Food Systems, Safety & Sustainability (FSSS) requires transparent disclosure and appropriate management of financial and non-financial interests that could influence, or reasonably appear to influence, scholarly judgement.

For the purposes of this policy, the terms conflict of interest and competing interest are treated as equivalent. A competing interest may arise when a secondary interest, relationship, role, commitment, or activity could affect—or could reasonably be perceived as affecting—the design, conduct, interpretation, review, editorial handling, publication, or public communication of scholarly work.

The existence of a competing interest does not necessarily indicate misconduct, bias, or invalid research. The purpose of disclosure is to enable editors, reviewers, and readers to evaluate relevant circumstances transparently and to determine whether additional safeguards are required.

1. Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to:

• all manuscript and article types submitted to FSSS;
• all authors and contributors;
• peer reviewers and individuals assisting with reviews;
• the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editors, Associate Editors, and Section Editors;
• Editorial Board and Advisory Board members;
• Guest Editors and special-issue organisers;
• statistical, methodological, ethical, technical, or legal advisers;
• journal and publisher staff involved in manuscript processing;
• sponsors, institutional partners, and organisations supporting special content; and
• other individuals who participate in editorial recommendations or publication decisions.

The policy applies during research planning, research conduct, manuscript preparation, submission, peer review, revision, editorial decision-making, production, publication, and post-publication assessment.

2. Definition of a Competing Interest

A competing interest exists where a relationship, activity, commitment, or interest could interfere with—or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with—independent professional judgement.

A competing interest may be:

• financial or non-financial;
• direct or indirect;
• actual, potential, or perceived;
• personal, professional, institutional, intellectual, commercial, political, or organisational;
• positive or negative;
• current, recent, expected, or continuing; and
• connected directly to the manuscript or to the broader subject under consideration.

A conflict does not require proof that a decision was actually biased. A reasonable perception that judgement could be affected may be sufficient to require disclosure or recusal.

3. General Disclosure Principles

All participants in the publication process must:

• disclose relevant relationships and activities completely and accurately;
• provide sufficient detail for the journal to assess the interest;
• update the disclosure if circumstances change;
• avoid relying solely on their own judgement that an interest is insignificant;
• cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification or documentation;
• withdraw from a role where impartiality cannot be maintained; and
• not conceal an interest because disclosure may be inconvenient or embarrassing.

Disclosure is not an admission of wrongdoing. Transparent disclosure ordinarily allows the journal to manage an interest without excluding the individual or rejecting the manuscript.

4. Financial Interests

Financial interests that may require disclosure include, but are not limited to:

• employment or prospective employment;
• consultancy arrangements;
• research grants and sponsored research;
• institutional funding directly related to the work;
• honoraria and speaking fees;
• advisory-board or committee payments;
• paid expert testimony;
• travel, accommodation, hospitality, or meeting support;
• stock, share, equity, option, or other ownership interests;
• royalties and licensing income;
• patents, patent applications, and other intellectual-property interests;
• commercial contracts;
• gifts or in-kind support;
• equipment, materials, food products, laboratory services, software, or data supplied without charge or at a preferential rate;
• publication, writing, statistical, or editorial assistance paid by another organisation;
• fees or commissions connected with a product, service, certification scheme, or policy discussed in the manuscript;
• commodity, land, agricultural, food-production, or supply-chain investments relevant to the work; and
• another financial relationship that could benefit or be harmed by the manuscript’s findings.

Financial interests should be disclosed whether payment was made to the individual, their institution, laboratory, department, research group, company, or another organisation acting on their behalf.

5. Non-Financial Interests

Non-financial interests may be as important as financial interests and must be disclosed where relevant.

Examples include:

• personal or family relationships;
• close friendships or significant personal disputes;
• recent supervisory, mentoring, or student relationships;
• recent collaboration or co-authorship;
• direct academic competition;
• professional rivalry;
• institutional leadership or governance responsibilities;
• membership of governmental, regulatory, professional, industry, advocacy, or civil-society organisations;
• unpaid advisory or fiduciary roles;
• participation in policy development relevant to the manuscript;
• publicly stated positions concerning the principal question under review;
• political, ideological, religious, or advocacy commitments directly relevant to the work;
• involvement in litigation, regulatory proceedings, or public campaigns;
• access to confidential information concerning the manuscript or authors;
• editorial roles at FSSS or another journal; and
• another relationship that could reasonably affect impartiality.

