Publication ethics
National Technical University of Ukraine "Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute" as the publisher of the scientific journal Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology recognizes the principles developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The editorial office of the journal Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology operates in accordance with internationally recognized principles of transparency, integrity, and responsible scientific publishing. The journal’s editorial policy aslo takes into account the the provisions of DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) aimed at avoiding a purely formal and exclusively quantitative approach to the evaluation of research results. And furthermore, the Journal is guided by Code of Honour of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”.
It is essential that all who participate in producing the journal, who conduct themselves as authors, reviewers and editors, strictly adhere to the highest level of professional ethical standards. The journal Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology expects that editors, authors, and reviewers will observe high standards with respect to publication ethics. We encourage our editors, authors and reviewers to work in accordance with the Code of Conduct adopted by the COPE.
In issuing the journal, we abide by the relevant laws and regulations for the protection of intellectual property rights and copyrights.
The editorial office supports the principles of transparency in peer review processes, clear distribution of roles and responsibilities among all participants in the publication process, regulation of conflicts of interest, and equal and impartial treatment of authors. Editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of scientific quality, novelty, methodological validity, and practical significance of the research, regardless of official status, institutional affiliation, or any other non-scientific factors.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Authors must adhere to high standards with respect to publication ethics, remain in good communication with the editor(s), the publisher and any co-authors. Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavor.
By submitting a manuscript to this journal, each author explicitly confirms that the manuscript meets the highest ethical standards from the author and coauthors including proper statistical investigations and thorough ethical reviews by the data owning organizations.
We consider unacceptable:
(1) Plagiarism (and self-plagiarism) in whole or in part without proper citation. All the citations should be correct. An author need to have written permission from the copyright owner for any reproduced figures or tables – exceptions exist under the fair dealing concept. An author must guarantee his/her submission is original, owned by the author, that no part of it has been previously published (partly or in full), and that no other agreement to publish it or a part of it is outstanding. The manuscript must not be under consideration elsewhere.
Manuscripts submitted to Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology are screened with Strikeplagiarism anti-plagiarism software in an attempt to detect and prevent plagiarism.
(2) Falsification or fabrication of data. No data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support conclusions. Fabrication, falsification or selective reporting of data with the intent to mislead or deceive is unethical, as is the theft of data or research results from others. If an author uses secondary data (datasets gathered by someone else), he/she need to obtain copyright clearance before data can be reproduced (exceptions exist under the fair dealing concept).
(3) Misappropriation of others’ work. All the contributors to an article are to be included and all acknowledgments should be up-to-date. An author(s) should acknowledge the work of others used in the research and cite publications that have influenced the direction and course of the study.
(4) The deliberate exclusion of information regarding financial support that would be viewed as a conflict of interest. An author should openly to disclose any conflict of interest – for example, if publication were to benefit a company or services in which the author(s) has a vested interest.
The manuscript should be approved by all co-authors and responsible authorities at the institute or organization where the work has been carried out.
In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he/she has done, a corresponding author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.
Adding and/or deleting authors at revision stage may be justifiably warranted. A letter must accompany the revised manuscript to explain the role of the added and/or deleted author(s). Further documentation may be required to support the request.
To ensure objectivity and transparency in research and to ensure that accepted principles of ethical and professional conduct have been followed, authors should include information regarding sources of funding, potential conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial).
When authors discover a serious error in their work, they must report this to the Managing Editor as soon as possible in order to modify the work, withdraw it, retract it, or publish a correction or erratum notice.
Allegations of unethical conduct will be discussed initially with the corresponding author. In the event of continued dispute, the matter will be referred to the author's institution and funding agencies for investigation and adjudication.
Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
The Editorial Board of Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology should continuously work to improve the Journal.
Members of the Editorial Board are required to ensure the confidentiality of all manuscripts received and of their content until they have been accepted for publication. Editors must not share information about manuscripts, including whether they have been received and are under review, their content and status in the review process, criticism by reviewers, and their ultimate fate, to anyone other than the authors and reviewers.
In addition, no member of the Editorial Board may use data, lines of reasoning or interpretations in unpublished manuscripts for his or her own research, except with the authors' express written consent.
