This Statement outlines the best practice principles that we apply to our journal.
Energy Safety and Energy Economy is a peer-reviewed journal. We practice accurate and unbiased double-blind peer review. Keeping in mind high ethical standards and our responsibilities, we do our best to prevent misconduct. We are committed to ensuring that any commercial or political goal has no influence on editorial decisions and that all papers are published based on their quality and suitability to our audience. At Energy Safety and Energy Economy, we constantly improve our journal’s quality.
Research Integrity
We uphold our core values and principles of integrity of our academic content and publishing process. Therefore, we encourage researchers to conduct their research work in line with best practices and code of conduct of relevant professional or international regulatory bodies. We promote and expect honesty in all aspects of research, thoroughness and excellence in research practice, transparency and open communication, and respect of all participants of research.
Editorial Board
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit and relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or 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 will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without a written consent of the authors. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers.
Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Editors will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
Peer Reviewers
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
Any reviewer who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Our peer review process may take up to 2 months to be completed.
Authors
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
Plagiarism
By submitting a manuscript, the authors declare that their manuscript presents their original work. Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable.
Multiple Publications and Simultaneous Submissions
By submitting a manuscript, the authors declare that their manuscript has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is considered unethical behavior and unacceptable.
Reprinting of papers published in our journal without written permission of the editors is forbidden.
Conflicts of Interest
Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones including support, membership, employment, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript.
Investigation of Questionable Research Practices
Concerns about questionable research practices may be raised through the use of screening software or by editors, peer reviewers, or third parties. Sometimes further investigation may require disclosing the third party’s identity. If so, the individual should be informed and give approval before their identity is disclosed. Regardless of whether the concern arose from screening, editors, peer reviewers, or third parties, potentially questionable research practices that have specific, detailed evidence to support the claim or concern should be investigated appropriately, whether they are raised anonymously or otherwise.
Retractions
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. Retractions are usually reserved for papers that are so seriously flawed that their findings or conclusions should not be relied upon. Journal editors will consider retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern in line with COPE’s Retraction Guidelines. In any case of research misconduct leading to retraction of a publication, we update the academic record as soon as possible.
Further Principles of Transparency and Best Practice
Our journal’s web site contains all information about the ownership and management, copyright and licensing, publishing schedule, subscription, etc. Our journal’s name is unique and protected by the certificate of registration as indicated on this web site.
We allow for limited and appropriate advertising within our journal. Where present, advertising must be independent from editorial decisions on what we publish as well as be clearly distinct from content.
We are fully committed to the principle and promotion of freedom of speech and expression so we will never be complicit in censorship.
There are no page charges or submission fees for our publications.
We also follow the EASE golden rules for scholarly journal editors
1. Be aware of your target audience.
2. Make instructions to authors simple and understandable, and review them regularly.
3. Ensure a fair peer review process (usually with 2-3 reviews, or more if necessary).
4. Pay due attention to ethical issues: data fabrication or manipulation, plagiarism, authorship, conflict of interest, copyright, legislation, etc.
5. Inform authors about progress and delays as soon as possible; do not overburden reviewers and authors.
6. Do your best to ensure that publications are complete, concise, and clear, with appropriate methods and correct citations.
7. Make sure that abstracts properly summarize essential information (usually: background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions) and contain major keywords.
8. Ensure safe long-term storage of publications and documentation of the editorial process.
9. Develop your journal.
10. Perfection is impossible to reach, so common sense is necessary.
Read more about our peer review process click here.
What to read:
Two Levels of Ethical Issues in Academic Publishing Zernes, S. Sci Eng Ethics (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0035-3
Watch on YouTube:
Svetlana Zernes speaks on predatory publishing for MIEE Conference, watch online