European Journal of Sustainable Development Research

Ethical Guidelines

European Journal of Sustainable Development Research (EJOSDR) is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. Publisher, editors, reviewers, and authors must follow the following ethical guidelines to ensure the delivery of research material of the highest quality.

The journal supports the ethical principles set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are initially screened with iThenticate through the manuscript submission and editorial system. iThenticate is a plagiarism screening service provided by Crossref that checks the similarity of the manuscript against millions of published research articles and documents. Editors may run this service for all revisions of the manuscript. This feature is offered by Modestum free of charge as part of its ethical guidelines.

Responsibilities of the authors

Bu submitting a manuscript to the journal, authors confirm that:

  • All submitted manuscripts are the original works of the author(s).
  • Article, or part of the article, is not published elsewhere or is not being evaluated in another journal at the same time.
  • If part of data has been used in any other publication or presentation, editor is informed during submission.
  • Any conflict of interest, including financial and personal relationships that might bias the manuscript or the editorial process, is clearly disclosed.
  • All references are properly cited.
  • All contributions while preparing the manuscript, such as funding, technical help, general support, etc., are acknowledged.
  • If significant errors and inaccuracies are found in submitted manuscript or published article, editor is to be informed immediately about the details of this case.

Responsibilities of the peer-reviewers

  • Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to evaluate the manuscript or has conflict of interest about the invitation must inform the editor.
  • All information regarding the manuscript must be kept confidential.
  • Review reports must be prepared objectively and in timely manner.

Responsibilities of the editors

  • Editors have the authority over the editorial process and are responsible to manage the double blind peer review process of a manuscript.
  • Editors invite reviewers and collect the review reports. Depending on the review reports and their own objective evaluations, editors are responsible to decide whether to accept or reject the manuscript for publication.
  • In case of a conflict of interest, editor must inform the managing editor and release from the duties regarding the manuscript.
  • All the manuscript information must be kept confidential.
  • In case of malpractice, necessary actions and/or sanctions must be applied by editors.

General Principles

Criteria for authorship: Authorship be based on the following 4 criteria: Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND Final approval of the version to be published; AND Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors. All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. In addition, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

Conflicts of interest: Reliability of the articles is important, and thus any conflict of interest on the side of the author, peer-reviewer or the editors should be avoided. These conflicts of interest can be on the personal, financial, political, academic or religious level. Authors, peer-reviewers or editors should, whenever these are relevant to the content being considered or published, declare their interests and affiliations, so that the appropriate measures can be taken by the editors. Authors are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly in the letter accompanying the submitted manuscript whether potential conflicts do or do not exist. If needed, a statement can be made in the journal that a certain person has a personal, financial, political, academic or religious conflict of interest with the topic. One of the measures that the editors can take when there is a conflict in interests is to change the persons who are involved in peer-reviewing the article. Authors can also be prevented to publish their article in the journals.

Funding: Readers should know who funded the research project or the publication of a document. This can be a charity or government department, university or commercial company. Funders of a paper, in the form of persons, organizations or companies or any other form should be mentioned. The role of the research funders or any other research contributors in the design or preparation of the article should be mentioned, if they are not mentioned in the list of authors. They can, for example, be mentioned in acknowledgement section.

Confidentiality: It is important that authors and peer-reviewers handle the information carefully and that informants and research subjects are protected. Authors should provide a statement in which they identify the ethics committee that approved that the study conforms to recognized standards. These standards ensure the reader that adequate steps have been taken to minimize physical and psychological harm to participants and to avoid coercion or exploitation. Authors should only publish information and images from individual participants where the individual has given his or her free, prior informed consent. Authors should strive to treat the privacy of research objects with as much care as possible. Where there is no consent of the individual that appears in a picture, the person should be made anonymous. Authors should be careful in publishing images of objects that might have cultural significance and cause offense (as in for example religious texts). Publisher has the right to refuse articles that may cause offense or violations of human dignity. 

Protection of human and animal rights: For experimental, clinical, and drug researches, an Ethics Committee report consistent with international agreements on human and animal rights (Helsinki Declaration of 1975, revised 2002 - and “Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals - and an informed consent of patients are required. The journal will assume that all submitted manuscripts are prepared in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, that institutional ethics and legal permissions have been obtained, and will not accept responsibility if proved otherwise. If the "Animal" item is used in the study, the authors must state that they protect animal rights and get approval from the ethics committees of their institutions in accordance with the Guidelines for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals ( principles.

Plagiarism and Malpractice Policy

The items in the non-exhaustive list below are considered unethical and misconduct behavior. Authors are strongly suggested to be very well informed about them and avoid them under all circumstances.

  • Plagiarism
  • Duplication
  • Fraud Authorship/Denied Authorship
  • Research/Data Fabrication
  • Salami Slicing/Salami Publication
  • Breaching of Copyrights
  • Prevailing Conflict of Interest

By submitting a manuscript to the journal, authors confirm that the manuscript is free from any of the malpractices listed above. Authors take full responsibility for the opinions, findings and discussions presented in the manuscripts as well as resolution of all disputes arising from using copyrighted materials in their manuscripts without proper permission. To prevent articles from being unrightly duplicated or being subject to any other misconduct, every party involved in the publishing has to behave according to the ethical guidelines. 

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are processed with Similarity Check software to prevent plagiarism. Manuscripts that are highly similar to existing works in the literature will be subject to plagiarism sanctions.


Editors will take appropriate measures when ethical concerns are raised against a manuscript under review or a published article, even if it is discovered after years after publication. Upon demanded, authors are required to clarify such concerns within one week. In the event of documented malpractices or lack of reasonable explanations, one or more of the following sanctions may applied:

  • Immediate rejection of the manuscript under review,
  • Immediate rejection of all the manuscripts of all co-authors,
  • Prohibition of the co-authors from submitting new manuscripts up to five years,
  • Prohibition of the co-authors from serving as a reviewer or editorial board member of the journal,
  • Retracting the published article that involves the malpractice.
  • Informing appropriate legal entities about the details of the case.

For any question that is not addressed on this page, please contact