1. Ethical rules applicable to the editorial and steering committee and to the reviewers of the journal Gestion et Management Public (GMP)
The Editorial and Steering Committee is responsible for all content published in the journal and seeks to constantly improve its scientific quality. It regularly renews its board of reviewers and its scientific council, as well as its own renewal, with a view to ensuring professional rigor. The term of office of the Co-Editors is three years, renewable once (maximum two terms per Co-Editor). It is important to mention the affiliations of the members of the editorial and orientation committee, the international assembly of evaluators and the scientific council on the journal’s website.
Ethical publication standards aim to ensure scientific publications, public confidence in scientific results and credit for authors’ ideas. To meet these requirements, GMP journal complies with the guidelines and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE: https://publicationethics.org ).
For GMP journal, knowledge is a global public good, which must be inclusive of researchers from all over the world. In line with this commitment, our journal encourage publishers, authors and reviewers to adopt epistemically fair citation practices, banishing racial, gendered or imperialist hierarchies from the production of knowledge.
The editorial and steering committee selects articles with a concern for impartiality. It pays particular attention to articles that contribute to scientific debate. Any article presenting a relevant criticism of an article published in the journal may be proposed for publication. Moreover, any author can propose a response to a criticism of his or her article in the journal.
Any sources of funding for the research presented in the journal are mentioned where appropriate. The editorial and steering committee is also committed to responding to complaints made by readers against the journal.
Articles are selected solely on their intellectual or scientific content, without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationalitý, academic affiliation, or political philosophy of the authors. The editorial and policy committee takes into account in its decisions the legal requirements for defamation, copyright infringement or plagiarism. The procedure for submitting an article to the journal is specified in a document posted on the journal’s website and updated regularly. Any financial charges for publishing an article must be explicitly mentioned in this document.
The missions of the reviewers are specified in a document published on the journal’s website and updated regularly. The editorial and steering committee guarantees the anonymity of reviewers.
The Editorial and Policy Committee seeks to identify and prevent unethical publication behavior. It is committed to investigating complaints against the journal in accordance with the procedure outlined below. The author is responsible for the alleged violation. The editorial and steering committee is always willing to publish corrections, apologies, explanations, if necessary.
A complaint about unethical publication practices may be made at any time by anyone to the Editorial and Policy Committee of the journal. The person lodging the complaint must provide the elements justifying his/her complaint. All complaints will be taken seriously by the Editorial and Policy Committee and processed to conclusion. All complaints will be handled regardless of the date of publication of the article concerned. Records of the handling of the complaint will be retained by the Editorial and Policy Committee. The following steps may be taken in the event of a complaint to the journal:
- Interview with the author, in the case of a misunderstanding of the ethical charter and the rules of publication of the journal
- Sending a letter to the author, detailing the infraction and having the value of a warning
- A letter is sent to the author’s employer
- Publication of an editorial informing the readership
- Withdrawal of the article from the journal and from the indexing databases, and information to the readership
- Embargo any new articles by that author for a specified period of time
- Refer to an outside organization or body with authority to deal with the complaint
With the exception of any book reviews, which are reviewed by the reviewer (and discussed with the editorial and policy committee members), all articles submitted to the journal are double-blind: the author does not know the identity of the reviewers, and the reviewers do not know the identity of the author. There are at least two reviewers for each article.
In case of doubt or differences of opinion between the reviewers, additional opinions may be requested by the editorial and steering committee. Articles that are contrary to the editorial line of the journal may be rejected by the Editorial and Orientation Committee without an evaluation report (desk reject). Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editorial and Policy Committee makes one of four decisions:
- Acceptance of the text, as submitted to the journal
- Acceptance subject to major changes
- Acceptance subject to minor changes
- Rejection
In the latter case, the Editorial and Orientation Committee will make a final decision, either positive or negative, depending on whether the author has taken into account the suggestions and comments made by the reviewers. Any text accepted, from the first submission, or after modification by the author, will be the subject of editorial work carried out in consultation with the author. In any case, the editorial and orientation committee takes into account, in its decisions, the legal requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement or plagiarism.
Reviewers are selected for their intellectual and scientific expertise. They are responsible for evaluating manuscripts solely on their content, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, academic affiliation or political philosophy. Reviewers’ opinions must be objective. Reviewers are required to report all articles that have a similarity to the article submitted to the journal. Reviewers should report any significant publications related to the article that have not yet been cited.
