POLICIES

Focus and Scope
Open to research articles about social development and resource management in the Philippines from researchers worldwide. Social Development and Resource Management Journal publishes articles about resource management and conservation, biodiversity, and social and technological development in the Philippines.


Peer Review System
          • Peer Reviewer
          • Qualification
                    a. Published researcher from the field
          • Term
                    a. Per issue and renewable
          • Roles/Functions
                    a. provide a detailed, objective report on the merits of an article;
                    b. identify flaws in the design of the research, and in the analysis and interpretation of results;
                    c. highlight ethical concerns;
                    d. comment on the appropriateness of the literature cited; and
                    e. offer their view on the suitability of an article for

Dr. Mae Flor G. Posadas – Social General Science                                                                                                                                                                                                Central Philippines State University, Kabankalan, Negros Occidental

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

  1. Review papers within your field of expertise
  2. Any reviewer who feels he/she is not competent to review a particular manuscript must return it to the editor immediately.
  3. A reviewer must make available to the journal, personal and professional details that are truthful and exact representation of their competency.
  4. Reviewers must treat manuscript work with utmost confidentiality and must not make others aware of the details of any manuscript they review during or after the process of review.
  5. Reviewers should not use information from the manuscript for their own benefit or that of other bodies before they are published.
  6. Reviewers must be impartial, desisting from being provocative and from making defamatory or offensive personal comments.
  7. Reviewers must make known any competing or conflict of interest, be it personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious. Where they are not sure, the reviewer should seek clarification from the editor.
  8. Reviewers should decline to review if the manuscript under review is very similar to one they have in preparation or under consideration at another journal.
  9. If there is evidence of plagiarism, duplicate submission to another journal, unethical research design or excessive fragmentation of results to achieve multiple publications of manuscript, the reviewer should comment on them.
  10. The reviewer’s identity must be kept anonymous throughout the review process, unless they have authorized disclosure
  11. The reviewer must report to the editor any similarities between the manuscript under review and any published paper submitted to the same or another journal.
  12. The reviewer must not make known to others, without the consent of the editor or author, any unpublished information, arguments or interpretations contained in the manuscript under consideration.
  13. A reviewer should not review a manuscript of an author with whom he/she has a personal or professional relationship, if such relationship will affect the judgment of the manuscript.

Ethical Considerations for Editors

  1. Editors must acknowledge the receipt of manuscript in a timely manner and ensure that editorial and peer review processes are fair, efficient, and responsive
  2. The editor must make sure that submitted manuscripts remain confidential throughout the editorial and peer review process
  3. The decision by the editor to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based purely on the paper’s quality, originality, and clarity, as well as its relevance to the focus of the journal
  4. In the spirit of transparency, the nature and method of peer review processes should be published, and editors should be ready to explain any important nonconformity to the described processes
  5. The editor must attend immediately to any complaints in an open and respectful manner, and must ensure that there is a well-laid out mechanism for handling any grievances
  6. The editor must not be partial in the judgment of manuscripts. Each manuscript must be considered independent of background, religion, gender, race, institutional affiliation, etc.
  7. To avoid issues of conflict of interest, any manuscript authored by the editor must not be handled by the editor him or herself, but must be given to some other qualified editor to manage
  8. If errors are discovered in a paper published by a journal, the editor should aid in the preparation of a report indicating the outlined errors and if possible provide correction to such errors. The report could be written by you, the author, or another member of your editorial team
  9. Editors should publish corrections if errors are discovered that could affect the interpretation of data or information presented in an article
  10. Editors should ensure that there is a clear guideline that defines the criteria for authorship. Any author who does not meet such criteria must be omitted from the list of contributors
  11. Editors should be very cautious when publishing images of objects that might have cultural significance or cause offense