Publishing Ethics

Purpose and Scope

The SDEWES Journals Publishing Ethics Policy sets out the ethical principles and responsibilities that apply to all journals published by SDEWES Centre. The policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, Guest Editors, Editorial Board members and SDEWES Centre as publisher.

This policy applies to all submitted, accepted and published content, including regular articles, review articles, special issue papers, article collections, conference-linked submissions and any supplementary materials.

Related guidance, statement templates, declaration forms and checklists relevant to this policy are listed in Appendix A: Related COPE and International Guidance and Appendix B: Practical Forms, Statements and Checklists.

Publication Ethics Framework

SDEWES journals are committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity and editorial transparency. Authors, reviewers, editors and SDEWES Centre are expected to follow recognised principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including fairness, confidentiality, transparency, accountability, editorial independence and correction of the scholarly record when necessary.

The publication ethics framework of SDEWES journals is guided by the COPE Core Practices, the COPE Ethics Toolkit, relevant COPE guidelines, flowcharts, position statements, discussion documents and other applicable COPE resources, together with relevant international standards and the principles set out in the SDEWES Journals Policies.

This policy provides the general publishing ethics framework for all SDEWES journals. Detailed requirements are set out in the relevant SDEWES Journals Policies and, where applicable, in journal-level policies and instructions that must be consistent with this framework.

Respectful and Professional Behaviour

SDEWES Centre is committed to supporting a respectful, professional and constructive publishing environment. Authors, reviewers, editors, Guest Editors, Editorial Board members, readers and SDEWES staff are expected to treat one another with respect, courtesy and professionalism throughout the submission, peer-review, editorial and publication processes.

SDEWES Centre does not tolerate disrespectful, inappropriate or unprofessional behaviour, including discrimination, harassment, bullying, intimidation, abusive communication, retaliation or other conduct that may undermine trust, fairness or the integrity of the scholarly publishing process.

Concerns about disrespectful or unprofessional behaviour in editorial decision-making or peer review may be assessed under Editorial Independence and Peer Review Policy. Formal complaints about conduct, communication, discrimination, harassment, retaliation or policy application are handled under Editorial Decision Appeals and Complaints, with personal data and confidential information protected in accordance with Privacy.

Duties of Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair, objective and timely editorial process. Editorial decisions must be based on the scientific quality, originality, relevance and clarity of the manuscript, and its suitability for the journal, without discrimination based on personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, nationality, political views or other non-scientific factors.

Editors must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents and must not use unpublished material for their own research without the author’s written consent. Confidentiality and the handling of manuscript and reviewer information are governed by Peer Review Policy and Privacy. Editors must declare and manage any actual, potential or perceived competing interests in accordance with Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure. Where an editor has a competing interest, the manuscript must be reassigned or handled through an independent editorial process in accordance with Editorial Independence.

Editors should take reasonable steps to identify and respond to suspected research or publication misconduct, including plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate manipulation, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation, undisclosed competing interests, unethical research practices and misuse of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies. Such concerns should be assessed under one or more relevant specialised SDEWES Journals Policies and documented using the practical documents listed in Appendix B.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers support editors in assessing the quality, validity, originality and relevance of submitted manuscripts. Reviews should be objective, constructive and evidence-based, and should help editors make informed decisions and authors improve their work.

Reviewers must treat manuscripts and related materials as confidential and must not share, discuss or use unpublished material outside the peer-review process. Reviewers should decline a review invitation if they lack the required expertise, cannot complete the review in a timely manner, or have an actual, potential or perceived competing interest. Reviewer confidentiality, selection, conduct and competing interests are governed by Peer Review Policy and Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure.

Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, review reports or other confidential peer-review materials to public or non-approved generative AI tools. Any permitted use of AI-assisted technologies must comply with Generative AI Policy and must not compromise the confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property or integrity requirements established in Peer Review Policy and Privacy.

Duties of Authors

Authors are responsible for the originality, accuracy and integrity of the work they submit. Manuscripts must not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time and must not have been published previously in the same form, except where this is permitted by the journal’s policies, such as preprints or substantially extended conference papers.

All listed authors must have made a meaningful scholarly contribution to the work and must approve the submitted and accepted versions of the manuscript. Authorship criteria, contribution statements and author responsibilities are governed by Authorship and Contributorship. Any request to add, remove or reorder authors, change the corresponding author or update an author name must follow Authorship Changes and Inclusive Name Changes.

Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others and obtain permission for third-party material where required under Copyright & Licensing. They must disclose funding sources and competing interests in accordance with Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure, report ethical approval and consent where applicable under Research Ethics, provide an accurate Data Availability Statement under Research Data and Transparency, and disclose relevant use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies under Generative AI Policy.

Duties of SDEWES Centre as Publisher

SDEWES Centre, as publisher of the SDEWES journals, is responsible for supporting the integrity, independence and transparency of the publishing process. The publisher provides the editorial and publishing infrastructure, maintains the SDEWES Journals Policies, supports editors in handling ethical concerns and ensures the long-term availability and preservation of the scholarly record. Personal data, confidential editorial records and publication-ethics case information must be handled in accordance with Privacy.

SDEWES Centre does not interfere with editorial decisions. Acceptance or rejection of manuscripts is based on editorial assessment and peer review and is independent of Article Processing Charges, conference participation, institutional relationships, sponsorship, advertising, SDEWES membership or other non-scientific considerations, in accordance with Editorial Independence.

Where the accuracy or integrity of published content is affected, SDEWES Centre supports the relevant journal in correcting and maintaining the scholarly record in accordance with Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals.

Research Integrity and Publication Misconduct

SDEWES journals do not tolerate research or publication misconduct. Potential concerns may include plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate image or data manipulation, citation manipulation, undisclosed competing interests, unethical research practices, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation, misuse or unauthorised disclosure of confidential manuscript or peer-review information, or misuse of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies.

Suspected misconduct is assessed proportionately by the editors of the relevant journal and, where appropriate, SDEWES Centre. Authors, reviewers, editors and other parties may be asked to provide explanations, original data, code, source files, ethics approval documentation, consent records, authorship confirmations, competing-interest declarations, relevant peer-review records or other evidence necessary for the assessment.

Concerns involving the ethical conduct of research are assessed under Research Ethics. Concerns involving data, code, images, reproducibility or supporting materials are assessed under Research Data and Transparency. Authorship concerns are assessed under Authorship and Contributorship and Authorship Changes and Inclusive Name Changes. Competing-interest concerns are assessed under Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure, peer-review concerns under Peer Review Policy, and concerns involving generative AI or AI-assisted technologies under Generative AI Policy.

Where a confirmed or unresolved concern affects published content, the journal will consider the appropriate action in accordance with Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals. Depending on the nature and status of the concern, this may include a correction, editorial note, expression of concern, retraction, removal, replacement or other appropriate notice.

Special Issues, Article Collections and Conference-Linked Submissions

Special issues, article collections and conference-linked submissions are subject to the same standards of editorial independence, peer review, competing-interest management and publication ethics as regular submissions.

Guest Editors and conference organisers may assist with topic development, reviewer suggestions or editorial recommendations where appropriate, but final editorial responsibility remains with the Editor-in-Chief or another editor authorised by the journal. Guest Editor responsibilities, peer-review procedures and independent editorial decision-making must comply with Peer Review Policy and Editorial Independence. Any actual, potential or perceived competing interest involving a Guest Editor, conference organiser, sponsor, author, reviewer or editor must be disclosed and managed under Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure.

Submissions derived from conference papers must meet the journal’s requirements for originality, transparency and substantial extension, where applicable, and must properly cite and disclose any previous version.

Handling Ethical Concerns and Investigations

Ethical concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, funders, other publishers or other parties with a legitimate concern. Concerns should be assessed fairly, confidentially, independently and proportionately, without assuming that misconduct has occurred before the available information has been evaluated.

The journal and SDEWES Centre may request clarification or supporting evidence from authors, reviewers, editors or other relevant parties. Where necessary, they may consult an institution, employer, funder, research-integrity office, another publisher or an appropriately qualified adviser. Personal data, confidential information and unsupported allegations should not be disclosed more widely than necessary for the assessment, in accordance with Privacy.

Editorial handling, peer review, production or publication may be paused while a concern is assessed. Competing interests involving the person handling the concern must be declared, and independent handling must be arranged where required under Editorial Independence and Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure.

If a concern affects published content, any correction, editorial note, expression of concern, retraction, removal, replacement or other amendment must be considered under Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals.

