Complaints and Appeals Policy

The Journal of Circular Economy Innovations is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, accountable, and responsible editorial process. The journal recognizes that authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may occasionally wish to raise concerns regarding editorial decisions, publication processes, ethical matters, or published content.

This Complaints and Appeals Policy establishes a structured process for receiving, evaluating, and responding to complaints and appeals in a timely, confidential, and impartial manner.

The purpose of this policy is not to guarantee a particular outcome but to ensure that legitimate concerns are considered through a fair and transparent procedure based on evidence, editorial principles, and responsible scholarly communication practices.

This policy should be read together with the journal’s:

  • Publication Ethics Policy;

  • Peer Review Policy;

  • Research Misconduct Policy;

  • Conflict of Interest Policy;

  • Data Availability Policy;

  • Corrections and Retractions Policy; and

  • Retraction Policy.

1. Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to concerns relating to:

  • editorial decisions;

  • peer-review procedures;

  • publication ethics issues;

  • suspected research misconduct;

  • authorship disputes;

  • conflicts of interest;

  • reviewer conduct;

  • published article concerns;

  • corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions;

  • data availability concerns;

  • copyright or publication-related issues; and

  • other matters affecting the integrity and fairness of the publishing process.

The journal distinguishes between a legitimate complaint or appeal and disagreement based solely on dissatisfaction with an editorial outcome.

2. Principles for Handling Complaints and Appeals

The journal handles complaints and appeals according to the following principles:

Fairness

All concerns are evaluated objectively without discrimination based on author identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, professional status, or research position.

Confidentiality

Information relating to complaints and appeals is handled confidentially and shared only with individuals who require access for appropriate assessment.

Transparency

The journal communicates decisions and procedures clearly while protecting confidential information.

Independence

Where a conflict of interest exists, the complaint or appeal should be handled by an appropriate independent individual.

Evidence-Based Assessment

Decisions are based on relevant evidence, documentation, editorial records, and applicable journal policies.

3. Types of Complaints Considered

The journal may consider complaints concerning:

Editorial Process

Examples include:

  • failure to follow stated editorial procedures;

  • unreasonable delays;

  • inappropriate handling of manuscripts;

  • concerns regarding fairness of editorial assessment; or

  • failure to apply published policies consistently.

Peer Review

Examples include:

  • reviewer comments that are inappropriate, discriminatory, offensive, or unrelated to scholarly evaluation;

  • breaches of reviewer confidentiality;

  • concerns regarding reviewer conflicts of interest;

  • suspected peer-review manipulation; or

  • procedural concerns regarding the review process.

Publication Ethics

Examples include:

  • plagiarism concerns;

  • duplicate publication;

  • authorship disputes;

  • data integrity concerns;

  • undisclosed conflicts of interest;

  • ethical approval concerns;

  • misleading publication information; or

  • suspected research misconduct.

Published Articles

Examples include:

  • factual errors;

  • concerns regarding published data;

  • misleading interpretations;

  • requests for correction;

  • requests for retraction review; or

  • post-publication scholarly concerns.

4. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal editorial decisions when they believe that the decision resulted from:

  • a significant factual misunderstanding;

  • incorrect interpretation of manuscript content;

  • procedural irregularity;

  • inappropriate consideration of irrelevant factors;

  • failure to consider important evidence; or

  • a demonstrable conflict of interest affecting the decision.

An appeal should not be submitted solely because authors disagree with reviewer comments or because a manuscript was rejected.

Disagreement with academic judgment alone is generally not sufficient grounds for appeal unless authors can demonstrate a substantive procedural or factual issue.

5. Requirements for Submitting an Appeal

An appeal should include:

  • manuscript title;

  • manuscript identification number where available;

  • corresponding author details;

  • date of editorial decision;

  • specific reasons for requesting reconsideration;

  • explanation of any factual or procedural concerns;

  • supporting evidence where applicable; and

  • a clear explanation of the requested action.

Authors should respond to reviewer comments where relevant and identify which specific issues they believe require reconsideration.

6. Appeal Review Process

When an appeal is received, the journal will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether:

  • the appeal falls within the scope of this policy;

  • sufficient information has been provided;

  • a procedural issue may have occurred;

  • additional evaluation is justified; or

  • the appeal primarily represents disagreement with academic judgment.

Where appropriate, the appeal may be reviewed by:

  • the Editor-in-Chief;

  • a senior editor;

  • an independent editor not involved in the original decision; or

  • another qualified individual appointed for impartial assessment.

The original decision-maker may provide relevant background information but should not solely determine the outcome of an appeal concerning their own decision.

7. Possible Outcomes of an Appeal

After assessment, the journal may:

  • uphold the original decision;

  • request additional clarification from authors;

  • seek further expert opinion;

  • invite additional peer review;

  • reconsider the editorial decision;

  • allow resubmission where appropriate; or

  • take another proportionate action.

The outcome of an appeal is final unless substantial new evidence becomes available.

8. Complaints Regarding Peer Review

The journal takes concerns regarding peer-review conduct seriously.

Complaints may involve:

  • inappropriate reviewer language;

  • personal criticism unrelated to scholarly assessment;

  • discrimination or bias;

  • confidentiality breaches;

  • undisclosed reviewer conflicts;

  • suspected misuse of confidential manuscript information; or

  • attempts to manipulate editorial decisions.

The journal may review reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and relevant records when assessing such concerns.

9. Complaints Regarding Research Integrity

Concerns relating to possible research misconduct may include:

  • fabrication;

  • falsification;

  • plagiarism;

  • image manipulation;

  • data manipulation;

  • unethical research practices;

  • authorship misconduct;

  • citation manipulation;

  • peer-review manipulation; or

  • misleading research statements.

Such concerns will be handled according to the journal’s Research Misconduct Policy.

The journal may request supporting evidence and may involve relevant institutions or organizations where appropriate.

10. Authorship Disputes

The journal recognizes that authorship disagreements may arise during manuscript preparation, submission, review, or after publication.

The journal may consider concerns involving:

  • inappropriate inclusion of authors;

  • exclusion of legitimate contributors;

  • unauthorized changes to author lists;

  • disputes regarding contributions; or

  • incorrect attribution of affiliations.

Authors should attempt to resolve authorship disputes through appropriate institutional procedures.

The journal may request written agreement from all affected authors before making changes to authorship information.

11. Complaints After Publication

Readers and researchers may raise concerns regarding published articles.

Post-publication concerns may involve:

  • errors affecting interpretation;

  • questionable data;

  • ethical concerns;

  • conflicts of interest;

  • misleading information;

  • research integrity issues; or

  • requests for correction or retraction review.

The journal will evaluate such concerns according to the seriousness of the issue and available evidence.

Possible outcomes may include:

  • no action;

  • clarification;

  • correction;

  • expression of concern;

  • retraction review; or

  • another appropriate editorial action.

12. Confidentiality During Complaint Handling

The journal seeks to protect the confidentiality of all parties involved in complaints and appeals.

Information may be shared only with individuals directly involved in assessment, including where necessary:

  • editors;

  • reviewers;

  • independent experts;

  • institutional representatives;

  • ethics committees; or

  • legal advisors.

The journal will avoid unnecessary disclosure of personal information while ensuring appropriate investigation.

13. Conflicts of Interest in Complaint Handling

Individuals involved in evaluating complaints or appeals must disclose relevant conflicts of interest.

A person should not handle a complaint or appeal where they have:

  • a personal relationship with the parties involved;

  • involvement in the original decision;

  • financial interests connected with the matter;

  • institutional conflicts;

  • professional competition; or

  • another relationship affecting impartiality.

Where necessary, another qualified person will manage the matter independently.

14. Anonymous Complaints

The journal may consider anonymous complaints when they contain:

  • specific allegations;

  • sufficient supporting information;

  • identifiable publication concerns; and

  • evidence that can reasonably be evaluated.

Anonymous complaints without sufficient information may not allow meaningful investigation.

The journal balances confidentiality protection with the need for fair assessment.

15. Malicious or Unsupported Complaints

The journal does not encourage complaints submitted for harassment, personal disputes, competitive advantage, or intentional disruption of scholarly communication.

Concerns should be raised honestly and with reasonable supporting information.

Submitting an unsupported complaint does not automatically result in action against the complainant. However, repeated malicious use of complaint procedures may be addressed appropriately.

16. Communication of Decisions

The journal will communicate outcomes of complaints and appeals to relevant parties where appropriate.

Communication may include:

  • the basis for the decision;

  • actions taken;

  • further steps available, if any; and

  • relevant policy references.

The journal may limit disclosure where confidentiality, privacy, legal obligations, or third-party rights apply.

17. Timelines

The time required to evaluate complaints and appeals may vary depending on:

  • complexity of the issue;

  • availability of relevant information;

  • need for expert consultation;

  • involvement of institutions;

  • number of parties involved; and

  • ethical or legal considerations.

The journal aims to handle concerns as efficiently as possible while ensuring appropriate evaluation.

18. Record Keeping

The journal may retain records relating to complaints and appeals for appropriate periods.

Records may include:

  • correspondence;

  • submitted evidence;

  • editorial decisions;

  • reviewer information where relevant;

  • investigation notes;

  • responses from authors or other parties; and

  • final outcomes.

Records are maintained confidentially and used only for legitimate editorial, ethical, or legal purposes.

19. Relationship With Publication Ethics Procedures

Complaints and appeals involving ethical concerns may require additional procedures under relevant journal policies.

Depending on the nature of the issue, the journal may apply:

  • Research Misconduct Policy;

  • Retraction Policy;

  • Corrections Policy;

  • Conflict of Interest Policy;

  • Authorship Policy; or

  • Data Availability Policy.

The journal may take appropriate action independently of external investigations when necessary to protect the scholarly record.

20. Editorial Independence

The handling of complaints and appeals is conducted independently of commercial, financial, institutional, or personal influence.

Editorial decisions should be based on scholarly standards, ethical requirements, and evidence.

No author, institution, sponsor, advertiser, or external party may improperly influence the outcome of a complaint or appeal.

Commitment to Fair and Transparent Resolution

The Journal of Circular Economy Innovations is committed to maintaining a publishing environment based on fairness, accountability, transparency, and respect for research integrity.

Through this Complaints and Appeals Policy, the journal provides a structured mechanism for addressing legitimate concerns while protecting authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal seeks to resolve complaints and appeals responsibly, proportionately, and consistently with principles of ethical scholarly publishing.