Author
Abstract
Purpose - This paper aims to compare and contrast the concept, mechanism and functions of the two socio-economic institutions, i.e.waqf(Islamic trust) and English trust. It endeavours to juxtapose the salient features ofwaqfand trust with an objective to examine the nature of similarities and dissimilarities between the two institutions. Design/methodology/approach - This paper applies the socio-legal research methodology and uses qualitative paradigm to analyse the literature. The paper is based on a desk-based research. Findings - This paper finds that there is nothing intrinsically rigid in the jurisprudential paradigm ofwaqfwhich might impinge upon either the efficiency or effectiveness of thewaqfvis-à-vis trust. The main findings of the paper are encapsulated in underlining certainShariahprinciples which essentially holdwaqffrom transforming into a trust-like secular institution. Research limitations/implications - This paper compares the jurisprudential underpinnings and conceptual frameworks ofwaqfand trust, and it does not evaluate their efficiency or effectiveness in empirical terms. The underlying socio-economic efficiency and impacts of the two institutions can be examined empirically in separate comparative case studies. Practical implications - This paper examines and critically analyses the different socio-economic implications thatwaqfand trust entail for the societies in which they function. This analysis is important for the policy recommendations towards protecting the religious identity ofwaqfwhile re-structuring its models. Originality/value - The main contribution of the paper is encapsulated in the critical analysis of how the paradigms of the two institutions, i.e.waqfand trust, which appear similar in form but differ in the substance, are shaped and governed.
Suggested Citation
Mohammad Abdullah, 2019.
"Waqfand trust: the nature, structures and socio-economic impacts,"
Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(4), pages 512-527, July.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jiabrp:jiabr-10-2016-0124
DOI: 10.1108/JIABR-10-2016-0124
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- P5 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Comparative Economic Systems
- H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
- K1 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jiabrp:jiabr-10-2016-0124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.