Quantity or Quality? A Systematic Review of Research Policies, Funding, and Collaboration in Indonesia

Indonesia has implemented significant research policy reforms, including university autonomy (2014) and publication incentives (2017), to boost scientific productivity. However, the impact of these policies on publication quality remains unclear. This systematic review synthesises evidence on how research policies, funding, collaboration, and institutional factors affect scientific publication quality in Indonesia. A systematic literature search was conducted in Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Springer for open-access, peer-reviewed original articles published in English between 2018 and 2026. Eligibility followed the Population, Exposure, Outcome (PEO) framework. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, and quality appraisal using JBI checklists. Thematic synthesis was used to integrate findings. Seven studies (three qualitative, one cross-sectional, three bibliometric) met the inclusion criteria. Incentive policies dramatically increased publication quantity (autonomous HEIs: from 935 to 12,992 papers per year; non-autonomous: from 483 to 18,171), but quality remained low: 18.05% of papers were in unclassified journals, and most were in Q3/Q4. International collaboration was the strongest predictor of Q1 publication and higher citations, yet it remained underutilised (17.5–37.9% of papers). Research funding significantly improved journal quartile (p = 0.000), but only 18.7–61% of papers declared funding. Bureaucratic and ethical approval processes caused delays of 2–6 months and wasted grant resources. High-quality e-services explained 57% of variance in individual publication performance, and structured research training achieved 92% participant satisfaction and 96% recommendation rates. New researchers (post-2014 cohort) produced more papers but of lower quality than previous cohorts. Indonesia’s research policies have successfully boosted publication volume, but quality lags behind. The evidence reveals a systematic quantity-quality trade-off, particularly among new researchers and non-autonomous institutions. International collaboration is the most effective yet underused quality driver. To achieve a balanced research ecosystem, policymakers should differentiate incentives by journal quartile, foster equitable international partnerships, streamline ethical procedures, and invest in sustainable capacity-building interventions.