Skip to content

Ethical standards

Editorial ethical rules and good practices

Classiques Garnier is an independent French publishing house that specializes in publishing scholarly works. It publishes economics and social sciences journals that cover the latest developments on topics including the history of economic thought; the dynamics of food systems in France and around the world; the relationship between businesses, finance, and society; and multidisciplinary studies on the theme of services. Through these publications, Classiques Garnier seeks to advance knowledge, learning, and research in these areas and is committed to improving knowledge sharing at a global level. The primary aim of the journals it publishes is to advance academic discussions within their disciplines.

All of these journals use double-blind peer review, guaranteeing the intellectual integrity of the articles that are published. Publishing is an act that involves several parties, each of which ensures the quality and originality of the selected and published works. Each and every actor in the chain, whether it is the editor-in-chief, a peer reviewer, an author, or a member of the editorial staff, should adhere to the ethical standards defined in this charter and should be committed to enforcing them, from the submission of an article to its publication.

Classiques Garnier is committed to respecting and ensuring respect for intellectual good practices and ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. Below you will find a summary of our main expectations of editors-in-chief, peer reviewers, authors, and editorial staff as well as the procedures in place should situations arise that involve proven intellectual acts of fraud, such as plagiarism.

I Definition of expected ethical practices

1. Responsibilities of editors-in-chief

We expect editors-in-chief to be objective and fair when carrying out their duties. The selection criteria for articles must therefore be applied without discrimination based on authors’ gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity, or geographical location.

We also expect articles that were funded by grants or that were part of a special issue to be selected with the same rigor as other articles, in order to guarantee a principle of selection based on academic merit alone.

We expect editors-in-chief to apply and abide by appropriate procedures in the event of complaints about the quality or ethics of an article. Doing so will entail giving the author concerned the opportunity to respond to any complaint made against his or her work and examining all complaints made, regardless of the date on which the text was approved. It is advisable to keep all documents dealing with such complaints, particularly email exchanges.

2.      Responsibilities of peer reviewers

The role of peer reviewers is to contribute to the decision-making process and to help improve the quality of the document submitted for review by examining the manuscript objectively.

Peer reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of any information provided by the editor-in-chief or the author. Peer reviewers must therefore not retain any copies of the manuscript submitted for review.

Peer reviewers must alert the editor-in-chief and the editorial staff of any submitted or published content that they believe to be the product of plagiarism or intellectual dishonesty.

Peer reviewers must also be aware of any potential conflict of interest that may exist between themselves and the authors whose work they are to review. If such a situation arises, it is the responsibility of the peer reviewer to report it to the editor-in-chief and to relinquish the task of reviewing the author’s work.

3.      Responsibilities of authors

Contributing authors have a responsibility to guarantee the originality and the intellectual integrity of their work. They must therefore provide assurance that their contribution has not already been published, whether on the internet or by another publisher, and that they have not submitted their manuscript to another publisher or journal for review. Authors must also cite the work of their colleagues correctly when reproducing passages of it or when supporting their own reasoning using existing works.

Authors are required to declare any potential conflict of interest—that is, if they have any interests that could be considered or perceived as having undue influence on their work and/or influencing the publication of their work.

Finally, authors are required to notify the editor-in-chief or the editorial staff if they identify a significant error in their publication and to work with the editor-in-chief and the editorial staff to publish an erratum, an addendum, a correction notice, or to retract the publication if this is necessary.

4.      Responsibilities of editorial staff

Classiques Garnier and the journals that it publishes must ensure that good practices are maintained in accordance with the standards detailed in this charter. Editorial staff must provide assurance that they subscribe to the principles set out above.

 

II Procedures in place for dealing with unethical behavior

1.  Identification of unethical behavior

Misconduct and unethical behavior should be identified and brought to the attention of the editor-in-chief and editorial staff at any time and by anyone. This type of behavior can include, but is not limited to, the examples cited in section one of this charter.

Anyone who informs the editor-in-chief or the editorial staff of such conduct must, however, provide sufficient evidence so as to allow an investigation to be launched. All allegations must be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a decision or conclusion is made.

2.      Inquiry

The initial decision must be made by the editor-in-chief, who must consult the editorial staff. Evidence against the accused party must be collected with the greatest discretion, so as to avoid any allegations spreading beyond those who need to know about them.

3.      Minor offenses

In the case of misconduct deemed to be minor, the issue should be handled without the need for a full inquiry. In any case, authors should be given the opportunity to respond to any accusations made against them.

4.      Serious offenses

Serious misconduct may require employers (university president or board of directors, research unit director, and so forth) of the author to be informed. The editor-in-chief and the editorial staff must decide whether or not it is appropriate to include the employers in the inquiry.

5.      Sanctions incurred (in order of increasing severity)

  • Informing the author or the peer reviewer and notifying him or her of the facts, when there seems to be a misunderstanding or a bad application of rules relating to good editorial practices.
  • Sending of a warning letter in due form to the author or to the peer reviewer to inform him or her of the misconduct found.
  • Publication  of a formal notice in the journal detailing the misconduct.
  • Publication of an editorial in the journal detailing the misconduct.
  • Sending of a formal letter to the management of the department or the research unit to which the author or the peer reviewer belongs.
  • Formal withdrawal of the work from the journal as well as the sending of a letter to the employer of the author or the peer reviewer informing it of the misconduct found.
  • Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from the individual for a defined period of time.
  • Reporting of the case and the results of the inquiry to a professional organization or to a higher authority so as to launch a second inquiry and apply additional sanctions.