Mapping Indonesia’s Border Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scopus-Indexed Publications (2015–2025)

Mapping Indonesia’s Border Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scopus-Indexed Publications (2015–2025) | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Mapping Indonesia’s Border Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scopus-Indexed Publications (2015–2025) Anju Nofarof Hasudungan This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9533347/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study aims to map the intellectual structure and thematic dynamics of Indonesian border studies through a bibliometric analysis of 1,247 Scopus-indexed publications from 2015–2025. Data were analyzed using a systematic workflow that included keyword cleaning and normalization with OpenRefine, and network visualization using VOSviewer. The descriptive analysis of Scopus reveals a significantly increasing publication trend after 2019, with journal articles and conference proceedings dominating as the primary document types. Publication sources are dominated by international conference proceedings, while the largest institutional contributions come from universities and leading research institutions in Indonesia, reflecting the strong national orientation of this study. Indonesia is the main contributor, although international collaboration with Asia-Pacific and Western countries is also quite prominent. Keyword co-occurrence analysis identified four main thematic clusters: sustainable development and cross-border economics, border governance and management, regionalism and international cooperation, and cross-border health and non-traditional security. Overlay visualizations reveal a shift in research focus from regional planning and environmental issues to transboundary health, human mobility, and pandemic risk, particularly in the post-COVID-19 era. This research is limited to a single database and publication metadata; therefore, future studies are recommended to combine multiple databases and qualitative and comparative approaches to deepen the analysis of Indonesian border studies. Border Studies Bibliometric Analysis Scopus Indonesia Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Introduction Indonesia is a country with unique geographic and geopolitical characteristics in a global context. As the world's largest archipelagic nation, Indonesia not only possesses vast land territory but also a much larger maritime territory, making it an archipelagic state with highly complex territorial boundaries (Sodik, 2018 ; Rochwulaningsih et al., 2019 ; Raharja & Karim, 2024 ). Geographically, Indonesia shares land borders with three countries: Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, and Timor Leste, and maritime borders with at least ten other countries, including Singapore, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Australia, India, and Palau (Schofield, 2015 ; Pratomo & Kwik, 2020 ; Ohoiwutun, 2023 ; Suryadi et al., 2024 ). This situation places border issues, both land and sea, as a strategic dimension closely related to state sovereignty, national security, natural resource management, human mobility, and the social and economic dynamics of border areas. Over the past two decades, Indonesian border issues have garnered increasing academic attention, coinciding with the intensification of cross-border interactions, boundary disputes, maritime security concerns, and the development of regional cooperation in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific (Gopal & Alverdian, 2021 ; Murray, 2020 ; Song, 2023 ). Border areas are no longer understood solely as territorial demarcations, but as dynamic social, political, and economic spaces where local, national, and global interests intertwine (Sassen, 2015 ; Laine, 2016 ; Chouliaraki & Georgiou, 2019 ; Mogiani, 2023 ). This transformation of perspective has encouraged the emergence of various cross-disciplinary studies, ranging from international relations, geopolitics, maritime law, security, political economy, to socio-cultural studies and border region development. Although the number of scholarly publications on Indonesia's borders continues to increase, studies that systematically map the development, patterns, and directions of research in this field remain relatively limited. Most existing studies tend to be thematic and case-specific, for example, focusing on specific maritime boundary disputes, land border security issues, or economic development in border areas. Consequently, a comprehensive overview of the intellectual landscape, key academic actors, international collaboration networks, and dominant and marginalized themes in Indonesian border studies has yet to be identified. This is where a bibliometric approach becomes relevant and important. Bibliometric analysis allows researchers to quantitatively and visually evaluate the development of scientific literature in a research field, including publication trends, citation patterns, author and institutional collaborations, and the thematic structure of knowledge (Lyu et al., 2023 ; Yan & Zhiping, 2023 ; Hassan & Duarte, 2024 ). By utilizing the Scopus database, known for its broad coverage and international quality standards, bibliometric studies can provide an objective, data-driven mapping of the dynamics of knowledge production on Indonesia's borders over a specific period. This research specifically focuses on analyzing Scopus publications from 2015–2025, using strict selection criteria. These include English-language documents, final publication stages, and relevant scholarly document types such as journal articles, conference proceedings, books, and book chapters. Using analytical tools such as OpenRefine for data cleaning and VOSviewer for bibliometric network visualization, this study aims to uncover the intellectual structure, key research themes, and the evolution of academic discourse on Indonesia's land and maritime borders. Therefore, this research is expected to not only contribute to strengthening bibliometric studies in border studies but also provide a conceptual and empirical foundation for researchers, policymakers, and stakeholders in understanding Indonesia's position as a strategic border state regionally and globally. This mapping is crucial for identifying research gaps, guiding future research agendas, and strengthening Indonesia's academic contribution to the global discourse on borders and archipelagic sovereignty. Research Methods This research uses a descriptive quantitative approach with bibliometric analysis. This approach was chosen because it provides a systematic and objective mapping of the development of scientific literature, intellectual structures, and thematic dynamics in studies of Indonesia's land and maritime borders. Through bibliometric analysis, this study explores patterns of knowledge production, academic collaboration networks, and the evolution of research focuses based on metadata from internationally indexed scientific publications (Kipper et al., 2020 ; Ahmed et al., 2023 ; Nazim et al., 2025 ). The research data sources were obtained from the Scopus database, selected for its broad coverage, global reputation, and stringent curation standards. The search process was conducted using the search within feature in the title, abstract, and keywords sections to ensure that the collected documents were substantively relevant to the topic of Indonesian borders. The search was limited to English-language publications published between 2015 and 2025, in the final publication stage, and included relevant scientific document types, namely journal articles, conference proceedings, literature reviews, conference reviews, books, book chapters, and editorials. Based on these criteria, 1.247 documents were obtained, which were then used as the research data corpus. Table 1 Data Search Criteria Criteria Description Number of Documents Source Database Scopus (Retrieved on December 27, 2025) - Search String TITLE-ABS-KEY ("Border Indonesia") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ("Indonesia Border") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ("Indonesian Borders") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ("Borders Indonesia") 1.688 documents found Years 2015–2025 1.303 documents found Inclusion Criteria Article, Conference paper, Book chapter, Book, Review, Conference review, and Editorial. 1.291 documents found Exclusion Criteria The selected documents are only the final ones, not Articles in press 1,279 documents found Language English 1,247 documents found Documents Total The bibliometric analysis in this study also utilizes various bibliographic metadata provided by Scopus as the primary analysis variables (Iqbal et al., 2019 ; Ejaz et al., 2022 ; Hartanto et al., 2024 ). This metadata includes publication year, which is used to analyze trends in the number of documents over time and identify patterns of growth or fluctuation in academic interest in Indonesian border issues. Furthermore, publication sources or journals are analyzed to identify key journals that are dominant platforms for disseminating knowledge in this field. This variable is used to map levels of academic productivity and influence, while affiliation or institution is analyzed to understand institutional contributions and patterns of national and international collaboration. Document type is analyzed to examine the distribution of scholarly publication forms, while subject area is used to identify dominant disciplines and assess the interdisciplinary nature of Indonesian border studies. To maintain data consistency and quality, this study applied strict inclusion and exclusion criteria (Pirri et al., 2020 ; Passas, 2024 ; Alsadi et al., 2025 ). Included documents were publications that explicitly discussed Indonesia in the context of land and/or maritime borders, were published within the study period, were in English, and had gone through the final publication stage. Conversely, non-scholarly documents, publications without peer review, documents that only marginally mentioned Indonesia, and data with duplicates or incomplete metadata were excluded from the analysis. The selected bibliographic data were then exported from Scopus in CSV (Comma-Separated Values) and RIS formats and processed using OpenRefine software. This stage included data cleaning and normalization by removing duplicate documents, standardizing author names and institutional affiliations, aligning keyword terms and subject areas, and correcting various metadata inconsistencies. This data cleaning process is crucial for ensuring the accuracy of the network analysis and bibliometric visualization results (Wen et al., 2021 ; Shah et al., 2024 ; Passas, 2024 ). Subsequent bibliometric analysis was conducted using VOSviewer software. Before this, keyword cleaning and normalization were performed to improve the accuracy of the keyword co-occurrence analysis and ensure that the resulting network map truly represents the intellectual structure of Indonesian border studies, not simply a collection of indexing artifacts or general methodological terms. This process was carried out after the data were exported from Scopus and before the network analysis was conducted using VOSviewer. Keyword filtering was performed using the verify selected keywords feature in VOSviewer, using a manual-conceptual approach. Each keyword was assessed based on its relevance to the research's main themes: Indonesian borders, transnational dynamics, and non-traditional security issues, including cross-border health. In this process, keywords that were not checked were systematically excluded from the analysis. First, the authors removed administrative and methodological keywords, such as "article," "controlled study," and "cross-sectional study." These keywords do not reflect the substance of the study but merely describe the publication format or research design, potentially artificially fragmenting thematic clusters. Second, demographic and research subject keywords, such as "adult," "male," "female," "child," "adolescent," and "nonhuman," were eliminated. These terms are common Scopus indexing artifacts in the health literature but lack analytical value in mapping border issues and cross-border governance. Third, purely biological and bioscience keywords, for example, genetics, phylogeny, taxonomy, classification, and veterinary medicine, were removed because they did not directly contribute to the understanding of border regions, policies, or transnational dynamics. This removal was crucial to prevent clusters from being drawn toward molecular biology, which is outside the focus of the study. Fourth, the authors normalized semantically overlapping terms. Common terms such as border and border area(s) were combined into the umbrella term border region, chosen as more spatially and conceptually informative. Similarly, variations in health terms, such as epidemic, were normalized into concepts more relevant to the transnational dimension, such as pandemic and disease transmission. Conversely, keywords reflecting the core dimensions of Indonesian border studies, including territorial aspects, governance, political economy, environment, migration, and transboundary health, were retained. In the health context, the term "animals" was selectively retained because it serves as a bridging concept within the One Health framework, particularly when related to zoonoses, disease transmission, and transboundary health issues in border areas. Through this process of cleansing and normalization, the keyword co-occurrence analysis produced a more coherent, sharper, and more relevant thematic map, thus depicting the landscape of Indonesian border research more accurately and conceptually. Table 2 Results of Keyword Cleaning and Normalization Category Keyword Retained Indonesia; Southeast Asia; ASEAN; Border region; Cross-border; International cooperation; Security; Migration; Refugees; Human rights; Government; Local government; Policy; Identity; Sustainable development; Economic development; Economic growth; Economics; International trade; Commerce; E-commerce; Investments; Regional planning; Planning; Development; Rural areas; Education; Climate change; Land use; Environmental protection; Sustainability; Biodiversity; Conservation; Forestry; Remote sensing; Spatiotemporal analysis; COVID-19; Pandemic; Disease transmission; Disease surveillance; Malaria; Public health (implicit); Humans; Animals (selective/One Health); Papua New Guinea; Timor-Leste; Malaysia; Singapore; Australia; Viet Nam; China; India; Sarawak; Kalimantan; Borneo; Sumatra; Greater Sunda Islands Merged Normalized Border → Border region; Border area(s) → Border region; Epidemic → Pandemic / Disease transmission; Animal → Animals; Surveillance → Disease surveillance Removed Article; Controlled study; Cross-sectional study; Questionnaire; Adult; Young adult; Middle aged; Aged; Male; Female; Child; Adolescent; Nonhuman; Genetics; Phylogeny; Taxonomy; Classification; Veterinary medicine The keyword cleaning and normalization process was carried out to minimize overlapping meanings and eliminate noise caused by indexing artifacts (Zitt et al., 2019 ), so that the resulting co-occurrence network is analytically sharper and aligned with the main focus of the study of Indonesian borders and cross-border health issues. All analysis results are visualized as network, overlay, and density visualizations to comprehensively demonstrate the structure and dynamics of knowledge. Results Annual Growth of Publications on Indonesia's Borders The distribution of the number of documents per year indicates that studies on Indonesia's borders experienced significant and relatively consistent growth throughout the 2015–2025 period. In the initial phase, 2015–2016, the number of publications was still relatively low, at 39 and 47 documents, respectively. This reflects that studies on Indonesia's borders during that period were still limited and tended to be fragmented, both in terms of themes and involvement of the international academic community. Source: Scopus, December 27, 2025 Entering the 2017–2018 period, a moderate increase in the number of publications was observed, from 76 documents in 2017 to 90 documents in 2018. This increase marked the initial phase of consolidation of studies on Indonesia's borders, along with increasing attention to issues such as maritime security, border management, and the dynamics of Indonesia's relations with neighboring countries in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific. A more pronounced surge occurred in the 2019–2021 period. In 2019, the number of publications increased to 119 documents, although there was a relative decline in 2020 to 109 documents. This decline can be interpreted in a global context, particularly the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has impacted research productivity and the international research agenda. However, in 2021, publications rose again to 135 documents, demonstrating the resilience and continued academic interest in Indonesian border studies. The 2022–2025 period marks a phase of research acceleration and intensification. The number of publications increased consistently from 130 documents in 2022, to 152 documents in 2023, 167 documents in 2024, and peaked at 183 documents in 2025. This trend demonstrates that Indonesian border studies have developed into a mature and increasingly strategic research field within global academic discourse. The sharp increase in the final phase of the research period also indicates the strengthening relevance of border issues in the context of regional geopolitics, maritime security, cross-border connectivity, and Indonesia's position as an archipelagic nation at the crossroads of global trade and politics. The progressively increasing publication trend over the past decade confirms that Indonesian border studies have shifted from a peripheral issue to a mainstream research theme across various disciplines. This growth pattern also reflects the increasing involvement of international researchers, the strengthening of cross-border collaboration, and the expansion of interdisciplinary approaches in understanding the complexities of Indonesia's land and maritime borders. Therefore, this year-by-year