Agriculture, Environment & Society

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Agriculture, Environment & Society (AES) is dedicated to publishing and widely disseminating high-quality content. The editorial operations of AES are guided by rigorous ethical standards that are both transparent and fair. We acknowledge that the scholarly publishing ecosystem involves various stakeholders, including editors, authors, reviewers, and publishers. We expect all parties involved to have a shared understanding and acceptance of the journal's policies on publication ethics and malpractice. Our policies are closely aligned with the Core Practices document of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at: COPE Core Practices.

By submitting an article to AES, you agree to comply with the following publication ethics and malpractice statement.

 

1. Responsibility of the Author

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work performed and provide an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the paper. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study along with the manuscript for editorial review. They should also be prepared to make the data publicly available if feasible. Authors must ensure that such data remains accessible to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication, preferably through an institutional or subject-based data repository, provided that the confidentiality of participants is protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not prevent their release.

Originality

Authors must submit only entirely original works and must appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work should also be cited. Authors should clearly express their primary ideas and tasks, even if they have been revised or quoted from other sources. If specific sentences or paragraphs appear to be extracted from another author’s work, they must be placed in quotation marks, and the source must be clearly indicated. Authors should not submit a manuscript that has been previously submitted to AES, assessed, and ultimately rejected by the editor. If the initial submission was rejected and the author wishes to submit a revised version, the justification for resubmission must be clearly explained to the editor. Resubmission is permitted only under specific circumstances.

Plagiarism

Upon article registration, all authors will be notified via email. It is understood that listing an author’s name implies their significant contribution to the manuscript. If an individual listed as an author did not contribute to the writing of the manuscript, this must be reported immediately. All authors are responsible for the originality of the work. The journal reserves all rights to check for plagiarism.

Plagiarism can take various forms, including:

1. Listing individuals as authors who did not contribute to the article.
2. Copying or reproducing significant portions of another article, even if the copied work belongs to the same author.
3. Presenting the results or findings of other research as one’s own.
4. Reporting false results that contradict scientific findings or distort research outcomes.
5. Repeatedly publishing similar content by a single author in multiple journals.
6. Using unreliable data or manipulating research data.

The journal editors will investigate plagiarism cases thoroughly to uphold the integrity of research. Depending on the severity of the plagiarism, the following actions may be taken:

1. The article will be rejected, and if already published, it will be removed from the journal’s website.
2. The authors’ names will be added to a blacklist maintained by the publisher.
3. Legal action may be pursued through appropriate judicial channels.
4. An official letter will be sent to other relevant domestic and international journals to inform them of the plagiarism.
5. An official letter will be sent to the Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology, as well as to universities, institutes, and other relevant entities where the author has used the article for academic or professional purposes.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications

Generally, manuscripts describing the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts that have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted to AES. Additionally, manuscripts under review by one journal should not be submitted to other publications while under review. Exceptions may be made for creative works; authors should consult the editor for guidance.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others. Publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work should be cited. Information obtained privately, such as through conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author involved.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All individuals who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Those who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the manuscript and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.

All listed authors must have actively participated in the research and are responsible for the results. Authorship should be proportional to the contributions made. Faculty members should list students as the primary authors if the article is derived from a student’s dissertation or thesis. The corresponding author must share the manuscript with all co-authors to ensure their approval before submission.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed to the editor at the earliest possible stage. Readers should be informed about the funding sources and the role of funders in the research.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Conflict of Interests

Authors must disclose the sources of financial support in the manuscript and submit this information along with the article. Each funding source should be listed in the published article. If there is any doubt about a potential conflict of interest, it should be clarified. Any potential conflict of interest must be disclosed to the editor or the publishing office. The corresponding author may suggest potential reviewers for the manuscript at the time of submission. Authors must avoid any potential conflicts of interest in the selection of editors and reviewers. This applies not only to the corresponding author but also to all co-authors.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest include:

1. An author and a reviewer being from the same institution or university.
2. An author being a member of the thesis committee of a reviewer, or vice versa.
3. An author, editor, or reviewer having been a co-author with another party in a different article within the past two years.

