The editorial board of the journal “Economic Theory”, whose founders are National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, State Organization “Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine” and Vadym Hetman Kyiv National University of Economics named after, strictly adheres to the rules of academic integrity.We categorically reject plagiarism, falsification of data and duplication of publications. The editors guarantee strict observance of copyright, confidentiality of reviews and prevention of any forms of conflict of interest in order to ensure objectivity and trust in the results of scientific research. The activity of the editorial board is based on international quality standards, in particular the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics , the guidelines of the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit of the Elsevier Publishing House, the Journal Editors’ Code of Conduct  from Springer Nature, as well as the principles of Ethical of the Code of the Scientist of Ukraine.

Ethical obligations of the editorial board

The editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board contribute to the publication of the new scientific knowledge obtained, giving scientists the freedom of choice regarding the directions of research, but in compliance with high requirements for the professionalism of their implementation. The editors categorically do not allow falsification, plagiarism, dishonest practices, censorship and pseudo-scientific approaches.

The editorial board is responsible for the implementation of the editorial policy aimed at the free dissemination of scientific knowledge with strict observance of copyright. When making a decision to publish or reject articles, the members of the editorial board act exclusively in the interests of science and professional reputation of the authors, without being guided by their own interests.

The decision to publish is based on an objective analysis of the scientific content and value of the research, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, social status or political views of the authors, evaluating the article only on the scientific content and taking into account the scientific value of their research.

The editorial board prevents publication of materials in the presence of evidence of unethical behavior of the researcher or signs of plagiarism.

The articles of the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board of the journal are considered on the general basis of the review of manuscripts in the journal – double “blind” review by external, independent, unrelated to the authors, reviewers and a collegial decision on publication at a meeting of the editorial board of the journal.

If there is an urgent need – an urgent study of changes in the economic situation or other factors and the development of relevant recommendations that must be made public in a short time – it is allowed to publish articles by the editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board of the journal more than once a year, upon recognition by independent reviewers of their unconditional relevance and scientific novelty, as well as a unanimous decision of the editorial board of the journal regarding their publication.

Privacy and data protection

• Personal information of authors, reviewers, editors and other persons registered on the journal’s website (names and e-mail addresses) is used exclusively by the editors for checking, reviewing and/or publishing articles;this data is not transferred to third parties.

• Employees of the editorial and publishing group guarantee the confidentiality of editorial processing of manuscripts. Information about submitted materials is not disclosed to anyone other than the authors themselves, designated reviewers, and (if necessary) the publisher. All submitted manuscripts are the private property of the authors.

• The editors do not disclose the names of the reviewers and the details of the review to third parties in order to avoid a conflict of interests and protect the reputation of the participants in the process.

In the event of conflicting situations regarding the considered manuscripts and published materials, the editor-in-chief takes all necessary measures to restore rights, correct errors, and refute inaccurate information.

Ethical obligations of the authors

The authors, starting from the postulate that scientific research is a process of acquiring new knowledge, submit articles to the journal with the results of original, self-conducted research that had not been published before. The authors are personally responsible for the content of the manuscripts, the reliability of the data presented, the correctness of the use of quotations and references.

Authors must recognize international and national copyright laws.  Research results in the article should be presented transparently, and own and others’ achievements should be clearly defined. All citations and borrowings must be accompanied by appropriately formatted bibliographic references. Excessive borrowing, piracy, plagiarism in any form (appropriation of other people’s results, paraphrasing without reference) are unacceptable.

If the provisions (elements) of the article have already been published by the author, it is necessary to refer to the previous article(s), clearly stating how the new work differs from the previous one(s). Verbatim copying (self-plagiarism), repetition of the presentation of previously published own researches or their paraphrasing are not allowed – they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions.

If the research was conducted by a group of scientists, all those who participated in it, made their intellectual contribution to the concept and structure of the article and the interpretation of the research results should be listed as authors when publishing the results. The criterion of authorship in this case is the real creative contribution of the scientist. All the authors mentioned in it must bear public responsibility for the content of the article.

