Editorial Independence

Purpose and Scope

The SDEWES Journals Editorial Independence Policy sets out the principles that protect independent editorial decision-making across all journals published by SDEWES Centre. This policy applies to Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Guest Editors, Editorial Board members, reviewers, authors and SDEWES Centre as publisher.

This policy applies to all editorial decisions concerning submitted, accepted and published content, including regular articles, review articles, special issue papers, article collections, conference-linked submissions and supplementary materials.

Related guidance, statement templates, declaration forms and checklists relevant to this policy are listed in Appendix A: Related COPE and International Guidance and Appendix B: Practical Forms, Statements and Checklists.

Principle of Editorial Independence

SDEWES journals uphold editorial independence as a fundamental principle of responsible scholarly publishing. Editorial decisions must be made independently and must be based on the scientific quality, originality, validity, relevance and clarity of the manuscript, its contribution to the field and its suitability for the journal.

Acceptance, rejection, revision and other editorial decisions must be based on editorial assessment and, where applicable, peer review. Decisions must not be influenced by Article Processing Charges, conference participation, institutional relationships, sponsorship, advertising, SDEWES membership, personal relationships, political views, commercial considerations or other non-scientific interests.

Roles and Responsibilities of Editors and SDEWES Centre

Editors are responsible for editorial assessment and decision-making within the journal’s aims and scope, peer-review procedures and applicable policies. Reviewer recommendations and advice from Editorial Board members or other qualified advisers may inform editorial decisions but do not replace independent editorial judgement. Peer-review procedures and reviewer responsibilities are set out in Peer Review Policy.

SDEWES journals may have an Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors and Editorial Board members as standing editorial roles. Guest Editors or other temporary editorial roles may be appointed for special issues, article collections or conference-linked submissions where appropriate. The responsibilities, authority and duration of each role should be clearly defined by the relevant journal.

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for the editorial direction, scientific quality, integrity and development of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief oversees the editorial process, ensures that editorial decisions are made independently and in accordance with the SDEWES Journals Policies, and has final responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts unless a clearly defined delegation of editorial authority applies.

Associate Editors support the Editor-in-Chief by handling assigned manuscripts, usually within their field of expertise. Their responsibilities may include initial assessment of manuscript suitability, identifying and inviting reviewers, overseeing the peer-review process, evaluating reviewer reports, assessing author revisions and making recommendations or editorial decisions in accordance with the journal’s defined workflow.

Editorial Board members are recognised experts who support the quality, reputation and development of the journal. Their role may include advising the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors on journal scope, emerging topics, editorial strategy and special issues; acting as peer reviewers; recommending suitable reviewers; encouraging high-quality submissions; promoting the journal within their scholarly networks; and supporting ethical and professional standards. Editorial Board members do not normally have final decision-making authority for manuscripts unless they are formally assigned an editorial handling role.

SDEWES Centre, as publisher, is responsible for providing the publishing infrastructure, maintaining the SDEWES Journals Policies, supporting journal operations and ensuring the long-term availability and preservation of the scholarly record. SDEWES Centre does not direct the acceptance or rejection of individual manuscripts. It may participate in matters involving publication ethics, legal obligations, privacy, copyright, safety or correction of the scholarly record in accordance with Publishing Ethics, Privacy, Copyright & Licensing and Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals, while respecting independent scientific and editorial judgement.

Editorial appointments, renewal of appointments, changes in editorial responsibilities or discontinuation of editorial roles must not be used to influence the handling or outcome of individual manuscripts. Decisions concerning editorial appointments may take into account performance, compliance with applicable policies, journal needs and defined terms of service, but disagreement with a particular independent editorial decision should not, by itself, be used as grounds for adverse action.

The relationship between editors and SDEWES Centre is based on mutual respect, trust and recognition of their different responsibilities: editors protect the quality, integrity and scholarly direction of the journal, while SDEWES Centre supports the journal’s operation, sustainability and compliance with publishing standards.

Basis for Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript’s intellectual and scientific content, including its originality, methodological soundness, validity of results, relevance to the journal scope, clarity of presentation and contribution to knowledge.

Manuscripts must be evaluated without discrimination based on personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, nationality, citizenship, political views, religious belief, gender, race, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation or other non-scientific factors.

Separation from Non-Editorial Interests

Editorial assessment, reviewer selection and editorial decision-making must remain separate from the financial, organisational, promotional or strategic interests of SDEWES Centre, conferences, sponsors, partners, institutions, advertisers or other stakeholders.

Payment or non-payment of an Article Processing Charges must not influence editorial assessment or the peer-review outcome. Conference participation, an invitation to submit an extended paper, SDEWES membership, institutional cooperation, sponsorship, advertising or another relationship with SDEWES Centre or the journal must not create an expectation of acceptance, preferential treatment or accelerated editorial handling.

Administrative, financial, conference and production activities may support journal operations, but the individuals responsible for these activities must not direct or predetermine the scientific assessment or editorial outcome of an individual manuscript.

Competing Interests and Independent Handling

Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Guest Editors and Editorial Board members must declare any actual, potential or perceived competing interest that could affect, or could reasonably appear to affect, editorial independence.