Authors must not suggest reviewers who know them personally or have previously reviewed their manuscript, as this violates the double-blind peer-review process. Manuscripts submitted by authors from the same institution as the reviewers or editorial board members must be reviewed by external referees.

Double-Blind Peer-Review

AES follows a double-blind peer-review process, where authors and reviewers are unaware of each other’s identities. Authors must respect the confidentiality of the review process and must not reveal their identity to reviewers or vice versa. For example, the manuscript should not contain any self-identifying information that could reveal the author’s identity. Authors should not publish their submitted manuscripts on personal or social websites, as this could allow reviewers to identify them. Authors must not suggest reviewers who have previously reviewed their manuscript or provided feedback, as this undermines the double-blind review process.

Precision

Authors are ultimately responsible for the content of their submitted manuscript. They must present an accurate and objective discussion of the research, including its significance. Authors must report their findings thoroughly, without omitting data relevant to the research questions. Results should be reported regardless of whether they support the expected outcomes. Authors must present the features, findings, and interpretations of their research accurately. Fundamental theories, methods, and research schemes relevant to the findings must be disclosed.

The manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to allow other researchers to replicate the study. If an author discovers a significant error or oversight, they must promptly inform the editor-in-chief and cooperate in correcting or revising the manuscript. If a third party identifies a significant error in a published article, the author must cooperate in correcting or revising the article and provide evidence to the editor supporting the accuracy of the original work.

Human Rights

Authors are responsible for upholding privacy, human dignity, freedom, and welfare, as well as the rights of research participants. Articles involving human subjects (e.g., field studies, simulations, interviews) must comply with human rights regulations.

Timeliness

Authors must act promptly to revise and modify their manuscripts. If an author cannot meet the deadline (maximum one month), they must contact the editor-in-chief to request an extension or withdraw from the review process.

 

2. Responsibility of the Editor

The editor’s primary responsibility is to determine which submissions will be published. Decisions must be based on the manuscript’s merit, without consideration of the author’s race, gender, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity, or citizenship.

Confidentiality

Information concerning a submitted manuscript must only be disclosed to the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or the publisher as required or appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research without the author’s explicit written consent. Reviewers must recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper. Editors must follow the procedures outlined in the COPE flowchart. Editors must respond promptly to complaints and ensure that there is a mechanism for dissatisfied complainants to escalate their concerns.

Independence

Editors must maintain their independence and ensure that authors are free to write without undue influence. Editors are responsible for accepting or rejecting articles based on the recommendations of reviewers. However, editors may reject articles without review if they deem them inappropriate.

No Biases

Editors must act impartially, without personal or ideological bias. They must evaluate manuscripts based solely on scientific merit.

Conflict of Benefits

Editors must avoid actions that could create conflicts of interest. For example, editors must not publish articles that have not been clearly identified, reviewed, or partially reviewed. If an editor has a potential conflict of interest, they must delegate the handling of the manuscript to another qualified individual, such as a previous editor or a member of the editorial board. Editors must avoid reviewing articles that could create a real or potential conflict of interest, such as those involving competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with authors, companies, or institutions.

Examples of conflicts of interest include:

1. An author and editor being employed by the same institution.
2. An editor being a member of the thesis committee of an author, or vice versa.
3. An editor and author being co-authors on another article or having been co-authors within the past two years.

Double-Blind Peer-Review

AES follows a double-blind peer-review process, where authors and reviewers are unaware of each other’s identities. Review standards must be clearly and concisely communicated.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial board members must not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone other than the reviewers and authors. Formal procedures must be in place to ensure the confidentiality of the review process. Editors must ensure that the double-blind peer-review process is maintained and that no information is revealed that could identify the authors or reviewers. Reviewers’ anonymity may only be breached if they consent to the disclosure of their identity. Editors must ensure that their editorial boards are aligned with these confidentiality standards.

