PUBLICATION ETHICS STATEMENT FOR THE JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENT AND AGRICULTURE RESEARCH (JEEAR)

This statement shows the ethical guidelines for potential authors, editors/editorial staff, and peer reviewers of the Journal of Environment, Engineering, and Agriculture Research (JEEAR). These guidelines, which guarantee the integrity, quality, and trustworthiness of scholarly materials published in JEEAR, are largely based on the Committee on Publication Ethics or COPE's Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Brill’s Publication Ethics.

JEEAR adopts the guidelines stipulated herein and expects all authors, editors/editorial staff, and peer reviewers to conform to ethical standards, befitting their respective roles in the editorial board. Where applicable or when the essence of the provisions/recommendations is better expressed by the above-mentioned source material/s, these are quoted verbatim (shown in italics) in this policy statement.

Specifically, JEEAR expects that:

1. Potential authors for JEEAR must present an objective discussion of the significance of research work, sufficient methodological details and references to ensure the replicability of the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements in the manuscript constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. For submitted review articles, they must be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art of the topic being considered. The authors must ensure that their work is entirely original, and if any content or language from other sources has been used, it must be duly acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior. Moreover, submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is considered a breach of research ethics. The corresponding author should first secure the consensus and approval of all co-authors before sending the final version of the paper for publication.
   
   
2. As for Editors and Editorial Staff, they must endeavor to safeguard the integrity of the peer-review process by ensuring that all submitted articles get the same treatment and that all ethical guidelines are followed. Specifically, the following must be observed:

• All submissions must be handled fairly, promptly, and respectfully. Submissions must be acknowledged, and decisions after peer review must be communicated to the author immediately, along with any suggestions or recommendations by the reviewer for improving the paper.
• Submitted manuscripts must be handled with strictest confidentiality. Details about the paper, the author/s, and other pertinent information must not be disclosed to any person outside of the peer review process.
• Decisions to be made about the paper must be based solely on its academic/scientific merits.
• Should allegations of misconduct or conflicts of interest arise about a submitted paper, the section editor must contact the editor-in-chief and the editorial board for appropriate action/s.
• If any member of the editorial board has a conflict of interest (in any form) about an article in consideration, the involved member can recuse himself/herself from making editorial decisions.
• It is also the responsibility of the editor to check if the author/s complies with Philippine legal provisions and policies regarding the use of human subjects, biological materials, and IKS and resources.
• The editor can outrightly reject a submitted article if he/she considers it inappropriate for the journal and outside of its scope.

3. Peer Reviewers or Referees who will be selected for peer review must handle any submitted manuscript with utmost confidentiality. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain. Reviews must be conducted objectively and formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the submitted paper or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
   
   Reviewers should inhibit themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competition, collaboration, and personal (by blood or affinity) or other relationships or connections with any or all the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In particular, the reviewer is expected to carry out the following tasks:

• Initially, the reviewer should preview a submitted paper to check for potential conflicts of interest that could complicate the review. If there is any potential for bias, the reviewer is obligated to disclose this to the editors and recuse himself from the review process.
• During the review process, the reviewer must consider the submitted article objectively. It should be evaluated based on its merits and without regard for religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation/position of the author(s).
• The reviewer must keep the process confidential. He must not share information about a manuscript with anyone outside the peer review process. Furthermore, the reviewer must not retain copies of any reviewed article.
• The reviewer must provide a constructive, comprehensive, scientifically sound, and substantial peer report of the article in a timely, considerate, and objective manner while exercising confidentiality at every stage of the process.
• The reviewer must refrain from making comments that can impugn the author’s scientific/academic reputation.
• The reviewer must inform the editors should he notice any significant issues (i.e. plagiarism, research misconduct) on the part of the author and the submitted manuscript.

OTHER ISSUES RELATING TO PUBLICATION

JEEAR adheres to the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines that encompass various themes, including ethical permission for the study, conflicts of interest, data availability, authorship determination, research misconduct, and article retractions, among others. A submitted manuscript may be rejected if the editors deem it as non-compliant with journal guidelines or if it does not adhere to an adequate ethical framework.

• Requisite Permits/Clearances for Studies involving Indigenous Peoples, Biological Specimen collection, Human Subjects, Animals, and Identifiable Materials/Data
  
  Authors must ensure that the submitted research complies with widely accepted ethical standards (such as the Helsinki Declaration for animal use). For studies done in the Philippines, appropriate permits and clearances must be secured by the author/s. R.A. 9147 (Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Law) requires the acquisition of a gratuitous permit for the collection of biological specimens, while R.A.  8485 requires an animal permit before the use of animals during experimentation. Clearance from an accredited Ethics Board is also necessary for studies dealing with human subjects/respondents, especially if they are deemed as vulnerable sectors.
  
