QUALITY OF LIFE OF RURAL NATIVE COMMUNITY: AN UNDERSTANDING USING PHENOMENOLOGICAL APPROACH
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The ineffectiveness of a development program in increasing the quality of life of an indigenous community is often linked to the attitude of the planners who fail to understand the needs and life aspirations of the target group as well as the realities of their social world. Therefore, the objective of this study is to understand the world-view of the Bidayuh community about the quality of life. This research has drawn on the phenomenological approach utilising abductive logic based on idealist ontology and constructionist epistemology. This study was conducted in the Serian District, Sarawak which is one of the four districts under the administration of Samarahan Division. The size of the sample for this study was achieved through the continuous support of measurement or the criteria on theoretical saturation. Data in this study was collected using the technique of in-depth interview and informal group discussion. The themes of capability, participation and empowerment are the themes that became the main choice of the suburban Bidayuh community. However, the themes of residence, income, money and savings, employment, infrastructure and public services, customary land and land grant and accessibility to agricultural produce market are the themes that became the main choice of the rural Bidayuh community. The findings also showed that even though the position of the categories of quality of life-based on world-view between the respondents who live in the suburban and rural areas differ, the respondents' interpretation of each theme contained in those categories are almost similar. Suggestions for further action are addressed to the development agencies, development planners and policy makers so as to give more emphasis on the bottom-up approach in designing or planning any community development programmes.
Downloads
Article Details
BORNEO RESEARCH JOURNAL PUBLICATION ETHICS & PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT
These guidelines are fully consistent with the COPE Principles of Transparency and Best Practice Guidelines and the COPE Code of Conduct (https://publicationethics.org).
We encourage the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible of principles of transparency and measures against publication malpractices. The Department of Southeast Asian Studies as the publisher of Borneo Research Journal plays its roles of guardianship over all processes of publishing seriously and we perform our ethical and other tasks.
General duties and responsibilities of editors
Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals. This means the editors should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors; constantly improve their journal; have processes in place to assure the quality of the material they publish; champion freedom of expression; maintain the integrity of the academic record; preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards; and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed. In addition to these general duties, the editors accept the obligation to apply best will and practice to cope with the following responsibilities:
Editorial Board
Editorial board will be generated from recognized experts in the field. The editor will provide full names and affiliations of the members as well as updated contact information for the editorial office on the journal webpage.
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.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors should follow the format of reporting the original research with accurate data gathered. The author should include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. It is unacceptable if the author performs malpractices in the paper.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have produced original papers, and must appropriately cite or quoted if the authors have used the work and words of others.
Concurrent Publication
It is an ethical and acceptable for an author to submit or publish same research or manuscripts in more than one journal or primary publication but should be using different data.
Acknowledging the Sources
Authors should cite properly publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Paper authorship
Those who have made a significant contribution to the paper should be named as an author and co-authors. Those who have participated in the aspects of the research, they should be listed as contributors. All co-authors should have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Announcement and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should include the financier or grant giver if the manuscript or research financed by the research grant or any financial support body.
Errors in Published Works
The author is responsible for communicating and co-operating with the editor to retract or correct the paper when a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work.
Publication Decisions
The editor should be 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 editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Peer review Process
All journal’s content (articles) are subjected to a double-blind, peer-review process. Articles are first reviewed by editors and may be rejected because it is not dealing with the subject matter. Articles that are found suitable for review are then sent to two experts are unknown to each other in the field of the paper.
Reviewers are asked to classify the paper as publishable, publishable with amendments and improvements, or rejected. Reviewer’s evaluations normally include the recommendation of what to do with the paper. Reviewer’s comments are then seen by the author.
Editors should be ready to justify any important points from the described process. Editors should not reverse decisions on publication. Editors should publish guidance to both authors and reviewers on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and will refer or link this code.
Fair Play
The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Editors´ decision to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper´s importance, originality and clarity, and the study´s relevance to the aim of the journal.
Digital Archiving
The editor will ensure digital preservation of access to the journal content by the University of Malaya Journal depository section at http://e-journal.um.edu.my/publish/BRJ/ and Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia athttp://www.myjurnal.my/public/browse-journal-view.php?id=40
Confidentiality
Editor and any editorial staff must keep confidential of all information about a submitted and review process of the manuscript to anyone except the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Publication and Submission fee
Authors are freed from fees or charges for manuscript processing. Authors pay neither submission nor publication fee beyond eventual conference registration fee (in case conference paper accepted for publication).
Open Access Policy
The journal is freely available online. Authors are required to agree with this open access policy which enables unrestricted access and reuse of all published articles. The articles are published under the Creative Commons copyright license policy CC-BY.
Reporting standards
Authors of papers 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 behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial “opinion†works should be identified as such.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works and if the authors have used the work and words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Plagiarism takes many forms, steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own, to use (another's production) without crediting the source, to commit literary theft, to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.