Review Quality

Typically, two reviewers are invited to evaluate each manuscript. The editor must assess the quality of all reviews. The editor may occasionally edit a reviewed manuscript before sending it to the author (e.g., removing expressions that reveal the reviewer’s identity). Review quality scores and other functional metrics are periodically assessed by the editor to ensure the journal’s optimal operation. These metrics help inform decisions regarding the reappointment of reviewers and ongoing review requests. Individual performance data must remain confidential and accessible only to editors.

Timeliness

Editors must ensure that manuscripts are reviewed promptly and that authors receive timely updates on the status of their submission. The initial review and reviewer selection should be completed within one week of receiving the manuscript.

Quality of Decision

Editors must clearly communicate the editorial board’s decisions to authors. Decision letters must combine the reviewers’ recommendations with additional suggestions for the author. Editors must not simply attach the decision result without explaining the reviewers’ advice and suggestions.

Precision

If the editor receives convincing evidence of false concepts or results in an unpublished manuscript, they must inform the author and initiate the appropriate procedures. If similar evidence is found in a published article, the editor must arrange for an emergency correction or retraction and communicate the relevant issues to readers.

Authority

The editor has the final authority and responsibility for the journal. They must respect the journal’s stakeholders (e.g., readers, authors, reviewers, editorial board members) and strive to maintain the journal’s integrity and continuous improvement. The editor must select editorial board members based on written assessments, define their responsibilities, and evaluate their performance regularly.

Operations

The editor must design the journal’s operations in detail, considering all policy, technical, economic, financial, institutional, management, environmental, socio-cultural, and gender-related aspects. The journal’s performance will be assessed annually based on metrics such as submission rates, publication intervals, revision rates, and operational data. These metrics will help improve the journal’s operations and ensure the timely publication of high-quality research.

 

3. Responsibility of Reviewers

Purpose of Peer-Review

The peer-review process is a critical component in helping the editor and editorial board make publishing decisions. It also serves to help authors improve the quality of their submissions.

Promptness

Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if they feel unqualified to assess the contribution or cannot provide a timely review as defined by the editor.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not discuss the manuscript with others without the editor’s approval.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research without the author’s explicit written consent. Reviewers must recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper. Reviewers must inform the editor of any potential conflicts of interest.

Objectivity

Reviewers must strive to be objective in their assessments. Comments should be clearly expressed and supported by data or arguments. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers must also inform the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper of which they are aware.

Reciprocal Communication

Reviewing manuscripts is a professional activity that contributes to the scientific community. Researchers who submit articles to a journal are expected to accept invitations to review articles for that journal.

Right to Decline or Reject

Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if they are unqualified, have a conflict of interest, or cannot meet the deadline. If a reviewer is asked to review a manuscript they have previously reviewed, they must inform the editor of the prior review unless asked to reassess.

Double-Blind Peer-Review

AES follows a double-blind peer-review process. Reviewers must not review manuscripts they have previously assessed or provided feedback on. Reviewers must not reveal their identity to the authors or disclose any information that could compromise the review process.

No Biases

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally. They must avoid any personal bias in their reviews.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the review process. They must not discuss the manuscript with anyone other than the editor and must not share any information about the manuscript with others. If reviewers suspect misconduct, they must inform the editor confidentially.

Precision

Reviewers must provide honest and constructive feedback to authors. Their reviews must be scientifically sound and supported by sufficient detail to justify their recommendations. Reviewers must not provide contradictory feedback, such as overly friendly comments to the author and harsh criticism to the editor.

Punctuality

Reviewers must complete their reviews promptly. If a reviewer cannot meet the deadline (maximum one month), they must contact the editor to request an extension or decline the review.

 

4. Copyright and License

AES is a fully open-access journal, meaning all articles are available online immediately upon publication. All articles are published under a Creative Commons License, allowing authors to retain copyright to their work without restrictions. Authors have complete control over their work, including the right to reuse, distribute, and republish it. All content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits users to:

• Share: Copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
• Adapt: Remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as users comply with the license terms.

Attribution: Users must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. This must be done in a reasonable manner without suggesting that the licensor endorses the user or their use.

