Ethical Guidelines

Editorial Roles

• Editor-in-Chief (EIC) is responsible for the overall development of the journal. The EIC makes the final editorial decisions unless co-authoring a manuscript. The EIC with inputs from the editorial board members sets the editorial processes and ethical standards for the journal.
• Associate Editors (AEs) support the EIC by managing submissions within their subject expertise. They oversee the peer review process of the assigned articles and make recommendations to the EIC. They may also independently review the manuscript.
• Advisors are senior members of the scientific community who provide high-level strategic advice on journal's mission and vision and offer advice on the journal’s long-term goal.
• If an editorial team member submits a manuscript as an author, they will not participate in the decision-making process for their own submission. Instead, the manuscript will be reviewed and managed by editors or reviewers with no conflicts of interest to ensure an impartial evaluation.

Editorial Independence

The Journal of Environmental Science, Health & Sustainability and its publisher maintain the ethos of complete editorial independence. The publisher upholds the value of independency in decision making process by editorial board members and having a clear commitment of no interference in peer review processes. The journal's commitment to editorial independence, along with that of its publisher, ensures that personal characteristics or identity do not influence how we treat authors, editors, or peer reviewers.

Editorial Processes

The journal follows a single-blind peer review model, balancing transparency with fair assessment to uphold the highest standards. Reviewers are encouraged to reveal their names to the authors post-acceptance of the manuscript, but they can remain anonymous. The journal article includes the names of the handling editor and reviewer (if they agree) in the published version. This ensures the confidence of our readers.

The detailed editorial workflow is shown below:

• All submissions undergo initial editorial screening by the journal manager to ensure that the submitted manuscript meets the journal’s basic requirements, such as whether the submission follows the author's guidelines. AI detection checks were also performed in this stage. The manuscript also undergoes a plagiarism check by the journal manager and confirms whether the manuscript meets the journal’s quality control of a similarity index of less than 20%. Authors are informed of any changes that are required at this stage. If any changes and formatting are required, the submissions are sent back to the authors for recommended changes before assigning the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC).
• EIC is responsible for checking the quality, including thorough plagiarism checks and relevance to the journal’s scope. At this stage, the EIC or an assigned Associate Editor (AE) may provide constructive editorial feedback to authors to help improve clarity, structure, and overall quality before peer review. The EIC determines whether the manuscript has merit and novelty to go through the peer-review process. The EIC can either reject the manuscript or assign that to an Associate Editor (AE) based on the subject matter of the manuscript. The entire process is normally completed within one week from submission unless the manuscript does not pass the initial editorial screening.
• The peer review process is handled by the AE. The AE sends the manuscripts to two or more external reviewers for evaluation under the single-blind peer review model. Reviewers are typically given 3 weeks to complete their assessments and submit their detailed recommendations to the associate editor (ie. handling editor). The AE checks thoroughly the reviewer’s comments and recommendations and makes his initial determination whether to ask for revision or recommend rejection of the manuscript. In cases of required revisions, the AE with the help of the journal manager sends authors detailed feedback from reviewers to help guide the revisions. Authors are typically given 1–2 weeks to address minor comments. For substantial revisions, authors may receive 3-4 weeks to make changes and resubmit. The revised manuscript may undergo an additional round of review if substantial changes are made or if new concerns arise. Once all revisions are satisfactorily addressed, the manuscript undergoes a final editorial review. The AE then makes a final recommendation on the acceptance and rejection of the manuscript to the EIC. This process normally takes 6 to 8 weeks to finish.
• The EIC reviews the AE’s recommendations and makes the final decision. Authors are notified whether their manuscript is accepted or rejected.
• Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage for copyediting, language check, formatting, and proofreading and are typically published in the next available issue. Online pre-publication may be available before the issue's release. The production process is done by the copyeditor. During the production stages, authors are required to check and confirm both copyedited manuscripts as well as proofread the final version of the manuscript before being published online.

