Focus and Scope

Frontier Agribusiness is a journal managed by the Agribusiness Study Program, Faculty of Agriculture, Lambung Mangkurat University. This journal focuses on various aspects of agribusiness, which includes:

1. Agricultural business analysis, production, and efficiency
2. Consumption and marketing
3. Agribusiness systems and management
4. Agricultural policies and food security
5. Resource and environmental economics
6. The role and performance of agribusiness institutions
7. Community/farmer empowerment
8. Local wisdom in wetland areas
9. Agricultural development communication

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

1. The author(s) create an account on the website and submit their manuscript.

2. The editor in chief would conduct an initial review, taking into account the following points:

• Adherence to the focus and scope of the manuscript,
• The uniqueness and significance of the manuscript,
• The manuscript's compliance with the guidelines,
• Check for manuscript similarity,
• Copyrights transfer agreement form available.

3. The editor in chief decides on the initial review using the following decision types:

• If the manuscript is rejected during the initial review, it will be returned to the author(s) with the specific comment attached,
• If the manuscript is returned for revision prior to peer review, it will be returned to the author(s) with the specific comment attached. The author(s) should revise their manuscript and re-submit it to the system,
• If the manuscript passes the initial review, it will proceed to the peer-review stage.

4. The section editor would seek reviewers who are a good fit for the manuscript. Following that, the manuscript will be distributed to at least two (2) independent reviewers via a Double-blind peer-review process.

5. Frontier Agribisnis has strengthened its peer review system through strategic expansion of external reviewers. Our current reviewer pool includes experts from multiple national institutions, ensuring objective double-blind review and maintaining international quality standards across all evaluations.

6. The reviewers would provide insightful comments on the manuscript and make the following recommendations, 

• Accepted in its current form,
• Minor revisions,
• Major revision,
• Rejected completely.

7. Before making a decision, the section editor would consider the reviewers' comments and recommendations as follows:

• Rejected completely indicates that the manuscript has been rejected from consideration for publication,
• Accepted as-is indicates that the manuscript has been accepted in its entirety without revision.
• Minor revision indicates that the manuscript should be revised in response to the reviewer's minor comment,
• Major revision indicates that the manuscript should be revised in response to the reviewer's major comment.

8. If the section editor accepts the manuscript, it is sent to the copyeditor for copyediting and typesetting before being sent to the author for final review and layout.

9. If the author(s) make a minor or major change to the manuscript, they should revise and resubmit it to the system. The section editor would then decide whether to accept it for the next step or subject it to the second round of revision.

10. If the section editor rejects a manuscript, the author(s) will be notified that the manuscript was not accepted for publication. Additionally, this decision is accompanied by detailed comments.

Publication Frequency

Frontier Agribisnis publishes quarterly a year (March, June, September dan December)

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Screening for Plagiarism

Articles submitted to Frontier Agribisnis will be checked for similarity using Turnitin. Articles found to have a similarity index percentage higher than 20% will be rejected.

Publication Ethics

Frontier Agribisnis is a peer-reviewed open-access international journal that is published by Universitas Lambung Mangkurat. By stating these publication ethics and publication malpractice statements, Frontier Agribisnis pledges to ensure best practices in publishing integrity and to manage any malpractice that occurs. Publication malpractice is an unfortunate occurrence in the scholarly literature world. It occurs across all subject areas and jurisdictions, and few journals are immune. Every author, editor, reviewer, publisher, and institution must take responsibility for preventing publication malpractice. This statement is based on major publishers, guidance from the Scopus title evaluation requirements for publication ethics and malpractice statements (PEMS), the declaration on research assessment (DORA), and industry organizations such as:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
• Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in this journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher, and the society. 

Frontier Agribisnis as publisher takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprinting, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Frontier Agribisnis and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing articles by authors or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record. In cases of suspected misconduct, the editors and editorial board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them in resolving the complaint and addressing the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the editors. If the editors discover such misconduct in a submitted manuscript, they will reject it. If a published paper reveals such misconduct, we can publish a retraction and link it to the original article. The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether it is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article, are sufficient. Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, editors, publisher, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, IAES will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decisions

The editors of the Frontier Agribisnis journals are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Complaints and Appeals

This journal has a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, editorial staff, editorial board, or publisher. Respected personnel will clarify the complaints based on the specific case. The scope of complaints encompasses all aspects of journal business processes, such as editorial processes, citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer practices, and peer-review manipulation, among others. We will process the complaint cases in accordance with COPE guidelines. You should send the complaint cases by email to [email protected].

