Upholding academic integrity, editorial independence, transparency, and responsible research throughout the scholarly publishing process.
Green Economics Review (GER) is a peer-reviewed journal published biannually by Yayasan Al Ma’arif Dawuhan Indonesia. The journal is available online as an open-access publication and in print. This statement establishes the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, editorial board members, reviewers, and the publisher.
GER is committed to maintaining the integrity, credibility, and quality of scholarly publishing. Its publication ethics framework is informed by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including its guidance on ethical editorial practice, peer review, and the handling of publication misconduct.
All participants in the publication process are expected to uphold the following principles.
Original, accurate, transparent, and responsibly reported research.
Editorial and review decisions based on scholarly merit.
Protection of unpublished manuscripts and privileged information.
Responsibility for research, editorial decisions, and published records.
The Editor-in-Chief, together with the editorial team where appropriate, is responsible for deciding which manuscripts are accepted for publication. Decisions must be based on the manuscript's originality, scientific validity, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope, contribution to Green Economics, and compliance with applicable ethical and legal requirements.
Editorial decisions may take account of reviewers' recommendations and advice from other editors or editorial advisers. However, the final decision remains the responsibility of the authorized editor and must be made independently of commercial considerations.
Editors must also consider relevant legal and ethical issues, including plagiarism, copyright infringement, research misconduct, and conflicts of interest. Acceptance for publication must never be based solely on financial considerations or an author's institutional status.
Manuscripts must be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit, originality, scientific quality, and relevance to the journal. Editors and reviewers must not discriminate against authors on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, nationality, citizenship, institutional affiliation, disability, or political philosophy. Personal relationships, academic rivalry, and other irrelevant considerations must not influence editorial assessments.
Editors, editorial staff, and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and all related correspondence as confidential. Information about a submission may be disclosed only to the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, authorized editorial personnel, and other advisers whose involvement is necessary for the editorial process.
Unpublished manuscripts, research data, arguments, and findings must not be shared with unauthorized parties or used for personal, academic, or professional advantage. The journal's double-blind peer review procedure must be respected throughout the review process.
Editors, editorial board members, and reviewers must disclose actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Such conflicts may arise from financial interests, professional relationships, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, collaboration, competition, or other relevant circumstances.
An editor who has a conflict of interest concerning a manuscript must not handle its evaluation or decision. The manuscript should be assigned to an independent editor who can manage the process objectively.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's, reviewer's, or editorial board member's own research without the author's explicit written permission.
Peer review assists editors in evaluating the scientific quality, originality, validity, and relevance of a manuscript. Reviewers should provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work and supports informed editorial decisions.
Reviewers who lack the expertise required to assess a manuscript or cannot complete the review within the requested timeframe should notify the editor promptly and decline the invitation where appropriate.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or discuss the manuscript with others without the editor's authorization.
Reviews must be objective, respectful, and supported by clear reasoning or evidence. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should identify major concerns, explain their significance, and offer actionable recommendations.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and notify the editor of substantial similarity between the manuscript and other published or known work. Any concerns should be communicated confidentially and supported by appropriate evidence where possible.
Reviewers must decline assignments when conflicts of interest could compromise their impartiality. They must not use privileged information obtained during peer review for personal advantage or to benefit others.
Authors must present an accurate, transparent, and sufficiently detailed account of their research. Data, methods, analyses, and findings should be reported honestly, with enough information to support critical assessment and, where feasible, replication. Fabricated, falsified, misleading, or intentionally inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
Authors must ensure that their submissions are original and that all ideas, quotations, data, images, and other materials derived from external sources are appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism, including presenting another person's work as one's own, is unacceptable. Similarity reports are considered alongside the context of the matched text and the quality of citation practices.
Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal. Manuscripts should not reproduce substantially overlapping publications without transparent disclosure and appropriate justification. Any related manuscripts, prior publications, or overlapping datasets that may affect the assessment of originality must be disclosed to the editor.
Authors must acknowledge the work of others that has materially influenced their research. All sources must be cited accurately and consistently with the journal's reference requirements.
Authorship must reflect substantial scholarly contributions to the conception or design of the study, data collection, analysis or interpretation, or other substantive research activities, together with participation in drafting or critically revising the manuscript and approval of the final version. All listed authors must approve submission and accept responsibility for the integrity of the work. Individuals who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately rather than listed as authors.
Authors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research, its analysis, or its interpretation. All sources of financial support, grants, and other relevant assistance must be acknowledged.
Authors must comply with applicable ethical requirements, including informed consent, protection of participants' privacy, confidentiality, and approval by a relevant ethics committee where required. Research data and supporting materials must not be fabricated, falsified, manipulated deceptively, or presented in a misleading manner.
Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and proper attribution of their submissions, including material prepared with AI-assisted tools. AI tools must not be listed as authors. Authors should disclose the use of generative AI in the preparation of a manuscript when required by the journal's AI policy, particularly where AI contributes to substantive content, analysis, or interpretation. AI-generated references, facts, data, and citations must be checked for accuracy. The use of AI must not replace the authors' responsibility for research design, critical interpretation, or ethical compliance.
If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly inform the editor and cooperate in investigating the issue and issuing an appropriate correction, clarification, or retraction where necessary.
Yayasan Al Ma’arif Dawuhan Indonesia, as the publisher of GER, supports the journal's commitment to responsible scholarly publishing. The publisher is expected to provide appropriate support for editorial independence, publication integrity, and the preservation of the scholarly record.
GER takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. Concerns may include plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, manipulated images, breaches of research ethics, or other violations of publication standards.
When a credible concern is raised, the editorial team will conduct an initial assessment and may request clarification or supporting documentation from the relevant parties. Where necessary, the journal may consult independent experts or contact the relevant institution or organization in accordance with applicable ethical and legal requirements.
Actions will be proportionate to the evidence and circumstances. Depending on the findings, the journal may reject a manuscript, request corrections, issue an expression of concern, retract a published article, or take other appropriate steps. Parties involved should be given a fair opportunity to respond, subject to the requirements of confidentiality and applicable law.
GER is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of its published record. When an error or ethical concern is identified after publication, the journal will assess the nature, significance, and implications of the issue before determining the appropriate response.
Corrections and retractions should be clearly linked to the original article, with the reason for the action stated transparently. The original publication record should be maintained in accordance with the journal's applicable archiving and publication policies.
Authors who believe that an editorial decision resulted from a substantive factual error, a significant misunderstanding of the manuscript, or a procedural irregularity may submit a reasoned appeal to the editorial office. Appeals should identify the specific grounds for reconsideration and provide relevant supporting information. Complaints about editorial conduct, peer review, or publication ethics should be submitted to the journal for impartial assessment. The journal will review such matters fairly and may seek independent advice where appropriate. An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
GER provides online open access to its published content in accordance with the journal's stated open-access policy. Authors and readers should refer to the journal's separate copyright, licensing, and author-rights statements for the applicable terms of use, distribution, and reuse. Authors are responsible for ensuring that they have the necessary rights and permissions for third-party material included in their manuscripts.
By upholding these ethical principles, Green Economics Review seeks to maintain public trust in scholarly research and contribute responsibly to the advancement of Green Economics. All authors, editors, reviewers, and publishing partners share responsibility for protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.
