Ethical Oversight Policy

The Journal of Circular Economy Innovations is committed to ensuring that research submitted for publication is conducted and reported in accordance with appropriate ethical, legal, professional, and institutional standards. Ethical oversight forms an integral part of the journal's editorial evaluation and applies to research involving human participants, personal or sensitive data, animals, communities, organizations, environmental interventions, field studies, and other activities for which formal ethical review or responsible research safeguards may be required.

Authors are responsible for determining and complying with the ethical requirements applicable to their research before the study is conducted. Editorial consideration or publication by the journal does not replace approval by an appropriate institutional review board, research ethics committee, regulatory authority, or other competent body where such approval is required.

The journal evaluates ethical matters according to the nature of the research, applicable legal and institutional requirements, disciplinary standards, and the information provided by the authors.

1. Purpose of Ethical Oversight

The purpose of this policy is to promote responsible research and ensure that manuscripts published by the Journal of Circular Economy Innovations provide appropriate transparency concerning ethical approval, participant protection, informed consent, privacy, environmental responsibility, research integrity, and other relevant ethical considerations.

Ethical oversight seeks to:

  • protect the rights, dignity, safety, privacy, and welfare of research participants;

  • ensure that ethically regulated research has received appropriate approval where required;

  • promote transparent reporting of ethical procedures;

  • protect confidential and sensitive information;

  • support responsible research involving communities, organizations, and vulnerable populations;

  • ensure appropriate consideration of environmental and societal consequences;

  • identify and address ethical concerns that may affect the reliability or acceptability of submitted research; and

  • preserve confidence in the published scholarly record.

2. Research Ethics Approval

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, interventions, surveys, interviews, behavioral observations, experimental procedures, or other activities subject to ethical review should receive approval from an appropriate ethics committee, institutional review board, or equivalent authority where required.

Authors should include an ethics statement in the manuscript identifying, where applicable:

  • the name of the approving ethics committee or institutional review board;

  • the institution responsible for the approval;

  • the approval, protocol, or reference number where available;

  • the date or period of approval where relevant; and

  • confirmation that the research was conducted in accordance with the approved protocol.

Where formal ethical approval was not required, authors should state this where the nature of the research could reasonably lead readers to expect ethical review.

The journal may request supporting documentation where clarification is necessary.

3. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must respect individual dignity, autonomy, privacy, safety, and applicable rights.

Authors should demonstrate that foreseeable risks were appropriately considered and that participation was voluntary wherever informed consent was required.

Research involving interviews, questionnaires, behavioral analysis, workplace observations, consumer studies, community participation, socioeconomic surveys, or similar activities may require ethical review depending on institutional and jurisdictional requirements.

The journal will not assume that a study is exempt from ethical oversight merely because it is nonclinical or low risk.

4. Informed Consent

Where informed consent is required, authors should confirm that participants received adequate information concerning the research and voluntarily agreed to participate.

Consent procedures should be appropriate to the study population, research design, level of risk, and applicable institutional or legal requirements.

Where written consent was not obtained, authors should explain the alternative procedure where relevant and confirm that it was ethically appropriate.

Consent to participate in research should be distinguished from consent to publish identifiable information.

5. Consent for Publication

Where a manuscript includes identifiable personal information, photographs, case descriptions, quotations, recordings, or other material through which an individual could reasonably be recognized, authors should obtain appropriate consent for publication where required.

Removing a participant's name may not be sufficient if other information makes the individual identifiable.

Authors are responsible for protecting participant confidentiality and should include only information necessary for the scholarly purpose of the article.

6. Privacy and Confidentiality

Research involving personal, confidential, proprietary, or sensitive information should incorporate appropriate safeguards throughout data collection, storage, analysis, sharing, and publication.

Authors should avoid publishing directly identifiable information unless its inclusion is necessary, ethically justified, and appropriately authorized.

Where datasets are shared, authors should consider the possibility of re-identification even after obvious identifiers have been removed.

Data-access arrangements should comply with the journal's Research Data Sharing Policy, Data Availability Policy, and Privacy Policy.

