•  
•  

Ethics & Policies

Forest and Society adheres to high ethical standards in publishing and follows guidelines issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal is committed to maintaining integrity, transparency, and accountability in all aspects of publication. Submission of a manuscript implies that all authors have read and approved the content, and that the work conforms to the journal's ethical policies and standards.

Contents

1. Access, Copyright, Licensing

Who Can Submit?

Anyone may submit an original work to Forest and Society, provided they hold the copyright to the work or have obtained the necessary permissions from the copyright holder(s). Authors must confirm that the manuscript is original, not previously published, and not under consideration elsewhere.

↑ Back to Top

Open Access Policy

All articles published in Forest and Society are freely accessible online to read and download immediately upon publication. This approach aligns with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access, promoting unrestricted dissemination of scholarly knowledge.

↑ Back to Top

Copyright Statement

Once accepted for publication, authors transfer copyright of their work to Forest and Society, which then publishes and distributes the content under an open license in accordance with the journal's licensing policies.

↑ Back to Top

Licensing

All articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits users to read, download, copy, distribute, share, translate, and adapt the work for any purpose, including commercial use, as long as appropriate attribution is given to the original authors. Users must provide a proper credit, include a link to the license, and indicate if any changes were made.

↑ Back to Top

Author Fee (Article Processing Charge)

As a fully Open Access journal committed to the unrestricted dissemination of scholarly knowledge, Forest and Society applies an Article Processing Charge (APC) to support the costs of publication, including peer review management, editing, production, and long-term archiving.

The standard APC is USD 400. This fee applies to authors who have support from a research grant that is explicitly stated in the paper's acknowledgments.

Waivers and Discounts
The journal is committed to ensuring that ability to pay does not become a barrier to publication. Requests for full or partial waivers of the APC are considered on a case-by-case basis for:

• Graduate students (without grant support).
• Researchers from low- and middle-income countries.
• Authors demonstrating genuine financial need.

Authors should submit a waiver or discount request during the manuscript submission process.

Payment Process
No payment is required at the time of submission. The APC is only invoiced after the manuscript has successfully completed the peer review process and has been formally accepted for publication by the editors.

Payment Details
Payment should be made to Forest and Society via bank transfer to the following account. Please note that the account currency is Indonesian Rupiah (IDR), so the transferred amount should be converted accordingly.

↑ Back to Top

2. Publication Policies

Advertisements

Forest and Society maintains a strict policy of not accepting commercial or third-party advertising. Any promotional content is strictly limited to announcements from our host institution, the Forest and Society Research Group (FSRG) of Universitas Hasanuddin, and our official network partners. Such announcements are clearly distinguished from scholarly content and have no influence on the editorial process or decision-making.

↑ Back to Top

Affiliations

All authors are required to provide accurate and complete information about their institutional affiliations at the time of the manuscript submission. For research articles, authors must list the institutional affiliation where the research was approved, supported, or conducted. For non-research articles, authors should list their current institutional affiliation at the time of submission.

In cases where an author has moved to a different institution after completing the work but before publication, the affiliation where the work was supported or conducted must be listed, with a note indicating the author's current affiliation and contact details in the acknowledgments section. Change of affiliation alone does not justify removing an author from the authorship list, provided the author meets the authorship criteria.

Misrepresentation of affiliation is considered a form of misconduct and will be addressed in accordance with the journal's ethical policies, including investigation and communication with relevant institutions if necessary. Accurate affiliation information is essential for attribution, accountability, and transparency in scholarly publishing.

↑ Back to Top

Appeals and Complaints

Appeals
Genuine appeals to editorial decisions are welcome. However, appeals should be based on new evidence, data, or information that was not previously available or considered during the initial review process. When submitting an appeal, authors must provide a clear, reasoned explanation supported by relevant evidence or additional data, responding directly to the reviewer or editor's comments. Appeals are more likely to be considered if they address substantive issues that could impact the scientific validity or ethical integrity of the work.

