Publication Ethics

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY
The Journal of Economics, Business, and Government Challenges (JOEBGC) promotes responsible research and transparent scholarly communication. This policy defines the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher throughout submission, peer review, and publication.

JOEBGC acts in accordance with the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and supports the development and practical application of consistent ethical standards throughout the scholarly publishing community.

This policy applies to regular articles, special issues, and other scholarly contributions. It draws on Emerald Publishing’s publication ethics guidance, adapted to JOEBGC’s editorial procedures. JOEBGC remains responsible for its own policies and editorial decisions.

1. Responsibilities of Authors
Authors must provide an accurate account of their research, distinguish findings from interpretation, and acknowledge limitations. Information entered into the submission system must agree with the manuscript.

The corresponding author coordinates communication, confirms all authors’ approval, and ensures that requests from the journal are shared with co-authors. Authors must promptly report material errors discovered during review or after publication.

2. Originality, Attribution, and Related Publications
Submitted work must be original and must not be under consideration by another journal. Authors must identify related publications and explain any overlapping material.

Previous dissemination through a thesis, preprint, conference presentation, or proceedings must be disclosed at submission. Editors will assess whether the manuscript provides a sufficiently distinct contribution and whether any permissions are required.

Sources for quotations, ideas, instruments, tables, and figures must be acknowledged. Permission must be obtained where required by the material’s licence or rights holder.

3. Authorship and Contributorship
Authorship requires substantial contribution, participation in drafting or substantive revision, approval of the final manuscript, and accountability for the work.

Each submission must include an author contribution statement. Administrative position, seniority, funding acquisition, or general supervision alone does not justify authorship.

Changes to authorship require an explanation and written agreement from all affected authors. Processing may be paused while a dispute is unresolved. Where necessary, the journal will seek clarification from the relevant institution rather than determine research contributions independently.

4. Research Integrity
Plagiarism, fabricated evidence, falsified findings, and misleading alteration of research materials are unacceptable.

Authors must preserve supporting records sufficiently to answer reasonable questions about their work. Statistical exclusions, missing-data treatment, transformations, and departures from planned procedures must be explained where relevant.

Simulated data must be clearly distinguished from observations collected from people or organisations. Graphs and tables must accurately represent their underlying data.

Similarity reports are screening aids. Editorial assessment will consider the nature and context of overlap rather than rely solely on a numerical score.

5. Citation Ethics
References must support the scholarly argument. Authors, reviewers, and editors must not request or insert irrelevant citations to increase citation counts.

Authors may question a suggested reference by explaining why it is not relevant. Such disagreement must not, by itself, prejudice the editorial decision.

6. Artificial Intelligence
Generative AI must not be used to write new manuscript content. Editing or translating authors’ existing original text is permitted with transparent disclosure and human verification.

AI tools cannot qualify as authors. Authors must identify the tool, its version where available, its purpose, and the material affected. Authors remain responsible for accuracy, references, and originality.

AI-generated material must not be presented as authentic empirical evidence. Clearly identified examples used to study or critically discuss AI require editorial assessment.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential submissions to generative AI services or use them to perform scholarly evaluation. Language editing of review reports must preserve confidentiality and be disclosed to the editor.

7. Ethical Approval, Consent, and Confidentiality
Research involving participants or identifiable personal information must explain applicable ethical requirements and safeguards. Authors must report approval or an authorised exemption where required, including the issuing body and available reference details. Required ethical approval must be obtained before the research begins.

Participant consent and organisational permission serve different purposes. Permission from an employer does not automatically replace consent from participating employees.

Authors must explain measures protecting participants from identification, coercion, or foreseeable harm. Identifiable quotations, images, and case descriptions require particular attention to publication consent.

Where ethical approval is not required, authors must provide a reasoned explanation grounded in applicable institutional requirements. Authors must not claim approval, an exemption, or consent that was not obtained.

8. Funding and Conflicts of Interest
Submissions must disclose funding and relevant financial or non-financial interests. A declaration is required even when no conflict exists.

Editors and reviewers must disclose relationships that could compromise impartiality. An editor who authors a submission must take no part in its assessment or decision. Another editor without the relevant conflict will manage the submission.

Publication charges and funding arrangements must not determine acceptance.

9. Data Availability and Reproducibility
Research articles must include a Data Availability Statement describing the location of supporting data or explaining access restrictions.

Where feasible, authors should provide variable definitions, instruments, analytical code, and documentation sufficient to understand the analysis. Third-party data remain subject to their owners’ access conditions.

The journal does not require disclosure that would breach participant consent, confidentiality, or legitimate access restrictions. Authors must describe such restrictions accurately and must not promise access they cannot provide.

10. Editorial and Reviewer Responsibilities
Editors assess submissions for relevance, methodological quality, clarity, and contribution. Editorial decisions must remain independent of commercial interests and inappropriate external influence.

Reviewers provide reasoned, respectful assessments and distinguish essential revisions from optional suggestions. They must disclose conflicts of interest and decline assignments where impartial assessment is compromised.

Unpublished information must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers must alert editors to suspected problems without independently contacting authors or publicly disclosing allegations.

Special issues remain subject to journal oversight. Guest editors must disclose conflicts and follow the same ethical requirements.

11. Complaints, Appeals, and Misconduct Reports
Concerns should be submitted through the official editorial contact listed on the journal’s Contact page. Reports should identify the manuscript or article, explain the concern, and provide supporting evidence.

The journal will distinguish complaints about process, appeals against decisions, and allegations of misconduct. Appeals should identify a substantive error, procedural concern, or relevant evidence requiring reconsideration.

A person directly implicated in a complaint must not be its sole assessor. Cases involving the Editor-in-Chief will be referred to an appropriate independent editor or publisher representative.

Relevant parties will have an opportunity to respond. The journal will communicate the outcome and explain material delays. An appeal does not guarantee acceptance or additional review.

12. Corrections and Post-publication Action
Readers and authors may report errors or concerns about published articles. The journal will assess whether the issue affects a limited part of the article or the reliability of its overall findings.

Depending on the evidence, action may include a correction, an expression of concern, or retraction. Notices will explain the reason and remain linked to the article. Retraction serves to correct the scholarly record.

Removal of published content will be considered only in exceptional circumstances requiring protection from serious harm or compliance with applicable obligations.

13. Implementation and Policy Review
Required article declarations include author contributions, funding, conflicts of interest, AI use, data availability, and research ethics, as applicable.

The journal may request supporting documents during assessment or investigation. Decisions will consider the evidence, seriousness of the concern, and applicable guidance.

This policy will be reviewed periodically. Material revisions and their effective dates will be displayed on the journal website.

Further Information
For further information about our publication ethics policies, please contact the editorial office through the journal’s Contact page.

Policy References
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Emerald Publishing. Publication ethics.