About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The Journal of Economic and Socio-Environmental Law (ISSN 2179-8214) is a four-monthly scientific journal, promoted by the Post-Graduate Program in Law of PUCPR – PPGD (Master of Laws and Doctorate in Law Programs - http://www.pucpr.br/ppgd). Its main scope is the publication and dissemination of law articles, both from national and foreign scholars, on topics related to the research areas of PPGD-PUCPR, and to reach scholars, professors and law students from different countries interested in Economic and Social-Environmental Law, by publishing articles in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and French.

The journal’s editorial line follows the Concentration Areas and respective lines of research of the Post-Graduate Program in Law of PUCPR: 1. Economic Law and Development: 1.1. State, Economy and Development; 1.2. Social Rights, Development and Globalization; 2. Socio-Environmental Law and Sustainability: 2.1. State, Societies and Environment; 2.2. Justice, Democracy and Human Rights. Within the mentioned lines of research are included, among others, subjects as: a) Business Law and development; b) Economic Analysis of Law; c) Public services, economic activity, public procurement and state intervention; d) Economic Law and international relations; e) Development, fundamental rights and taxation; f) Criminal incidence in the global economic activity and transnational crimes; g) Public Administration, public policies and social inclusion; h) Nature, traditional peoples and communities and territorial, social, environmental, economic and cultural rights; i) Consumption Law, economic activity and socio-environmental sustainability; j) Social function of contract, technology and consumption; k) Biolaw, bioethics and social development; l) Judiciary, politics and democracy; m) Protection of human rights in the international order; n) Philosophical foundations of human rights, liberalism and democracy.

Peer Review Process

1. Articles submitted to the journal are analyzed in two stages: desk review and peer review.

2. In the desk review stage, it is verified whether the article strictly complies with all Author Guidelines. In case of non-compliance with any of the guidelines, whether for reasons of form or content, the article will be rejected outright.

3. Once approved in the desk review stage, the article undergoes the double blind peer review procedure, being sent without identification of authorship to at least two evaluators holding a PhD who are members of the journal's Board of Reviewers, affiliated with national (exogenous to the State of Paraná) and foreign higher education institutions.

4. To be approved, the article must obtain two favorable opinions for publication, either as it is or through corrections suggested by the reviewers. If there is at least one opinion for disapproval, the article may be rejected. In case of controversy between the two reviewers, the article is submitted to a third one.

5. The criteria used in the evaluation form are as follows:

a) Is the reviewer in a position to evaluate the article, as there is no conflict of interest?
b) Does the article cover a topic within the focus and scope of the journal (Economic Law and Socio-Environmental Law)?
c) Is the delimitation of the topic and the research approach original, innovative and relevant, distinct from other publications on the topic, to the point of justifying a new publication on the subject?
d) Is the text well written, clear and cohesive, free from typing and spelling errors?
e) Does the title clearly and sufficiently reflect the content of the article?
f) Does the article comply with the formatting and scientific methodology standards described in the Author Guidelines (ABNT)?
g) Does the abstract indicate the research problem, the objectives of the article, the methodology used and the main conclusions of the research?
h) Does the article present an extensive and in-depth bibliographical survey, which includes a significant number of specific and updated bibliographical references that already exist on the topic?
i) Are the topics covered in the article explored with theoretical depth, examining the issue under debate from different perspectives and considering arguments contrary to those defended in the article?
j) Does the article bring arguments and effective contributions prepared by the author of the article, without relying on excessively long direct quotations from other authors?
k) Are the concepts used throughout the text, in general, correct?
l) Does the content comply with the criteria for not conveying prejudice and/or defamation and slander that harm the integrity of the readers and/or individuals mentioned?

6. The possible outcomes of the assessment process are as follows:

a) Article without scientific content restrictions; may be accepted for publication.
b) Article with minor restrictions; can be accepted as long as the corrections indicated in the review are made.
c) Article with major content restrictions; should not be accepted for publication.

7. The evaluation process usually takes 12 to 18 months.

Publication Frequency

The Journal adopts the method of rolling publication. Three issues are released per year, one every four months:

Issue n. 1 (January/April)
Issue n. 2 (May/August)
Issue n. 3 (September/December)

Articles are inserted continuously into published issues, according to approval and layout, without the need to close a complete issue for publication. Each article is published within an issue with its own table of contents and identified within that issue using the e-location (code composed of the letter e and three digits - example: e231).

Open Access Statement

This journal provides immediate open access to its content following the principle that scientific knowledge freely available to the public supports a greater democratization of knowledge worldwide. It adheres to the DOAJ definition of open access: Open Access is the condition "where the copyright holder of a scholarly work grants usage rights to others using an open license (Creative Commons or equivalent). This allows for immediate free access to the work and permits any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose". (https://doaj.org/apply/guide/).

Publishing Ethics and Publishing Malpractice Statement

This journal is committed to ethics and quality in publication, following international patterns of scientific publication. We support standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing in our journal: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher. We do not accept plagiarism or other unethical behavior. Thus, it follows the guidelines of the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010.

Duties of Editors:

Publication decision: The journal’s editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with editorial board or reviewers in decision making.
Fair play: The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of interest: The editor must not use unpublished information in his/her own research without the express written consent of the author. The editor should recuse him/herself from considering manuscripts in which he/she has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations: The editor should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Duties of Reviewers:

Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Source: Peer reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The peer reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 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.

Duties of Authors:

Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable..
Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Multiple or Redundant Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. To publish the same article in different journals without informing the editors and having their agreement constitute unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Duties of the Publisher

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Our articles are peer reviewed to ensure the quality of scientific publishing and we are also users of iThenticate (Turnitin’s plagiarism software).

* This statement is based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.