Preamble
The AirSpace Power Journal, published by the Emirates Scholar Center for Research & Studies (ESRC), is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, scholarly quality, transparency, confidentiality, and accountability throughout the publication process.
These policies establish the ethical and editorial responsibilities of the principal parties involved in scholarly publication, including editors, reviewers, authors, and the publisher. They apply to manuscripts submitted to the Journal and to the editorial and post-publication processes associated with those manuscripts.
The Journal follows recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), together with applicable ESRC policies and the Journal's Submission Guidelines and Peer Review Policy.
All participants in the publication process are expected to uphold these principles and to act with integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and professional responsibility.
1. Editors' Responsibilities
1.1 Editorial Decision-Making
The Editorial Office is responsible for managing the editorial evaluation and publication process of the AirSpace Power Journal.
Editorial decisions are based primarily on the scholarly merits of a manuscript, including:
-
Originality and contribution to knowledge
-
Relevance to the scope of the Journal
-
Methodological rigor and academic soundness
-
Clarity and adequacy of reported findings.
-
Accuracy and completeness of relevant citations.
-
Academic and ethical compliance.
-
Potential academic, practical, strategic, or policy significance.
Editorial decisions must not be influenced by personal, commercial, political, institutional, or other considerations unrelated to the scholarly merits of the manuscript.
Editors must treat submitted manuscripts and associated information as confidential and must recuse themselves where an actual or potential conflict of interest could compromise impartial editorial judgment.
1.2 Peer Review Oversight
The AirSpace Power Journal operates a rigorous double-blind peer review process.
The Editorial Office is responsible for:
-
Conducting an initial editorial assessment of submitted manuscripts.
-
Taking reasonable measures to ensure that reviewers do not have relevant conflicts of interest.
-
Maintaining the confidentiality of authors and reviewers.
-
Considering reviewer reports together with the editors' own assessment.
-
Communicating editorial decisions to authors.
-
Ensuring that revisions are appropriately evaluated before a final decision is reached.
Manuscripts satisfying the Journal's initial requirements may be sent to at least two professional referees with relevant expertise.
The final editorial decision rests with the appropriate editor and is not determined solely by a mechanical aggregation of reviewer recommendations.
1.3 Initial Editorial Assessment and Integrity
Before peer review, submitted manuscripts may be assessed for compliance with the Journal's requirements, including originality, scope, scholarly quality, language and presentation, and applicable academic and ethical standards.
Manuscripts may be returned to authors for correction or clarification or may be declined at the initial stage where they demonstrate, for example:
-
Insufficient originality.
-
Significant scientific or scholarly deficiencies.
-
Inadequate language or presentation.
-
Failure to meet essential submission requirements.
-
Lack of relevance to the Journal's scope.
The Journal may use appropriate originality or similarity-screening tools, including Turnitin or iThenticate, where necessary.
1.4 Corrections and Maintenance of the Scholarly Record
The Editorial Office is responsible for maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the Journal's published record.
Where a valid error or issue is identified after publication, the Journal may consider an appropriate correction or rectification with editorial approval.
Articles will not ordinarily be withdrawn after publication. Where correction is warranted, the Journal will follow its applicable content-updating procedures.
Where serious concerns arise regarding the integrity of published work, the Journal may consider further appropriate editorial action in accordance with applicable publication-ethics principles and ESRC procedures.
2. Reviewers' Responsibilities
2.1 Reviewer Eligibility and Selection
Reviewers should accept an assignment only where they possess appropriate expertise relevant to the manuscript and are able to provide an objective and informed assessment.
Reviewers are selected by the Editorial Office based on their academic expertise, relevant experience, and suitability for the manuscript.
Authors may recommend potential reviewers or request the exclusion of particular reviewers where appropriate; however, the final selection rests with the Editorial Office.
2.2 Review Quality and Standards
Reviewers are expected to provide thorough, constructive, evidence-based, and respectful assessments.
Reviews should consider, as applicable:
-
Originality and contribution to the field
-
Relevance to the Journal's scope.
-
Methodological rigor, accuracy, and clarity.
-
Validity and interpretation of results.
-
Significance of academic, practical, strategic, or policy implications.
-
Accuracy and completeness of relevant citations.
-
Compliance with applicable ethical and academic standards.
Reviewers may also recommend improvements to language, style, structure, clarity, or presentation where these affect the scholarly communication of the work.
2.3 Confidentiality and Anonymity
The Journal follows a double-blind peer review system. The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.
Reviewers must treat manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and unpublished information as strictly confidential.
Reviewers must not:
-
Share or disclose manuscripts to unauthorized third parties
-
Discuss the manuscript outside the authorized review process.
-
Use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.
