Privacy Statement and Publication Ethics  

 

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

 

Publication Ethics Statement

 

The Brazilian Journal of Environmental Sciences (Revista Brasileira de Ciências Ambientais – RBCIAMB) works together with its Editorial Team (Editors and Editorial Board), authors and evaluators to ensure the quality and ethical criteria of manuscripts from submission to publication.

When submitting the article, the authors automatically agree with all items of this declaration of publication ethics for this journal.

1 - Responsibilities of the Editorial Team

1.a - Confidentiality

Information regarding the submitted article will only be disclosed to the authors, to the reviewers (but without identification of the authors), the editorial team, as the case may be.

The disclosure of materials not published in a manuscript submitted will only be with the express written permission of the author.

Inside information or ideas obtained through peer reviews must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

 

1.b - Conflicts of interest, participation and cooperation in investigations

If the general editor, session editor or evaluator has conflicts of interest, resulting from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or links with any of the authors shall communicate and pass the responsibility of the article to another member of the Editorial Team.

Publishers should require all contributors to disclose relevant conflicting interests and publish corrections if they are revealed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate measures will be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or note of interest.

Act in case of suspected misconduct, either in articles under evaluation or already published, following the guidelines of COPE (Ethics Committee in Publications), giving the authors ample opportunity to respond to complaints. All complaints are investigated, no matter when the article was approved. The documentation related to the complaint remains in the custody of the journal. 

1.c - Ethic

An editor must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without distinction of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origins, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

1.d - Publication Decisions

The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which articles to publish. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers should always be the reason that drives such decisions. The editor may be guided by the Editorial Board's policies and limited by current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor can share with other editors the decision making, should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors to: ensure the quality of the published material; publish errata, clarifications, retractions and apologies, if necessary; improve the journal; maintain the integrity of the file and the journal's memory.

On the homepage of the journal is the instructions to the authors defining details about what is expected for manuscript submissions. These instructions are updated regularly and inform you of the steps in the evaluation procedures.

Special number editions are conducted in the same way as any other, and manuscripts will be considered and accepted solely for their academic merit, regardless of any personal influence.

2 - Responsibilities of the authors

Authors must follow the rules for submission in:

http://rbciamb.com.br/index.php/Publicacoes_RBCIAMB/about/submissions

2.a - Originality and plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written completely original works, and if they use the work and/or words of another person, that they are properly quoted. Plagiarism takes various forms, some of which are characterized when an author presents the work of another as his own, by copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of a work done by another (without attribution), or even claiming the results of a research done by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Papers presented at congresses must have substantial modifications and alterations for submission to the journal, with at least 50% different content.

2.b - Simultaneous publications

Presentation of the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical publication behavior and is unacceptable.

The publication of some types of articles (clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one newspaper is justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. Authors and editors of interested newspapers should agree that secondary publication should reflect the same data and interpretations of the primary document. The primary reference should be cited in the secondary publication.

2.c - Authorship

The authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions in the conception, structuring, execution or interpretation of the presented document. All those who have made a significant contribution should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the work, and that they have seen and approved the final version and agree on its presentation for publication. 

The intellectual property rights of third parties must be respected. Permissions must be sent for use, reproduction and publication of graphics, maps, diagrams, photographs, etc. Each author who signs the article must have contributed significantly to its realization.

Authors should name each other's contribution in relation to the work (Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding, acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing).

2.d - Funding

All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

2.e - Conflicts of interest

All authors must notify in their manuscript any conflict of interest, whether financial or other relevant conflict that could be understood as an influence on the results of the interpretation of the work.

The conflict of interest may be of a personal, commercial, political, academic or financial nature. Examples of possible conflicts of interest are labor ties, consulting, stock ownership, fees, documents, expert payments, application/patent filings and scholarships or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest or should not be informed at the time of submission by the authors.

2.f - Recognition of sources

The work done by another researcher must always be recognized. Authors should say the publications that were consulted in the presented work. Information obtained in particular, such as conversations, interviews, correspondence, or discussions with third parties should not be used or presented without the explicit and written permission of the source. The information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as submitted manuscripts or presentations to scholarships should not be used without explicit written permission by the author of the referred work.

It is necessary to present a list of bibliographical references at the end of the article, the institutional or private location of all the historical documents mentioned in the article, as well as the complete bibliographic references.

By submitting the manuscript, the authors recognize and accept the rules of the Creative Commons License Attribute BY.

2.g - Published works with possible errors

When a significant error is identified in the published work, it is the duty of the author to immediately notify the editor and cooperate to retract or correct it. If the editor discovers by third parties that a published work contains significant errors, it is the author's obligation to retract or correct the work or to provide evidence to the editor about the accuracy of the original work.

2.h - Access and data storage

Authors may be required to submit raw data in relation to the work for editorial reviews, they must be prepared to allow public access to this data if it is viable, and they must, independently of the instance, be prepared to retain that data for a period of time adequate after its publication.

2.i - Use of humans or animals for research

When involving the use of human or animal guinea pigs, the author must ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures have been performed in accordance with current laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) is approved.

3 - Responsibilities of reviewers

3.a - Confidentiality

Manuscripts should not be shown or discussed with others that do not have permission from the editor. Any article received for review must be treated as a confidential document.

3.b – Procedures in cases of unethical behavior

The complaints received by the journal will be evaluated and answered by the Editorial Coordination and the Editorial Board. Its members are responsible for the proper investigation of the problems that arise.

Evidence of misconduct must be gathered, preventing any information from spreading beyond those who really need to know about the investigations, as long as they are in the process of being resolved.

The Editorial Team is responsible for the investigation of possible complaints against the Chief Editor.

Minor problems will be resolved without further consultation. In any case, the author or reviewer should have the opportunity to respond to any accusation.

Results to be published after investigating the complaints: To inform the author or reviewer where there is a lack of understanding or non-application of acceptable behavior standards; To send a letter warning of misconduct with a notice for future actions; To publish a formal note detailing the misconduct; To send a formal letter to the Director of the Department or Sponsor of the author or reviewer; To publish a formal retraction of the article already published.

3.c - Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The reviewers must not consider manuscripts which they have conflicts of interest, whether as a result of competition, collaboration or another relationship or link with any other author, company or institutions that have connection with the work.  Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in a researcher's personal research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer reviews should be kept confidential and should not be used for personal gain.

3.d - Recognition of sources

The reviewers must identify publications of relevant works that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or argument has been submitted previously must be accompanied by the corresponding citation. The reviewer should also draw the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between a manuscript under evaluation and any other published work of which he has personal knowledge.

3.e – Objectivity Norms

Reviews must be conducted objectively. The author's personal criticisms are inadequate. Evaluators should express their views with unbiased arguments.

3.f - Promptness

The selected evaluator who feels disqualified to review the research presented in a manuscript, or who is certain that he or she will not be able to conduct a quick review must notify the editor and request that it be removed from the review process.

3.g - Contributions for editorial decisions

The peer review helps the editor to make editorial decisions, and the publisher through communication with the author can bring improvements to the work. Peer review is an essential component of the editorial decision regarding the manuscript.