EDITORIAL POLICY OF THE JOURNAL
Targets and goals
The Journal “Arctic: Ecology and Economy” is a research and analysis periodical that covers the main challenges and achievements of Russian and foreign science in the field of studying, exploration and providing favorable environmental conditions for the development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation and the Arctic as a whole.
The main purpose of the Journal is to provide the broad strata of the scientific community, employees of federal and regional legislative and executive bodies, research and production enterprises, students, graduate students and businessmen with the opportunity to get acquainted with the results of scientific research and applied developments on key issues of study and economic development of the Arctic, as well as the preservation of its unique ecology. The comprehensive coverage of the relevant issues of Arctic exploration and development favors the creation of scientific basis for justification of the government decisions on domestic and international Arctic issues and economic activities in the Arctic Ocean and adjacent areas. The study of ecological and geographical factors that can reduce risks in the development of the Arctic regions also has an important place here.
The tasks of the Journal are:
The Journal publishes the original articles of scientists and specialists of research organizations, higher educational institutions, industrial enterprises and administrative structures of Russia, as well as foreign authors on urgent problems of the Arctic.
For the purpose of an integrated approach to the problems of the Arctic, the Journal includes the following headings: “Ecology”, “Economics and Management of the Arctic zone”, “Research in the Arctic”, “Research and development of the natural resources in the Arctic”, “Shipbuilding for the Arctic”, “Problems of the Northern Sea Route”, “New Arctic development technologies”, “Problems of the Regions”, “State Administration in the Arctic zone”, “Quality and standard of living of the North Indigenous Peoples”.
The heading “Ecology” covers the problems of assessing the ecological conditions of the Arctic as a whole, its territories and water areas and human impact on the natural environment of the Arctic.
The heading “Economics and Management of the Arctic zone” provides for publication of the results of researches on economic systems of different scales, levels and fields of activity in the Arctic zone, their status, development and forecasting, as well as the methods and techniques for managing these systems.
The heading “Research in the Arctic” covers the results of research of the water masses and the bottom of the Arctic Ocean, adjacent areas, the Arctic climate and its impact on the Earth’s climate.
The heading “Research and development of the natural resources in the Arctic” providesfor the publication of the results of scientific work in the field of forecasting, prospecting and exploration of oil, gas and other mineral resources, including marine minerals, and development and exploitation of these deposits.
The heading “Shipbuilding for the Arctic”providesfor the publication of the results of research on the theory, design and construction of vessels and offshore structures for arctic ice conditions.
The heading “Problems of the Northern Sea Route” covers the issues of its state, patterns of functioning, planning, management and development, as well as problems of activity and further development of the Russian nuclear icebreaker fleet. Great importance is attached to publications on preservation of the Northern Sea Route as a national Russian thoroughfare.
The heading “New Arctic development technologies” includes the problems of developing new and improving existing technologies for development of the Arctic mineral wealth and rational use of its natural resources.
The heading “Problems of the Regions” covers the issues of sustainable development of the regions of the Arctic zone, socio-economic policy and managing their economies and nature.
The heading“State Administration in the Arctic zone” covers the issues of public administration of structural changes in the economy, forms and mechanisms of interaction between the Federation and regions in addressing the key issues of socio-economic development of the Arctic zone.
The heading “Quality and standard of living of the North Indigenous Peoples" includes analytical information materialon the problems of life and activity of the population of the Russian Arctic, the preservation and development of its population and cultural heritage, as well as the impact of growing economic activity in the regions on the livelihoods of northern peoples.
4 issues per year
The Journal provides direct open access to its content on the following principle: free open access to research results contributes to an increase in global knowledge sharing.
The procedure for reviewing manuscripts submitted for publication in the Journal "Arctic: Ecology and Economics":
The review of manuscripts of scientific articles in the Journal’s editorial office is carried out to maintain its high scientific and theoretical level. All scientific articles submitted to the editors undergo mandatory double-blind peer review.
1. Scientific articles received from the authors are subject to the primary control on the completeness and correctness of design.
2. The initial assessment of a scientific article for compliance with the Journal profile and the proposal for the nomination of two reviewers are carried out by the Chief Editor, Deputy \Chief Editors.
3. Reviewers must be recognized experts on the subject of the article under review.
The reviewer can be neither the co-author of the work under review, nor scientific leaders of applicants for a scientific degree.
Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts submitted to them for reviewing are intellectual property and relate to information that is not subject to disclosure.
If contradictory reviews are received from reviewers, the Editorial Board has the right to send the article to another reviewer.
4. As a result of expert evaluation of a scientific article, a reviewer may:
- recommend the article for publication;
- recommend the article for publication after revision, taking into account the comments;
- recommend additional review of the article by another specialist;
- recommend rejecting the article.
5. The review is issued on a standard form and is accompanied by written comments in free form. Reviewer submits the executed review to the Editorial Body by e-mail within 2-4 weeks.
6. Comments and suggestions of the reviewer (without specifying his personal data) are sent to the author.
If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the editors of the Journal propose to the author the text of the review asking to take recommendations into account when preparing a new version of the article or to reasonably (partially or fully) refute them.
7. The article, revised by the author, is re-sent for review.
8. If the authors refuse to modify the materials, they must notify the editorial staff in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after three months from the day the review was sent, the editors will remove it from the register. In such a case, the author is notified of the removal of the manuscript from registration in due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.
9. If the author and reviewers have insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the Editorial Board has the right to send the manuscript for additional reviewing. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Chief Editor at the Editorial Board meeting.
10. The decision to refuse to publish the manuscript is taken atthe Editorial Board meeting in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. The article, not recommended for publication by the Editorial Board decision, is not accepted for reconsideration. The message about the refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
11. The positive review is not sufficient reason to publish an article. The final decision on the publication expediency is made by the Editorial Board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Chief Editor.
13. The Editorial Board does not enter into discussions with the authors about its decisions.
Publications of the Journal "Arctic: Ecology and Economy" are included in the calculation systems of citing indexes of authors and journals. “Citation Index” is a numerical indicator characterizing the significance of this article and calculated on the basis of subsequent publications that refer to this work.
The Journal is indexed in the systems:
Ethics of Scientific Publications
The research and analysis Journal “Arctic: Ecology and Economy” (hereinafter – the Journal) complies with high standards of publishing ethics. The ethics of scientific publications is a system of norms of professional conduct in the relationships of all parties (editors, publishers, reviewers and authors) participating in the process of publishing the Journal.
The Editor-in-Chief and his Deputies (hereinafter - Editors), the Editorial Board, the Editorial Body, reviewers and the publisher of the Journal follow the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community and do their best to prevent any violations of these norms.
Editorial Board, Editorial Body, reviewers and the publisher of the Journal base their work on the recommendations and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and also take into account the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishers.
The principles of ethical behavior presented below are mandatory for all parties involved in the process of reviewing and publishing a scientific article: Editors, the Editorial Board, the Editorial Body of the Journal, reviewers and authors.
Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications by all participants in this process contributes to ensuring the authors’ rights to intellectual property, improving the quality of the publication in the eyes of the world scientific community and excluding the possibility of misuse of copyright materials in the interests of individuals.
1. The principles of professional ethics in the activity of Editors, the Editorial Board and the Editorial Body of the Journal
Editors are responsible for everything that is published in the Journal, therefore they seek to improve the Journal, upgrade the quality of its publications, and remain faithful to the principles of scientific integrity and protect freedom of opinion, always be ready to publish corrections, clarifications, refutations and apologies when it is necessary.
In their activity, Editors, members of the Editorial Body of the Journal are responsible for the publication of copyright works, which makes it necessary to follow the following principles:
1.1. When deciding on publication, Editors of the Journal are guided by the reliability of the data presented and the scientific significance of the work in question.
1.2. Editors of the Journal are personally and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the magazine will be accepted for publication and which ones will be rejected. At the same time, they are guided by the Journal policy and observe legal restrictions, avoiding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
1.3. Editors should not have any conflict of interest regarding articles they reject or accept.
1.4. The Editor should recuse himself from reviewing manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with authors, companies and, possibly, other organizations associated with the manuscript.
1.5. Editors and members of the Editorial Body should not disclose any information on the article submitted to the Journal to anyone other except authors, the appointed reviewers, other editorial staff and, if necessary, the publisher.
1.6. Unpublished data obtained from the submitted manuscripts should not be used by Editors or members of the Editorial Body for personal purposes or transferred to third parties (without the written consent of the author). Information or ideas received during the review process and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for the purpose of obtaining benefits.