Complaints
Concerns or complaints regarding authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, or the peer review process, including post-publication concerns, should be directed to the Editors-in-Chief. The Editors-in-Chief will investigate the matter by collecting relevant information from all involved parties and will propose an appropriate course of action in line with the principles outlined by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). During investigations, the editorial process can be temporarily halted if necessary. If the Editors-in-Chief are involved in the complaint, the most senior members of the editorial board will oversee the investigation and determine the appropriate resolution.

The journal emphasizes that appeals are expected to be rare, given the rigorous peer review process and editorial judgment involved in editorial decisions. Rejected manuscripts are typically advised to be submitted elsewhere, especially when decisions involve subjective editorial or priority judgments that cannot be addressed through appeal.

↑ Back to Top

Acknowledgment

Authors should recognize individuals who contributed to the development of the manuscript but do not meet the criteria for authorship, such as those providing technical assistance, general support, or valuable feedback. These contributions should be acknowledged appropriately in the acknowledgment section.

Furthermore, organizations or funding bodies that provided financial support, resources, or other assistance relevant to the research or article should also be acknowledged.

All acknowledgments must be truthful, specific, and accurately reflect the contributions or support received. Falsely attributing support or contributions is considered unethical and may lead to corrective actions, including correction or retraction, in accordance with the journal's ethical standards.

↑ Back to Top

Authorship

Authorship Criteria
Only individuals who have made significant and meaningful contributions should be listed as authors, according to the following standards aligned with international best practices:

• Participation in the conception or design of the study, or in the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
• Involvement in drafting the manuscript or providing critical revisions that enhance its intellectual content.

Additionally, all authors are required to:

• Approve the final version of the manuscript before submission.
• Take responsibility for all aspects of the work, ensuring its accuracy, integrity, and compliance with ethical standards.

Individuals not meeting these criteria should be acknowledged but not listed as authors. The corresponding author is tasked with verifying that all listed authors meet these standards and that the author list correctly reflects individual contributions.

Responsibilities of the Corresponding Author
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and that they agree with its submission. The author list must accurately reflect each individual's contribution and must not include anyone who does not fulfill the authorship criteria. Any misrepresentation—such as including non-contributors or excluding qualified individuals—is deemed a serious ethical violation and may result in corrections, retractions, or other measures in accordance with the journal's policies.

Contribution Details
For manuscripts with multiple authors, the journal requires a brief contribution statement that clearly outlines each author's specific roles—such as study design, data collection, data analysis, manuscript drafting, or critical revision. The corresponding author must confirm that all authors have approved this statement and that it accurately describes their respective contributions.

↑ Back to Top

Citations

All references cited in the manuscript should be accurately and appropriately documented according to the journal's reference style. Authors must ensure that every citation is relevant, verifiable, and directly supports the content of the manuscript. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Primary sources, such as peer reviewed journal articles, should be prioritized to ensure the currency and reliability of references. Self-citations should be used judiciously and only when relevant.

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all citations and for avoiding citation manipulation or excessive self-citation. Failure to adhere to proper citation practices may lead to rejection, correction, or retraction of the published work, in line with the journal's ethical standards. For more guidance, authors are encouraged to review the COPE discussion on citation manipulation.

↑ Back to Top

Conflicts of Interest

All authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to their manuscript at the time of submission. A conflict of interest exists when personal, financial, or other secondary interests could be perceived to influence the objectivity, integrity, or impartiality of their work. This includes, but is not limited to, financial ties such as employment, consultancies, grants, honoraria, royalties, stock ownership, patents, or benefits derived from products or services related to the research. It also encompasses non-financial interests such as personal or professional relationships, advisory roles, positions on boards, ideological beliefs, or legal disputes that could be viewed as influencing the research.

Examples of conflicts include receipt of funding from interested organizations, holding patents relevant to the research, being employed by or affiliated with organizations with a financial stake, or having personal relationships with individuals involved in the work.

Authors must disclose all relevant conflicts in the manuscript's disclosure statement, which will be published alongside the article. Failure to disclose conflicts of interest, whether intentional or not, can have serious ethical implications and may result in rejection, correction, or retraction of the publication, ensuring transparency and maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

↑ Back to Top

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

The journal is committed to the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. Corrections shall be issued when a published article contains an error that affects the interpretation, indexing, or scientific accuracy of the work but does not invalidate its overall findings. Such corrections will be linked to the original article and clearly indicate the nature of the correction.

