Editorial Policies

Journal Information

Contents

Editorial Policies

Xplore Environment: An International Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and rigor in scholarly publishing. The journal endorses and follows the standards and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) along with internationally recognized best practices to ensure ethical and responsible publication.

Our editorial policies are periodically reviewed and updated to remain aligned with global standards in environmental research publishing and evolving ethical guidelines.

Open Access Policy

Xplore Environment: An International Journal is committed to the principle that knowledge should be freely accessible to everyone. To support this mission, the journal follows a fully open access publishing model.

All articles published in the journal are made freely and permanently available online immediately upon publication, without subscription fees, registration requirements, or access charges. This ensures that researchers, practitioners, policymakers, students, and the wider public can benefit from the latest environmental research without financial or technical barriers.

Copyright Policy

Authors retain the copyright and full publishing rights for their work. By submitting to this journal, authors agree to make their work freely available for use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided proper credit is given to the authors and the original source.

A copyright statement will appear on all published articles in HTML, PDF, and XML formats. Authors grant the journal the right of first publication by signing a License to Publish agreement before formal publication.

Manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration elsewhere. If copyrighted materials (such as figures, tables, or images) are included, authors are responsible for obtaining permissions and giving appropriate acknowledgments.

CC BY License

All articles in Xplore Environment: An International Journal are published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. This open access license ensures the free and permanent availability of environmental research, encouraging knowledge sharing and wide academic exchange in the field.

Under this license, users are free to:

Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.

Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use.

Conditions of Use:

Attribution – Proper credit must be given to the original authors and source, a link to the license must be provided, and any changes made must be indicated.

No Additional Restrictions – Users may not apply legal or technological measures that restrict others from exercising the rights granted under this license.

For more details, visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Example Copyright Line

© The Author(s) 2025. Published by Xplore Environment: An International Journal. This article is licensed under CC BY 4.0.”

Editorial Freedom

Xplore Environment: An International Journal upholds the principle of editorial independence to ensure credibility, fairness, and transparency in environmental research publishing. The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board have full authority over the editorial content and timing of publication.

All editorial decisions—including article review, selection, revision, and acceptance—are made solely on the basis of:

The scientific quality of the work

The originality of the research

Its relevance and contribution to the field of environmental science and sustainability

The publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions, and no commercial or external influence affects the peer review or publication process. This guarantees fairness, transparency, and integrity in the dissemination of environmental knowledge.

Key Editorial Policies & Reference Links

Publication Ethics
Follows international standards of ethical publishing.
🔗 Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Plagiarism Policy
Strict zero-tolerance approach for plagiarism in environmental research.
🔗 IEEE Plagiarism Policy

Authorship & Contributions
Clear criteria for authorship and contributorship.
🔗 COPE Guidance

Conflict of Interest
Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any conflicts.
🔗 COPE Guidance

Peer Review Policy
Double-blind peer review based on ethical guidelines.
🔗 COPE Peer Review Guidelines

Copyright & Licensing
Published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License.
🔗 CC BY License

Open Access Policy
Fully open access, aligned with DOAJ best practices.
🔗 DOAJ Guide

Archiving & Preservation
Long-term digital preservation through:
🔗 Portico | 🔗 CLOCKSS

Retraction & Corrections
Committed to COPE retraction and correction guidelines.
🔗 COPE Retraction Guidelines

Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Model

The journal follows a single-blind peer review model: reviewers remain anonymous to authors, while authors’ identities are visible to reviewers.

All submitted manuscripts (except invited Editorials) undergo a rigorous review to evaluate their:

  • Originality and novelty of environmental research
  • Scientific validity and soundness of methodology
  • Relevance and significance to environmental science and sustainability
  • Clarity, organization, and contribution to the field

Peer Review Process

1. Initial Check
🔗 [Download Initial Check Form]
The Managing Editor screens each submission for:

Plagiarism and research integrity

Alignment with the journal’s scope in environmental sciences

Compliance with formatting requirements

Only manuscripts that pass this stage are assigned to an Academic Editor.

2. Editorial Evaluation
The Editor-in-Chief or a designated Editorial Board member decides if the manuscript proceeds to full peer review. Submissions clearly unsuitable or of insufficient quality may be declined at this stage.