7. Vulnerable Participants

Additional safeguards may be required for research involving individuals or groups who may have reduced autonomy, increased risk of harm, or limited ability to refuse participation freely.

Depending on the study, this may include:

  • children and minors;

  • economically disadvantaged populations;

  • individuals with impaired decision-making capacity;

  • displaced or marginalized communities;

  • employees participating in employer-related research;

  • individuals dependent on institutional services;

  • Indigenous or traditional communities; and

  • persons whose participation may expose them to social, economic, professional, or legal risks.

Authors should explain relevant protections where such issues are material to the study.

8. Community-Based and Participatory Research

Research involving communities, local organizations, Indigenous knowledge, traditional practices, or community-based resource systems should be conducted with appropriate sensitivity to local rights, interests, knowledge ownership, cultural practices, and expectations concerning participation and benefit.

Authors should avoid extractive research practices in which knowledge or data are collected from communities without appropriate consideration of consent, recognition, attribution, or potential consequences.

Where relevant, manuscripts should explain how community participation, consultation, or permission was obtained.

9. Ethical Considerations in Circular Economy Research

Research in circular economy and sustainability may involve ethical issues extending beyond conventional human-participant research.

Authors should consider relevant ethical implications associated with topics such as:

  • waste collection and informal waste labor;

  • recycling and recovery systems;

  • hazardous materials;

  • electronic waste;

  • industrial symbiosis;

  • resource extraction;

  • product reuse and repair;

  • supply-chain practices;

  • environmental justice;

  • circular business models;

  • community resource management;

  • labor conditions;

  • lifecycle assessment;

  • material traceability;

  • environmental monitoring; and

  • implementation of circular-economy interventions.

Research should not disregard foreseeable harms to workers, communities, ecosystems, or vulnerable populations when such risks are directly relevant to the study.

10. Environmental and Field Research

Research involving field interventions, ecosystems, environmental sampling, natural resources, protected areas, waste streams, industrial sites, or regulated materials should comply with applicable legal, institutional, environmental, and safety requirements.

Authors should obtain relevant permits, permissions, or institutional approvals where necessary.

Field research should be conducted in a manner that minimizes unnecessary environmental disturbance and respects applicable conservation, safety, property, and access requirements.

Where a study involves potentially hazardous materials or environmental risks, appropriate safeguards should be described where relevant to the manuscript.

11. Research Involving Animals

Where research involves animals, authors should comply with applicable institutional, national, and disciplinary requirements governing animal welfare and research ethics.

Manuscripts should identify the relevant approval body and approval number where applicable.

Authors should demonstrate appropriate consideration of animal welfare, humane treatment, reduction of unnecessary harm, and scientifically justified use of animals.

The journal may request additional documentation where the ethical basis of animal-related research is unclear.

12. Organizational and Workplace Research

Studies conducted within companies, factories, government agencies, institutions, workplaces, supply chains, or other organizations may involve confidentiality, consent, employment, or commercial sensitivity.

Authors should ensure that participation is voluntary where required and that employees or organizational participants are not exposed to unreasonable professional or personal risk.

Permission from an organization does not automatically replace individual consent where individual-level participation requires consent.

Authors should also distinguish organizational authorization from independent ethical approval.

13. Research Using Secondary or Public Data

Research using publicly available, archived, administrative, or previously collected data may not always require new ethics approval.

However, authors remain responsible for determining whether secondary use is permitted and whether privacy, consent, licensing, confidentiality, or contractual restrictions apply.

Public accessibility of information does not automatically remove all ethical obligations concerning its collection, analysis, or republication.

Where sensitive secondary data are used, authors should explain relevant safeguards where appropriate.

14. Internet and Social Media Research

Research involving social media content, online communities, digital platforms, web-based behavioral information, or other internet-derived data requires careful consideration of privacy, consent, identifiability, and reasonable user expectations.

Authors should not assume that publicly visible online information may always be reproduced without ethical consideration.

The level of ethical protection required should take account of:

  • the sensitivity of the information;

  • the possibility of identifying individuals;

  • platform terms and access conditions;

  • expectations of privacy;

  • potential harm resulting from publication; and

  • applicable legal and institutional requirements.

