PUBLICATION ETHICS

Environmental and Agriculture Management (EAM) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes original research, review articles, case studies, and short communications in environmental and agricultural management. EAM is committed to maintaining high standards of research integrity and publication ethics throughout the editorial, peer-review, and publication processes. This statement describes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, Editorial Board members, peer reviewers, the publisher, and the managing unit. It seeks to protect the reliability of the scholarly record through fairness, transparency, confidentiality, accountability, and appropriate responses to ethical concerns.

This policy has been developed with reference to internationally recognized scholarly publishing principles, including guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing developed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME. This reference does not imply COPE membership or endorsement.

1. Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of peer-reviewed research is essential to the development and dissemination of reliable scientific knowledge. EAM recognizes that the integrity of the scientific record depends on the responsible conduct of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher. Editorial decisions must be based on scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal, and ethical compliance. Decisions must not be influenced by an author’s race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability, nationality, religion, institutional affiliation, political beliefs, or other personal characteristics. EAM supports transparency concerning authorship, funding, competing interests, research data, ethical approval, the use of artificial intelligence (AI), preprints, and related scholarly outputs.

2. Responsibilities of Editors and the Editorial Board

2.1. Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and designated handling editors are responsible for decisions concerning manuscripts submitted to EAM. Decisions are based on scientific validity, originality, sound methodology, relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, and the contribution of the work. Editors may consult members of the Editorial Board and independent peer reviewers. Manuscripts may be rejected when they fall outside the journal’s scope, fail to meet scientific or ethical standards, or contain conclusions inadequately supported by the evidence. Reviewers provide recommendations; final editorial decisions remain the responsibility of authorized editors.

2.2. Editorial Independence and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose and appropriately manage any personal, professional, financial, competitive, collaborative, or institutional conflict that could affect their impartiality. An editor with a relevant conflict must not oversee the affected manuscript; an independent qualified editor must be assigned instead. Submissions authored by editors or Editorial Board members are subject to the same scientific and peer-review standards as other submissions and must be handled independently of the author concerned.

2.3. Handling Ethical Concerns

Editors must respond appropriately to credible concerns about research integrity or publication misconduct, including plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, image manipulation, citation manipulation, or compromised peer review. They may request explanations, original data, supporting documents, or expert advice. Allegations must be assessed fairly, confidentially, and proportionately. Individuals whose conduct is questioned should normally have an opportunity to respond. Where formal fact-finding is beyond the journal’s authority, EAM may seek assistance from the relevant research institution or other competent body. Editorial decisions may be suspended pending clarification. Depending on the evidence and the seriousness of the issue, EAM may reject a manuscript, require revisions, or issue an appropriate post-publication notice, including a correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

3. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

3.1. Editorial Responsibilities and Decision-Making Authority

The Editor-in-Chief of Environmental and Agriculture Management (EAM) is responsible for conducting the initial editorial screening of submitted manuscripts, including assessments of scientific suitability, novelty, and alignment with the journal's aims and scope.

Manuscripts that meet the initial editorial requirements are assigned by the Editor-in-Chief to members of the Editorial Board whose academic expertise is relevant to the manuscript's subject area.

The assigned Editorial Board members are responsible for managing the peer review process, evaluating reviewers' reports, and overseeing the scientific assessment of manuscripts.

The Editorial Board holds responsibility for final editorial decisions concerning manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection following peer review. These decisions are based on scientific merit, methodological rigor, originality, relevance, and compliance with publication ethics.

Reviewer recommendations serve as independent scientific advice and do not automatically determine editorial decisions. All editorial assessments and decisions must remain independent of inappropriate institutional, financial, or personal influence.

3.2. Competence and Promptness

Reviewers should accept assignments only when they have appropriate expertise and can complete the evaluation within the agreed timeframe. Those unable to review competently or promptly should inform the editor and decline the invitation.