6. Intellectual and Academic Interests

Intellectual commitment to a theory, method, policy position, or previous finding does not automatically prevent scholarly participation. However, disclosure may be required where the commitment is sufficiently strong or direct that impartial evaluation could reasonably be questioned.

Relevant circumstances may include:

• having developed a method, framework, index, model, or theory evaluated in the manuscript;
• having published directly competing findings;
• being involved in an active scientific dispute with an author;
• having publicly advocated for or against a technology, regulation, intervention, or policy assessed in the manuscript;
• being responsible for a standard, certification scheme, database, or assessment tool evaluated by the authors;
• having a professional interest in the acceptance or rejection of the findings; or
• having taken part in an earlier confidential assessment of substantially the same work.

7. Interests Particularly Relevant to FSSS

Because FSSS publishes research concerning food systems, safety, sustainability, agriculture, public health, technology, governance, and industry, relevant interests may include relationships with:

• food and beverage manufacturers;
• agricultural producers and commodity organisations;
• seed, pesticide, fertiliser, feed, and agricultural-technology companies;
• pharmaceutical, nutritional, supplement, or functional-food companies;
• food-testing and laboratory-service providers;
• packaging, logistics, cold-chain, retail, and distribution companies;
• software, blockchain, artificial-intelligence, traceability, and data-platform providers;
• certification, auditing, inspection, and standards organisations;
• environmental, animal-welfare, consumer, agricultural, or industry advocacy groups;
• government ministries, food-safety authorities, regulators, and intergovernmental organisations;
• consulting firms and policy institutes;
• commercial farms, fisheries, food-processing facilities, restaurants, or retailers;
• organisations whose products or policies are evaluated in the manuscript; and
• organisations that may benefit commercially or reputationally from the findings.

8. Authors’ Disclosure Responsibilities

Every author must disclose all relationships and activities that could influence, or reasonably appear to influence, the submitted work.

Authors must consider:

• their own interests;
• relevant interests managed through their institution, laboratory, consultancy, company, or research group;
• financial or professional interests connected with the manuscript’s subject;
• relationships with organisations that funded, supplied, commissioned, or may benefit from the research;
• relevant intellectual-property rights;
• personal and professional relationships involving editors, reviewers, or other authors;
• related legal, regulatory, political, or advocacy activity; and
• interests that arose after submission but before publication.

Each author is personally responsible for the completeness and accuracy of their disclosure. The corresponding author must collect the declarations and ensure that they are submitted to the journal, but this does not remove the responsibility of individual authors.

9. When Authors Must Disclose

Authors must provide or update their disclosures:

• when the manuscript is initially submitted;
• when an author is added or the authorship list changes;
• when a revised manuscript is submitted, if circumstances have changed;
• before final acceptance;
• during proof review;
• after publication if a relevant omitted or new interest is identified; and
• whenever requested by the Editorial Office.

Authors must not wait until acceptance to disclose a relationship that was known at submission.

10. Disclosure Period

Authors must disclose all current and recent relationships or activities that are directly or topically relevant to the manuscript.

A relationship should also be disclosed where:

• it began before the research but continued to influence the work;
• financial benefit remains possible;
• an intellectual-property right remains active;
• a continuing professional, institutional, personal, or advocacy relationship exists;
• a reasonable reader might consider the information relevant; or
• its omission could create doubt about the transparency of the publication.

The absence of a fixed time limit does not mean that all historical relationships must be listed indefinitely. Authors should focus on relationships that remain relevant to the submitted work. When uncertain, disclosure is preferred.

11. Funding Is Not the Same as a Competing-Interest Declaration

The Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement serve related but different purposes.

The Funding Statement should identify direct financial or material support for the research, including:

• the official name of each funder or sponsor;
• grant or project numbers;
• support provided to individual authors;
• equipment, products, data, services, or other material support; and
• the role of the funder or sponsor.

The Competing Interests Statement should identify broader relationships and activities that could affect—or appear to affect—the authors’ judgement.

