PoliEcoM Administration Review is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity, editorial independence, peer review transparency, and responsible scholarly communication. The journal expects authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff to follow ethical principles that protect the credibility of the scholarly record.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal must be original, ethically conducted, accurately reported, and free from plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and other forms of publication misconduct.

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts meet the journal’s academic, ethical, legal, and professional standards before submission. By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that the work is original, accurate, properly attributed, and not under consideration elsewhere.

• The manuscript must be original and must not have been published previously.
• The manuscript must not be submitted to another journal at the same time.
• All sources, data, ideas, quotations, and prior studies must be properly cited.
• Authors must report methods, data, findings, and limitations honestly and accurately.
• Authors must disclose funding sources and any actual or potential conflicts of interest.
• Authors must obtain permissions for copyrighted materials where required.

2. Originality, Plagiarism, and Text Recycling

The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text recycling, or misrepresentation of prior work. Manuscripts may be screened for similarity before or during editorial review. Submissions with serious originality concerns may be rejected, and published articles may be corrected, retracted, or subject to further editorial action if misconduct is identified after publication.

3. Authorship and Contributor Responsibilities

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a meaningful scholarly contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the manuscript. All listed authors must approve the submitted version and agree to be accountable for the integrity of the work.

• All authors must have contributed meaningfully to the manuscript.
• All authors must approve the submitted and accepted versions of the manuscript.
• The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal.
• Individuals who contributed but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged where appropriate.
• Gift authorship, honorary authorship, ghost authorship, and undisclosed authorship are not permitted.

4. Authorship Changes

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be explained in writing and approved by all affected authors. The Editorial Office may request documentation confirming each author’s contribution and consent. Authorship changes after acceptance or publication are subject to strict editorial review and may not be approved without sufficient justification.

5. Data Integrity and Research Reporting

Authors must present research data, evidence, analysis, and findings accurately and transparently. Fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, image manipulation, inappropriate data exclusion, or misleading interpretation of results are serious ethical violations.

• Research methods should be described clearly and sufficiently.
• Data sources, measurement strategies, and analytical procedures should be transparent.
• Tables, figures, and statistical results should accurately represent the underlying evidence.
• Limitations, uncertainty, and alternative explanations should be acknowledged where appropriate.
• Authors should retain research materials and data where possible to support verification if requested.

6. Human Participants, Consent, and Sensitive Data

Manuscripts involving human participants, interviews, surveys, administrative records, confidential information, vulnerable populations, or sensitive data must comply with applicable ethical requirements. Authors should provide ethical approval, informed consent, anonymization, confidentiality, or data protection statements where applicable.

7. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may influence the research, review, editorial evaluation, or publication process. Conflicts may be financial, institutional, personal, professional, political, ideological, or academic.

• Authors must disclose funding sources and any relevant relationships or interests.
• Reviewers must decline review assignments when a conflict prevents impartial assessment.
• Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where impartiality may be compromised.
• Undisclosed conflicts discovered after publication may require correction or further editorial action.

8. Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose all sources of financial support related to the research, authorship, or publication of the manuscript. If no funding was received, authors should include a statement confirming that no financial support was received.

9. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to provide fair, confidential, constructive, and timely evaluations. Reviewers should assess manuscripts based on scholarly merit and should not allow personal, institutional, ideological, financial, or competitive interests to influence their judgment.

• Reviewers must keep manuscripts and review materials confidential.
• Reviewers must not use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.
• Reviewers should identify relevant uncited work where appropriate.
• Reviewers should report suspected ethical concerns to the Editorial Office.
• Reviewers must provide respectful, specific, evidence-based, and constructive comments.

10. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for maintaining editorial independence, fairness, confidentiality, and integrity throughout the review and publication process. Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal, and contribution to scholarly and policy debates.

• Editors must evaluate submissions fairly and without discrimination.
• Editors must preserve the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.
• Editors must manage conflicts of interest appropriately.
• Editors must ensure that peer review is conducted objectively and responsibly.
• Editors must take appropriate action when ethical concerns are identified.

11. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and reliability of all content submitted to the journal. Artificial intelligence tools must not be listed as authors. If AI-assisted tools are used in the preparation of a manuscript, authors should disclose their use where relevant and ensure that no confidential, copyrighted, private, or restricted material is improperly processed.

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, review materials, or editorial communications to external AI tools or platforms that may store, process, or reuse the content without authorization from the Editorial Office.

12. Post-Publication Corrections and Retractions

The journal is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. When errors, omissions, or ethical concerns are identified after publication, the Editorial Office will review the matter and determine the appropriate action.

13. Misconduct Investigation

The Editorial Office may investigate suspected misconduct before, during, or after peer review. Authors may be asked to provide original data, ethics approvals, consent forms, authorship explanations, conflict of interest disclosures, or other relevant documentation. Failure to cooperate with an investigation may affect editorial decisions or post-publication actions.

• Plagiarism or duplicate submission
• Data fabrication, falsification, or manipulation
• Inappropriate authorship or contributor disputes
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest or funding sources
• Lack of required ethical approval, consent, anonymization, or data protection
• Misrepresentation of affiliations, approvals, findings, or research procedures

14. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, or other parties may raise ethical concerns, complaints, or appeals by contacting the Editorial Office. Complaints should include a clear description of the concern, relevant evidence, manuscript or article details, and contact information. Appeals must identify a significant factual error, misunderstanding, or procedural irregularity. The submission of a complaint or appeal does not guarantee a change in editorial decision.

15. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are independent of publication charges, institutional affiliation, nationality, seniority, personal relationship, political position, or other non-scholarly considerations. Payment of any publication or administrative charge does not guarantee acceptance and does not influence peer review or editorial judgment.

16. Contact

© 2025 Panorama Scholarly Group. All rights reserved.