Code of Ethics

Publication Ethics

Manuscripts submitted for publication in MyCP must be unpublished and provide a significant contribution to the study of politics, economics, environment, culture and society of Asia-Pacific countries, as well as to the analysis of regional integration processes among them.

Manuscripts submitted to the Journal must comply with strict publication standards. Counterfeiting or fabricating information and plagiarism (including duplicate publication of the authors' own work without proper citation) are not practices accepted by this Journal. MyCP reserves the right to use anti-plagiarism software during the evaluation of the manuscripts.

Prior to the publication of their pieces, authors must submit a signed letter declaring that such work has not been published and will not be published in another diffusion outlet, whether Mexican or international.

Furthermore, in a footnote in the first page of the article authors must disclose all funding sources, if any.

 

Code of Ethics

México y la Cuenca del Pacífico adheres to the code of ethics for the performance of those involved in the publishing process (Executive Committee, Editorial Board, authors and examiners) as issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); this organism was established in 1997 and currently has over 12,000 affiliates from all around the world. Available for consultation at publicationethics.org.

México y la Cuenca del Pacífico will ensure that the corresponding best practices are closely linked to the following standards:

Code of Ethics for examiners

  • Examiners will only accept the manuscripts if the subject matter matches their area of expertise.
  • Examiners will deliver the evaluation on or before deadline (three weeks). Examiners must inform the Journal if they will not be able to deliver the examination on time and in such case may request an extension.
  • Examiners promise not to involve any other party in the manuscript review process and will respect confidentiality during and after such process.
  • Should a conflict of interest that could affect the impartial opinion on the submitted manuscript arise, the examiner must notify the Technical-Administrative Editor, who will propose a new examiner.
  • Examiners may suggest changes that could improve the manuscript. In order to do so, the examiner must fill the evaluation form after accepting to perform the assessment, in which they must justify each of the proposed modifications.
  • Examiners will inform the Journal of similarities between the manuscript and other reviewed articles or any kind of plagiarism.

Code of Ethics for the Executive Committee

The Editor undertakes to inform the readers of the steps followed to ensure that the pieces published in the Journal were impartially and objectively examined by the Executive Committee and the Examination Committee, and to declare any possible conflict of interests over the editorial process due to institutional affiliation, ethical stance, kinship, or personal or work relationship.

  • The Editor guarantees to protect the intellectual property and copyright of the pieces.
  • The Editor undertakes to submit manuscripts to an assessment process performed by examiners qualified and specialized in each topic.
  • Authors will receive full examinations.
  • The Editor’s decision to accept or reject a manuscript for publication will be pursuant to its relevance and contributions to the topic, as well as originality and clarity.
  • In the case of misconduct, the Editor will follow COPE’s codes and flowcharts: https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts
  • The Editor will make the final decision on the publication or rejection of a manuscript.
  • The Editor and his/her work team undertake not to disclose any information regarding the manuscripts submitted for publication to people alien to the Editorial Board, the authors or the examiners.
  • The double-blind peer review process will be observed by avoiding any indication of authorship. The identity of examiners is also confidential.
  • Except for institutional affiliation, email address, ORCID ID number and other information that the authors may request to be included in the published articles, the authors’ personal information is confidential.

