Journal Policies

Editorial Policies

Environmental Reports, an International Journal published by Research Floor, endorses and strictly adheres to the principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and other internationally recognized ethical bodies relevant to scholarly publishing. These standards ensure transparency, integrity, and rigor throughout the editorial, peer review, and publication processes. The journal’s editorial policies are reviewed and updated periodically to remain consistent with evolving international publishing and ethical guidelines.

Open Access Policy

The journal operates under a full open access model. All published articles are immediately and permanently accessible online without subscription fees or access barriers. Readers are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to, and use the full texts of articles for any lawful purpose, provided proper attribution is given to the original work. This policy supports the global dissemination of environmental knowledge and promotes equitable access to scientific research.

Copyright and Publishing Rights

Authors retain full copyright ownership of their published work without restrictions. By submitting and publishing in the journal, authors agree to make their work freely available for use, reproduction, and distribution in any format, provided that appropriate credit is given to the authors and the source. A formal copyright statement is included in all published formats, including HTML, PDF, and XML. The authors grant Research Floor the right of first publication through the completion of a License to Publish agreement before formal publication. Authors must confirm that the manuscript is original, not previously published, and not under consideration elsewhere. Written permission must be obtained for any third-party copyrighted material included in the manuscript.

Creative Commons License (CC BY)

All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. This license allows users to share, reuse, adapt, and build upon the published material for any purpose, including commercial use, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors and source, a link to the license is included, and any changes made are clearly indicated. No additional legal or technical restrictions may be applied that limit the rights granted by this license.

Article Processing Charges (APC)

The International Journal of Environmental Reports does not charge article processing fees (APCs) for manuscripts submitted and accepted before March 31, 2023. During this period, all publication costs are fully supported by the Research Floor. From April 1, 2025, an APC of USD 75 per accepted article (excluding applicable taxes) will be applied. Information regarding APC waivers and discounts for authors from low- and middle-income countries will be provided on the journal’s website.

Editorial Freedom

In accordance with the definition provided by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the International Journal of Environmental Reports fully recognizes and safeguards editorial freedom. The Editor-in-Chief holds complete authority over the editorial content of the journal and the timing of its publication. Research Floor respects this independence and does not interfere in the peer review process, manuscript selection, or editorial decision-making.

All editorial decisions are made solely based on the scientific validity, originality, relevance, and importance of the submitted work to the journal’s readership. Editorial judgments are exercised independently of commercial interests, publication fees, institutional affiliations, or any external influence from the publisher or sponsoring bodies.

Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Model

The journal employs a single-blind peer review model, in which the identities of reviewers are concealed from authors, while the authors are aware of the reviewers’ identities. All submitted manuscripts, except for certain Editorials authored by the editorial team, are subject to a rigorous peer review process designed to assess novelty, scientific quality, academic integrity, and relevance to environmental research and reporting.

Peer Review Process

Each manuscript undergoes an initial screening conducted jointly by the Managing Editor and an Academic Editor. During this stage, submissions are evaluated for plagiarism, compliance with ethical standards, alignment with the journal’s scope, and adherence to formatting guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected without further review.

Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to an Academic Editor, typically the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Editorial Board member, Guest Editor, or subject-matter expert. The Academic Editor evaluates whether the manuscript merits full peer review. Submissions deemed unsuitable due to insufficient quality or scope misalignment are rejected at this stage.

Manuscripts approved for peer review are evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with demonstrated expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers assess the manuscript’s scientific soundness, originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and contribution to environmental knowledge. Reviewers are expected to submit constructive and objective reports within 14 days of accepting the review invitation.

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Academic Editor makes one of the following decisions: Acceptance, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Rejection. Additional reviewer reports may be requested when initial reviews present conflicting opinions or when further expert input is necessary to support editorial decision-making.

Manuscripts Submitted by Editors and Guest Editors

Manuscripts submitted by members of the Editorial Board or Guest Editors are handled independently to avoid conflicts of interest. The submitting editor is excluded from all stages of the peer review and editorial decision-making process for their manuscript.

Special Issue Manuscripts

All manuscripts submitted to special issues, whether invited or unsolicited, are subject to the same rigorous peer review standards as regular submissions. The Editor-in-Chief retains overall responsibility for content quality and editorial oversight of special issues and supervises the work of Guest Editors to ensure adherence to the journal’s editorial and ethical policies.