Disclosure of funding does not eliminate the need to disclose employment, consultancy, ownership, patents, advisory roles, personal relationships, advocacy positions, or other relevant interests.

12. Sponsor Role

Authors must explain whether a funder or sponsor participated in:

• development of the research question;
• study design;
• selection of participants, samples, outcomes, or comparators;
• data collection;
• data ownership or access;
• statistical or other analysis;
• interpretation of findings;
• preparation or editing of the manuscript;
• approval of the manuscript;
• selection of the journal;
• the decision to submit for publication; or
• restrictions on publication or data sharing.

Where the funder had no involvement, authors should state this explicitly.

13. Independence and Access to Data

Authors must not enter into agreements that prevent them from:

• accessing the data necessary to evaluate the study;
• conducting an independent analysis;
• interpreting results honestly;
• reporting unfavourable, negative, or inconclusive findings;
• disclosing relevant sponsor involvement;
• responding to editorial questions; or
• publishing the work independently.

The journal may request confidential review of a funding, data-access, publication, or sponsor agreement where editorial independence is uncertain.

For sponsored research, the journal may require a responsible author to confirm:

I had sufficient access to the study data to take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the analysis. The sponsor did not prevent the authors from analysing, interpreting, or publishing the findings independently.

14. Studies of Commercial Products or Services

Where a manuscript evaluates a commercial product, service, platform, intervention, certification, method, or technology, authors must disclose:

• the identity of the manufacturer, developer, owner, or supplier;
• whether the product or service was supplied free of charge or at a discount;
• financial relationships between the authors and the organisation;
• patents, licences, royalties, or equity interests;
• the sponsor’s role in study design, analysis, and publication;
• whether authors had independent access to the data;
• professional writing or statistical assistance funded by the organisation; and
• any contractual limitation affecting publication.

Commercial sponsorship does not automatically prevent publication. The manuscript must be reported objectively and must not function as advertising or marketing material.

15. Author Declaration Format

A Competing Interests Statement must be included on the title page and will normally be published with the article.

Where no relevant interests exist, authors should state:

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Where interests exist, the declaration should identify the relevant author, organisation, nature of the relationship, and relationship to the submitted work.

Example:

J.A.S. has received research funding and consultancy fees from GreenChain Technologies, a company developing food-traceability systems. H.K.L. serves as an unpaid adviser to the Sustainable Food Certification Council. M.W. is a co-inventor on a pending patent concerning antimicrobial food packaging. The remaining authors declare that they have no competing interests.

16. Complete Disclosure

Authors must not use vague statements where more specific disclosure is reasonably possible.

Statements such as the following are normally insufficient:

• “The authors have industry relationships.”
• “Potential conflicts may exist.”
• “Relevant interests have been disclosed to the editor.”
• “The authors received some financial support.”

A sufficient declaration should identify:

• the person concerned;
• the organisation or interest;
• the type of relationship;
• whether the relationship is paid or unpaid where relevant; and
• its connection to the manuscript.

17. Institutional Interests

An author may have no personal financial interest while their institution has a relevant commercial, intellectual-property, regulatory, or contractual interest.

Institutional interests should be disclosed where:

• the institution owns relevant patents or equity;
• the institution receives royalties or commercial funding;
• the institution developed or sells a product evaluated in the manuscript;
• publication could affect an institutional contract or legal position;
• the research was conducted under an agreement limiting publication; or
• the institutional interest could reasonably affect interpretation of the work.

18. Personal and Family Interests

Relevant financial or professional interests held by an immediate family or household member should be disclosed where they could reasonably affect, or appear to affect, the author’s judgement.

The journal does not require unnecessary disclosure of private family information. The declaration should contain only the information needed to explain the relevant interest.

19. Editors’ Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose interests that may affect editorial judgement and must recuse themselves where impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

An editor should not handle a manuscript where they:

• are an author or contributor;
• work at the same institution as an author and independence cannot be assured;
• have recently collaborated or co-authored with an author;
• have a current or recent supervisory relationship with an author;
• have a close personal relationship or substantial dispute with an author;
• have a financial interest in the manuscript’s outcome;
• hold relevant patents, licences, equity, or commercial relationships;
• are directly involved in the research, data, intervention, policy, or product;
• are in direct academic competition with the authors; or
• have another interest that could compromise independent assessment.