Human Subjects and Animal Research

Research involving human subjects must carry approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or from a relevant committee. Research involving animals must also carry approval from the Institutional IRB. In such instances the submissions must contain the relevant documentations.

Use of Generative AI in Research

Authors must declare the extent of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) use in writing and conceptualization of the manuscript in their cover letter. Generative AI and/or AI technologies can be used during manuscript preparation; however, the authors should not frame their research based on GenAI or ChatGPT. Instead, they can use it at a minimal level to improve the grammar and readability of the manuscript. This must be disclosed in the cover letter. The journal and its publisher use AI detector to identify the misuse of AI in scientific writing.

For more comprehensive information regarding the use AI, please refer to the guidelines provided by Elsevier.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including financial, personal, or professional relationships, they may have. This disclosures help in promoting transparency and trust among the journal's users and further helps in making unbiased decision-making.

Authors should clearly disclose funding sources and the role of funders in the research design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and publication.

Editors and reviewers must also declare any conflicts that could compromise the integrity of the review process. Alternative editors or reviewers may be assigned, if needed.

The conflicts of interest disclosure prevent ethical concerns and protects journal's reputation.

Ethical Practices

We are not a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); however, we adhere to COPE guidelines to ensure integrity, transparency, and accountability in our publishing practices. We take plagiarism and data falsification seriously:

• The authors must ensure that all sources listed in the manuscript are cited appropriately including instances of attribution of their own work. The editorial team will take extreme care in checking manuscript for plagiarism (using iThenticate software) prior to making an editorial decision.
• The authors responsibility is to provide accurate and unpublished data in the submission. Data falsification in any form (e.g., in figures and tables) will result in rejection of submitted manuscript. If such an issue arises in a published article, the journal’s ethical committee will take a serious note and investigate the case to resolution. In an extreme case the published article will be retracted. Proper citation of data sources is highly recommended.

Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism is defined as the wrongful attribution of publication of someone else work as one’s own. Journal of Environmental Science, Health & Sustainability strongly object to such unethical practices. This includes practices such as copying or rephrasing a source without proper citation. Authors can prevent from doing such actions by citing or acknowledging the original source. During submissions authors must sign a declaration of copyright notice and submission agreement and confirming that all sources have been properly cited, that they understand plagiarism and its unethical nature, and that they take full responsibility for their work and any citation errors.

To prevent plagiarism, the journal adopts a single-blind peer review process, and uses iThenticate software to check for similarities (typically 20% or less), ensuring high ethical standards in publication.

Retraction, Correction and Complaint Processes

The journal follows the policy of retractions, corrections and complaints as stipulated in COPE guidelines:

• In the event of a reported or confirmed case of scientific misconduct, data falsification, or ethical violations the journal issues a retraction notice. A clear explanation for the retraction is provided to maintain transparency. We have a dedicated team of ethical committee to address these issues.
• Minor errors can lead to an erratum. This means that the research outcome is not compromised in any way. In such a situation, a correction notice is tied to the original article.
• Complaints are managed through a formal process to ensure fairness and alignment with publishing practices and ethical guidelines. Each case is reviewed thoroughly and transparently.

Misconduct Handling

For complaints related to ethical practices, such as plagiarism, data falsification, and authorship dispute, should be addressed to either the publisher or the editors-in-chief. Publisher note these complaints very seriously. Publisher have a dedicated ethical committee to address these complaints and consider resolution following the COPE guidelines.

If misconduct is identified, such as by the reviewer or by the reader, the journal investigates and take appropriate action based on evidence provided, including notifying authors to explain the issue in writing. In cases of proven scientific misconduct, data falsification, fraud, or plagiarism, the publisher, in collaboration with editors-in-chief, may issue corrections or retraction of the paper. Efforts will be made to detect and prevent such misconduct, such as plagiarism detection, during the review process. All authors must comply with the journal’s and/or publisher’s decisions on such matters.