Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal has been published from 2005 once a year in 2 volumes.

According to the Order by Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine № 241 09.03.2016 р. the scientific journal is recognized as the professional edition , in which the results of dissertation research on receiving of scientific degrees of the doctor or candidate of sciences can be published.

The journal publishes reviewed articles, in which the actual problems of regional economy are considered.

The main fields for the articles are:

Theory and history of economic thought.

World economy and International Economic Relations.

Economy and management of national economy.

Economy and management (by sectors).

Development of productive forces and regional economy.

Economics of Natural Resources and Environment.

Demography, Labor economics, social economics and politics.

Money, finance and credit.

Accounting, analysis and audit (by sectors).

Statistics.

Mathematical methods, models and information technologies.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Marketing

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Human capital development

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Financial and credit market development

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public finance

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. If approved by the editor, submissions will be considered by peer-reviewers, whose identities will remain anonymous to the authors.

STATEMENT OF  MANUSCRIPT REVIEW PROCEDUR

 

1. Reviewing Arrangements

1.1. All research papers submitted to the journal are subject to mandatory peer review. Reviewing of the manuscripts for publication in a thematic  of " THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT " is organized by the editorial boards. Responsibility for the quality and timeliness of the peer reviews rests with the editor-in-chief.  Deadlines for reviewing are set by the executive secretary.

1.2. The editor-in-chief and the executive secretary test the paper for the appropriate subject scope and formatting style and have the paper sent for reviewing to members of the editorial board with the most direct knowledge of the subject matter in the field. Reviewers cannot be the author or co-author of the paper under review. Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts are private property of the authors and contain the information that is not to be disclosed. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the papers.

1.3. Reviewing is held in confidence by the principles of double-blind reviewing, when neither the author nor the reviewer know each other. The interaction between authors and reviewers occurs in a way of correspondence by e-mail through the executive secretary of the journal. The text of the review is submitted for the author’s consideration. The rule of anonymity is only broken in case of the alleged plagiarism or falsification of the material contained in the paper.

1.4. If the review contains recommendations for modification of the paper, the executive secretary sends the review to the author asking to revise the manuscript according to the reviewer’s comments, or the author is entitled to submit a point-to-point rebuttal. The revised paper is resubmitted for reviewing .

1.5. If the reviewer does not recommend to accept the paper, the editorial board may have the paper sent to be revised according to the reviewer’s comments, as well as to be analyzed by  another reviewer . The review report containing strong criticism is sent to the author .

1.6. The decision to publish lies ultimately with the editorial board of the series and is recorded in the minutes of the editorial board meeting.

1.7. When a paper is formally accepted, it will be scheduled for publication, and the author will be informed of the tentative date. The review report is forwarded to the author.

1.8. Reviews of manuscripts should be stored in a thematic series of the editorial board for three years from the date of publication and be presented at the request of the VAK  Expert Council in Ukraine.

2. Requirements for the Review Reports

2.1. A review should include the analysis of the paper content, its objective evaluation and reasonable recommendations.

2.2. In a review the following issues should be highlighted:

·          general analysis of the scientific validity, the layout of the paper, and its topical importance;

·          relevance of the paper content to its title;

·         appropriate language and style satisfying the requirements for the format of the paper;

·          scientific timeliness of the paper and the methods used to describe the results of the research;

·        the length of the paper on the whole as well as its elements (text, tables, illustrations, references); relevance of the tables and illustrations to the subject under study; recommendations for reducing their length where appropriate (stating the element of the paper);

·          relationship to prior publications on this subject if the paper duplicates them (the  whole of it or in part );

·          the author’s inaccuracies and errors;

·          a detailed description of the strengths and weaknesses of the paper.

2.3. The reviewer should make suggestions to the author and publisher for improvement of the manuscript. Reviewer's comments and suggestions should be impartial and principled, meant to enhance the scientific and technical validity of the manuscript.

2.4. In the final part of the review clear recommendations should be given on the acceptance for publication in this thematic series of " THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT " in a particular scientific field corresponding to the list of scientific specialties approved by VAK of Ukraine.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

PUBLISHING ETHICS

The editors office, editorial board of the ‘THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT’ journal support the policy directed at the observance of the publishing ethics principles  and admit that tracking of the observance of publishing ethics is one of the main components of review and publishing process.