Code of Ethics for authors 

  • Authors must submit their manuscripts to México y la Cuenca del Pacíficothrough the Open Journal System (OJS) platform.
  • Manuscripts submitted for publication inMyCP must be unpublished and should make a significant contribution to the study of politics, economics, environment, culture and society of the Asia-Pacific countries, as well as to the analysis of regional integration processes among them.
  • Authors must adhere to strict publication standards. Counterfeiting or fabricating information as well as plagiarism (including duplicate publication of the authors' own work without proper citation) are not practices accepted by this journal. MyCP reserves the right to use anti-plagiarism software during the evaluation of the manuscripts.
  • Authors must disclose all funding sources, if any, in a footnote in the first page of the article.
  • Authors that submit a manuscript must indicate the order of authorship in a fair manner according to the contribution of each member; MyCP will not alter such order. Candidates are responsible for giving each author their corresponding role (author, co-author, assistant, acknowledged collaborator, etc.) and timely communicate it to the Editor. Involved collaborators must solve all issues related to authorship before submitting their manuscript. All collaborators listed as authors take responsibility for the contents of the manuscript. The number of collaborators must correspond to the functions performed during research and drafting of the manuscript, as well as to the requirements of the field of study. For avoidance of doubt, consult COPE guidelines on authorship. Should a dispute over authorship arise, the Editor, assisted by the Editorial Board, might withdraw a manuscript from the examination process, reject the submission or retract the published article from the Journal platform until the situation is resolved.

 

Detection of misconduct

Malpractice will be identified by the Editorial Team, the Editor, examiners or readers. Upon detection, allegations will be heard, provided they are justified and supported by evidence. In order to attend such instances, and to the extent it is suitable, COPE flowcharts will be adapted to the Journal’s structure and used as support and reference.

Some examples of malpractice in authorship are: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, previous publication of the same material, falsification of the research data and results, among others.

The first respondent will be the Editor, who will contact the author(s) suspected of malpractice to inform them about the controversy and request a reply to the allegation, without disclosing the name of the person who lodged the complaint. Should the author not submit a satisfactory response, an investigation will ensue.

The case will be exposed to the members of the Editorial Board, who collectively will make a decision based on the evidence and the severity of the case. Such decision may lead to the withdrawal of the manuscript from the review or editing process or the retraction of the article from the Journal’s website.

 

Serious malpractice

If misconduct is serious and implies a violation of the law, the case will be referred to the Office of the General Lawyer of the University of Guadalajara, where the appropriate process will be followed.

If deemed necessary and/or useful for the scientific community, the University or Research Center to which the indicted author is affiliated will be informed of the circumstances. The corresponding government agencies (CONACYT, in the case of Mexico) may also be informed.

 

Attention to complaints

Complaints from authors will be received by the Editor, provided they are backed by evidence. Once admitted, such complaints will be addressed to the extent possible following COPE regulations and flowcharts, as well as the Journal’s internal rules.

Under no circumstances shall the process of complaint resolution disclose the identity of the examiners. Any complaint about a review process will be addressed as long as the author identifies possible mistakes in the manuscript review process; notwithstanding, the examiners’ aptitude will never be called into question.

The Editor will only accept complaints if they are supported by arguments and evidence necessary to take the case into consideration. If necessary, the Editor may request the support of the Editorial Board or a single member specialized in the topic addressed by the corresponding article.

 

Detection of Plagiarism

México y la Cuenca del Pacífico uses Plagiarism Checking Software to detect illegal duplicates. Submitted manuscripts will undergo a plagiarism check process before reaching Editorial and academic review; manuscripts will be rejected if the similarity score regarding another piece published or available online is over 35%. This rule does not apply to pieces published as working papers (own authorship texts that have not gone through an arbitration process and whose publication aims to promote discussion and suggestions for revision before publication).

If plagiarism is detected or reported in a published text, the procedure to follow is the one COPE outlines in the following flowchart: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.1

 

Implications for authors and examiners

  • The Editor will inform the author or examiner in written that malpractice has been detected, explaining the inappropriate publishing behavior and acting as a warning.
  • The Editor will provide the institution to which the author or examiner is affiliated with a written report.
  • The Editor will retract the manuscript from the Journal’s processes.

 

Implications for the Executive Committee

In the event of complaints about bad practices by the Executive Committee members, the case will be referred by the Editor or the Technical-Administrative Editor to the Editorial Board, which in turn will discuss the possibility of removing him/her/them from the Executive Committee.

 

Post-publication discussions and corrections

México y la Cuenca del Pacífico and the Editor commit themselves to having a written discussion in the case of articles already published, as well as executing mechanisms to correct, review or withdraw articles after publication.