Journal Policy
Open Access Policy
The Editorial Board of Agrarian Bulletin of the North Caucasus supports the global exchange of knowledge and the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). The Journal operates under the model of platinum open access, which implies that all articles are immediately available to read, download, and share without any restrictions. No publication fees are charged.
Copyright Policy
The authors retain full copyright to their work and grant the Journal the right of publication under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) license, which allows others to read, download, and distribute the work, adapt and build upon the work for any purpose, including commercial use, share the work with proper attribution to the original authors and source.
Authors may enter into separate contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the work published in the Journal (e.g., placing the work in institutional repositories or personal websites) both before and after publication with a link to the final published version in Agrarian Bulletin of the North Caucasus. Such a practice of sharing research is aimed at maximizing its impact.
Archiving
Scientific Electronic Library (elibrary.ru)
Federal State Budgetary Institution Russian State Library;
Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media of the Russian Federation.
Stavropol Regional Universal Scientific Library named after M. Y. Lermontov
Stavropol Centralized Library System
Peer review
The Journal adheres to the principles of double-blind peer review, in which the identities of reviewers and authors are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This approach ensures objectivity and impartiality in the process of evaluating the submissions, which contributes to maintaining high standards of scientific publication.
Peer-review order
Each manuscript submitted to the Journal passes a preliminary assessment stage by the editorial board to verify compliance with the thematic scope and quality standards. The submissions meeting these criteria are forwarded for expert evaluation by at least two independent reviewers.
Peer-review terms
The reviewers are requested to complete their reviews within the period of three weeks. When an extension is required, the reviewers should notify the Editorial Team.
Evaluation criteria
The reviewers evaluate materials based their originality, relevance, methodological rigor, quality of presentation, and validity of conclusions. The reviewers, guided by the principles of publication ethics and the recommendations of the editorial board, fill out a review form within the period of three weeks, providing their comments and suggesting the following options:
- accept the manuscript for publication in its current form (without revision);
- recommend revisions to be made;
- reject the
Confidentiality
The manuscript received for review is treated as a confidential document. Its contents may not be disclosed or discussed with any persons not authorised by the editor.
Revision process
The Editorial Board communicates the recommendations of reviewers to the authors with a proposal to prepare a new version of the manuscript or to make a reasoned refutation of the reviewers’ comments. The authors are requested to introduce the required changes during the period of two weeks. In cases where the authors fail to return their manuscript after three months from the moment of receiving the review conclusion, the manuscript is withdrawn from the consideration process.
A positive review is not a sufficient reason for publication of the article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. The revised manuscript accepted for publication is subjected to scientific editing and proofreading.
The peer-review process of a manuscript lasts for about three months from the moment of its submission. All reviewers are recognized experts in the field of reviewed materials and have published on related topics over the past three years. The reviews remain in the editorial office for five years. Upon request, the editorial board shall send a copy of the review to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
Personal data protection
The Editorial Board guarantees the use of personal data indicated by the author solely for communication purposes concerning the publication process. The personal data of the author shall not be shared with third parties. All authors sign their informed consent to personal data processing.
Publication ethics
The Editorial Board of the Agrarian Bulletin of the North Caucasus adheres to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the ethical principles enshrined in the Scientific Publications Declaration of the Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP).
Basic principles
1.1. The publication of materials in peer-reviewed journals is a means of scientific communication, which makes a significant contribution to the development of scientific knowledge. Therefore, all parties to the process of scientific communication (authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members) should make every reasonable effort to adhere to the ethical code of the Agrarian Bulletin of the North Caucasus.
1.2. The Publisher must adhere to the relevant principles and procedures governing ethical responsibilities of the editors, reviewers and authors of its journals.
1.3. The Publisher should promote good research practice and implement industry standards by implementing the strictest possible peer review process.
Responsibilities of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
The Editor-in-Chief of the Agrarian Bulletin of the North Caucasus carries responsibility for making the final publication decision. The Editor shall analyse the validity of the work in question and its compliance with the publishing requirements for the form and content of submitted works, based on the editorial policy of the Journal and current legislation.