15. Research Data and Ethical Restrictions

Research-data sharing should not compromise participant rights, privacy, confidentiality, legal protections, or legitimate third-party interests.

Where ethical restrictions prevent unrestricted data sharing, authors should describe the limitation accurately in the Data Availability Statement.

The journal does not require public disclosure of data where such disclosure would violate valid ethical obligations.

Controlled-access arrangements may be used where appropriate.

16. Research Involving Artificial Intelligence and Automated Systems

Where artificial intelligence, automated decision-making, machine learning, or algorithmic analysis is used in research, authors should consider ethical implications relevant to the study.

These may include:

  • algorithmic bias;

  • discriminatory outcomes;

  • privacy;

  • automated profiling;

  • data provenance;

  • explainability;

  • human oversight;

  • accountability;

  • cybersecurity;

  • environmental and energy impacts of computational systems; and

  • potential misuse.

Authors should disclose substantive use of AI tools where necessary for transparency and should not use automated systems in ways that compromise participant rights or research integrity.

17. Ethical Use of Generative AI

Generative AI tools should not be used as substitutes for human ethical responsibility.

Authors remain accountable for all content, data interpretation, references, analysis, and conclusions submitted to the journal.

AI systems cannot provide informed consent, assume authorship responsibility, approve a manuscript, or accept accountability for research conduct.

Any substantive use of generative AI in research procedures, data processing, analysis, or manuscript preparation should be disclosed where relevant under the journal's applicable AI policy.

18. Dual-Use and Potentially Harmful Research

Certain research may have legitimate scholarly value while also presenting potential for harmful, unsafe, unlawful, environmentally damaging, or socially irresponsible use.

Where a manuscript presents significant dual-use concerns, editors may consider whether additional review or safeguards are necessary.

The journal may decline publication where disclosure would create a substantial and unjustifiable risk of harm that cannot reasonably be mitigated through responsible reporting.

Editorial decisions in such cases should consider both the scholarly value of the work and the potential consequences of publication.

19. Conflicts of Interest and Ethical Oversight

Authors should disclose relationships or interests that could influence the design, conduct, interpretation, or reporting of research.

Relevant conflicts may include financial, commercial, institutional, professional, or personal interests.

Ethical approval does not remove the obligation to disclose competing interests.

Editors and reviewers involved in ethical assessment must also disclose relevant conflicts and should withdraw from evaluation where impartiality cannot reasonably be maintained.

20. Funding and Sponsor Influence

Authors should disclose funding sources and describe the role of funders where relevant.

Funding organizations should not be permitted to suppress unfavorable findings, manipulate analysis, restrict appropriate academic reporting, or otherwise compromise the integrity of the research.

Where a sponsor had a role in study design, data collection, analysis, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit for publication, that involvement should be disclosed.

21. Ethical Approval and Editorial Review

Ethics committee approval does not automatically guarantee that a manuscript will be considered ethically acceptable for publication.

Editors may raise additional ethical concerns where:

  • participant protection appears inadequate;

  • consent procedures are unclear;

  • sensitive information is unnecessarily disclosed;

  • research practices appear inconsistent with the approved protocol;

  • ethical approval does not appear applicable to the reported research;

  • significant environmental or societal risks have not been addressed; or

  • other concerns affect responsible publication.

The journal may request clarification or supporting documentation before continuing editorial evaluation.

22. Absence of Ethical Approval

Where research appears to require ethical approval but no approval is reported, the editorial office may request an explanation.

If approval should reasonably have been obtained before the research was conducted, retrospective approval may not necessarily resolve the concern.

The journal may reject a manuscript where required ethical authorization was not obtained or where serious participant-protection concerns cannot be satisfactorily addressed.

23. Ethical Concerns Identified During Peer Review

Reviewers who identify possible ethical concerns should report them confidentially to the editor.

Such concerns may involve:

  • inadequate consent;

  • missing ethics approval;

  • participant identification;

  • unsafe procedures;

  • inappropriate data collection;

  • environmental harm;

  • undisclosed conflicts;

  • questionable treatment of vulnerable populations; or

  • other conduct requiring editorial attention.