An Expression of Concern may be issued when there is credible suspicion of misconduct or unresolved issues that could affect the validity of an article, but the matter is still under investigation. This notice will be published promptly to inform readers of potential concerns without prejudicing any subsequent decisions.

Retractions are issued in cases where research is unreliable due to misconduct (such as data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism), or honest error that fundamentally undermines the findings. Retractions may also occur if there is evidence of unethical conduct or duplicate publication. The retraction notice will clearly state the reasons for retraction and will be linked to the original article, which remains part of the scholarly record but is marked as retracted.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their responsibility to promptly notify the journal and fully cooperate in correcting or retracting the article.

In all cases, the decision to publish corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions will be made by the editor-in-chief, following recommendations from the COPE Retraction Guidelines and after consultation with authors, reviewers, or relevant institutions as appropriate. The goal is to ensure transparency, accountability, and the correction of the literature for the benefit of the scholarly community.

↑ Back to Top

Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts are considered confidential material. The journal is committed to safeguarding the confidentiality of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and staff. Manuscripts submitted to the journal will only be accessible to authorized individuals involved in processing, peer review, and publication, such as editorial staff, peer reviewers, and the handling editors.

All parties involved in the handling of a manuscript, including those conducting investigations into misconduct or ethical concerns, will treat the information with strict confidentiality. During misconduct investigations, the journal may share relevant information with authorized third parties such as ethics committees or the authors' institutions to resolve issues, always adhering to applicable data protection regulations.

↑ Back to Top

3. Research & Data Policies

Data Sharing Policy

The journal values the principles of transparency, openness, and reproducibility in scholarly research. We believe that sharing research data, where feasible, contributes to the integrity and verifiability of scientific findings and supports the advancement of knowledge across disciplines.

Recognizing that data sharing may not be feasible or appropriate in all cases due to concerns such as confidentiality, participant privacy, or intellectual property restrictions, a data availability statement is not mandatory for publication. However, the journal strongly encourages authors to share their data whenever possible and to provide access to data on a reasonable request, in accordance with ethical and legal requirements.

This policy highlights our commitment to promoting trust and collaboration in research while respecting the rights and protections of research participants and organizations.

↑ Back to Top

Funding

All authors are required to disclose any sources of financial support related to the work reported in the manuscript in the "Acknowledgments" section. This statement should specify details of grants, sponsorships, institutional funding, or any other financial assistance that may have influenced the research. If no funding was received, authors must explicitly declare this by including a statement such as: "The authors received no funding for this work." This transparency helps ensure the integrity of the research and allows readers to assess potential conflicts of interest.

↑ Back to Top

Images and Figures

Visual elements such as photographs, diagrams, charts, and other figures should be used to strengthen and clarify the presentation of research findings. Authors are encouraged to submit images that are clear, relevant, and effectively communicate the data and scientific message.

Authors should aim to provide figures with sufficient quality, resolution, and detail to support the scientific content and facilitate peer review. High-quality images contribute to the overall professionalism and impact of the publication.

All images should be original or properly credited if created or reproduced from sources other than the authors. When using material from external sources, appropriate permissions or licenses must be obtained. Digital image manipulation should be done ethically, ensuring that it does not misrepresent data or results, and any modifications should be disclosed within the manuscript.

Regardless of copyright status or licensing, all figures and images must always be properly cited to acknowledge their original source, whether they are reused with permission or under licenses that permit unrestricted use. If requested, authors should be prepared to provide original or high-resolution versions of their images to verify clarity and authenticity.

↑ Back to Top

Research Ethics and Consents

Research Involving Humans
Research involving human subjects should be conducted in accordance with internationally accepted ethical standards, such as the Declaration of Helsinki. Authors are responsible for obtaining all necessary ethical approvals from an appropriate institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee before conducting the study. Exceptions to this requirement are acceptable in cases where obtaining prior ethical approval is not feasible, necessary, or applicable, such as retrospective studies using anonymized data or publicly available datasets, where the risk to individuals is minimal. Authors must adhere to applicable laws and guidelines governing ethical research conduct in their jurisdiction. The journal may request confirmation of ethical approval or relevant documentation when necessary. Failure to comply with ethical standards may result in rejection or retraction of the manuscript.