The practical documents used to support initial assessment, policy routing, misconduct assessment, case management, external consultation and outcome communication are listed in Appendix B.

Post-Publication Discussion and Scholarly Critique

SDEWES journals welcome evidence-based post-publication comments, scholarly critique and alternative interpretations of published work. Such submissions may be handled through letters to the editor, journal correspondence or another moderated route identified by the relevant journal.

Scholarly disagreement does not by itself establish error or misconduct. Where a critique identifies a possible error affecting the published record, the matter will be assessed under Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals. Where it raises a possible research-integrity or publication-ethics concern, it will be assessed under Publishing Ethics and the relevant specialised policy. Personal data, confidential information and allegations must be handled in accordance with Privacy.

Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals, Appeals and Complaints

SDEWES journals are committed to correcting and maintaining the scholarly record when necessary. Errors, omissions or concerns identified before or after publication may lead to a correction, editorial note, expression of concern, retraction, withdrawal, removal, replacement or other appropriate action under Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals.

Authors may submit an appeal where they believe that an editorial decision was affected by a significant factual or technical error, procedural problem, competing interest, bias, misunderstanding or other substantial issue. Complaints may be raised about editorial processes, peer-review handling, conduct, policy application, confidentiality, delays or publication-related handling. Appeals and complaints must be specific, evidence-based and respectful and are handled under Editorial Decision Appeals and Complaints.

Policy Review and Updates

SDEWES Centre may review and update this policy periodically to reflect developments in publication ethics, research integrity, open science, scholarly publishing practice, legal requirements and international standards.

Updated policies apply from the date of publication on the SDEWES Journals Policies website unless otherwise stated.

Appendix A. Related COPE and International Guidance

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE Core Practices

Provides the overarching framework for journal and publisher responsibilities in publication ethics, including allegations of misconduct, authorship and contributorship, complaints and appeals, conflicts of interest, data and reproducibility, ethical oversight, intellectual property, journal management, peer review and post-publication discussion and correction.

COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics - General approach to publication ethics for the editorial office

Provides general step-by-step guidance for editors and editorial offices when receiving, assessing, documenting and responding to publication ethics concerns.

COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics - Systematic manipulation of the publication process

Provides guidance on identifying and responding to coordinated or systematic manipulation involving authorship, peer review, identities, citations or other parts of the publication process. 

COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics - Plagiarism in a submitted manuscript

Provides steps for editors when plagiarism or substantial unattributed overlap is suspected before publication.

COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics - Plagiarism in a published article

Provides steps for assessing and responding to suspected plagiarism identified after publication.

COPE DOAJ OASPA WAME. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

Provides overarching principles concerning journal governance, ownership, editorial processes, peer review, fees, competing interests, publication ethics and transparency.

Appendix B. Practical Forms, Statements and Checklists

The documents below are intended for cross-cutting publishing ethics concerns. Policy-specific forms and checklists are listed in the appendix to the relevant specialised SDEWES Journals Policy.

Post-Publication Amendment Checklist for Editors

Internal editor checklist - Supports selection of correction, editorial note, expression of concern, retraction, removal, replacement or no formal action where a concern affects published content.

Publishing Ethics Concern Initial Assessment and Policy-Routing Checklist for Editors

Internal editor and publisher checklist - To record the allegation, urgency, evidence, confidentiality needs, competing interests, responsible handler and the specialised SDEWES Journals Policy or policies under which the concern should be assessed.

Research or Publication Misconduct Assessment Checklist for Editors

Internal editor and publisher checklist - To support proportionate assessment of suspected plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate manipulation, citation manipulation, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation or other publication-process misconduct.

Publishing Ethics Case Record and Investigation Log

Internal case-management form - To document dates, correspondence, evidence requested and received, decisions, consultations, confidentiality restrictions and follow-up actions throughout an ethics assessment.

Institution, Funder or Other Publisher Contact Letter Template

Editorial correspondence template - To request clarification or cooperation from an institution, funder, employer, research-integrity office or another publisher while avoiding unsupported allegations and unnecessary personal information.

Publishing Ethics Concern Outcome Letter Template

Editorial response template - To communicate the issue considered, process followed, outcome, corrective action and any further steps where the matter is not handled as an appeal or complaint.