analysis of documents provides a strong empirical basis for mapping the intellectual landscape and the dynamics of the development of Indonesian border studies on a global scale. Analysis of Documents per Year by Source in Indonesian Border Studies The distribution of documents by publication source throughout the 2015–2025 period indicates that knowledge production on Indonesia's borders is heavily influenced by international conference proceedings, particularly the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. The dominance of these sources, comprising a total of 102 documents, suggests that Indonesian border studies are evolving rapidly within a responsive, applicable, and interdisciplinary academic space, characteristics typically found in international conference proceedings. Source: Scopus, December 27, 2025 Temporarily, the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science began to show a significant increase in publications since 2018, with a sharp spike in 2019 and peaking in 2021. This pattern is in line with the increasing attention to environmental issues, coastal governance, and the management of Indonesia's maritime borders in the context of climate change, maritime security, and natural resource sustainability. Fluctuations after 2021, although remaining at a relatively high level, indicate a shift in some research output to other publication channels or a diversification of research themes. The AIP Conference Proceedings, which ranks second with 29 documents, exhibits a more stable growth pattern, with a peak in publications occurring in 2023. This suggests that Indonesian border issues are also being framed within more technical and methodological perspectives, such as environmental modeling, spatial analysis, and quantitative approaches, which are commonly presented at AIP forums. Meanwhile, the E3S Web of Conferences (22 documents) shows consistent contributions since 2018, indicating an increase in studies linking Indonesia's borders to sustainable development, energy, and environmental issues. In contrast to conference proceedings, contributions from scientific journals such as Biodiversity and the International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning are relatively more limited quantitatively, with 15 documents each. However, the presence of these journals reflects a phase of theoretical consolidation and empirical deepening in Indonesian border studies. Journal publications tended to appear more steadily in the period after 2019, indicating that some of the findings previously presented at conference forums were being refined and published in the form of more methodologically rigorous journal articles. Overall, the pattern of documents per year by source indicates that Indonesian border studies in the 2015–2025 period remain in a dynamic between rapid expansion through conference proceedings and scientific consolidation through reputable journals. The dominance of conference proceedings reflects the highly contextual nature of border studies, which is responsive to developments in geopolitics, maritime policy, and regional environmental issues. Meanwhile, the increasing contribution of scientific journals in the final phase of the research period indicates the maturation of this field of study, moving towards a more established theoretical and methodological direction. In the context of bibliometric mapping, these findings confirm that Mapping Indonesia's Border Studies not only records the quantitative growth of publications but also reveals the character of the knowledge dissemination ecosystem, where conference forums serve as initial exploration spaces and scientific journals serve as a medium for long-term academic legitimacy. Analysis of Documents by Author in Indonesian Border Studies The distribution of documents by author indicates that knowledge production on Indonesia's borders during the 2015–2025 period was dispersed and collaborative, with no single, overt dominance by any single researcher. The [No Author ID found] category ranked highest with 14 documents, indicating limitations in the Scopus author identification system, particularly in conference proceedings publications or documents with non-standardized author metadata. This finding is methodologically important because it suggests that some scholarly contributions to Indonesian border studies have not been fully mapped individually, despite their continued contribution to the field's accumulated knowledge. Source: Scopus, December 27, 2025 Among the clearly identified authors, Missbach, A., emerged as the most prolific contributor, with 12 papers. This position places Missbach as a central figure in Indonesian border studies, particularly in the context of cross-border issues, migration, security, and the socio-political dynamics of border regions. This relatively high productivity demonstrates consistent and sustained research leadership in this field. At the next level, Rahardjo, S.N.I., and Taena, W., each produced six papers, representing medium-sized but significant contributions. The existence of this group of authors with medium productivity indicates that Indonesian border studies are not dependent on a single center of scholarship, but rather develop through several active academic hubs. This reinforces the character of border studies as a multidisciplinary field open to various methodological perspectives. Meanwhile, several other authors, such as Elyta, Fios, F., Ninef, J.S.R., Rijanta, R., Rustadi, E., and Sipayung, B.P., each contributed five documents. This pattern indicates a relatively consistent group of researchers contributing, albeit on a more moderate scale. The presence of multiple authors with roughly equal levels of productivity demonstrates that knowledge production in Indonesian border studies is horizontally distributed, rather than vertically concentrated among a handful of academics. The distribution of documents by author reflects an inclusive and collaborative research ecosystem, with relatively reasonable variations in productivity levels for such a contextual and interdisciplinary field. The absence of extreme dominance by a single author indicates that Indonesian border studies are developing through the collective contributions of various researchers from diverse scientific and institutional backgrounds. In the context of bibliometric mapping, these findings strengthen the argument that Indonesian border studies is a dynamic, open, and evolving academic field in line with changes in maritime policy and regional geopolitical dynamics. Analysis of Documents by Affiliation in Indonesian Border Studies Figure 4 Documents by Affiliation The distribution of documents by institutional affiliation indicates that knowledge production on Indonesia's borders during the 2015–2025 period was dominated by major universities and national research institutions, which served as knowledge hubs in the development of this research. Gadjah Mada University (UGM) topped the list with 65 documents, indicating the institution's central role in developing and guiding academic discourse on Indonesia's land and maritime borders. UGM's dominance reflects its institutional strength in the fields of regional studies, geopolitics, public policy, and environmental studies, which form a crucial foundation for border research. Source: Scopus, December 27, 2025 Second place went to the University of Indonesia (UI) with 58 documents, reflecting strong contributions to a multidisciplinary approach to border studies, particularly through the perspectives of international law, international relations, and policy studies. UI's productivity demonstrates that Indonesian border studies are developed not only through territorial and maritime approaches, but also through a normative framework emphasizing issues of sovereignty, governance, and interstate relations. IPB University came in third with 51 documents, emphasizing the strong environmental, natural resource, and sustainable development dimensions in border studies, particularly related to coastal ecosystem management, food security, and the sustainability of ecologically vulnerable areas. In addition to universities, the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), with 49 documents, demonstrates the strategic role of national research institutions in producing policy-oriented knowledge, reflecting the close link between academic research and the needs of border management and state sovereignty. Other institutions, such as Diponegoro University (36 documents) and Tanjungpura University (34 documents), also made significant contributions, particularly in coastal and land border studies. Tanjungpura University's high productivity reflects the influence of its geographic proximity to the Indonesia-Malaysia border in West Kalimantan on the development of locally context-based research. Bandung Institute of Technology and Airlangga University, each with 31 documents, demonstrate involvement from the disciplines of engineering, regional planning, public health, and public policy, while Brawijaya University (29 documents) and Padjadjaran University (25 documents) complete the main institutional contributions. Overall, this pattern of affiliation demonstrates that Indonesian border studies is developing within a research ecosystem centered on high-capacity institutions, yet remains inclusive and reflects a diversity of disciplinary approaches and regional contexts. Analysis of Documents by Type in Indonesian Border Studies The distribution of documents by publication type shows that Indonesian border studies during the 2015–2025 period were dominated by journal articles, with a total of 828 documents, or approximately two-thirds of all publications. This dominance of journal articles indicates that the dissemination of knowledge regarding Indonesia's land and maritime borders is primarily conducted through formal, peer-reviewed academic channels, oriented toward strengthening ongoing theoretical and empirical contributions. This pattern reflects the field's maturity, where research results are not only produced rapidly but also undergo a rigorous scientific selection process. Next to journal articles, conference papers rank second with 240 documents, demonstrating the important role of conference forums as an initial space for the exchange of ideas, presentation of preliminary findings, and exploration of new issues in Indonesian border studies. The substantial proportion of conference papers reflects the dynamic nature of border studies, which is responsive to developments in maritime policy, regional geopolitical dynamics, and constantly evolving environmental and security issues. Conference forums serve as a medium that allows researchers to respond quickly to these changing contexts before consolidating their findings in journal articles. Other types of publications represent more limited but still substantively significant contributions. Book chapters, with 96 documents, mark thematic and conceptual deepening efforts within a broader framework, often comparative or interdisciplinary. The presence of books overall, although only 35 documents, reflects the contribution of monographic works, which generally focus on long-term synthesis and in-depth analysis of Indonesian border issues. The 28 review articles demonstrate that systematic efforts to synthesize and evaluate the literature are still relatively limited. This situation indicates future research opportunities to strengthen conceptual studies and provide more comprehensive theoretical mapping in Indonesian border studies. Meanwhile, conference reviews and editorials, numbering 13 and 7 documents, respectively, play a minor role and generally serve as reflections, policy commentaries, or thematic introductions, rather than as primary means of empirical knowledge production. Overall, this pattern of documents by type indicates that Mapping Indonesia's Border Studies exhibits a strong publication orientation toward journal articles and conference proceedings as two key pillars of knowledge dissemination. The dominance of journal articles affirms the academic legitimacy and methodological depth of this field, while the high proportion of conference papers reflects the adaptive, contextual nature of border studies, which is responsive to regional policy and geopolitical dynamics. This combination indicates that Indonesian border studies is developing in a balance between rapid exploration and mature scholarly consolidation. Analysis of Documents by Subject Area in Indonesian Border Studies The distribution of documents by subject area indicates that Indonesian border studies in the 2015–2025 period are highly multidisciplinary, although they still display the dominance of certain disciplines. The Social Sciences field is the most dominant, with 581 documents (26.2%), confirming that Indonesian border studies are primarily understood as a social, political, and institutional phenomenon. This dominance reflects a strong focus on issues such as state sovereignty, border security, international relations, regional governance, the social dynamics of border communities, and public policy and development in border areas. Environmental Science ranked second with 287 documents (12.9%), demonstrating that the environmental dimension is a crucial component of Indonesian border studies. The high contribution of this field is closely related to Indonesia's archipelagic nature, where borders often intersect with issues of natural resource management, the sustainability of coastal and marine ecosystems, climate change, and environmental degradation in land and maritime border areas. This finding indicates that Indonesian border studies are developing strongly within the framework of sustainability and environmental governance. Significant contributions also came from Earth and Planetary Sciences (169 documents; 7.6%), reflecting attention to the physical and spatial aspects of border areas, such as geomorphology, oceanography, and coastal dynamics. Arts and Humanities (160 documents; 7.2%) complemented this landscape with historical, cultural, and identity approaches, emphasizing that Indonesia's borders are understood not only as geopolitical entities but also as historical and symbolic spaces that shape the social and cultural identities of its people. The Agricultural and Biological Sciences field (152 documents; 6.9%) demonstrates the relevance of food security, biological resource management, and agricultural practices in border regions, particularly in remote and vulnerable areas. Meanwhile, Business, Management and Accounting (128 documents; 5.8%) and Economics, Econometrics and Finance (118 documents; 5.3%) reflect increasing attention to the economic dimensions of borders, including cross-border trade, connectivity, maritime economics, and regional development. Contributions from Engineering (113 documents; 5.1%) and Computer Science (86 documents; 3.9%) demonstrate the involvement of technical and technological approaches, such as spatial mapping, geographic information systems (GIS), border monitoring, and the use of digital technology in border management and surveillance. The presence of the Energy field (69 documents) is also relevant to the exploration and management of energy resources in border regions and the high seas. Health fields such as Medicine (74 documents), Public Health-related fields (Nursing, Health Professions), and pure science fields such as Physics, Chemistry, and Biochemistry appear in smaller proportions. While their contributions are limited, the presence of these fields demonstrates the expansion of border studies into cross-border health, biosecurity, and environmental impacts on the health of border communities. The Multidisciplinary category (20 documents) highlights the existence of integrative cross-disciplinary efforts, although the number remains relatively small compared to the total number of publications. This pattern of documents by subject area demonstrates that Mapping Indonesia's Border Studies reveals the character of Indonesian border studies as a field firmly rooted in social and environmental sciences, but increasingly evolving toward an interdisciplinary approach involving natural sciences, technology, economics, and the humanities. The dominance of Social Sciences reflects the strategic importance of borders in the context of state and society, while the significant contributions of Environmental Science and Earth Sciences emphasize the importance of ecological and spatial dimensions in understanding the complexity of Indonesia's borders as an archipelagic nation. These findings also open up space for strengthening interdisciplinary research in the future, particularly on the intersection of policy, technology, and sustainability in border areas. Network Visualization of Keyword Co-occurrence: All Keywords The keyword network visualization shows the multidimensional and interconnected thematic structure of Indonesian border studies, with Indonesia serving as the largest central node. This central position confirms that all research discourses in the Scopus corpus (2015–2025) are strongly centered on the Indonesian national context, while other themes develop as intersecting subclusters. Based on cluster proximity, density, and color patterns, this network can be interpreted into four main thematic clusters. Source: December 31, 2025 Cluster 1: Sustainable Development and Cross-Border Economics (Red) The red cluster is dominated by keywords such as sustainable development, economics, planning, regional planning, agriculture, biodiversity, commerce, e-commerce, and economic and social effects. The presence of cross-border keywords in this cluster indicates that development and economic issues are not positioned solely domestically, but rather linked to cross-border interactions and regional integration. The strong connection between sustainable development and planning indicates that Indonesian border studies are largely directed at planning border areas as strategic development spaces, not simply buffer zones for the country. Meanwhile, the connection with commerce and international trade demonstrates the growing academic attention to the role of border areas as cross-border economic and trade corridors, particularly within the ASEAN context. Cluster 2: