Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

These Ethical Statements are based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)'s Best Practices for Journal Editors and on existing Elsevier policies.

The Journal of Renewable Energies (JREEN) is committed to providing our readers with a high quality academic journal. JREEN maintains the highest ethical standards by applying the following principles:

 

Editor

The Editors adhere to COPE’s Core Practices on publication ethics. 

Submitted manuscripts are evaluated exclusively on the basis of their academic merit without regard to race, sex, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, ethnicity, position, political philosophy of the authors.

The manager and editorial staff are aware that they must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone except the corresponding author, reviewers, and other editorial advisers, as appropriate. Also, unpublished data contained in the submitted manuscripts will not be used by the editor, section editors, and reviewers in their own research without the express consent of the authors.

The editor decides on the publication of the articles submitted. This decision is guided by peer review reports, recommendations from section editors, and COPE ethical statements.   The editor can share the decision with other members of the editorial board or with reviewers. Before publication, the editorial team of the Journal of Renewable Energies takes care to identify and prevent the publication of articles containing research errors. However, the editorial team may publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies as appropriate.

 

Authors

The information contained in manuscripts submitted for publication should present the results of the research carried out by the authors as well as an objective discussion of these results and their importance. The underlying data must be presented correctly. Fraudulent and knowingly inaccurate information is considered unethical acts and is not acceptable.

Authors should guarantee that they have written a completely original study, and if they have used work or comments from other people, these should be properly cited.

Authors should not submit manuscripts presenting the same study to more than one journal (or book). Submission of the same manuscript to another journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable. However, submissions of preprints without peer review are accepted. Authors must then declare it in their manuscript, specifying the received digital object identifier (DOI).

Identification of research carried out by others researchers should always be indicated. Authors should cite publications that influenced their study.

All contributors to the study should be included in the list of authors. If anyone else who was involved in some aspects of the research project, they should be mentioned in the acknowledgements.

The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors and they alone are included in the list of authors of the manuscript, that the co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript, and that they have given their consent to submission of the manuscript.

All authors should indicate in their manuscript conflicts of interest that may affect their interpretation in the manuscript.

If the author discovers a material error or an inaccuracy in his publication, his obligation is to promptly inform the editor and to consider, in agreement with the editor, the withdrawal of the article or the publication of the error information.

 

Reviewers

Reviewers are invited by the editor-in-chief or one of the section editors, based on their expertise and geographical location, in order to limit the risks of conflict of interest.

If a guest reviewer does not feel competent enough to assess the research presented in the manuscript, is unable to provide an opinion in time, or has a potential conflict of interest with the authors, he should inform the editor without delay, in order to give him the time to contact other reviews.

Reviewers are encouraged to follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Reviewers should not accept a manuscript to review if it may create a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors.

Reviewers should treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not show them to anyone without the permission of the Editor-in-Chief.

Information and ideas obtained by anonymous reviewers are confidential and should not be used for the personal benefit of the reviewer.

Reports must be objective. Personal critical remarks addressed to the author are not admissible. The reviewer's opinion must be clear and reasoned.

Reviewers assist the editor in making decisions and can also assist the authors to improve the quality of their manuscripts. The reviewer should identify appropriate publications not cited by the author. Any such indication must be accompanied by an appropriate comment. The reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any similarities or overlaps between the manuscript and previously published material.