Our Editors should decline to use reviewers who submit reports that are of poor quality, erroneous or disrespectful, or that are delivered after the agreed deadline.
Editors should not publish or publicize peer-reviewers’ comments without permission of the reviewer and author. Our journal policy is to blind authors to reviewer identity and comments are not signed. Due to this, identity must not be revealed to the author or anyone else without the reviewers’ expressed written permission.
Confidentiality may have to be breached if dishonesty or fraud is alleged, but editors should notify authors or reviewers if they intend to do so.
Editors should do all they can to ensure timely processing of manuscripts with the resources available to them. If editors intend to publish a manuscript, they should attempt to do so in a timely manner and any planned delays should be negotiated with the authors. If a journal has no intention of proceeding with a manuscript, editors should endeavor to reject the manuscript as soon as possible to allow authors to submit to a different journal.
Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts should recuse themselves from editorial decisions if they have conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential conflicts related to articles under consideration. Other editorial staff members who participate in editorial decisions must provide editors with a current description of their financial interests or other conflicts (as they might relate to editorial judgments) and recuse themselves from any decisions in which a conflict of interest exists. Editorial staff must not use information gained through working with manuscripts for private gain.
Allegations of unethical conduct will be discussed initially with the Editor. In the event of continued dispute, the matter will be referred to the Editor’s institution for investigation and adjudication.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Manuscripts submitted to the Journal are subject to mandatory peer-review. Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology expects that reviewers will observe high standards with respect to publication ethics.
Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
Reviewers are expected to respond promptly to requests to review and to submit reviews within the time agreed. Reviewers’ comments should be constructive, honest, and polite.
Reviewers should keep manuscripts, associated material, and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers must not publicly discuss the authors' work and appropriate authors' ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy paper copies of manuscripts and delete electronic copies after submitting their reviews.
Reviewers must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work they're reviewing before its publication to further their own interests.
Reviewers should report any breach of publishing ethics they identify directly to the Editorial Office. The following may constitute a breach: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, manipulated images/photos/figures, biased reference list, duplicate publication, data from a previous publication reused without proper referencing, redundant publication, unstated conflicts of interest or funding, etc.
Allegations of unethical conduct will be discussed initially with the reviewer. In the event of continued dispute, the matter will be referred to the reviewer’s institution for investigation and adjudication.
Dealing with Allegations of Misconduct
We take seriously all possible misconduct. If an editor has concerns that a submitted article describes something that might be considered to constitute misconduct in research, publication or professional behavior, we will discuss the case in confidence among our editorial team.
If the case cannot be resolved by discussion with the author(s) and the Editor still has concerns, the case may be reported to the appropriate authorities. If, during the course of reviewing an article, an editor is alerted to possible problems (for example, fraudulent data) in another publication, the editor should immediately alert the Editor-in-Chief here: energy.journal@edu.kpi.ua.
Readers that suspect misconduct in a published article are encouraged to report this to the Editor-in-Chief here: energy.journal@edu.kpi.ua.
Procedure for Considering Complaints Concerning Violations of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics
The editorial office of the journal Power Engineering: Economics, Technique, Ecology adheres to the principles of academic integrity, transparency, and responsibility in accordance with international publication ethics standards, including COPE recommendations. All appeals concerning possible violations (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, improper authorship, duplicate publication, conflicts of interest, peer review manipulation, etc.) are considered regardless of the stage of the editorial process, both before and after publication.
A complaint must be submitted in writing to the editorial office, stating the essence of the alleged violation and, where possible, accompanied by supporting materials. After registration of the complaint, the Editor-in-Chief initiates a preliminary analysis; if necessary, an expert commission is established from among members of the editorial board or independent specialists. The author(s) of the article are necessarily informed of the substance of the allegations and have the opportunity to provide reasoned explanations within a specified period. The decision is made on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the materials, taking into account the principles of impartiality and confidentiality.
Following consideration of the complaint, the editorial office may reject the complaint as unfounded; recommend editorial or authorial corrections (erratum, corrigendum, addendum); publish an expression of concern; or initiate a full retraction of the article.
