Following international best practices in the evaluation and publication of scientific studies, the Journal Sustainable and Responsible Management (henceforth the Journal) aims to follow a Code of Ethics inspired by the Core Practices that the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has determined in order to support and develop good practices in publishing processes [1].
To this end, the Journal will implement a process of evaluation and selection of contributions for publication based on the following ethical requirements shared by all actors in the process (Editors, Management, Reviewers and Authors).
1. Duties of the Bodies of the Journal
The Scientific Director and the Managing and Responsible Editor are responsible for choosing the contributions to be published in the Journal. This choice is based on an anonymous double-blind peer-review entrusted to one or more experts Reviewers belonging to the Committee of Reviewers of the Journal.
The Scientific Director and the Managing and Responsible Editor undertake to perform their duties in such a way as to ensure a high profile for the Journal, acting according to the principles of diligence and professionalism, and taking care that the contributions selected are characterised by a high degree of scientific rigour.
Decisions to accept or reject a contribution for publication will be based exclusively on the relevance, originality and clarity of the contribution itself and the relevance of the study to the objectives and editorial line of the Journal.
For this reason, the Scientific Director and the Managing and Responsible Editor will ensure the regularity of the entire review process of contributions, guaranteeing the anonymity of the Reviewers and undertaking to avoid any conflict of interest, discrimination on the grounds of gender, sexual or religious orientation, personal or political convictions, geographical origin and ethnic origin. Therefore, we will always ensure readiness to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies where necessary.In particular, following the Core Practices of COPE, the Journal bodies will address the following areas concerning editorial ethics.
A. Authors and Contributors
In case of changes in Authorship of the paper (for which see below: Authorsâ Duties):
1. addition and/or removal of one or more Authors before publication;
2. addition and/or removal of one or more Authors after publication,
the Scientific Director and the Managing and Responsible Editor will follow the flowchart of COPE, which provides for the following steps in case of changes in the Authorship of the paper[2]:
1. clarify with the Authors the reasons for the change in Authorship of the paper;
2. ensure that the change of Authorship of the paper is shared;
3. amend the list of Authors;
4. proceed to publish the paper with the new list of Authors, or proceed to revise the paper by editing the list of Authors if already published.
B. Conflicts of interest/competing interests
The Bodies of the Journal will have to take action to ensure the resolution of any conflicts of interest encountered or conceivable. In particular, the actions foreseen by the COPE flowchart concerning conflicts of interest will be undertaken both at the article submission stage and with reference to a paper already published by the Journal[3]:
1. ascertain the existence of conflicts of interest by contacting the Authors of the article;
2. found the existence of conflicts of interest, revise the paper by including a declaration by the Authors of the existence of such conflicts (in case of a paper at submission stage) or consider post revisions or possible withdrawal of the paper (in case of a paper at post-publication stage).
C. Data and reproducibility
In cases where there is suspicion:
1. falsification of manuscript data both during submissionand post-publication;
2. manipulation of images of the manuscript both during submissionand post-publication,
the Journal bodies, in accordance with the COPE guidelines, will follow the steps set out in the relevant flowchart, from the stage of ascertaining the facts to verifying the responsibility of the Authors, up to the revision (in the absence of malicious intent) or withdrawal (in the case of responsibility of the Authors) of the paper[4]
D. Ethical oversight
The Journal accepts the definition of ethical oversight proposed by COPE: âEthical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practicesâ.
The Bodies of the Journal will monitor the Authorsâ compliance with ethical principles in cases where the research falls into one of the cases listed at above. If there is any suspicion that the Authorsâ behaviour does not comply with ethical principles (e.g. behaviour due to lack of ethical approval, lack of consent or protection of people or lack of care in case of animal species) the Bodies of the Journal will take action to ascertain the actual presence of such conduct and, subsequently, proceed to verify the possible responsibility of the Authors, up to the conclusion of the process with a revision or withdrawal of the paper, depending on the seriousness of the conduct[5] .
E. Intellectual property
The Bodies of the Journal supervise the respect of the intellectual property by the Authors, subjecting the received manuscripts to an antiplagiarism check, using the dedicated software Turnitin. If the anti-plagiarism check gives a positive result, the Bodies of the Journal, in accordance with the COPE guidelines, will follow the steps foreseen by the flowchart dedicated to intellectual property, from the ascertainment of the Authorsâ responsibilities to the eventual rejection/withdrawal of the paper in submission/published, in case of non-cooperation of the latter in the phases of ascertaining possible violations of the intellectual property of others.
F. Appeals and complaints procedures
In the event of appeals and/or complaints, the Bodies of the Journal will follow appropriate procedures according to the type of appeal or complaint that has occurred. In the event of an appeal concerning the rejection of the manuscript, the Bodies of the Review will, based on the Author(s)â request and the Reviewersâ report, take one of the following possible decisions:
1. request for a further independent opinion on the paper;
2. confirmation of rejection;
3. the appeal is allowed.
