Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The main content of the Journal are original scientific papers devoted to topical issues of regional policies, economy and sociology, as well as to analysis of the integrated development of the regions of the Russian Federation and other countries.

The priority goals and objectives of the Journal are:

– to cover important issues of the state structure of the Russian Federation and foreign countries, as well as peculiarities of regional political regimes in the world today;

– to describe the processes taking place in the regions in the economic, social and political context;

– to present results of pieces of original political, sociological, and economic research;

– to disseminate ideas of scholars and practitioners for developing scientifically dubstantiated mechanisms and practice-oriented strategies for the harmonious development of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and foreign countries;

– to ensure high professional quality of published papers by virtue of peer review;

– to increase the prominence and credibility of the Journal.

The target audience of the Journal is researchers and scholars who study the issues of regional policies, Economics, and Sociology at both the theoretical and empirical levels. The Journal is addressed to specialists and experts representing sociological, information and analytical services of public and non-governmental organizations, commercial structures; it is aimed at those interested in the issues of regional policies, Economics and Sociology.

Our editorial policy is grounded in the principles of free academic inquiry. We support the right of scholars to conduct and present their research openly, to engage in professional dialogue across disciplines and borders, and to have their work evaluated solely on the basis of its scholarly merit. By ensuring impartial review and decision-making, the journal safeguards the integrity of academic communication and provides a platform where scientific contributions can be assessed fairly and disseminated responsibly.

Through adherence to these principles, the Russian Journal of Regional Studies seeks to foster a research environment in which academic freedom is fully respected, intellectual independence is protected, and scientific progress is guided only by rigor, relevance, and ethical responsibility.

Sections

Social Structure, Social Institutes and Processes

Political Institutions, Processes, Technologies

International Relationships

EconomicSociology

Demography

Political Sociology

Sociology of Culture

Sociology of Management

Public Administration and Sectoral Policies

Regional and Sectoral Economy

World Economy

ЭКОНОМИКА И УПРАВЛЕНИЕ НАРОДНЫМ ХОЗЯЙСТВОМ

ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКАЯ СОЦИОЛОГИЯ И ДЕМОГРАФИЯ

Peer Review Process

Russian Journal of Regional Studies strives to uphold the highest standards of publication ethics and ensure the integrity of scientific data. Our review process is designed to ensure an objective, fair, and constructive evaluation of submitted manuscripts. This policy describes the journal's review principles and procedures, which are consistent with the best practices and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The journal uses a double-blind review process for all submitted scientific articles. This means that the identities of the authors are not disclosed to the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors. However, authors may choose an open review format when submitting their manuscript without removing their personal data from the manuscript.

Criteria for Publication

For a manuscript to be accepted for publication, it must meet the following core criteria. It must present a significant and original contribution to the field of regional studies, capable of influencing existing knowledge. The research methodology must be sound, appropriate, and clearly described. Furthermore, the manuscript must be structured according to the journal's guidelines for its specific article type, ensuring all structural components serve a clear purpose.

Reviewer Selection

The selection of reviewers is a critical step in the publication process. The editorial board selects reviewers based on their expertise and reputation in the relevant subject area, their previous publication record, recommendations from editorial board members, and their past performance as a reviewer. We strive to invite reviewers who can provide a thorough, objective, and reasoned evaluation.

Reviewer Responsibilities and Protocol

The main purpose of a review is to provide editors with the information they need to make an editorial decision and to offer authors constructive comments to improve their work. Reviews should be objective, supported by arguments, and free of personal comments directed at the authors. A review recommending rejection should clearly explain the main shortcomings of the work. Confidential comments to the editor are welcome, but should not contradict the main points raised in the comments to the authors. Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest.

Anonymity and Transparency

The journal does not disclose the identity of reviewers to authors or other reviewers. Reviewers may, at their discretion, sign their reviews to increase the transparency of the process. In accordance with the double-blind review model, the identity of authors is not disclosed to reviewers, except in cases where the author has chosen an open review format.

Handling of Reviewer Reports

In accordance with COPE guidelines, the editorial office does not alter the substantive content of reviewer reports. All comments intended for the authors are forwarded to them. In rare cases, the editorial office may redact parts of a review that contain confidential information unrelated to the manuscript or language that could be deemed offensive. Authors are encouraged to respond to all reviewer comments point-by-point when submitting a revised manuscript.

Post-Review Decisions and Procedures

A manuscript revised in accordance with reviewers' comments may be sent for re-review at the editor's discretion. Authors who wish to appeal the editorial decision should send a formal letter of appeal to the editorial office for consideration. Review records are kept by the editorial office for five years and are available for official requests.

This policy complies with the metadata requirements and best practices promoted by Crossref.

Open Access Policy

Russian Journal of Regional Studies is an open access journal, i.e. all content is freely available to users in accordance with the definition of open access of the BOAI. The journal's materials are available under a Creative Commons “Attribution” 4.0 International license. Articles in this journal are available to anyone interested parties from the moment of publication, which ensures free open access to research results and contributes to the advancement of science.

Regulations on the Editorial Board

1. General Provisions

1.1. These Regulations establish the procedures for the activities of the Editorial Board (hereinafter referred to as the "Editorial Board") of the peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal Russian Journal of Regional Studies (hereinafter referred to as the "Journal").

1.2. The Journal is founded and published by the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education National Research Mordovia State University (hereinafter referred to as the "Founder").

1.3. The Editorial Board is a collegial advisory body established by the Founder to provide organizational, methodological, scientific, and technical support for the Journal. Its activities are carried out on a voluntary basis.

1.4. The Editorial Board is composed of distinguished specialists in the relevant field, representing various scientific, educational, and research institutions in the Russian Federation and abroad.

1.5. The size and composition of the Editorial Board are approved by the Founder. The Editorial Board includes the Chairperson (Editor-in-Chief), Co-Chairpersons (Deputy Editors-in-Chief), the Executive Secretary, and other members. Membership is confirmed in writing. Representatives of the Founder may also join the Editorial Board upon their written consent. The list of Editorial Board members is published on one of the title pages of the Journal and on its official website.

1.6. The Editorial Board is chaired by the Editor-in-Chief.

1.7. These Regulations on the Editorial Board are approved by the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal.

2. Competence of the Editorial Board

The Editorial Board is responsible for the following:

– Defining and developing the editorial policy of the Journal;

– Developing and implementing strategies to enhance the scientific authority of the Journal and expand its readership;

– Formulating recommendations on the scope of the Journal;

– Identifying and recruiting new authors based on the Journal's scope;

– Participating in the review process for articles submitted to the Journal;

– Contributing to the promotion of the Journal, including through the use of information technology and social media;

– Proposing improvements to the publication's quality and the editorial and publishing processes.

3. Meetings of the Editorial Board

3.1. Meetings of the Editorial Board are convened by the Editor-in-Chief and held as necessary, including via video conference, in accordance with the procedure established by the Chairperson.

3.2. A meeting of the Editorial Board is considered valid if more than half of its members are present.

3.3. The agenda for the Editorial Board meetings is determined by the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal. The minutes of the meetings are prepared by the Executive Secretary, kept by the Editorial Board for five years, and then transferred to the archive for permanent storage.

3.4. The meetings will address matters within the Editorial Board's competence. Board members may request that additional topics be included in the agenda, either before or during the meeting.

3.5. Authors and other interested parties may be invited to attend meetings of the Editorial Board.

3.6. Decisions of the Editorial Board are made by a simple majority vote of the members present at the meeting and are subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief. In the event of a tie vote, the presiding officer's vote is decisive. The decisions of the Editorial Board are advisory in nature, and the Editor-in-Chief is not obligated to justify any refusal to approve them.

3.7. Only members of the Editorial Board have the right to vote at meetings. Invited guests do not participate in the voting process.

3.8. The Chairperson is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Board's decisions.

4. Members of the Editorial Board

4.1. Members of the Editorial Board are required to:

– Participate in meetings and contribute to the development of draft decisions;

– Support the Journal by liaising with government, public, scientific, and other organizations;

– Ensure the quality and thematic direction of the Journal's content.

4.2. Members of the Editorial Board have the right to:

– Receive the necessary information from the Editorial Board to carry out its tasks effectively;

– Participate in expert groups focused on the Journal's scope;

– Review materials proposed for publication, participate in discussions about them, and share their opinions.

Publication Fee and Edition Business Model

The Russian Journal of Regional Studies is an Open Access journal. All content is freely available to readers, and no fees are charged from authors.

No Fees for Authors

The journal does not charge any publication fees. Authors are not required to pay for submission, peer review, editing, translation, or formatting. The journal does not pay royalties.

Free Access for Readers

All articles are available free of charge immediately upon publication.

Funding

The journal is fully funded by its founding organization, the National Research Mordovia State University.

Editorial Practices

– Articles are accepted only directly from authors.

– The Editorial Board does not work with intermediaries or offer any paid services.

– The journal does not provide a fast-track publication option.

CrossMark Policy

The Russian Journal of Regional Studies uses the CrossMark service to maintain the content it publishes and to promptly inform readers about any changes to published articles, including corrections and retractions. This policy is developed in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Crossref rules.