It is not acceptable to submit the same article to several publications, even if the article was written in a different language. Authors should be well aware that this is an unethical practice.

At the request of the editors, authors must disclose research sources.

The author must provide a clear disclaimer about the use of artificial intelligence at some stage of research or article preparation (for example, for data visualization, literature search, text editing, etc.) – both directly in the text and in the abstract. The use of AI tools for the development, formulation or interpretation of research results and conclusions is strictly prohibited. AI cannot be credited as an author or co-author. In the case of using AI to generate text or images, the authors must clearly describe this in the text of the article, while guaranteeing the absence of plagiarism and full responsibility for the accuracy of the facts presented.

In the event that significant errors or inaccuracies are discovered at the stage of review, preparation for publication, or after publication, the authors must immediately notify the editors and, as soon as possible, either jointly correct the situation, or cooperate to withdraw the article.

Authors should indicate all sources of funding for the project, if available.

Authors must avoid conflicts of interest.

Ethical obligations of the reviewer

The purpose of the reviewer’s activity is to objectively and impartially evaluate the quality of the article, determine the degree of novelty in the disclosure of the topic, its compliance with the scientific and ethical standards of publications and the requirements of the journal.

Expert evaluations are designed to help the author improve the quality of the presentation of the material, and the editorial board to make a decision on the publication of the article.

The reviewer must have in-depth knowledge of the achievements of world science in the scientific direction from which the article submitted to him for review was written, in order to professionally assess the degree of its novelty and determine the adequacy of the review of already published works on this topic. If the reviewer does not consider himself an expert on the topic of the material or cannot meet the specified deadlines, he should refuse to review.

The co-author of the article, the academic supervisor of the recipient cannot act as a reviewer.

A manuscript submitted for review is a confidential document and may not be discussed with outsiders (except members of the editorial board). The reviewer may not use the information and ideas from the article provided to him for review for personal gain.

Reviewers and participants in the editorial process should not disclose information about the status of the article in the review process, reviewers’ comments and suggestions, as well as intermediate or final review results.

In case of suspicion of plagiarism or falsification of data, the reviewer immediately informs the members of the editorial board.

The reviewer is the first barrier to detecting plagiarism and undeclared use of AI and bears personal responsibility for the quality of his conclusion. In case of suspicion of plagiarism or falsification of data, the reviewer immediately informs the members of the editorial board.

The reviewer’s opinion must be expressed clearly, unambiguously and correctly.

Ethical obligations of the publisher

The publisher of the journal, the State Organization “Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine” is aware that the publication of the journal is a non-commercial scientific project aimed at the development of economic science, and does not aim at making a profit.

 Key principles of the publisher’s activity

 • The publisher, together with the editorial board, ensures the fulfillment of the above ethical requirements by all participants in the process – authors, reviewers, and editorial staff.

• The publisher promotes compliance with high standards of academic integrity and guarantees editorial autonomy in making decisions regarding the publication of materials.

• The publisher provides support and assistance to the editorial staff of the journal in observing the ethical aspects of publication of materials, in communication with other scientific publications and facilitates the publication of corrections, clarifications, refutations (retractions) or apologies in case of errors or violations.

• The publisher supports the editors in measures to prevent the publication of plagiarism in any of its forms or pseudo-scientific research.

Adherence to the principles of transparency and best practices in publishing

 In its activities, the journal’s editorial board takes into account the best recognized international experience in editorial activity, adhering to the principles and recommendations of:

•  COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

- a transparent process of submitting, reviewing and publishing articles,

- impartiality and independence of editors and reviewers,

- academic integrity (prevention of plagiarism, falsification, duplicate publications),

- a clear definition of the contribution of each of the authors according to the CRediT taxonomy,

- working with complaints – availability of open and clear procedures for consideration of appeals and complaints regarding ethics.