In the event of a complaint concerning the sphere of incorrect behaviour and conduct of Authors or Reviewers, the Journal bodies will assess the behaviour/conduct on a case-by-case basis and act in accordance with the Journalâs ethical standards inspired by the COPE guidelines[6] .
G. Discussions and post-publication corrections
The Journalâs policy on post-publication corrections or retractions of articles provides for the publication of a specific notice in which information about post-publication operations is given. The changes reported in the notice (any clerical errors, misquotations, etc.) must be made in the original manuscript within a specified time (no more than 7 days).
The Journal may withdraw the paper in the event of serious problems that cannot be remedied by corrections. In such cases, the Journal will issue a withdrawal notice stating the issues that led to the withdrawal. A withdrawal notice will be attached to the original paper, to which the reader will be linked each time he or she accesses it.
2. Authorsâ duties
Authors, when submitting their contributions to the Journal, must ensure their originality, guarantee that they are unpublished, that they do not infringe the intellectual property rights of others and that they have not been evaluated by another scientific Journal. Authors must also confirm the intellectual property of the manuscript and declare that the copyright has not been transferred to others. Authors must also ensure that the manuscript is free from conduct that includes (but is not limited to) plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification, or ad hoc data creation.
Authors must ensure that there are no conflicts of interest that have in any way influenced the content of the contribution submitted to the Journal.
With regard to the quality of the contributions submitted to the Journal, the Authors undertake to guarantee high quality standards, respecting the obligation to correctly cite the sources of any content contained in the contribution and to obtain the necessary permissions for the inclusion of images or other material protected by copyright.
Authors must guarantee the veracity of the data reported in their contributions, as well as obtain the necessary permissions if natural or legal persons are involved by the study. Authors must also make themselves available to share the data that were used for the analysis in their paper, if requested during the review process, i.e. also to be in line with the principles of an open access Journal.
Contributions submitted to the Journal that have been drafted by more than one Author must clearly state the names of all the individuals who actually contributed to the drafting and approval of the work. These individuals will be listed as Authors of the contribution.
The Authorship of the paper must only be acknowledged to those who have contributed significantly to all stages of its realisation: from the conception phase to the design, through to the final drafting of the manuscript. Only those who have made a substantial contribution to the work will be listed as Authors. All those who contributed marginally to the manuscript (e.g. English editing or graphic design) may be mentioned in the acknowledgments section of the paper. Regarding the order of the Authors, this must be approved by all Authors at the time of manuscript submission. In order to proceed with any changes in the order and/or the exclusion/inclusion of one or more Authors, it is necessary for Authors to make a formal request to the Journal Bodies.
In the event that errors or significant inaccuracies are found in contributions already published by the Journal, the Authors are obliged to promptly notify the Journal with any errata.
C. Reviewersâ duties
Reviewers play an important role in ensuring the quality of the contributions to be published in the Journal. The review process depends to a large extent on the trust and voluntary participation of the scholars involved, who must behave responsibly and ethically.
The COPE dedicated ample space to review models and, in any case, reiterated important rules of conduct that Reviewers must follow to ensure an impartial and quality assessment of submissions submitted for evaluation[7].
In particular, the main duties of the Reviewers include:
1. carefully read the manuscript, as well as any supplementary files and/or ancillary material (e.g. instructions for reviewers, required ethics and policy statements). If something is unclear, it is important to request missing elements that you need to complete the review;
2. do not contact the Authors directly without the permission of the Journal;
3. respect the confidentiality of the review process and refrain from using information obtained during the review process for their own benefit or the benefit of others, or to disadvantage or discredit third parties;
4. do not involve anyone else in the revision of a manuscript;
5. remain impartial with regard to nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the Authors;
6. in the event of a perceived conflict of interest that may prevent a fair and impartial review, notify the Journal;
7. if there is a suspected breach of research and publication ethics, report it to the Journal;
8. follow the Journalâs instructions for assessing the paper (special format or scoring mode, advice on whether or not the contribution can be published);
9. prepare a revision report that is objective and constructive, providing feedback that can help Authors improve their manuscript.
In carrying out the revision of assigned manuscripts, Reviewers will be urged by the Journal Bodies to use the flowchart provided by COPE, which can support the revision process, thanks to a timely and precise schematisation of the various steps, from the reception of the paper by the Journal Bodies to the management of the information flow between Reviewers and Journal Bodies concerning the manuscript[8].
[1] See Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available on the Commission’s website, https://publicationethics.org/.
[2] See https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english.
[3] See https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english.
[4] See https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english.
[5] See https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english.
[6] See https://publicationethics.org/.
[7] See COPE, Council. Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. September 2017. https://www.publicationethics.org.
[8] See https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english.