The publication of scientific articles in the journal “Municipality: Economics and Management” presupposes mandatory reviewing of the manuscripts submitted by the authors. All manuscripts submitted to the editorial office for publication are subject to peer review. Manuscripts are reviewed in 2 stages:
- 1st stage is an express assessment of the manuscript for compliance with the requirements for materials sent for publication in the journal “Municipality: Economics and Management” and for the presence of borrowings from open sources (verification is performed using the Antiplagiat-VUZ system). An express assessment of the manuscript is carried out by the technical secretary of the scientific journal within five working days after the manuscript is received by the editorial office.
- 2nd stage – is a reviewing.
The review is organized by the editor-in-chief, who sends the article to at least two reviewers who are specialists in the relevant subject matter of the manuscript. A reviewer may be either a member of the editorial board or an external expert. Evaluation of articles is carried out according to the principle of “double blind” peer-review. The reviewer must consider the scientific article within 45 days from the date of receipt and send to the editorial office (by e-mail or otherwise) a reasoned opinion for scientific publication. As a result of peer review, one of four decision options is made:
- publish the material;
- publish after revision;
- send for additional review to another specialist;
- reject the manuscript.
After receiving the reviews at the next meeting of the editorial board, the issue of the articles received is considered and a final decision is made based on the assessment of the review on the publication or refusal to publish the articles.
On the basis of the decision taken, a letter is sent to the authors by e-mail on behalf of the editorial board. The letter gives an overall assessment of the article. If the article can be published after revision, taking into account the comments – recommendations for revision are given, if the article is not accepted for publication – the reasons for such a decision are indicated.
If the article is recommended for publication after revision, the author is given a 14-day period to eliminate the comments. An article sent by the author to the editor after the elimination of comments is considered in the general order. A note is made in the registration journal about the date of receipt of the new edition of the article.
The editorial board has the right not to accept the author’s material for publication in the following cases:
- non-observance by the authors of the rules and requirements;
- identifying elements of plagiarism;
- inconsistencies of the material with the subject of the scientific journal;
- negative reviewer assessment of the received author’s material;
- presence of restrictive information.
If the article is not recommended for publication and the author does not agree with the editor’s decision, he has the right to submit an application to the editorial office of the journal with a request to re-review by another expert (in this case, the article is transferred to the print plan for the next issue of the journal). The author can use this right only once.
The originals of the reviews are subject to storage in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years. The editorial office undertakes to send copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon receipt of the corresponding request to the editorial office of the publication.
To conduct editorial review, authors may be requested to provide intermediate (raw) data relevant to the manuscript. Authors should be prepared to make such information freely available in accordance with
ALPSP-STM Statementon Data and Databases where feasible. In any case, authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