Regional Governance and Border Security (Green) The green cluster focuses on the keywords border region, government, local government, security, migration, economic growth, and regional markers such as Kalimantan, Borneo, Sumatra, Sarawak, and the Sunda Isles. This cluster represents studies that emphasize the spatial and institutional dimensions of borders, with a focus on governance, non-traditional security, and the socio-economic dynamics of border areas. The close link between border regions and government indicates that research has highlighted the role of the state and local governments in managing border areas, which often face specific challenges, such as isolation, development inequality, and security vulnerabilities. The presence of migration and refugees also emphasizes that cross-border human mobility is a crucial issue in Indonesian border discourse, from both a security and humanitarian perspective. Cluster 3: Regionalism and Interstate Relations (Blue) The blue cluster is characterized by the keywords ASEAN, international cooperation, policy, COVID-19, and countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, China, and India. This cluster reflects the study of Indonesia's borders within a regional and international framework, with an emphasis on interstate cooperation and policy responses to cross-border issues. The strong link between ASEAN and international cooperation indicates that many studies view Indonesia's borders as part of the Southeast Asian regional architecture, not as separate entities. The inclusion of COVID-19 in this cluster indicates that the pandemic is understood as a transboundary phenomenon, reinforcing the importance of regional policy coordination, particularly in managing mobility and health security. Cluster 4: Transboundary Health and the One Health Approach (Purple–Yellow) This cluster is characterized by the keywords humans, animals, malaria, epidemic, prevalence, and risk assessment. The presence of animals alongside humans and infectious diseases indicates that health studies in this corpus frequently utilize the One Health approach, which links human, animal, and environmental health within the context of border regions. The connection between malaria and epidemics confirms that infectious disease issues remain a significant focus, particularly in Indonesia's land border regions such as Papua and Kalimantan. This cluster does not stand alone but intersects with the governance and regionalism clusters, indicating that transboundary health is positioned as a non-traditional security and policy issue, rather than simply a medical one. This network demonstrates that Indonesian border studies is developing as an interdisciplinary field integrating issues of development, governance, regionalism, and transboundary health. No clusters are completely isolated, indicating a high degree of interconnectedness between themes. Indonesia's central position, connecting all clusters, emphasizes that border research addresses national boundaries not simply as geographic lines, but as complex spaces of interaction encompassing economic, political, social, environmental, and health dimensions. Thus, this map demonstrates a shift in Indonesian border studies from a classic geopolitical approach to a more comprehensive, issue-based perspective. Discussion The increase in the number of publications on Indonesia's borders during the 2015–2025 period cannot be separated from the dynamics of regional geopolitics and the direction of national maritime policy, which have evolved significantly over the past decade. This trend reflects the close relationship between changes in state policy, the escalation of regional security issues, and the global academic community's response to Indonesia's strategic position as an archipelagic nation. The initial phase of the research period (2015–2016), characterized by a relatively low number of publications, coincided with the initial transition period of Indonesia's maritime policy following the inauguration of President Joko Widodo (Connelly, 2015 ; Sebastian & Chen, 2021 ). Although the Global Maritime Fulcrum concept was introduced in 2014, during the early stages of its implementation, the policy focus remained normative (Rosyidin, 2021 ). It had not yet been fully institutionalized in the international research agenda. This explains why academic studies related to Indonesia's borders and maritime affairs during this period were still limited and did not show a significant surge. Entering the 2017–2018 period, the moderate increase in the number of publications coincided with the strengthening implementation of Indonesia's maritime policy, particularly in upholding sovereignty in maritime areas. Policies to curb illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, including the practice of sinking foreign vessels, have attracted widespread regional and international attention (Chapsos & Hamilton, 2019 ; Stefanus & Vervaele, 2021 ; Dirhamsyah et al., 2022 ; Widjaja et al., 2023 ). This issue has not only impacted Indonesia's relations with neighboring countries but has also sparked increased academic research on maritime boundaries, maritime law, and the security of Indonesia's border waters. The significant surge in publications in 2019–2021 coincided with rising geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly regarding the South China Sea. China's unilateral nine-dash line claims, which intersect Indonesia's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in Natuna waters, have spurred numerous studies on maritime sovereignty, international law, and border diplomacy (Yang & Zou, 2024 ). Despite a relative decline in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the resurgence of publications in 2021 demonstrates that border and maritime issues remain a strategic concern, even during a global crisis (Radil et al., 2021 ; Oyenuga, 2021 ; Chua et al., 2022 ). The 2022–2025 period marks a particularly strong phase of research acceleration, as Indonesia becomes increasingly integrated into the geopolitical dynamics of the Indo-Pacific. Strengthening regional maritime security cooperation, Indonesia's involvement in forums such as the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP), and the increasing presence of major powers in the region are fostering more complex and multidisciplinary studies on borders (Bitas, 2020 ). At the same time, domestic policies such as border area development, strengthening maritime connectivity, and sustainable marine resource management have also expanded the research focus from purely security issues to social, economic, and environmental dimensions (Effendi, 2025 ). The peak of publications in 2024–2025 reflects the maturity of Indonesian border studies as a well-established and strategic research field. In this phase, Indonesia is no longer positioned merely as an object of regional study, but as a key actor in global discourses on archipelagic states, maritime governance, and border security. The increasing number of publications also demonstrates that Indonesian border studies have become integrated into the broader discourse of global geopolitics, including issues of great power rivalry, the stability of the Indo-Pacific region, and the challenges of border management in the era of globalization. This progressively increasing publication trend over the past decade reflects the dynamic interaction between Indonesian maritime policy, changes in the regional geopolitical landscape, and the responses of the international academic community. This analysis confirms that the development of Indonesian border studies is not a linear process, but is strongly influenced by the political, security, and strategic policy contexts that frame it. Bibliometric findings in this study also indicate that Indonesian border studies are no longer limited to the classical understanding of borders as territorial lines denoting state sovereignty. Instead, the structure of the keyword network demonstrates a significant shift toward conceptualizing borders as dynamic social, economic, and political spaces, in line with contemporary border studies approaches that emphasize processes of bordering, debordering, and rebordering. Within this framework, borders are understood as arenas of interaction continually negotiated by states, local communities, and transnational actors. In the initial phase (around 2019), the dominant themes of sustainable development, regional planning, and environmental management, such as planning, sustainable development, biodiversity, and remote sensing, reflected an initial shift in border studies from a geopolitical approach to understanding borders as development spaces (border as a resource). Border regions were positioned as strategic areas requiring spatial and environmental-based policy interventions, in line with literature that views bordering as a practice of spatial management, not simply territorial control. Entering the transitional phase (2020–2021), the research focus shifted to cross-border economics, governance, and regional cooperation. The emergence of themes such as economics, international trade, commerce, government, and ASEAN demonstrates a partial debordering process, where borders are understood as nodes of economic integration and Southeast Asian regionalism, as well as spaces for multi-actor interaction within the framework of border governance. The dominance of sustainable development and regional planning clusters strengthens the argument that Indonesia's borders are increasingly positioned as strategic development spaces, rather than simply peripheral regions. This aligns with the border-as-resource perspective, which views borders as opportunities for economic development and regional integration (Konrad & Brunet-Jailly, 2019 ; Andersen & Tinning, 2025 ). The close link between sustainable development, planning, and cross-border commerce reflects the transformation of Indonesian border policy, which is oriented toward improving welfare and connectivity, particularly within the context of ASEAN and regional economic cooperation. From a border governance perspective, the border governance and security cluster emphasizes the important role of the state and local governments in managing the complexities of border areas. The presence of keywords such as government, local government, security, and migration demonstrates the multi-level governance nature of Indonesian border issues, where national policies must interact with local capacities and practices. This confirms the border studies perspective that borders are not only the product of central policies but also the result of everyday bordering practices at the local level (Laine, 2016 ). Furthermore, the interconnectedness of migration, refugees, and security within the keyword network places Indonesia's borders within the non-traditional security spectrum. Within the NTS framework, threats to state security are no longer understood solely as military aggression but also encompass human mobility, cross-border crime, and social vulnerability. These findings demonstrate that Indonesian border studies are increasingly adopting a human-centric approach, placing human safety and well-being as an integral part of national security. The cross-border health dimension, emerging as a distinct cluster, provides an important contribution to the NTS literature. The interconnectedness of COVID-19, malaria, disease transmission, and the human-animal node demonstrates that health is understood as a transboundary security issue requiring regional coordination and a cross-sectoral approach. This pattern aligns with the One Health concept, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health, and with the NTS framework, which views pandemics and infectious diseases as serious threats to a country's social and economic stability. The presence of the regionalism and international cooperation clusters reinforces the argument that Indonesia's borders cannot be separated from the regional context of Southeast Asia. The interconnectedness between ASEAN, international cooperation, and neighboring countries reflects a process of debordering in the form of policy coordination and regional integration, as well as rebordering through tightened border controls in crisis situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This dynamic emphasizes that borders are contingent and responsive to changes in the global environment. Indonesian border studies have evolved toward an interdisciplinary and issue-oriented approach, integrating border studies and non-traditional security perspectives. Borders are no longer understood as static national boundaries, but rather as strategic spaces where interests in development, human security, health, and regional cooperation converge. These findings not only enrich theoretical understanding of Indonesia's borders but also provide important policy implications, particularly in designing adaptive, inclusive, and responsive border management strategies to non-traditional challenges. Conclusion This study confirms that Indonesian border studies have undergone significant development and transformed into an increasingly interdisciplinary and issue-based field, as reflected in a bibliometric analysis of 1,247 Scopus-indexed publications from 2015–2025. The Scopus data analysis reveals a consistent upward trend in the number of publications, particularly after 2019, reflecting increased academic attention to border issues in line with regional dynamics, national policies, and global crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of publication characteristics, journal articles and conference proceedings emerged as the dominant document types, with the primary sources of publications coming from international conference forums and multidisciplinary journals. Author contributions and institutional affiliations are dominated by major Indonesian universities and national research institutions such as the University of Indonesia, Gadjah Mada University, and the National Research and Innovation Agency. The distribution of authors' countries indicates that Indonesia is a hub of knowledge production, although collaborations with Asia-Pacific and Western countries are also growing significantly. These findings indicate that Indonesian border studies are firmly rooted in the national context but increasingly connected within global academic networks. The network analysis identify four main thematic clusters: cross-border development and economics, border governance and management, regionalism and international cooperation, and cross-border health and non-traditional security, and demonstrate a shift in research focus from regional planning and environmental issues to cross-border health, human mobility, and pandemic risk. This shift underscores the growing integration between border studies and non-traditional security frameworks, where borders are understood as strategic spaces that converge development, policy, and human security interests. This research not only enriches conceptual understanding of Indonesia's borders but also demonstrates the methodological value of bibliometric analysis in uncovering evolving patterns, dynamics, and research agendas. These findings provide an important empirical basis for further research and the formulation of more adaptive and responsive border policies to future cross-border challenges. Declarations Author Contribution The bibliometric analysis that supports the findings of this study is available on Scopus.com, but there are limitations and systematic procedures that apply only when collecting the data for this study. Data Availability The bibliometric analysis that supports the findings of this study is available on Scopus.com, but there are limitations and systematic procedures that apply only when collecting the data for this study. References Ahmed, M., Roslina, B. T., Othman, & Noordin, M. F. (2023). TRENDS IN OPEN SCIENCE: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH TOPICS, CITATIONS, JOURNALS, AND PRODUCTIVE ENTITIES. Journal of Information Systems and Digital Technologies , 5 (2), 170–193. https://doi.org/10.31436/jisdt.v5i2.422 Alsadi, J., Alkhatib, F., Antony, J., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Tortorella, G., & Cudney, E. A. (2025). A systematic literature review with bibliometric analysis of Quality 4.0. The TQM Journal , 37 (5), 1446–1470. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-02-2024-0050 Andersen, D. J., & Tinning, S. (2025). The green transition as boundary object? On green cross-border collaboration in the Danish-German borderlands. European Planning Studies , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2025.2578373 Bitas, B. C. (2020). ASEAN amid China’s Vision of the Belt and Road and the US Strategy for the Indo-Pacific: Building a Strategic Bridge to Two Great Power Initiatives. China and the World , 03 (01), 1950026. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2591729319500263 Chapsos, I., & Hamilton, S. (2019). Illegal fishing and fisheries crime as a transnational organized crime in Indonesia. Trends in Organized Crime , 22 (3), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-018-9329-8 Chouliaraki, L., & Georgiou, M. (2019). The digital border: Mobility beyond territorial and symbolic divides. European Journal of Communication , 34 (6), 594–605. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323119886147 Chua, J. Y., Foo, R., Tan, K. H., & Yuen, K. F. (2022). Maritime resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: impacts and solutions. Continuity & Resilience Review , 4 (1), 124–143. https://doi.org/10.1108/CRR-09-2021-0031 Connelly, A. L. (2015). Sovereignty and the Sea: President Joko Widodo’s Foreign Policy Challenges. Contemporary Southeast Asia , 37 (1), 1–28. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24916512 Dirhamsyah, D., Umam, S., & Arifin, Z. (2022). Maritime law enforcement: Indonesia’s experience against illegal fishing. Ocean & Coastal Management , 229 , 106304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106304 Effendi, T. D. (2025). Navigating the sea: a comparative study of maritime identity and policies in Indonesia and Taiwan. Maritime Studies , 24 (2), 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-025-00415-2 Ejaz, H., Zeeshan, H. M., Ahmad, F., Bukhari, S. N. A., Anwar, N., Alanazi, A., Sadiq, A., Junaid, K., Atif, M., Abosalif, K. O. A., Iqbal, A., Hamza, M. A., & Younas, S. (2022). Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on the Omicron Variant from 2020 to 2022 in the Scopus Database Using R and VOSviewer. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 19 (19), 12407. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912407 Gopal, P., & Alverdian, I. (2021). Maritime Security Cooperation Between India and Indonesia: Imperatives, Status and Prospects. India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs , 77 (2), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/09749284211005009 Hartanto, A., Nachrowi, N. D., Samputra, P. L., & Huda, N. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of Islamic banking sustainability: a study based on Scopus scientific database. Journal of Islamic Marketing , 15 (9), 2245–2285. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-04-2023-0123 Hassan, W., & Duarte, A. E. (2024). Bibliometric analysis: A few suggestions. Current Problems in Cardiology , 49 (8), 102640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102640 Iqbal, W., Qadir, J., Tyson, G., Mian, A. N., Hassan, S., & Crowcroft, J. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of publications in computer networking research. Scientometrics , 119 (2), 1121–1155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03086-z Kipper, L. M., Furstenau, L. B., Hoppe, D., Frozza, R., & Iepsen, S. (2020). Scopus scientific mapping production in industry 4.0 (2011–2018): a bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Production Research , 58 (6), 1605–1627. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1671625 Konrad, V., & Brunet-Jailly, E. (2019). Approaching borders, creating borderland spaces, and exploring the evolving borders between Canada and the United States. Canadian Geographies / Géographies Canadiennes , 63 (1), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12515 Laine, J. P. (2016). The Multiscalar Production of Borders. Geopolitics , 21 (3), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2016.1195132 Lyu, P., Liu, X., & Yao, T. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of literature on bibliometrics in recent half-century. Journal of Information Science . https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515231191233 Mogiani, M. (2023). Studying Borders from the Border: Reflections on the Concept of Borders as Meeting Points. Geopolitics , 28 (3), 1323–1341. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2026329 Murray, P. (2020). Managing Security: Reimagining ASEAN’s Regional Role. Asian Studies Review , 44 (1), 44–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2019.1680605 Nazim, M., Ur Rehman, S., Iqbal, A., & Ahmad, S. (2025). Patterns of Scholarly Communication in Global Information Retrieval Research: A Bibliometric Analysis (1954–2021). Science & Technology Libraries , 44 (3), 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2024.2429064 Ohoiwutun, Y. (2023). Development of the Indonesia-Papua New Guinea Interstate Border. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning , 18 (8), 2579–2585. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.180830 Oyenuga, A. (2021). Perspectives on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global and African maritime transport sectors, and the potential implications for Africa’s maritime governance. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs , 20 (2), 215–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-021-00233-3 Passas, I. (2024). Bibliometric Analysis: The Main Steps. Encyclopedia , 4 (2), 1014–1025. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia4020065 Pirri, S., Lorenzoni, V., & Turchetti, G. (2020). : an explorative methodological study to enhance consistency in literature. BMC Health Services Research , 20 (1), 688. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05544-4 . Scoping review and bibliometric analysis of Big Data applications for Medication adherence. Pratomo, E., & Kwik, J. (2020). Good agreements make good neighbours: Settlements on maritime boundary disputes in South East Asia. Marine Policy , 117 , 103943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103943 Radil, S. M., Pinos, C., J., & Ptak, T. (2021). Borders resurgent: towards a post-Covid-19 global border regime? Space and Polity , 25 (1), 132–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562576.2020.1773254 Raharja, D. P., & Karim, M. F. (2024). Re-territorialization and the governance of ocean frontiers in Indonesia. Territory Politics Governance , 12 (9), 1353–1371. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2118824 Rochwulaningsih, Y., Sulistiyono, S. T., Masruroh, N. N., & Maulany, N. N. (2019). Marine policy basis of Indonesia as a maritime state: The importance of integrated economy. Marine Policy , 108 , 103602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103602 Rosyidin, M. (2021). The cult of glory: national myth and the idea of Global Maritime Fulcrum in Indonesia’s foreign policy, 2014–2019. South East Asia Research , 29 (3), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/0967828X.2021.1954484 Sassen, S. (2015). Bordering Capabilities versus Borders: Implications for National Borders. In Borderities and the Politics of Contemporary Mobile Borders (pp. 23–52). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137468857_2 Schofield, C. (2015). Indonesia’s delimited maritime boundaries. Journal of the Indian Ocean Region , 11 (1), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2015.1018662 Sebastian, L. C., & Chen, J. (2021). Indonesia’s Foreign and Maritime Policies Under Joko Widodo: Domestic and External Determinants. Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs , 8 (3), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/23477970211039639 Shah, N. U., Ali, N., Hamid, A., & Khan, M. A. (2024). Research visualization trends in research data management (RDM): a bibliometric analysis. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication . https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-09-2023-0349 Sodik, D. M. (2018). The Outermost Small Islands of the Indonesian Archipelago: A Legal Analysis. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law , 33 (4), 706–767. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718085-13310001 Song, A. M. (2023). Civilian at Sea: Understanding Fisheries’ Entanglement with Maritime Border Security. Geopolitics , 28 (3), 1161–1185. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2021.1997995 Stefanus, A. A., & Vervaele, J. A. E. (2021). Fishy business: regulatory and enforcement challenges of transnational organised IUU fishing crimes. Trends in Organized Crime , 24 (4), 581–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-021-09425-y Suryadi, S., Sulistyowati, S., Maharani, D. N., & Maharaja, G. B. (2024). Maritime Boundary Arrangements with Other Countries and The Economic Impact on Indonesian Fishermen. BIO Web of Conferences , 134 , 07001. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/202413407001 Wen, Q. J., Ren, Z. J., Lu, H., & Wu, J. F. (2021). The progress and trend of BIM research: A bibliometrics-based visualization analysis. Automation in Construction , 124 , 103558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103558 Widjaja, S., Long, T., Wirajuda, H., As, H., Van, Bergh, P. E., Brett, A., Copeland, D., Fernandez, M., Gusman, A., Juwana, S., Ruchimat, T., Trent, S., & Wilcox, C. (2023). Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing and Associated Drivers. In The Blue Compendium (pp. 553–591). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16277-0_15 Yan, L., & Zhiping, W. (2023). Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS. Sage Open , 13 (1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231158562 Yang, Y., & Zou, Y. (2024). Development and national security: Indonesia’s Natuna Island and the South China Sea issue. Third World Quarterly , 45 (3), 493–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2023.2270507 Zitt, M., Lelu, A., Cadot, M., & Cabanac, G. (2019). Bibliometric Delineation of Scientific Fields (pp. 25–68). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_2 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9533347","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":631475886,"identity":"646c98aa-ceb3-4a3e-93eb-aa3cd488a798","order_by":0,"name":"Anju Nofarof Hasudungan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Indonesia","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Anju","middleName":"Nofarof","lastName":"Hasudungan","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-26 16:08:25","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9533347/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9533347/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108708029,"identity":"fc446c94-253b-44c9-a71d-b5e47c92aa7f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-07 13:46:05","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":24495,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDocuments by Year (2015-2025)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9533347/v1/289b2e8ed9f8de84621ef046.png"},{"id":108807330,"identity":"0e245310-0603-4cc0-9329-4516966c5324","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-08 15:30:27","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":70052,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDocuments per Year by Source\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9533347/v1/888d5bf5fb9b29aa95b9583d.png"},{"id":108708030,"identity":"79e8d36c-68f9-4ff5-a4e1-4c81f88af1f4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-07 13:46:05","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":35815,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDocuments by Author\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9533347/v1/1b0947865cef47bc17a43a22.png"},{"id":108708033,"identity":"94d3019a-1265-4efc-9586-48cc000c1946","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-07 13:46:05","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":51343,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDocuments by Affiliation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9533347/v1/cb7d0e766aaa5f534f3277d5.png"},{"id":108708032,"identity":"c882c76d-b139-4a5f-9a4b-20d99b5d4dcc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-07 13:46:05","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1010836,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNetwork Visualization VOSViewer\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: December 31, 2025\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9533347/v1/3c2385517adc780a5dc9f569.png"},{"id":108810289,"identity":"ae785601-0de7-4fdc-87a7-a10d4eb9a3e2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-08 15:57:59","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1392602,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9533347/v1/b75beee2-be30-4ec0-a4bb-ef40e29e83e3.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Mapping Indonesia’s Border Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scopus-Indexed Publications (2015–2025)","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIndonesia is a country with unique geographic and geopolitical characteristics in a global context. As the world's largest archipelagic nation, Indonesia not only possesses vast land territory but also a much larger maritime territory, making it an archipelagic state with highly complex territorial boundaries (Sodik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Rochwulaningsih et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Raharja \u0026amp; Karim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Geographically, Indonesia shares land borders with three countries: Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, and Timor Leste, and maritime borders with at least ten other countries, including Singapore, the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Australia, India, and Palau (Schofield, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Pratomo \u0026amp; Kwik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Ohoiwutun, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Suryadi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This situation places border issues, both land and sea, as a strategic dimension closely related to state sovereignty, national security, natural resource management, human mobility, and the social and economic dynamics of border areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver the past two decades, Indonesian border issues have garnered increasing academic attention, coinciding with the intensification of cross-border interactions, boundary disputes, maritime security concerns, and the development of regional cooperation in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific (Gopal \u0026amp; Alverdian, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Murray, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Song, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Border areas are no longer understood solely as territorial demarcations, but as dynamic social, political, and economic spaces where local, national, and global interests intertwine (Sassen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Laine, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Chouliaraki \u0026amp; Georgiou, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Mogiani, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This transformation of perspective has encouraged the emergence of various cross-disciplinary studies, ranging from international relations, geopolitics, maritime law, security, political economy, to socio-cultural studies and border region development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough the number of scholarly publications on Indonesia's borders continues to increase, studies that systematically map the development, patterns, and directions of research in this field remain relatively limited. Most existing studies tend to be thematic and case-specific, for example, focusing on specific maritime boundary disputes, land border security issues, or economic development in border areas. Consequently, a comprehensive overview of the intellectual landscape, key academic actors, international collaboration networks, and dominant and marginalized themes in Indonesian border studies has yet to be identified.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis is where a bibliometric approach becomes relevant and important. Bibliometric analysis allows researchers to quantitatively and visually evaluate the development of scientific literature in a research field, including publication trends, citation patterns, author and institutional collaborations, and the thematic structure of knowledge (Lyu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Yan \u0026amp; Zhiping, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Hassan \u0026amp; Duarte, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). By utilizing the Scopus database, known for its broad coverage and international quality standards, bibliometric studies can provide an objective, data-driven mapping of the dynamics of knowledge production on Indonesia's borders over a specific period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research specifically focuses on analyzing Scopus publications from 2015\u0026ndash;2025, using strict selection criteria. These include English-language documents, final publication stages, and relevant scholarly document types such as journal articles, conference proceedings, books, and book chapters. Using analytical tools such as OpenRefine for data cleaning and VOSviewer for bibliometric network visualization, this study aims to uncover the intellectual structure, key research themes, and the evolution of academic discourse on Indonesia's land and maritime borders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, this research is expected to not only contribute to strengthening bibliometric studies in border studies but also provide a conceptual and empirical foundation for researchers, policymakers, and stakeholders in understanding Indonesia's position as a strategic border state regionally and globally. This mapping is crucial for identifying research gaps, guiding future research agendas, and strengthening Indonesia's academic contribution to the global discourse on borders and archipelagic sovereignty.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Research Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis research uses a descriptive quantitative approach with bibliometric analysis. This approach was chosen because it provides a systematic and objective mapping of the development of scientific literature, intellectual structures, and thematic dynamics in studies of Indonesia's land and maritime borders. Through bibliometric analysis, this study explores patterns of knowledge production, academic collaboration networks, and the evolution of research focuses based on metadata from internationally indexed scientific publications (Kipper et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Ahmed et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Nazim et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The research data sources were obtained from the Scopus database, selected for its broad coverage, global reputation, and stringent curation standards. The search process was conducted using the search within feature in the title, abstract, and keywords sections to ensure that the collected documents were substantively relevant to the topic of Indonesian borders. The search was limited to English-language publications published between 2015 and 2025, in the final publication stage, and included relevant scientific document types, namely journal articles, conference proceedings, literature reviews, conference reviews, books, book chapters, and editorials. Based on these criteria, 1.247 documents were obtained, which were then used as the research data corpus.