Publication Ethics

Saturday, 12 February 2022 18:31 Admin

Journal of Environmental Management and Safety (JEMS)

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement


Publication guidelines:

Authors must follow the submission guidelines of the journal

Uniqueness and Plagiarism

All manuscripts must be the original work of authors and not others intellectual properties.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship of a manuscript should be restricted to authors who have made substantial contributions.

Various, redundant or simultaneous publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.

Credit of sources

Authors must properly and accurately acknowledge the work of others.

Disclosure and Conflicts of interest and monetary support

Authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or

interpretation of their manuscript

and acknowledge individuals or organizations that have provided financial support for research.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with manuscripts for editorial review,

and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible.


The editors are responsible for everything published in this journal. The editors attempt to:

Publication Decisions

Editors are accountable for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to

the journal should be reviewed or published.


Editors should ensure the integrity of the publication review process. As such, editors should not reveal either the

identity of authors of manuscripts to the reviewers, or the identity of reviewers to authors.


Editors must treat received manuscripts for review as confidential documents

and must not disclose any information about

submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author,

reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and any editorial staff must not use materials disclosed in

a submitted manuscript (published or unpublished)

for their own research without the author’s written authorization.


Editors shall conduct proper and fair investigation into ethical complaints.



Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential

and treat them as privileged information.

Ethics of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.

Contribution to Editorial Decision

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.


Reviewers should complete their reviews within a specified timeframe.

Leak and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from;

competitive, collaborative,

or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies,

or institutions connected to the papers.


 When distrust or assertions arise regarding any of misstatement or malpractice,

the editors will ideally, address such issues after submission and prior to publication. 

Editors will investigate suspicions and any assertions made

and reach a decision on the basis of those investigations.

When the editors suspect an ethics abuse may exist in relation to an article submitted,

or allegation concerning a submitted article,

the editors will take the following steps:

1. Editors, as a matter of due process, will raise the issue with

the corresponding author and in some cases

with a precise co-author whose activities are criticized

about— in some situations all co-authors of the article in

enquiry may need to be communicated.

Editors will seek a clarification and, where needed, the provision of evidence supportive that explanation.

2. Editors will also seek a clarification from, and the views of,

any complainant together, where necessary, with evidence supporting that explanation.

3. Editors will try to find the complainant’s views on

any clarification and evidence provided by the author.

Likewise, editors will seek the views of the author on

any explanation and evidence provided by the complainant.

At this point in the investigation, Editors may be satisfied

that there has been no ethical violation.

If not, however, editors will continue to investigate the matter.

4. If the authors are incapable to gratify editors on

a balance of probabilities that there has been no violation,

then the editors will carry out further investigation.

The depth of the investigation will vary from case to case, but may include the following steps:

Caution concerning defamation claims

In carrying out any investigation, editors will take great care to act fairly and objectively and not to defame any author

(or complainant) in any way, which could give rise to legal liabilities, including damages.

To avoid defamation claims by authors, editors will bear in mind the following guidelines in investigation:

Legal consequences of findings

In the case of plagiarism, there may be an infringement of copyright and, possibly, also moral rights.

Moral rights include the right of an author of a work to be identified as such, 

as well as the right of an author to prevent changes to his or her work that are of a derogatory nature.

In the case of research results not being original to the purported author,

and allegations about authorship of contributions,

there may be an infringement of the moral rights outlined above,

but also infringement of a person’s moral right not to have

a work attributed to him or her when not the author.

In all cases of ethical misconduct, there is likely to be a breach of contract by the author,

who will have contravened the terms of his or her publishing agreement,

with the publisher or the relevant instructions to authors.

Other Journals/publications

Once a paper has been published in another journal or other publication and it look as if that this paper

(1) copies a paper published in the JEMS,

(2) contains research results that are not unique to its author

but are unique to the author of a paper published in JEMS,


(3) has already been published in whole or in part in the JEMS,

editors will observe the following procedure.

As a first step, editors will communicate with the editor of the publication,

in which the aberrant paper appears,

looking for a full explanation.

It is to be expected that the editor of that publication will take steps parallel to those recommended

by these guidelines in relation to our publications.

If that editor fails to investigate the matter appropriately or is not

able to gratify you on a balance of probabilities that there is no issue,

then JEMS editors will follow the steps recommended

when the suspected offending paper appears in the JEMS.

That is, editors will investigate the suspicion or allegation by initially contacting the author(s) of the

offending publication for a clarification, and continuing the investigation to its necessary conclusion

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 March 2022 14:45