Where an editorial-role holder has a competing interest concerning a manuscript, that person must not participate in its initial assessment, reviewer selection, peer-review evaluation, recommendation or decision. Access to confidential manuscript information should also be restricted where necessary, and the manuscript must be reassigned to another editor or handled through an independent editorial process.

An editorial-role holder must not handle a manuscript that they authored or co-authored, a manuscript reporting research that they directly supervised or funded, or a manuscript involving a close personal, professional, institutional, financial or competitive relationship that could compromise independent judgement. Where the Editor-in-Chief has a competing interest or is an author of the manuscript, SDEWES Centre must designate an appropriate independent handler.

Disclosure, assessment and management of editorial competing interests are governed by Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure. Reviewer competing interests and manuscript reassignment within peer review are addressed in Peer Review Policy.

Peer Review and Editorial Responsibility

Peer review supports editorial decision-making but does not replace editorial responsibility. Reviewers provide expert advice and recommendations, while the Editor-in-Chief or another editor authorised by the journal remains responsible for the editorial decision.

Editors should independently assess reviewer reports, author responses and the strength and relevance of the arguments presented. Where reviewer recommendations differ, the editor is not required to follow the majority recommendation but must make a reasoned editorial judgement based on the manuscript and the applicable journal requirements.

The peer-review model, reviewer selection, reviewer responsibilities, confidentiality, revisions and review records are governed by Peer Review Policy.

Appeals, Complaints and Ethical Concerns

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they believe that a significant factual or technical error, procedural problem, competing interest, bias, misunderstanding or other substantial issue affected the decision. Appeals and complaints are handled under Editorial Decision Appeals and Complaints.

Where the person who made or participated in the original decision is named in an appeal or complaint, has a competing interest or cannot assess the matter independently, another editor or independent handler must be assigned.

Concerns involving pressure on editors, interference with editorial decisions, undisclosed competing interests, retaliation or other possible breaches of editorial independence may also be assessed under Publishing Ethics and Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure.

Special Issues, Article Collections and Conference-Linked Submissions

Special issues, article collections and conference-linked submissions are subject to the same standards of editorial independence, peer review, competing-interest management and publication ethics as regular submissions.

Guest Editors and conference organisers may assist with topic development, reviewer suggestions or editorial recommendations where appropriate, but they must not override independent editorial assessment or control the outcome of individual manuscripts. Guest Editors must not handle manuscripts where they have an actual, potential or perceived competing interest.

Final responsibility for acceptance or rejection remains with the Editor-in-Chief or another editor authorised by the journal. Conference participation, an invitation to submit, sponsorship, partnership or involvement in a special issue does not imply or guarantee acceptance.

Submissions derived from conference papers must meet the journal’s requirements for originality, transparency and substantial extension, where applicable, and must properly cite and disclose any previous version.

Policy Review and Updates

SDEWES Centre may review and update this policy periodically to reflect developments in editorial independence, editorial governance, publication ethics, open science, legal requirements and international standards.

Updated policies apply from the date of publication on the SDEWES Journals Policies website unless otherwise stated.

Appendix A. Related COPE and International Guidance

COPE Trustee Board. COPE position - External influence on editorial decisions

Provides principles for protecting editorial decision-making from inappropriate external, organisational, commercial, political or other influence, maintaining academic freedom and establishing an appropriate division of responsibility between editors and publishers.

World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). The Relationship Between Journal Editors-in-Chief and Owners

Provides guidance on the authority of Editors-in-Chief over journal editorial content and on the responsibilities of journal owners and publishers not to interfere in the evaluation, selection or editing of individual articles.

COPE DOAJ OASPA WAME. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

Relevant to transparency concerning journal ownership and management, editorial governance, peer review, fees, conflicts of interest and the requirement that editorial decisions be based on scholarly merit.

COPE Council. COPE Discussion Document: Handling competing interests

Relevant to the disclosure and management of competing interests involving editors, reviewers, authors, publishers and other parties involved in editorial decision-making.

Appendix B. Practical Forms, Statements and Checklists

The documents below provide practical support for independent manuscript handling and for concerns involving editorial influence, competing interests, appeals or complaints. More detailed forms and checklists are listed in the appendices to the relevant specialised SDEWES Journals Policies.

Editor, Guest Editor and Editorial Board Competing Interest Checklist

Internal editor checklist – Used to assess and document competing interests involving editorial-role holders, exclude affected persons from manuscript handling and establish an independent handling process.

Editorial Decision Appeal Assessment Checklist for Editors

Internal editor checklist – Used to check appeal eligibility, competing interests and whether an appeal must be assigned to an independent handler.

Complaint Handling and Response Checklist for Editors

Internal editor and publisher checklist – Used where a complaint concerns editorial conduct, inappropriate influence, failure to follow procedures, competing interests or another possible breach of editorial independence.

Publishing Ethics Concern Initial Assessment and Policy-Routing Checklist for Editors

Internal editor and publisher checklist – Used where a concern involving editorial interference or independence must first be assessed and routed under this policy, Publishing Ethics, Competing Interests and Funding Disclosure or another applicable SDEWES Journals Policy.