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData Search Criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of Documents\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource Database\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScopus (Retrieved on December 27, 2025)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSearch String\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTITLE-ABS-KEY (\"Border Indonesia\") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (\"Indonesia Border\") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (\"Indonesian Borders\") OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (\"Borders Indonesia\")\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.688 documents found\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYears\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2015\u0026ndash;2025\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.303 documents found\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclusion Criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticle, Conference paper, Book chapter, Book, Review, Conference review, and Editorial.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.291 documents found\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExclusion Criteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe selected documents are only the final ones, not Articles in press\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,279 documents found\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnglish\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1,247 documents found\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDocuments Total\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe bibliometric analysis in this study also utilizes various bibliographic metadata provided by Scopus as the primary analysis variables (Iqbal et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Ejaz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Hartanto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This metadata includes publication year, which is used to analyze trends in the number of documents over time and identify patterns of growth or fluctuation in academic interest in Indonesian border issues. Furthermore, publication sources or journals are analyzed to identify key journals that are dominant platforms for disseminating knowledge in this field. This variable is used to map levels of academic productivity and influence, while affiliation or institution is analyzed to understand institutional contributions and patterns of national and international collaboration. Document type is analyzed to examine the distribution of scholarly publication forms, while subject area is used to identify dominant disciplines and assess the interdisciplinary nature of Indonesian border studies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo maintain data consistency and quality, this study applied strict inclusion and exclusion criteria (Pirri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Passas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Alsadi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Included documents were publications that explicitly discussed Indonesia in the context of land and/or maritime borders, were published within the study period, were in English, and had gone through the final publication stage. Conversely, non-scholarly documents, publications without peer review, documents that only marginally mentioned Indonesia, and data with duplicates or incomplete metadata were excluded from the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe selected bibliographic data were then exported from Scopus in CSV (Comma-Separated Values) and RIS formats and processed using OpenRefine software. This stage included data cleaning and normalization by removing duplicate documents, standardizing author names and institutional affiliations, aligning keyword terms and subject areas, and correcting various metadata inconsistencies. This data cleaning process is crucial for ensuring the accuracy of the network analysis and bibliometric visualization results (Wen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shah et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Passas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubsequent bibliometric analysis was conducted using VOSviewer software. Before this, keyword cleaning and normalization were performed to improve the accuracy of the keyword co-occurrence analysis and ensure that the resulting network map truly represents the intellectual structure of Indonesian border studies, not simply a collection of indexing artifacts or general methodological terms. This process was carried out after the data were exported from Scopus and before the network analysis was conducted using VOSviewer.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eKeyword filtering was performed using the verify selected keywords feature in VOSviewer, using a manual-conceptual approach. Each keyword was assessed based on its relevance to the research's main themes: Indonesian borders, transnational dynamics, and non-traditional security issues, including cross-border health. In this process, keywords that were not checked were systematically excluded from the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, the authors removed administrative and methodological keywords, such as \"article,\" \"controlled study,\" and \"cross-sectional study.\" These keywords do not reflect the substance of the study but merely describe the publication format or research design, potentially artificially fragmenting thematic clusters.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, demographic and research subject keywords, such as \"adult,\" \"male,\" \"female,\" \"child,\" \"adolescent,\" and \"nonhuman,\" were eliminated. These terms are common Scopus indexing artifacts in the health literature but lack analytical value in mapping border issues and cross-border governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, purely biological and bioscience keywords, for example, genetics, phylogeny, taxonomy, classification, and veterinary medicine, were removed because they did not directly contribute to the understanding of border regions, policies, or transnational dynamics. This removal was crucial to prevent clusters from being drawn toward molecular biology, which is outside the focus of the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFourth, the authors normalized semantically overlapping terms. Common terms such as border and border area(s) were combined into the umbrella term border region, chosen as more spatially and conceptually informative. Similarly, variations in health terms, such as epidemic, were normalized into concepts more relevant to the transnational dimension, such as pandemic and disease transmission.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConversely, keywords reflecting the core dimensions of Indonesian border studies, including territorial aspects, governance, political economy, environment, migration, and transboundary health, were retained. In the health context, the term \"animals\" was selectively retained because it serves as a bridging concept within the One Health framework, particularly when related to zoonoses, disease transmission, and transboundary health issues in border areas. Through this process of cleansing and normalization, the keyword co-occurrence analysis produced a more coherent, sharper, and more relevant thematic map, thus depicting the landscape of Indonesian border research more accurately and conceptually.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults of Keyword Cleaning and Normalization\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKeyword\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndonesia; Southeast Asia; ASEAN; Border region; Cross-border; International cooperation; Security; Migration; Refugees; Human rights; Government; Local government; Policy; Identity; Sustainable development; Economic development; Economic growth; Economics; International trade; Commerce; E-commerce; Investments; Regional planning; Planning; Development; Rural areas; Education; Climate change; Land use; Environmental protection; Sustainability; Biodiversity; Conservation; Forestry; Remote sensing; Spatiotemporal analysis; COVID-19; Pandemic; Disease transmission; Disease surveillance; Malaria; Public health (implicit); Humans; Animals (selective/One Health); Papua New Guinea; Timor-Leste; Malaysia; Singapore; Australia; Viet Nam; China; India; Sarawak; Kalimantan; Borneo; Sumatra; Greater Sunda Islands\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMerged Normalized\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBorder \u0026rarr; Border region; Border area(s) \u0026rarr; Border region; Epidemic \u0026rarr; Pandemic / Disease transmission; Animal \u0026rarr; Animals; Surveillance \u0026rarr; Disease surveillance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRemoved\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArticle; Controlled study; Cross-sectional study; Questionnaire; Adult; Young adult; Middle aged; Aged; Male; Female; Child; Adolescent; Nonhuman; Genetics; Phylogeny; Taxonomy; Classification; Veterinary medicine\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe keyword cleaning and normalization process was carried out to minimize overlapping meanings and eliminate noise caused by indexing artifacts (Zitt et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), so that the resulting co-occurrence network is analytically sharper and aligned with the main focus of the study of Indonesian borders and cross-border health issues. All analysis results are visualized as network, overlay, and density visualizations to comprehensively demonstrate the structure and dynamics of knowledge.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAnnual Growth of Publications on Indonesia's Borders\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of the number of documents per year indicates that studies on Indonesia's borders experienced significant and relatively consistent growth throughout the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period. In the initial phase, 2015\u0026ndash;2016, the number of publications was still relatively low, at 39 and 47 documents, respectively. This reflects that studies on Indonesia's borders during that period were still limited and tended to be fragmented, both in terms of themes and involvement of the international academic community.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEntering the 2017\u0026ndash;2018 period, a moderate increase in the number of publications was observed, from 76 documents in 2017 to 90 documents in 2018. This increase marked the initial phase of consolidation of studies on Indonesia's borders, along with increasing attention to issues such as maritime security, border management, and the dynamics of Indonesia's relations with neighboring countries in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA more pronounced surge occurred in the 2019\u0026ndash;2021 period. In 2019, the number of publications increased to 119 documents, although there was a relative decline in 2020 to 109 documents. This decline can be interpreted in a global context, particularly the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has impacted research productivity and the international research agenda. However, in 2021, publications rose again to 135 documents, demonstrating the resilience and continued academic interest in Indonesian border studies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe 2022\u0026ndash;2025 period marks a phase of research acceleration and intensification. The number of publications increased consistently from 130 documents in 2022, to 152 documents in 2023, 167 documents in 2024, and peaked at 183 documents in 2025. This trend demonstrates that Indonesian border studies have developed into a mature and increasingly strategic research field within global academic discourse. The sharp increase in the final phase of the research period also indicates the strengthening relevance of border issues in the context of regional geopolitics, maritime security, cross-border connectivity, and Indonesia's position as an archipelagic nation at the crossroads of global trade and politics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe progressively increasing publication trend over the past decade confirms that Indonesian border studies have shifted from a peripheral issue to a mainstream research theme across various disciplines. This growth pattern also reflects the increasing involvement of international researchers, the strengthening of cross-border collaboration, and the expansion of interdisciplinary approaches in understanding the complexities of Indonesia's land and maritime borders. Therefore, this year-by-year analysis of documents provides a strong empirical basis for mapping the intellectual landscape and the dynamics of the development of Indonesian border studies on a global scale.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis of Documents per Year by Source in Indonesian Border Studies\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe distribution of documents by publication source throughout the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period indicates that knowledge production on Indonesia's borders is heavily influenced by international conference proceedings, particularly the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. The dominance of these sources, comprising a total of 102 documents, suggests that Indonesian border studies are evolving rapidly within a responsive, applicable, and interdisciplinary academic space, characteristics typically found in international conference proceedings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTemporarily, the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science began to show a significant increase in publications since 2018, with a sharp spike in 2019 and peaking in 2021. This pattern is in line with the increasing attention to environmental issues, coastal governance, and the management of Indonesia's maritime borders in the context of climate change, maritime security, and natural resource sustainability. Fluctuations after 2021, although remaining at a relatively high level, indicate a shift in some research output to other publication channels or a diversification of research themes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe AIP Conference Proceedings, which ranks second with 29 documents, exhibits a more stable growth pattern, with a peak in publications occurring in 2023. This suggests that Indonesian border issues are also being framed within more technical and methodological perspectives, such as environmental modeling, spatial analysis, and quantitative approaches, which are commonly presented at AIP forums. Meanwhile, the E3S Web of Conferences (22 documents) shows consistent contributions since 2018, indicating an increase in studies linking Indonesia's borders to sustainable development, energy, and environmental issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast to conference proceedings, contributions from scientific journals such as Biodiversity and the International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning are relatively more limited quantitatively, with 15 documents each. However, the presence of these journals reflects a phase of theoretical consolidation and empirical deepening in Indonesian border studies. Journal publications tended to appear more steadily in the period after 2019, indicating that some of the findings previously presented at conference forums were being refined and published in the form of more methodologically rigorous journal articles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, the pattern of documents per year by source indicates that Indonesian border studies in the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period remain in a dynamic between rapid expansion through conference proceedings and scientific consolidation through reputable journals. The dominance of conference proceedings reflects the highly contextual nature of border studies, which is responsive to developments in geopolitics, maritime policy, and regional environmental issues. Meanwhile, the increasing contribution of scientific journals in the final phase of the research period indicates the maturation of this field of study, moving towards a more established theoretical and methodological direction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the context of bibliometric mapping, these findings confirm that Mapping Indonesia's Border Studies not only records the quantitative growth of publications but also reveals the character of the knowledge dissemination ecosystem, where conference forums serve as initial exploration spaces and scientific journals serve as a medium for long-term academic legitimacy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis of Documents by Author in Indonesian Border Studies\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe distribution of documents by author indicates that knowledge production on Indonesia's borders during the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period was dispersed and collaborative, with no single, overt dominance by any single researcher. The [No Author ID found] category ranked highest with 14 documents, indicating limitations in the Scopus author identification system, particularly in conference proceedings publications or documents with non-standardized author metadata. This finding is methodologically important because it suggests that some scholarly contributions to Indonesian border studies have not been fully mapped individually, despite their continued contribution to the field's accumulated knowledge.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the clearly identified authors, Missbach, A., emerged as the most prolific contributor, with 12 papers. This position places Missbach as a central figure in Indonesian border studies, particularly in the context of cross-border issues, migration, security, and the socio-political dynamics of border regions. This relatively high productivity demonstrates consistent and sustained research leadership in this field. At the next level, Rahardjo, S.N.I., and Taena, W., each produced six papers, representing medium-sized but significant contributions. The existence of this group of authors with medium productivity indicates that Indonesian border studies are not dependent on a single center of scholarship, but rather develop through several active academic hubs. This reinforces the character of border studies as a multidisciplinary field open to various methodological perspectives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeanwhile, several other authors, such as Elyta, Fios, F., Ninef, J.S.R., Rijanta, R., Rustadi, E., and Sipayung, B.P., each contributed five documents. This pattern indicates a relatively consistent group of researchers contributing, albeit on a more moderate scale. The presence of multiple authors with roughly equal levels of productivity demonstrates that knowledge production in Indonesian border studies is horizontally distributed, rather than vertically concentrated among a handful of academics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of documents by author reflects an inclusive and collaborative research ecosystem, with relatively reasonable variations in productivity levels for such a contextual and interdisciplinary field. The absence of extreme dominance by a single author indicates that Indonesian border studies are developing through the collective contributions of various researchers from diverse scientific and institutional backgrounds. In the context of bibliometric mapping, these findings strengthen the argument that Indonesian border studies is a dynamic, open, and evolving academic field in line with changes in maritime policy and regional geopolitical dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis of Documents by Affiliation in Indonesian Border Studies\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFigure 4 Documents by Affiliation\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of documents by institutional affiliation indicates that knowledge production on Indonesia's borders during the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period was dominated by major universities and national research institutions, which served as knowledge hubs in the development of this research. Gadjah Mada University (UGM) topped the list with 65 documents, indicating the institution's central role in developing and guiding academic discourse on Indonesia's land and maritime borders. UGM's dominance reflects its institutional strength in the fields of regional studies, geopolitics, public policy, and environmental studies, which form a crucial foundation for border research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource: Scopus, December 27, 2025\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond place went to the University of Indonesia (UI) with 58 documents, reflecting strong contributions to a multidisciplinary approach to border studies, particularly through the perspectives of international law, international relations, and policy studies. UI's productivity demonstrates that Indonesian border studies are developed not only through territorial and maritime approaches, but also through a normative framework emphasizing issues of sovereignty, governance, and interstate relations. IPB University came in third with 51 documents, emphasizing the strong environmental, natural resource, and sustainable development dimensions in border studies, particularly related to coastal ecosystem management, food security, and the sustainability of ecologically vulnerable areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to universities, the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), with 49 documents, demonstrates the strategic role of national research institutions in producing policy-oriented knowledge, reflecting the close link between academic research and the needs of border management and state sovereignty. Other institutions, such as Diponegoro University (36 documents) and Tanjungpura University (34 documents), also made significant contributions, particularly in coastal and land border studies. Tanjungpura University's high productivity reflects the influence of its geographic proximity to the Indonesia-Malaysia border in West Kalimantan on the development of locally context-based research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBandung Institute of Technology and Airlangga University, each with 31 documents, demonstrate involvement from the disciplines of engineering, regional planning, public health, and public policy, while Brawijaya University (29 documents) and Padjadjaran University (25 documents) complete the main institutional contributions. Overall, this pattern of affiliation demonstrates that Indonesian border studies is developing within a research ecosystem centered on high-capacity institutions, yet remains inclusive and reflects a diversity of disciplinary approaches and regional contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAnalysis of Documents by Type in Indonesian Border Studies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of documents by publication type shows that Indonesian border studies during the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period were dominated by journal articles, with a total of 828 documents, or approximately two-thirds of all publications. This dominance of journal articles indicates that the dissemination of knowledge regarding Indonesia's land and maritime borders is primarily conducted through formal, peer-reviewed academic channels, oriented toward strengthening ongoing theoretical and empirical contributions. This pattern reflects the field's maturity, where research results are not only produced rapidly but also undergo a rigorous scientific selection process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNext to journal articles, conference papers rank second with 240 documents, demonstrating the important role of conference forums as an initial space for the exchange of ideas, presentation of preliminary findings, and exploration of new issues in Indonesian border studies. The substantial proportion of conference papers reflects the dynamic nature of border studies, which is responsive to developments in maritime policy, regional geopolitical dynamics, and constantly evolving environmental and security issues. Conference forums serve as a medium that allows researchers to respond quickly to these changing contexts before consolidating their findings in journal articles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther types of publications represent more limited but still substantively significant contributions. Book chapters, with 96 documents, mark thematic and conceptual deepening efforts within a broader framework, often comparative or interdisciplinary. The presence of books overall, although only 35 documents, reflects the contribution of monographic works, which generally focus on long-term synthesis and in-depth analysis of Indonesian border issues.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe 28 review articles demonstrate that systematic efforts to synthesize and evaluate the literature are still relatively limited. This situation indicates future research opportunities to strengthen conceptual studies and provide more comprehensive theoretical mapping in Indonesian border studies. Meanwhile, conference reviews and editorials, numbering 13 and 7 documents, respectively, play a minor role and generally serve as reflections, policy commentaries, or thematic introductions, rather than as primary means of empirical knowledge production. Overall, this pattern of documents by type indicates that Mapping Indonesia's Border Studies exhibits a strong publication orientation toward journal articles and conference proceedings as two key pillars of knowledge dissemination. The dominance of journal articles affirms the academic legitimacy and methodological depth of this field, while the high proportion of conference papers reflects the adaptive, contextual nature of border studies, which is responsive to regional policy and geopolitical dynamics. This combination indicates that Indonesian border studies is developing in a balance between rapid exploration and mature scholarly consolidation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis of Documents by Subject Area in Indonesian Border Studies\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe distribution of documents by subject area indicates that Indonesian border studies in the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period are highly multidisciplinary, although they still display the dominance of certain disciplines. The Social Sciences field is the most dominant, with 581 documents (26.2%), confirming that Indonesian border studies are primarily understood as a social, political, and institutional phenomenon. This dominance reflects a strong focus on issues such as state sovereignty, border security, international relations, regional governance, the social dynamics of border communities, and public policy and development in border areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Science ranked second with 287 documents (12.9%), demonstrating that the environmental dimension is a crucial component of Indonesian border studies. The high contribution of this field is closely related to Indonesia's archipelagic nature, where borders often intersect with issues of natural resource management, the sustainability of coastal and marine ecosystems, climate change, and environmental degradation in land and maritime border areas. This finding indicates that Indonesian border studies are developing strongly within the framework of sustainability and environmental governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificant contributions also came from Earth and Planetary Sciences (169 documents; 7.6%), reflecting attention to the physical and spatial aspects of border areas, such as geomorphology, oceanography, and coastal dynamics. Arts and Humanities (160 documents; 7.2%) complemented this landscape with historical, cultural, and identity approaches, emphasizing that Indonesia's borders are understood not only as geopolitical entities but also as historical and symbolic spaces that shape the social and cultural identities of its people.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Agricultural and Biological Sciences field (152 documents; 6.9%) demonstrates the relevance of food security, biological resource management, and agricultural practices in border regions, particularly in remote and vulnerable areas. Meanwhile, Business, Management and Accounting (128 documents; 5.8%) and Economics, Econometrics and Finance (118 documents; 5.3%) reflect increasing attention to the economic dimensions of borders, including cross-border trade, connectivity, maritime economics, and regional development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eContributions from Engineering (113 documents; 5.1%) and Computer Science (86 documents; 3.9%) demonstrate the involvement of technical and technological approaches, such as spatial mapping, geographic information systems (GIS), border monitoring, and the use of digital technology in border management and surveillance. The presence of the Energy field (69 documents) is also relevant to the exploration and management of energy resources in border regions and the high seas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHealth fields such as Medicine (74 documents), Public Health-related fields (Nursing, Health Professions), and pure science fields such as Physics, Chemistry, and Biochemistry appear in smaller proportions. While their contributions are limited, the presence of these fields demonstrates the expansion of border studies into cross-border health, biosecurity, and environmental impacts on the health of border communities. The Multidisciplinary category (20 documents) highlights the existence of integrative cross-disciplinary efforts, although the number remains relatively small compared to the total number of publications.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis pattern of documents by subject area demonstrates that Mapping Indonesia's Border Studies reveals the character of Indonesian border studies as a field firmly rooted in social and environmental sciences, but increasingly evolving toward an interdisciplinary approach involving natural sciences, technology, economics, and the humanities. The dominance of Social Sciences reflects the strategic importance of borders in the context of state and society, while the significant contributions of Environmental Science and Earth Sciences emphasize the importance of ecological and spatial dimensions in understanding the complexity of Indonesia's borders as an archipelagic nation. These findings also open up space for strengthening interdisciplinary research in the future, particularly on the intersection of policy, technology, and sustainability in border areas.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eNetwork Visualization of Keyword Co-occurrence: All Keywords\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe keyword network visualization shows the multidimensional and interconnected thematic structure of Indonesian border studies, with Indonesia serving as the largest central node. This central position confirms that all research discourses in the Scopus corpus (2015\u0026ndash;2025) are strongly centered on the Indonesian national context, while other themes develop as intersecting subclusters. Based on cluster proximity, density, and color patterns, this network can be interpreted into four main thematic clusters.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource: December 31, 2025\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCluster 1: Sustainable Development and Cross-Border Economics (Red)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe red cluster is dominated by keywords such as sustainable development, economics, planning, regional planning, agriculture, biodiversity, commerce, e-commerce, and economic and social effects. The presence of cross-border keywords in this cluster indicates that development and economic issues are not positioned solely domestically, but rather linked to cross-border interactions and regional integration. The strong connection between sustainable development and planning indicates that Indonesian border studies are largely directed at planning border areas as strategic development spaces, not simply buffer zones for the country. Meanwhile, the connection with commerce and international trade demonstrates the growing academic attention to the role of border areas as cross-border economic and trade corridors, particularly within the ASEAN context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCluster 2: Regional Governance and Border Security (Green)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe green cluster focuses on the keywords border region, government, local government, security, migration, economic growth, and regional markers such as Kalimantan, Borneo, Sumatra, Sarawak, and the Sunda Isles. This cluster represents studies that emphasize the spatial and institutional dimensions of borders, with a focus on governance, non-traditional security, and the socio-economic dynamics of border areas. The close link between border regions and government indicates that research has highlighted the role of the state and local governments in managing border areas, which often face specific challenges, such as isolation, development inequality, and security vulnerabilities. The presence of migration and refugees also emphasizes that cross-border human mobility is a crucial issue in Indonesian border discourse, from both a security and humanitarian perspective.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCluster 3: Regionalism and Interstate Relations (Blue)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe blue cluster is characterized by the keywords ASEAN, international cooperation, policy, COVID-19, and countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, China, and India. This cluster reflects the study of Indonesia's borders within a regional and international framework, with an emphasis on interstate cooperation and policy responses to cross-border issues. The strong link between ASEAN and international cooperation indicates that many studies view Indonesia's borders as part of the Southeast Asian regional architecture, not as separate entities. The inclusion of COVID-19 in this cluster indicates that the pandemic is understood as a transboundary phenomenon, reinforcing the importance of regional policy coordination, particularly in managing mobility and health security.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCluster 4: Transboundary Health and the One Health Approach (Purple\u0026ndash;Yellow)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis cluster is characterized by the keywords humans, animals, malaria, epidemic, prevalence, and risk assessment. The presence of animals alongside humans and infectious diseases indicates that health studies in this corpus frequently utilize the One Health approach, which links human, animal, and environmental health within the context of border regions. The connection between malaria and epidemics confirms that infectious disease issues remain a significant focus, particularly in Indonesia's land border regions such as Papua and Kalimantan. This cluster does not stand alone but intersects with the governance and regionalism clusters, indicating that transboundary health is positioned as a non-traditional security and policy issue, rather than simply a medical one.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis network demonstrates that Indonesian border studies is developing as an interdisciplinary field integrating issues of development, governance, regionalism, and transboundary health. No clusters are completely isolated, indicating a high degree of interconnectedness between themes. Indonesia's central position, connecting all clusters, emphasizes that border research addresses national boundaries not simply as geographic lines, but as complex spaces of interaction encompassing economic, political, social, environmental, and health dimensions. Thus, this map demonstrates a shift in Indonesian border studies from a classic geopolitical approach to a more comprehensive, issue-based perspective.