1.7. Editors evaluate the manuscript solely for its scientific content - regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, origin, social status or political views of the authors of the manuscript.
1.8. Editors should not allow publication of information if there are reasonable grounds to believe that it is plagiarized.
1.9. The article, if accepted for publication, is on open access; copyright reserved by the authors.
1.10. By sending the article to the Journal for publication, the author thereby agrees to the terms of the License Agreement for the use of a scientific work (a template for the text of the License Agreement is available on the Journal website). The author (co-authors) assume the responsibility in the process of preparing the article for publication to download the License Agreement from the Journal’s website, supplement it with the necessary information about the article and its authors, and send the scan of the License Agreement signed by all co-authors to the Editorial Board by e-mail.
1.11. The Editor-in-Chief, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. In identifying a conflict situation, they should take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights, and, when errors are detected, they should facilitate the publication of corrections or refutations.
1.12. Editors and members of the Editorial Body are obliged not to unnecessarily disclose information on the accepted manuscript to all persons except authors, reviewers and the publisher.
1.13. Editors and members of the Editorial Body should ensure the confidentiality of names and other information relating to reviewers.
1.14. Editors should inform readers about who funded the study, as well as whether sponsors played any role in the research and publication of its results.
1.15. Editors should publish requirements in full for authors of articles. These guidelines should be updated regularly and have a reference to the COPE (Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines).
1.16. Editors should respect the wishes of the authors that a person should not review their work, if such a request is reasonable and doable.
1.17. Editors should notify authors of all comments on their work made by reviewers, unless they contain offensive or slanderous remarks.
1.18. Editors in case of suspicion of dishonest behavior and disputes about authorship should use the COPE scheme.
1.19. Editors shouldtake action when they suspect dishonest behavior or find out about the charge with dishonest behavior. This obligation is applied to both published and unpublished materials.
1.20. When recalling articles, Editors should follow the COPE schemesand the recommendations of the Ethics Council of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP).
1.21. Editors should encourage and readily consider valid criticism of works published in the Journal. Authors of criticized materials should be able to respond to criticism. Editors should be open to research that challenges previous work published in the Journal. Papers reporting only negative results can also be published.
2. Ethical principles in the reviewer activity
The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of copyright materials, as a result of which his actions should be unbiased, consisting in observing the following principles:
2.1. The reviewer helps the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Body to decide on publishing and through appropriate interaction with the authors can also help the author improve the quality of work.
2.2. The reviewer, who does not consider himself an expert in the field of the article subject, or knows that he will not be able to submit a review of the article in a timely manner must notify the Editor-in-Chief and withdraw from the review process.
2.3. The reviewer can neither be the author or co-author of the work under review, nor scientific leader and/or employee of the department where the author works.
2.4. Any manuscript received from the Editorial Office for review is a confidential document. It cannot be discussed with other persons, except for the persons indicated by the Editor-in-Chief.
2.5. The reviewer should be objective. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. The reviewer should express his opinion clearly, definitely and convincingly.
2.6. The reviewer should, if possible, identify the published articles relevant to the article under review and not cited by the author. Any statement in the review that some observation, conclusion or argument from the article under review has already been encountered in the literature should be accompanied by an exact bibliographic reference. The reviewer should also draw attention of the Editor-in-Chief to the significant similarity or partial coincidence of the article under review from any other previously published.
2.7. The reviewer should not use the information and ideas from the article submitted to him for review to personal advantage, respecting the confidentiality of the information and ideas.
2.8. The reviewer should not accept manuscripts for consideration if there is a conflict of interest caused by competition, collaboration or other relationships with any authors or organizations associated with the article.
3. Ethical principles that should guide the author of a scientific publication
The submission of the article to the Editorial Staff for consideration implies that it contains new scientific results of the author (team of authors), which have never been published before.
Authors should be aware that they bear personal responsibility for the submitted text of the manuscript, which implies compliance with the following principles:
3.1. Provide reliable results of the work or research. Knowingly false or falsified statements are equated with unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
3.2. The Editor-in-Chief may ask the authors for the original data of the scientific article for review, and the authors should be ready to provide open access to such data, if possible, and in any case should be prepared to keep the original materials within a reasonable period of time after their publication.