Research Involving Animals
Research involving animals should be conducted in accordance with internationally accepted ethical standards and guidelines for animal welfare and relevant national or institutional guidelines. Authors are responsible for obtaining all necessary ethical approvals or licenses from an appropriate animal care or ethics review board prior to conducting the study. Exceptions may be made in cases where obtaining formal approval is not applicable or feasible, such as retrospective studies using archived samples or data, provided that animal welfare considerations were appropriately observed. Authors must ensure compliance with local laws and guidelines related to animal research. The journal may require confirmation of ethical approval or supporting documentation upon request. Failure to adhere to ethical standards for animal welfare may result in rejection or retraction of the manuscript.

Consent for Participation
All research involving human participants must be conducted with their informed consent. Participants should voluntarily agree to take part in the study after being provided with clear, comprehensive information about the purpose, procedures, potential risks, and benefits of the research. Consent must be obtained in writing or via documented electronic means, where applicable, and must be freely given without coercion or undue influence. Researchers are responsible for retaining the signed consent forms and ensuring that participants understand that their participation is voluntary and that they may withdraw at any time without penalty. The signed consent documents must be kept on file and are not to be submitted with the manuscript. Such consent forms should be available for review upon request and must demonstrate that participants were properly informed and freely agreed to participate. Failure to retain or produce appropriate consent documentation when requested may result in the rejection or retraction of the manuscript, in line with ethical standards and the protection of participant rights. The handling of consent must also adhere to relevant data protection and privacy regulations. Exceptions to obtaining consent may be made when it is not feasible, necessary, or applicable, such as in cases involving retrospective studies using anonymized data, data collected from publicly available sources, or research where obtaining consent might compromise the integrity of the study. In such cases, the authors should provide a clear explanation of the basis for this exception upon request.

Consent for Publication
Identifying information such as details in written descriptions, photographs, sonograms, CT scans, pedigrees, or other data that could potentially identify individuals should not be published unless it is essential for scientific purposes and informed consent for publication has been obtained. For any manuscript that includes personal information, images, or details that could potentially identify individual persons, authors must obtain and retain written informed consent for publication. This includes photographs, case descriptions, or any other data where individuals may be recognized. Consent must be obtained from the individual directly, or from their parent or legal guardian if they are minors (under 18). If the individual is deceased, consent should be obtained from their next of kin or legal representative. The consent should explicitly cover the dissemination of these details or images in an open-access publication, allowing for free online access and sharing. Authors are responsible for securing this consent prior to submission and must include a statement in the manuscript confirming that informed consent for publication has been obtained. The relevant consent forms should be properly archived by the authors and are not to be uploaded with the cover letter or sent via email to editors or the publisher. The forms should be kept on file and made available to the editor upon request. Failure to obtain appropriate consent may lead to rejection or retraction, in order to uphold ethical standards and respect individual privacy.

↑ Back to Top

4. Editorial Processes

Misconduct

In alignment with guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), any misconduct related to research or publication practices will be taken seriously and addressed appropriately to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

Types of Misconduct
Misconduct may encompass a range of unethical behaviors that compromise the integrity of research and the publication process, including but not limited to the examples listed below.

