URVIO, as a member of the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO), is committed to promoting ethical behavior as a scientific publication (https://www.flacso.edu.ec/portal/pnTemp/PageMaster/lu0e5rhzxgogyy044rl8ku4x711brc.pdf). It also takes as reference the principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct).

The International Scientific Council of URVIO, Latin American Journal of Security Studies, will ensure that editors, peer reviewers, and authors respect ethical principles during all phases of the entire editorial process. In this perspective, we detail our norms to the entire academic community.

About authors and authorship:

• Articles that send to URVIO must be originals and unpublished.
• Copyright and access. Authors keep the copyright and give to URVIO the right of the first publication (License CC BY-ND 3.0 of Creative Commons). For more information, see section 6.2 in Normative for authors. Publishing in the journal is free and all single articles and full numbers are available in open access.
• Refrain from repeated or multiple submission of articles to different editorials or publishers. This is a reprehensible behavior in the dissemination of academic research.
• Consideration to original sources used in your article. Bibliographical references must be correctly and completely indicated.
• Mistakes in published articles. When author recognizes a mistake or an inaccuracy in his or her work, must report to URVIO editorial team and should provide necessary information for corrections.
• The researcher commits to check the most actual and prominent academic literature on the researched topic.
• Order the signature of authorship according to the level of responsibility and involvement in the article. The authors guarantee the inclusion of those persons who have made a significant scientific and intellectual contribution in the conceptualization and planning of the work, the interpretation of the results, and in its drafting as well.
• Access and retention. If the editors consider it appropriate, the authors of the manuscripts should provide the sources or information on which the article is based. These data will be kept by the editors for a reasonable period of time after publication and eventually made accessible.
• Conflict of interests and divulgation. All authors must inform that there are no conflicts of interest that may have influenced the results obtained or the proposed interpretations. The authors also have to indicate any funding for research projects from universities and/or civil society.

About peer reviewers:

• Contribution to the editorial decision. The reviewers assume the commitment to do a critical and constructive review, considering high canons of scientific quality.
• Objectivity. The blind peer review will be done objectively, without any personal judgment. They also have an obligation to inform publishers if substantial parts of the work have already been published or are under review for another journal. At the same time, they commit to indicate with precision the main bibliographical references possibly forgotten by the author.
• Report whether conflicts of interest exist. If an evaluator or reviewer has any personal or financial opinion or interest that might affect his or her objectivity in his or her evaluation, he must refrain from participating in the editorial process.
• Anonymity. Reviewers will never know the authors (only through the OJS code) and also will not have knowledge of the identity of the other blind pair.
• Confidentiality. Upon completion of the evaluative process, the reviewer will refrain to disclose the read to external agents to URVIO.
• Conformity about journal deadlines. The reviewer is responsible for notifying publishers if there are any drawbacks to delivering the evaluation on time.

About editors responsibilities:

• Honesty. Guarantee transparency in the processes of evaluation, edition, and publication of each issue.
• Confidentiality. The editorial team will maintain anonymity among reviewers and authors throughout the process.
• Answering concerns through email. Questions and clarifications requested by authors, reviewers or anyone interested in URVIO, will be answered promptly.
• Facilitate corrections. Clarifications and corrections will be published through the website of the journal.
• Diffusion. The published number will be disseminated to repositories, databases and social networks.
• Publication process. The editors will choose with a critical perspective the most capable reviewers.
• Conflict of interests and divulgation. The editors are committed to not use in their own research, information included in the articles sent for a review, without authors consent.
• Conformity about journal deadlines. The editors are responsible for complying with deadlines for reviews and the publication of accepted papers, to ensure fast dissemination of their scientific results. Also, they commit themselves to comply published times (maximum of 4 weeks in the estimation/rejection since the manuscript was received in the Revision Platform), and a maximum of 12 weeks from the beginning of the double-blind review process.

Procedures for dealing with conflicts of interest. Transparency policy.

Our editorial process is based on good faith. The Editorial Board of the journal trusts what the authors say, and the objectivity/impartiality of peer reviewers. The authors, in turn, should trust the integrity of the editors and reviewers. 

In case of inappropriate behaviors

• When identified, they could be communicated to the editor and to the Editorial Board of the journal, by any natural person.
• The complainant has the duty to provide sufficient evidence for a formal investigation. All denouncement must have an open process until a decision is reached.

Research process.

• The editor should initiate an investigation and find legal advice in the institution responsible for the journal.
• Collect the evidence and maintain anonymity at all times, to avoid leaks in the scientific context.  

  Minor infractions.

• It is possible to give a solution without the need for greater transcendence. The author will be able to respond to the accusations.

Major infractions.

• It will have as a first step, to notify the employers of the accused. In the second step, the author or reviewer will be notified by letter that the behavior has been detected, hence a violation of the Ethic Code to the journal.

Consecuences

• Publication of an editorial in the journal in which inappropriate conduct is detailed.
• The formal removal of the publication of the journal.
• Official prohibition about contributions of an individual/author for a defined time.  

 Download PDF           Descargar PDF