CrossMark is an international initiative that provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of a published article. The CrossMark logo is applied to both HTML and PDF versions of articles. By clicking on it, a reader can view the current status of a publication, its change history, and access additional record information.

The CrossMark system applies to current and future content of the journal, covering specific publication types as outlined below.

Publication Types

Addendum	A publication item giving additional information regarding another publication item, mostly presenting additional results
Clarification	A variety of correction in which errors are not reported, but the data of a previously published article is clarified or elaborated
Comment (Commentary)	A critical or explanatory note written to discuss, support, or dispute an article or other presentation previously published. It may take the form of an article, letter, etc.
Conference Materials (Proceedings)	A published record of the papers delivered at or issued on the occasion of a congress, symposium, or meeting
Correction	An article describing corrections made to another article previously published in the same journal. Unlike Corrigendum/Erratum, the corrections are not necessarily due to error
Correspondence	A letter to the editor or a reply to such a letter
Discussion	An argumentative communication, like papers in a discussion, perspectives, or commentaries
Duplicate Publication	An accidental republication of an article that has already been published in another journal. The content is withdrawn; the HTML page is replaced with an explanation, and the PDF is watermarked with "DUPLICATE"
Editorial	A statement of the opinions, beliefs, or policy of the editor or publisher, usually on current matters of significance to the journal's audience
Erratum Corrigendum	An article listing and correcting errors made in an earlier publication in the same journal (by the publisher — Erratum, by the author — Corrigendum)
Expression of Concern	A notification to readers about concerns regarding the integrity of a published article. It is issued by the editors, who are responsible for initiating an investigation and informing readers of its outcome, which may lead to a retraction
Original Research Article	A complete report on original research results
Removal	An editorial note on the removal of a previously published article. The article's content is completely removed and replaced with a page containing an explanation
Retraction	An editorial note on the retraction of a previously published article. The HTML page is replaced with citation details and an explanation, and the PDF is watermarked with "RETRACTED"
Partial Retraction	An editorial note on the retraction of a part of a previously published article
Review Article	A substantial overview of original research, usually with a comprehensive bibliography
Short Communication	A short report or announcement of research, often claiming preliminary results
Withdrawal	A refutation of a previously published article in situations where a standard retraction procedure cannot be performed

Ethics of Scientific Publications

The editorial policy of the Russian Journal of Regional Studies is guided by the principles of publication ethics, in accordance with international standards. This policy applies to all parties involved in the publication process: the publisher, editors, reviewers, and authors.

The Editorial Board ensures adherence to ethical standards by following the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, UK), Elsevier Publishing (Netherlands), other international editorial associations and information systems, as well as the Declaration "Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications" adopted by the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP, Russia).

Publisher's Responsibilities

Copyright and Licensing
Authors retain significant rights to their published work. Open-access articles are typically published under a Creative Commons licence; the specific type of licence is indicated on the journal's website. The journal's detailed policies regarding preprints and self-archiving are also available online.

Handling of Retractions
In cases of proven research misconduct, the journal will retract the publication. A retraction notice will be issued, clearly stating the reason for the retraction. The original text will remain accessible as part of the scientific record but will be prominently marked as retracted.

Preservation of Scientific Record
The publisher is committed to ensuring the long-term digital preservation of the journal's content.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editorial Independence and Integrity
The Editor-in-Chief holds sole responsibility for decisions regarding the publication of manuscripts. These decisions are based exclusively on the scholarly merit, originality, and clarity of the work. Editorial decisions must be free from influence by commercial, political, or any other external interests. Third-party involvement in decision-making is strictly prohibited. Maintaining this independence is fundamental to preserving the journal's integrity. Any departure from this principle jeopardises the journal's scientific standing and credibility. The journal remains steadfast in its commitment to maintaining the trust of the academic community.

Fair Play and Confidentiality
Editors shall evaluate manuscripts objectively, without bias related to the authors' race, gender, nationality, religion, or institutional affiliation. The confidentiality of all submitted materials and the identity of reviewers must be maintained throughout the review process.

Investigation of Ethical Violations
Upon receiving allegations of ethical misconduct, the editors will initiate a thorough investigation in accordance with COPE guidelines. This process may involve contacting the authors' institutions if necessary.

Appeal Policy
Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a formal, written request to the editorial office within one month of receiving the decision. The appeal will be considered by the Editorial Board, whose decision is final.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Objectivity and Confidentiality
Reviewers are expected to provide objective and constructive critiques. They must maintain the confidentiality of the peer review process; manuscripts must not be disclosed to others or used for personal advantage.

Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should decline to review a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest, whether competitive, collaborative, or otherwise.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewers are responsible for providing comprehensive and objective assessments that contribute to informed editorial decisions. Their critical evaluations and constructive recommendations play a crucial role in enhancing the scientific quality of manuscripts and ensuring the integrity of the publication process. Reviewers' input is essential for maintaining the scholarly rigour and credibility of the journal.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authorship and Originality
Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the research. All co-authors must approve the final version of the manuscript prior to its submission. Practices such as guest, gift, or ghost authorship are strictly prohibited.

Author Identification
All authors are obliged to provide a valid ORCID iD as part of the submission process. This unique identifier is required to ensure proper attribution of scientific contributions, facilitate tracking of authors' publications, and maintain transparency in the academic record.

Data Integrity and Accuracy
Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the data presented in their work. Fabrication, falsification, or selective manipulation of data and imagery constitute serious ethical misconduct.

Generative AI Policy
Authors must disclose any use of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process (e.g., for language polishing, data analysis). The authors retain sole responsibility for the content of their work, including any errors or inaccuracies introduced by the use of such tools.

Plagiarism
Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. The journal employs plagiarism detection software to screen submissions. The Editorial Board is particularly vigilant against translation plagiarism, which involves publishing a translated version of another author's work without proper attribution.

Conflict of Interest and Ethical Approvals
Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed. For studies involving human subjects or animals, authors must include statements confirming that informed consent was obtained and that the study protocol was approved by an appropriate ethics committee.

Use of Generative AI

With the development of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies increasingly used by authors in creating scientific manuscripts, the Russian Journal of Regional Studies has established a policy to regulate their use. The journal will closely monitor advancements in this field and revise its policy as necessary.

Policy for Authors

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools in Scientific Writing

This policy applies exclusively to the writing process and does not cover the use of AI for data analysis or deriving scientific conclusions during research.

Authors may use generative AI and AI tools solely to enhance the readability and linguistic quality of their manuscripts. Such tools must be used under human supervision, with the output carefully reviewed and edited by the authors. It is important to recognize that AI can generate text that appears authoritative but may contain inaccuracies, incomplete information, or biases.

Responsibility and Disclosure

Authors bear full responsibility for the content of their work. The use of AI tools must be disclosed in the manuscript, and this disclosure will be included in the published article to ensure transparency and build trust among all participants in the publication process.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship implies responsibility and the fulfillment of tasks that only humans can perform. Authors must ensure their work is original, complies with ethical standards, and does not infringe on the rights of third parties.

Use of AI in Illustrations and Graphic Content

Prohibition on AI-Generated or Altered Images. The use of generative AI or AI tools to create, alter, or process images in manuscripts is prohibited. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, and color balance are permitted only if they do not distort the presented data.

Exception. If the use of AI is part of the research methodology (e.g., biomedical imaging), it must be thoroughly described in the "Methods" section, including the name and specifications of the AI tool used.

Policy for Reviewers

Confidentiality and Use of AI Tools

Manuscripts submitted for review are considered confidential documents. Reviewers are obligated to maintain strict confidentiality regarding the content of manuscripts and any related information.

The uploading of manuscripts or their parts to any AI systems is strictly prohibited, as it may compromise the confidentiality of the authors and their intellectual property rights. Review comments, which may contain sensitive information about the manuscript and its authors, are also not to be uploaded to AI systems.

The use of generative AI in the preparation of reviews is not permitted, as the peer review process necessitates critical thinking and independent expert evaluation, which fall outside the capabilities of artificial intelligence. Reviewers bear full responsibility for the quality of their expert assessment, the content of their reviews, and compliance with ethical reviewing standards.

Policy for Editors

Confidentiality and Use of AI Tools

All manuscripts submitted for consideration must be treated as confidential documents. Editors are required to ensure the protection of authors’ personal data and prevent unauthorized distribution of materials.

The use of AI systems to support editorial decision-making and the formulation of editorial policy is prohibited. The evaluation of manuscripts requires critical thinking and an objective approach, which can only be provided by qualified human editors.

However, the use of secure AI technologies is permitted for tasks such as checking manuscripts for plagiarism, analyzing content completeness, and identifying potential reviewers, provided that confidentiality standards are maintained.

Editors are fully responsible for the quality of the editorial process, the final decisions regarding manuscripts, informing authors about the status of their submissions, and adhering to ethical norms in editorial work.

Digital Аrchiving Policy

The journal provides constant access to its articles on the Internet. The archive with the full set of metadata is available online. If the journal is temporarily unable to provide access, for example, due to an emergency, articles can be found in other digital archives.