3. External Peer Review
Manuscripts are reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant environmental field. Reviewers assess:

  • Novelty and environmental significance
  • Scientific rigor and sound methodology
  • Contribution to environmental knowledge and practice
  • Clarity of writing and presentation

Reviewers provide constructive feedback and a recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Standard review time: 14 days from acceptance of the invitation.

4. Decision
The Academic Editor considers reviewer reports and makes the final decision. Additional reviews may be requested if reports are conflicting or inconclusive.

Editorial Board and Guest Editor Submissions

Manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board Members or Guest Editors are handled independently by other qualified editors to ensure fairness and transparency.

Special Issue Manuscripts

Papers submitted to Special Issues follow the same rigorous peer review process as regular submissions. The Editor-in-Chief oversees quality standards and supervises Guest Editors to maintain consistency.

Peer Reviewers Policy

Selection of Reviewers

Appropriate reviewers are carefully selected based on the following criteria:

  • Independent from the authors and their institutions.
  • Expertise in the same or closely related area of environmental research.
  • Strong publication record in relevant environmental or sustainability fields.
  • Ability to deliver a timely and informed review.

Author-Suggested Reviewers

Authors may suggest potential reviewers with suitable expertise, but the journal reserves the right to make the final decision. Suggested reviewers must:

  • Have a recent publication record in the relevant environmental research area.
  • Not have co-authored with any of the manuscript’s authors in the recent past.
  • Not share a current or recent institutional affiliation with the authors.
  • Not be current or recent collaborators of the authors.
  • Not have close personal relationships with the authors.
  • Not have any financial or professional conflict of interest related to the work.

Authors should provide each suggested reviewer’s name, email, institution, research area, and ORCID (if available).

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review.
  • Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process.
  • Destroy all manuscript files after completing the review.
  • Provide objective, evidence-based, and constructive feedback.
  • Avoid bias based on nationality, gender, religion, politics, or personal factors.
  • Report suspected research misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission, fabricated data).
  • Avoid recommending unnecessary citations to their own work.
  • Submit reviews on time, or request an extension if needed.

Roles of Participants in Peer Review

Managing Editor – Screens submissions for scope, formatting, and plagiarism (using tools such as iThenticate), identifies suitable reviewers, and manages communication between authors, reviewers, and editors.

Academic Editor – Oversees the review process, evaluates reviewer reports, and makes the final decision (accept, revise, or reject). Usually the Editor-in-Chief, but may be delegated to an Editorial Board member, Guest Editor, or subject expert. The Academic Editor’s name will appear on the final published article.

🔗 iThenticate Plagiarism Screening Tool

Peer Reviewers

Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are chosen carefully to ensure fairness and expertise in evaluating environmental research. Appropriate reviewers are selected if:

  • They are independent from the authors and their institutions.
  • They have expertise in the same or a closely related area of the manuscript.
  • They have recent publications in the relevant field and can provide an informed evaluation.
  • They are able to complete reviews within the required timeframe.

Author-Suggested Reviewers

Authors may recommend potential reviewers with suitable expertise, but the journal reserves the right to decide whether to invite them. Suggested reviewers must:

  • Have a recent publication record in the relevant environmental research area.
  • Not have co-authored or submitted a paper with the authors in the recent past.
  • Not share a current or recent institutional affiliation with the authors.
  • Not be a current or recent collaborator of the authors.
  • Not have a close personal or financial relationship with the authors.
  • Not have any conflicts of interest regarding the manuscript.

Authors should provide the reviewer’s name, email address, institution, research area, and ORCID (if available).

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of the peer review process.
  • Dispose of manuscript files after completing the review.
  • Provide objective, constructive, and unbiased feedback.
  • Report any suspected misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication).
  • Avoid requesting unnecessary citations to their own work.
  • Submit timely reviews or request an extension when needed.

Roles in Peer Review

Managing Editor – Screens submissions for scope, formatting, and plagiarism (using tools such as iThenticate); selects reviewers; and manages communications between authors, reviewers, and editors.

Academic Editor – Oversees the review process, evaluates reviewer reports, and makes the final decision (accept, revise, or reject). Usually the Editor-in-Chief, but may also be an Editorial Board member, Guest Editor, or subject expert. The Academic Editor’s name is published alongside the article upon acceptance.

Authorship

Authorship Criteria

The journal follows authorship principles recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (COPE Guidelines) and other international best practices. To qualify as an author, individuals must:

Contribute substantially to the conception, design, execution, or analysis of the research.