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe increase in the number of publications on Indonesia's borders during the 2015\u0026ndash;2025 period cannot be separated from the dynamics of regional geopolitics and the direction of national maritime policy, which have evolved significantly over the past decade. This trend reflects the close relationship between changes in state policy, the escalation of regional security issues, and the global academic community's response to Indonesia's strategic position as an archipelagic nation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe initial phase of the research period (2015\u0026ndash;2016), characterized by a relatively low number of publications, coincided with the initial transition period of Indonesia's maritime policy following the inauguration of President Joko Widodo (Connelly, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Sebastian \u0026amp; Chen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Although the Global Maritime Fulcrum concept was introduced in 2014, during the early stages of its implementation, the policy focus remained normative (Rosyidin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). It had not yet been fully institutionalized in the international research agenda. This explains why academic studies related to Indonesia's borders and maritime affairs during this period were still limited and did not show a significant surge.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEntering the 2017\u0026ndash;2018 period, the moderate increase in the number of publications coincided with the strengthening implementation of Indonesia's maritime policy, particularly in upholding sovereignty in maritime areas. Policies to curb illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, including the practice of sinking foreign vessels, have attracted widespread regional and international attention (Chapsos \u0026amp; Hamilton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Stefanus \u0026amp; Vervaele, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Dirhamsyah et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Widjaja et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This issue has not only impacted Indonesia's relations with neighboring countries but has also sparked increased academic research on maritime boundaries, maritime law, and the security of Indonesia's border waters.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe significant surge in publications in 2019\u0026ndash;2021 coincided with rising geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly regarding the South China Sea. China's unilateral nine-dash line claims, which intersect Indonesia's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in Natuna waters, have spurred numerous studies on maritime sovereignty, international law, and border diplomacy (Yang \u0026amp; Zou, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Despite a relative decline in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the resurgence of publications in 2021 demonstrates that border and maritime issues remain a strategic concern, even during a global crisis (Radil et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Oyenuga, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Chua et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe 2022\u0026ndash;2025 period marks a particularly strong phase of research acceleration, as Indonesia becomes increasingly integrated into the geopolitical dynamics of the Indo-Pacific. Strengthening regional maritime security cooperation, Indonesia's involvement in forums such as the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP), and the increasing presence of major powers in the region are fostering more complex and multidisciplinary studies on borders (Bitas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). At the same time, domestic policies such as border area development, strengthening maritime connectivity, and sustainable marine resource management have also expanded the research focus from purely security issues to social, economic, and environmental dimensions (Effendi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe peak of publications in 2024\u0026ndash;2025 reflects the maturity of Indonesian border studies as a well-established and strategic research field. In this phase, Indonesia is no longer positioned merely as an object of regional study, but as a key actor in global discourses on archipelagic states, maritime governance, and border security. The increasing number of publications also demonstrates that Indonesian border studies have become integrated into the broader discourse of global geopolitics, including issues of great power rivalry, the stability of the Indo-Pacific region, and the challenges of border management in the era of globalization.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis progressively increasing publication trend over the past decade reflects the dynamic interaction between Indonesian maritime policy, changes in the regional geopolitical landscape, and the responses of the international academic community. This analysis confirms that the development of Indonesian border studies is not a linear process, but is strongly influenced by the political, security, and strategic policy contexts that frame it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBibliometric findings in this study also indicate that Indonesian border studies are no longer limited to the classical understanding of borders as territorial lines denoting state sovereignty. Instead, the structure of the keyword network demonstrates a significant shift toward conceptualizing borders as dynamic social, economic, and political spaces, in line with contemporary border studies approaches that emphasize processes of bordering, debordering, and rebordering. Within this framework, borders are understood as arenas of interaction continually negotiated by states, local communities, and transnational actors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the initial phase (around 2019), the dominant themes of sustainable development, regional planning, and environmental management, such as planning, sustainable development, biodiversity, and remote sensing, reflected an initial shift in border studies from a geopolitical approach to understanding borders as development spaces (border as a resource). Border regions were positioned as strategic areas requiring spatial and environmental-based policy interventions, in line with literature that views bordering as a practice of spatial management, not simply territorial control.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEntering the transitional phase (2020\u0026ndash;2021), the research focus shifted to cross-border economics, governance, and regional cooperation. The emergence of themes such as economics, international trade, commerce, government, and ASEAN demonstrates a partial debordering process, where borders are understood as nodes of economic integration and Southeast Asian regionalism, as well as spaces for multi-actor interaction within the framework of border governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe dominance of sustainable development and regional planning clusters strengthens the argument that Indonesia's borders are increasingly positioned as strategic development spaces, rather than simply peripheral regions. This aligns with the border-as-resource perspective, which views borders as opportunities for economic development and regional integration (Konrad \u0026amp; Brunet-Jailly, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Andersen \u0026amp; Tinning, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The close link between sustainable development, planning, and cross-border commerce reflects the transformation of Indonesian border policy, which is oriented toward improving welfare and connectivity, particularly within the context of ASEAN and regional economic cooperation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a border governance perspective, the border governance and security cluster emphasizes the important role of the state and local governments in managing the complexities of border areas. The presence of keywords such as government, local government, security, and migration demonstrates the multi-level governance nature of Indonesian border issues, where national policies must interact with local capacities and practices. This confirms the border studies perspective that borders are not only the product of central policies but also the result of everyday bordering practices at the local level (Laine, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the interconnectedness of migration, refugees, and security within the keyword network places Indonesia's borders within the non-traditional security spectrum. Within the NTS framework, threats to state security are no longer understood solely as military aggression but also encompass human mobility, cross-border crime, and social vulnerability. These findings demonstrate that Indonesian border studies are increasingly adopting a human-centric approach, placing human safety and well-being as an integral part of national security.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe cross-border health dimension, emerging as a distinct cluster, provides an important contribution to the NTS literature. The interconnectedness of COVID-19, malaria, disease transmission, and the human-animal node demonstrates that health is understood as a transboundary security issue requiring regional coordination and a cross-sectoral approach. This pattern aligns with the One Health concept, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health, and with the NTS framework, which views pandemics and infectious diseases as serious threats to a country's social and economic stability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe presence of the regionalism and international cooperation clusters reinforces the argument that Indonesia's borders cannot be separated from the regional context of Southeast Asia. The interconnectedness between ASEAN, international cooperation, and neighboring countries reflects a process of debordering in the form of policy coordination and regional integration, as well as rebordering through tightened border controls in crisis situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic. This dynamic emphasizes that borders are contingent and responsive to changes in the global environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndonesian border studies have evolved toward an interdisciplinary and issue-oriented approach, integrating border studies and non-traditional security perspectives. Borders are no longer understood as static national boundaries, but rather as strategic spaces where interests in development, human security, health, and regional cooperation converge. These findings not only enrich theoretical understanding of Indonesia's borders but also provide important policy implications, particularly in designing adaptive, inclusive, and responsive border management strategies to non-traditional challenges.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study confirms that Indonesian border studies have undergone significant development and transformed into an increasingly interdisciplinary and issue-based field, as reflected in a bibliometric analysis of 1,247 Scopus-indexed publications from 2015\u0026ndash;2025. The Scopus data analysis reveals a consistent upward trend in the number of publications, particularly after 2019, reflecting increased academic attention to border issues in line with regional dynamics, national policies, and global crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn terms of publication characteristics, journal articles and conference proceedings emerged as the dominant document types, with the primary sources of publications coming from international conference forums and multidisciplinary journals. Author contributions and institutional affiliations are dominated by major Indonesian universities and national research institutions such as the University of Indonesia, Gadjah Mada University, and the National Research and Innovation Agency. The distribution of authors' countries indicates that Indonesia is a hub of knowledge production, although collaborations with Asia-Pacific and Western countries are also growing significantly. These findings indicate that Indonesian border studies are firmly rooted in the national context but increasingly connected within global academic networks. The network analysis identify four main thematic clusters: cross-border development and economics, border governance and management, regionalism and international cooperation, and cross-border health and non-traditional security, and demonstrate a shift in research focus from regional planning and environmental issues to cross-border health, human mobility, and pandemic risk. This shift underscores the growing integration between border studies and non-traditional security frameworks, where borders are understood as strategic spaces that converge development, policy, and human security interests. This research not only enriches conceptual understanding of Indonesia's borders but also demonstrates the methodological value of bibliometric analysis in uncovering evolving patterns, dynamics, and research agendas. These findings provide an important empirical basis for further research and the formulation of more adaptive and responsive border policies to future cross-border challenges.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe bibliometric analysis that supports the findings of this study is available on Scopus.com, but there are limitations and systematic procedures that apply only when collecting the data for this study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe bibliometric analysis that supports the findings of this study is available on Scopus.com, but there are limitations and systematic procedures that apply only when collecting the data for this study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAhmed, M., Roslina, B. T., Othman, \u0026amp; Noordin, M. F. (2023). TRENDS IN OPEN SCIENCE: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH TOPICS, CITATIONS, JOURNALS, AND PRODUCTIVE ENTITIES. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Information Systems and Digital Technologies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(2), 170\u0026ndash;193. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.31436/jisdt.v5i2.422\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.31436/jisdt.v5i2.422\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlsadi, J., Alkhatib, F., Antony, J., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Tortorella, G., \u0026amp; Cudney, E. A. (2025). A systematic literature review with bibliometric analysis of Quality 4.0. \u003cem\u003eThe TQM Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(5), 1446\u0026ndash;1470. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-02-2024-0050\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/TQM-02-2024-0050\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAndersen, D. J., \u0026amp; Tinning, S. (2025). The green transition as boundary object? On green cross-border collaboration in the Danish-German borderlands. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Planning Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;19. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2025.2578373\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09654313.2025.2578373\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBitas, B. C. (2020). ASEAN amid China\u0026rsquo;s Vision of the Belt and Road and the US Strategy for the Indo-Pacific: Building a Strategic Bridge to Two Great Power Initiatives. \u003cem\u003eChina and the World\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e03\u003c/em\u003e(01), 1950026. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1142/S2591729319500263\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1142/S2591729319500263\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChapsos, I., \u0026amp; Hamilton, S. (2019). Illegal fishing and fisheries crime as a transnational organized crime in Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eTrends in Organized Crime\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(3), 255\u0026ndash;273. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-018-9329-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12117-018-9329-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChouliaraki, L., \u0026amp; Georgiou, M. (2019). The digital border: Mobility beyond territorial and symbolic divides. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Communication\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e34\u003c/em\u003e(6), 594\u0026ndash;605. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0267323119886147\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0267323119886147\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChua, J. Y., Foo, R., Tan, K. H., \u0026amp; Yuen, K. F. (2022). Maritime resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: impacts and solutions. \u003cem\u003eContinuity \u0026amp; Resilience Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(1), 124\u0026ndash;143. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/CRR-09-2021-0031\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/CRR-09-2021-0031\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConnelly, A. L. (2015). Sovereignty and the Sea: President Joko Widodo\u0026rsquo;s Foreign Policy Challenges. \u003cem\u003eContemporary Southeast Asia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;28. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.jstor.org/stable/24916512\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.jstor.org/stable/24916512\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDirhamsyah, D., Umam, S., \u0026amp; Arifin, Z. (2022). Maritime law enforcement: Indonesia\u0026rsquo;s experience against illegal fishing. \u003cem\u003eOcean \u0026amp; Coastal Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e229\u003c/em\u003e, 106304. