Editorial Policies | Annals of Civil and Environmental Engineering

At the Annals of Civil and Environmental Engineering (ACEE), our editorial policies are designed with clarity, accountability, and responsibility at the forefront. We are committed to adhering to the highest standards defined by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and international open access mandates. Every editorial decision—whether initial screening, peer review, or final publication—is guided by ethics, transparency, and scholarly rigor.

Authorship & Contribution Integrity

ICMJE-compliant authorship: authors must have made substantial contributions to research, drafting or revising the manuscript, and approve all parts of the final version.
Contribution statements: Each manuscript must include a clear description of each author’s role to ensure transparency.
No ghost or honorary authorship: Only those who meet authorship criteria should be listed.

Conflict of Interest & Disclosure

Authors, reviewers, and editors are required to declare any potential conflicts—financial or otherwise—that might influence their work. These declarations are published alongside articles and are handled per COPE standards to uphold trust and objectivity.

Peer Review Process

ACEE employs a double‑blind peer review system: reviewers do not know author identities, and authors do not see reviewer identities. This approach reduces bias and promotes impartial evaluation. Decisions to accept, revise, or reject are made by the editorial board based on reviewers’ reports and ACEE’s scholarly standards.

COPE Membership & Ethical Oversight

As a registered member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ACEE follows its flowcharts and guidelines regarding disputes, corrections, retractions, and other ethical issues. Any allegations or questions are addressed with fairness, transparency, and confidentiality.

Handling Misconduct, Corrections & Retractions

If serious ethical violations occur—such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or failure to disclose conflicts—ACEE proceeds with investigations aligned with COPE guidance. Outcomes may include corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern, depending on severity and context.

Ethical Standards in Research

Human subjects or sensitive data: Must follow ethics committee protocols, informed consent, anonymization, and applicable legal standards.
Environmental or field studies: Must comply with local, national, and international guidelines, including impact assessments and permits.
Data availability: Authors are encouraged to deposit data according to FAIR principles and to include Data Accessibility Statements.

Editor & Reviewer Ethics

Editorial independence: Editors are recused from handling submissions where a conflict exists, and peer reviewers are assigned impartially.
Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must treat all manuscript content and reviewer comments as strictly confidential.
Professional conduct: Abusive or coercive behavior towards any contributor is prohibited and may result in removal from processes or boards.

Appeal Mechanisms

Authors may submit appeals or complaints regarding editorial decisions. Such appeals must include clear evidence or substantive new data. Appeals are reviewed by a separate editorial member and handled per COPE recommendations, ensuring fairness and clarity.