No Additional Restrictions: Users may not apply legal terms or technological measures that restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

 

5. Informed Consent

All participants in human subjects research have a right to privacy. Identifying information, such as names or initials, must not be published without the participant’s written informed consent. Authors must disclose to participants whether any identifiable material may be available online or in print after publication. Consent must be documented and archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as required by local regulations or laws.

 

6. Plagiarism Policy

The Journal of Agriculture, Environment & Society (AES) adheres to the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). We fully endorse and comply with the terms and conditions set forth by COPE regarding plagiarism. In cases where plagiarism is brought to our attention with substantial evidence, we will follow the flowcharts and workflows outlined by COPE.

The Editorial Board of AES is committed to ensuring the originality, reliability, and proper citation of all submitted articles. Plagiarism is considered unacceptable, and the journal has established specific policies and penalties for handling such cases.

Authors must ensure that their submissions are entirely original. If they have used the work or statements of others, proper citation or referencing is mandatory. Plagiarism in any form, including the substantial use of another's work without attribution, presenting someone else's work as one's own, or claiming results from research conducted by others, is considered unethical and unacceptable. Manuscripts that are compilations of previously published materials without original interpretation will not be accepted. Unfair text borrowing or claiming research results not belonging to the authors is also prohibited. Authors must guarantee that their manuscript:

• Is entirely original;
• Is free from plagiarism;
• Has not been published previously in any language;
• Properly cites or references any information or words taken from other publications.

Copyright laws must be respected. Permission must be obtained for reproducing copyrighted materials such as tables, figures, or large quotations. AES is dedicated to upholding publication ethics, particularly in cases of multiple submissions and plagiarism. Editors reserve the right to screen manuscripts for plagiarism. The acceptable similarity level for submitted manuscripts is less than 10%, with no single reference exceeding 1%. Any manuscript with a similarity level above 10% will be rejected.

 

7. The Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

All manuscripts must be free from plagiarized content. Authors are encouraged to use plagiarism detection software to check their work. The journal uses Grammarly and iThenticate for plagiarism detection. Articles found to contain plagiarism or self-plagiarism will be rejected immediately. AES follows international standards to prevent plagiarism, and authors must ensure their work respects the copyrights of others.

Upon submission, the editorial board assigns a team to check the manuscript for plagiarism using various tools. If plagiarism is detected, the manuscript will be rejected, and the author will be asked to provide an explanation and make necessary corrections. Failure to respond or make corrections within a reasonable time will result in a five-year ban from submitting to the journal. If the Editorial Board suspects unethical research practices, the journal's code of ethics will be reviewed and appropriate actions taken.

Definition of Plagiarism:

Plagiarism is the use of others' published or unpublished ideas or words without proper attribution or permission, presenting them as original. This includes ideas or words taken from abstracts, grant applications, or unpublished manuscripts. Self-plagiarism refers to reusing portions of one's previous work without proper citation. While self-plagiarism is not viewed as severely as plagiarizing others' work, it is still discouraged. Direct plagiarism involves copying text, while mosaic plagiarism involves borrowing ideas and phrases without proper credit.

Authors can report plagiarism by:

• Informing the editor of the journal where the plagiarized article is published;
• Providing the original and plagiarized articles with highlighted sections;
• If evidence is convincing, the editor will arrange a disciplinary meeting;
• The editor of the plagiarized article will contact the editor of the original article to resolve the issue;
• The plagiarist will be asked to explain;
• If no response or unsatisfactory explanation is provided, the article will be retracted;
• The author will be blacklisted for at least five years;
• The head of the author's institution will be notified.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions do not violate copyright or ownership rights. Permission must be obtained for reproducing any copyrighted material, and proper acknowledgments must be included.

Plagiarism, whether intentional or unintentional, involves using others' work without proper attribution. Manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration elsewhere. If plagiarism is detected, the Editor-in-Chief will review the manuscript and take appropriate action based on the severity of the plagiarism.

Plagiarism Level

1. Copying a short sentence without proper citation: Authors will be warned and asked to correct the text.
2. Copying significant portions of another article without proper citation: The manuscript will be rejected, and the author may be banned from submitting to the journal.
3. All authors are responsible for the content of their manuscript. If plagiarism is found, all authors will face the same consequences.
4. If an author submits a manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously, the manuscript will be rejected, and the author will face penalties.
5. The Editorial Board reserves the right to impose sanctions in cases of multiple instances of plagiarism.

