Since 1997

EDITORIAL ETHICS

The ethics of scholarly publications is a system of norms of professional behavior in relationships between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and readers in the process of creating, disseminating and using scholarly publications.
The basis of the ethical rules of scholarly publications adopted by the editorial board of the “Belarusian Economic Journal” includes:

Articles submitted for publication must meet the following criteria:

  • The papers submitted must contain only original results of the authors’ research.
  • Incorrect borrowings, plagiarism and excessive self-citation are not allowed.
  • The material must be original, not published earlier, not accepted for publication and not submitted for consideration to other print media.
  • Only those authors are indicated who have made a significant intellectual contribution to obtaining the results. It is assumed that at the time of sending the article, all the authors agree with the publication in the journal and do not object to the order of indicating the authors in the article.
  • The reference list consists of the sources that were actually used in the course of research; all the sources should be included in the citations in the text of the article.
  • Calculations, formulas, tabular and graphic materials are provided in the format required by the editorial board; they are monitored by the author at each stage of work.
  • The data, text, images or ideas designed and developed by other authors must be presented with respective references and citations. The original text borrowed from other authors’ works must be put in quotation marks.
  • The author must provide an adequate and timely feedback response to the reviewers’ comments.
  • The author must cooperate with the editorial board of the journal to work on correcting errors or neglected points if they are found in the article.

Reviewers and editors should strictly follow the following principles in their activities:

  • The article is peer-reviewed strictly according to the principle of double-blind peer reviewing, i.e. the authors do not know the names of reviewers, and the reviewers do not know the names of the authors.
  • Each manuscript is treated as a confidential document. Any dissemination of materials by the reviewer is not allowed, for personal use included.
  • The object of the review is the result of the research. The purpose of the review is to express the expert’s own opinion on the reliability, newness, and significance of the findings.
  • The expert’s opinion should be unbiased, i.e. the discrepancy between the scholarly positions of the author and the reviewer is a basis for a scholarly discussion, but in itself cannot serve as a sufficient reason for refusing to publish the article.
  • The reviewer performs a voluntary evaluation of manuscripts that are in line with his/her area of ??scholarly and professional interests. Coercion of an expert to review is not allowed. If it is impossible to conduct the examination at the proper level or within the required time, the reviewer is obliged to inform the editorial board about this.

Violations and liability

  • The violation by the author of the standards of publication ethics discovered at the stage of the article’s consideration may serve as a sufficient basis for refusing the publication.
  • The violation of publication ethics by a reviewer or editor may serve as a basis for termination of cooperation on the part of the journal.
  • The violations discovered after the publication of an article are subject to detailed review by the interested parties. Minor irregularities can be corrected by the publication of official clarifications. Significant violations entail the removal of the article from a publication with a notification about this in the journal and on the journal's website.
  • The fact of violating the rules of publication ethics can be established only with the participation of all the parties of the conflict that arose due to such violation. Until such a fact is established, any case must be described as a suspected violation. The editorial board of the journal necessarily considers all such suspicions.