• Data Fabrication and Falsification: Fabricating or manipulating data, results, or findings is a serious breach of ethical standards. This includes inventing data, altering figures or tables, or selectively omitting data to mislead or support desired outcomes. Such misconduct undermines trust and can result in rejection, retraction, and disciplinary action.
• Image Manipulation: Images, including photographs, scans, and diagrams, should accurately represent the data. Digital adjustments—such as altering brightness, contrast, or cropping—are acceptable only if they do not distort or misrepresent the original data. Any manipulation must be disclosed in the manuscript, and fabricated or distorted images are unacceptable.
• Plagiarism: Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, is strictly prohibited. Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Any use of the work, words, or ideas of others must be properly cited and quoted according to scholarly standards. Proper acknowledgment of sources is essential to maintain academic integrity and transparency.
• Duplicate Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is unethical and can lead to multiple publications of the same work. Authors must ensure that their work is under consideration in only one journal at a time.
• Duplicate (Redundant) Publication: Publishing the same or substantially overlapping content in more than one journal constitutes misconduct. Such practices may artificially inflate the author's publication record and distort the scholarly literature. Authors are required to disclose any related prior submissions or publications at the time of submission.
• Salami Slicing (Fragmentation): Splitting one extensive study into multiple smaller publications—often with overlapping data and findings—without proper disclosure, is unethical. This practice, known as salami slicing, can mislead readers and artificially inflate publication counts. Authors are expected to present their work comprehensively and transparently.
• Citation Manipulation: Inappropriate citation practices, including excessive self-citation or citation stacking to artificially inflate metrics, are unethical. Citations should be relevant, accurate, and support the content of the manuscript, not used solely to manipulate impact factors.
• Improper Authorship Practices: Authorship should only include individuals who have made a significant contribution to the research and manuscript preparation. Ghost authorship (uncredited contributors) and honorary authorship (individuals listed without substantial contribution) are considered misconduct. All authors should meet authorship criteria and approve the final manuscript.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct
The journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. When an allegation of misconduct is received, the following process will be followed:

1. Initial Validation and Scope: The allegation will be carefully assessed to determine whether it pertains to research misconduct as defined. An initial assessment will be made to evaluate the credibility of the allegation and whether it aligns with the journal's scope of misconduct. The identity of the complainant will be protected to maintain confidentiality, and potential conflicts of interest will be evaluated.
2. Sharing with Authors and Gathering Evidence: If the allegation appears substantiated, the editor will contact the corresponding author(s) to request a detailed response on behalf of all co-authors. The authors will be given a clear deadline to provide explanations, data, or relevant documentation. The investigation may include additional review by experts (e.g., statistical reviewers, subject matter specialists) if necessary to evaluate the evidence thoroughly.
3. External Investigation and Institutional Role: The journal recognizes that institutions have primary responsibility for investigating research misconduct. Therefore, where appropriate, the matter will be referred to the relevant institutional authorities for a formal inquiry. The journal may collaborate with or request updates from institutions regarding their investigations, as permitted.
4. Evaluation and Decision: Based on all collected evidence, including author responses and expert reviews, the editor will determine whether misconduct has occurred. If misconduct is confirmed, the journal will take appropriate actions, such as issuing a correction, retraction, or statement of concern, in accordance with COPE guidelines. If the allegation is unsubstantiated, the matter will be closed with notification to the complainant that no misconduct was found.
5. Publication of Actions and Record Maintenance: Corrections or retractions will be linked directly to the original articles and will be publicly accessible. All documentation and correspondence related to the misconduct investigation will be securely stored by the journal for a defined period, respecting data privacy laws.

Throughout the process, confidentiality will be maintained for all involved parties. The accused author(s) will be given fair opportunity to respond to allegations and findings. The journal commits to transparent decision-making, following the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and flowcharts, to preserve the scientific record's accuracy and integrity.

↑ Back to Top

Post-Publication Discussions

The journal provides a channel for post-publication discussions through direct communications with the editorial office. Readers may share comments, critiques, or concerns regarding published articles. All communications will be reviewed by the editorial team and appropriate editorial actions (response, corrections, retractions, or notices) will be taken in line with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and flowcharts.

↑ Back to Top

Publication Ethics

The journal adheres to the highest standards of ethical practices in scholarly publishing, following the guidelines and principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Maintaining integrity, transparency, and accountability is fundamental to every stage of the publication process. Below are the ethical standards for authors, editors, and reviewers.