Indicators of plagiarism include:

• Direct copying of another author's work without citation;
• Reproducing substantial parts of another's work without proper attribution;
• Paraphrasing another's ideas or words without citation.

 

8. Responding to Allegations of Possible Misconduct

Definitions of Misconduct

Misconduct may be deliberate, reckless, or due to ignorance. The journal investigates potential misconduct by considering both the act and the intent of the individual involved. Common forms of scientific misconduct include:

• Falsification of data: Fabricating or selectively reporting data, omitting conflicting data, or distorting results.
• Plagiarism: Using another's ideas or words without proper attribution.
• Improprieties of authorship: Misrepresenting authorship, including excluding contributors or submitting multi-authored work without consent.
• Misappropriation of ideas: Using ideas obtained during peer review or other scholarly activities without permission.
• Violation of research practices: Deviating from accepted research practices, manipulating experiments, or misreporting results.
• Failure to comply with regulations: Violating laws or regulations related to research, including the use of funds, care of animals, or human subjects.
• Inappropriate behavior: Making false accusations, failing to report misconduct, or retaliating against those involved in investigations.

 

9. Responses to Possible Misconduct

A committee led by the editor-in-chief and editorial board members will investigate allegations of misconduct. Actions will be based on recommendations from COPE, WAME, and ICMJE. AES follows COPE's guidelines and code of conduct in handling misconduct cases.

 

10. Open Access Policy

AES provides immediate open access to its content, following the Budapest Open Access Initiative. Research published in the journal is freely available to the public, allowing users to read, download, and distribute the articles without financial or legal barriers. Authors retain copyright, and articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits sharing and adaptation of the material for any purpose, provided proper credit is given.

Benefits of open access for authors include:

• Retaining copyright;
• Free access for users worldwide;
• Increased visibility and readership;
• Rapid publication;
• High availability on search engines and indexing databases;
• Increased citation rates;
• Recognition and acceptance of research work.

11. Data Sharing Policy

AES encourages authors to share their research data to promote transparency and reproducibility. Authors are encouraged to deposit data in public repositories and include a Data Accessibility Statement in their manuscript. The journal requires authors of Original Investigations, Case Reports, and Special Papers to:

1. Place de-identified data in a repository;
2. Include a Data Availability Statement describing where and how the data can be accessed.

Data includes digital materials such as spreadsheets, text files, images, videos, and software code. Authors should deposit the minimum amount of data needed to reproduce the results. Data can be placed in institutional or general repositories like Figshare, Open Science Framework, or Zenodo. The Data Availability Statement should include the location of the data, a unique identifier, and any access instructions.

Exceptions to the data-sharing policy may be granted for proprietary data or privacy concerns. Confidential data, such as human subject data, must be anonymized or shared with permission.

Benefits of Sharing Data:

• Long-term preservation of data;
• Proper citation and credit for researchers;
• Opportunities for meta-analysis and new discoveries;
• Improved research transparency and reproducibility;
• Wider availability of research data supports practical applications.

AES offers several data-sharing policies:

• Basic: Encourages data sharing where possible;
• Share upon reasonable request: Authors agree to share data upon request;
• Publicly available: Data is freely available to the public;
• Open data: Data is freely available and reusable by third parties;
• Open and fully FAIR: Data meets FAIR standards (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable).

 

12. Archive of the publication's website

All journal articles are archived in two ways: the PDF version of all articles is online and available to readers on the journal website. The backup copy of the articles is kept in the computer of the journal office.

13. Data Citation

Data should be cited similarly to articles, books, and web resources. Authors must include data citations in their reference list. The journal follows the format proposed by the Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles, including the author, year, dataset title, repository, version, and persistent identifier.

For questions or concerns, please contact the journal office at aes.uoz.journal@gmail.com

 

The following are usefull links for our authors, reviewers, and editors:

COPE Flow-Charts

COPE Ethical Guideline for New Editors

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Authors