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers assist the editor in making editorial decisions. Generally, the editor asks reviewers to treat authors and their work with the respect they deserve and to adhere to proper reviewing etiquette. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Editorial communications can also aid the author in enhancing the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Internal Submissions and Editorial Objectivity

Frontier Agribisnis is committed to maintaining impartial peer review for all submissions, including those from our editorial team, reviewers, and students. To ensure objectivity:
- All internal submissions undergo mandatory external peer review
- Editors exclude themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest may arise
- Additional editorial oversight is implemented for internal submissions
- We are progressively increasing external content ratio while maintaining our educational mission
- All review processes are transparently documented within OJS

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Ethical Oversight

In order to follow the rules for ethical research involving people and animals, the author must make it clear in the manuscript if the research involves chemicals, people, animals, procedures, or equipment that have any special risks that come with using them. If required, authors must provide legal ethical clearance from an association or legal organization. If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter, whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Intelectual Property (Copyright Policy)

Here is the declaration of the journal's intellectual property or copyright policy: https://ppjp.ulm.ac.id/journals/index.php/fag/about/submissions#copyrightNotice.

Peer-Review Process Policy

The peer-review process/policy is declared here: https://ppjp.ulm.ac.id/journals/index.php/fag/about/editorialPolicies#peerReviewProcess.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

This journal accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by readers. In case the reader is giving discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact the editor in chief by email to explain the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by the editor in chief), the discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as a letter to the editor. Respected authors can reply to the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to the editor in chief. Therefore, editors may publish the answer as a reply to the letter to the editor.

Ethical Guidance

Ethical Oversight

According to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ethical oversight should include but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practices. Frontier Agribisnis is committed to considering appeals concerning our authors' non-observance of ethical principles.

Research Involving Human Subjects

When reporting studies that involve human participants, authors should include a statement that the studies have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), revised in 2013, and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach and demonstrate that the independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. At a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in Section ‘Ethical Approval’ of the article.

An example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before participating in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."

Use of Animals in Research

The welfare of animals used for research must be respected. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals have been followed and that the studies have been approved by a research ethics committee at the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted (where such a committee exists).

Frontier Agribisnis Studies endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (https://arriveguidelines.org/arrive-guidelines) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers can use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, which can be found at: https://arriveguidelines.org/resources/author-checklists.

Research Involving Cell Lines

Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines, the provenance should be stated, and references must also be given to either a published paper or a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.

Example of an ethical statement: "The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX, and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXX."

Research Involving Plants

Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild), including a collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. We recommend that authors comply with the CBD (https://www.cbd.int/convention/) and the CITES (https://cites.org/eng).

For each submitted manuscript supporting genetic information and origin must be provided. For research manuscripts involving rare and non-model plants (other than, e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Oriza sativa, or many other typical model plants), voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for review by future investigators to verify the identity of the material used in the study (especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur in the future). They should include details of the populations sampled on the site of collection (GPS coordinates), date of collection, and document the part(s) used in the study where appropriate. For rare, threatened, or endangered species, this can be waived, but it is necessary for the author to describe this in the cover letter.

Example of an ethical statement: "Torenia fournieri plants were used in this study. White-flowered Crown White (CrW) and violet-flowered Crown Violet (CrV) cultivars selected from ‘Crown Mix’ (XXX Company, City, Country) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX (XXX Institute, City, Country)."

R-W-C-R-R Policy

Article Retraction

At Frontier Agribisnis, we have a commitment to maintaining the integrity of the academic record, so there are times when there is a need to retract articles. An article would be retracted for the following reasons:

• If there are major scientific errors, that will invalidate the article's conclusion. An example is when there is evidence that that the findings in the article are unreliable either due to an honest error – a miscalculation or experimental error or as a result of misconduct – data fabrication.
• If the research and resulting findings have already been posted elsewhere without appropriate cross-referencing, justification, or permission – the case of a redundant publication.
• If there are plagiarism issues – the use of the words used in another publication without giving credit – or inappropriate authorship.

