Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies

Ecosystem Intelligence is committed to maintaining high standards of research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the publication process.

The journal’s publication ethics and editorial practices are informed by internationally recognised principles of scholarly publishing, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. These policies apply to authors, reviewers, editors, guest editors, and other participants in the journal’s editorial and publication processes.

1. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on the scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness, relevance, and fit of submissions with the journal’s aims and scope.

Editors make decisions independently of commercial, institutional, political, personal, or other inappropriate influence. Neither the publisher, hosting institution, sponsors, funders, nor other external parties determine whether an individual manuscript is accepted or rejected.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by an author’s nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, religion, political views, professional status, or other personal characteristics unrelated to the scholarly merits of the work.

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for maintaining the integrity and independence of the journal’s editorial processes.

2. Originality and Publication Integrity

Submissions must represent original scholarly work and must not involve plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate manipulation of data or images, duplicate publication, redundant publication, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, or other forms of research or publication misconduct.

Authors must appropriately acknowledge and cite the ideas, data, methods, text, figures, tables, software, and other materials of others.

Material reproduced or adapted from previously published or copyrighted sources must be appropriately cited and, where required, accompanied by permission from the rights holder.

Authors must disclose relevant overlap with their own previously published, accepted, or simultaneously submitted work. Substantially the same manuscript must not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time.

Secondary publication, translated publication, or substantial reuse of previously disseminated material may be considered only where academically justified, transparent, appropriately referenced, legally permitted, and agreed with the editors.

3. Research Misconduct and Investigations

Allegations of research or publication misconduct will be assessed fairly, confidentially, and proportionately.

Potential misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

• fabrication or falsification of data, evidence, results, or research records;
• plagiarism or inappropriate textual, conceptual, methodological, or data reuse;
• inappropriate manipulation of images or other research materials;
• citation manipulation or coercive citation practices;
• peer-review manipulation or interference with the editorial process;
• undisclosed duplicate or redundant publication;
• inappropriate authorship or omission of legitimate contributors;
• undisclosed competing interests;
• deceptive, selective, or seriously misleading reporting; and
• other conduct that compromises the reliability or integrity of the scholarly record.

Editors will assess concerns according to the available evidence and may seek explanations, documentation, underlying data, ethics approvals, contributor information, or other relevant materials.

Where necessary, the journal may contact authors’ institutions, research-integrity bodies, funders, publishers, other journals, or appropriate authorities. The journal will not normally attempt to substitute for a formal institutional investigation where such an investigation is required.

If misconduct or a serious error is established, the journal may reject a manuscript, correct or retract a published article, publish an expression of concern, restrict future submissions, or take other proportionate action necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Editors and reviewers must not request irrelevant citations or require authors to cite their own work, the journal, or particular publications for the purpose of artificially increasing citation counts.

4. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the work and who accept responsibility for the published article.

All authors should:

• have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, interpretation, or scholarly development of the work;
• have participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
• approve the version submitted for publication and the final version to be published; and
• agree to be accountable for their own contributions and appropriately respond to questions concerning the integrity of the work.

Individuals who contributed to the research but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately, subject to their consent where necessary.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all legitimate authors are included, that inappropriate authors are not included, that all authors have approved the submission, and that relevant disclosures are complete.

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be explained and agreed by all affected authors. The editors may request documentation before approving an authorship change. Authorship changes after acceptance or publication will be permitted only in justified circumstances and may require a formal correction.

Artificial-intelligence systems, language models, software tools, organisations, and other non-human entities cannot qualify as authors because they cannot assume responsibility or accountability for scholarly work.

5. Competing Interests, Funding, and Editorial Recusal

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose relationships or interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their work, judgement, or editorial decisions.

Competing interests may be financial, professional, institutional, personal, intellectual, or otherwise relevant to the manuscript or editorial process.

Authors must disclose relevant sources of funding and, where appropriate, describe the role of funders in the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or reporting of the research.

Reviewers must decline invitations where a competing interest could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality.

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a relevant competing interest. Such manuscripts will be assigned to another qualified editor who is independent of the authors and the work.

Manuscripts submitted by an Editor-in-Chief, Co-Editor, Associate Editor, Editorial Board member, guest editor, or another individual closely involved with the journal will not receive preferential treatment. The manuscript will be handled independently by an editor without a relevant conflict of interest, and the submitting editor or board member will have no access to or influence over the editorial decision.

Where necessary, the journal may disclose relevant editorial conflicts or handling arrangements in the published article.

6. Peer Review and Confidentiality

Scholarly manuscripts are evaluated according to the journal’s published peer-review policy and editorial procedures.

Reviewers must provide objective, evidence-based, constructive, respectful, and timely assessments. Personal criticism, discriminatory comments, inappropriate language, or requests unrelated to improving the scholarly quality of the manuscript are unacceptable.

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose, distribute, reproduce, or use unpublished material for personal, professional, commercial, or competitive advantage.

Reviewers must not share or delegate a manuscript or review task to another person without prior permission from the responsible editor.

Editors must protect the confidentiality of authors, reviewers, manuscript contents, editorial correspondence, and other information obtained through the peer-review process, except where disclosure is necessary to investigate misconduct, comply with legal obligations, or protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal’s full peer-review process is described in the Author Guidelines.

7. Data, Code, Materials, and Reproducibility

Authors are expected to present research methods, analyses, evidence, and results with sufficient transparency to permit appropriate scholarly assessment and, where reasonably possible, verification or reuse.

Where relevant, authors should provide access to supporting data, code, models, protocols, instruments, documentation, or other research materials, subject to ethical, legal, confidentiality, security, contractual, intellectual-property, or legitimate commercial restrictions.

