Purpose This study aims to provide a bibliometric analysis of the current publication trends and key themes related to cash waqf from 1979 to 2024 and identify potential future research directions. Design/methodology/approach This study uses bibliometric analysis as a quantitative approach. Data was retrieved based on keywords in the TITLE-ABS-KEY field of articles from the Scopus database. A total of 237 documents were screened and selected for review and analysis. The R-biblioshiny, VOSviewer and Harzing’s Publish or Perish (PoP) applications were utilised for data visualisation, citation analysis and network analysis. Importantly, we integrated content analysis to address the research questions, adding depth to our approach. Findings The results indicate a significant growth rate in the literature on cash waqf. Malaysia and Indonesia are the countries that contribute the most and lead in cash waqf research. The journals with the highest contributions to publications are the ISRA International Journal of Islamic Finance, the Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research and the International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management. In addition, based on the study, five main themes were identified, which consist of 1) cash waqf and Islamic finance, 2) cash waqf for social welfare, 3) cash waqf for micro-enterprise financing, 4) Muslim behaviour towards cash waqf and 5) cash waqf as a solution for poverty alleviation. Research limitations/implications This study provides a comprehensive and up-to-date review of research trends in cash waqf and potential future research themes, which can be valuable for researchers, professionals and policymakers. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study represents the earliest analysis to explore and evaluate the progress and direction of cash waqf literature, utilising literature sourced from the Scopus database since 1979.
Syaifullah et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: