Eseconomía Journal, its editorial team, reviewers, and all individuals involved in the publication of its issues are committed to best practices. Therefore, we seek compliance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (https://www.wcrif.org/guidance/singapore-statement).

Code of ethics for the editor

Editors must assign reviewers according to the scope and content of the manuscript in order to obtain the most appropriate and rigorous evaluation. They must provide reviewers with all necessary information to ensure a proper academic assessment.

Editors must clearly and explicitly communicate the journal’s policies and guidelines. They must ensure impartiality in the manuscript review process and guarantee that decisions are free from conflicts of interest.

Editors shall provide review forms and tools for reviewers and authors to facilitate monitoring of the editorial process.

They must respond within the established timeframes to follow up on reviews and address any questions or requests from reviewers or authors.

Editors are responsible for enforcing sanctions in cases of ethical misconduct.

At all times, editors must respect the confidential nature of the peer-review process and must not disclose details of the research after peer review unless authorized by the author.

Code of ethics for authors

An author of a contribution is an individual who has played a significant role in the conceptualization, execution, writing, development of methods, procedures, methodologies, or generation of results presented in the manuscript. Technical participation that does not constitute a direct contribution to the creation of new scientific knowledge should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.

Authors must comply with the Eseconomía Author Guidelines and submit their manuscripts in the required format.

Authors who have benefited from the peer-review process should consider serving as reviewers as part of their professional responsibility.

Authors must respond to and address reviewers’ comments within the established deadlines.

The language used in the manuscript must be clear, concise, coherent, and supported by scientific evidence.

If any member of the editorial team or an academic reviewer identifies unjustified authorship, the authors of the submitted contribution will be notified through the corresponding author. In such cases, a letter of explanation will be requested and evaluated by the editorial team, specifically the Director, Executive Editor, and an advisor. Penalties for this misconduct may include the temporary or permanent rejection of future submissions from one or more of the authors involved.

Code of ethics for reviewers

Individuals interested in serving as reviewers for the journal should familiarize themselves with the peer-review guidelines and comply with the journal’s requirements. Reviewers must make their professional expertise available to the journal and only accept review assignments when they possess the necessary knowledge and can provide an impartial evaluation.

If a reviewer belongs to the same institution as one of the authors or has any other circumstance that could create a conflict of interest, they must disclose it and decline the review assignment.

Once a reviewer accepts a manuscript for evaluation, they are expected to complete the review within the established deadlines. If an extension is required, the reviewer must notify the journal.

If a reviewer is unable to evaluate a manuscript, they should inform the journal and, when possible, suggest qualified experts in the field who do not have conflicts of interest.

If reviewers have questions about the manuscript, missing files, or incomplete information, they must contact the journal directly. Under no circumstances should they contact the authors. If they suspect the identity of the authors and believe this may create a conflict of interest, they must inform the journal.

Reviewers may not involve third parties in the review process without the journal’s permission. The names of any individuals who assist in the evaluation must be disclosed to the journal for record-keeping purposes and acknowledgment of their contribution.

Reviewers must remain impartial regardless of the authors’ nationality, religion, political ideology, gender, or other personal characteristics. If they are unable to conduct an unbiased review, they must notify the journal.

If reviewers detect any ethical concerns related to the research or publication process—for example, substantial similarity between the manuscript under review and another publication—they must promptly inform the journal editor.

Reviewers must provide objective and constructive evaluations, offering feedback that helps authors improve their manuscripts. Criticism should be specific, clear, and supported by evidence. Reviewers should avoid hostile language, derogatory remarks, or unfounded accusations.

If a manuscript lacks clarity due to insufficient analysis, reviewers should explain what types of analyses could strengthen the work. However, it is not the reviewer’s responsibility to expand the scope of the manuscript.

Reviewers must prepare their reports independently unless authorized by the journal to involve another person. They should refrain from making unjustified negative comments, suggesting citations that primarily benefit themselves or their associates, or intentionally delaying the review process through unnecessary requests or prolonged review periods.

Good practices

Corresponding Author. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting the complete list of collaborators with all information required by the journal (while preserving the anonymity of the contribution) and ensuring the accurate completion of metadata in the submission platform.

No Plagiarism. Manuscripts submitted to Eseconomía must be original works and free from any form of plagiarism. Any material used from other sources must be properly cited in accordance with APA 7th Edition guidelines. Authors who commit plagiarism will be subject to sanctions.

Use of Artificial Intelligence. Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools cannot be listed as authors of an article because they cannot assume responsibility for the work presented, declare conflicts of interest, or manage copyright issues. Authors who use AI tools for manuscript writing, image creation, graphical elements, data collection, or data analysis must clearly disclose how and which AI tools were used in the Materials and Methods section (or equivalent). Authors remain fully responsible for all content in their manuscripts, including portions generated with AI tools, and are therefore accountable for any breaches of publication ethics.

Bias-Free Language. Authors should strive to use language that avoids implicit or irrelevant evaluations of individuals or groups discussed in their work, with the aim of preventing the perpetuation of derogatory attitudes. The journal does not accept wording that reflects prejudicial beliefs or reinforces biased assumptions based on age, disability, gender, research participation, racial or ethnic identity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or any combination of these or other personal characteristics. Instead, authors should use affirmative and inclusive language.

The writing style used by authors, as well as all communications among the editorial team, reviewers, and authors, must be inclusive and free from bias. Eseconomía rejects offensive language and promotes equity and equal opportunities for all members of the scientific community conducting research related to the journal’s thematic areas.