration Department Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Sebelas Maret .This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Spirit Publik Jurnal Administrasi Publik 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 method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Public Administration Department Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Sebelas Maret as publisher of Spirit Publik Jurnal Administrasi Publik takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Public Administration Department Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Sebelas Maret and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

 Publication Decisions

The editor of the Spirit Publik Jurnal Administrasi Publik 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.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


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.

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.

Duties of Reviewers

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.


 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.


 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.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

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.

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.

Duties of Authors

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 are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

 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.

 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.

 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.



Indexing and Abstracting

  1. SINTA 3
  2. Dimensions
  3. Google Scholar


Plagiarism Policy

The author(s) must consent about the plagiarism issue, therefore the submitted paper should be free of plagiarism. The author has to check the indication of plagiarism using Plagiarism Check. Prior to publish in journal, the article will be rechecked by the editor using Turnitin for checking the similarity, with the policy at least 30%