Authors

• Accurate and Transparency: Authors of original research reports must present a precise and honest account of the work conducted, including an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be accurately represented within the manuscript. The paper should include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the study. Any fraudulent or knowingly misleading statements are considered unethical and will not be tolerated.
• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is completely original. If any part of the manuscript includes the work or words of others, proper citation and quotation must be provided in accordance with scholarly standards. Plagiarism, in any form, is considered unethical and unacceptable.
• Misconduct Avoidance: Authors are expected to uphold the highest standards of integrity in their research and publication practices. They should avoid any form of misconduct, including but not limited to data fabrication and falsification, image manipulation, plagiarism, duplicate submission, duplicate (redundant) publication, salami slicing (fragmentation), citation manipulation, and improper authorship practices. Upholding ethical standards is essential to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record and the reputation of the journal.
• Acknowledgment of Sources: All work of others that has influenced the research must be properly acknowledged. Authors should cite relevant publications that have significantly contributed to shaping or guiding the reported work, ensuring appropriate recognition and transparency.
• Disclosure of Interests and Funding: All authors are required to disclose any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that could be perceived to influence the accuracy, interpretation, or reporting of their manuscript. In addition, all sources of financial support related to the project should be transparently disclosed.

Editors

• Editors are responsible for overseeing all articles submitted to the journal. They should assist authors in understanding and adhering to the journal's guidelines for authorship and publication.
• Editorial decisions should be made based solely on the quality, originality, and scientific merit of the manuscript, without influence from the authors' nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation. Editors must decline any assignment where a conflict of interest may arise.
• The content of the manuscript sent for peer review must be anonymized to ensure the confidentiality of author identities, and the authors' details should be kept separate from the reviewer's copy.
• Reviewers' comments and editor's decisions should be communicated clearly to authors, accompanied by reviewer feedback unless it contains offensive or libelous remarks. Editors should also respect requests from authors to exclude specific reviewers, provided such requests are well-justified and practicable.
• Ensuring the confidentiality of all submissions throughout the review process is a fundamental obligation of the editors and staff.
• In cases of suspected misconduct, disputes over authorship, or ethical concerns, editors will follow the guidance provided by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts and procedures to handle the situations appropriately and ethically.

Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review plays a vital role in assisting the editor to make informed decisions about manuscript suitability for publication. Through constructive communication with authors, reviewers may also help improve the quality and clarity of the manuscript.
• Promptness: Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript or anticipate delays should notify the editor promptly and excuse themselves from the review process to ensure timely evaluation.
• Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose or discuss the manuscript with others unless explicitly authorized by the editor.
• Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be objective, impartial, and based solely on the scientific merit of the work. Personal criticisms or biases are inappropriate. Reviewers should clearly articulate their evaluations with well-supported arguments.
• Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observations that certain ideas, derivations, or data have been reported previously must be supported with appropriate citations. Reviewers should also alert the editor to any significant overlap or similarity between the manuscript under review and other published work they are aware of.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: All privileged information obtained during peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where conflicts of interest—such as competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with authors or affiliated institutions—may compromise objectivity.

↑ Back to Top

Peer Review Process

Editor in Chief will assign the manuscript to a corresponding Editor or Managing Editor for further handling. The Editor or Managing Editor will request at least two scientists to review the research article manuscript. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review, where the identities of both reviewers and authors are kept confidential from each other.

The editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions:

• Accept without any changes (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper in its original form.
• Accept with minor revisions (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections.
• Accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance): the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors.
• Revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes.
• Decline or reject the paper (outright rejection): the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.

↑ Back to Top

Inclusivity and Diversity

We are dedicated to a proactive approach to inclusiveness and diversity and are actively pursuing the elimination of prejudice in order to provide an equal and inviting publishing environment for everyone. Although English language dominates much research, we do not discriminate against authors by their command of written English. We ask reviewers to reflect on content rather than use of language.

↑ Back to Top

Supplementary Materials

Authors may submit additional files as supplementary material. These materials will be made available to reviewers and may be assessed at the reviewers' discretion. However, supplementary files do not undergo the same comprehensive peer review as the main manuscript. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, quality, and completeness of all supplementary content provided.

↑ Back to Top

Desk Rejection Policy

The journal reserves the right to reject manuscripts without peer review at the initial screening stage if they do not meet the basic requirements for publication or fall outside the scope of the journal. This process ensures efficient use of editorial resources and provides authors with early guidance on the suitability of their work. Typical grounds for desk rejection include, but are not limited to:

• Manuscripts that do not adhere to the journal's scope and aims.
• Submissions that are incomplete, poorly formatted, or do not follow the author guidelines.
• Lack of originality, or substantial overlap with previously published work.
• Manuscripts with insufficient scientific rigor or methodological flaws that cannot be remedied through revision.
• Non-compliance with ethical standards.
• Manuscripts that are commercially motivated or contain promotional content.

