Publication Ethics


Jurnal ENVIROTEK is a journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of environment research information. The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer from COPE Ethical Guidelines.

Duties for Authors

  1. 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. Transparency about the contributions of authors is encouraged.
  2. Originality and plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others,that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  3. Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.
  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. Envirotek does not view the following uses of a work as prior publication: publication in the form of an abstract; publication as an academic thesis; publication as an electronic preprint.
  5. Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
  6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest.
  7. Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  8. Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

Duties of Editors

  1. Publication Decision: The editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals).
  2. Peer review: The editor shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely.  Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least internal and additional independent reviewers, and where necessary the editor should seek additional opinions.
  3. Fair play: The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The editor shall establish, along with the publisher, a transparent mechanism for appeal against editorial decisions.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct

Duties of Peer reviewers

  1. Only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
  2. Respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
  3. Declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
  4. Not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
  5. Be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments
  6. Acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavor and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
  7. Recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.