The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, editorial transparency, and responsible scholarly publishing. This policy sets out the ethical principles and publication procedures applied by the journal in relation to authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher.
The journal publishes research in International Relations, Political Science, Development Studies, Global Governance, Political Economy, Area Studies, Peace and Conflict Studies, and related areas of the social sciences. Accordingly, the journal’s ethical framework is designed specifically for scholarship in these fields, including manuscript-based research, archival work, discourse analysis, policy analysis, interviews, surveys, and fieldwork involving human participants.
The Rest follows its own editorial and ethical procedures while aligning its practices with internationally recognised publishing standards, including the COPE Core Practices, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, the CSE recommendations, the EASE Guidelines, and the WAME policies.
1. General Principles
The journal expects all parties involved in the publication process to act with honesty, fairness, accountability, and professionalism. Editorial decisions are made on academic grounds only. Submissions are evaluated in relation to their originality, scholarly contribution, methodological soundness, clarity of argument, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, manipulated citations, redundant publication, undeclared conflicts of interest, guest authorship, ghost authorship, or any other form of publication misconduct.
2. Responsibilities of Authors
2.1 Originality and Prior Publication
Authors must submit original work that has not been published previously and is not under consideration elsewhere. Submission to The Rest implies that the manuscript is not simultaneously under review by another journal, publisher, or edited volume, unless this has been clearly disclosed and explicitly approved by the editorial office.
Any use of the work of others, including ideas, data, tables, or direct quotations, must be properly acknowledged. All sources must be cited accurately and transparently.
2.2 Authorship
Authorship must reflect a genuine scholarly contribution. Persons listed as authors should have made a substantial contribution to the conception of the study, the research design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and/or the writing and revision of the manuscript. Individuals who contributed in a more limited way should be acknowledged appropriately but should not be listed as authors.
Gift authorship, honorary authorship, and ghost authorship are unacceptable.
2.3 Data Integrity and Accuracy
Authors are responsible for the accuracy of all statements, references, quotations, data, and interpretations presented in their manuscripts. Evidence must not be fabricated, manipulated, or selectively misrepresented in a misleading way.
Where relevant, authors should be prepared to explain their research design, coding logic, data construction process, interview procedures, or analytical steps in sufficient detail for editorial assessment.
2.4 Research Involving Human Participants
Research involving interviews, surveys, focus groups, participant observation, or other forms of engagement with human participants must be conducted in accordance with accepted ethical standards. Authors must respect informed consent, voluntary participation, confidentiality, anonymity where appropriate, and the safety of participants.
This requirement is particularly important for research conducted in politically sensitive environments, conflict-affected settings, authoritarian contexts, or among vulnerable populations, including refugees, migrants, dissidents, minorities, and conflict-affected communities.
If formal institutional ethics approval was required for the research, authors must state the approving body in the manuscript or during submission. If such approval was not required, authors may be asked to explain the ethical safeguards applied in the research process.
2.5 Confidentiality and Sensitive Information
Authors must protect confidential or sensitive information obtained through fieldwork, interviews, elite-level conversations, or restricted-source material. Identifying details should not be disclosed where disclosure could put participants, informants, or third parties at risk.
2.6 Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, political, personal, or professional relationship that could reasonably be seen as influencing the research, interpretation, or publication of the manuscript. If there is no conflict of interest, this should be stated clearly.
2.7 Funding Disclosure
All sources of research funding or other material support must be declared. Authors should also indicate whether the funder had any role in the design, execution, interpretation, or write-up of the study.
2.8 Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
If artificial intelligence tools or large language models were used in any meaningful way during the preparation of the manuscript, this use must be disclosed transparently. Such tools cannot be listed as authors, and responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the manuscript remains fully with the human authors.
3. Responsibilities of Reviewers
3.1 Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents. Submissions received for review must not be shared, discussed with others, or used for personal advantage without the permission of the editor.
