The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal contributes to the development of reliable academic knowledge. Published articles reflect the quality of the authors' scholarship and the institutions supporting their work. All participants in the publication process therefore share responsibility for protecting scholarly integrity.

Escalate applies ethical principles throughout manuscript submission, editorial screening, peer review, revision, publication, and post-publication assessment. These principles include academic honesty, objectivity, confidentiality, respect for intellectual property, transparent reporting, fair treatment, and responsible management of competing interests.

Editorial and publication procedures should be consistent with applicable laws and regulations relating to copyright, defamation, research ethics, privacy, confidential information, and the responsible use of scholarly materials.

1. Reporting Standards and Research Accuracy

Authors must present an accurate, objective, and complete account of their research, including the study objectives, theoretical framework, research design, methodological procedures, analysis, results, and conclusions. Underlying evidence must be reported honestly without fabrication, falsification, selective manipulation, or misleading interpretation. Manuscripts should contain sufficient methodological information to permit critical evaluation and, where feasible, replication of the research.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent original scholarly work. Ideas, theories, data, written material, tables, figures, and findings originating from other sources must be properly attributed. Direct quotations and paraphrased materials must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism, substantial unattributed text reuse, and misrepresentation of another individual's scholarly contributions are prohibited.

3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals. Manuscripts must not substantially duplicate previously published work without transparent disclosure and appropriate scholarly justification. When multiple publications arise from the same dataset or research project, authors must clearly identify related work and explain the distinct contribution of each manuscript.

4. Data Access, Retention, and Reproducibility

Authors should maintain accurate records of research materials, datasets, instruments, analytical procedures, and supporting documentation. The Editorial Team may request underlying data or additional information during manuscript assessment or when significant post-publication concerns arise.

Where ethical, legal, and contractual conditions permit, authors are encouraged to make relevant data and research materials available to support verification, replication, and further scholarly investigation. Confidential business records, personal information, and restricted datasets must not be disclosed without appropriate authorization.

5. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must accurately reflect substantial scholarly contributions to the work. Individuals listed as authors should have contributed meaningfully to the research and manuscript preparation, approved the submitted or published version, and accepted responsibility for their contributions. Individuals providing technical, administrative, financial, or other support that does not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

Guest, honorary, and ghost authorship are unacceptable. Authorship changes must be supported by appropriate justification and agreement among the individuals involved.

6. Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must acknowledge all scholarly sources that substantially informed their research, including relevant theories, prior studies, methodological references, and secondary datasets. Citation practices must be accurate, relevant, and free from inappropriate citation manipulation. Authors must obtain permission to reproduce copyrighted materials when required.

7. Disclosure of Funding and Competing Interests

Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial competing interests that could reasonably influence, or appear to influence, the design, implementation, analysis, interpretation, or reporting of research. Funding sources, grants, sponsorship arrangements, consultancy relationships, and relevant institutional connections must be disclosed transparently.

8. Fundamental Errors in Published Work

When authors discover significant inaccuracies, analytical errors, unreliable evidence, or other substantial problems in published work, they must promptly inform the Editorial Office and cooperate in the assessment and implementation of necessary corrections, clarifications, or retractions.

9. Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and intellectual content of their manuscripts when artificial intelligence tools are used. Substantive use of generative AI in manuscript preparation, data analysis, image creation, or other scholarly activities should be disclosed in accordance with the journal's applicable AI-use policy. AI systems must not be listed as authors.

1. Publication Decisions

The Editor in Chief and authorized editors are responsible for making decisions concerning manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection. Decisions must be based on scholarly significance, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal's scope, and peer-review recommendations. Applicable legal requirements must also be considered.

2. Fair Evaluation and Non-Discrimination

Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic content and compliance with publication standards, without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, political viewpoint, disability, institutional affiliation, or other irrelevant personal characteristics.

3. Editorial Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts, review reports, author communications, and unpublished research materials as confidential. Information may be shared only with individuals authorized to participate in the editorial, peer-review, or publication process, or where disclosure is appropriately required for ethical or legal reasons.

4. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must remain independent from inappropriate influence by sponsors, advertisers, institutional authorities, commercial partners, the publisher, or other stakeholders. The payment of an Article Processing Charge, where applicable, does not guarantee acceptance or confer preferential editorial treatment.

5. Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose financial, professional, institutional, academic, or personal relationships that could compromise impartiality. Editors with material conflicts of interest must recuse themselves from handling affected manuscripts and arrange independent editorial assessment where appropriate.

6. Maintaining the Scholarly Record

Editors must respond appropriately to credible concerns involving research integrity, publication misconduct, and material errors. They should seek relevant evidence, provide affected parties with a fair opportunity to respond, and take proportionate editorial action when required.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviewers assist the Editorial Team in assessing the quality, originality, methodological soundness, theoretical contribution, and relevance of manuscripts. Review reports should provide constructive recommendations that help editors make informed decisions and authors improve their scholarly work.

PT Takaza Innovatix Labs, as the publisher of Escalate: Economics and Business Journal, provides the organizational, administrative, technical, and publishing infrastructure supporting the dissemination of scholarly contributions.

The publisher should support responsible publication practices, editorial independence, accessibility of published work, appropriate recordkeeping, and cooperation with the Editorial Board in addressing research and publication integrity concerns.

Advertising income, commercial agreements, sponsorship, institutional relationships, and publication-related payments must not improperly influence manuscript evaluation, reviewer selection, or editorial decisions.

The publisher and Editorial Team should cooperate with relevant institutions, publishers, and scholarly organizations where appropriate to investigate serious ethical concerns and preserve the integrity of the published record.

Research involving human participants, including employees, managers, entrepreneurs, consumers, business owners, and other respondents, must comply with applicable ethical, institutional, and legal requirements.

