In order to secure high quality of scientific communications, public acceptance
of the outcomes of a researcher’s efforts, to avoid malpractice in publishing
(plagiarism, fraudulent data, etc.) the journal’s editorial board as well as every
member of the editorial board, every author, every reviewer, and every publisher
must comply with the ethical standards, norms and regulations and take exhaustive
measures to prevent any infringement of such measures.
Editorial Board of “Water Sector of Russia: Problems, Technologies, Management”
journal in its activities is guided by the publication ethics principles accepted
by the world community and reflected in recommendations of Committee on Publication
Ethics (Committee on Publication Ethics, http://publicationethics.org/).
THE EDITOR’S ETHICAL CODE
1. Editorial Board of the journal takes a decision on an article publication
on the basis of the results of the test on its compliance with all requirements
concerning its arrangement and the reviewing results. When taking a decision on
the manuscript publication Editorial Board is being guided by the journal’s policy
and does not allow publication of articles with indications of plagiarism or infringement
of copyright. The final decision on the article publication or rejection is to
be taken by Chief Editor.
2. The editor of the journal in its activities must be guided by the following
– to improve the journal continuously;
– to follow the principle of freedom of opinion;
– to exclude influence of business or political interests on decision making concerning
any article publishing;
- to assess articles only by their scientific content;
– to take decisions on publishing in accordance with the journal subject orientation,
an article urgency, novelty, scientific value, reliability of results, and cogency
of conclusions. The quality of research and its urgency are the basis for the
decision on the publication.
3. The editor is to take exhaustive measures to secure high quality of the materials
to be published and to protect the personal information confidentiality. Editorial
Board should reject publication of an article if the latter is in some competitive
relations with the author or an organization connected with the research’s outcome,
or if there is any other conflict of interests. The editor can require all the
publishing process stakeholders to disclose all the conflicting interests.
4. The editor must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript
to anybody but the author or reviewers. Any unpublished data that the submitted
article may contain cannot be used by the editor without a written approval by
the author. It is not allowed to communicate the content of a negative review
to anybody but the author. Any confidential information obtained in the process
of communication with the author or reviewers is not to be divulged.
5. Editorial Board can reject an article if its content infringes intellectual
rights of any third persons, norms of scientific ethics, or if it contains any
information of limited access with advising the author and the organization that
submit the article.
THE AUTHOR’S ETHICAL CODE
1. Persons who have made a considerable contribution into the article target
setting and the corresponding problem solution and who are responsible for the
results obtained can be considered the authors of an article. An author who has
submitted the article to the editorial board takes the responsibility for agreement
with the rest of authors all issues concerning the choice of a journal for the
publication and reliability of the contact information. An author who has submitted
the manuscript warrants that he/she listed all co-authors, that all of them approve
the manuscript final version and agree to submit it to the “Water Sector of Russia:
Problems, Technologies, Management” scientific/practical journal editorial board
to be published.
2. Authors of the article are responsible for originality and reliability of
the material submitted. An author is to submit to the “Water Sector of Russia:
Problems, Technologies, Management” journal editorial board a manuscript of the
article which has not been previously published or submitted for publication to
any other journals. Concurrent submission of a manuscript to several journals
is not considered ethical.
3. An author is obliged to list correctly all scientific and other references
that he/she has used in the process of research. An author is obliged to make
references to all textual or graphical information taken from other authors/this
author previous publications. Any borrowing without reference is to be considered
plagiarism by Editorial Board.
4. Authors are obliged to disclose all conflicts of interest that can influence
their manuscript assessment and interpretation. All sources of financial support
(grants, governmental programs, projects, etc.) must be disclosed and obligatory
listed in the manuscript.
5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes in accordance
with the notes of editors or reviewers.
6. In case of acceptance the article is in open access and copyright is reserved
with the authors. The authors have a right to dispose the published material and
republish it in any other printings while indicating the place of its first publication.
THE REVIEWER’S ETHICAL CODE
1. Editorial Board takes decision on acceptance of the manuscript, its return
to the author for revision or its rejection on the basis of peer review results.
The expert opinion provided by a reviewer will assist in making editorial decisions
as well as in improvement of the article by the author.
2. A reviewer participating in peer review process concerning materials submitted
for publication in “Water Sector of Russia: Problems, Technologies, Management”
– to take objective and unbiased decisions;
– to keep confidentiality;
– not to allow discussion of the given article with any other persons excluding
persons authorized by Chief Editor to work with the author’s manuscript;
– not to use the information obtained in the course of peer reviewing in its personal
3. A reviewer is obliged to present a review before the deadline set by Editorial
Board. If the set deadline is not realistic a reviewer must inform Editorial Board.
4. При наличии конфликта интересов, несоответствии содержащихся в рукописи исследований
сфере своей научной компетенции, наличии профессиональных связей с авторами, которые
могут повлиять на объективность рецензии, рецензент обязан заявить об этом редакционной
коллегии и отказаться от оценки рукописи.
5. A reviewer is obliged to assist the author in improvement of the article quality.
6. A reviewer can pass the manuscript to a third person in accordance with the
editorial board consent.
7. Editorial Board is free to choose anonymous reviewers and their number in
order to secure an unbiased review of the manuscript. No one but the persons involved
in professional assessment of the manuscript is to have access to its content.