Code of Ethics and Standards of Good Practices

Estudios Económicos is an academic journal dedicated to publishing scientific research committed to complying with ethical standards and good editorial practices. Along this line, this Code of Ethics and Declaration of Good Practices is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. All participants in the publication of an article (authors, referees, editorial and honorary boards) must respect the principles expressed in this document.

Responsibilities and Obligations for authors

Authors should:
• Ensure that the articles submitted for evaluation constitute unpublished manuscripts, that is to say, they are works that have not been previously published. Likewise, it is not ethical behaviour to submit a manuscript for evaluation that has been evaluated in another journal.
• Ensure that the data and/or statistical information used in the preparation of the article have been collected ethically.
• Prepare their manuscripts following the presentation rules established by the Editorial Board.
• Present a detailed description of the work done and the references to allow its replication, as well as an objective discussion of its importance. The presentation of its meaning and implications must be objective and commensurate with the results. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
• Incorporate in the work the references of all the articles that have served as a guide for the preparation of the manuscript. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes an unacceptable practice. Consequently, any manuscript found to incur plagiarism will be returned to those who have submitted it.
• Indicate, if any, the funding sources of the research and the authors' conflicts of interest.
• Notify the Director of the journal in case the published article contains numerical, conceptual, spelling or typographical errors to be corrected.
• Participate in the peer review process and the editing stage, each time the Director requires it.
• Ensure that any individuals who have made a significant contribution to the research are included in the article, and, in addition, that all of them have seen and approved the final version and presentation.

Responsibilities and obligations for editors

The editors, and exceptionally the members of the Honorary Advisory Board, are responsible for evaluating the manuscripts and conducting a first review (by filling the pre-evaluation form) about their intellectual content (the importance of the article, its originality, its clarity and the relevance of the subject of study for the journal). The manuscript evaluation procedure must be the same for all articles submitted to the journal, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors. In addition, the acceptance and rejection decisions of the manuscript cannot be influenced by a conflict of interest related to authors, work or their funders. In case of not being able to be objective, the editors must state it and depart from the evaluation of that work.

The members of the Editorial Board should

• Ensure compliance with the double-blind characteristic of the evaluation process. Likewise, they should not disclose the content of the articles submitted for evaluation. They should not use the manuscripts sent to the journal in personal research studies.
• Notify the other members of the Editorial Board when errors are detected in articles already published, and proceed to their correction.

The Editorial Board must publish a detailed description of the review process to inform the authors.
The final decisions regarding the articles, the issue in which they are published, and the order of the articles within that issue are the Editorial Board's responsibilities.

Responsibilities and obligations for referees

Reviewers must support the Editorial Board to achieve scientific excellence in the selection of manuscripts that meet significant quality standards. For this purpose, they must complete the evaluation form following the guidelines established for that purpose.
In case the reviewers do not consider themselves sufficiently expert in the subjects addressed by the manuscript or are unable to meet the deadlines established by the editorial committee, they must notify the Editorial Board to assign alternative reviewers. Reviewers must perform their duties objectively, clearly arguing their opinion.
During the review process, the reviewers must advise the authors about relevant references that have not been incorporated into the manuscripts. Moreover, should they detect a potential/possible plagiarism or that the manuscript under evaluation has already been published, the reviewers must report it to the Editorial Board.
Reviewers should ensure compliance with confidentiality and the triple-blind evaluation process. In addition, the information expressed in the manuscripts cannot be shared during the process. Finally, reviewers should not totally or partially use any information contained in the articles that are in the process of evaluation or that have been rejected.