Fair decisions. Confidential review. A trustworthy scholarly record.

Authorship carries both credit and responsibility for the published work.

• Every listed author must have made a substantial intellectual contribution, participated in drafting or critical review, approved the final version and accepted accountability for the work.
• The corresponding author confirms the author list, order, affiliations and approval of all co-authors before submission.
• Contributions should be described transparently using appropriate CRediT contributor roles; contribution statements do not replace authorship criteria.
• Contributors who do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged with their permission.
• Requests to add, remove or reorder authors after submission require a written explanation and agreement from all affected authors. The editor may investigate disputed changes.

JEERESD considers only original work that is not simultaneously under review elsewhere.

• Text, data, images and ideas taken from other sources must be accurately cited and, where necessary, used with permission.
• Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate image manipulation and citation manipulation are prohibited.
• Related manuscripts, preprints, conference versions and reused datasets must be declared at submission so that overlap can be assessed transparently.
• Suspected misconduct may lead to review suspension, rejection, notification of relevant institutions, correction, expression of concern or retraction, depending on the evidence and stage of publication.

Research must respect participants, communities, animals and ecosystems throughout the study lifecycle.

• Studies involving human participants must identify the approving ethics committee, approval reference and informed-consent procedure, or justify a recognised exemption.
• Identifiable personal information or images require explicit consent for publication.
• Animal research must state ethical approval, welfare safeguards and compliance with applicable institutional and national standards.
• Community-based and Indigenous-knowledge research should describe meaningful engagement, permissions, benefit sharing and safeguards against extractive or harmful practices.
• Editors may request protocols, consent forms, approvals or additional documentation when ethical compliance is unclear.

Transparency allows readers and editors to assess factors that could influence a manuscript.

• Authors must disclose relevant financial, professional, institutional and personal relationships and identify every source of funding or material support.
• Funders’ roles in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing and publication decisions must be stated.
• Reviewers and editors must disclose potential conflicts and decline or recuse themselves when impartial assessment could reasonably be questioned.
• Article-processing charges, waivers, sponsorship or institutional relationships do not influence editorial decisions.

Published conclusions should be supported by transparent methods and accessible evidence whenever ethically and legally possible.

• Every research article must include a data-availability statement explaining where supporting data can be accessed or why access is restricted.
• Authors should preserve original data, analysis files, protocols and documentation and provide them confidentially if needed to resolve editorial questions.
• Methods, software, code, instruments and statistical procedures must be described sufficiently for critical evaluation and reasonable replication.
• Sensitive human, ecological or community data must not be shared in ways that breach consent, privacy, law or conservation safeguards.

Human authors remain fully responsible for every part of the submitted and published work.

• AI systems cannot be listed as authors because they cannot accept responsibility, approve publication or manage conflicts of interest.
• Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in writing, analysis, images, code or other research tasks, naming the tool and purpose where relevant.
• Authors must verify accuracy, originality, citations, permissions and absence of confidential information in all AI-assisted content.
• Editors and reviewers must not upload manuscripts or review material into external AI systems when confidentiality cannot be assured or author permission has not been obtained.

The permanent scholarly record must remain accurate, transparent and linked to any post-publication action.

• Minor errors that do not affect interpretation may be corrected through a clearly identified correction notice.
• Serious but unresolved concerns may lead to an expression of concern while an investigation is underway.
• Articles may be retracted when findings are unreliable, publication is redundant, research is unethical or serious misconduct is established.
• Notices will identify the affected article, explain the reason as clearly as permitted, remain freely accessible and be linked to the published record.
• Retraction is intended to correct the literature, not to punish authors; authors’ agreement or disagreement with the notice may be recorded.

Concerns are assessed fairly, confidentially and without retaliation.

• Authors may submit one reasoned appeal that identifies a material error in the editorial or review process and provides supporting evidence.
• Disagreement with a decision alone is not sufficient; appeals do not guarantee reconsideration or external re-review.
• Complaints should state the manuscript or article reference, relevant facts and the remedy requested and should be sent to jeeresd@jeeresd.online.
• Whenever possible, an editor who was not responsible for the disputed decision will assess the matter. A person named in a complaint will not decide its outcome.
• Allegations of misconduct may be referred to authors’ institutions, funders or appropriate bodies when independent investigation is required.