Where research materials cannot be shared openly, authors should explain the relevant restrictions and, where possible, describe appropriate procedures for requesting access.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, integrity, provenance, documentation, and lawful use of data and other research materials included in their work.

The editors may request underlying data, code, documentation, or other evidence during peer review or when concerns arise before or after publication.

Failure to provide reasonable supporting information when necessary to assess the integrity of a manuscript may affect the editorial decision or lead to post-publication action.

8. Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, personal or sensitive data, human-derived data, animals, field interventions, communities, environmental resources, or other activities requiring ethical or regulatory oversight must comply with applicable laws, institutional requirements, permits, and recognised ethical standards.

Where ethics approval, exemption, informed consent, regulatory permission, community authorisation, or another form of oversight is required, the manuscript should identify the responsible body and provide appropriate approval, exemption, permit, or reference information.

Authors must protect participant privacy and confidentiality and should not publish personally identifiable information unless its publication is scientifically necessary, legally permissible, and supported by appropriate consent.

Research involving vulnerable participants or communities requires particular attention to informed consent, potential harm, power relationships, privacy, and fair representation.

Research involving animals must comply with applicable animal-welfare legislation and institutional or professional standards.

Field research and research involving environmental, ecological, cultural, community, or protected resources must comply with applicable permissions, access requirements, environmental protections, and relevant local or community obligations.

Editors may request evidence of ethical approval, consent, permits, exemptions, or other relevant authorisation where necessary.

9. Intellectual Property and Permissions

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submission respects copyright, licensing conditions, intellectual-property rights, confidentiality obligations, and applicable permissions.

Material created by others—including figures, tables, images, datasets, questionnaires, maps, software, extensive textual material, or other copyrighted content—must be appropriately credited and may require written permission before publication.

Authors must obtain all permissions required for material they do not have the right to reproduce or adapt.

The journal’s copyright and licensing conditions are described separately in its Copyright and Open Access policies.

Authors must also respect confidential, proprietary, culturally restricted, security-sensitive, or otherwise protected information and must not publish such material without appropriate authority.

10. Corrections, Retractions, Expressions of Concern, and Post-Publication Discussion

The journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the published scholarly record.

Errors or concerns identified after publication will be evaluated according to their nature, significance, and effect on the reliability of the article.

Corrections

A correction may be issued where an otherwise reliable article contains an error or omission that materially affects interpretation, attribution, metadata, presentation, or part of the scholarly record but does not invalidate the main findings.

Corrections will be linked to the original article and published transparently.

Retractions

An article may be retracted where there is clear evidence that its findings or conclusions are unreliable as a result of major error or misconduct, where the publication constitutes plagiarism or seriously redundant publication, where research was conducted or reported unethically, or where another serious problem makes continued reliance on the article inappropriate.

A retraction notice will explain the reason for the retraction to the extent reasonably possible and will remain permanently linked to the article. The original scholarly record will normally remain accessible and clearly marked as retracted.

Expressions of concern

An expression of concern may be issued where serious questions have arisen about a published article but available information is insufficient to reach a final conclusion, or where an investigation is incomplete or likely to take substantial time.

Post-publication discussion

Readers, researchers, authors, institutions, or other interested parties may submit substantive post-publication comments, concerns, corrections, or evidence relating to a published article.

The editors will assess such communications and, where appropriate, seek responses from the authors or other relevant parties. Depending on the circumstances, the journal may publish a correction, response, editorial note, expression of concern, retraction, or other appropriate update.

Disagreement with an article’s interpretation or conclusions does not by itself justify correction or retraction. Scholarly disagreement may instead be addressed through further research, commentary, correspondence, or other forms of academic discussion where appropriate.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other parties may raise concerns about editorial procedures, publication ethics, peer review, editorial conduct, conflicts of interest, discrimination, corrections, or other matters relating to the journal.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they believe that a significant factual, procedural, or interpretative error affected the decision.

An appeal should clearly identify:

• the manuscript concerned;
• the decision or procedure being challenged;
• the specific grounds for the appeal; and
• relevant evidence supporting reconsideration.

An appeal is not an opportunity simply to disagree with reviewers or request additional rounds of review without substantive grounds.

Complaints and appeals will be handled fairly, respectfully, and as confidentially as reasonably possible. Wherever practicable, they will be considered by an editor who was not directly responsible for the matter being challenged.

Where a complaint concerns an Editor-in-Chief or another senior editor, it will be referred to an appropriate independent editor or institutional authority where necessary.

Following consideration, the journal may uphold the original decision, reconsider the manuscript, seek additional review, correct a procedural problem, initiate an ethics investigation, or take other appropriate action.

Questions, complaints, appeals, or concerns relating to publication ethics, research integrity, editorial conduct, or the published scholarly record may be sent to:

editorialoffice@ecosystemintelligence.academy

12. Special Issues and Guest-Edited Collections

Special issues, thematic collections, and guest-edited collections are subject to the same aims and scope, scholarly standards, peer-review procedures, research-integrity requirements, competing-interest policies, and editorial principles as regular journal content.

Guest editors must disclose relevant competing interests and must not make editorial decisions on manuscripts for which they have a conflict of interest. Final responsibility for maintaining the journal’s editorial and ethical standards remains with the journal’s editorial leadership.

13. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Authors, reviewers, and editors must comply with the journal’s separate AI Policy, which sets out requirements concerning the appropriate use and disclosure of generative artificial intelligence and other AI-assisted tools, human accountability, authorship, confidentiality, and integrity in research, manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial work.

Use of an AI tool does not transfer responsibility from a human author, reviewer, or editor. AI systems cannot be listed as authors or otherwise assume responsibility for scholarly content.