Ethical Guidelines

These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and COPE`s Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editors.

1.- Organization of the Journal

1.1- Editorial Team

The Journal has an Editorial Team made up of an Editor, a Deputy Editor, an Editorial Board and an International Advisory Board.

The Editor and Deputy Editor are appointed by the General Assembly of the International Association of Cooperative Law for a four-year term, which may be extended indefinitely for equal periods. The Assembly may also decide to remove them and replace them with other members.

The Editorial Board is made up of professors and experts specialized in the field of Law of Cooperatives. At the request of the Editor of the Journal, they can help and advice on the publication of the manuscripts received. Likewise, they are consulted before a change in the focus and scope of the Journal.

The International Advisory Board is made up of professors and experts specialized in the field of Law of Cooperatives from more than twenty countries. At the request of the Editor, they can help and advice on the publication of the manuscripts received, as well as they can evaluate manuscripts received by the Journal and propose reviewers for manuscripts.

The Editorial Board, like the International Advisory Board, is appointed at the proposal of the Editor by the General Assembly of the International Association of Cooperative Law among professors and/or renowned professionals. And in the same way, the Assembly may decide to dismiss it at the proposal of the Editor of the Journal.

1.2. - General duties of the Management of the Journal

The Editor of the Journal should:

1. Constantly improve the Journal;
2. Ensure the quality of the articles published;
3. Maintaining the integrity of the academic record;
4. Champion freedom of expression;
5. Always be willing to publish corrections, and to do so if mistakes are detected, and to publish clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed. In this regard, it will observe the Guidelines for retracting articles published by COPE
6. Preserve anonymity of the reviewers in each case.
7. Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
8. Review and ensure the compliance of the publication ethics and malpractice statement together with the Editorial Board.

1.3.- Confidentiality and conflicts of interest of Editorial Team

The Editor, the Deputy Editor, the Editorial Board and the International Advisory Board of the Journal must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers and potential reviewers.

Unpublished articles may not be used under any circumstances in research by the members of the Management of the Journal, the Editorial Board, the International Advisory Board or any other person who may have access to it, unless it is counted with the express consent of the author. The information or ideas obtained through peer review by the reviewers must also be kept confidential and must not be used under any circumstances for personal benefit.

The members of the Management of the Journal, the Editorial Board or the International Advisory Board must refrain from reviewing manuscripts with respect to which they may find themselves in a situation of conflict of interest as a result of the existence of close relationships or connections with the authors or with their affiliated institutions.

2. - Relation with authors

2.1. - Promotion of ethical conducts

The Editor of the Journal should ensure to take appropriate measures to ensure the quality of articles published. Furthermore, the Editor should avoid the publication of plagiarisms or unoriginal works.

2.2. - Duties of authors

2.2.1.-Originality and plagiarism

The submitted manuscripts for publication must contain the data necessary to allow be quoted by other authors.The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off another`s paper as the author`s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another`s paper (without attribution). Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical conduct and is unacceptable. Editor of the Journal should take reasonably measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published article. Such measures will include contacting the author and giving due consideration of the respective complaint made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions o research bodies. And if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction or other type of note, even if it is discovered years after publication.

2.2.2.-Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of one article in more than one journal is justified only in exceptional cases. In any case, the primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

2.2.3.-Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in his/her own work. Information obtained privatelymust not be used or reported without explicit and written permission from the author.

2.2.4.- Mistakes in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author`s duty to promptly notify the Editor of the Journal and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article. If the editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original article.

2.2.5.-Authorship

The journal understands an author of a published work as an individual who has intellectually contributed to it in a significant form. Following the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), in order to be considered an author the following criteria must be met:

• Having contributed significantly to the conception and design, or the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data of the study that resulted in the article.
• Having contributed significantly to the writing or the critical revision of the text.
• To have approved the final version of the text submitted.

Those who do not meet these three criteria can only be mentioned in the acknowledgements.

All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed properly.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication in the Journal.

In order to avoid the risk of ghostwriting or fictive/purloined authorship it is advisable that before the document is submitted all authors agree upon their contributions and upon the order in which they will appear on the list of co-authors.

2.2.6.-Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should 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.

2.3. - Guidelines for authors

It shall be published and maintained properly updated the process of publication in the Journal so that the authors can have all the information you need about this, and only for duly justified and explained reasons may be altered. In particular, it shall be published peer review process.

2.4. - Decisions regarding the publication

Decisions regarding acceptance or rejection of an article for publication should be based solely on the quality of the article, concretely, in its clarity, originality, significance and its relevance to the objectives and scope of the Journal.The Editor of the Journalis responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Journal should be published.

Articles are never rejected because of their critical viewpoints of majority and/or expressed views by members of the Journal, provided that such articles are quality and justify their positions without disparaging other authors or researchers.

Moreover, the decision either of acceptance or of rejection is always communicated to the author in the time indicated on publication standards, and it must be justified, especially in case of rejection. This decision should not be changed later, unless there have been serious problems in the publication process that must be justified properly.

In any case, whatever change in the structure of the Journal does not affect previous decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles submitted for publication.

2.5. - Confidentiality and conflicts of interest

Editor, Assistant Editor and Editorial Board of the Journal must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor`s, assistant editor`s, members of the Editorial Board`s and reviewer`s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editor and assistant editor should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from close relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscripts. Editor should require all authors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.

3. - Peer review process

3.1.-Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review is an essential component of the Journal. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

The articles will be reviewed by two reviewers. It may be required the opinion of a third reviewer in case of discrepancies between the two assessments about the publication of the article in the Journal.

3.2.-Standard of conduct

Reviewers or referees should be conducted objectively, and should make judgments and assessments clear and precise, well-supported and objective enough. Similarly, they should avoid conflicts of interest of whatever type (personal, academic, commercial, etc.). In particular, reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published article of which they have personal knowledge.

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 immediately the editor of the Journal.

3.3.-Confidentiality

In any case the evaluation process is subject to strict conditions of confidentiality. Neither the reviewers nor the authors will know their identities, thus avoiding conflicts of interest that might occur. In this connection, the Editor of the Journal will have a strict duty of confidentiality. Similarly, any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized expressly by the editor of the Journal.

3.4.-Disclosure and conflicts 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. 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 close relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts.