Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Food Innovation, Nutrition and Environmental Sciences (JFINES) is committed to responsible scholarly publishing and to maintaining the integrity of the academic record. The journal expects authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff to follow recognised standards of publication ethics, research integrity, transparency, and accountability.

JFINES is guided by established principles of ethical scholarly publishing, including relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other recognised standards where applicable. The journal’s publication ethics policies apply to all manuscripts submitted to JFINES and to all articles published by the journal.

1. Responsibilities of Authors

1.1 Originality and Duplicate Submission

Authors must submit original work that has not been published previously and is not under consideration by another journal or publication outlet.

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Duplicate submission, redundant publication, salami publication, or substantial overlap with previously published work must be disclosed and may lead to rejection or other editorial action.

Where a manuscript builds on previously published work, conference abstracts, preprints, datasets, theses, reports, or related publications, this must be clearly disclosed and properly cited.

1.2 Authorship and Author Contributions

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial contribution to the work. Contributions may include conception or design of the study, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of findings, drafting the manuscript, critical revision, approval of the final version, or accountability for the integrity of the work.

All listed authors should:

  • approve the submitted version of the manuscript;
  • agree to be listed as authors;
  • accept responsibility for their contributions;
  • approve the final version before publication;
  • agree to the journal’s submission and publication policies.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged, with their permission, in the Acknowledgements section.

Changes to authorship after submission, including addition, removal, or rearrangement of authors, must be explained in writing and approved by all authors, including any author being added or removed.

1.3 Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, professional, academic, institutional, political, or commercial relationships that could influence, or be perceived to influence, the research, interpretation, writing, or publication of the manuscript.

Potential conflicts of interest may include funding, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, paid expert testimony, patents, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, or competing academic interests.

If no conflicts of interest exist, authors should include a statement such as:

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

1.4 Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose all sources of funding or support received for the research, writing, or publication of the manuscript.

The funding statement should identify the funder, grant number where applicable, and the role of the funder in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, or publication decision. If the research received no specific funding, this should be stated.

1.5 Plagiarism and Text Reuse

JFINES does not accept plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, duplicate publication, or misrepresentation of another person’s work as the author’s own.

Authors must properly cite and acknowledge all sources used in the manuscript. Direct quotations, adapted material, data, images, figures, tables, and ideas from other sources must be appropriately cited and used in accordance with copyright and licensing requirements.

The journal may use similarity-checking tools and editorial assessment to identify possible overlap. Similarity reports are interpreted carefully, considering the source, amount, context, and nature of the overlap.

Manuscripts with serious plagiarism or originality concerns may be rejected. Concerns identified after publication may lead to correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other appropriate action.

1.6 Data Integrity and Availability

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the data reported in their manuscript.

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, selectively omit, or misrepresent data, images, results, references, or research procedures.

Where appropriate, authors should provide a Data Availability Statement explaining whether the data supporting the findings are publicly available, included in the article or supplementary materials, available upon reasonable request, restricted for ethical or legal reasons, or not applicable.

The journal may request raw data, ethics approval documents, study protocols, consent forms, or other supporting materials where concerns arise during editorial assessment, peer review, or after publication.

1.7 Ethical Approval and Informed Consent

Research involving human participants, animals, identifiable personal data, biological samples, sensitive information, or vulnerable groups must comply with applicable ethical standards and legal requirements.

For research involving human participants, authors should include a statement confirming:

  • approval by an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board, where required;
  • the name of the approving body;
  • approval number or reference number, where available;
  • the date of approval, where available;
  • whether informed consent was obtained;
  • how confidentiality and participant privacy were protected.

For research involving animals, authors should include a statement confirming compliance with relevant animal welfare guidelines and approval by an appropriate ethics or animal care committee where required.

If ethical approval was not required, authors should explain why.

1.8 Use of Third-Party Material

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce or adapt third-party material where required. This includes figures, tables, photographs, maps, diagrams, tools, questionnaires, datasets, long quotations, or other copyrighted content.

Any third-party material included in a manuscript must be properly cited and accompanied by appropriate permission or licence information where applicable.

1.9 Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must cite relevant and appropriate sources accurately. References should support the claims made in the manuscript and should not be manipulated to inflate citation counts or misrepresent the literature.

Authors should avoid excessive self-citation, inappropriate citation practices, or citation of irrelevant sources.

2. Responsibilities of Editors

2.1 Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript’s scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, clarity, relevance to the journal’s scope, reviewer comments, and editorial assessment.

Editorial decisions are not influenced by authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion, political views, personal characteristics, or ability to pay publication charges.

2.2 Fair and Transparent Editorial Handling

Editors are responsible for managing manuscripts fairly, consistently, and in accordance with journal policies. Editors should ensure that manuscripts are assessed by suitably qualified reviewers where external review is required.

Editors may decline manuscripts without external review if they are outside the journal’s scope, substantially incomplete, ethically problematic, methodologically weak, insufficiently original, or unlikely to meet the journal’s publication standards.

2.3 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information about a manuscript should not be disclosed to anyone outside the editorial and peer-review process, except where disclosure is necessary for ethical investigation, legal compliance, or publication management.

Editors must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal, professional, academic, or commercial advantage.

2.4 Conflicts of Interest

Editors must declare any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that may affect their ability to handle a manuscript impartially.

Editors should not handle manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest involving the authors, institutions, funders, subject matter, or competing work. In such cases, the manuscript should be assigned to another qualified editor.

