Integrating Islamic Financing and Halal Industry: A Survey on Current Practices of the Selected Malaysian Authority Bodies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Halal industry is a vast industry that consists of several sectors; ranging from food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products, services (i.e. transportation and logistics) and, banking and finance. All these various sectors in the actual state of practices are currently positioned separately. This paper expands the proposal of integrating halal industries with the Islamic funds. Principally, these sectors should not be deemed separately as they are under the same umbrella of Shariah. The collaboration of the industry can lead to harmonious system that can support each other. In this case, the Islamic financial system through Islamic banking and capital market instruments will channel their long term funding to other Halal industry. As the start, it is important to look at the current practices of authority bodies in the sectors of Halal industry (except for Islamic banking and finance) and Islamic capital market. This outlook is prioritized given that the authority bodies will influence the behavior of the players. This paper focuses on Halal industry in Malaysia. Specifically, the main selected documents of the related authority bodies in this industry were assessed to grasp their approaches regarding Shariah compliance approval or Halal recognition. This will contribute to an initiative that can integrate this industry from the policy makers and supervisors’ perspective. Finding shows that there are different angles of Halal aspects focused by these authority bodies, and there is a room for adjustment towards integration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".