- Philosophy of Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development
- Who Can Submit?
- General Submission Rules
- Formatting Requirements
- Copyrights for Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development
- Open Access Policy for Users
- Digital Archiving Policy and Download Statistics
- Attribution and Usage Policies
- General Terms and Conditions of Use
- Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
- The Responsibilities of Editors
- The Responsibilities of Reviewers
- The Responsibilities of Authors
Philosophy of Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development
Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development is a non-profit, open access, double-blind journal featuring peer-reviewed articles along with special editions featuring internally resourced materials and working papers. JRD was established in 2020 to provide an intellectual platform for policy solutions and research involving regional and rural development for an audience of academics and policy practitioners. JRD publishes original research articles, review papers, and communications that identify, explain, analyze and review real-world regional and rural development phenomena and issues.
Who Can Submit?
Anyone may submit an original article to be considered for publication in Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development provided he or she owns the copyright to the work being submitted or is authorized by the copyright owner or owners to submit the article. Authors are the initial owners of the copyrights to their works (an exception in the non-academic world to this might exist if the authors have, as a condition of employment, agreed to transfer copyright to their employer).
General Submission Rules
- Submitted articles cannot have been previously published, nor be forthcoming in an archival journal or book (print or electronic). Please note: "publication" in a working-paper series does not constitute prior publication.
- By submitting material to Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development, the author is stipulating that the material is not currently under review at another journal (electronic or print) and that he or she will not submit the material to another journal (electronic or print) until the completion of the editorial decision process at Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development.
- Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development does not publish research in which data is fabricated or falsified, duplicated, self-plagiarized or plagiarized. As a general rule, JRD does not except a manuscript that contains more than 20% similarity index. In addition, each source should not be cited more than 2%.
- After publication, authors have the right to post pre-print or post-print versions of their article online, including on their personal, departmental, or institutional repository pages.
- If you have concerns about the submission terms for Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development, please contact the editors.
Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development has no general rules about the formatting of articles upon initial submission. There are, however, rules governing the formatting of the final submission. See Submission Guidelines for details. Although bepress can provide limited technical support, it is ultimately the responsibility of the author to produce an electronic version of the article as a Microsoft Word or RTF file that can be converted to a PDF file. The bepress system will generate an initial .pdf file of the text, and the editors will later add supplemental figures into the .pdf file manually.
It is understood that the current state of technology of Adobe's Portable Document Format (PDF) is such that there are no, and can be no, guarantees that documents in PDF will work perfectly with all possible hardware and software configurations that readers may have.
Copyrights for Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development
Authors are allowed to hold the copyright without restrictions; however, they must agree to the following when submitting a manuscript for consideration:
I hereby grant to the USF Tampa Library and the journal publisher the nonexclusive, royalty-free right to distribute, display, and archive this work in a digital and/or print format for non-commercial educational and research uses during the full term of copyright. I warrant that I have the copyright to make this grant to the USF Tampa Library and the journal publisher unencumbered and complete. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce copyrighted material from other sources.
Following publication, the author’s rights will be protected under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International.
Open Access Policy for Users
Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Nonetheless, reproduction, posting, transmission or other distribution or use of the article or any material therein requires credit to the original publication source with a link to both the article and the license. This open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative's (BOAI) definition of open access.
Digital Archiving Policy and Download Statistics
As a service to the research community, the USF Libraries’ commitment to true open access to scholarly information extends to authors. This means that there are no article or submission charges for Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development. Since there is no charge for processing and/or submission, there is no waiver policy too. After publication, authors have the right to post pre-print or post-print versions of their article online, including on their personal, departmental, or institutional repository pages. The journal content is preserved in LOCKSS and Portico, in addition to the back-ups at USF and offsite via bepress ensuring that they will be secure and available into the future.
The number of downloads for the article should display beneath the Download button once it receives over 10 downloads, and authors will automatically receive a monthly email when they receive new downloads.
Attribution and Usage Policies
Reproduction, posting, transmission or other distribution or use of the article or any material therein, in any medium as permitted or by written agreement requires appropriate credit to the original publication source with a link to both the article and the Creative Commons License.
Following publication, the author’s rights will be protected under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International.
General Terms and Conditions of Use
Users of the Digital Commons @ University of South Florida website and/or software agree not to misuse the Digital Commons @ University of South Florida service or software in any way.
The failure of Digital Commons @ University of South Florida to exercise or enforce any right or provision in the policies or the Submission Agreement does not constitute a waiver of such right or provision. If any term of the Submission Agreement or these policies is found to be invalid, the parties nevertheless agree that the court should endeavor to give effect to the parties' intentions as reflected in the provision, and the other provisions of the Submission Agreement and these policies remain in full force and effect. These policies and the Submission Agreement constitute the entire agreement between Digital Commons @ University of South Florida and the author(s) regarding submission of the article.
Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
The Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development is dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and the Economic Policy Institute: Journal of Regional Development does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.
The following duties outlined for editors, authors, and reviewers are based on the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors to prevent any unethical behaviors. Editors, authors, and reviewers will also adhere to the JRD Policies.