Members of the editorial and steering committees and reviewers must recuse themselves if they have a conflict of interest with one of the authors or with the content of the manuscript being reviewed. In addition, any reviewer who knows that he or she is not qualified to review a manuscript, or who knows that he or she cannot review a manuscript in a timely manner, is required to notify the Editorial and Policy Committee and to recuse him or herself.
GMP journal welcomes appeals of the editor’s decisions. However, the author(s) will be required to provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the Editor-in-Chief’s and reviewers’ comments. An appeals committee made up of the journal’s former editors-in-chief deals with appeals received by the journal.If you wish to appeal a journal editor’s decision, please submit a letter of appeal to this appeal board, clearly explaining the reasons for the appeal. You will need to detail the reasons why you disagree with the decision and provide specific responses to any comments made by the editor and/or reviewers that contributed to the rejection decision. In particular, you can provide any new information or data you would like the journal to consider, or evidence if you believe a reviewer has made technical errors in assessing your manuscript. You can also provide evidence if you think a reviewer may have a conflict of interest.
After receiving the appeal, the Appeals Committee may interview the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors who carried out the peer review of the original submission. The appeal board may confirm the decision to reject the manuscript, invite submission of a revised manuscript, or request further peer or statistical evaluation of the original manuscript. Appeal board members will consider only one appeal per article, and all decisions on appeals are final.
received for review are treated as confidential. No information about a manuscript submitted to the journal is disclosed to anyone other than the author(s), potential reviewers, and possibly the publisher. Reviewers agree not to retain or copy a manuscript received for review.
Data presented in submitted articles must not be used in the research work of any member of the editorial and policy committee or reviewer without the express written consent of the author.
Authors are invited to complain and request explanations if they perceive a breach of applicable policies and ethical guidelines. Authors may lodge complaints by sending an e-mail to gmp_auteurs@airmap.fr, specifying the title and references of the article concerned (Article Identification Number or, if published, DOI).
An author or any other academic may lodge a complaint about any issue, including the following:
• Plagiarism
• Copyright infringement
• Deception in search results or erroneous search results
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Bias in the evaluation process
• Unsatisfactory peer review comments
• Authorship problems
• Complaints handling policy
When a complaint is received, an acknowledgement is sent to the complainant with the assurance that appropriate action will be taken.
The investigation procedure is initiated by the journal’s management team, in accordance with the editor-in-chief’s instructions. Once the investigation is complete, a meeting is held with a full report on the complaint. The decision is taken and forwarded to the academic concerned via the e-mail address he or she has provided.
We regard complaints as an opportunity to improve our manuscript handling policy.
2. Ethical rules applicable to academic authors of the journal Gestion et Management Public (GMP)
Authors must guarantee the originalitý of their article and not publish any text that would amount, in any form, to counterfeiting as defined by the Intellectual Property Code. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute behavior contrary to the ethics of scientific publication; they are therefore unacceptable.
Authors agree not to submit an article that has been previously published in another journal or a new article that is based exclusively on work already published elsewhere. Similarly, authors agree not to submit their article to several journals at the same time.
All citations (or use of other authors’ work) must be identified as such and accompanied by the appropriate references, presented in the format usually used by the journal. If the author wishes to use information obtained privately (conversation, correspondence), every effort should be made to obtain permission from the source of the information.
The list of authors should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, conduct, or interpretation of the study presented in the text submitted to the journal or in the writing of that text. All authors should be listed, with their affiliation, in alphabetical order or according to their degree of involvement in the conduct of this study or writing of this text. The author who is in contact with the journal must ensure that only appropriate co-authors are included in the list of authors, and that all co-authors, after seeing and approving the final version of their paper, agree to submit this article for publication.
Authors agree not to exceed the rules of scientific debate in the articles submitted and not to make defamatory statements that could be construed as an attack on the reputation of a third party.
Authors must declare any potential conflict of interest, professional or financial. All sources of non-public funding for the research presented in the submission must be explicitly stated.
Any author who discovers, after publication, a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own work must inform the journal’s editorial and policy committee without delay and cooperate with the committee in issuing an erratum or withdrawing the article.
Upon request from the editorial and policy committee, authors may be asked to provide raw data related to their research. If the article is based on clinical cases involving real-life situations, the author undertakes to respect the anonymity of the persons referred to, or to obtain their explicit agreement.
Authors agree, when submitting their article, to authorize its distribution in digital format – notably via the cairn.info and EBSCO platforms as well as on the journal’s website. It is strongly recommended to authors to make their article available on HAL.
Authors undertake to respect all the rules set out above by signing the ethical charter posted on the GMP journal website. For all new submissions, the team charter must be signed by the corresponding author on behalf of all authors, and posted on the GMP journal submission platform.