General provisions of publication ethics of ‘Ecosystem transformation’ are based on the ethical standards devised by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The Editorial Board does its best to prevent any misconduct and violation of publication ethics.
1. Publication Ethics for the Editorial Office
1.2 The Editorial Office guarantees consideration of all the manuscripts submitted for publication, editorial independence and impartial decisions made without any prejudice to nationality, religion, job title and affiliation of the authors; regardless of commercial benefit and relationship with the Founder of the journal; based on respect to personal and intellectual property rights of the authors.
1.3 The Editorial Office pursues the policy of ensuring and improving the quality of the publication, of making a significant contribution to Russian and international science, of satisfying the needs of the readers and the authors.
1.4 The Editorial Office can make alternations to the manuscripts, publish corrections and refutations (even retract the articles, if necessary), and never ignores the instances of misconduct in research and publication.
1.5 The Editorial Office guarantees that all the manuscripts or any other data published in the journal meet international standards and ethical principles.
1.6 The Editorial Office protects authors’ reputation. In case of identifying plagiarism or any other research or publication misconduct, the Editorial Office is entitled to reject the manuscript, retract the publication or ban publishing in the journal.
1.7 The decision about accepting or rejecting a manuscript for publication is based on the expert opinion of independent reviewers. Authors are informed about the final decision of the Editorial Office and its motivation.
2. Publication Ethics for Autors
2.1 Submitting a manuscript for publication in ‘Ecosystem transformation’, the author guarantees that:
• the manuscript (more than 50 per cent of the text) has not been published elsewhere (in print and/or in electronic media) except as a preprint;
• all copyright material has been appropriately cited or quoted according to applicable copyright laws and conventions;
• the manuscript does not contain any call for extremism or terrorism, foul language, confidential data, classified or state secret information;
• the manuscript does not contain any information which is not permitted to be published in public sources under statutory acts currently in force.
2.2 The author guarantees that the manuscript is not being submitted or considered for publication elsewhere, there are no conflicts of interest associated with authorship, existing copyright or any other rights violations.
2.3 Authors guarantee that all the individuals designated as authors meet the criteria for authorship, viz., have made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
2.4 The author should ensure that his personal information is correct; the manuscript does not contain any form of plagiarism or other types of unlawful borrowings.
2.5 All copyright sources both by authors and other researchers should be appropriately cited or quoted; reusing parts of previous works or rephrasing are acceptable only as a basis for novel conclusions to present a research at various stages of its evolution. Where the authors use texts, data, images or ideas from other sources, they should be cited or quoted as well.
2.6 The author must alert the Editorial Office immediately if he discovers an error in any submitted, accepted or published work and cooperate with the Editorial Office in issuing corrections or retractions when required.
2.7 Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.
2.8 The author assigns to the Publisher free of charge the rights for publication and distribution of the article (to publish, distribute, print, copy or reproduce the Work in any form).
3. Publication Ethics for Reviewers
3.1 The reviewer should only agree to review the manuscripts for which he has the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which he can assess in a timely manner.
3.2 The reviewer should notify the Editorial Office of ‘Ecosystem transformation’ if he does not have the expertise to assess all aspects of the manuscript or cannot carry out a proper assessment in time, and ask the Editorial Office to excuse himself from the review process.
3.3 The reviewer should be objective, constructive and careful in his reviews, providing fair and unbiased expert evaluation.
3.4 Any manuscript received for reviewing is considered confidential. It is not acceptable for reviewers to use information or ideas obtained through peer review for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
3.5 The reviewer identifies relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.