To make sure that retractions are handled to the best practice of publications, and also in accordance with COPE retraction guidelines, Frontier Agribisnis make use of the following retraction process:

• Any article which requires potential retraction should be brought to the notice of the journal editor.
• Once this is done, the journal editor would follow the guidelines according to the COPE flow chat – this includes the evaluations of the answers given by the author of the article t certain questions.
• The editor's findings are then sent over to the Ethics Advisory Board before any action can be taken. This step is put in place to ensure a consistent approach to these situations in accordance with the best practices of the industry.
• The decision on whether or not the publication is going to be retracted or not is communicated to the author and other relevant bodies such as the Author's institution if necessary.
• When all this is concluded, a retraction statement is posted online and then published in the next available issue of the journal – we are going to be giving detailed information on this step as we move on.

Note: if the author retains copyright for an article, this does not qualify them for the right to retract it after publication. The integrity of the public scientific record is important, and COPE's Retraction Guidelines still apply in such cases.

Article Withdrawal

It is not in the jurisdiction of an author to withdraw a submitted manuscript. This is because referees, editors, and publishers have spent a lot of time editing and processing the submitted manuscript leaving the sudden retraction a waste of valuable resources. Before an author submits a manuscript, through our OJS, the author is required to provide the following checklist:

• If the author requests the removal or withdrawal of his/her manuscript when it is still in the peer-reviewing process, the authors would be banned to submit their manuscript to Frontier Agribisnis one year after the withdrawal date.
• If the author wants to withdraw the article after being accepted for publication, the authors would be banned to submit their manuscript to Frontier Agribisnis two years after the withdrawal date.
• If the article has been published as “Article in Press” – articles which have been accepted for publication although not formally coming without the complete package – that has errors, or has violated the Journal publishing ethics guideline as viewed by editors, or has been discovered to be a duplicate to another published article, or maybe it has been Withdrawn from the Frontier Agribisnis website. The authors would be banned to submit their manuscript to Frontier Agribisnis three years after the withdrawal date. The term "Withdrawn" means that the article's content has been replaced with a PDF of HTML page stating that the article has been withdrawn.
• If the author refuses to pay the penalty at any point, the author, alongside any affiliation linked to him/her, would be blacklisted for publication for three years.
• If there is a request to withdraw a manuscript by the author, an official letter signed by the corresponding agency leader and the author must be sent to the Principal Editor.

Article Correction

Issuing a correction is considered by Frontier Agribisnis if the following happens:

• A small section of a reliable publication reports flawed data, which misleads due to an honest error.
• The Contributor list or Author is incorrect (e.g., a deserving author has been omitted, and likewise, a person who is not worthy of authorship criteria has been included.

Corrections to peer-reviewed content fall into one of these three categories:

• Publisher correction (erratum): this helps to notify readers of a major error made by a publishing staff that negatively impacts a publication record or the scientific veracity of the article, or the reputation of the Journal or authors.
• Author correction (corrigendum): this also helps to notify a reader of an error made by an author, which negatively impacts the scientific integrity of a publication record or the reputation of the author of the journal.
• Addendum: this is where there is an addition to the article by the author to explain inconsistencies and expand the existing work or explain or update the information in the main work.

Deciding whether a correction should be issued is made by the editor of a journal, and this sometimes comes with advice from Reviewers or Editorial Board Members. Handling Editors would contact the Authors of the concerned paper with a clarification request, but the final decision on a correction is required, and if so, which type rests on the editors.

Article Removal

There might be a need to remove a published article from an online platform in a limited number of cases. This would only occur if an article is defamatory or infringes the legal rights of others, or we have good reason to believe that the publication would cause certain court orders. In such situations, while the metadata of the article will be retained, the text would be will be replaced with another screen, which points out that the article has been removed to prevent any legal complications.

Article Replacement

At a point, an author of an original paper may wish to remove or retract the flawed original and replace it with another corrected version. Under these circumstances, the retraction procedure would be followed, with the difference stating that the article retraction notice would contain a link to the – corrected – re-published article alongside the history of the document.