Issues of the journal are deposited in the following digital archives

– The full issues of the journal are stored on the journal's website in the PDF / A format and are deposited as a legal deposit copy to the Russian State Library (rsl.ru)

– The full issues of the journal are stored on the RCSI Journals Platform

– Files of journal articles are saved on the site in PDF format.

– Files of journal articles are deposited with metadata to the Scientific Electronic Library / Russian Scientific Citation Index (РИНЦ) (e-library.ru)

– Files of journal articles are deposited along with metadata in the Cyberleninkа digital library (cyberleninka.ru)

Policies for Authors

Authorship

Criteria for Authorship
Authorship is granted to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the research and manuscript. Contributing roles include:
– Conceptualization and research design.
– Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
– Drafting the manuscript or substantively revising it for intellectual content.
– Final approval of the version to be published.
All individuals who meet these criteria should be listed as authors.

Authorship Responsibilities
The corresponding author is primarily responsible for communication with the journal and ensures all co-authors have approved the final manuscript and agree to its submission.
The order of authorship should be a joint decision of all co-authors.
All co-authors share collective responsibility for the entire content of the work, not only for their specific contributions.
Submitting false or fraudulent information in accompanying documents is grounds for immediate rejection, regardless of peer-review outcomes.

Contributorship and Acknowledgments
Individuals who have contributed to the research (e.g., financial sponsors, supervisory support) but do not meet the full criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in a dedicated Acknowledgments section.
To ensure transparent attribution of contributions, this journal requires the use of the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) standard. Authors must specify the role(s) of each contributor using the controlled vocabulary provided at https://credit.niso.org.

Post-Publication Corrections and Retractions

General Principles
The journal is committed to preserving the integrity and completeness of the scientific record. While published articles are considered final, there are circumstances under which post-publication corrections or retractions are necessary. All such actions are handled following COPE guidelines.

Reporting Errors
Authors who identify a significant error in their published article must contact the journal immediately. The editorial team, in consultation with the RASEP Ethics Council if necessary, will review the case and determine the appropriate course of action.

Types of Corrections
– Corrigendum: Issued to correct an error or omission made by the authors that does not affect the article's core conclusions. All authors must agree to the publication of a Corrigendum, which will be permanently linked to the original article.
– Erratum: Issued to correct an error introduced by the journal/publisher during the production process. An Erratum will also be linked to the original article.

Withdrawal of Accepted Manuscripts
A manuscript in the "accepted for publication" stage (Ahead of Print) may be withdrawn if:
– Critical errors are discovered.
– It constitutes a duplicate submission or plagiarism.
– It violates editorial policies (e.g., false authorship, data fraud).
– It was published online in error by the journal.
Withdrawn manuscripts are replaced by a page stating the reason for withdrawal, with a link to this policy.

Retraction of Published Articles
A published article may be retracted if serious issues are identified that undermine its reliability or integrity. Grounds for retraction include, but are not limited to:
– Unreliable findings due to major error or misconduct (e.g., data fabrication).
– Plagiarism or duplicate publication.
– Unauthorized use of third-party material or legal issues (e.g., copyright infringement).
– Ethical violations in research involving humans or animals.
– Compromised peer review, citation manipulation, or authorship fraud.
– Failure to disclose a major conflict of interest.
The retraction notice clearly states the reason for the action and is permanently linked to the retracted article.

Use of Third-Party Materials

General Principles
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to reproduce any copyrighted material not owned by them. This policy protects the rights of copyright holders and ensures the legal integrity of the published work.

When Permission is Required
Permission is required for the reproduction of substantial parts of any copyrighted work, including text, illustrations, diagrams, tables, and photographs.

Permission Process
Authors must:
– Identify and contact the copyright holder (e.g., publisher, society, or author).
– Request formal written permission for use in a scholarly article, specifying the type of publication (print and online).
– Submit all permission grants to the journal editorial office along with the manuscript.

Attribution and Exceptions
Proper attribution must be provided as stipulated by the copyright holder.
Permission is not required for material in the public domain or published under an open license (e.g., Creative Commons), provided the license terms are strictly followed.
Failure to secure necessary permissions may lead to manuscript rejection or article retraction.

Data Availability and Transparency

General Principles
To promote research reproducibility and transparency, the journal enforces the following policy on data access, aligned with COPE and Crossref recommendations.

Authors' Responsibilities
Authors must be prepared to provide supporting data and materials upon reasonable request from editors or reviewers during peer review.
This may include:
– Raw data (observational, experimental).
– Protocols, scripts, or algorithms used for analysis.
– Detailed methodologies that enable the replication of results.