The decision to desk reject is made solely based on the manuscript's fit, quality, and compliance with submission criteria. Authors will receive feedback and guidance if their manuscript is declined at this stage, enabling them to improve and submit to other journals if appropriate.

↑ Back to Top

Plagiarism Policy

The journal strictly adheres to ethical publishing standards and maintains a firm policy against plagiarism. All submitted manuscripts are subjected to similarity checks using the iThenticate similarity check tool. Manuscripts exhibiting unethical levels of overlap or unoriginal content will be rejected or require revision prior to further consideration. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work is original, properly cited, and free from any form of plagiarism. The journal reserves the right to investigate suspected cases of misconduct and take appropriate actions, including the retraction of published papers if necessary.

↑ Back to Top

Withdrawal Policy

Withdrawal refers to the removal of a manuscript from the publication process prior to its formal publication. This action is typically initiated by the authors. Authors may request withdrawal by submitting a written request to the editorial office. Such requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis and granted at the discretion of the editorial team. Authors are encouraged to notify the journal as early as possible to minimize disruptions to the publication schedule. Once withdrawal is approved, no further editorial or production work will proceed. After formal publication, withdrawal is no longer possible; retraction procedures apply instead. For more information on retractions, please refer to the "Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions" section.

↑ Back to Top

Submission of Manuscripts by Editors

Editors are permitted to submit manuscripts to the journal; however, strict procedures are in place to uphold impartiality and transparency. When an editor submits a manuscript, they must recuse themselves from any involvement in the peer review process, editorial handling, or decision-making pertaining to that submission.

To maintain fairness, the editorial handling of manuscripts submitted by editors will be delegated to another independent member of the editorial board. This designated editor will oversee the review and decision, following the same peer review procedures as for all other submissions.

↑ Back to Top

Repository and Self-Archiving Policy

The journal is committed to the widest possible dissemination of scholarly work. In line with the journal's copyright and licensing framework and recognized best practices in open access publishing, the journal allows and encourages authors to deposit all versions of their manuscripts in repositories of their choice without embargo. This policy complies with the journal's copyright and licensing terms and supports institutional and funder open access requirements.

Permitted Versions

• Preprint (submitted version prior to peer review)
• Author's Accepted Manuscript (AAM) (post-peer review, before publisher formatting)
• Published Article / Version of Record (VoR) (final publisher PDF as it appears on the journal website)

Conditions of Deposit

Preprints

• Authors may deposit preprints at any time.
• Preprints should be clearly labeled as such and indicate that they have not undergone peer review.
• Preprints must not include publisher formatting, logos, or layout that may misrepresent them as the published version.
• Once the article is published, authors are encouraged to update the preprint record with full attribution to the Version of Record, including citation details and DOI.

Author's Accepted Manuscript (AAM)

• Deposited versions should clearly indicate that they are the accepted version of the manuscript.
• Authors are permitted to deposit the AAM, provided it is made available with full attribution to the author(s) and the journal, in accordance with the license (CC BY 4.0).
• Once the article is formally published, the record must be updated with full attribution to the Version of Record, including citation details and DOI.
• The AAM must not include publisher formatting, logos, or layout.

Version of Record (VoR)

• Authors are permitted to deposit the Version of Record, provided it includes full attribution to the published article in the journal, including citation details and the DOI, in accordance with the license (CC BY 4.0).

↑ Back to Top

5. Special Policies

Use of Third-Party Material

Authors are responsible for ensuring that any third-party material included in their submissions—such as text, images, illustrations, tables, datasets, audio, or video—has the necessary rights and permissions for reuse.

All third-party material must either:

• be in the public domain (i.e., free of copyright restrictions, such as works with expired copyright or those explicitly dedicated to the public domain, e.g., CC0), or
• be available under a reuse license that is compatible with the journal's license (i.e., a license that allows the material to be reused under the same terms as the journal's articles, without adding extra restrictions), in which case no additional permission is required, provided the license permits such use and the license terms are fully respected, or
• be accompanied by explicit written permission from the copyright holder that allows publication under the journal's license, or

In cases where the license does not permit broader or unlimited reuse, short excerpts may be used without formal permission for purposes such as criticism, review, or commentary provided such use is limited in scope and properly attributed to the original source.

