The editorial board of the journal Precision Agriculture, published by Lviv Polytechnic National University, follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in the selection and acceptance of articles.
The editorial board presents below the ethical standards (based on COPE principles) which must be observed by all participants involved in the publication of research results in the scientific fields of the journal, as defined in the Certificate of State Registration.
Ethical Obligations of Editors
- Editors are responsible for everything published in their journal.
- An editor must evaluate all submitted manuscripts impartially, considering each on its merits regardless of race, religion, nationality, institutional affiliation, or the position of the author(s).
- Information shall not be accepted for publication if there are sufficient grounds to believe it is plagiarized.
- All submitted materials undergo careful selection and peer review. The editorial board reserves the right to reject a manuscript or return it for revision. The editor must monitor reviewers’ work and take measures to ensure high standards.
- Editorial decisions to accept a manuscript are based on its importance, originality, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the scope of the journal. Manuscripts may be rejected without review if deemed outside the journal’s scope. In such cases, the editor may consult the editorial board or reviewers.
- Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than those involved in the professional evaluation of the manuscript. Upon positive editorial decision, the article is published in the journal and placed on relevant electronic platforms.
- The publication and distribution of journal materials by third parties or organizations on paper or physical electronic media is prohibited. Use of published materials in other contexts requires citation of the original source.
- Responsibility for any manuscript authored by the editor must be delegated to another qualified person.
- Unpublished materials from a submitted manuscript must not be used in editors’ or editorial board members’ own research without the author’s written consent. Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest and publish corrections if such conflicts are identified after publication. The editor resolves conflicts of interest involving authors, reviewers, and editorial board members.
- Any financial, academic, or personal conflicts of interest must be disclosed by participants in the review process. Disputed issues are considered at editorial board meetings.
- Editors should consider legitimate criticisms of articles published in the journal.
- Accepted articles are made openly available on the journal’s website; copyright remains with the authors.
- Editors must respond promptly to complaints and provide fair remedies for dissatisfied parties.
- Editors should regularly review the composition of the editorial board and provide clear guidance to board members regarding their functions and responsibilities.
- Editors should take into account the views of authors, readers, reviewers, and board members on improving the journal.
- Editors must strive to continuously improve their journal.
Ethical Obligations of Authors
- Authors must ensure that they submit entirely original works, and if others’ work or words are used, these must be properly cited or quoted.
- Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the reported study.
- Data must be presented accurately.
- Articles must be properly structured, sufficiently referenced, and formatted according to journal requirements.
- Dishonest or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
- The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.
- Authors are obliged to revise their manuscripts in accordance with reviewer or editorial board comments. If they disagree with certain comments, they must provide a detailed response to the reviewer.
- Authors have the right to respond to criticism of their articles.
- Authors bear full responsibility for the content of their articles and for the fact of their publication. The editorial office assumes no liability for any possible harm resulting from publication. The editorial board has the right to retract an article if it is found that rights or generally accepted standards of scientific ethics were violated during the publication process. The author will be informed of the retraction.
- Authors may not republish their article in other journals without the consent of the editorial board. Anyone using materials from an article must provide a citation to the original source.
- Since journal space is a limited resource, authors must use it reasonably and economically.
Ethical Obligations of Reviewers
- To ensure objectivity, the journal applies a double-blind peer review process.
- As peer review is an essential part of the publication process and of the scientific method itself, every scholar has an obligation to contribute to reviewing.
- If a selected reviewer feels unqualified to evaluate the research in a manuscript, they must return it promptly.
- Reviewers must objectively assess the quality of the manuscript, including experimental and theoretical work, interpretation, and presentation, and consider whether it meets high scientific and literary standards. Reviewers must respect the intellectual independence of authors.
- Reviewers must consider potential conflicts of interest if the manuscript is closely related to their own current or published work. In such cases, they should return the manuscript immediately without review, explaining the conflict.
- Reviewers must treat the manuscript as a confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with others except in special cases where a reviewer requires specific consultation.
- Reviewers should clearly and adequately explain their judgments so that editors and authors understand the basis of their comments. Any claim that observations, conclusions, or arguments have been previously published must be supported by a reference.
- Reviewers must point out instances where authors fail to cite relevant work of other scholars.
- Reviewers should alert the editor to any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work or manuscript submitted to another journal.
- Reviewers must provide their review in a timely manner.
- Reviewers must not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in a manuscript without the author’s consent.