Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

 

Selection Policy

 

Peer review process

Submitted papers are evaluated by an editor, who decides if they correspond to the focus and scope of the publication. If a submitted article complies with the guidelines for authors, it is forwarded to an expert reviewer. The reviewing process is mutually anonymous. Reviewers evaluate the paper following reviewing guidelines. The author introduces corrections based on the reviewer’s suggestions up to the moment when the editor either accepts it for publication or rejects it.

Publication Frequency

 

Open Access Policy

 

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement (20.03.2026.)

Green Future Technologies
(Aligned with COPE, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Publication Standards)

1. General Principles

Green Future Technologies adheres to the highest standards of publication ethics and follows the guidelines of:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • IEEE Publication Services and Products Board (PSPB) Operations Manual
  • International best practices for scholarly publishing

All parties involved in publication (authors, editors, reviewers, publisher) must comply with these principles.

2. Authorship and Contribution (IEEE-Specific Requirement)

2.1. Authorship is limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to:

  • research design,
  • data collection or analysis,
  • manuscript writing or revision.

2.2. All authors must:

  • approve the final version,
  • agree to submission,
  • take responsibility for the content.

2.3. Ghost, guest, or honorary authorship is strictly prohibited.

2.4. Any changes in authorship after submission must be approved by all authors and the editor.

3. Plagiarism and Originality

3.1. All submissions must be original and properly cite prior work.

3.2. The Publisher uses plagiarism detection tools.

3.3. The following are considered misconduct:

  • plagiarism,
  • self-plagiarism without proper citation,
  • duplicate submission,
  • redundant publication.

3.4. Manuscripts with significant overlap may be:

  • rejected,
  • reported to institutions,
  • subject to submission bans.

4. Use of AI-Generated Content (IEEE-aligned update)

4.1. AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) may be used only for language assistance.

4.2. AI tools cannot be listed as authors.

4.3. Authors must disclose any significant use of AI in:

  • writing,
  • data analysis,
  • image generation.

4.4. Authors remain fully responsible for all content.

5. Data Integrity and Research Ethics

5.1. Authors must ensure:

  • accuracy of data,
  • reproducibility of results.

5.2. The following are strictly prohibited:

  • data fabrication,
  • data falsification,
  • image manipulation that alters scientific meaning.

5.3. Research involving humans or animals must include:

  • ethical approval,
  • informed consent.

6. Copyright and Licensing (IEEE emphasis)

6.1. Authors must ensure that submitted work does not infringe copyright.

6.2. Authors are required to sign a copyright or license agreement prior to publication.

6.3. Proper permissions must be obtained for reused material.

7. Peer Review Process

7.1. All manuscripts undergo double-blind peer review.

7.2. At least two independent reviewers evaluate each submission.

7.3. Review criteria include:

  • originality,
  • technical quality,
  • clarity,
  • relevance.

7.4. The process is confidential and unbiased.

8. Conflict of Interest

8.1. All participants must disclose conflicts of interest.

8.2. Conflicts include:

  • financial relationships,
  • institutional affiliations,
  • personal relationships.

8.3. Undisclosed conflicts may result in rejection or retraction.

9. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

9.1. Provide objective and constructive feedback.

9.2. Maintain confidentiality.

9.3. Avoid using unpublished material for personal advantage.

9.4. Report suspected misconduct.

9.5. Decline review if conflicts of interest exist.

10. Editor Responsibilities

Editors:

10.1. Make decisions based solely on scientific merit.

10.2. Ensure fair and unbiased review.

10.3. Maintain confidentiality.

10.4. Address ethical concerns promptly.

10.5. Follow COPE and IEEE procedures in misconduct cases.

11. Misconduct Handling and Sanctions (IEEE-style strictness)

11.1. Allegations of misconduct are investigated according to COPE procedures.

11.2. If misconduct is confirmed, actions may include:

  • manuscript rejection,
  • retraction,
  • publication ban (temporary or permanent),
  • notification of institutions.

11.3. Severe violations (e.g., plagiarism, falsification) may lead to:

  • multi-year submission bans.

12. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

12.1. Errors affecting interpretation must be corrected.

12.2. Retractions are issued in cases of:

  • misconduct,
  • unreliable findings.

12.3. All corrections and retractions are:

  • clearly labeled,
  • linked to original articles,
  • publicly accessible.

13. Transparency and Indexing Compliance

13.1. The Publisher ensures transparency in:

  • editorial board composition,
  • peer review process,
  • publication policies.

13.2. Metadata standards (DOI, ORCID) are maintained.

13.3. The publication complies with:

  • Scopus,
  • Web of Science,
  • IEEE indexing expectations.

Indexing