Participate in drafting or critically revising the manuscript.

Approve the final version before submission.

Agree to take responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the work.

Corresponding Author

In multi-authored papers, one author must act as the Corresponding Author. This person is responsible for:

Managing communication with the journal.

Ensuring all authors meet authorship criteria.

Handling declarations of conflicts of interest, acknowledgments, and ethical compliance.

Responding to queries after publication.

Equal / Dual Authorship

Dual first or corresponding authorship is allowed if clearly indicated in the Author Contributions section.

Group Authorship

For large collaborative projects, group authorship is permitted. All listed members must meet authorship criteria and be accountable for the work. Group names may also be included if contributors are identified.

Authorship Disputes

Authorship must be agreed upon before submission. Disputes should be resolved by the authors’ institutions in line with COPE guidance. Editors will not adjudicate disputes.

Authorship Changes

Requests for addition, removal, or rearrangement of authors must be submitted before acceptance, with written consent from all authors, including the author being added or removed.

Author Contributions (CRediT Taxonomy)

Contributions should be described using the CRediT Taxonomy (CRediT), e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing – Original Draft, Supervision, Funding Acquisition.

ORCID

Authors are encouraged to provide their ORCID iD (ORCID) for proper identification and linking of research outputs.

Acknowledgments

Contributors who do not qualify as authors (e.g., technical support, editing, or general assistance) should be acknowledged with their specific role.

Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

AI tools cannot be credited as authors. Authors may use AI for language editing or formatting but not for generating scientific content, data, or conclusions. Failure to disclose AI use may be treated as misconduct.

AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Scientific Writing

Authorship and Responsibility

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship in environmental research requires human responsibility, accountability, and the ability to explain and defend the work—roles that AI cannot fulfill.

Permitted Use

Authors may use AI, machine learning, or similar tools only for language-related purposes, such as:

  • Grammar and spelling corrections.
  • Improving readability and clarity.
  • Formatting adjustments.
  • AI tools must not be used to:
  • Generate original environmental research ideas.
  • Design or conduct experiments.
  • Analyze or interpret ecological, environmental, or climate data.
  • Draw scientific conclusions.

These responsibilities rest entirely with the researchers.

Disclosure of AI Use

If AI-assisted technologies are used, authors must provide a disclosure statement in the Declarations section of the manuscript. For example:

“During the preparation of this work, the authors used [name of AI tool/service] for [purpose, e.g., grammar checking]. The authors reviewed and edited the content, and take full responsibility for the final version of the manuscript.”

Use of basic tools for spelling, grammar, or reference formatting does not require disclosure.

Misconduct and Ethical Compliance

Failure to disclose AI usage may be considered research or publication misconduct. Any such cases will be addressed following the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (COPE).

⚠️ AI Use Policy (Environment Journal Context):
This journal does not permit AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Grammarly, QuillBot, GitHub Copilot) to be listed as authors. Authors may use such tools only to enhance language clarity. Full accountability for the originality, integrity, and scientific accuracy of environmental research findings remains with the human authors.

Conflicts of Interest

Definition

A conflict of interest (COI) in environmental publishing arises when an individual’s objectivity or professional judgment related to a manuscript may be influenced by secondary interests such as financial, institutional, academic, or personal considerations. Conflicts may be real, potential, or perceived, and full transparency is required to maintain fairness in the review and publication process.

Examples include:

Financial interests: employment, consultancy, stock ownership, patents, paid expert testimony, or financial ties to industries affecting the environment.

Academic or professional relationships: recent collaborations, institutional affiliations, or direct competition.

Personal factors: close friendships, rivalries, or strong intellectual, ideological, or policy-related beliefs in environmental debates.

Authors

Authors must include a Conflict of Interest Statement at the end of their manuscripts.

If no conflicts exist, the statement should read:
“The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this work.”

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors provide full and accurate disclosures.

Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts (e.g., recent collaborations, institutional ties, financial interests).

If a conflict exists, reviewers should decline the review or notify the editors, who will decide if the review can proceed impartially.

Editors, Board Members, and Staff

Editors, editorial board members, guest editors, and staff must declare any conflicts related to manuscripts they handle.

If a conflict is present, the editor must recuse themselves from the review and decision-making process.

Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members or guest editors will be managed by independent editors to ensure impartiality.

Funding Disclosure

Authors must clearly state all funding sources that supported the research, including the names of agencies and relevant grant numbers, under the Funding section of the manuscript.

Authors must also specify the role of the sponsor, if any, in study design, data analysis, manuscript preparation, or the decision to publish.

Editors, Board Members, Guest Editors, and Editorial Staff

Editors, board members, guest editors, and other editorial staff must disclose any potential conflicts of interest. If an editor’s financial, institutional, academic, or personal interests could compromise—or appear to compromise—their impartiality, they must inform the editorial office and recuse themselves from the process.

In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief will reassign the manuscript to another qualified editor. To maintain fairness and transparency, manuscripts submitted by editorial board members or guest editors are always managed independently by other editors, ensuring that the submitting editor has no role in the review or decision-making process.

Research Ethics

Xplore Environment: An International Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of ethical practice, research integrity, and transparency in environmental science and sustainability research. Authors must ensure that their work complies with institutional, national, and international ethical guidelines relevant to environmental studies.

Human Participants and Community-Based Research

For studies involving human participants, surveys, or community engagement (e.g., local knowledge, environmental perceptions, or conservation practices):

Informed consent must be obtained from all participants.

Ethical approval from a recognized committee or institution must be documented.

A statement of consent and ethics approval should be included in the manuscript.

For sensitive data (e.g., personal information, photographs, interviews), explicit consent for publication must be secured.

👉 Reference: OECD – Good Practice for Human Research

Use of Animals and Biodiversity in Research

If the study involves animals, wildlife, or biodiversity assessments:

Authors must follow international standards for animal welfare and ecological research.

Necessary approvals from national or institutional Animal Ethics Committees must be obtained.

Research must avoid practices that cause unnecessary harm to species or ecosystems.

👉 Reference: ARRIVE Guidelines for Animal Research

Environmental Safety and Sustainability Standards

Authors must ensure that their research:

Promotes sustainability and minimizes negative environmental impacts.

Adheres to environmental safety regulations for handling hazardous substances, pollutants, waste materials, or genetically modified organisms.

Reports data honestly, without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation.

Ensurs transparency in fieldwork, laboratory methods, and data analysis.

👉 Reference: COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics

Ethical Responsibility to the Environment

Research published in this journal should align with the broader goals of environmental protection, conservation, and sustainable development. Studies must respect ecological balance, biodiversity conservation, and community rights.

Registration of Experimental Studies

Definition of Experimental Studies

Xplore Environment: An International Journal emphasizes transparency, reproducibility, and ethical responsibility in environmental research. Experimental studies are structured projects designed to test interventions, systems, models, or processes in order to evaluate their performance, safety, ecological impact, or effectiveness. These may include laboratory, field, or community-based environmental research.

Examples of environmental experimental studies include:

Climate and ecosystem modeling studies

Development and testing of eco-friendly materials, renewable energy solutions, or waste management technologies

Pollution monitoring and mitigation experiments

Biodiversity conservation trials or habitat restoration projects

Soil, water, and air quality improvement methods

Community-based interventions for sustainable practices

Where applicable, authors should provide details of study registration, ethical approval, or compliance with relevant environmental and institutional standards when reporting experimental research.

Environmental Research Ethics and Compliance Policies

The journal requires all submitted manuscripts to follow internationally recognized ethical guidelines, ensuring ecological responsibility, community respect, and research integrity.

1. Experimental Studies and Field Trials

All experiments, field trials, and ecological interventions must comply with accepted environmental standards and sustainability principles.

Authors must clearly describe the objectives, methodology, and ecological considerations of their research.

Field studies should avoid practices that cause irreversible harm to ecosystems or endangered species.

2. Ethical Approval for Human Participation

Studies involving human participants (e.g., surveys on environmental attitudes, community engagement in conservation, or behavioral studies) must obtain approval from an appropriate ethics committee.

Informed consent must be obtained from participants, and this must be documented in the manuscript.

3. Safety and Environmental Compliance

Research must ensure safety for humans, wildlife, and the environment.

Studies involving hazardous chemicals, genetically modified organisms, or pollutants must follow national and international environmental safety standards.

Authors should include an environmental impact assessment when relevant.