3.3. Ensure that the results of the research presented in the manuscript constitute an independent and original work. In the case of using fragments of someone else’s works and/or borrowing the statements of other authors, the article should contain relevant bibliographic references with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. All articles are subject to mandatory verification through the "Anti-plagiarism" system. Excessive borrowings, as well as plagiarism in any form, including incomplete quotations, paraphrasing, or appropriation rights to the results of other people’s research, are unethical and unacceptable actions. Articles that are compilations from materials published before by other authors, without their creative processing and their own author’s interpretation,are not accepted by the Journal Editorial Staff for publication.
3.4. Acknowledge the contribution of all persons who in one way or another influenced the course of the research or determined the nature of the submitted scientific work. In particular, the article should include bibliographic references to Russian-language and foreign publications, which were relevant during the research. Information obtained privately through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties should not be used without obtaining an open written permission from its source. All sources due to be disclosed. Even if written or illustrative materials of a large number of people are used, permission should be obtained and submitted to the Editorial Office.
3.5. Submit to the Journal the original manuscript that was not sent to another journal and is not currently under consideration, as well as an article not previously published in another journal. Non-observance of this principle is regarded as a gross violation of the ethics of publications and gives grounds for withdrawing the article from reviewing. The text of the article should be original, that is, be published in the provided form in a periodical for the first time. If the manuscript fragments were previously published in another article, the authors are obliged to refer to the earlier paper and indicate what the significant difference is between the new work and the previous one. Verbatim copying of own works and their paraphrasing are unacceptable; they can be used only as a basis for new conclusions.
3.6. Ensure the correct composition of the list of the paper co-authors. Among the co-authors, all persons who have made a significant intellectual contribution to its concept, structure, as well as to the conduct or interpretation of the results of the submitted work should be indicated. Other persons who participated in some aspects of the work should be thanked. The author should also ensure that all co-authors are familiar with the final version of the article, approve it and agree with its submission for publication. All authors referred to in the article should bear public responsibility for the content of the article. If the article is a multi-disciplinary work, the co-authors may be responsible for their personal contribution, leaving collective responsibility for the overall result. Among the co-authors, it is inadmissible to identify persons who did not participate in the study.
3.7. In case of detecting significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, immediately notify thereof the Editorial Office of the Journal and make a joint decision on admitting the error and/or correcting it as soon as possible. If the Editorial Office finds out from a third party that the published work contains significant errors, the author is obliged to immediately remove or correct them, or to provide the editors with evidence that the information submitted by him is correct.
3.8. Indicate in their manuscripts all funding sources; declare possible conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the research, their interpretation, as well as the opinions of reviewers. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.
3.9. The Journal undertakes to communicate to the authors all comments on their work made by reviewers, unless they contain offensive or slanderous remarks.
4. Principles of professional ethics in the publisher activities
In his activities, the publisher is responsible for the publication of copyright works, which entails the need to follow the following fundamental principles and procedures:
4.1. Support the Editorial Staff of the Journal in reviewing claims to the ethical aspects of published materials and help to interact with other journals and/or publishers, if this contributes to the duties of editors.
4.2. Ensure the confidentiality of any information received from the authors of publications before it is published.
4.3. Realize that the activity of the Journal is not a commercial project and does not carry with it the purpose of profit-making.
4.5. Provide Editorial Staff with the opportunity to exclude publications containing plagiarism and inaccurate data.
Federal State Budgetary Institution of Science Nuclear Safety Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IBRAE RAN).
The editors do not charge authors for the preparation, placement and printing of materials.
Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the author.
Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the authors, companies or other organizations related to the submitted work.
The Editorial Board of the Journal "The Arctic: Ecology and Economics", when reviewing an article, can check the material using the Anti-plagiarism system. In case of detection of multiple borrowings, the editors act in accordance with the COPE guidelines.
Preprint and Post-print Placement Policy
In the process of submitting an article, the author is due to confirm that the article was not published or was not accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the Journal “Arctic: Ecology and Economy”, the publisher asks to place a link (full URL of the material) at the official website of the Journal.
Articles previously posted by authors at personal or public websites that are not related to other publishing houses are admitted to reviewing process.
Licensing policy and copyright
The Journal publishes scientific articles in accordance with the terms of the public license Creative Commons license CC-BY
© 2011-2020 Arctic: ecology and economy