The Romanian Journal of Regional Science (RJRS) aims at assuring a high-quality research standard and ethical behaviour for all the parties concerned with the publication process.
RJRS’s standards of publication ethics are aligned with the guidelines endorsed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) including but not limited to:
Ethical Obligations of Authors
When submitting the article into the system the author accepts the Journal’s standards of publication ethics.
The author guarantees that the article and any supplemental information submitted for publication are the author’s original work and that other authors’ works used in the manuscript were appropriately cited. Authors should not engage in plagiarism. Self-plagiarism is also not acceptable by the journal.
The author guarantees that the manuscript has not been submitted for publication (in English or any other language) elsewhere.
The author should provide the raw data for editorial review if requested and should be prepared to allow access to these data for the replication of the research if requested.
Authors should disclose to the editor any potential conflict of interest that may affect the independence of their manuscript’s evaluation for publication.
Shall any error or inaccuracy occur after the publication of the manuscript, it is the author’s responsibility to inform the editor, to correct or even to retract the manuscript.
Ethical Obligations of Reviewers
When accepting the article for peer-review the reviewer accepts the Journal’s standards of publication ethics.
Reviewers should demonstrate objectivity in performing the peer-review process. Their duty is to complete the peer-review form in an objective manner, and by providing clear and concise recommendations for the improvement of the reviewed manuscript.
Reviewers should inform the editor if they consider themselves to be unqualified to review the assigned paper, they lack time to do that, or they consider that their objectivity and correctness of evaluation is being threatened by any reason.
The reviewer should disclose any potential conflict of interest to the editor immediately after receiving the paper for revision or after its occurrence.
Reviewers should treat the manuscript as confidential, and should not pass the paper or parts of the paper to third parties for revision or for any other reason. More so, reviewers are not allowed to use the information gained from unpublished manuscripts for their own interest.
Ethical Obligations of Editors
The Editor-in-Chief and the members of the Editorial Board (“the editors”) should treat any submission with confidentiality.
The editors have full authority and responsibility to accept or reject a submitted manuscript.
The editors should demonstrate independence in making the decision regarding which of the submitted articles should be published.
The editors should guarantee the double-blind peer review process in which both authors and referees are anonymous.
The editors should not use the information gained from unpublished manuscripts for their own interest, unless obtaining the authors’ written and explicit consent.