Allegations of Misconduct

Plagiarism

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

• Directly copying text from other sources without attribution
• Copying ideas, images, or data from other sources without attribution
• Reusing text from your own previous publications without attribution or agreement of the editor
• Exception: Reusing text from the Methods section in the author’s previous publications, with attribution to the source, is acceptable.
• Using an idea from another source with slightly modified language without attribution.

If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may issue a correction or retract the paper as appropriate.

Data fabrication 

This concerns the making up of research findings.

• Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
• Suspected fabricated data in a published manuscript

Data falsification 

Manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images (e.g., micrographs, gels, radiological images), removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc.

Duplicate submissions

Duplicate submission is a situation whereby an author submits the same or similar manuscripts to two different journals at the same time, either within Academic Journals or any other publisher. This includes the submission of manuscripts derived from the same data in such a manner that there are no substantial differences in the manuscripts. Duplicate submission also includes the submission of the same/similar manuscript in different languages to different journals.

Authorship Issues

Clear policies (that allow for transparency around who contributed to the work and in what capacity) should be in place for requirements for authorship and contributorship, as well as processes for managing potential disputes.

Citation Manipulation

Citation Manipulation includes excessive citations in the submitted manuscript that do not contribute to the scholarly content of the article and have been included solely for the purpose of increasing citations to a given author’s work or to articles published in a particular journal. This leads to misrepresenting the importance of the specific work and journal in which it appears and is thus a form of scientific misconduct.

Suspected Manipulation of Peer Review/Bias of Peer Reviews

Frontier Agribisnis selects the reviewers on any manuscript with due care so as to avoid any conflict of interest between the reviewers and the authors. Our policy is compliant with COPE Guidelines on peer review.

Advertising Policy

At present, we do not publish any advertisements in Frontier Agribisnis

Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)

Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR)

Generative AI Policy

Frontier Agribisnis

Frontier Agribisnis welcomes responsible use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) and large language models (LLMs) in academic writing and research. This policy defines how authors, reviewers, and editors may apply these tools in the publication process.

1. Allowable Use of Gen-AI for Authors

Authors may use Gen-AI tools for limited academic assistance such as:

• Checking grammar, editing clarity, or rephrasing academic language.
• Supporting idea generation, outlining, or improving readability.
• Supporting data analysis, coding, and bibliometric or qualitative processing tools when appropriate and reported transparently.

Gen-AI may not replace critical intellectual contributions. The core scientific reasoning, originality, methodology, data interpretation, and final conclusions remain the responsibility of the authors.

2. Prohibited Use

Authors may not:

• List Gen-AI as an author.
• Use Gen-AI to generate fabricated data, references, citations, or results.
• Submit AI-generated text or figures without human intellectual contribution.
• Use Gen-AI to bypass plagiarism detection or disguise copied content.

Any violation may result in rejection or retraction.

3. Disclosure and Acknowledgment

If Gen-AI tools are used during manuscript preparation, authors must provide a short statement in the Acknowledgment section that includes:

• The specific tool used and version if available.
• The purpose of use.

Example:

“The authors used ChatGPT for language editing and grammar checking. All intellectual content, analysis, and interpretation were produced by the authors.”

No disclosure is needed for automated proofreading tools embedded in word processors.

4. Authorship and Accountability

Authorship credit requires human academic contribution. Gen-AI tools cannot meet accountability standards for:

• Originality and academic integrity
• Research design and analysis
• Ethical responsibility
• Publication copyright and licensing

Authors remain fully responsible for accuracy and ethical validity of all content derived from Gen-AI tools.

5. Reviewers and Editors

Reviewers and editors may use Gen-AI for:

• Language refinement of comments
• Checking readability of feedback
• Supporting task organization

They may not use Gen-AI to:

• Input confidential manuscripts or review data
• Generate review comments or evaluations without human judgment

Confidentiality rules remain fully binding.

6. Plagiarism and Ethical Checks

All submissions involving Gen-AI remain subject to standard ethical procedures, including:

• Similarity checks
• Data verification
• Copyright checks
• Research integrity review

Undisclosed or unethical use of Gen-AI may be treated as publication misconduct.

7. Updates to Policy

This policy will be reviewed periodically by IJELE editor in response to new technological, ethical, and academic developments.