Religious and Socioeconomic Implications of Islamic Insurance: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, our purpose is to evaluate religious and socioeconomic implication of Islamic insurance to the society. Islamic insurance i.e. takaful is a form of protection and wealth preservation method based on the principles of mutual cooperation, encompassing the elements of Shari’ah compliancy such as prohibitions of riba (interest/usury), gharar (uncertainty) and maysir (gambling), while upholding the virtue of mudharabah (profit sharing), wakalah (trusted agency), tabarru’ (donation/charity) and ta’awun (cooperation). Recently, there are numerous literatures on religious and socioeconomic realms with regards to takaful industry due to the financial product being widely accepted in the modern day. In addition, contemporary scholars made various efforts to study the legality and feasibility of takaful as an alternative to the conventional insurance. Within the legality and feasibility of takaful, it is essential to recognize its implications to the society. As such, this paper reviews the implications of takaful products within the context of religious duty and spiritual fulfilment, at the same time towards the socioeconomic attainment. The finding of this paper embodies that takaful industry indeed substantially influence the religious and socioeconomic behavior, hence influence the society in making decision with regards to protection of their life, family as well as preservation of their wealth. Besides, this paper outlines the benefits and pitfalls of takaful which open the door for improvement. Nonetheless, this paper limits itself to the implications in general context, hence it provides space for a more focused setting in the near future. On the other hand, as this paper is evaluative in nature, review process is done via analysis of the current literature from academic papers, journals and books obtained via library and online research databases.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".