The manuscript must be assigned to an independent editor, and the recusal should be documented internally.

20. Editors and Editorial Board Members as Authors

Editors, Editorial Board members, Guest Editors, and publisher personnel may submit manuscripts to FSSS, but they receive no preferential treatment.

Where such an individual is an author:

• the manuscript must be assigned to an independent handling editor;
• the author must not select or recommend the final reviewers;
• the author must not participate in editorial deliberations;
• the author must not access reviewer identities or confidential internal records;
• the final decision must be made by an editor without a relevant conflict;
• the recusal must be documented; and
• the published article should disclose the author’s journal role.

Example:

J.A.S. is a member of the Editorial Board of Food Systems, Safety & Sustainability. J.A.S. had no involvement in the peer review or editorial decision concerning this article.

21. Editorial Disclosure Statements

The journal may maintain current disclosure statements for senior editors, Editorial Board members, or journal staff where this supports transparency.

Individuals holding editorial roles must update the journal when a relevant relationship or activity changes.

22. Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose relevant interests before accepting an invitation.

A reviewer should normally decline or recuse themselves where they:

• have a current or recent collaboration with an author;
• work at the same institution as an author where independence may be compromised;
• have supervised or been supervised by an author recently;
• have a close personal or family relationship with an author;
• have a serious professional dispute with an author;
• have a financial, commercial, or intellectual-property interest in the outcome;
• are directly competing to publish substantially similar work;
• have participated in the research or manuscript preparation;
• have previously reviewed substantially the same manuscript for another journal and confidentiality concerns remain;
• hold a role in an organisation whose product, policy, or conduct is evaluated;
• cannot provide an impartial assessment because of a strong prior commitment; or
• have another relationship that creates a reasonable perception of bias.

A disclosed interest does not automatically disqualify a reviewer. The handling editor will determine whether the review may proceed.

23. Reviewer Declaration

Before accepting an invitation, reviewers should confirm:

I have disclosed all relationships and activities that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, my assessment of this manuscript. I will notify the editor immediately if a relevant interest becomes apparent during review.

If uncertainty exists, the reviewer should describe the circumstances to the editor rather than making the final determination alone.

24. Author-Suggested Reviewers

Authors must disclose any relevant relationship with a suggested reviewer.

Authors must not suggest:

• current colleagues from the same institution;
• recent collaborators or co-authors;
• current or recent supervisors, students, or mentors;
• close personal associates;
• individuals involved in preparing the manuscript;
• individuals with a direct financial interest in the findings;
• individuals whose impartiality may reasonably be questioned; or
• fabricated or misleading reviewer identities.

Failure to disclose a relationship with a suggested reviewer may be treated as attempted peer-review manipulation.

25. Guest Editors and Special Issues

Guest Editors must declare relevant financial, professional, institutional, and personal interests before beginning their role and must update the declaration when circumstances change.

A Guest Editor must not handle:

• their own manuscript;
• a manuscript by a close collaborator;
• a manuscript from which they may receive financial or professional benefit;
• a manuscript concerning a product or policy in which they have a relevant interest;
• a manuscript where an authorship, institutional, supervisory, or personal relationship impairs independence; or
• another submission for which their impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Such manuscripts must be reassigned to an independent editor. Final editorial authority remains with the journal’s authorised editorial leadership.

26. Sponsors and Special Collections

Financial or institutional support for a special issue, collection, conference proceeding, or thematic series must be disclosed clearly.

The sponsor must not:

• select reviewers for individual manuscripts;
• control editorial decisions;
• guarantee acceptance;
• suppress unfavourable findings;
• require promotional language;
• prevent disclosure of its involvement; or
• condition funding on publication of a preferred conclusion.

Sponsored content must meet the same peer-review, ethics, and editorial standards as other journal content.

27. Article Processing Charges

Article Processing Charges, waivers, discounts, institutional payment arrangements, or an author’s ability to pay must not influence:

• initial editorial screening;
• reviewer selection;
• peer-review reports;
• revision requirements;
• acceptance or rejection; or
• post-publication editorial action.

