Journal of Ecology and Environmental Management

Journal of Ecology and Environmental Management (JEEM) follows ethical principles in scholarly publishing and supports responsible conduct by authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and readers. JEEM refers to internationally recognized publication ethics principles, including the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), to ensure fairness, academic integrity, transparency, and accountability throughout the publication process.

All parties involved in manuscript submission, editorial handling, peer review, and publication are expected to comply with the journal’s ethical policies. Editorial decisions are made based on academic merit, relevance to the journal scope, originality, methodological soundness, clarity, and contribution to the fields of ecology, environmental management, sustainability, conservation, coastal resilience, and related disciplines.

Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair, objective, confidential, and academically rigorous editorial process. The Editor-in-Chief, together with relevant editors and reviewers, evaluates whether a manuscript is suitable for publication in JEEM.

• Editors have the authority to accept, reject, or request revisions to manuscripts.
• Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts throughout the review process.
• Editors must preserve reviewer anonymity in accordance with the journal’s peer review policy.
• Editors should avoid and disclose any potential conflict of interest.
• Editors must assess manuscripts based on intellectual content, academic merit, and relevance to JEEM.
• Editors may investigate suspected plagiarism, data falsification, unethical authorship, or other misconduct.
• Unpublished materials from submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal research without written permission from the author.

Reviewers play an important role in supporting editorial decisions and improving the quality of manuscripts. Reviews should be objective, constructive, timely, and based on scholarly considerations.

• Reviewers should assist editors in evaluating the quality, originality, and relevance of manuscripts.
• Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents.
• Reviewers should provide clear, professional, technical, and objective comments.
• Reviewers should complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.
• Reviewers must not use information obtained during peer review for personal advantage.
• Reviewers should decline a review invitation if they have a conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, funders, or research topic.

Authors submitting manuscripts to JEEM are responsible for ensuring the originality, accuracy, transparency, and ethical compliance of their work. Manuscripts must be submitted with the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere and are not under consideration by another journal.

• Authors must submit original work that is free from plagiarism.
• Authors must ensure that the manuscript is not simultaneously submitted to another journal.
• All listed authors must have made a meaningful contribution to the research and manuscript preparation.
• The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the editorial office and for ensuring approval from all co-authors.
• Authors must disclose funding sources, sponsors, and their roles in the research where applicable.
• Authors must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest.
• Authors should promptly notify the editor if they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work.
• Authors agree that submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism detection tools.

JEEM considers the following practices as violations of publication ethics. When suspected or confirmed, the editorial team may investigate and take appropriate action in accordance with the seriousness of the case.

When ethical concerns arise, JEEM will handle the matter carefully, fairly, and proportionally. The editorial team may request clarification from authors, consult editorial board members, involve relevant committees, or take corrective actions depending on the nature and severity of the case.