Email this article 
Mapping The Islam Nusantara Discourse: Bibliometric analysis of conceptual structure and key debates
Abstract
This study was motivated by the rapid development of the discourse on Islam Nusantara in academic literature, contrasted with limited efforts to systematically map its intellectual structure and conceptual debate patterns. The purpose of this study is to map the intellectual structure of Islam Nusantara studies, identify its theoretical foundations, and reveal the primary directions of conceptual debates that have developed in scientific literature. Using a bibliometric analysis method, this study examines 1,653 articles indexed by Scopus between 2017 and 2024, analyzed via the Bibliometrix tool through Biblioshiny. The results show that publications on Islam Nusantara have experienced significant annual growth. The thematic map reveals that the main discourse of Islam Nusantara centers on the relationship between Islam, human values, and religion as a social practice, while themes of Islamism, Islamic law, and nationality occupy an emerging or declining position. Furthermore, keyword network analysis demonstrates a strong connection between the religious, social, and political dimensions within the study of Islam Nusantara. This study concludes that Islam Nusantara in contemporary scientific literature is constructed primarily as a humanistic, moderate, and contextual discourse on Islam, rather than solely as an ideological-political project, and remains open to the development of more specific micro and thematic studies. Future research should explore digital Islam Nusantara, gender, youth, and pesantren globalization. Applying longitudinal bibliometrics and regional comparisons will enhance the field's theoretical depth, empirical richness, and global relevance.
Penelitian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh pesatnya perkembangan wacana Islam Nusantara dalam literatur akademik, yang kontras dengan masih terbatasnya upaya untuk memetakan struktur intelektual dan pola perdebatan konseptualnya secara sistematis. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk memetakan struktur intelektual studi Islam Nusantara, mengidentifikasi landasan teoretisnya, serta mengungkap arah utama perdebatan konseptual yang berkembang dalam literatur ilmiah. Dengan menggunakan metode analisis bibliometrik, penelitian ini memeriksa 1.653 artikel terindeks Scopus antara tahun 2017 dan 2024, yang dianalisis menggunakan alat Bibliometrix melalui Biblioshiny. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa publikasi tentang Islam Nusantara mengalami pertumbuhan tahunan yang signifikan. Peta tematik mengungkapkan bahwa wacana utama Islam Nusantara berpusat pada hubungan antara Islam, nilai-nilai kemanusiaan, dan agama sebagai praktik sosial, sementara tema Islamisme, hukum Islam, dan kebangsaan berada pada posisi yang baru muncul (emerging) atau menurun (declining). Lebih lanjut, analisis jaringan kata kunci menunjukkan hubungan yang kuat antara dimensi keagamaan, sosial, dan politik dalam studi Islam Nusantara. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa Islam Nusantara dalam literatur ilmiah kontemporer dikonstruksikan secara utama sebagai wacana Islam yang humanis, moderat, dan kontekstual, bukan semata-mata sebagai proyek ideologis-politik, serta tetap terbuka bagi pengembangan studi mikro dan tematik yang lebih spesifik. Penelitian masa depan harus mengeksplorasi Islam Nusantara digital, gender, pemuda, dan globalisasi pesantren. Penerapan bibliometrik longitudinal dan perbandingan regional akan meningkatkan kedalaman teoretis, kekayaan empiris, dan relevansi global dari bidang ini.
Keywords
References
Akhiyat, A. (2017). Islam Nusantara antara Ortodoksi dan Heterodoksi. Al-Tahrir: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam, 17(1), 247. https://doi.org/10.21154/altahrir.v17i1.881
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2017.08.007
Assyaukanie, L. (2009). Islam and The Secular State in Indonesia. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Azra, A. (2013). Jaringan Ulama Timur Tengah Dan Kepulauan Nusantara Abad XVII & XVIII. In Jakarta: Prenada Media (Perenial). Kencana.
Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1162/QSS_A_00019
Bornmann, L., & Haunschild, R. (2017). Measuring field-normalized impact of papers on specific societal groups: An altmetrics study based on Mendeley Data. Research Evaluation, 26(3), 230–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvx005
Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2015). Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(11), 2215–2222. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.23329
Bruinessen, M. (2013). Kitab kuning; Books in Arabic script used in the Pesantren milieu; Comments on a new collection in the KITLV Library. Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- En Volkenkunde / Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia, 146(2–3), 226–269. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134379-90003218
Burhani, A. N. (2017). Geertz’s Trichotomy of Abangan, Santri, and Priyayi: Controversy and Continuity. Journal of Indonesian Islam, 11(2), 329. https://doi.org/10.15642/JIIS.2017.11.2.329-350
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003
Caron, E., & van Eck, N. J. (2014). Large Scale Author Name Disambiguation Using Rule-based Scoring and Clustering. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, 79–86.
