Journal of Research and Innovation for Sustainable Society

1. Introduction

The Journal of Research and Innovation for Sustainable Society (JRISS) is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity and ethical behavior in all aspects of the publication process. Our ethics and malpractice statement is based on the guidelines and best practices set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Duties of editors

2.1. Fair Play:
 Editors assess submitted manuscripts exclusively based on their scholarly merit, irrespective of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, nationality, or political affiliations.

2.2. Confidentiality:
 The editor and editorial team are obligated to maintain the confidentiality of information pertaining to manuscripts submitted by authors. Such information should only be disclosed to reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher as deemed appropriate.

2.3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
 Editors and editorial board members must refrain from utilizing unpublished materials revealed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the author’s explicit written consent. Additionally, editors should withdraw from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest arise due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

2.4. Publication decisions:
 The editor-in-chief holds the responsibility for determining which submitted manuscripts will be published in the journal. This decision should be guided by the editorial board’s policies and must comply with legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

2.5. Involvement and Cooperation in investigations:
 Editors, in collaboration with the publisher, will take appropriate actions when ethical complaints are raised concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. These measures typically involve contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving thorough consideration to the complaint or claims made.

3. Duties of reviewers

3.1. Contribution to editorial decisions:
 Peer review aids the editor in making informed editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, can also help the author enhance the quality of the paper.

3.2. Promptness:
 Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research detailed in a manuscript or anticipates being unable to complete the review promptly should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

3.3. Confidentiality:
 Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

3.4. Standards of objectivity:
 Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5. Acknowledgement of sources:
 Reviewers should identify any relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Statements regarding previously reported observations, derivations, or arguments must be accompanied by appropriate citations. Additionally, reviewers should alert the editor to any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work with which they are familiar.

3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of interest:
 Confidential information or ideas acquired through peer review must remain private and not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should avoid evaluating manuscripts if they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved.

4. Duties of authors

4.1. Reporting standards:
 Authors of original research reports must provide a precise and objective account of their work and its significance. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the paper. Additionally, the manuscript should include sufficient detail and references to enable replication of the work by others. Any fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements are considered unethical and unacceptable.

4.2. Data access and retention:
 Authors may be requested to provide raw data associated with their paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to grant public access to this data if feasible and ensure that the data is retained for a reasonable period following publication.

4.3. Originality and Plagiarism:
 Authors are obligated to ensure that their submissions are entirely original. When utilizing the work or language of others, they must provide precise citations or quotations as appropriate.

4.4. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication:
 An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.5. Acknowledgement of sources:
 Adequate acknowledgment of the contributions of others is essential. Authors must cite all relevant publications that have significantly influenced the development of the reported work.

4.6. Authorship of the paper:
 Authorship should be confined to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. Those who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Individuals who have played a role in other substantial aspects of the research should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.7. Disclosure and conflicts of interest:
 All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.8. Fundamental errors in published papers:
 If an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their published paper, it is their responsibility to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and collaborate with them to retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher

5.1. Handling of unethical publishing behavior:
 In instances of alleged or confirmed scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in concert with the editors, will take all necessary actions to address and resolve the issue. This may involve the prompt issuance of an erratum, clarification, or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work.

5.2. Access to journal content:
 The publisher is dedicated to the enduring availability and preservation of scholarly research, ensuring its accessibility through partnerships with relevant organizations and the maintenance of an independent digital archive.