Chapter 1. General Principles
1. The objectives of Ethical codes for researchers are to ensure integrity of submitted and published manuscripts on the Journal of EIA edited by KSEIA (JEIA) and to establish rules and principles for achieving systematically fair investigations and verifications in case of research misconducts to be suspected.
2. The code is applied to all authors submitting manuscripts, to reviewing peers, and to the editorial board members.
3. The code should be informed to the authors before submitting a manuscript and to peers before reviewing. Both authors and peers are expected to abide by the code at the time of submission and reviewing processes.
Chapter 2. Ethics for Authors
1. To submit an manuscript to JEIA(Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment), all authors should avoid following misconducts in the process of research and submission
2. Research misconducts is defined as falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, duplicate publication /simultaneous submission, and improper assignment of authorship.
1) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
2) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
3) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
4) Duplicate publication is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published.
5) Improprieties of authorship means improper assignment of credit, such as excluding others who contribute to the research work and including individuals as authors who have not made a contribution to the work
6) Simultaneous submissions refers to submitting the same research material to two or more journals and being reviewed almost at the same time. If the author submits a paper which has been rejected previously, such a paper will not be considered as Simultaneous submission.
3. Authors should submit a written consent for fulfilling research ethics along with the manuscript.
4. In case of finding serious errors in research outputs, authors should inform and request the KSEIA editorial board for a revision or withdrawal, even after making the decision to accept for publication or publishing
Chapter 3. Ethics for Peer Reviewers
1. All reviewers who are asked to review manuscripts by the editorial board must deliberate with diligence and inform assessment reports to the board by the deadline. If reviewers are not competent to review the manuscript reviewers should inform the editorial board immediately,
2. All reviewers must evaluate an manuscript based on objective criteria and not be hazed their judgment by the personal academic belief or any personal relationship with author.
All reviewers should not reject an manuscript due to the conflict with the auditor's point of view or interpretation. Also, reviewers should not reject an manuscript without specifying a sufficient basis without reading the paper correctly and thoroughly.
3. All Reviewers must respect the independence of authors as professional intellectuals. In assessment reports, reviewers should describe their examination and detailed explanation of a necessary part of modifications or supplements. Derogatory or insulting expression about the author should not be present in the assessment report.
4. All Reviewers should keep confidentiality about the manuscript in all the process of examination. Reviewers should neither let others read nor discuss about the manuscript except for receiving some specific advice. An manuscript still in process cannot be cited before its official publication.
Chapter 4. The Research Ethics Committee
1. The editorial board has the right of final judgment regarding research misconducts on the code of research ethics and has a role of the research ethics committee for reviewing and judging about the matter of research misconducts informed by general readers or board's own judgments. The judgment whether the code of ethics has been violated or not will be made by the approval of two-thirds vote of a majority of the editorial board members present at a meeting. Anyone of the editorial board members who may have conflict of interest must not be included in the judgment process.
2. The Research Ethics Committee, in case of violating the code of ethics, will make the judgment by examination through informants, researchers, judges, references, and evidence materials. The Committee should inform the fact of a violation to the researchers and provide enough opportunity for explanation after setting a given deadline. The Committee should not disclose the identity of informants and authors before making a final judgment
3. Researchers proven to be involved in research misconducts shall be prohibited from posting a paper as a first author or co-author in JEIA(Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment) for three years and the concerned paper will be deleted from the paper list of JEIA. The Committee shall make a public announcement of misconduct on its next edition of JEIA and the website of KSEIA. The Committee may notify the details of ethics violation and penalties to related organizations after completing the examination process.