Editorial Policy

This Editorial Policy sets out the principles, responsibilities, and practical procedures that guide the editorial team in acquiring, evaluating, and stewarding the journal’s scholarly content. Its purpose is to ensure decisions are fair, consistent, transparent, and driven only by scholarly merit and the journal’s stated scope. The policy is intended for editors, section editors, editorial board members, staff, and the International Advisory Board and is designed to be clear enough for day-to-day use while robust enough to support ethical and strategic decision-making.

 1.      Core Principle

The editorial team exists to safeguard the intellectual integrity of the journal. Editorial decisions are made independently and solely based on originality, methodological soundness, clarity, significance to the field, and fit with the journal’s scope. Personal, political, commercial, or other external pressures must never influence editorial judgment.

 2.      Roles and Responsibilities

a.       Editor-in-Chief: provides strategic and final editorial leadership; sets and reviews policy; makes final decisions on contentious or borderline submissions; ensures integrity and public trust in the editorial process.

b.      Section Editors/Associate Editors: manage submissions in their areas, invite and evaluate peer reviewers, synthesise reviewer reports, recommend decisions, and communicate with authors.

c.       Editorial Board: advises on editorial direction, recommends reviewers, assists in quality assurance, and may guest-edit special collections.

d.      Managing Editor / Production Staff: handle administrative processing, enforce timelines, coordinate copyediting and publication logistics, and maintain records.

e.       International Advisory Board: (see Section 13 below) offers high-level strategic advice, advocacy, and subject-matter guidance; it does not perform daily editorial tasks or make individual manuscript decisions.

All participants must act in good faith, document key decisions, and recuse themselves where conflicts of interest exist.

 3.      Fairness, Impartiality and Diversity

Editors must evaluate manuscripts without bias related to authors’ gender, race, religion, nationality, institutional affiliation, sexual orientation, or political views. The editorial team will actively cultivate a diverse reviewer pool and board membership to reduce systemic bias and enrich scholarly perspectives.

 4.      Conflicts of Interest

Editorial team members must declare any real or potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling affected submissions. Conflicts include close personal relationships with authors, direct financial interests, recent collaborations, or competitive research relationships. When a recusal occurs, an alternate editor will be appointed, and the recusal will be recorded.

 5.      Confidentiality and Data Protection

Editors and reviewers must treat submissions as confidential. Manuscripts, reviews, and editorial deliberations are not to be disclosed outside the editorial process without explicit permission from authors. Personal data collected during submission and review will be handled following applicable data-protection principles and retained only as necessary for editorial purposes.

 6.      Reviewer Conduct and Expectations

Reviewers should:

a.       Provide timely, well-reasoned, and constructive critiques focused on content and methodology.

b.      Alert editors to any ethical concerns (plagiarism, manipulated images, redundant publication, ethical approval shortcomings).

c.       Maintain confidentiality and not use privileged information from the manuscript for personal advantage.

d.      Editors will support reviewers with clear guidance, reviewer training materials, and recognition of their contributions.

7.      Ethical Standards and Misconduct

The editorial team will uphold strict ethical standards. Suspected misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, redundant publication, inappropriate authorship, or ethical approval breaches, will be investigated promptly. Where misconduct is confirmed, corrective measures may include corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions, following appropriate guidance. The journal will cooperate with institutions and funders in investigations when appropriate.

 8.      Appeals, Corrections and Retractions

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a concise, evidence-based appeal. Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editor not previously involved. Post-publication corrections (errata), expressions of concern, and retractions will be issued when warranted; notices will be linked to the original article and will explain the reason for the action.

 9.      Transparency and Documentation

The editorial office will publish key policies (peer review model, editorial board membership, authorship guidelines, and appeals contact). Decision rationales and significant changes to submissions will be documented. This transparency strengthens trust among authors, reviewers, and readers.

 10.  Timeliness and Professionalism

a.       The editorial office will strive for predictable turnaround times at each review stage and will communicate delays proactively. All communications with authors, reviewers, and board members should be courteous, professional, and constructive.

b.      The journal commits to periodic review of editorial practices, using performance metrics (e.g., review turnaround, acceptance rates, appeal outcomes) and stakeholder feedback. The journal will promote professional development for editors and reviewers on peer review, publishing ethics, and inclusive practices.

11.  International Advisory Board (IAB)

a.       Purpose and Nature

The International Advisory Board (IAB) is a strategic, non-executive body appointed to strengthen the journal’s international profile, advise on long-term direction, and provide expert subject-matter guidance. The IAB complements, but does not substitute for, the editorial team: it has no role in day-to-day manuscript handling or in making acceptance/rejection decisions. Instead, its remit is advisory, strategic, and promotional.

b.      Composition and Appointment

Members of the IAB are eminent scholars and practitioners drawn from diverse geographic regions and disciplines relevant to the journal’s scope. Selection criteria include: recognised scholarly contribution, breadth of perspective, willingness to advocate for the journal, and commitment to ethical publishing. Appointments are made by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the Editorial Board. Terms are ordinarily two to four years, renewable once by mutual agreement; staggered terms are encouraged to preserve institutional memory and continuity.

c.       Responsibilities

IAB members are expected to:

                    i.            Offer high-level advice on editorial strategy, priority themes, and emerging areas of research to keep the journal academically current and globally relevant.

                  ii.            Suggest potential special-issue themes, guest editors, and high-quality contributors.

                iii.            Recommend qualified reviewers, section editors, or associate editors when appropriate.

                iv.            Advocate for the journal within their professional networks, assisting with visibility, indexing, and reputation building.

                  v.            Provide independent perspectives on appeals or complex ethical matters if formally requested by the Editor-in-Chief (while respecting the IAB’s non-executive role).

                vi.            Advise on opportunities for partnerships, events, and capacity building (for example, workshops for reviewers or early-career researchers).

d.      Limitations and Boundaries

The IAB does not:

                    i.            Participate in peer review unless specifically invited as an external reviewer and subject to the same conflict-of-interest rules.

                  ii.            Make unilateral editorial decisions on manuscripts.

                iii.            Engage in fundraising with implied decision-making power over editorial content.
These boundaries preserve editorial independence and avoid conflicts between advocacy and adjudication.

e.       Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality

IAB members must declare potential conflicts of interest (e.g., close collaborations with prospective authors, commercial ties) and recuse themselves from advisory tasks where conflicts exist. Like editors and reviewers, IAB members are bound by confidentiality concerning non-public submissions and editorial deliberations they may see in the course of advising.

f.        Meetings, Reporting and Deliverables

The IAB will meet (virtually or in person) at least once per year to review strategy and provide an advisory report to the Editor-in-Chief. Additional consultations may be convened for special projects (indexing bids, special issues, strategic initiatives). The IAB’s advice will be recorded, and the Editor-in-Chief will report on actions taken in response to the IAB’s recommendations in an annual editorial report.

g.      Performance and Renewal

Membership effectiveness will be reviewed periodically. Criteria for continued appointment include active engagement, constructive contributions to journal strategy, and adherence to ethical standards. Members may resign or be asked to step down for non-performance, conflicts of interest, or conduct inconsistent with the journal’s values.

By following these principles and procedures and by clarifying the complementary but distinct role of the International Advisory Board, the editorial team will preserve the journal’s scholarly standards and serve the research community with fairness, integrity, and professionalism. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for maintaining and periodically reviewing this policy to ensure it remains fit for purpose; substantive revisions should be presented to the Editorial Board and IAB for comment before adoption.