3.2 Objectivity and Constructive Evaluation
Reviewers are expected to provide fair, evidence-based, and constructive assessments. Reviews should focus on the manuscript’s scholarly merit, methodological rigor, conceptual clarity, and contribution to the field. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
3.3 Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should decline invitations to review if they have a conflict of interest arising from personal relationships, institutional affiliation, recent collaboration, direct academic competition, or any other circumstance that may affect their impartiality.
3.4 Identification of Ethical Concerns
Reviewers should alert the editor if they suspect plagiarism, duplication, major citation omissions, serious methodological problems, unethical research practices, or any other matter that may raise concerns about the manuscript’s integrity.
4. Responsibilities of Editors
4.1 Editorial Independence
The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial team are responsible for all editorial decisions. Decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial, political, institutional, or personal considerations.
4.2 Fair Evaluation
Manuscripts are assessed on the basis of scholarly quality and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope. Authors are not discriminated against on the basis of nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, political view, institutional affiliation, or career stage.
4.3 Peer Review
The Rest uses a double-blind peer-review process. Submissions that pass initial editorial screening are normally sent to at least two expert reviewers. The editorial team may reject manuscripts without external review if they are clearly outside the journal’s scope, fail to meet minimum scholarly standards, or violate ethical or submission requirements.
4.4 Confidentiality
Editors must preserve the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, author identities, reviewer identities, and editorial communications, except where disclosure is required as part of a formal ethical investigation.
4.5 Handling Misconduct
Where ethical concerns arise, the journal will investigate them carefully and proportionately. In doing so, the editors may consult relevant guidance, including the COPE flowcharts. Depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue, the journal may request clarification, require correction, reject the manuscript, publish a correction notice, issue an expression of concern, or retract the article.
5. Responsibilities of the Publisher
The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development is published by CESRAN International. The publisher supports editorial independence, facilitates the journal’s technical and administrative operations, and works to ensure the integrity, continuity, and accessibility of the publication.
The publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions and does not influence acceptance or rejection decisions on non-scholarly grounds.
6. Complaints and Appeals
Authors may contact the editorial office if they wish to raise a complaint about editorial handling, peer review, or a publication ethics matter. Authors may also appeal editorial decisions where they believe a serious procedural or evaluative error has occurred. Appeals must be reasoned, specific, and supported by relevant explanation. Submission of an appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
7. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
If an error is identified after publication, the journal will determine the appropriate course of action depending on the seriousness of the issue. Minor errors may be corrected through a corrigendum. More serious concerns may result in an expression of concern or retraction.
Retraction may be necessary in cases including, but not limited to, plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, major analytical error, unethical research conduct, or duplicate publication. Where possible, retraction notices will explain the reason clearly and remain linked to the original publication record.
8. Plagiarism Screening
Submitted manuscripts may be screened for textual overlap and plagiarism. A high similarity score does not automatically establish misconduct, but unexplained or inappropriate overlap may lead to rejection or further inquiry.
9. Open Access and Transparency
The Rest is an open-access journal. The journal is committed to transparency in its editorial policy, peer-review procedures, contact information, and publication ethics. Relevant information is made publicly available on the journal website.
10. Scope-Specific Ethical Position
Because the journal is devoted to politics, international relations, and development studies, its ethical framework is designed for the realities of social science research. The journal does not normally publish biomedical, clinical, or animal-based research. Accordingly, ethical evaluation is focused on issues such as authorship integrity, responsible use of evidence, fair representation of sources, fieldwork ethics, participant protection, political sensitivity, and the accurate communication of scholarly findings.
11. External Standards and Reference Frameworks
The journal’s editorial practices are informed by the following external frameworks:
- COPE Core Practices
- COPE Flowcharts
- DOAJ Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
- WAME Policies
- CSE White Paper on Publication Ethics
- EASE Guidelines
12. Policy Review
This policy may be reviewed and updated periodically by the editorial team in order to maintain alignment with good publishing practice and the evolving needs of the journal.