Peer Reviewers

Selection of Peer Reviewers

Suitable peer reviewers are selected based on the following criteria:

• Reviewers must be independent of all authors and their affiliated institutions.

• Reviewers should have expertise in the same or closely related research area as the submitted manuscript and be capable of providing an impartial assessment of originality, validity, and scientific significance.

• Reviewers should have a recent publication record in the relevant field.

• Reviewers must be able to complete the peer review within the required timeframe.

Authors’ Suggestions for Reviewers

Authors are welcome to suggest potential reviewers, particularly when manuscripts require highly specialized expertise. However, the final decision to invite any suggested reviewer rests solely with the journal.

Authors should provide a list of suggested reviewers, including full name, institutional affiliation, email address, research expertise, and ORCID (if available). Suggested reviewers must meet the following conditions:

• Have recent publications in the subject area of the submitted manuscript;

• Have no recent publications or submissions with any of the authors;

• Not shared, nor have shared, the same institutional affiliation with any author;

• Not be a current or recent collaborator of any author;

• Have no close personal relationship with any author;

• Have no financial or other conflicts of interest related to the submitted work.

Notes for Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are expected to adhere to the highest ethical and professional standards. Reviewers should:

• Declare any relevant conflicts of interest before accepting a review invitation and withdraw if such conflicts exist.

• Maintain strict confidentiality and do not disclose any information about the manuscript or contact the authors without editorial permission;

• Destroy all copies of the manuscript after completing the review.

• Provide objective, unbiased, and constructive evaluations regardless of the authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, beliefs, or other personal characteristics;

• Report any suspected research or publication misconduct, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical breaches, to the editorial office.

• Refrain from requesting unnecessary citations of their own work unless scientifically justified.

• Submit review reports promptly or request an extension if needed.

Other Participants and Their Responsibilities

Managing Editor

The Managing Editor is responsible for the initial screening of submitted manuscripts, including scope suitability, formatting compliance, and plagiarism detection using iThenticate. The Managing Editor also assists in identifying suitable reviewers and coordinates communication among authors, reviewers, and Academic Editors throughout the review process.

Academic Editor

The Academic Editor evaluates whether a manuscript is suitable for peer review and makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection based on reviewer reports. The Academic Editor oversees the entire review process and assesses the academic merit and relevance of the manuscript.

The Academic Editor is typically the Editor-in-Chief. In certain cases, the Editor-in-Chief may assign another Editorial Board member, Guest Editor, or qualified external expert to act as Academic Editor. The name of the Academic Editor will be published alongside the final article.

Authorship

Authorship Criteria

The journal follows the authorship criteria defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authorship is limited to individuals who meet all of the following criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;

• Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content;

• Final approval of the version to be published.

• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to address questions related to accuracy or integrity.

Corresponding Author

For manuscripts with multiple authors, one author must be designated as the corresponding author. The corresponding author is responsible for all communication with the journal, coordinating responses among coauthors, submitting required documentation, and remaining available throughout the review, publication, and post-publication processes.

Dual and Group Authorship

The journal permits dual first or last authorship when authors have contributed equally. Equal contributions should be clearly stated in the Author Contributions section.

For group authorship, all listed authors must meet authorship criteria and be able to take public responsibility for the work. When a group name is used, the corresponding author must clearly identify individual members who qualify as authors.

Authorship Disputes and Changes

Authorship disputes should be resolved by the authors and their institutions, not the journal. Editors follow COPE guidance when addressing disputes. Changes to authorship are permitted only before manuscript acceptance and require written consent from all authors involved.

Author Contributions

Authors must include an Author Contributions statement using the CRediT taxonomy to clearly describe each author’s role in the research and manuscript preparation.

ORCID

Authors are encouraged to provide an ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) to ensure accurate attribution and linkage of scholarly work.

Acknowledgments

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged, with a brief description of their contributions.

AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Scientific Writing

AI and AI-assisted technologies may be used only to improve language clarity and readability. Such tools must not be listed as authors or replace essential research tasks such as data analysis, interpretation, or scientific decision-making.

Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of the manuscript. Any use of AI tools must be disclosed in the Declarations section using the following format:

AI-Assisted Work Statement
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [tool/service name] for [specific purpose]. The content was reviewed and edited by the author(s), who take full responsibility for the published work. During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [tool/service name] for [specific purpose]. The content was reviewed and edited by the author(s), who take full responsibility for the published work.

Failure to disclose AI use or misuse of AI technologies will be treated as scientific misconduct and handled in accordance with COPE, WAME, and ICMJE guidelines.

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest in scholarly publishing arise when an individual’s personal, professional, financial, academic, political, or religious interests may influence, or be perceived to influence, editorial judgment, peer review, or research reporting. Conflicts may be actual, potential, or perceived. The International Journal of Environmental Reports requires full disclosure of all conflicts of interest to ensure transparency, objectivity, and trust in the publication process.

The journal adheres to the guidance and flowcharts provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for the identification and management of undisclosed or disputed conflicts of interest.

Definition of Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment regarding a primary interest, such as the validity of research or integrity of publication, may be influenced by a secondary interest, including financial gain or personal advantage.

Financial relationships, such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, patents, grants, or paid expert testimony, are the most easily identifiable conflicts. Conflicts may also arise from personal relationships, academic competition, intellectual beliefs, or institutional affiliations.

Authors

Authors are required to include a Conflicts of Interest statement at the end of their manuscript disclosing any potential or existing conflicts relevant to the submitted work. If no conflicts exist, authors must state:
“The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.”

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all coauthors are aware of and comply with this disclosure requirement.

Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any relationships or circumstances that could represent a conflict of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. Reviewers should decline the review if a conflict prevents them from providing an impartial evaluation. Reviewers with a potential conflict that does not preclude objective assessment must disclose the conflict to the editorial office, which will consider it when making editorial decisions.

Editors, Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors, and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff must disclose any conflicts of interest related to manuscripts assigned to them in accordance with the journal’s Conflicts of Interest Checklist. When an editor’s objectivity may be compromised, they must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief will assign an alternative editor.

Manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board members or Guest Editors are managed independently, and the submitting editor is excluded from all editorial decisions and peer review processes.

Funding Disclosure

All sources of financial support must be disclosed under a “Funding” section at the end of the manuscript, including grant numbers where applicable. Authors must also describe the role of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Research Ethics

Human Subject Research

Ethical Approval

Research involving human participants or human-derived data or samples must have prior approval from an appropriate institutional ethics committee and must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki. Authors must include an Ethical Approval statement in the Declarations section of the manuscript.

Consent to Participate

Written informed consent must be obtained from all participants. Authors should confirm that consent has been obtained and archived and can be provided upon request.

Consent to Publication

For manuscripts containing identifiable personal data, images, or videos, authors must obtain explicit consent for publication and confirm this in the manuscript.

Animal Research

Studies involving animals must be approved by an institutional animal care and use committee and conducted in accordance with recognized ethical and welfare standards. Authors must include an ethical statement specifying the approving body and protocol.

Registration of Clinical Trials

Definition of Clinical Trials

The journal adopts the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) definition of a clinical trial as any research project that prospectively assigns human participants to a health-related intervention to study its effects on health outcomes.

Clinical Trial Registration Requirements

• All clinical trials must be registered.

• Registration must occur in a publicly accessible registry at or before the enrollment of the first participant;

• Accepted registries include those listed in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov;

• The registration number must be included at the end of the Abstract.

• Secondary analyses of registered trials should reference the original trial registration.

Authors unsure about registration requirements are encouraged to consult ICMJE guidance.

Confidentiality

Editors, authors, and reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts and associated correspondence as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose manuscript content or use unpublished information for personal advantage and must destroy manuscript copies after completing the review.

Reviewer identities are kept confidential under the journal’s single-blind peer review model. Reviewers may not contact authors or reveal their identities without editorial permission.

Manuscript details, review reports, and editorial correspondence must not be disclosed publicly without written consent. Rejected manuscripts are removed from the editorial system unless author permission is obtained for retention.

The journal does not share manuscript information with third parties before publication, except when investigating suspected misconduct. In such cases, all parties will be informed. Published manuscript records, including reviews and correspondence, are retained for a minimum of three years or longer where required by local regulations.

Availability of Data and Materials

To promote transparency, reproducibility, and reuse of research, the International Journal of Environmental Reports strongly encourages authors to make all data, materials, and protocols underlying their published research openly available wherever legally and ethically possible.