The Editor may consult with other editors and reviewers (or representatives of the publisher) during the process of publication decision.
2.2. Decency
The Editor shall evaluate the intellectual content of submitted manuscripts without reference to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship or political alignments of the Authors.
2.3. Confidentiality
The Editor and the Editorial Board members shall not unnecessarily disclose information about the accepted manuscript to any persons, with the exception of the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other scientific consultants and the publisher.
2.4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
2.4.2 In the case of a possible conflict of interest arising between an editor and the authors of manuscripts submitted for publication, the editor shall declare this conflict of interest to the publisher. The manuscript will then be allocated to another editor for analysis and evaluation.
2.5. Oversight
The Editor who has provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in the publication are erroneous should inform the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) in order to initiate the introduction of corrections, withdrawal of the publication, expression of concern, or other relevant statements.
2.6. Engagement and collaboration
The Editor, together with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), takes adequate response measures in case of ethical claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript and argumentation of the relevant complaint or claim, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers play a key role in the process of ensuring the quality of scientific publications. In this regard, they undertake to follow the principles and ethical standards.
3.2. Objectivity and impartiality: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, based on scientific facts and the quality of the submitted materials, without regard to personal preferences or presentiment.
3.3. Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the materials under review as confidential information. They have no right to discuss the contents of the article with third parties, except when permitted by the editorial board.
3.4. Timeliness: Reviewers are obliged to provide their reviews within the established deadline (three weeks) or notify the editorial board of the need to extend the deadline, if necessary.
3.5. Justification of comments: Reviewers must provide constructive criticism, clear comments and recommendations for improving the article.
3.6. Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers are required to notify the editor in the case of potential conflicts of interest (e.g. personal, financial, or professional relationships with the authors of the article). On this basis, the reviewers must recuse themselves from examination of the corresponding manuscripts.
3.7. Honesty and Integrity: Reviewers must maintain high standards of scientific integrity and point out any instances of plagiarism, falsification of data, or insufficient citation of previous research discovered during the review process.
3.8. Refusal to Use Information: Reviewers must not use information contained in peer-reviewed articles for their own scientific or other purposes until the work is published.
Responsibilities of Authors
4.1. Requirements for Manuscripts
4.1.1 Published research results must be obtained in accordance with ethical standards and without violating any laws or rights. Authors should use reliable and proven methods for analysing and processing data, as well as generally accepted methods for displaying results.
4.1.2. Researchers must present their results honestly, without falsification or distortion of the results.
4.2. Data Access and Storage
Authors may be asked to provide raw data relevant to the manuscript for review by the Editors.
4.3. Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1 Authors should ensure that the work presented is entirely original. All data, text, images or ideas created and developed by other authors should be presented with appropriate references.
4.3.2 Plagiarism can take many forms, from presenting someone else's work as your own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial portions of someone else’s work (without attribution), to claiming the results of someone else’s research. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable.
4.4. Multiple, Redundant, and Simultaneous Publications
4.4.1 Authors should not publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal as the original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In taking full responsibility for the originality of the work presented, the authors guarantee that this work has not published in another journal in any language.
4.5. Acknowledgment of Sources
Acknowledgment of the contributions of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been essential to the conduct of the reported work. Information obtained privately, such as through conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without the express written permission of the source. Information obtained through confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without a written permission of the author.
4.6. Authorship criteria
4.6.1 Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, conduct, or interpretation of the study results may be named as the authors.
4.6.2. Authors should describe their actual contribution to the work according to the CRediT system, which includes 14 roles: conceptualization, methodology, software, data verification, formal analysis, research conduction, resources, data administration, manuscript drafting, manuscript writing and editing, visualization, study supervision, administration, and funding. The order of indicating the authors can be selected by the authors.