Editors and reviewers should not normally be involved in financial-assistance decisions concerning manuscripts they are evaluating.

28. Advertising, Commercial Partnerships, and Other Revenue

Advertising, sponsorship, institutional partnerships, commercial services, reprint income, special-issue funding, or other publisher revenue must remain separate from editorial decision-making.

Publication of an article must not be treated as endorsement of a sponsor, product, service, organisation, certification, political position, or commercial claim.

29. Management of Disclosed Interests

After reviewing a disclosure, the journal may:

• determine that no additional action is required;
• publish the disclosure with the article;
• request further information;
• require a more specific declaration;
• appoint an independent editor;
• replace or exclude a reviewer;
• obtain additional independent review;
• request independent statistical or methodological analysis;
• require clarification of sponsor involvement;
• request confirmation of data access or publication independence;
• require modification of promotional or unsupported wording;
• decline the manuscript where the conflict cannot be managed responsibly; or
• take another proportionate measure necessary to protect editorial independence.

Management decisions depend on the nature, relevance, seriousness, and proximity of the interest rather than on disclosure alone.

30. Confidential Disclosure

In exceptional circumstances, an individual may request that particularly sensitive information be supplied confidentially to the editor rather than published in full.

The journal will consider:

• whether the information is necessary for readers to evaluate the work;
• whether publication would create a disproportionate privacy, legal, safety, or confidentiality risk;
• whether a generalised public statement would provide sufficient transparency; and
• whether the interest can be managed without complete public identification.

The journal cannot guarantee confidential treatment where disclosure is required by law, necessary for fair editorial assessment, or essential to protect the scholarly record.

31. Undisclosed Interests Identified during Review

Where a possible undisclosed interest is identified before publication, the journal may:

1. pause editorial processing;
2. request an explanation and updated declaration;
3. seek clarification from other authors or involved parties;
4. assess whether editorial or reviewer independence was affected;
5. replace an editor or reviewer;
6. obtain additional independent review;
7. revise the disclosure statement;
8. reject the manuscript where the omission is serious or deliberate; or
9. take action under the Publication Ethics Policy.

32. Interests Identified after Publication

Where a relevant undeclared or inaccurately declared interest is identified after publication, the journal will assess:

• the nature and importance of the omitted information;
• whether the omission appears accidental or deliberate;
• whether the interest affected—or could reasonably have affected—the research or editorial process;
• whether readers require additional information to interpret the article;
• whether the published conclusions remain reliable; and
• whether other articles or submissions may be affected.

The journal may:

• update the disclosure statement;
• publish a formal correction;
• publish an editorial clarification;
• issue an expression of concern;
• investigate possible misconduct;
• notify an institution or funder where appropriate;
• retract the article where the undisclosed interest is associated with unreliable or seriously compromised work; or
• take another proportionate action.

Retraction is not normally required solely because an interest was omitted if the article remains reliable and the omission can be corrected transparently.

33. Deliberate Non-Disclosure

Purposeful concealment, false declaration, or material misrepresentation of a relevant interest may constitute publication misconduct.

Examples include:

• denying a known financial relationship;
• concealing commercial funding or sponsor involvement;
• misrepresenting a patent or ownership interest;
• failing to disclose professional writing funded by an interested organisation;
• concealing a relationship with a suggested reviewer;
• failing to recuse from an editorial decision despite a known conflict;
• using another affiliation to obscure an interest;
• providing an incomplete declaration after the journal requests clarification; or
• coordinating with a third party to hide a relevant relationship.

34. Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the seriousness and stage of the matter, FSSS may:

• request clarification or correction;
• require an updated declaration;
• replace an editor or reviewer;
• repeat part or all of the peer-review process;
• pause editorial processing or production;
• reject the manuscript;
• publish a correction or clarification;
• publish an expression of concern;
• retract an article where its integrity is materially compromised;
• review related submissions or published articles;
• restrict future editorial or reviewer participation;
• notify an institution, employer, funder, regulator, professional body, or another journal where justified; or
• take another proportionate action under the journal’s ethics policies.