4. Data Transparency and Availability

Authors are encouraged to deposit datasets, codes, or supplementary files in trusted public repositories (e.g., Zenodo, Figshare, Dryad).

A Data Availability Statement must be included in the manuscript, specifying where and how the data can be accessed.

5. Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest.

If no conflicts exist, the statement should read: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

6. Intellectual Property and Indigenous Knowledge

Research based on traditional or indigenous knowledge must acknowledge and respect the communities involved, following principles of benefit-sharing.

Authors must disclose any patents or proprietary restrictions associated with their work.

7. Replication and Verification

Methods should be reported in sufficient detail to allow independent replication and verification.

Limitations of the study, including ecological uncertainties, should be acknowledged.

8. Compliance with Publication Ethics

The journal follows COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

Plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submissions, or unethical research practices will not be tolerated.

All manuscripts are screened for originality using plagiarism detection tools such as iThenticate.

Confidentiality

Editors, reviewers, and authors are required to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all aspects of the editorial and peer review process for submitted manuscripts. All correspondence and materials exchanged during review are considered confidential and must not be disclosed outside the editorial process.

Reviewer Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential intellectual property.

The content of a manuscript—including field data, biodiversity records, ecological models, community surveys, or environmental intervention results—may not be used for personal, professional, or institutional benefit.

Reviewers are expected to delete or destroy all manuscript files after completing their review.

If technical consultation with colleagues is necessary, prior permission from the editorial office must be obtained.

Reviewer Anonymity

The journal adopts a single-blind peer review system.

Reviewer identities must remain confidential and may not be disclosed to authors.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly without explicit permission from the editorial office.

Editorial Confidentiality

The editorial team will not disclose details of submitted manuscripts—including author identities, data, or peer review reports—to any third party.

Exceptions may be made only in cases of suspected academic misconduct, plagiarism, or data fabrication. In such cases, both authors and reviewers will be informed before confidentiality is lifted.

Retention of Records

If a manuscript is rejected, all files will be removed from the editorial system, unless retention is legally or ethically required. In such cases, the journal will seek author permission.

For accepted and published manuscripts, the journal will retain records of submissions, peer review reports, revisions, and editorial correspondence for a minimum of three years, or longer if required by institutional, publisher, or national regulations.

Data and Materials Availability Policy

The journal upholds a strict policy on the availability of data, materials, models, and supporting resources to promote transparency, reproducibility, and long-term usability in environmental research.

1. Mandatory Data Availability Statement

All submissions must include a Data and Materials Availability Statement at the end of the manuscript.
Manuscripts without this statement will not be considered for publication.

2. Public Repositories

Authors are strongly encouraged to deposit datasets, biodiversity records, climate or ecological models, GIS files, survey data, and other supporting materials in trusted and publicly accessible repositories (e.g., Zenodo, Dryad, Figshare, GBIF, PANGAEA, EarthChem, ICPSR).
Repository links and dataset identifiers (DOI, accession number, or URL) must be cited within the manuscript.

3. Restricted Access

If data or materials cannot be shared due to confidentiality, community agreements, intellectual property, or legal restrictions, authors must provide a clear justification in their Data Availability Statement.
Requests for restricted data must be directed to the corresponding author.

4. Use of Third-Party Data

If the research relies on third-party datasets (e.g., government monitoring data, licensed satellite images, or NGO biodiversity surveys), authors must acknowledge the original source and provide details on how others may access these materials, if permissible.

5. No Data Generated

If no new datasets or materials were generated (e.g., review articles, theoretical analyses, or policy studies), authors must clearly state:
“No new data were generated or analyzed in this study.”

6. Editorial Oversight

The editorial office may request raw data, field logs, GIS layers, or analytical codes at any stage of peer review to verify results.
Failure to comply may result in rejection, correction, or retraction of the manuscript.

Citation Policy

Proper citation is essential to ensure academic integrity, transparency, and credit to original contributors in environmental research. Authors must cite relevant, reliable literature to support any statement that relies on external sources of information.

Author Responsibilities

Primary Sources: Authors should cite original research articles, field studies, and environmental datasets rather than relying solely on review papers.

Accuracy and Relevance: All references must be accurate, relevant, and should directly support the statements made in the manuscript.

Diversity of Sources: Authors are encouraged to cite work from a broad range of countries, ecosystems, and environmental contexts to avoid geographic or institutional bias.