1. Responsibilities of Chief Editor

Decision on publishing an article

Chief Editor of the ‘THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT’ journal is responsible for choosing the submitted articles for further publication. This decision should always be taken considering the reliability of work and its importance for researchers and readers. Chief Editor can rely on recommended practice developed by the editorial board of the journal and on legal requirements, including defamation prevention, copyright violation and plagiarism. Moreover, Chief Editor can consult with the members of the editorial board, the reviewers, or the representatives of the research team.

Correctness

THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT’ Chief Editor evaluates the articles by intellectual content regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic background, citizenship and/or political opinion of the author.

Privacy

Chief Editor of the ‘THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT’ and the members of the editorial board should not disclose the information about the submitted article to anybody except the author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, consultants of the editorial board and the publisher.

Disclosure of information and conflict of interest

The content of the submitted article may not be used in any own publication of the chief editor and the members of the editorial board without the written permission of the author. Any confidential information or ideas received during the review should be kept secret and may not be used to gain any benefit. Chief Editor should withdraw from the review if any conflict of interest occurs as a result of competition, collaboration or other relations with any of the authors, companies or organizations related to the article.  Chief Editor should ask all authors to provide the information about any conflicts of interest and publish the corrections if a conflict of interest is revealed after the publication. If necessary, other appropriate actions can be taken, such as publishing a disclaimer or expression of concern.

Analysis of ethical complaints

Chief Editor of the ‘THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT’ journal should respond reasonably quickly to the ethical complaints with regard to the submitted manuscript or the published article, contacting the editors office, publisher or the research team.

2. Responsibilities of reviewers

Participation in decision-making process at the editors office

Review process helps the chief editor take the decision on publishing the article and also helps the author to improve the article through the communication of editors office with the author.

Efficiency

Every chosen reviewer should notify the editor and withdraw from the review if he/she feels incompetent to review the manuscript or realizes that timely review would be impossible.

Privacy

Each and every manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown to or discussed with any persons except for the authorized by the editor.

Standards of neutrality

The reviews should be written neutrally. Personal accusations are unacceptable. The reviewer should express his/her opinion clearly and on a reasonable basis.

Acknowledgement of sources

If the authors have not provided the reference to any of the published works, the reviewer should mention it. Any statement claiming that any data, conclusions or arguments have already been published in scientific press, should be provided with the reference. The reviewer should also draw the attention of the chief editor if the reviewed manuscript largely resembles or partially matches any other manuscript that is known by the reviewer.

Disclosure of information and conflict of interest

Unpublished information that is disclosed in the reviewed article may not be used in any own publication of the reviewer without the written permission of the author. Any confidential information or ideas received during the review should be kept secret and may not be used to gain any benefit.  Chief Editor should withdraw from the review if any conflict of interest occurs as a result of competition, collaboration or other relations with any of the authors, companies or organizations related to the article.

3. Author responsibility

Originality and plagiarism

The authors of the article should guarantee full originality of the article. If the authors have used the work and/or the words of other authors, it should be highlighted in the text or marked with a reference. Plagiarism has many types starting from passing the work of another author for your own to copying or paraphrasing the substantial parts of other works (without providing a reference to the source) and to claiming your right for the results of another research performed by a third party. All types of plagiarism are unethical and unacceptable.  Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at a time is unethical and unacceptable. The articles already published in other journals should not be submitted.  You should properly recognize the works of other researchers. The authors should provide the references to the publications that have had impact on the contents of the article.

Authorship of an article

The authorship should be limited to the persons who have substantially contributed to the concept, planning, executing or interpreting the research under consideration.  Everyone who made a significant contribution should be mentioned as co-authors. If a person contributed to any substantial part of the project, you should express appreciation to him/her or mention him/her as a co-author.

Disclosure of information and conflict of interest

All authors should disclose all financial or other substantial conflict of interest that can affect the evaluation of the manuscript. All financial sources of the project should be disclosed.

Errors in published articles

If the author discovers a serious error or inaccuracy in the published article, the author should immediately contact the chief editor and collaborate with the chief editor to publish a disclaimer or a correction. If the chief editor receives the information on a serious error in a published article from a third party, the author should timely publish a disclaimer or correction, or provide the proof of correctness for the published article.

Revealing the plagiarism

The editors office, editorial board of the ‘THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL ECONOMY DEVELOPMENT’ journal undertake an obligation to help the scientific community to observe and practice publishing ethics, especially in cases of possible double submission or plagiarism.

 



ISSN: 2518-7589