Publication Ethics Statement

  • Regional Sustainability (electronic ISSN 2666-660X) and its Publisher, Elsevier, are dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the Editorial Board. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and the Editorial Board of this journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting articles to the Regional Sustainability affirm that manuscript contents are original.

     

    The Editors and Editor-in-Chief evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

     

    Editors, authors, and reviewers will also adhere to the Regional Sustainability submission guideline policies:

     

    Duties of Editors

    1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report, the Editors have complete responsibility and authority to accept, reject or request modifications to the manuscript.

    2. Review of Manuscripts: Each Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the Editors and Editor-in-Chief for originality, making use of appropriate software to do so. Those manuscripts that meet the criteria for peer review are passed on to one of the Associate Editors to invite at least 2 expert reviewers to blind peer review the manuscripts.

    3. Fair Review: The Editors must ensure that each manuscript submitted to the Regional Sustainability is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.

    4. Confidentiality: The Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

    5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The Editors of Regional Sustainability shall not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without the written consent of the author.

    6. Errata Information: The Editors must publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.

    7. Ethical Guidelines: The Editors shall ensure that all research materials they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

    8. Proof of Misconduct: The Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, but they should have proof of misconduct.

    9. Accountability: Editors should attend four annual meetings through video conferences or virtual communications and make suggestion on journal policy and scope, including suggest ideas, new initiatives and programs if necessary. They may review submitted manuscripts, identify topics for special issues or attract new authors and submissions if necessary.

     

    Duties of Authors

    1. Publication guidelines: Authors must follow the submission guidelines of the journal (See http://regsus.xjegi.com/EN/column/column23.shtml).

    2. Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Transparency about the contributions of authors is encouraged, for example in the form of a CRediT author statement.

    3. Originality and plagiarism:The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

    4. Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.

    5. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.

    6. Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

    7. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest.

    8. Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal Editors or publisher and cooperate with the Editors to retract or correct the paper.

    9. Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

    10. Undisputed map: All authors must provide undisputed maps.

     

    Duties of Reviewers

    1. Confidentiality: Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.

    2. Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the authors.

    3. Supporting Argument: Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

    4. Plagiarism, Fraud and Other Ethical Concerns: Reviewers should let the Editors know if you find that a manuscript is a substantial copy of another work, citing the previous work in as much detail as possible.

    5. Relevant Work: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

    6. Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

    7. Promptness: In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of the manuscript within stipulated time, then this information must be communicated to the Editors, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

    8. Accountability: Review members should attend two annual meetings through video conferences or virtual communications and suggest ideas, new initiatives, and programs for inclusion in the journal if necessary. They review submitted manuscripts, identify topics for special issues or attract new authors and submissions if necessary.

     

    Access to journal content

    The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.


  • 2020-03-17 Visited: 1439