-
Upload manuscript content or unpublished information to external services without appropriate authorization.
2.4 Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could reasonably affect the objectivity of their assessment.
Where a relevant conflict exists, the reviewer should notify the Editorial Office and, where appropriate, decline or withdraw from the assignment.
Potential conflicts may include professional, institutional, financial, personal, collaborative, or competitive relationships with the authors or the work under review.
2.5 Ethical Concerns
Reviewers who identify potential ethical or academic concerns—including suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, fabricated or falsified information, or undisclosed conflicts of interest—should report the concern directly to the Editorial Office.
Such concerns will be treated confidentially and assessed in accordance with the Journal's applicable procedures and recognized publication-ethics principles.
3. Authors' Responsibilities
3.1 Originality and Prior Publication
By submitting a manuscript to the AirSpace Power Journal, authors confirm that the work is original and has not been previously published in substantially the same form.
The manuscript must not be simultaneously under consideration by another journal or publication.
Authors must appropriately acknowledge the work of other researchers and must not present another person's ideas, words, data, or intellectual contribution as their own.
Substantial duplication, redundant publication, or inappropriate reuse of previously published material may constitute an ethical violation.
The Journal may conduct originality or similarity checks where appropriate.
3.2 Authorship
All individuals listed as authors must have made an appropriate contribution to the work and must have approved the submitted manuscript.
The submitting author is responsible for confirming that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript and its submission.
Authors should carefully establish the authorship list and order before submission.
Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors must follow the Journal's editorial procedures and may require an explanation and written confirmation from the authors concerned.
Post-acceptance authorship changes may be considered only in exceptional circumstances. Where an authorship issue arises after online publication, an appropriate published correction may be required.
3.3 Disclosure of Conflicts and Funding
Authors must disclose financial or personal relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing or biasing the research.
Relevant disclosures may include, where applicable:
-
Employment
-
Consultancy
-
Financial interests
-
Honoraria
-
Paid expert testimony
-
Patent applications or registrations
-
Grants or research funding
-
Other relationships that could influence the work.
Authors should also disclose relevant sources of financial or institutional support associated with the research.
3.4 Research Integrity and Ethical Compliance
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their research complies with applicable academic, ethical, legal, and professional requirements.
Where research requires ethical approval, informed consent, institutional authorization, or other formal permissions, authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals and providing appropriate information or documentation where required.
Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their data, analyses, findings, interpretations, and conclusions.
Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, intentional misrepresentation, and other forms of research or publication misconduct are not accepted.
3.5 Citations and References
Authors must provide accurate and complete citations for relevant sources.
References should appropriately support the claims made in the manuscript and should follow the Journal's stated referencing requirements, including Harvard or APA style.
Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy and completeness of their references before submission.
3.6 Third-Party Content and Permissions
Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions for the reproduction or use of copyrighted or otherwise protected third-party material, including figures, tables, images, instruments, or other content where permission is required.
Authors must ensure that all such material is appropriately acknowledged and that evidence of required permissions can be provided when requested.
3.7 Post-Publication Responsibilities
Authors who discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work should promptly notify the Editorial Office.
Authors are expected to cooperate with the Journal in investigating substantive concerns and, where appropriate, in correcting the published record.
4. Publisher's Responsibilities — ESRC
4.1 Editorial Independence
The Emirates Scholar Center for Research & Studies (ESRC) supports the independence and integrity of the scholarly editorial process.
Editorial decisions are made according to established editorial and peer review procedures and are based on scholarly merit, relevance, and ethical compliance.
The publisher does not override legitimate editorial judgments on the basis of personal, commercial, political, or other inappropriate interests.
4.2 Publication Infrastructure and Scholarly Record
ESRC provides publishing infrastructure supporting the management, publication, identification, preservation, and discoverability of journal content.
Published content may be assigned persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) and maintained through appropriate digital preservation and publishing systems in accordance with applicable ESRC publishing practices.
4.3 Transparency and Accountability
The Journal seeks to maintain transparent information concerning its editorial processes, publication policies, peer review procedures, and relevant author and reviewer responsibilities.
The Journal may update its policies and procedures when necessary to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, applicable ESRC requirements, and recognized publication-ethics principles.
5. Misconduct Handling and Appeals
5.1 Reporting Ethical Concerns
Concerns regarding potential research or publication misconduct may be raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, or other appropriate parties.
Concerns should be submitted to the Editorial Office with sufficient information and supporting documentation, where available, to allow the matter to be assessed.
All allegations will be handled seriously and, to the extent appropriate, confidentially.
5.2 Assessment and Investigation
Where an allegation is received, the Editorial Office may conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the Journal's ethical or editorial responsibilities and whether sufficient information exists for further consideration.
Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the Editorial Office may:
-
Request clarification or documentation from the authors.
-
Review submission, editorial, and publication records.
-
Consult reviewers, editors, institutions, or other appropriate parties.
-
Refer serious matters to the appropriate institution or authority where warranted.
Where concerns are substantiated, appropriate action may include:
-
No further action where the concern is not supported.
-
Correction of the published record.
-
An appropriate editorial notice or expression of concern.
-
Retraction or other action where warranted by the circumstances.
Editorial actions will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the matter and will be documented as appropriate.
5.3 Appeals
Authors who believe that a significant procedural or ethical error has affected an editorial decision may submit an appeal to the Editorial Office within the period specified by the Journal.
An appeal should clearly state the grounds for the appeal and provide relevant supporting information.
Appeals are considered independently and do not guarantee a change in the original editorial decision.
6. Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools
6.1 General Principle
The Journal recognizes that generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted tools may be used in scholarly research and writing. Such tools must not compromise research integrity, authorship accountability, confidentiality, originality, or the accuracy of the scholarly record.
AI systems and generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of all submitted and published content.
6.2 Responsible Use by Authors
Where AI-assisted tools are used in manuscript preparation, authors remain responsible for:
-
Verifying all generated or assisted content.
-
Checking the accuracy of factual statements.
-
Independently verifying references and citations.
-
Ensuring that no fabricated information, data, or references are introduced.
-
Protecting confidential or proprietary information.
-
Complying with applicable copyright, intellectual property, and ethical requirements.
AI tools must not be used to fabricate or falsify research data, findings, statistical results, references, or other scholarly evidence.
7. Publication Decisions
The Editorial Office considers the totality of the editorial assessment and peer review when reaching a final decision.
Possible editorial decisions include:
-
Acceptance
-
Minor Revision
-
Major Revision
-
Rejection
Where revisions are requested, authors may be required to submit a revised manuscript together with a point-by-point response addressing the reviewers' comments.
A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers where appropriate.
The final editorial decision rests with the appropriate editor, taking into consideration the reviewers' recommendations and comments.
8. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Actions
The Journal is committed to preserving the integrity and reliability of the published scholarly record.
Where an error is identified after publication, the Journal may issue an appropriate correction or rectification where warranted.
Where substantial concerns affect the reliability or integrity of a published article, the Journal may consider an appropriate post-publication action, including an expression of concern or retraction, where justified by the available evidence.
Any correction or other post-publication notice should clearly identify the affected article and explain the nature of the action taken.
The Journal's decisions concerning post-publication actions will be guided by applicable ESRC procedures and recognized publication-ethics principles.
9. Language, Presentation, and Editorial Quality
The AirSpace Power Journal accepts manuscripts in Arabic or English.
Authors are responsible for the grammatical accuracy, spelling, scholarly language, clarity, and overall presentation of their manuscripts.
American or British English may be used, provided that usage is consistent throughout the manuscript.
The Editorial Office may request language or stylistic improvements where necessary. In exceptional circumstances, a manuscript may be returned for substantial linguistic or stylistic correction before further editorial consideration.
10. Copyright and Intellectual Property
Copyright and publication rights are governed by the applicable Emirates Scholar journals author/publisher agreement.
Authors warrant that their submission is original and does not infringe the copyright, trademark, patent, statutory, or other proprietary rights of any third party.
Authors retain the rights specified in the applicable agreement, including permitted use of all or part of their article, tables, and figures in future works with appropriate acknowledgment.
All parties involved in the publication process are expected to respect applicable intellectual property rights and licensing requirements.
11. Disclaimer and Responsibility for Published Content
Authors are solely responsible for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and completeness of their submitted and published work, including its data, analyses, interpretations, conclusions, citations, permissions, and ethical compliance.
Publication of an article does not constitute endorsement by the AirSpace Power Journal, its Editorial Board, reviewers, or ESRC of the author's views, methodologies, interpretations, or conclusions.
The Journal, Editorial Board, reviewers, and publisher are not responsible for errors, omissions, misinterpretations, or consequences arising from material contained in a published article.
12. Commitment to Responsible Scholarly Publishing
The AirSpace Power Journal and the Emirates Scholar Center for Research & Studies (ESRC) are committed to maintaining a scholarly publishing environment founded on:
-
Academic integrity
-
Editorial independence
-
Fair and rigorous peer review
-
Confidentiality
-
Transparency
-
Originality
-
Responsible authorship
-
Research integrity
-
Respect for intellectual property
-
Appropriate handling of ethical concerns
-
Integrity of the published scholarly record
The Journal's policies may be reviewed and updated periodically to remain consistent with applicable ESRC requirements, recognized publication-ethics principles, and evolving standards in scholarly publishing.