Data Sharing and Formats
Data should be provided in reusable formats (e.g., CSV, TXT for data; PDF for protocols).
Authors are strongly encouraged to deposit data in recognized public repositories (e.g., Zenodo, Mendeley Data) upon article acceptance. A Data Availability Statement must be included in the manuscript, describing how and where the supporting data can be accessed.
Temporary private access for peer review is acceptable, with the understanding that data will be made publicly available upon publication.

Confidentiality and Reviewer Rights
Data shared during peer review will be treated confidentially and used solely for the evaluation process.
Reviewers may request data essential for validating the study's conclusions; such requests must be justified.

Consequences of Non-Compliance
Refusal to provide essential data for verification may result in the suspension of the review process or rejection of the manuscript. Post-publication concerns regarding data transparency may lead to an investigation and potential corrective action.

Article Retraction Policy

Purpose of Retraction

The goal of retraction is to inform readers about materials containing significant errors or unreliable data that cannot be trusted. Data unreliability may arise from honest mistakes or deliberate misconduct, such as duplicate publications, plagiarism, or undisclosed conflicts of interest that could distort data interpretation or recommendations for use.

Retraction also serves to uphold scientific integrity by warning other researchers and readers against using the results of the retracted article in subsequent studies. Its primary function is to maintain the reliability of scientific research by removing misleading or inaccurate data from circulation.

Retraction thus contributes to upholding high scientific standards and trust in published research, ensuring that only reliable and accurate data remain within the scientific community.

The editorial board of the Russian Journal of Regional Studies, following the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the "Rules for Retraction" of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP), adheres to the following retraction policy.

Grounds for Retraction

Articles may be retracted due to violations of scientific publishing ethics, including:
– incorrect and/or unattributed borrowing of the information (plagiarism);
– duplicate publication in multiple outlets;
– self-plagiarism;
– falsification or fabrication of data (e.g., manipulation of experimental results);
– identification of significant errors in the publication (e.g., incorrect interpretation of research findings), undermining its scientific value;
– misrepresentation of authorship (including individuals who do not meet authorship criteria);
– undisclosed conflicts of interest;
– republishing an article without the author's consent;
– other violations of publication ethics.

A retraction confirms that the article contains violations. While authors may disagree with the decision, the journal retains the right to proceed with the retraction process. Articles may be retracted by the authors or by the journal's editorial board. Retraction is not intended as a tool to discredit authors but as a mechanism to ensure the transparency and integrity of scientific communication and knowledge dissemination.

When a retraction decision is made based on an expert review, triggered by third-party information or an author's request, the authors are formally notified. Authors (or the corresponding author in case of collective authorship) must review and acknowledge the reasoning for retraction. If authors refuse to retract, the editorial board reserves the right to proceed without their consent, since it is responsible for the content of the journal and the accuracy of the data presented in it.

Retraction Process

Process initiation
The retraction process is initiated by the editor-in-chief based on expert review and the authors' responses to specific concerns. Authors either agree to the retraction or present convincing arguments against it. The editorial board makes the final decision on retraction.

Author-Initiated Retraction
Authors submit a written request to the editorial board explaining the reasons (e.g., errors in the presented data or unauthorized use of third-party information). If the board agrees to the retraction, it is implemented in line with COPE guidelines and ASEP ethical standards. If the board does not respond, authors may appeal to the ASEP Ethics Council.

Third-Party-Initiated Retraction
The editorial board conducts an expert review based on third-party claims and notifies the authors of its decision. If ignored, the editorial board may proceed independently.

Decision documentation
Retraction decisions are documented in an editorial board meeting protocol.

Retraction notice content
The retraction statement includes:
– author(s)' name(s), article title, journal name, publication details, and DOI;
– the party initiating the retraction;
– grounds for retraction (e.g., plagiarism, duplication, with references to the original source);
– date of decision and link to the article metadata page on the journal's website, containing the retraction notice and the full text marked as "RETRACTED."

Exceptional cases
In exceptional cases, articles may need to be removed entirely because of defamatory content or threats to public health. Metadata (title and authors) will be retained, with an explanation of why the article was removed.

Notification distribution
The editor-in-chief sends the retraction protocol to:
– National Electronic Library (eLibrary.ru) and other bibliographic databases. While article information remains in the system, its indexing in databases like RSCI is removed, and the retraction note is appended;
– ASEP's Ethics Council for inclusion in the Retraction Database;
– Relevant dissertation councils if the article is referenced in academic defenses.

Retraction information is also published as a separate file on the journal's website.

Based on the expert review, the editorial board may impose a publication ban on the author(s) for a specific period.

Plagiarism and Improper Borrowing

The Russian Journal of Regional Studies maintains a zero-tolerance policy towards plagiarism and will not publish any work that contains plagiarism in any form, including verbatim text plagiarism, idea plagiarism, or data plagiarism.