Authors must obtain appropriate informed consent where required and secure research ethics approval or exemption from a competent authority when applicable to the study design and relevant institutional or regulatory requirements.

Authors must respect participant privacy, protect personally identifiable information, and describe appropriate measures for data confidentiality and security. The publication of sensitive organizational information, financial records, commercially confidential data, or identifiable participant information requires appropriate authorization.

Research involving vulnerable participants or sensitive personal and organizational information may require additional ethical safeguards. Authors should provide relevant statements concerning ethical approval, consent, permissions, and data protection within the manuscript where applicable.

Distinguishing Misconduct from Honest Error

An honest mistake, legitimate difference of scholarly opinion, or methodological limitation does not automatically constitute research misconduct. Nevertheless, significant errors affecting the reliability of published findings may require correction or retraction even when misconduct has not occurred.

When credible allegations of research or publication misconduct arise, the Editorial Team should examine the available evidence, evaluate its relevance and seriousness, and assess potential competing interests among individuals involved in handling the case.

Where further investigation is warranted, the corresponding author and other relevant parties may be requested to provide written explanations, underlying data, supporting materials, or other relevant documentation. Independent subject experts, methodological reviewers, or research integrity specialists may be consulted.

Cases requiring formal institutional investigation may be referred to relevant universities, research institutions, or authorized bodies. The journal should cooperate with such investigations while maintaining appropriate editorial independence.

Allegations do not automatically establish wrongdoing. Affected individuals should receive a fair opportunity to respond to substantive concerns. Editorial actions must remain proportionate to the evidence and the implications for the reliability of the scholarly record.

Editorial Assessment Procedure

01. Receive and document the allegation or concern.

02. Conduct an initial assessment of available evidence.

03. Identify and manage relevant conflicts of interest.

04. Request an author explanation or supporting documentation.

05. Seek expert or institutional consultation when necessary.

06. Determine appropriate editorial action.

07. Communicate relevant outcomes and maintain records.

All submitted manuscripts are subject to an initial editorial assessment to determine their relevance, originality, completeness, ethical compliance, and suitability for peer review.

Manuscripts meeting the journal's preliminary requirements are evaluated by appropriately qualified reviewers according to the journal's published peer-review procedures. Reviewer selection should consider subject expertise, independence, and relevant conflicts of interest.

Reviewers should assess the research problem, originality, theoretical foundation, methodological quality, analytical rigor, presentation of results, discussion, conclusions, and the relevance and accuracy of references.

The final editorial decision rests with the Editor in Chief or authorized handling editor, informed by reviewer recommendations and the journal's academic and ethical standards. Acceptance cannot be guaranteed solely on the basis of submission, payment, or completion of initial administrative checks.

Escalate welcomes good-faith complaints concerning editorial procedures, peer-review integrity, unethical conduct, conflicts of interest, potential bias, publication ethics, or other legitimate journal governance matters.

Complaints should identify the relevant manuscript, article, editorial decision, or publication process and provide a clear explanation supported by available evidence. The Editorial Team should evaluate concerns fairly and arrange independent consideration where conflicts of interest exist.

Authors may request reconsideration of an editorial decision when they can identify material factual errors, procedural irregularities, relevant new evidence, or other substantive grounds for appeal. An appeal does not automatically guarantee reversal of a decision.

01. Corrections

Corrections may be issued when identifiable errors or omissions require amendment but the principal findings and conclusions remain sufficiently reliable. Correction notices should describe the changes and be appropriately linked to the original article.

02. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be published when credible and significant questions concerning the reliability or integrity of a published article remain unresolved and readers should be made aware of the ongoing concerns.

03. Retractions

Retraction may be necessary when substantial evidence demonstrates that published findings are unreliable or when serious publication ethics violations undermine confidence in the article. Retracted publications should ordinarily remain identifiable with a clear retraction notice.

04. Scholarly Discussion and Clarification

Readers and researchers may submit evidence-based comments concerning published articles. Where appropriate, the Editorial Team may consider publication of Letters to the Editor, author responses, technical clarifications, or other scholarly correspondence.

Authors must respect the intellectual property rights of third parties and obtain appropriate permissions when reproducing copyrighted material, including figures, photographs, tables, illustrations, substantial text extracts, and other protected content.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all reproduced or adapted materials are appropriately acknowledged in accordance with the applicable copyright conditions.

Copyright ownership, author permissions, publication licensing, and reuse conditions are governed by the journal's official copyright and licensing policies.

Escalate seeks to maintain clear and publicly accessible information concerning its journal scope, editorial management, peer-review procedures, author responsibilities, publication fees where applicable, copyright conditions, and research integrity policies.

The Editorial Team and publisher should periodically review publication ethics procedures to respond to emerging academic publishing challenges, including evolving standards of data transparency, artificial intelligence use, research integrity, and responsible peer review.

The journal encourages constructive engagement from authors, reviewers, readers, and academic institutions to strengthen the fairness, clarity, and effectiveness of its publication policies.

OFFICIAL EDITORIAL CONTACT

Escalate: Economics and Business Journal

For questions or concerns regarding publication ethics, editorial decisions, research misconduct, authorship, confidentiality, or post-publication matters, please contact the journal's Editorial Office.

Please identify the relevant article or manuscript, provide its DOI or submission ID where available, and describe the concern with relevant supporting documentation. Sensitive information should be transmitted through secure and authorized channels.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

International guidance on publication ethics, editorial responsibilities, scholarly integrity, and the handling of research misconduct.

COPE Retraction Guidelines

Guidance on corrections, Expressions of Concern, retractions, and preservation of the scholarly record.

Crossref

Publishing infrastructure and recommendations concerning DOI metadata, scholarly record updates, and publication relationships.