Focus and Scope
The European Journal of Government and Economics (EJGE) is an international academic journal for peer reviewed research on all aspects of government and economics. EJGE is particularly interested in current issues regarding the interrelationship between the fields of government and economics, from the influence of government on the economy (economic policy) to economic explanations of government (public choice). It is also particularly interested in questions directly or indirectly related to Europe.
Contributions will be valued by the substantial relevance of their research questions as well as their originality. The latter may consist in the development of new models to explain existing data, the application of existing models to new data sets, or (ideally) a combination of both.
Peer Review Process
The editors read all submitted manuscripts. Authors of papers that are judged to be of sufficient interest, but lack in some aspects, may be asked to improve their manuscripts before the external review. The editor will directly reject manuscripts that are not of sufficient interest or quality.
Appropriate manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer-review process. To maximize quality, each manuscript is typically reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers are independent of the authors, i.e. not affiliated with the same institution.
The editorial team only invites resubmissions when there is a reasonable chance that a revised version of the article will be accepted at a later stage.
The EJGE uses Crossref Similarity Check software to screen papers for unoriginal material. By submitting your paper to the EJGE you are agreeing to any necessary checks.
The European Journal of Government and Economics is a biannual publication.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. In order to facilitate maximum dissemination and use, all article are licensed “Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0)”. This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon articles, as long as it is not for commercial purposes, and they credit authors for the original creation.
Authors can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF.
Abstracting and indexing
Publication ethics and malpractice
The publication of an article in an academic journal is an essential building block in the advancement of science. Peer-reviewed articles embody the scientific method, which means they need to meet certain quality standards. These include ethical considerations.
The European Journal of Government and Economics intends to adhere to the highest ethical standards. What follows should serve as guidance to authors, reviewers, and editors in performing their duties.
The debate about publication ethics is in constant evolution. We intend to follow the developments in this debate by constantly monitoring the recommendations and policy statements of international committees and major academic publishers. As this situation evolves, we shall update our ethical guidelines.
Duties of Authors
Authors have the main responsibility for the quality of their work. This includes the need to comply with certain ethical standards as follows below.
Reporting standards, replicability and corrections
Manuscripts should contain an accurate account of the research performed. This should include an accurate representation of the underlying data and a detailed discussion of the significance of the results of the research.
Such accounts should be sufficiently detailed to permit other researchers to replicate the work. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The presentation of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate data or statements constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
When an author subsequently discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to provide prompt notification to the editors and to cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper. If an editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author should be prepared to provide prompt correction or to retract the paper, or to provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Papers representing editorial ‘opinion’ should be clearly identified as such.
If the research performed involves the use of human subjects, the author should include a statement in the manuscript indicating that all procedures were performed in compliance with applicable laws and regulations and that the relevant institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript indicating that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Originality, multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
Authors should ensure that their work is original, and refrain from publishing manuscripts containing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
The concurrent submission of a manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit a previously published paper, unless the authors and editors of the publications concerned agree to the secondary publication, which must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of sources and plagiarism
When the authors use the work and/or words of others, they must ensure that that this has been appropriately acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained from private 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 authors involved.
Plagiarism in its many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of the paper of another author (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others, constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should include those and only those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The corresponding author should ensure that authorship reflects this, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
The omission of appropriate co-authors or the inclusion of inappropriate ones constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and are unacceptable.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
If authors have any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript, they should disclose it in their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be acknowledged. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Duties of reviewers
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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Peer review should also be guided by ethical considerations.
Contribution to editorial decisions
It is a shared view that that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications and thus benefit from peer review have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
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.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively and express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A 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 conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Unpublished data or ideas disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors involved. 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. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Duties of editors
The editors of a peer-reviewed journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Editorial work must always respect and promote the journal’s ethical standards.
Editorial decisions must always be driven by the validity of the submitted work and its potential relevance for researchers and readers. The editors may be 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 editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making their decisions.
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their original contribution and potential relevance to readers, without regard to the gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
Manuscripts received should be treated as confidential material. 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
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Unpublished data or ideas disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the authors involved.
Editors should recuse themselves in favour of a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board when considering manuscripts in which they have 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.
Editors should require all contributors to disclose potential conflicts of interest and publish corrections if such conflicts are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored papers or issues is the same as for ordinary papers. Sponsored items should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and relevance to readers.
Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.
Journal Self Citation
An editor should never force or encourage authors to cite his or her journal either as an explicit or implicit criterion of acceptance for publication. Any recommendation regarding published works to be cited in a paper should be made on the basis of their direct relevance to the author’s article, with the objective of improving the final published paper. Although, editors should direct authors to relevant literature as part of the peer review process, this should never extend to blanket instructions to cite individual journals.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should react reasonably when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. Such measures will generally include the audience of the author of the manuscript or paper, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. If the complaint is upheld, measures will generally include the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as deemed appropriate. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be researched, even if it is discovered many years after publication.
This journal does not apply article processing charges (APCs) or submission charges.