Balance: Excessive citation of a single study or too many references for a single point should be avoided.

Citation Manipulation

In line with COPE’s Citation Manipulation Guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/discussion-document/citation-manipulation), the following practices are considered unethical:

Excessive self-citation solely to inflate citation counts.

Excessive citation of this journal to boost its metrics.

Honorary or coercive citations, e.g., citing editors, reviewers, or well-known environmental researchers without legitimate relevance.

Citation stacking, where groups of authors or journals mutually cite each other to artificially increase impact.

Journal Policy on Citation Ethics

Manuscripts showing evidence of citation manipulation will be rejected immediately.

The journal may report unethical citation practices to the authors’ institutions or funding agencies.

Any coercive citation requests from reviewers or editors must be reported by authors to the publisher.

Editors found guilty of enforcing or practicing citation manipulation may be removed from their roles after investigation.

Legitimate Self-Citation

The journal recognizes that some self-citations may be necessary for continuity of research in areas such as climate change, biodiversity monitoring, pollution control, and ecosystem modeling. However, all such citations must be relevant and justified.

References and Citation Formatting Policy (Environment Journal)

1. General Guidelines

References must be accurate, complete, and directly relevant to the subject matter of environmental science and sustainability research.

All cited works must appear in the reference list, and all entries in the reference list must be cited in the text.

Authors are responsible for verifying accuracy before submission, particularly for datasets, field studies, environmental regulations, and international reports (e.g., UNEP, IPCC, FAO).

2. Citation Style

The journal follows the APA citation style (7th edition), commonly used in environmental and life sciences. Authors should adhere to the following rules:

In-text citations: Use author(s) and year, e.g., (Smith & Jones, 2021) or (UNEP, 2020).

Reference order: References must be listed alphabetically by the first author’s last name.

Reference format: Each reference should include author(s), year, title, journal/book, volume(issue), page numbers, and DOI/URL when available.

3. Examples of APA Reference Style

Journal article:
Smith, A., & Jones, B. (2021). Renewable energy adoption in rural farming communities. Journal of Environmental Sustainability, 15(3), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/jes.2021.05.014

Book:
Johnson, M. (2019). Climate change and biodiversity loss: A global perspective (2nd ed.). Springer.

Report:
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press.

Website/Online source:
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2023). Global environment outlook. Retrieved from https://www.unep.org

4. Use of Reference Management Software

Authors are encouraged to use tools such as Zotero, EndNote, or Mendeley to ensure proper formatting and consistency.

5. Citation Integrity

Authors must cite original studies (e.g., field data, case studies, lab experiments, and policy assessments) rather than relying only on secondary reviews.

Citations should represent a balanced global perspective, avoiding over-reliance on research from a single country or institution.

Excessive self-citations, journal self-citations, or irrelevant citations are prohibited.

Citation manipulation (e.g., stacking, coercion, or honorary citations) will result in rejection in line with COPE citation manipulation guidelines.

6. Plagiarism

Plagiarism—including copying or reusing text, figures, data, or ideas without attribution—will not be tolerated.

Self-plagiarism, such as reusing large parts of previously published work, must be avoided unless properly cited and significantly extended.

The journal uses iThenticate to screen all submissions for originality.

Cases of confirmed plagiarism will be managed according to COPE flowcharts and may result in rejection, retraction, or institutional notification.

7. Duplicate Publication Policy

The journal publishes only original research in environmental sciences. Manuscripts must not be under consideration or published elsewhere (including non-English venues).

Exceptions include:

Preprints (on repositories like EarthArXiv, arXiv, or institutional repositories)

Theses or dissertations (institutional requirements)

Conference abstracts or posters (must be cited in the submission)

Datasets shared prior to publication (in repositories like Zenodo, Figshare, Dryad)

Policy briefs or summaries of environmental reports published by agencies (with proper acknowledgment)

Translations of existing works (with permission and CC BY license)

Duplicate or redundant publications discovered post-publication will be handled as per COPE guidelines and may result in retraction.

8. Related Policies (Cross-Reference)

Authorship Criteria

Plagiarism and Originality

Conflict of Interest

Peer Review Policy

Data and Materials Availability

Research Ethics (Environmental Context)

Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawals

Open Access and Copyright

Preprint Policy

Archiving and Digital Preservation

Adherence to COPE Guidelines

Misconduct Policy

The journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity and publication ethics. Any form of misconduct will be investigated in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), WAME (World Association of Medical Editors), and ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) guidelines.

