Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics for the Journal of Environmental Agriculture and Agroecosystem Management (JEAAM)

 

The Journal of Environmental Agriculture and Agroecosystem Management (JEAAM) is committed to ensuring ethical standards in all aspects of its publication process. The journal follows the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to uphold integrity, transparency, and fairness in research publishing.

 

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

  1. Originality and Plagiarism:

Authors must ensure that their submitted work is original and not previously published in any form. Proper citation and acknowledgment must be provided for the work of others.

The journal employs plagiarism detection software to identify potential cases of plagiarism.

  1. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication:

Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Submitting the same research to multiple journals constitutes unethical publishing behavior.

Redundant publication, where authors submit previously published data or findings without proper disclosure, is prohibited.

  1. Data Access and Retention:

Authors must provide raw data related to their research upon request during the peer review process and after publication.

Data must be retained for a reasonable period after publication for verification purposes.

  1. Authorship Criteria:

All listed authors should have made significant contributions to the research (e.g., conception, design, execution, or interpretation of results).

The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript before submission.

Any changes to the list of authors (addition, deletion, or rearrangement) must be agreed upon by all authors and justified to the editorial team.

  1. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:

Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their research.

All sources of financial support for the research must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript.

  1. Reporting Standards:

Authors must accurately describe the methodology used in their research, ensuring the work can be replicated by other researchers.

Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements or data constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

  1. Acknowledgment of Sources:

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced their research.

 

 

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

  1. Fairness and Objectivity:

Editors are responsible for evaluating manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

  1. Confidentiality:

The editorial team must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and their contents. They must not disclose any information about a manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisors.

  1. Decision on Publication:

Editors have full authority over the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. Their decisions should be based on the manuscript’s originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, clarity, and significance.

  1. Conflict of Interest:

Editors must recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

  1. Peer Review:

The editor must ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Manuscripts should be reviewed by experts in the field, and anonymity should be maintained unless otherwise agreed.

 

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality:

Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not share the manuscript with others without the permission of the editor.

  1. Objectivity:

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

  1. Timeliness:

Reviewers should complete their reviews within the agreed time frame. If a reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or is unable to do so promptly, they should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

  1. Acknowledgment of Sources:

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work should be reported to the editor.

  1. Conflict of Interest:

Reviewers should not review manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest with the authors or affiliated institutions. They must disclose any potential conflicts to the editor.



Addressing Ethical Misconduct

  1. Investigating Misconduct:

JEAAM will investigate any suspected cases of unethical behavior or misconduct. This includes plagiarism, data fabrication, improper authorship, and other violations of ethical standards.

  1. Corrections and Retractions:

If an ethical violation is confirmed after publication, the journal will issue a correction, retraction, or expression of concern, depending on the severity of the issue.

  1. Sanctions:

In cases of significant misconduct, JEAAM may impose sanctions, including banning the author from future submissions or informing the author’s institution.