The Editorial Board considers the following to constitute plagiarism:

– Verbatim copying of any materials in any volume without appropriate citation of the source.

– Use of images, illustrations, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams, or any other form of graphical representation without citing the original source.

– Use of such graphical materials previously published in scientific or popular sources without obtaining permission from the copyright holder, if required.

– Use of materials whose authors or copyright holders explicitly prohibit their use without prior written consent.

The Editorial Board considers the following to be forms of improper borrowing:

– Failure to clearly indicate (e.g., through quotation marks or block indentation) verbatim quotations, even if a source is cited.

– Incorrect references (e.g., an incomplete bibliographic description that prevents the source from being identified).

– Citing a secondary source of a borrowed text without explicitly acknowledging the primary source (an error in source attribution).

– Failure to provide in-text citations for sources listed in the bibliography.

Authors must submit entirely original works. Any mention of other authors' work, ideas, or research results must be accompanied by appropriate citation to the original source, which must be included in the reference list.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal for publication undergo mandatory screening using the “Antiplagiat” system. Should the editors have grounds for a more detailed check, additional plagiarism detection tools may be employed.

The detection of idea and/or data plagiarism is conducted during the scientific peer-review process and post-publication, should relevant claims be raised by readers. In cases of extensive plagiarism or improper borrowing, the editorial team will act in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

Policy on Preprint and Postprint Deposition

The Editorial Board of the Russian Journal of Regional Studies permits authors to deposit their manuscripts as preprints prior to submission and to self-archive their articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories under the following conditions.

Preprint

The Journal encourages the posting of preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as “a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) at an openly ac".

The following conditions apply:

– the existence of a preprint is not considered prior publication and does not affect the editorial decision;
– articles previously posted by the author on personal or public websites (not affiliated with other publishers) are eligible for submission;
– upon submission, authors must inform the editorial board about any related preprint, providing a link with its DOI and licensing terms;
– authors are responsible for updating the preprint record with a link to the final published article, including its DOI and URL on the journal’s website;
– the preprint itself should not be altered, updated, or replaced based on reviewer or editorial comments, nor should it be removed.

Accepted Manuscript (Postprint)

Authors are permitted to self-archive the version of the manuscript that has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication but has not yet been copyedited or typeset (the “Accepted Manuscript” or postprint).

This version may be deposited on:

– a personal website or blog;
– an institutional repository;
– a disciplinary repository (e.g., SSRN, ResearchGate);
– and may be shared for personal use with colleagues.

The deposited file must include a clear notice stating: “This is the peer-reviewed version of the following article: FULL ARTICLE TITLE, which has been accepted for publication in the Russian Journal of Regional Studies and is scheduled to appear in Issue [Number], [Year].”

Upon publication, authors must add a link to the final published article (Version of Record) on the journal’s website. The text of the Accepted Manuscript should not be replaced or removed.

Version of Record

Authors may self-archive the final, published version of the article (the Version of Record) which has been copyedited, typeset, and includes all enhancements.

This version may be deposited on:

– a personal website or blog;
– an institutional repository;
– a disciplinary repository;
– and may be shared for personal use with colleagues.

When citing or sharing the article, authors and readers are requested to provide a link to the Version of Record on the journal’s official website, using its DOI (as recommended by Crossref).

Appeals Policy

This appeals policy has been developed to ensure a fair and transparent process for addressing authors’ disagreement with editorial decisions. It outlines the procedures for submitting and reviewing appeals, as well as the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved.

If an author disagrees with the editorial decision, they have the right to submit a single appeal to the Editorial Board’s email address, provided all co-authors consent to the appeal submission. All appeals are reviewed by the editors, with the review period typically lasting several weeks.

The author must submit the appeal within a specified period following the receipt of the initial decision. The email subject line should include the words «Appeal» and the manuscript ID number.

The appeal document should contain a clear justification of the author’s position, responses to editors’ and reviewers’ comments, and any supporting evidence if technical errors, conflicts of interest, or bias are suspected.

The appeals review process is conducted by the journal’s editors. In cases involving alleged conflicts of interest, an independent member of the editorial board not involved in the original decision will handle the appeal.

It is important to note that if the author remains dissatisfied with the Editorial Board’s decision regarding the appeal, no further reconsideration of the manuscript will be undertaken. Agreement to reconsideration does not guarantee manuscript acceptance, and the process may involve additional peer review and substantial revision requirements.

To withdraw an appeal, the corresponding author must submit a notification to the journal, clearly indicating the withdrawal request and providing the manuscript ID number.