2.5 Peer Review Oversight

Editors are responsible for selecting appropriate reviewers, considering reviewer comments, assessing the manuscript independently, and making or recommending editorial decisions.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. Final editorial decisions are made by the authorised editor or editorial team, based on all relevant information.

2.6 Handling Ethical Concerns

Editors should take ethical concerns seriously, whether they are raised before or after publication. Such concerns may involve plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, data falsification, image manipulation, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest, peer-review manipulation, ethical approval concerns, or other forms of misconduct.

Where necessary, editors may request explanations, supporting documents, raw data, ethics approval letters, authorship statements, or institutional clarification before making a decision.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

3.1 Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not share, copy, distribute, discuss, or use manuscript content outside the peer-review process unless authorised by the editorial office.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information, ideas, data, methods, or findings from a manuscript for personal, academic, professional, or commercial advantage.

3.2 Objectivity and Constructive Review

Reviewers should provide fair, evidence-based, respectful, and constructive evaluations. Reviews should focus on the scholarly content of the manuscript, including originality, methodology, data analysis, interpretation, ethical compliance, clarity, and relevance to the journal.

Reviewers should avoid personal criticism, discriminatory language, unsupported claims, or comments unrelated to the scholarly assessment of the manuscript.

3.3 Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting or while conducting a review.

Conflicts of interest may include recent collaboration, shared institutional affiliation, supervisory relationships, personal relationships, financial interests, academic rivalry, or direct involvement in the research.

If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the invitation or notify the editorial office immediately.

3.4 Timeliness

Reviewers should complete reviews within the agreed timeframe. If a reviewer is unable to complete the review on time, they should inform the editorial office as soon as possible so that an extension or alternative reviewer can be considered.

3.5 Reporting Ethical Concerns

Reviewers should inform the editorial office confidentially if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data concerns, image manipulation, ethical approval problems, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or any other issue that may affect the integrity of the manuscript.

Reviewers should not investigate suspected misconduct independently or contact authors directly.

4. Research Misconduct and Publication Malpractice

JFINES does not tolerate research misconduct or publication malpractice. Concerns may include, but are not limited to:

  • plagiarism;
  • duplicate submission or duplicate publication;
  • data fabrication;
  • data falsification;
  • inappropriate image manipulation;
  • undeclared conflicts of interest;
  • authorship disputes or misrepresentation;
  • citation manipulation;
  • peer-review manipulation;
  • unethical research involving human participants or animals;
  • failure to obtain required ethical approval or consent;
  • misuse of confidential information;
  • copyright infringement;
  • misleading reporting or unsupported conclusions.

Where concerns arise, the journal will assess the matter carefully and may seek clarification from authors, reviewers, editors, institutions, or other relevant parties.

5. Handling Ethical Complaints and Concerns

Ethical complaints or concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, or other parties. Complaints should be submitted to the editorial office with sufficient details, including the article or manuscript title, DOI or link where available, description of the concern, and supporting evidence.

JFINES will assess ethical concerns in accordance with its policies and relevant publication ethics guidance. Depending on the nature of the concern, the journal may:

  • request clarification from the authors;
  • request original data or supporting documents;
  • consult reviewers, editors, or editorial board members;
  • contact institutions or ethics committees where appropriate;
  • issue a correction;
  • publish an expression of concern;
  • retract the article;
  • reject the manuscript;
  • take other appropriate editorial action.

The journal will aim to handle ethical concerns fairly, carefully, and proportionately.

6. Corrections, Expressions of Concern and Retractions

6.1 Corrections

A correction may be issued where an error is identified in a published article but the overall findings and conclusions remain reliable. Corrections may address errors in text, data, tables, figures, author details, funding information, acknowledgements, or other article information.

6.2 Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued where serious concerns have been raised about a published article but the outcome of an investigation is not yet available, is inconclusive, or requires further clarification.

6.3 Retractions

An article may be retracted where there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable or where serious ethical or legal concerns affect the integrity of the work. Reasons for retraction may include data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, major error, peer-review manipulation, or other serious misconduct.

Retraction notices will be linked to the original article and will state the reason for retraction where appropriate. Retracted articles may remain accessible with clear labelling to preserve the scholarly record, unless removal is required for legal, ethical, or safety reasons.

7. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions or raise concerns about the editorial process by contacting the editorial office with a clear, evidence-based explanation.

Appeals may be considered where there is evidence of a procedural error, factual misunderstanding, conflict of interest, or concern about fairness in the review process. Appeals are not intended to provide repeated review of manuscripts rejected on scholarly, methodological, ethical, or scope-related grounds.

Complaints about journal processes, peer review, editorial conduct, publication ethics, corrections, or retractions will be assessed by the editorial office and may be referred to the Editor-in-Chief, editorial board, or other appropriate parties.

8. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Authors, reviewers, and editors should use artificial intelligence tools responsibly and transparently.

Authors should not list artificial intelligence tools as authors. Where AI-assisted tools are used in manuscript preparation, authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of the submitted work. The use of such tools should be disclosed where required by the journal.

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, figures, tables, data, or supplementary files to AI tools or third-party platforms that may store, process, or reuse the content, unless explicitly authorised by the journal. Manuscript confidentiality must be maintained at all times.

9. Maintaining the Scholarly Record

JFINES is committed to preserving the integrity of the scholarly record. The journal will take reasonable steps to ensure that published content remains accurate, accessible, properly labelled, and linked to any relevant corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or updates.

The journal may update its publication ethics policies from time to time to reflect changes in recognised standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.