3.3. Confidentiality and Proper Use of Information

Manuscripts and associated review materials must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, share, copy, distribute, or discuss their contents without the editor’s authorization, nor use privileged information, methods, or data for personal or professional advantage.

3.4. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest and decline an assignment when a relationship or competing interest could reasonably compromise an impartial evaluation.

3.5. AI Use and Ethical Reporting

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or review materials to unauthorized AI services or delegate substantive scientific evaluation to generative AI. Permitted language assistance must comply with EAM’s Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Scholarly Publishing. Reviewers should promptly communicate suspected misconduct or peer-review manipulation to the handling editor. For more information, please visit our AI guidelines for authors here.

4. Responsibilities of Authors

4.1. Reporting Standards

Authors must provide an accurate, transparent, and complete account of their research. The methods, materials, data, analyses, and results should be described with sufficient detail to permit critical appraisal and, where feasible, replication. Findings and conclusions must reflect the evidence, with relevant limitations acknowledged. Fabrication, falsification, selective omission or manipulation intended to mislead, and misrepresentation of research data or results are unacceptable.

4.2. Originality, Plagiarism, and Similarity Checking

Submissions must represent original scholarly work. Text, ideas, data, methods, tables, figures, and other materials derived from others must be appropriately attributed. Plagiarism, including unattributed copying or appropriation of intellectual contributions, is unacceptable. Manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection tools. A similarity score alone is not evidence of plagiarism; editors consider the source, context, nature, and extent of overlap before deciding on appropriate action. Serious unattributed overlap, fabricated material, or other misconduct may result in rejection or further investigation.

4.3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

The same manuscript must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal. Substantially overlapping work must not be published without appropriate justification, disclosure, and citation. Authors must disclose related manuscripts published, submitted, or in press elsewhere and provide copies when reasonably requested by the editor.

4.4. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual contributions and accountability for the published work. EAM applies the following four criteria; each listed author must satisfy all four:

1. Substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
2. Drafting the manuscript or critically reviewing it for important intellectual content;
3. Approval of the final version to be published; and
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including cooperation in investigating and resolving questions concerning accuracy or integrity.

Individuals who meet all four criteria should be listed as authors and offered an opportunity to participate in manuscript review and final approval. Other contributors should be acknowledged, with their permission where appropriate. Funding acquisition, general supervision, routine technical assistance, or language editing alone does not confer authorship.

EAM encourages authors to describe individual contributions using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), where appropriate. CRediT roles do not independently establish authorship eligibility. Gift, guest, honorary, and ghost authorship are unacceptable. The corresponding author must ensure that the author list and order are agreed upon, all eligible authors are included, no ineligible individuals are listed, all authors approve submission and the final manuscript, and contribution statements are accurate. All authors share responsibility for the integrity of the work.

4.5. Changes to Authorship

The author list and order should be agreed upon before submission. A proposed addition, removal, or rearrangement during editorial consideration requires a clear written explanation, the editor’s approval, and written agreement from all listed authors, including any author being added or removed. Changes after acceptance are considered only in exceptional circumstances. Approved authorship changes after publication may require a linked correction. Further details are provided in EAM’s Authorship and Contributorship Policy. For more information detail please check our Change Author Template.

4.7. Authorship Disputes

Authorship disagreements should first be addressed by the authors and, where appropriate, their research institutions. EAM does not independently adjudicate competing authorship claims. Where an unresolved dispute could affect the integrity of a submission, editorial evaluation or publication may be suspended pending clarification or an institutional determination.

4.8. Research Involving Human Participants or Animals

Research involving human participants, including surveys, interviews, or collection of personal information, must comply with applicable ethical standards, institutional requirements, and relevant laws. Where ethics review or approval is required, authors must identify the approving committee or institution and provide the approval details. Where approval was waived or not required, the basis should be explained where relevant. Informed consent must be obtained when applicable, and participant privacy and confidentiality must be protected. Identifiable personal information or images must not be published without appropriate consent or another valid ethical and legal basis. Research involving animals must comply with applicable welfare standards and institutional or regulatory requirements. Authors must report relevant approval or oversight arrangements, where required, and describe measures taken to minimize unnecessary animal suffering.

