A new research integrity risk index, which listed several of the country’s top universities as being at ‘high risk’ of systemic breaches of research integrity, has sparked a warning to universities from Indonesia’s Ministry of Higher Education and Science, calling on them to step up research integrity and improve research quality.
More than a dozen highly regarded universities in Indonesia have been listed as being ‘high risk’ for research integrity. Universitas Airlangga (UNAIR), Universitas Sumatera Utara (USU), Universitas Sebelas Maret, and Universitas Hasanuddin (UNHAS) are in the ‘Red Zone’ of the new Research Integrity Risk Index (RI²), released earlier this month by Professor Lokman Meho of the American University of Beirut.
According to the RI² website, the ‘Red Zone’ flags up “extreme anomalies; systemic integrity risk”.
Universitas Diponegoro (UNDIP), Universitas Padjadjaran (UNPAD), and Universitas Brawijaya (UNIBRAW) are in the ‘Orange’ or ‘High-Risk Zone’, implying “significant deviation from global norms”.
RI² is the world’s first empirically grounded, composite metric designed to identify and profile institutional-level risks to research integrity. Described by Meho as “diagnostic in nature, not punitive”, the RI² rating of 1,500 global universities is based on their level of institutional risk in research integrity.
Institutions were evaluated based on the number of retracted articles per thousand publications, capturing evidence of serious methodological, ethical, or authorship violations, as well as the percentage of an institution’s publications appearing in journals that were recently removed from Scopus or Web of Science for failing to meet quality or publishing standards.
These indicators place each institution into one of five risk tiers (from ‘Red Flag’ to ‘Low Risk’) based on a fixed reference group of the 1,000 most publishing universities worldwide.
University of Indonesia (UI), Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November (ITS), Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB), and Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) are in the list’s Yellow Zone, signalling “moderately elevated risk and emerging concern”.
Kurniasih Mufidayati, deputy chair of Commission IX in the House of Representatives – mainly relating to education and youth matters – said the Research Integrity Risk Index report that places 13 Indonesian universities under the integrity risk spotlight should be a wake-up call to “straighten out” the country’s research environment.
“Building a true academic culture will give a boost to university reputation and the quality of graduates,” she added.
Ministry reaction
In response to the rating, Indonesia’s Acting Secretary General of the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology, Togar Simatupang, called on universities not to merely pursue quantity of journal publications, but quality.
“The RI² research outcome is supposed to be taken positively as a reminder of Indonesian universities’ commitment to academic integrity,” Togas was quoted by the Antara news agency as saying on 18 July.
acknowledged in a statement to local media that “research practices in Indonesia are still in the early stages of development, even at leading and top-tier universities,” and added that intensive efforts were needed not just at the policy level but also by universities, who should “address warning signs of serious problems or unhealthy behaviour in research integrity.”
Kurniasih also urged Indonesian universities to build an academic culture that upholds honesty and integrity.
Kurniasih believes Indonesia’s current research policies and higher education system emphasise the number of journal publications above quality so that academics can gain academic titles and enhance their reputation while ignoring ethics and values.
“Lecturers and the universities they work for are more motivated to achieve a high number of publications by any means that often breaches academic ethics,” she told the media in Jakarta on Monday.
Already pursuing research integrity
Universitas Airlangga (UNAIR), listed in the ‘Red Zone’, said it has already been pushing for ethical and quality research, including the adoption of a standardised ethics protocol for publication.
“We have developed handbooks on publication ethics and hold regular workshops and mentoring to implement them in our research,” Hery Purnobasuki, chairperson of the UNAIR’s Institute for Innovation, told University World News.
The weekly UNAIR Menulis (UNAIR Writing) programme has become a vital platform for researchers to target reputable journals, avoid predatory outlets, and prevent researchers from problematic publications, he said.
Since 2017, UNAIR has undergone a substantial shift in its scientific publication strategy – from a focus on quantity to prioritising quality.
By 2025, more than 45% of its publications appeared in top-tier journals (Q1-Q2), while 72% were published in top 75% journals (Q1-Q3). Notably, 23.9% of these were in Q1 journals (top 25%), showing steady year-on-year growth, according to Purnobasuki.
“To reduce reliance on foreign journals, UNAIR has also established and manages 20 Scopus-indexed journals spanning quartiles Q1 (top 25%) through Q4 (bottom 25%), Purnobasuki said, referring to a method of ranking Scopus journals based on research findings, citations, and industry value.
“We’re not just productive – we’re making an impact. To date, over 22,751 UNAIR papers are indexed in Scopus,” he added.
Lack of verification
He regards the RI² findings as an external evaluation but notes a lack of verification with the universities concerned. “Such external evaluations should be confirmed with data and information on what we have been doing.
“We acknowledge the data exists, but the figures cited are significantly exaggerated and do not match our internal records,” he maintained, pointing out “while the report mentioned 5,000 problematic articles, we have only identified around 2,000,” he said.
The Forum for Indonesian Rectors (FRI) questioned the authority of the index, saying research institutions should be accredited by an international agency, which sets specific standards.
“Without accreditation and scientific recognition, such research can be used to bring down the reputation of certain universities and bring up certain others. I hope the (academic) community does not easily take such research for granted,” FRI chairperson Didin Muhafidin told University World News.
He fears such research could be aimed at downgrading some universities in order to attract students to the universities that perform better on RI². “The fact is that many universities overseas are short of students. Such research will encourage students to pursue studies overseas,” he added.
He also called for further clarity. “The so-called integrity risk should be explained clearly. For example, (whether it is flagging) plagiarism or similar.”
Pressure on Academics
However, some academics see RI² reflecting the reality of Indonesia’s higher education. Danu Riyanto, a senior lecturer in ocean engineering at the Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology (ITS), said the main problem was the unrealistic targets imposed on academics.
“Lecturers face pressures and expectations for high research output in reputable indexed journals within tight deadlines with low funding,” Riyanto said.
He pointed at the BKD – the Indonesian acronym for Lecturer Workload – that demands every academic to be good at everything: from teaching to research to community service.
“Faculties are burdened with accreditation reports, endless forms, and clerical duties that detract from actual teaching and research. Even when we have a grant, it is harder to write the budget report than the actual research reporting.
“So, the problem is systemic, not (about) individual organisations,” he said.