Reviewers should avoid independently investigating authors or contacting research participants.

Responsibility for managing ethical concerns rests with the journal's editorial process.

24. Ethical Concerns Identified After Publication

Ethical concerns may arise after an article has been published.

Where credible concerns are received, the journal may:

  • request clarification from authors;

  • examine relevant documentation;

  • seek independent expert advice;

  • contact an institution or ethics committee where appropriate;

  • publish a correction;

  • issue an expression of concern;

  • retract an article; or

  • take another proportionate editorial action.

The appropriate response will depend on the seriousness of the concern and its effect on the reliability or ethical acceptability of the published research.

25. Cooperation With Institutions

Research institutions and ethics committees generally have greater authority and access to evidence for investigating serious allegations concerning research conduct.

Where a matter requires formal investigation beyond the journal's capacity, the journal may refer relevant concerns to an appropriate institution, ethics committee, funding agency, or other responsible authority.

Journals may take independent editorial action necessary to protect the scholarly record while an institutional investigation is ongoing.

26. Confidentiality of Ethical Investigations

Ethical concerns will be handled with appropriate confidentiality.

Information should be disclosed only to individuals or organizations whose involvement is reasonably necessary to evaluate or resolve the matter.

The journal seeks to avoid premature public allegations concerning authors, reviewers, editors, or institutions.

Where a public notice is necessary to protect readers or the scholarly record, the wording should be factual, proportionate, and based on available evidence.

27. Complaints and Appeals

Authors or other stakeholders who disagree with an ethical decision may use the journal's Complaints and Appeals Policy.

An appeal should provide specific grounds and relevant supporting information.

Where practicable, significant appeals should be assessed by an editor or individual who was not solely responsible for the original decision.

An appeal does not automatically suspend or reverse an ethical or editorial decision.

28. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for:

  • identifying ethical requirements applicable to their research;

  • obtaining approval before commencing regulated research where required;

  • obtaining informed consent where applicable;

  • protecting participant privacy and confidentiality;

  • obtaining necessary permissions and permits;

  • accurately reporting ethical approval;

  • disclosing conflicts of interest and funding;

  • complying with data-protection requirements;

  • protecting vulnerable participants;

  • maintaining appropriate research records;

  • reporting ethical limitations honestly; and

  • cooperating with legitimate editorial inquiries.

Authors should not fabricate, alter, misrepresent, or selectively report ethics approval information.

29. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for considering relevant ethical information objectively and consistently.

Editors may request clarification, additional documentation, specialist advice, or institutional confirmation where necessary.

Editorial decisions should seek to protect participants, research integrity, legitimate confidentiality, and the accuracy of the scholarly record.

Editors should not permit commercial interests, author status, institutional reputation, or personal relationships to determine the outcome of an ethical assessment.

30. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers should consider ethical issues relevant to the manuscript and confidentially communicate concerns to the editor.

Reviewers must protect participant and author confidentiality and must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers should not make allegations of misconduct directly to authors within review reports where confidential editorial assessment is more appropriate.

Relationship With Other Journal Policies

The Ethical Oversight Policy should be read together with the journal's:

  • Publication Ethics Policy

  • Research Misconduct Policy

  • Peer Review Policy

  • Authorship Criteria

  • Conflict of Interest Policy

  • Research Data Sharing Policy

  • Data Availability Policy

  • Privacy Policy

  • AI Usage Policy

  • Corrections and Retractions Policy

  • Retraction Policy

  • Complaints and Appeals Policy

Where a matter is addressed by a more specific journal policy, the specialized policy may determine the detailed procedure.

Commitment to Ethical Research

The Journal of Circular Economy Innovations seeks to publish research that is not only academically meaningful but also ethically responsible and transparently reported.

The journal recognizes that ethical standards vary according to research design, discipline, jurisdiction, population, and the nature of the materials or environments being studied. Ethical oversight is therefore applied proportionately and with attention to relevant institutional and professional requirements.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher share responsibility for supporting research practices that respect human dignity, participant welfare, privacy, environmental responsibility, institutional accountability, and the integrity of scholarly communication.