Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The aim of HABITAT Journal is to provide shared information on the latest research trends and experiments. The information is intended as primary as well as supplementary resource and knowledge for agro-industry sector, society, and policy-makers (goverment).

The scopes of published papers of HABITAT Journal are in the area of:

  1. Agribusiness management
  2. Economics of agriculture
  3. Community development
Submitted manuscripts should be original either the result of researches or critical thoughts of the mentioned scopes.

 

Section Policies

 

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts are reviewed by an editor and members of the editorial board or qualified international reviewers. Decisions will be made as soon as possible, and the manuscripts are returned completed with reviewers’ comments to the authors within four weeks. The editorial board will re-review manuscripts that have been accepted pending revision. Preview form

 

Publication Frequency

HABITAT Journal is published in a single volume every year. Each volume consists of three issues, which is normally published on April, August, and December. In addition, special issues consisting of a collection of papers dealing with a specific theme (e.g. proceeding of scientific conferences) may also be published. Organizers of scientific conferences/workshops are welcomed to contact the editor for related information.

 

Open Access Policy

HABITAT Journal provides immediate open access to its contents on the principles of providing research freely available to the public to support a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Frequency

HABITAT Journal is published in a single volume every year. Each volume consists of three issues, which is normally published on April, August, and December. In addition, special issues consisting of a collection of papers dealing with a specific theme (e.g. proceeding of scientific conferences) may also be published. Organizers of scientific conferences/workshops are welcomed to contact the editor for related information.

 

Publication Ethics

HABITAT Journal is the official scientific publication of the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Brawijaya. The journal is published three times per year, with three numbers each volume, containing scientific research, review, and/or original ideas about social economics agriculture which have never been published previously. Statement scientific code of conduct is a statement of the code of conduct of all parties involved in the process of scientific journal publications, namely managers, editors, peer reviewer (mitra bestari), and authors. Statement of the code of ethics of scientific publication is stipulated in the Regulation of LIPI Number 5 of 2014 on the Code of Ethics on Scientific Publications, which basically Code of Ethics on Scientific Publication essentially upholds the three values of ethics in publications:

Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in the management of publications.

Justice, which gives the right of authorship to the beneficiary as the author; and 

Honesty, which is free of duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in the publication.

Notes:

Fabrication is the act of making up the data from the truth (falsification of research results) that includes composeing, recording and/or announcing the results without proof has conducted the research process;

Falsification is changing the data which is intended to match the desired researchers (falsification of research data) that includes manipulating research materials, equipment or process, altering or not including data or results such that the research was not presented accurately as in the research note;

Plagiarism adalah theft of ideas, thoughts, process, objects and research, both in the form of data or words, including material obtained through limited research (confidential), the proposed research plan and manuscript of others without appropriate credit;

Duplication is publishing the findings as genuine in more than one (1) channels without any improvements, updates to content, data, and/or referring to previous publications;

Fragmentation is publishing fractions of 1 (one) findings which were not as the result of incremental research, multi-disciplinary and different perspective.

(The main referral of Regulation of LIPI Number 06/E/2013 on the Code of Ethics Researcher)

 

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

Data Access and Retention: Authors are 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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant the manuscript or manuscript describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical research publishing and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The authors should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use. If research involves human subjects, authors must be ensure the manuscript contains statement about all of procedures which are compatible with law and guidelines from approval of relevant constitutional and institutional committee. Authors must enclose statement in manuscript that the informed consent has been obtained for the use of human as the subject experiment. Private authorization from the human subject must be played.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest must be disclosure consisting of work, consultant, ownership holdings, honorarium, expert testimony, patent/register application, and grant or another fund. Potential conflict of interest must be disclosure at the earliest possible stage.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or publisher cooperates with the third part which published manuscript with significant error, author should retract or revised manuscript or notify the editor to correct the paper. (Based on Elsevier Policy and COPE’s Best Practice for Editor Guidelines).

 

Duties of Editor

Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. 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. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.

Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented and consent for publication where applicable. Editor is forbidden to reveal all off manuscript information to everyone except work owner, reviewer, potential reviewer, editorial board, and corresponding publisher.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest. Information or excellent idea that gets from review should be confidentially protected and not use for personal advantage. The editor should resign (should ask co-editor, editor association or another member from editorial board to review and consideration) from the manuscript that has conflict of interest as a result from competitive manuscript, collaborative, or another correlation or connection with one of authors, companies, or (maybe) the institutions which are connected with manuscript. The editor should order all of contributor to reveal conflict of interest and publishing evaluation if conflict of interest reveal after publication. If needed, another act as possible as publication should be repealed or apologize.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigation: The Editor must take responsible steps when found ethic problems about submitted manuscript at correlation with publisher (or society). These steps generally involve contact the author and give consideration from every problem or claim, furthermore communication to the institution and the research institution and if the problem has been discussed, so that publication evaluation, recall, apologized, or another relevant noted. Every report about unethical issue in publication should continue to be considered although it was found a few years after publication.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewers should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript. Reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

HABITAT Indexed by :