The Responsibilities of Editors
Publication decisions: The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal will be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered. Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editors can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal’s scope. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Review process: There are seven steps for the JRD Review Process
a) After receiving a manuscript, the editorial team checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s “Author Guidelines” to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. For the double-blind peer review process, the team makes sure that the manuscript is blinded and does not include any identification information such as author(s) name, affiliation, acknowledgement, project or fund number etc. To ensure that the file’s “Properties” are also anonymized, all word documents are converted to pdf to block out any hidden author information. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point. The manuscript is also uploaded to Turnitin to check for similarities and address any arising issues prior to beginning the review process.
b) After the initial check, the Assistant Editors double-check that the manuscript is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be desk rejected without further review.
c) After this screening, Subject Area Editors send invitations to individuals they believe would be appropriate reviewers from the journal master reviewers list.
After this screening, the Assistant Editors send invitations to individuals they believe would be appropriate reviewers from the journal master reviewers list. Master reviewers list is a database which includes all the reviewers and their information such as their affiliation and keywords related to their specific research areas. While selecting reviewers, the Assistant Editors pay attention to not match affiliations of the author(s) and reviewers. Also, reviewers are selected from different countries to have a global perspective. The Assistant Editors carefully select reviewers who have enough subject matter expertise to do justice to the manuscript. Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline to review the manuscript. As responses are received, further invitations are issued or reminder emails are sent, if necessary, until the required number (3) of commitments is obtained.
d) After reviewers accept to review, they then complete the review and provide recommendations and comments. Reviewers build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject – or else with a request for revision (marked either major or minor) before it is reconsidered. If the reviews differ widely, the Assistant Editors may invite an additional reviewer to get an extra opinion.
e) The Editorial team combines the manuscript and the reviews in a single file and sends them to the Subject Area Editors to obtain their informed decision and feedback about the manuscript. The Subject Area Editors are subject matter experts who have expertise and in-depth knowledge in their specific area. The Subject Area Editors check the manuscript and the reviewers’ comments blindly before reaching one of the following decisions: (a) making a decision to accept the submission, (b) asking the author(s) for a revision, or (c) rejecting the submission.
f) After getting feedback from the Editor/Associate Editor, the Assistant Editors send a decision email to the author(s) including any relevant anonymized reviewer’ and Subject Area Editor’s comments. At this point, reviewers are sent an email letting them know the outcome of their review. All accepted papers go through at least one or two rounds of blind revisions under the guidance of the Subject Area Editors.
g) If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If rejected, Subject Area Editors base rejections on negative recommendations in the double-blind peer review process and author(s) receive comments from the editors that describe some of the weaknesses of their submission. Ideally, the author(s) consider these constructive comments and revise the paper before they send it to another journal. If the manuscript is sent back for a major revision, the author(s) are expected to revise the manuscript and prepare a revision report to each reviewer within 3-4 weeks. In this report, the author(s) are expected to address each reviewers’ comments and attached reviewers’ report to resubmission file. The Assistant Editors check the resubmitted manuscript to make sure that the revision was completed; reviewers’ comments were addressed; reviewers’ reports were attached, and the resubmitted file was blinded for the next round of review. After a successful screening, the resubmitted manuscript is sent to the reviewers. The process continues until the Subject Area Editor reaches an acceptance or rejection decision. If the manuscript is sent back for a minor revision, this might be handled by Subject Area Editors. The final version of the manuscript is read by the Associate Editor and Editor and uploaded to Turnitin to check for similarities before it is sent to publication.
Fair play: The editors should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality: The editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the author(s) is kept confidential. The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author(s), reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used by the editors or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should restrain themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Research misconduct and plagiarism policy: JRD takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high-quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. JRD takes such publishing ethics issues very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero-tolerance policy. To verify the originality of content submitted to our journals, we use Turnitin to check submissions against previous publications. As a general rule, JRD does not accept a manuscript that contains more than a 20% similarity index. In addition, each source should not be cited more than 2%.
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with the Editors-in-Chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
The Responsibilities of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions: The double-blind peer-reviewing process assists the editors and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author(s) may also assist the author(s) in improving the paper. Double-blind peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors and withdraw from the review process so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.
Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by author(s) should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors.
Standards of objectivity: Reviews of submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources: Manuscript reviewers must ensure that author(s) have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited by the authors in the reference section. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author(s). Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Contribution to the quality of work: The quality of the work includes originality of subject or application, appropriateness of methods, accuracy of mathematical equations and computations, validity of conclusions, organization of subject matter, clarity and communicational competence, so to be acceptable a manuscript must make a worthwhile and significant contribution to the advancement of knowledge. The reviewers’ professional, objective and thorough review process will contribute to the quality of work and enhance the quality of published research.
The Responsibilities of Authors
Reporting standards: Author(s) of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts will follow the submission guidelines of the journal. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Originality: Author(s) will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.
Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publications: In general, manuscripts describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by the journal should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The author(s) and editor(s) of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in research work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Data access and retention: Author(s) may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. In any event, author(s) should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
Specifying the used fund: All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Retraction/correction policy: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editors to retract or correct the paper. If the editors learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author(s) to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editors of the correctness of the original paper.
Copyright agreement: Author(s) should take into account the rights related to the publication and distribution of research.
Avoiding the practices that harm the environment: If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author(s) should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Author(s) should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed and the author should avoid the practices that harm the environment.
If you have any questions, please contact the editors .