Definition of Misconduct

Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

Data falsification or fabrication – altering, omitting, or inventing environmental or scientific data (e.g., climate models, biodiversity records, pollution data).

Plagiarism – presenting another researcher’s work or ideas without proper acknowledgment.

Improper authorship – excluding valid contributors, including “guest authors,” or duplicate publication without disclosure.

Misuse of peer review – misappropriating confidential ideas or data during the review process.

Regulatory non-compliance – violating ethical standards, safety laws, or environmental regulations.

Citation misconduct – excessive self-citation, citation manipulation, omission of relevant prior studies, or use of fabricated references.

Monitoring and Reporting

All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection tools (e.g., iThenticate).

Reviewers and readers are encouraged to report suspected misconduct.

Allegations are investigated using COPE flowcharts, and outcomes may include rejection, retraction, or notification of institutions/funding bodies.

Sanctions

Severe cases of misconduct (e.g., falsification of environmental impact data, plagiarism, or citation manipulation) may result in:

Retraction of the published article

Banning authors from future submissions

Reporting to relevant academic or regulatory authorities

The journal upholds integrity, transparency, and accountability to ensure reliable and trustworthy environmental research.

Crossmark, Corrections, and Retractions Policy

The journal is committed to safeguarding the accuracy, transparency, and reliability of the scholarly record in environmental research. We follow the best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) in handling corrections, retractions, and post-publication discussions.

Crossmark

The journal participates in the Crossmark initiative by Crossref, which allows readers to verify whether a published article represents the most recent and reliable version. By clicking the Crossmark logo, readers can confirm the current status of an article and access publication updates.

Corrections

Recognizing that errors can occur in environmental research (e.g., climate data reporting, biodiversity records, pollution measurement, or ecological modeling), the journal ensures a transparent correction process:

Corrections will be issued promptly after verification of the error.

A correction notice will describe the nature of the change and link to the original article.

The original version will remain accessible with a correction note for transparency.

For online-first publications, corrections may be applied directly with an audit trail of edits.

For published issues, a formal correction notice will be issued and linked to the article.

Retractions

In rare but necessary cases, articles may be retracted to preserve the integrity of the environmental science record. Retractions may occur if:

Results are found unreliable due to errors, data falsification, or fabrication (e.g., manipulated climate models, falsified emissions data, or invalid ecological surveys).

Plagiarism is detected.

Duplicate publication is identified.

Data, materials, or environmental resources are used without authorization.

Copyright or legal violations are present.

Undisclosed conflicts of interest influence interpretations.

The peer review process is compromised.

Retraction practices include:

Publishing a linked retraction notice.

Clearly marking the retracted article while keeping it available for transparency.

Specifying article title, authors, reasons for retraction, and responsibility for the decision.

Preprint Policy

The journal supports open science in environmental research. Authors may deposit manuscripts on preprint servers (e.g., EarthArXiv, institutional repositories) at three stages:

Submitted Version (Original Manuscript)

Accepted Version (Post-Peer Review, Before Copyediting)

Published Version of Record

Authors must declare preprints during submission and, after publication, update the preprint with the final DOI and citation.

Archiving and Digital Preservation

To ensure the long-term availability of environmental research, all published content is archived in trusted repositories such as Portico and CLOCKSS. Authors are encouraged to deposit accepted versions in institutional or funder-mandated repositories.

Appeals and Complaints

Appeals: Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing clear justification (e.g., overlooked ecological data, misinterpretation of results). Appeals may involve additional peer review. The editor’s post-appeal decision is final.

Complaints: Complaints regarding editorial processes or ethical issues will be handled per COPE guidelines. Complaints involving an editor may be escalated to the publisher.

Post-Publication Discussion

The journal encourages scientific dialogue beyond publication. Readers and researchers may:

Report errors or ethical concerns to the editorial office.

Submit Letters to the Editor, Technical Notes, or Comments on published articles.

Engage in open scholarly debate to strengthen the reliability of environmental research.

Ethical Standards and Guidelines

This journal aligns with:

COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

WAME (World Association of Medical Editors)

ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors)

Environmental Publication Ethics Guidelines (e.g., UNEP and relevant scientific bodies)