The peer-review process often faces significant hurdles, including reviewer shortages and prolonged publication timelines, prompting this study to evaluate "Active Information Retrieval Strategies" designed to systematically identify and recruit expert reviewers from national (TCI) and international (Scopus) databases. A quantitative analysis was conducted on the editorial data of 141 manuscripts and 509 reviewers from the Asia Social Issues journal, focusing on Subject Area alignment and recent publication history to identify a pool of 1,198 potential experts. Statistical analysis, including Mean and Independent Samples t-test, revealed an overall average review duration of 12.51 days, with Scopus reviewers averaging 13.13 days and TCI reviewers averaging 11.21 days. The results indicated no statistically significant difference in review speed between international and national databases (t = 1.694, p = 0.091), proving that international experts are as responsive as national ones when identified through precise retrieval strategies. These strategies provide a validated framework for editors to move beyond passive selection, effectively reducing publication delays and the editorial burden by accessing a broader, global expert pool. Ultimately, systematic information retrieval serves as a vital strategic tool for modern journal management, effectively balancing academic rigor with operational speed to provide a sustainable solution to the global reviewer shortage.