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106304\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106304\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEffendi, T. D. (2025). Navigating the sea: a comparative study of maritime identity and policies in Indonesia and Taiwan. \u003cem\u003eMaritime Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(2), 20. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-025-00415-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s40152-025-00415-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEjaz, H., Zeeshan, H. M., Ahmad, F., Bukhari, S. N. A., Anwar, N., Alanazi, A., Sadiq, A., Junaid, K., Atif, M., Abosalif, K. O. A., Iqbal, A., Hamza, M. A., \u0026amp; Younas, S. (2022). Bibliometric Analysis of Publications on the Omicron Variant from 2020 to 2022 in the Scopus Database Using R and VOSviewer. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(19), 12407. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912407\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/ijerph191912407\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGopal, P., \u0026amp; Alverdian, I. (2021). Maritime Security Cooperation Between India and Indonesia: Imperatives, Status and Prospects. \u003cem\u003eIndia Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e77\u003c/em\u003e(2), 269\u0026ndash;288. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/09749284211005009\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/09749284211005009\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHartanto, A., Nachrowi, N. D., Samputra, P. L., \u0026amp; Huda, N. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of Islamic banking sustainability: a study based on Scopus scientific database. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Islamic Marketing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(9), 2245\u0026ndash;2285. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-04-2023-0123\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/JIMA-04-2023-0123\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHassan, W., \u0026amp; Duarte, A. E. (2024). Bibliometric analysis: A few suggestions. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Problems in Cardiology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(8), 102640. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102640\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102640\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIqbal, W., Qadir, J., Tyson, G., Mian, A. N., Hassan, S., \u0026amp; Crowcroft, J. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of publications in computer networking research. \u003cem\u003eScientometrics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e119\u003c/em\u003e(2), 1121\u0026ndash;1155. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03086-z\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11192-019-03086-z\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKipper, L. M., Furstenau, L. B., Hoppe, D., Frozza, R., \u0026amp; Iepsen, S. (2020). Scopus scientific mapping production in industry 4.0 (2011\u0026ndash;2018): a bibliometric analysis. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Production Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e58\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1605\u0026ndash;1627. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1671625\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00207543.2019.1671625\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKonrad, V., \u0026amp; Brunet-Jailly, E. (2019). Approaching borders, creating borderland spaces, and exploring the evolving borders between Canada and the United States. \u003cem\u003eCanadian Geographies / G\u0026eacute;ographies Canadiennes\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e63\u003c/em\u003e(1), 4\u0026ndash;10. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12515\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/cag.12515\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLaine, J. P. (2016). The Multiscalar Production of Borders. \u003cem\u003eGeopolitics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(3), 465\u0026ndash;482. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2016.1195132\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14650045.2016.1195132\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLyu, P., Liu, X., \u0026amp; Yao, T. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of literature on bibliometrics in recent half-century. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Information Science\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/01655515231191233\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/01655515231191233\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMogiani, M. (2023). Studying Borders from the Border: Reflections on the Concept of Borders as Meeting Points. \u003cem\u003eGeopolitics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(3), 1323\u0026ndash;1341. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2026329\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14650045.2022.2026329\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMurray, P. (2020). Managing Security: Reimagining ASEAN\u0026rsquo;s Regional Role. \u003cem\u003eAsian Studies Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(1), 44\u0026ndash;60. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2019.1680605\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10357823.2019.1680605\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNazim, M., Ur Rehman, S., Iqbal, A., \u0026amp; Ahmad, S. (2025). Patterns of Scholarly Communication in Global Information Retrieval Research: A Bibliometric Analysis (1954\u0026ndash;2021). \u003cem\u003eScience \u0026amp; Technology Libraries\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(3), 266\u0026ndash;281. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2024.2429064\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/0194262X.2024.2429064\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOhoiwutun, Y. (2023). Development of the Indonesia-Papua New Guinea Interstate Border. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(8), 2579\u0026ndash;2585. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.180830\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.18280/ijsdp.180830\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOyenuga, A. (2021). Perspectives on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global and African maritime transport sectors, and the potential implications for Africa\u0026rsquo;s maritime governance. \u003cem\u003eWMU Journal of Maritime Affairs\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(2), 215\u0026ndash;245. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-021-00233-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s13437-021-00233-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePassas, I. (2024). Bibliometric Analysis: The Main Steps. \u003cem\u003eEncyclopedia\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e4\u003c/em\u003e(2), 1014\u0026ndash;1025. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia4020065\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/encyclopedia4020065\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePirri, S., Lorenzoni, V., \u0026amp; Turchetti, G. (2020). : an explorative methodological study to enhance consistency in literature. \u003cem\u003eBMC Health Services Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(1), 688. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05544-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12913-020-05544-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Scoping review and bibliometric analysis of Big Data applications for Medication adherence.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePratomo, E., \u0026amp; Kwik, J. (2020). Good agreements make good neighbours: Settlements on maritime boundary disputes in South East Asia. \u003cem\u003eMarine Policy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e117\u003c/em\u003e, 103943. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103943\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103943\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRadil, S. M., Pinos, C., J., \u0026amp; Ptak, T. (2021). Borders resurgent: towards a post-Covid-19 global border regime? \u003cem\u003eSpace and Polity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(1), 132\u0026ndash;140. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13562576.2020.1773254\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13562576.2020.1773254\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRaharja, D. P., \u0026amp; Karim, M. F. (2024). Re-territorialization and the governance of ocean frontiers in Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eTerritory Politics Governance\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e(9), 1353\u0026ndash;1371. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2118824\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/21622671.2022.2118824\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRochwulaningsih, Y., Sulistiyono, S. T., Masruroh, N. N., \u0026amp; Maulany, N. N. (2019). Marine policy basis of Indonesia as a maritime state: The importance of integrated economy. \u003cem\u003eMarine Policy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e108\u003c/em\u003e, 103602. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103602\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103602\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRosyidin, M. (2021). The cult of glory: national myth and the idea of Global Maritime Fulcrum in Indonesia\u0026rsquo;s foreign policy, 2014\u0026ndash;2019. \u003cem\u003eSouth East Asia Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(3), 297\u0026ndash;314. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/0967828X.2021.1954484\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/0967828X.2021.1954484\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSassen, S. (2015). Bordering Capabilities versus Borders: Implications for National Borders. In \u003cem\u003eBorderities and the Politics of Contemporary Mobile Borders\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 23\u0026ndash;52). Palgrave Macmillan UK. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1057/9781137468857_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1057/9781137468857_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchofield, C. (2015). Indonesia\u0026rsquo;s delimited maritime boundaries. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Indian Ocean Region\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(1), 136\u0026ndash;140. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2015.1018662\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/19480881.2015.1018662\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSebastian, L. C., \u0026amp; Chen, J. (2021). Indonesia\u0026rsquo;s Foreign and Maritime Policies Under Joko Widodo: Domestic and External Determinants. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Asian Security and International Affairs\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(3), 287\u0026ndash;303. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/23477970211039639\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/23477970211039639\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShah, N. U., Ali, N., Hamid, A., \u0026amp; Khan, M. A. (2024). Research visualization trends in research data management (RDM): a bibliometric analysis. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Knowledge, Memory and Communication\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-09-2023-0349\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1108/GKMC-09-2023-0349\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSodik, D. M. (2018). The Outermost Small Islands of the Indonesian Archipelago: A Legal Analysis. \u003cem\u003eThe International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(4), 706\u0026ndash;767. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1163/15718085-13310001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1163/15718085-13310001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSong, A. M. (2023). Civilian at Sea: Understanding Fisheries\u0026rsquo; Entanglement with Maritime Border Security. \u003cem\u003eGeopolitics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e28\u003c/em\u003e(3), 1161\u0026ndash;1185. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2021.1997995\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/14650045.2021.1997995\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStefanus, A. A., \u0026amp; Vervaele, J. A. E. (2021). Fishy business: regulatory and enforcement challenges of transnational organised IUU fishing crimes. \u003cem\u003eTrends in Organized Crime\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(4), 581\u0026ndash;604. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-021-09425-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s12117-021-09425-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSuryadi, S., Sulistyowati, S., Maharani, D. N., \u0026amp; Maharaja, G. B. (2024). Maritime Boundary Arrangements with Other Countries and The Economic Impact on Indonesian Fishermen. \u003cem\u003eBIO Web of Conferences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e134\u003c/em\u003e, 07001. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/202413407001\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1051/bioconf/202413407001\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWen, Q. J., Ren, Z. J., Lu, H., \u0026amp; Wu, J. F. (2021). The progress and trend of BIM research: A bibliometrics-based visualization analysis. \u003cem\u003eAutomation in Construction\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e124\u003c/em\u003e, 103558. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103558\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103558\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWidjaja, S., Long, T., Wirajuda, H., As, H., Van, Bergh, P. E., Brett, A., Copeland, D., Fernandez, M., Gusman, A., Juwana, S., Ruchimat, T., Trent, S., \u0026amp; Wilcox, C. (2023). Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing and Associated Drivers. In \u003cem\u003eThe Blue Compendium\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 553\u0026ndash;591). Springer International Publishing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16277-0_15\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-031-16277-0_15\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYan, L., \u0026amp; Zhiping, W. (2023). Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS. \u003cem\u003eSage Open\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231158562\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/21582440231158562\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang, Y., \u0026amp; Zou, Y. (2024). Development and national security: Indonesia\u0026rsquo;s Natuna Island and the South China Sea issue. \u003cem\u003eThird World Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(3), 493\u0026ndash;512. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2023.2270507\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/01436597.2023.2270507\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZitt, M., Lelu, A., Cadot, M., \u0026amp; Cabanac, G. (2019). \u003cem\u003eBibliometric Delineation of Scientific Fields\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 25\u0026ndash;68). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Border Studies, Bibliometric Analysis, Scopus, Indonesia","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9533347/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9533347/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study aims to map the intellectual structure and thematic dynamics of Indonesian border studies through a bibliometric analysis of 1,247 Scopus-indexed publications from 2015\u0026ndash;2025. Data were analyzed using a systematic workflow that included keyword cleaning and normalization with OpenRefine, and network visualization using VOSviewer. The descriptive analysis of Scopus reveals a significantly increasing publication trend after 2019, with journal articles and conference proceedings dominating as the primary document types. Publication sources are dominated by international conference proceedings, while the largest institutional contributions come from universities and leading research institutions in Indonesia, reflecting the strong national orientation of this study. Indonesia is the main contributor, although international collaboration with Asia-Pacific and Western countries is also quite prominent. Keyword co-occurrence analysis identified four main thematic clusters: sustainable development and cross-border economics, border governance and management, regionalism and international cooperation, and cross-border health and non-traditional security. Overlay visualizations reveal a shift in research focus from regional planning and environmental issues to transboundary health, human mobility, and pandemic risk, particularly in the post-COVID-19 era. This research is limited to a single database and publication metadata; therefore, future studies are recommended to combine multiple databases and qualitative and comparative approaches to deepen the analysis of Indonesian border studies.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Mapping Indonesia’s Border Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scopus-Indexed Publications (2015–2025)","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-07 13:46:00","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9533347/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"356e9c6c-8b41-4b69-abe9-e784406c5aa0","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 7th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-07T13:46:01+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-07 13:46:00","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9533347","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9533347","identity":"rs-9533347","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}