MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2961428276 · doi:10.5430/rwe.v10n2p70

The Revival of Mudharabah Contract: A Proposed Framework

2019· article· en· W2961428276 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Siti Nurzahira Che Tahrim, Mohd Zulkifli Muhammad, Mohd Syakir Mohd Rosdi, Mohd Nor Hakimin Yusoff, Azizah Musa, Noormariana Mohd Din

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in World Economy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessProfit sharingOrder (exchange)Venture capitalAgency (philosophy)AccountingFinanceEconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mudharabah is a profit-sharing partnership agreement of a business venture to carry out economic activities. Despite its potential socioeconomic benefits to the parties involved and to the society, the application of mudharabah is limited to engineered Islamic finance products which transform the conventional financial products into Shari’ah-compliant ones. We argue that, in order to realise the mudharabah true potentials, among others, the mudharabah contract needs to be revived. The purpose of this study is to propose a framework in reviving the mudharabah contract between the sahibul mal (capital provider/investor) and the mudharib (entrepreneur). The research methods used in this study are library research and content analysis. As a result, agency theory is recognised to be very relevant to the mudharabah contract. To revive the mudharabah contract, tahaluf concept (Islamic treaty with compliance with Shari’ah) is identified as the most suitable concept to be adopted. This proposed framework serves as guidance in formulating the data collection strategy from different perspectives i.e. from sahibul mal, mudharib, Shari’ah advisors and academicians.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in World EconomySame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207