  For studies dealing with Indigenous peoples, their natural resources, and Indigenous knowledge systems (IKS), free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) is a requisite document for journal submission. Finally, repository sources (i.e., genebanks, the research group’s repository for DNA sequences, and culture collections) must be properly acknowledged for the use of germplasm materials (including their DNA sequences) in the submitted study.
  
  
• Conflict of Interest
  All authors must disclose relevant competing interests that could influence the review or publication process. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. Anyone who suspects an undisclosed competing interest regarding a work published or under consideration in JEEAR should inform the editor in chief.
  
  
• Funding Sources
  Authors must report all sources of funding for the submitted research. If the funder has involvement at any stage of the study (i.e. conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript), this must be mentioned in the paper.
  
  
• Authorship Determination
  To ensure integrity of the publication process, only authors who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the research should be included as authors. Non-intellectual contributions (i.e. technical support, funding acquisition and administrative oversight) do not warrant inclusion in authorship. The contributions must instead be indicated in the Acknowledgments section.
  
  
• Data Availability and Reproducibility
  JEEAR is committed to ensuring free readership of its articles and in cultivating an open research landscape, thereby enhancing replicability and robustness. Authors are thus encouraged to share published data (i.e. raw and processed data, softwares, algorithms,materials and methods), when deemed applicable. On the other hand, data with legal or ethical implications must not be disclosed, but clearly stipulated in this section of the paper.
  
  
• Errata and Retraction
  Any erroneous entries must be published as errata in the next issue of JEEAR. As for retractions, JEEAR will consider them in line with COPE’s Retraction Guidelines. An article will be considered for retraction if its basic scientific/ technical premise is seriously flawed and thus, does not merit publication. Other possible reasons for retraction are substantial plagiarism, fraud, research misconduct and unethical practices or content that is prejudicial or life-threatening for certain parties.
  
  
• Neutrality and Freedom of Information
  While freedom of expression is a tenet that JEEAR stands by, authors must endeavor to publish content that are not truthful, libelous, defamatory and prejudicial to its readers and experimental subjects.

STATEMENT ON IDENTIFYING AND ADDRESSING PUBLICATION MISCONDUCT 

The Journal of Engineering, Environmental Science and Agriculture Research (JEEAR) of Mindanao State University–General Santos upholds the highest standards of integrity in research and publication. The journal adopts and aligns with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and strictly adheres to its Core Practices in addressing issues of publication misconduct.

1. Scope of Misconduct

Publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• Plagiarism and self-plagiarism;
• Fabrication or falsification of data, images, or results;
• Redundant or duplicate publication;
• Manipulation of peer review;
• Inaccurate or misleading authorship attribution;
• Unethical research practices or undisclosed conflicts of interest.

2. Detection and Preliminary Assessment

• All manuscripts undergo plagiarism screening using recognized software prior to peer review.
• Concerns raised by editors, reviewers, or readers are formally documented.
• The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, conducts an initial assessment following COPE flowcharts for suspected misconduct.

3. Investigation Process

• Where concerns are substantiated, authors are notified in writing and provided an opportunity to respond and supply supporting evidence or clarification.
• The investigation is guided by COPE recommendations to ensure fairness, confidentiality, and transparency.
• When necessary, the journal may seek advice from external experts or notify the author’s affiliated institution for independent investigation.

4. Editorial Decisions and Actions

Depending on the severity and nature of the misconduct, the Editorial Board may take one or more of the following actions, consistent with COPE guidelines:

• Requesting corrections or clarifications;
• Publishing an Expression of Concern;
• Rejection of the manuscript under review;
• Retraction of a published article, with a clear and permanent notice indicating the reasons for retraction;
• Notification of the author’s institution, funding body, or other relevant authorities.

5. Transparency and Accountability

• All corrective actions (corrections, retractions, expressions of concern) are permanently linked to the original article and remain part of the public record.
• The Editorial Board ensures that records of investigations and decisions are properly maintained for accountability and future reference.

6. Commitment to Ethical Publishing

By enforcing this policy, JEEAR ensures that published work is accurate, trustworthy, and reflective of sound scientific practice. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to uphold these ethical standards at all stages of the publication process.

POLICY ON FAIR AND ETHICAL USE OF AI

The Journal of Engineering, Environment, and Agriculture Research (JEEAR) adopts the Mindanao State University (MSU) System-wide Policy on the Fair and Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence and Its Applications as its guiding framework for the responsible and ethical use of AI in scholarly publishing.

For the full policy, please refer to the official MSU System policy (PDF).