35. Fairness and Proportionality

The journal will distinguish between:

• an honestly overlooked minor relationship;
• an incomplete but correctable declaration;
• a substantial conflict requiring formal management;
• a relationship that prevents independent participation; and
• deliberate concealment or misrepresentation.

Editorial action will be proportionate to the evidence, the relevance of the interest, its effect on the publication process, and the need to maintain trust in the scholarly record.

36. Confidentiality during Assessment

Competing-interest concerns will be handled as confidentially and impartially as reasonably possible.

The journal will seek to:

• distinguish allegations from established findings;
• limit access to individuals with a legitimate need to know;
• give affected individuals a reasonable opportunity to respond;
• manage conflicts among individuals conducting the assessment;
• preserve relevant records;
• avoid unnecessary disclosure of private information; and
• document significant decisions.

37. Complaints and Appeals

An author, reviewer, editor, or other affected party may request reconsideration where they believe that:

• a relevant factual error affected the decision;
• material disclosure information was overlooked;
• the journal’s published policy was applied incorrectly;
• the person assessing the matter had an undisclosed conflict;
• the management measure was disproportionate; or
• significant new evidence has become available.

The request should identify the manuscript or article, explain the specific grounds for reconsideration, and provide supporting evidence.

Further procedures are described in the journal’s Complaints and Appeals Policy.

38. Record Retention

The journal may retain:

• author disclosure statements;
• reviewer and editor declarations;
• recusal records;
• funding and sponsor information;
• related editorial correspondence;
• supporting documentation;
• published correction or disclosure records; and
• materials associated with an investigation.

Records may be retained for legitimate editorial, auditing, research-integrity, legal, security, and preservation purposes, with access limited to authorised personnel.

39. Recommended Author Statements

No Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Financial Interest

J.A.S. has received research funding and consultancy fees from [organisation]. The remaining authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Patent or Intellectual-Property Interest

H.K.L. is named as an inventor on a patent application concerning the technology evaluated in this study. The patent is owned by [institution or organisation].

Unpaid Advisory or Advocacy Role

M.W. serves as an unpaid adviser to [organisation], which has an interest in the policy area discussed in this article.

Editorial Role

J.A.S. is an editor of Food Systems, Safety & Sustainability. J.A.S. had no involvement in reviewer selection, peer review, editorial deliberation, or the decision concerning this article.

Commercially Sponsored Research

This study was funded by [organisation]. The sponsor contributed to [describe role]. The authors retained responsibility for data analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit the work for publication.

40. Final Disclosure Checklist

Before submission, each author should confirm that they have considered and disclosed:

• employment and consultancy relationships;
• research funding and institutional support;
• honoraria, advisory roles, travel, and hospitality;
• stocks, equity, options, or other ownership interests;
• patents, patent applications, licences, and royalties;
• commercial products, services, or technologies discussed in the manuscript;
• material support, equipment, software, products, samples, or data supplied by another organisation;
• professional writing, editing, or statistical assistance;
• personal, family, supervisory, collaborative, or adversarial relationships;
• editorial or reviewer roles;
• institutional, regulatory, policy, political, or advocacy roles;
• relevant intellectual or academic commitments;
• sponsor involvement in research and publication;
• restrictions on access to data or publication;
• relevant interests of their institution or household;
• changes in circumstances arising after submission; and
• any other information that a reasonable reader might consider relevant.

41. Standards Informing This Policy

This policy is informed by internationally recognised guidance on disclosure and management of competing interests, including:

• ICMJE: Disclosure of Financial and Non-Financial Relationships and Activities, and Conflicts of Interest;
• ICMJE Disclosure of Interest;
• COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers; and
• Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

Reference to an external organisation means that its guidance informs this policy. It does not imply membership, certification, endorsement, or formal affiliation unless separately stated and independently verifiable.

42. Contact

Questions concerning competing interests, disclosure requirements, editorial recusals, sponsor involvement, reviewer eligibility, or correction of a published declaration should be directed to the FSSS Editorial Office through the official contact information provided on the journal website.

Correspondence concerning an existing manuscript or article should include:

• the manuscript title;
• the submission identification number or DOI;
• the name of the individual concerned;
• a clear description of the relationship or activity;
• its connection to the manuscript; and
• any supporting information necessary for assessment.