When reusing copyrighted or licensed material, including works published under Creative Commons, authors must comply fully with the exact terms of the applicable copyright or license. If authors are uncertain about license compatibility, they should consult the rights holder. The journal cannot provide legal advice on copyright or licensing.

Authors bear full responsibility for obtaining and retaining appropriate rights or permissions for all third-party material included in their submissions. The journal disclaims responsibility for unauthorized use of third-party content and will not be held liable for any legal issues arising from improper or unauthorized reuse of copyrighted material.

↑ Back to Top

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Authors' Use of AI in Manuscript Preparation
Authors who incorporate AI and AI-assisted tools into their writing process should do so primarily to improve language, clarity, and readability. These tools should not replace core scholarly tasks, such as generating original scientific insights, analyzing data, or forming conclusions. All use of AI must be under the author's oversight and subject to thorough review and editing by humans. Since AI tools can produce content that appears authoritative but may be incomplete, biased, or incorrect, authors must take full responsibility for the accuracy and originality of their work.

Authors are required to disclose the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in their manuscripts, with a statement indicating the extent and purpose of such use. This transparency supports trust among readers, reviewers, and editors, and ensures compliance with the terms of use for the tools employed.

Use of AI in Peer Review
The journal recognizes the increasing role of AI in enhancing the review process. To protect the integrity and confidentiality of peer review, the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools by reviewers during manuscript assessment is not permitted. Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential information and must not upload or use AI tools to analyze, summarize, or generate content related to the manuscript or review report. Doing so could compromise author confidentiality, violate data privacy rights, and impair the impartiality of the review process.

Peer review remains an intellectual task that requires human judgment and critical thinking, and the use of AI for evaluating scientific validity or originality is outside the scope of responsible peer review practices. Reviewers are responsible and accountable for the content and quality of their review reports.

Ongoing Policy Development
The journal remains committed to monitoring developments in AI technology and will adapt this policy as necessary to uphold standards of scientific rigor, confidentiality, and ethics.

↑ Back to Top

Special Issues

Scope and Call for Papers
Special issues focus on emerging or priority topics relevant to the journal's mission and readership. The editorial team will define or approve the theme and objectives for each special issue. Calls for submissions are typically announced in conjunction with the special issue release and communicated through the journal's website and other channels. Authors are encouraged to adhere to the general submission guidelines but should pay particular attention to the scope and focus outlined in the call.

Guest Editors
Guest Editors may be involved or nominated based on their expertise, reputation, and prior editorial experience. They are selected by the editorial board and approved by the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief or designated board members must oversee the activities of the Guest Editors throughout the process to ensure adherence to the journal's standards and policies. Guest Editors are responsible for defining the special issue's scope, preparing the call for papers, managing the review process, and making recommendations for final acceptance, in collaboration with the Editor-in-Chief. In cases where no guest editors are appointed, designated editorial board members will assume the same responsibilities.

All papers submitted by editors and guest editor(s) for a special issue must undergo an independent review process. The same policies regarding the handling of submissions made by editors, as outlined in the "Submission of Manuscripts by Editors" section of this page, also apply to guest editors.

Submission and Review
Manuscripts submitted for special issues follow the same process as regular issues. Submissions are received through the online system and undergo initial screening and full peer review. Guest Editors or designated editorial board members oversee the review process, with final decisions made in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief. Accepted articles are formatted, edited, and published in line with journal standards.

Special issues should maintain high-quality standards and align with the journal's ethical policies. All submissions must adhere to the journal's peer review and ethical guidelines. Special issues are subject to the same evaluation and monitoring processes as regular issues to ensure scholarly integrity.

Publication and Promotion
Once published, the special issue is promoted via the journal's distribution channels. The timing of publication aligns with the journal's regular schedule, ensuring consistency and quality. All special issue articles must be clearly labeled to ensure transparency. Post-publication metrics are monitored to assess impact and inform future special issues.

↑ Back to Top

---

Last Updated: January 20, 2026