4.6.3. The corresponding author should ensure that all participants who have made a substantial contribution to the study are listed as the authors and all authors have approved the final version of the article for publication. Individuals who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.
4.7. Risks; Human and Animal Subjects
4.7.1 In cases where the work involves dangerous or hazardous chemicals, procedures, or equipment, this should be clearly stated in the text of the article.
4.7.2 In cases where the work involves animal or human subjects, the author should indicate that all stages of the study were conducted in compliance with applicable laws and institutional guidelines and were approved by the appropriate committees. The manuscript should clearly indicate that informed consent was obtained from all human subjects. The rights of privacy must be respected at all times.
4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1 All authors should disclose in their manuscript any conflicts of interest that might have an influence on the results or conclusions of the work.
4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, providing expert testimony, patent applications or registrations, grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed as early as possible.
4.9. Errors in Published Works
Authors must promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief of any errors or inaccuracies discovered in the published work and cooperate to correct the errors. If the Editor or the Publisher receives information from a third party that a published work contains errors, which cannot be corrected, a retraction procedure is initiated.
Responsibilities of the Publisher
5.1 The Publisher must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical duties by Editors.
5.2. The Publisher should provide support to the Editors of the Journal in reviewing claims to the ethical aspects of the published materials and in interacting with other journals and/or Publishers, if this contributes to the fulfillment of the duties of Editors.
5.3. The Publisher should promote good research practices and implement industry standards in order to improve ethical guidelines, procedures for the removal and correction of errors.
5.4 The Publisher should provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice), if necessary.
Retraction Policy
Articles published in the journal may be subject to the procedure of retraction (withdrawal from print). Retraction is carried out in order to notify the readers about the publication of false information and to withdraw such publications from scientific circulation.
Retraction is used in cases where an already published article:
violates the publication ethics;
contains plagiarism or self-plagiarism;
comprises a duplicate publication;
contains serious errors or falsified data that cast doubt on the reliability of scientific results;
re-published without the consent of the author(s);
includes materials that contradict the current legislation of the Russian Federation.
Retraction can be performed at the request of the author(s), by decision of the editorial board, or at the official request of various bodies (other journals, scientific organizations, etc.), or at the request of third parties (with evidence of violations of scientific ethics by the author of an article published in the journal). Retraction is carried out after a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the publication of false information. The decision is made by a specially created commission, taking into account all available facts and opportunities to verify the publication for compliance with the requirements.
The editorial board notifies the author(s) of the violation of publication ethics and launches the retraction procedure. The author(s) are allowed to express their agreement or disagreement with the Editorial Board. In cases where the fact of violation of publication ethics (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, falsification of data, violation of legislation, etc.) has been confirmed, the Editorial Board has the right to carry out the retraction procedure without the consent of the author(s). Based on the verification of the circumstances that led to the retraction, the editorial board has the right to independently decide on further cooperation with the author(s) of the withdrawn articles (complete refusal of cooperation, refusal of cooperation for a certain period, appointment of additional examination of articles in case of repeated cooperation).
The retracted article is not deleted from the electronic version and remains on the journal website as part of the PDF version of the corresponding issue. In this case, the metadata of the article is marked “Withdrawn” and the date of the retraction. An identical mark is placed in the table of contents of the corresponding issue of the journal and the databases in which the journal is indexed.
Publication fee
Publication in the journal is free of all charges for the authors.
Plagiarism
Manuscripts submitted to the Journal undergo mandatory anti-plagiarism check using Antiplagiat (Russian platform) and Google Scholar.
Use of artificial intelligence (AI)
The Editorial Board of the Journal recognizes that AI is instrumental in improving the quality of scientific research and publications; however, such tools must not undermine the research integrity and ethical norms. When AI is used to support writing, the authors must clearly indicate which technologies and to what extent have been used. All the materials prepared with the help of AI (data collection, illustrations, etc.) should be carefully checked by the authors for correctness and reliability. The relevant information about AI tools should be presented in the Methodology section of the article.