Chen, C. (2017). Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/JDIS-2017-0006
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2010.10.002
Cobo, M. J., Lõpez-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1609–1630. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.22688
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis: An Overview and Guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2021.04.070
Dwijayanto, A., & Choirin, M. (2025). Tracing the Intellectual Legacy of Da’wah and Islamization in Nusantara: A Bibliometric and Historical Study. Al-Tahrir: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam, 25(2), 223–240. https://doi.org/10.21154/altahrir.v25i2.11011
Fadhly, F. (2018). Tradisi Intelektual Islam di Indonesia Abad VII–XXI M. Tamaddun: Jurnal Kebudayaan Dan Sastra Islam, 18(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.19109/tamaddun.v18i1.2315
Fauzia, A. (2017). Islamic Philanthropy in Indonesia: Modernization, Islamization, and Social Justice. ASEAS-Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 10(2), 223–236. https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-2017.2-6
Feener, R. M., Kloos, D., & Samuels, A. (2016). Islam and the Limits of the State. BRILL. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004304864
Feillard, A., & Madinier, R. (2011). The End of Innocence? Indonesian Islam and the Temptation of Radicalism. Flipside Digital Content Company Inc.
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016). Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 933–953. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2016.07.003
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.178.4060.471
Hafidz, M. (2021). The Role of Pesantren in Guarding the Islamic Moderation. INFERENSI: Jurnal Penelitian Sosial Keagamaan, 15(1), 117–140. https://doi.org/10.18326/infsl3.v15i1.117-140
Hilmy, M. (2013). The Politics of Retaliation: The Backlash of Radical Islamists to the Deradicalization Project in Indonesia. Al-Jami’ah: Journal of Islamic Studies, 51(1), 129. https://doi.org/10.14421/ajis.2013.511.129-158
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.0507655102
Imaduddin, M. F. (2021). Peta Perkembangan Wacana Intelektual Islam Nusantara Abad VII-XXI: Sebuah Analisis Historis. Tamaddun: Jurnal Kebudayaan Dan Sastra Islam, 21(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.19109/tamaddun.v21i1.8040
Isaacson, J. F., & Rubenstein, C. L. (2002). Islam in Asia: Changing Political Realities. Transaction Publishers. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=krMEfM_YO3UC
Kuhn, T. S. (2002). The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.20967
MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (2018). The mismeasure of science: Citation analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(3), 474–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.23970
Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Thelwall, M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2018.09.002
Menchik, J. (2016). Islam and Democracy in Indonesia. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316344446
Mietzner, M., & Muhtadi, B. (2018). Explaining the 2016 Islamist Mobilisation in Indonesia: Religious Intolerance, Militant Groups and the Politics of Accommodation. Asian Studies Review, 42(3), 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2018.1473335
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-015-1765-5
Moral-Muñoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Santisteban-Espejo, A., & Cobo, M. J. (2020). Software Tools for Conducting Bibliometric Analysis in Science: An Up-to-date Review. Profesional de La Informacion, 29(1). https://doi.org/10.3145/EPI.2020.ENE.03
Nicolaisen, J. (2007). Citation analysis. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, 609–641. https://doi.org/10.1002/ARIS.2007.1440410120
Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World. Publications, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/PUBLICATIONS9010012
Rinaldo, R. (2013). Mobilizing Piety. Mobilizing Piety. https://doi.org/10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199948109.001.0001
Robinson, K. M. (2009). Gender, Islam, and Democracy in Indonesia. Routledge. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=_sHwDYUyJpUC
Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the Scientific Literature: A New Measure of the Relationship between Two Documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.4630240406
Tahamtan, I., & Bornmann, L. (2019). What do citation counts measure? An updated review of studies on citations in scientific documents published between 2006 and 2018. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1635–1684. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-019-03243-4
van Bruinessen, M. (2018). Contemporary Developments in Indonesian Islam. Contemporary Developments in Indonesian Islam. https://doi.org/10.1355/9789814414579
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software Survey: VOSviewer, A Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-009-0146-3
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. Measuring Scholarly Impact, 285–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13
Venable, G. T., Shepherd, B. A., Loftis, C. M., McClatchy, S. G., Roberts, M. L., Fillinger, M. E., Tansey, J. B., & Klimo, P. (2016). Bradford’s law: Identification of the core journals for neurosurgery and its subspecialties. Journal of Neurosurgery, 124(2), 569–579. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.3.JNS15149
Wang, J. (2013). Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics, 94(3), 851–872. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-012-0775-9
Woodward, M., Umar, M. S., Rohmaniyah, I., & Yahya, M. (2013). Salafi Violence and Sufi Tolerance? Rethinking Conventional Wisdom. Perspectives on Terrorism, 7(6), 58–78.
Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z., & Duan, Z. (2016). Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 967–972. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.23437
Zhu, J., & Liu, W. (2020). A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123(1), 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-020-03387-8
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18860/eh.v28i1.38094
Editorial Office: Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang This work is licensed under a CC-BY-NC-SA. | Phone: +6282333435641 |