- a clearly defined procedure for retraction of articles, corrections and error messages;

• main criteria of international multidisciplinary directory of open access journals DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals):

- open full-text access immediately after publication of the article without an embargo period,

- active publication of scientific research,

- clear and convenient site,

- clear terms of licensing, copyright and ARS,

- quality control – full review;

• WAME (World Association of Medical Editors) – in the context of the practical use of journals from various fields of science:

- the decisions of the editorial board are not influenced by sponsors, institutions or commercial structures,

- all authors, reviewers and editors are obliged to declare conflicts of interest,

- ensuring objective, fair and timely expert assessment (reviewing),

- disclosure of information about grants, sponsors and research funding sources.

- support of young scientists – promotion of their publications at the initial stage of their careers;

      • DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) :

- researches are evaluated primarily by their quality, novelty and contribution to science and should not be limited to bibliometric indicators (impact factor, h-index),

- various types of achieving research results are evaluated and taken into account – with the help of software, algorithms, technical solutions, etc.,

- interdisciplinary studies are recognized as equivalent to classic publications,

- support for open science – encouraging the publication of preprints, open access to data and codes.

• guidelines Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing, concluded by DOAJ, OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association), COPE and WAME.

Ethical principles regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The editorial board welcomes the use of innovative technologies in the scientific process, but shares the position of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Ethics for Reviewers on the use of AI in research, and supports and declares the Elsevier policy principles , recommendations of  STM  (International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers) and EASE (European Association of Scientific Editors)  regarding the use of AI in scientific publications, emphasizing the need to observe the principles of academic integrity, transparency and responsibility when using AI tools.

Authors undertake to responsibly use artificial intelligence (AI) tools during the preparation and work on the manuscript and to declare any use of them for data collection, processing, analysis or interpretation (in the “Research methods” section, as well as in the captions of tables and figures).

 Failure to comply with the requirement to disclose information regarding the use of AI is grounds for rejecting the article. Submission of materials completely generated by AI without a significant author’s contribution to the scientific content and analysis of the results is not allowed. Regardless of the technologies used, the authors bear full personal responsibility for the scientific integrity, reliability, originality and quality of the submitted materials.

Reviewers and editors do not have the right to engage the ChatGPT AI chatbot when conducting scientific examination of manuscripts of articles submitted for review, as chatbots store the prompts given to them, including the content of the manuscript, which violates the confidentiality of the article submission.

In the editorial process, AI tools can be used as an aid in checking the manuscript (in particular, to detect possible plagiarism or fact-checking). At the same time, the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript is made by the editorial board regardless of the results obtained with the use of AI.

The use of AI technologies should not harm compliance with copyright, privacy principles, or lead to distortion or manipulation of data. Authors, reviewers, and editorial board members are bound by this policy. If violations are found, appropriate measures may be taken, such as corrections, refusal to publish or withdrawal of the article in accordance with current editorial procedures.

 Policy on funding sources

Authors should clearly state the sources of funding used to conduct the research and write the article.Information about other financial support, such as payment for translation, language editing of the article, etc., is noted as acknowledgments.

Conflict of Interest Policy

When submitting an article, the author must disclose all possible conflicts of interest with the editors of the journal. Once manuscripts have been submitted for review, reviewers are asked to notify the Editor-in-Chief of any conflicts that may arise.

The editorial board makes every effort to prevent conflicts of interest between the author and the editorial board, between the author and the reviewers, as well as interpersonal conflicts between the persons involved in the editorial process, which may interfere with the objective review of the article or affect the resolution of issues related to publication.

When submitting an article, the author designated by the co-authors as responsible for correspondence with the editors must declare any conflicts of interest in the author’s team on behalf of all authors.

A conflict of interest may also be related to employment, sources of funding, personal financial interests, membership in relevant organizations or other circumstances.

Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest (competing, collaborative, or other relationship or affiliation with any of the authors, institutions, higher education institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript).