Handling Appeals

Submission of Appeals

Appeals, complaints, proposals, and statements from citizens are accepted in Russian and English by the Correspondence Department of the Founder (National Research Mordovia State University) and the Journal’s Editorial Office.

Methods of Submission:

– in person;

– via post (including international mail);

– by email;

– by fax;

– through the electronic form on the Journal’s official website.

Procedure for Handling Appeals

In accordance with the Federal Law No. 59-FZ of 2 May 2006 «On the Procedure for Considering Appeals from Citizens of the Russian Federation»:

– all appeals are registered within three business days;

– processing is completed within 30 days from the registration date.

Appeals will not be considered in the following cases:

– if the appeal fails to state the sender’s full name (surname, first name, patronymic – if applicable) and a valid postal or email address for response;

– if the appeal concerns a court decision (it will be returned to the sender with an explanation of the appropriate legal procedure);

– if the appeal contains profanity, offensive language, or threats to the life, health, or property of a journal staff member or their family;

– if the text of the written appeal is illegible;

– if the appeal raises a question that has already been repeatedly addressed in written responses to prior appeals without presenting new arguments or circumstances;

– if a response cannot be provided without disclosing information classified as a state or other secret protected by federal law.

A response will be sent to the address (postal or email) provided in the appeal.

Confidentiality Requirements:

– disclosure of information contained in appeals or related to an individual’s private life without consent is prohibited;

– all personal data of applicants are processed in compliance with Russian legislation on personal data protection;

– data processing practices align with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) principles.

Purpose and Objectives

The handling of complaints, appeals, and claims, along with their outcomes, forms an integral part of the overall assessment of satisfaction among the Journal’s readers, authors, and other stakeholders.

Purpose: conflict resolution and enhancement of satisfaction with the quality of the Journal’s services.

Objectives:

– systematic recording of all consumer appeals;

– identification and analysis of root causes of dissatisfaction;

– implementation of measures to resolve conflicts;

– informing applicants about taken measures;

– continuous improvement of service quality based on feedback.

Archiving

All received appeals are archived and stored according to the filing system of the scientific journals’ editorial office. Records are maintained to ensure accountability and compliance with professional standards.

Policy of Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

To ensure transparency and allow readers to assess potential biases, the Russian Journal of Regional Studies requires authors to declare any financial and/or non-financial interests related to the research described. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting a conflict-of-interest statement on behalf of all authors of the article.

A conflict of interest is defined as any financial or non-financial interest that could directly undermine or be perceived as undermining the objectivity, integrity, and value of the publication, potentially influencing the authors' judgment and actions regarding the objective presentation, analysis, and interpretation of data.

Financial Conflicts of Interest

Funding: Research support (including salaries, equipment, supplies, and other expenses) from organizations that may gain or lose financially from the publication. Any role played by the funding organization in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation must be disclosed.

Employment: Recent (during the period of the research), current, or anticipated employment in any organization that may gain or lose financially from the publication.

Personal Financial Interests: Stocks or shares in companies that may gain or lose financially from the publication; consulting fees or other remuneration (including payments for participation in symposia) from organizations that may gain or lose financially; patents or patent applications (granted or pending) filed by the authors or their institutions, whose value may be affected by the publication. For patents and applications, the following details should be disclosed: applicant (author or institution), name of the inventor(s), application number, application status, and the specific aspect of the manuscript covered by the patent application.

Non-Financial Conflicts of Interest

Non-financial conflicts of interest may take various forms, including personal or professional relationships with organizations or individuals. Authors and reviewers must disclose any unpaid roles or relationships that could influence the publication process. Examples of non-financial conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to:

– Unpaid membership in a governmental or non-governmental organization.

– Unpaid membership in an advocacy or lobbying organization.

– Unpaid advisory roles in commercial organizations.

– Consulting activities for a company.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest during the manuscript submission process through the submission system. The corresponding author is required to provide the declaration on behalf of all authors. In cases of double-anonymous review, reviewers will receive a minimal statement indicating the presence of financial or non-financial interests to avoid revealing the authors' identities.

Regardless of the review model, all authors must include a declaration at the end of the published article about the presence or absence of conflicts of interest, using one of the following standard statements:

"The authors declare the following conflicts of interest: ..."

"The authors declare no conflicts of interest."

"The authors declare that confidentiality agreements prevent disclosure of conflicts of interest related to this work".

Responsibilities of Reviewers

The Russian Journal of Regional Studies encourages reviewers to exclude themselves from the review process if a significant conflict of interest exists. Reviewers must inform editors of any conflicts of interest that may be perceived as significant. Editors will consider these disclosures when evaluating reviewer recommendations.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Articles by members of the Editorial Board submitted to the Journal are reviewed on general grounds.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.