The "Innovative Economics and Management" journal complies with international standards for publication ethics.

 

The journal strongly follows the guidelines of COPE (the Committee on Publication Ethics). COPE policy refers all participants in publication process: Publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers. The guidelines address ethical concerns such as reviewer objectivity, treating all publications and authors equally, originality and plagiarism, confidentiality, false and misleading citations and data, and potential conflicts of interest. It is strongly recommended for all participants in the publication process to read and follow the COPE guidelines for publication ethics.

 

The journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publishing ethics and takes all necessary precautions to prevent publishing malpractice.

 

Authorship and contributorship

The journal follows internationally recognized principles of authorship and contributorship. Authorship should be based on substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; drafting or critically revising the manuscript; and approval of the final version for publication. All authors must agree to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal and confirming that all listed authors have approved the submitted manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.

Any changes to the authorship of a manuscript after submission, including the addition, removal, or rearrangement of authors, must be requested by the corresponding author and approved by all affected authors. The Editor may request a written explanation and documentary evidence of author consent before approving such changes.

 

Complaints and appeals

The journal welcomes complaints and appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review, publication procedures, or other aspects of the journal's editorial conduct.

Complaints should normally be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief or the journal's editorial office using the official contact details provided on the journal website. Complaints will be handled fairly, confidentially, and as promptly as reasonably possible.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant procedural error, misunderstanding, or factual issue affected the decision. An appeal should provide clear reasons and relevant evidence. Appeals will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or, where appropriate, by an independent editor who was not involved in the original decision. The outcome of an appeal is final unless substantial new evidence becomes available.

The journal will not tolerate abusive, threatening, or discriminatory conduct toward authors, reviewers, editors, or staff.

 

Allegations of misconduct

The journal takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. Such allegations may include, but are not limited to, plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate or redundant publication, inappropriate image manipulation, unethical research practices, manipulation of the peer-review process, authorship misconduct, and undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Allegations may be raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, or other interested parties and should be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief or editorial office with sufficient information to support the concern.

When an allegation is received, the journal will assess the available evidence and may contact the authors, reviewers, editors, or relevant institutions as appropriate. The journal may follow applicable COPE guidance and may seek clarification or investigation from the authors' affiliated institutions or other competent bodies.

Where misconduct is confirmed or there is sufficient evidence of a serious publication problem, the journal may take appropriate action, including correction, retraction, expression of concern, rejection of a manuscript, notification of relevant institutions, or other measures considered necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

 

Conflicts of interest

Authors, editors, reviewers, and other individuals involved in the publication process must disclose any financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their judgment.

Authors should disclose relevant conflicts of interest at the time of submission. Reviewers should inform the journal of any actual or potential conflict before accepting an invitation to review a manuscript and should decline the assignment where a conflict could affect the impartiality of the review.

Editors must not participate in editorial decisions involving manuscripts in which they have a personal, professional, financial, or institutional conflict of interest. Where appropriate, another independent editor will be assigned to handle the manuscript.

Disclosure of a conflict of interest does not necessarily mean that a manuscript will be rejected. The purpose of disclosure is to promote transparency and allow readers and other stakeholders to assess potential influences on the research and publication process.

 

Data availability

Authors are encouraged to make the data, materials, methods, code, and other resources supporting their published research available where ethically, legally, and practically possible.

Where data supporting the findings are publicly available, authors should provide an appropriate data availability statement and, where applicable, a persistent link or identifier to the relevant repository or dataset.

Where data cannot be shared because of privacy, confidentiality, legal, ethical, contractual, or other legitimate restrictions, authors should clearly state the reason and, where possible, describe the conditions under which access may be granted.

The journal encourages responsible data sharing and transparency while recognizing that some research data cannot be made openly available. Authors remain responsible for ensuring that data sharing complies with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements.

 

Ethical oversight

Research involving human participants, human data, animals, or other subjects requiring ethical oversight must comply with applicable ethical standards, institutional requirements, and relevant national or international regulations.

Where ethical approval is required, authors must provide information about the approving institution or ethics committee and the relevant approval or reference number, where applicable. Where informed consent is required, authors must confirm that appropriate consent was obtained.

For studies involving human participants, authors must protect participants' privacy and confidentiality and must not disclose personally identifiable information without appropriate consent and justification.

Editors may request evidence of ethical approval or informed consent when necessary. Manuscripts may be rejected, or publication may be suspended or withdrawn, where the journal has reasonable grounds to believe that applicable ethical requirements have not been satisfied.

 

Corrections, retractions and expressions of concern

The journal is committed to maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the published scholarly record. When an error or problem is identified after publication, the journal will assess its significance and take appropriate action.

A correction may be published when the published record contains an error that affects the accuracy or clarity of the article but does not invalidate the main findings or conclusions.

A retraction may be issued when a published article contains serious problems that undermine the reliability of the research, including confirmed fabrication or falsification, substantial plagiarism, major ethical violations, or other circumstances that make the findings unreliable.

An expression of concern may be published when there are serious or unresolved questions about the integrity, reliability, or ethics of a published article but the available evidence is insufficient to justify immediate retraction.

Corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern will be linked to the original article and clearly identified. The original publication will normally remain part of the scholarly record, with the relevant notice indicating the nature and reason for the post-publication action.

The journal may consult authors, editors, reviewers, institutions, or other appropriate parties when investigating post-publication concerns and may follow relevant COPE recommendations and procedures.

 

Editors' responsibilities

Publication decisions: The editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editorial board will be guided by the policies of the journal and constrained by legal requirements related to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. When making this decision, members of the editorial board will discuss and consider the suggestions made by reviewers.

Equality: Manuscripts will be evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, political philosophy, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, or religious belief of the authors. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. 

Anonymity and confidentiality: The editorial board guarantees that all information regarding a given manuscript will be kept confidential.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted paper is prohibited from being used without the author's explicit written consent in the editor's, reviewers, or any other reader's own research. Editors agree to keep any information, ideas or insights they get from working with the manuscript confidential and not to use them for their own gain. The editors are not allowed to review and evaluate the paper, in which the ideas expressed, the authors involved, institutes, companies or other organizations cause a conflict of interest and may affect the evaluation process. Instead, they must request that another editorial board member handle the manuscript.

 

Reviewers’ responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review results in evaluation and critique that help author make improvements to their manuscripts and, importantly, help the editorial board decide if the paper should be accepted for publishing in the journal.

Qualification: Any appointed reviewer who believes they are not qualified to evaluate the research presented in a paper, or who anticipates that completing the review within a reasonable timeframe will be impossible, should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process. The editorial board is responsible for ensuring that responses are provided as promptly as possible during the review process. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and conclusions should be supported by sufficient evidence to enable authors to use them to improve their manuscripts.

Confidentiality: All reviewers have to follow the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers established by COPE (the Committee on Publication Ethics). As a reviewer, they agree to keep information regarding a given manuscript confidential; information may only be shared with the authors' respective representatives, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and, if required, the publisher. Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted paper is prohibited from being used without the author's explicit written consent in the editor's, reviewers', or any other reader's research. Editors agree to keep any information, ideas, or insights they get from working with the manuscript confidential and not use them for their own gain during or after the peer review process.

Objectivity: The review should be completely objective. During the evaluation, the reviewer should not express his own position on the issue. The review should not contain personal criticism of the author..

Referencing and Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should look for instances when relevant published work cited in the manuscript has not been cited in the reference section. They should specify whether observations or arguments obtained from other publications are accompanied by a reference. Reviewers should alert the editor if there is a significant similarity or overlap between the article under consideration and any other published paper about which they are personally aware.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted paper is prohibited from being used without the author's explicit written consent in the editor's, reviewers, or any other reader's own research. Editors agree to keep any information, ideas or insights they get from working with the manuscript confidential and not to use them for their own gain. The editors are not allowed to review and evaluate the paper, in which the ideas expressed, the authors involved, institutes, companies or other organizations cause a conflict of interest and may affect the evaluation process. Instead, they must request that another editorial board member handle the manuscript.

 

Authors' responsibilities

Reporting standards: The author presents his original work in the journal, where there is an adequate report of the work carried out and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should include enough detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or willfully inaccurate statements are unethical and should be avoided.

Originality and Plagiarism: The author must present a completely original, own work. Any idea, word, sentence, work should be properly cited or quoted in the paper. Publications that have influenced the character of the paper should also be referenced. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and therefore also unacceptable. If any form of plagiarism is detected, the paper will be rejected and will not be accepted for future consideration.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to individuals who made a major contribution to the paper's conception, design, implementation, or interpretation. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author guarantees that the author list includes all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved individuals. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to publish it before submitting it for publication.

 Finding flaws in the paper: When an author or editor detects a critical mistake or inaccuracy in a published research, it is the author's responsibility to tell the journal editor immediately and work with the editor to remove or correct the article. If the Editors or publisher gets information from a third party that a published article includes a critical mistake or inaccuracy, it is the authors' responsibility to immediately edit or retract the manuscript or present evidence of the paper's accuracy to the Editors.

Publication of paper in different journals: Papers presenting fundamentally the same study should never be submitted to more than one publication. Submitting the same work to more than one journal is unethical, unacceptable, and inappropriate. Articles that have previously been published as copyrighted work elsewhere are not acceptable for submission. Furthermore, articles that are being reviewed by the journal should not be submitted to copyrighted journals.

The process of conducting a survey: If the research includes a survey, it should be conducted in full compliance with the methodological, procedural and ethical norms of the survey. The survey questionnaire should be straightforward and objective. Leading inquiries that induce an answer by word choice or a limited choice of answers should be avoided. Surveys should not include rhetorical questions or elements that are intended to embarrass or humiliate respondents. The survey should be conducted with the full consent of the respondents. Respondents should have the right to stop the survey at any time. Respondents should be selected purposively, depending on the objectives of the study. The selection should be representative and it should be possible to draw conclusions based on the survey. Respondents should be guaranteed their anonymity. If identifiable personal information is requested, it should be ensured that nothing contained in a research report would make them identifiable or recognizeable.