Ethical Declaration

Code of Éthics of the European Public & Social Innovation Review (EPSIR)

The European Public & Social Innovation Review (EPSIR) is committed to ethical publishing practices and applies ethical standards to all its articles. To this end, we follow the principles set by major international initiatives established by entities such as COPE.

In all cases of ethical issues that may arise in academic publishing, we strive to act professionally and efficiently, be fair and objective, maintain smooth communication with the accused party—and provide the necessary time—to establish their position before making a decision, keep all parties informed of the decisions, and protect the moral rights of the authors.

Basic Principles

Originality and Honesty: Submissions must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration by any other publication. Authors must ensure there are no instances of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism.

Copyright and Authorship: All works must respect copyright. Authorship should be justly attributed to all contributors according to their level of contribution, and no one who has contributed significantly will be excluded.

Conflicts of Interest: Any situation that may be seen as a potential conflict of interest must be declared. This includes, but is not limited to, personal or financial interests of funders in the outcomes of the research.

Research Ethics: All studies must have been conducted in accordance with the corresponding international and national ethical standards, including informed consents when necessary.

Editorial Responsibilities

Objectivity and Neutrality: Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic content without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political ideology.

Confidentiality: All details of the review process must be kept confidential and not reveal any information about a manuscript except to those legitimately involved in the process.

Publication Decisions: Editorial decisions should be fair, impartial, and timely.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to the Editorial Process: Reviewers should provide objective and constructive evaluations of the assigned work, clearly stating their arguments and recommendations.

Timeliness and Conduct Standards: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that timely review will be impossible should notify the editors.

Confidentiality: Every manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document.

Reviewer Timelines and Processes

Efficiency: EPSIR commits to strict timelines for the review and publication of articles to avoid unnecessary delays in the publishing process.

Dispute Resolution: A good conduct committee will be established to address any discrepancies or appeals in the review and editorial decision process.

Diversity and Inclusion

EPSIR ensures a commitment to inclusion and diversity at all stages of the editorial process. We strive to eliminate any bias and promote an inclusive and respectful environment.

Management of Complaints and Appeals

Complaints will be managed transparently and efficiently, ensuring that all parties are heard and treated with respect.

This code of ethics is fundamental to ensure the quality and integrity of EPSIR, and it is expected that all participants in the editorial process—editors, reviewers, and authors—follow it rigorously. 

Use of Artificial Intelligence

EPSIR establishes the following guidelines regarding the use of AI and fully adheres to the COPE Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Research and Publication:

Authors must explicitly declare whether AI was used at any stage of the research and writing process. Journals should require authors to specify how and to what extent AI was used, whether for data analysis, text generation, or reference management.

COPE clearly states that AI cannot be considered an author of a scientific article, as it cannot assume ethical responsibility or respond to issues of research integrity. Editors must ensure that all contributions are made by human authors, even when AI has been used as a supporting tool.

AI must not be used to generate scientific content.

Authors must indicate in the methodology section whether AI was used and, if so, specify the aspects in which it was applied.