Editors play a vital role in ensuring the quality, credibility, and ethical integrity of the Journal of Agricultural Innovation and Sustainability (JAIS). The following guidelines outline the expected ethical standards and responsibilities of Editors throughout the editorial and publication process.
The Editor is responsible for:
Maintaining the academic quality and integrity of the journal by publishing high-quality, original research.
Upholding freedom of expression within legal and ethical boundaries.
Safeguarding the credibility, reliability, and relevance of published content.
Meeting the needs of both authors and readers.
Ensuring adherence to ethical standards in all editorial activities.
Issuing corrections, clarifications, or retractions when necessary.
Good Editorial Practices include:
Encouraging constructive feedback and innovative suggestions from authors, reviewers, and board members.
Implementing the double-blind peer review process in its true spirit.
Promoting anti-plagiarism policies and maintaining transparency in publication ethics.
Educating authors and contributors about ethical research and publishing practices.
Ensuring editorial independence from institutional or external pressures.
Periodically revising journal policies to meet evolving academic standards.
The Editor must ensure that the Editorial Board includes qualified and respected scholars from relevant fields, with at least 50% international representation on the Advisory Committee.
The Editorial Board should consist of:
a. Editorial Committee: Responsible for journal management and logistics.
b. Advisory Committee: Responsible for evaluating submitted manuscripts.
Board members may be appointed for a fixed term, with provisions for revision or replacement as needed.
New board members must be informed of their roles, ethical obligations, and journal policies.
Editorial Board meetings should be held at least twice a year.
The Board shares responsibility for maintaining journal quality, as the HEC category of the journal depends on published work standards.
Editorial decisions must be based solely on academic merit, relevance, and quality of content.
The Editor must:
a. Respond promptly to authors upon manuscript submission.
b. Assign unique manuscript numbers for tracking and evaluation.
c. Ensure fair and unbiased assessment of all submissions.
Discrimination on the basis of gender, race, religion, nationality, political affiliation, or institutional association is strictly prohibited.
Editors must ensure reviewers disclose any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
The Editor must maintain strict confidentiality during the double-blind peer review process.
Information about manuscripts may only be shared with authors, reviewers, and editorial staff involved in the review.
Manuscript content should not be disclosed or used before publication without the author’s written consent.
Editors must ensure that the privacy of research participants is protected by requiring authors to follow ethical standards for data use and consent.
Both Editors and reviewers are prohibited from using unpublished data or findings for personal advantage.
The Editor must provide clear and accessible guidelines regarding manuscript preparation and formatting.
The preferred referencing style (e.g., APA, MLA, or Chicago) must be stated as a formal policy.
These guidelines should be published in every issue and on the journal website.
The Editor must ensure all manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review, including at least one international reviewer.
Reviewers’ identities must remain confidential, and authors’ names should be removed before review.
Reviewers must receive clear instructions and a standardized review form.
The Editor should ensure the review process is timely, objective, and free from bias.
A database of qualified reviewers must be maintained and updated regularly.
In cases of conflicting reviewer recommendations, the Editor should refer the matter to the Advisory Committee for final resolution.
Review feedback must be promptly shared with authors, and required revisions must be verified before acceptance.
The Editor should encourage reviewers to identify ethical violations, research misconduct, or plagiarism.
The Editor must verify suspected plagiarism using reliable software (e.g., Turnitin) and cross-check similar publications.
Confirmed cases of plagiarism or unethical conduct must result in retraction, correction, or publication of a corrigendum.
Authors found guilty of serious misconduct may face sanctions, including a ban on future submissions.
An author may publish only one article as a principal investigator per issue.
Co-authorship in the same issue is limited to one additional paper.
Editorial Board members, including the Editor, may publish only one paper per issue, either as principal author or co-author.
The Editor must discourage unethical authorship practices, including honorary or coerced authorship, and promote transparency in contributor roles.
Editors must recuse themselves from handling papers where they have any conflict of interest (e.g., personal, professional, or financial).
The same applies to reviewers and Editorial Board members.
A clear policy should exist for handling manuscripts submitted by editors or board members: in such cases, an Associate Editor or external reviewer must manage the review process independently.
The Editor must maintain and publish a record of potential conflicts of interest among editorial staff and board members, updated periodically.
The Editor must not use or disclose unpublished material or ideas obtained through peer review without the author’s written permission.
Any confidential information acquired during the review process must not be used for personal or professional gain.
The Editor has full responsibility for deciding which manuscripts are suitable for publication based on quality, relevance, and originality.
Rejection may be based on the following:
a. Lack of relevance to the journal’s scope.
b. Insufficient academic depth or quality.
c. Methodological flaws or ethical violations.
d. Evidence of plagiarism, fabricated data, or copyright infringement.
Editors must provide clear reasons for rejection and communicate decisions promptly.
Editorial decisions should not be altered arbitrarily after finalization.
The Editor must establish a transparent mechanism for handling appeals and complaints related to:
Manuscript rejection.
Allegations of ethical or procedural misconduct.
Objections to published content that may harm any party.
Appeals should be handled fairly, independently, and in accordance with the journal’s ethical policy.
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY
Frequency: Quarterly
Language: English
ISSN (Electronic): XXX-X
ISSN (Print): XXX-X
Publisher: Factum Research Institute (SMC-Private) Limited
Address: First Floor, Madina Center, Near Kabotar Square, Ring Road, Peshawar City, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