Editors should not edit manuscripts for which they have a conflict of interest related to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors or the higher education institutions or institutions associated with the research.

Any declarations of conflicts of interest made by authors, reviewers, or editors are reviewed by the journal’s editor-in-chief. In the case of substantiated statements about the existence of a conflict of interests with the editor-in-chief, such statements are considered by the editorial board of the publication.

The procedure for consideration of complaints regarding violations of ethical norms

A complaint can be submitted by an author, reviewer, reader or any other member of the scientific community by sending a letter to the editorial’s e-mail. It must clearly describe the essence of the violation, provide evidence (excerpts from texts, references to sources, copies of documents, etc.) and indicate the applicant’s contact details.

After registration, the complaint is considered by the editor-in-chief.In case of insufficient evidence, the applicant may be requested to provide additional materials.

The complaint is then submitted for review by the editorial board, which determines: the nature of the violation (plagiarism, falsification of data, double publication, wrongful authorship, violation of the review procedure, etc.);the scope and consequences of the violation;and available evidence.

If necessary, independent experts are involved in the consideration of the complaint.  If the complaint is unfounded or not supported by evidence, the editorial board rejects it.

If the violations are minor, the author is given a chance to correct the errors.

If the violations are significant and proven, the editorial board makes a decision on:

• rejection of the article (if a violation is detected at the stage of its consideration);

• retraction of an already published article (with corresponding official publication of the retraction);

• notification of the management of the research institution or the author’s employer about the recorded violations;

• denial to the author of further publications in the magazine within a specified time (sanction).

The author(s) and the applicant receive a written notification of the results of the review.

If an article is withdrawn, a notice with the reasons is published on the journal’s website.

The author(s) or applicant has the right to appeal within 30 days of receiving the decision.

The appeal is considered by the editor-in-chief and, if necessary, by members of the editorial board or external experts.

Policy of withdrawal of published articles (retractions)

All the activities of the editorial board are aimed at preventing the withdrawal of published articles from scientific circulation (retraction) due to such significant defects as plagiarism, falsification of results, self-plagiarism, non-compliance with ethical standards, violation of the policies of the publisher, the copyright owner or the rights of the author, significant errors in methodology or analysis, concealment of conflicts of interest, exclusion of persons who made a significant contribution to the work, or inclusion persons who do not meet the authorship criteria, or non-transparent funding.  However, if such a situation is detected, the editorial board will make efforts to timely inform readers and the scientific community about the presence of significant violations, errors or unreliable data in the publication, which affect its scientific value.

The withdrawal procedure is carried out by a collegial decision of the editorial board impartially, and taking into account all the evidence, meets international standards (based on the principles of COPE), according to the rules set out on the journal’s website.

Retraction requests may be submitted by authors, editors, or third parties.

In the first case (if the author’s team deems it necessary to withdraw the article), a written appeal is submitted to the editorial office with a detailed justification of the reasons for the retraction. The editors conduct an investigation involving the authors and, if necessary, external experts. After that, the editorial board decides on the expediency of withdrawing the article and  official registration of the retraction.

If the decision on retraction is initiated by the editorial office (on the basis of internal expertise or information received from third parties or organizations), the author (lead author / corresponding author) must be notified of the reason for retraction officially, indicating the wording of the reason for retraction.

After reviewing the appeal, the journal’s editor-in-chief or his deputy makes a decision on the expediency of withdrawing the article. In the case of a positive decision, the editorial office carries out all the necessary organizational and technical actions for the official registration of the retraction. When the decision to withdraw the publication is made, the text of the article is not removed from the electronic resource, a message is printed about the reasons for the retraction of the article, and each page of the electronic version of the pdf  file is marked with the mark “RETRACTED” with the date of retraction.  A similar mark is added to the content of the corresponding issue.

In accordance with the current requirements of scientific communication, the editorial office transmits information about the fact of retraction to databases, catalogs and registers where the journal is indexed.