Authors may be requested to specify the location of the raw data supporting the conclusions of their manuscript and to clarify whether and how such data can be accessed by other researchers. During peer review or before final acceptance, authors may also be asked to provide access to datasets that were analyzed or referenced in the manuscript.

For studies involving image-based data, including western blots and gel images, authors must retain unprocessed, original image files. These files do not need to be submitted at the initial stage but may be requested during peer review or before manuscript acceptance.

Recommended Public Repositories (Examples)

Authors are encouraged to deposit data in recognized public repositories, including but not limited to:

• DNA/RNA Sequences: GenBank, BankIt, Sequence Read Archive (SRA), European Nucleotide Archive (ENA), DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ)

• Protein Sequences: UniProt Knowledgebase (UniProtKB)

• Genetic Variants: dbSNP, Database of Genomic Variants Archive (DGVa), dbVAR

• Sequencing and Microarray Data: NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO), ArrayExpress

• Macromolecular Structures: Worldwide Protein Data Bank, Protein Data Bank in Europe, EMDataBank

• Small Molecule Structures: Cambridge Structural Database (CSD), PubChem

Equivalent repositories relevant to environmental sciences, geospatial data, climate data, or ecological datasets are also acceptable.

Availability of Data and Materials Statement

All manuscripts must include an Availability of Data and Materials statement at the end of the manuscript. Examples include:

• Publicly available datasets:
  “The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the [repository name] repository, [persistent link or accession number].”

• Data available on request:
  “The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any qualified researcher.”

• Data included in the manuscript:
  “All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary materials.”

• Restricted-access datasets:
  “The datasets are not publicly available due to [legitimate reason]. Access requests should be directed to [name, email].”

• Third-party data:
  “The data analyzed in this study were obtained from [source]. Access requests should be directed to [name, email].”

• No datasets generated:
  “Not applicable.”

Citation Policy

Authors must appropriately cite all relevant literature that supports statements relying on external sources. Citations should be accurate, relevant, and representative of the global research landscape.

Authors are expected to:

• Cite original research rather than secondary review articles where possible;

• Ensure that cited references genuinely support the statements made;

• Avoid excessive citations to a single author, institution, country, or journal;

• Avoid unnecessary or redundant citations.

Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation is considered unethical and includes practices intended solely to inflate citation metrics. According to COPE, this includes:

• Excessive self-citation without scholarly justification;

• Excessive citation of articles from the journal to artificially increase journal metrics;

• Honorary or coerced citations, including citation stacking among authors, editors, or journals.

Manuscripts containing citation manipulation will be rejected. The journal reserves the right to notify authors’ institutions. Editors or reviewers found to engage in citation manipulation may be removed following an investigation. Legitimate self-citation is permitted when scientifically justified.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable and includes copying or reusing text, ideas, figures, or data without appropriate attribution. Self-plagiarism, including substantial reuse of previously published material without citation, is also prohibited.

All submissions are screened using iThenticate plagiarism detection software. Suspected plagiarism is investigated following COPE guidelines and may result in rejection, correction, retraction, and notification of the authors’ institutions where appropriate. Editors, reviewers, and readers are encouraged to report potential plagiarism at any stage.

Duplicate Publication

The journal publishes only original work. Manuscripts must not have been previously published or simultaneously submitted elsewhere, in any language.

Authors must disclose any related manuscripts under consideration or in press. Reuse of previously published content must be properly cited, and authors must clearly explain how the submitted work differs from earlier publications.

Acceptable Exceptions

The following do not constitute duplicate publication when properly disclosed:

• Preprints: Posting on recognized preprint servers;

• Theses and dissertations: Publicly available academic theses;

• Conference abstracts or posters: Provided they are cited and disclosed;

• Datasets: Prior public release of datasets;

• Clinical trial registry summaries: Posting summary results in public registries;

• Translations: With appropriate permissions, disclosure, and attribution.

If a published article is later identified as redundant, the journal will act in accordance with COPE flowcharts, including retraction where necessary.

Misconduct

The journal addresses all allegations of scientific misconduct in accordance with COPE, WAME, and ICMJE guidance.