4.9. Disclosure of Competing Interests

Authors must disclose relationships or circumstances that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or its publication, including financial interests, employment, consultancy, grants, patents, professional relationships, or personal relationships. A competing interest statement is required even when there are no interests to declare.

4.10. Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose financial support for the research and manuscript preparation. Where applicable, they should identify the funder’s role in study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit. If the funder had no role in these activities, this should be stated.

4.12. Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

EAM permits responsible AI assistance in manuscript preparation, subject to the journal’s Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Scholarly Publishing. AI tools cannot qualify as authors. Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, references, analyses, figures, and interpretation of all content, whether or not AI was used. Substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies must be disclosed as required by the AI Policy. Routine spelling, grammar, and formatting assistance does not require formal disclosure. AI must not be used to fabricate results, invent references, or misleadingly alter research evidence.  For more information, please visit our AI guidelines for authors here.

5. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other concerned parties may submit complaints about editorial procedures, reviewer conduct, conflicts of interest, publication ethics, or published content through the journal’s official editorial contact channel, as identified on the EAM website. Complaints should describe the concern and include relevant evidence or documentation. Authors may appeal editorial decisions when they identify a substantive factual misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, or other demonstrable error. A reasoned appeal should identify the manuscript and grounds for reconsideration; disagreement with a scientific judgment alone does not automatically justify reversal. Complaints and appeals are assessed fairly and confidentially by the Editor-in-Chief or another qualified editor who is not involved in the matter, where practicable. The journal may consult independent advisers or refer institutional matters to an appropriate body. The outcome will be communicated to the complainant when appropriate, subject to confidentiality and privacy requirements.

6. Post-Publication Discussion and Maintenance of the Scholarly Record

6.1. Post-Publication Comments and Concerns

EAM welcomes evidence-based scholarly discussion of published articles. Readers and researchers may submit substantive comments, requests for clarification, or concerns about accuracy or integrity through the journal’s official contact channel. Editors assess the relevance and evidential basis of such submissions and may seek a response from the article’s authors or other appropriate experts. Where warranted, a formal published commentary, author response, or editorial notice may be arranged.

6.2. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

EAM is committed to correcting the published record when significant errors or integrity concerns arise. A correction may be issued when an otherwise reliable article contains an error requiring public amendment. An expression of concern may be issued where serious questions remain unresolved and readers should be alerted while an investigation proceeds or cannot reach a conclusion. Retraction may be appropriate where findings are unreliable owing to major error or misconduct, where publication is seriously redundant or unethical, or where other circumstances substantially compromise the scholarly record. Decisions are made with reference to relevant COPE guidance and the available evidence, with the primary aim of protecting the integrity of the literature rather than punishing individuals.
Editorial notices must clearly identify the affected article, explain the reason for the action, and be linked to the article’s publication record. Retracted articles will ordinarily remain accessible and clearly marked as retracted, unless removal is necessary for legal, privacy, or other compelling ethical reasons.

7. Copyright, Licensing, and Permissions

Authors retain copyright in their work and grant Environmental and Agriculture Management (EAM) a non-exclusive right of first publication. Articles published in EAM are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), which permits non-commercial sharing, distribution, and adaptation with appropriate attribution, provided that adaptations are distributed under the same license. Authors may enter into additional non-exclusive arrangements for the distribution of their published work and may deposit their manuscripts in institutional repositories or personal websites, with acknowledgment of the initial publication in EAM where applicable. Authors must respect third-party intellectual property rights and obtain necessary permissions for copyrighted text, figures, photographs, datasets, or other materials reproduced or adapted in their manuscripts. Further details are provided in the journal's Copyright Notice.