Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Innovative Solutions for Eco-Environmental Sustainability upholds a rigorous, fair, and confidential peer review process, guided by the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Peer review plays a vital role in ensuring the integrity, quality, and scientific validity of the content we publish.

Review Process

All submissions undergo double-blind peer review, in which both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous to ensure an unbiased evaluation. Manuscripts are reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. The Editorial Board oversees the peer review process to ensure transparency and adherence to ethical standards.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following principles, in accordance with COPE guidelines:

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not share, discuss, or disclose the content with others outside of the review process.
  • Objectivity and Constructive Feedback: Reviews should be conducted objectively, with clear and constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work.
  • Acknowledging Limitations: Reviewers should only accept review invitations for manuscripts they are qualified to assess. They must decline if the content is outside their expertise or if there is a conflict of interest.
  • Timeliness: Reviewers should complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or inform the editorial team if a delay is unavoidable.
  • Ethical Vigilance: Reviewers are encouraged to flag any ethical concerns, including plagiarism, redundant publication, data fabrication or falsification, and improper citation practices.

Editorial Oversight

All final decisions regarding manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection are made by the Editorial Board, based on reviewer feedback and alignment with the journal’s scope and ethical standards. The journal encourages a respectful, collaborative peer review environment that promotes scientific integrity, innovation, and responsible scholarship.

Publishing Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Innovative Solutions for Eco-Environmental Sustainability (JISEES), published by [Your Institution Name], strictly adheres to the internationally recognized standards of publication ethics, as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, Authors, and Reviewers, ensuring integrity, transparency, and accountability in all aspects of the publishing process.

Editorial Responsibilities

The Editorial Board is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics by:

  • Ensuring fair, objective, and timely peer review of all submissions, free from bias or discrimination based on race, gender, religion, nationality, or political beliefs.
  • Making publication decisions based solely on the manuscript's originality, scientific merit, relevance to the journal’s scope, and clarity.
  • Guaranteeing confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and ensuring that no information is disclosed to third parties without appropriate permissions.
  • Taking prompt action in response to complaints of ethical misconduct, including plagiarism, data falsification, duplicate publication, and authorship disputes.
  • Issuing retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern when necessary.

If the Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor submits a manuscript to the journal, the editorial process will be independently managed by a designated editorial board member to ensure a fair and impartial review process.

Author Responsibilities

Authors submitting to JISEES are expected to follow the highest ethical standards in research and scholarly writing. By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that:

  • The work is original, unpublished, and not under consideration elsewhere.
  • All data presented are accurate, authentic, and verifiable.
  • Proper citations and acknowledgments have been given for all previously published content and contributions by others.
  • Plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, and inappropriate self-citation are strictly prohibited.
  • Authorship reflects substantial intellectual contributions from all listed authors. All co-authors must approve the final version of the manuscript.
  • Ghost authorship, guest authorship, or honorary authorship is not acceptable.
  • Any funding sources and potential conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial) are fully disclosed.
  • The corresponding author ensures that all co-authors meet authorship criteria and agree to the submission and final version of the manuscript.

Use of AI Tools

Manuscripts that include AI-generated content must clearly specify the role of the AI tool. AI-generated text or data that cannot be independently verified or referenced will result in rejection.

Authorship Criteria

Following ICMJE and COPE guidelines, to qualify as an author, individuals must meet all the following criteria:

  1. Substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or analysis/interpretation of the research.
  2. Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for intellectual content.
  3. Final approval of the version to be published.
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgments” section, with their consent obtained beforehand.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Peer reviewers play a vital role in the publication process and are expected to:

  • Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts under review.
  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback to improve the quality of the manuscript.
  • Declare any conflicts of interest and decline to review if such conflicts exist.
  • Alert the editors to suspected ethical issues such as plagiarism, duplicate submission, or ethical violations in the research process.

Reviewers are selected based on their subject-matter expertise and are expected to evaluate only those submissions within their area of competence.

Plagiarism and Misconduct

JISEES employs iThenticate (via Crossref Similarity Check) to detect and prevent plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct. Any manuscript found to contain plagiarized material or falsified data will be rejected or retracted if already published.

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

  • Direct copying of text without proper attribution.
  • Paraphrasing without acknowledgment.
  • Using others’ research data or ideas without permission or credit.

Conflict of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may affect the interpretation or assessment of the manuscript. These may include:

  • Financial relationships (e.g., employment, consultancies, stock ownership).
  • Personal or professional affiliations that could be perceived as influencing objectivity.

All sources of funding, including grant numbers or sponsoring organizations, must be acknowledged clearly in the manuscript.

Corrections, Retractions, and Appeals

  • Authors are obliged to inform the Editorial Board if they discover errors in their published or submitted work. Corrections will be made accordingly.
  • If misconduct is confirmed post-publication, such as plagiarism or duplicate publication, the paper will be retracted, and a formal retraction notice will be posted online.
  • Authors may request to withdraw their manuscript only during the peer review process. Withdrawal is not allowed after final acceptance.
  • Authors may appeal rejection decisions by contacting the Editorial Office with a detailed rationale for reconsideration. Appeals will be reviewed by an independent editor.

By submitting to JISEES, all parties—authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers—agree to uphold these ethical principles to maintain trust and credibility in environmental and sustainability science publishing. For more information, visit the official COPE guidelines.