Definition of Misconduct

Scientific misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data;

• Plagiarism and self-plagiarism;

• Improper authorship practices;

• Misappropriation of ideas obtained through peer review;

• Serious deviations from accepted research practices;

• Violations of ethical, legal, or regulatory requirements;

• Retaliation, concealment, or failure to report known misconduct.

In addition, failure to disclose conflicts of interest, funding sources, or duplicate submissions constitutes misconduct.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

The journal uses iThenticate to support originality checks and relies on editors, reviewers, and readers to report suspected misconduct. All allegations are investigated confidentially and handled case by case following COPE flowcharts. Appropriate actions may include correction, retraction, notification of institutions, or other remedies as warranted.

Crossmark, Corrections, and Retractions

The International Journal of Environmental Reports is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, and reliability of the scholarly record. In rare circumstances, articles may require correction or retraction. The journal also actively encourages post-publication discussion. All such actions are handled in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Crossmark

The journal participates in the Crossmark service provided by Crossref. Crossmark is a multi-publisher initiative designed to help readers identify the current and authoritative version of a published article.

By displaying the Crossmark logo, Research Floor commits to maintaining the published content and notifying readers of any updates, corrections, or retractions. By clicking the Crossmark logo, readers can verify the document’s status and access additional publication record information when available.

Corrections

In line with ICMJE recommendations, the journal recognizes that honest errors may occur in published research and has a responsibility to correct them promptly and transparently.

Corrections are handled according to the following principles:

• Corrections are published as soon as an error has been verified.

• Correction notices clearly describe the changes made and link to the original article;

• The original article remains accessible, with a prominent notice and link directing readers to the correction.

For articles published online ahead of issue assignment, corrections may be made directly to the article, provided that a clear audit trail is maintained indicating what changes were made and when. For articles already assigned to an issue, a separate correction notice is published and linked to the original article, without altering the published version.

Retractions

Retractions are issued only in exceptional cases and are intended to correct the scholarly record rather than to penalize authors. Retracted articles remain accessible to ensure transparency, with clear labeling indicating their retracted status.

In accordance with COPE guidance, retraction may be considered when:

• There is clear evidence that findings are unreliable due to major error, fabrication, or falsification;

• The article contains plagiarism or redundant publication.

• Material has been published without appropriate permission or authorization.

• Serious legal issues exist, including copyright infringement or privacy violations.

• The research reported is unethical.

• The peer review process has been compromised or manipulated.

• A major conflict of interest was not disclosed and may have influenced editorial decisions.

Retraction notices follow these standards:

• Retractions are clearly identified and linked to the original article.

• Notices include the article title, reason for retraction, and who initiated the retraction;

• Retractions are issued promptly to minimize potential harm to the scientific record.

Communication Before Publication

The journal supports responsible communication of research findings. Authors may respond to media inquiries related to preprints or conference presentations by providing clarification and appropriate context. Media coverage before publication does not affect editorial evaluation.

Authors are encouraged to clearly state when findings have not yet undergone peer review and that conclusions may change following formal evaluation.

Post-Publication Discussion

Readers, authors, and institutions are encouraged to notify the editorial office of potential errors or ethical concerns in published articles. The editorial office will investigate such matters with the support of Academic Editors and Editorial Board members and may issue corrections or retractions where appropriate.

The journal also welcomes scholarly dialogue through Commentaries or Letters to the Editor, which may be subject to editorial assessment or peer review.

Preprint Policy

The journal permits authors to post preprints of the original manuscript, accepted manuscript, or version of record on recognized preprint servers, institutional repositories, or personal websites.

Authors must disclose the existence of a preprint during submission and provide relevant identifiers (such as a DOI or accession number). After publication, authors should update preprint records to include a citation and link to the final published article.

Archiving and Preservation

To ensure long-term digital preservation, all published content is archived through recognized preservation services such as Portico or equivalent platforms. Authors are encouraged to deposit their articles in appropriate institutional or subject repositories in accordance with funder or institutional requirements.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions or raise concerns regarding the peer review process. Appeals must be submitted to the journal’s editorial office and should clearly outline the basis for reconsideration.

Appeals are reviewed objectively, and editors may seek additional expert input if necessary. The final decision after an appeal rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Complaints related to editorial handling or publication ethics are investigated in line with COPE guidelines. If a complaint involves the handling editor, it will be escalated to the publisher, Research Floor, for independent revi