Code of ethics

The 4D Journal of Landscape Architecture and Garden Art is a peer-reviewed, open access, scholarly journal committed to the highest standards of publication ethics. All those involved in the publishing process (editors, authors and reviewers) must agree to the standards of expected ethical behaviour. The Journal's Publication Ethics Code is based on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Responsibilities of the editorial board and editors

• The editorial board decides which manuscripts submitted to the journal can be published and is responsible for ensuring that these decisions comply with the journal's editorial guidelines and the legislation in force on defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
• The editorial board assists authors and reviewers by providing authors’ and proofreaders’ guides available on the 4D website, which include the responsibilities of each actor in the publishing procedure, as well as a description of the reviewing process for those involved.
• New editorial board members shall be informed about the journal’s ethical standards and editorial guidelines for publication. The editorial board shall keep abreast of international trends to ensure that long-standing members are aware of new guidelines and developments.
• The contributions reflect the views of the authors, with which the editorial board does not necessarily agree, but it shall ensure that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific and intellectual merit, without regard to the race, age, gender, sexual orientation, disability, ethnic origin, religious beliefs, nationality, political affiliation or social class of the author(s).

• The unbiased, independent and double-blind peer review of manuscripts shall be ensured, alongside the confidentiality of all related information, and the protection of the identity of authors and experts.

• The editorial board will recruit appropriate peer reviewers and maintain a reviewer database that will provide information on the professional performance and institutional affiliation of reviewers.
• The editorial board is responsible for ensuring that unpublished material in the submitted manuscript is not used by the editors in their own research without the express written consent of the author.
• The appropriate procedures shall be initiated in the case of ethics complaints regarding submitted or published manuscripts, and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) shall be followed in cases of alleged misconduct.
• Where necessary, the journal publishes corrections, clarifications, withdrawals and apologies.

Responsibilities of the authors

• Authors’ research reports should accurately describe the original research and objectively discuss its significance. The background to the studies should be accurately described. Untrue or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical publishing behaviour and are therefore unacceptable.
• Authors must affirm that the article they have written is entirely original. If authors have used the work and/or ideas, or even the words, of others in their text, they must give a standard reference to it.
• Authors who submit their articles as original work declare that the work submitted comprises their own research and has not been copied in whole or in part from other works without acknowledging the source, i.e. that it has not been plagiarised. All forms of plagiarism constitute unethical publishing behaviour and are therefore unacceptable.

• Authors declare, both when submitting their manuscript and before publication, that if the images or figures in their publication have previously appeared on other platforms, journals or websites, they have the appropriate permission from the copyright owner to republish them. The original source of the images or illustrations used shall be acknowledged by the authors, even if the image or illustration is not protected by copyright or if re-use is authorised under a licence allowing unrestricted re-use.
• Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the research described in the paper. Those who made a significant contribution to the preparation of the article should be identified as co-authors. Those who worked on specific aspects of the research project should be mentioned as contributors or listed in the acknowledgements.

• The contact author is responsible for ensuring that the names of all co-authors are included in the manuscript and that there is full agreement between the co-authors on the final version of the article and its submission for publication.
• Authors may not submit the same manuscript to more than one publication at the same time. This constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is therefore unacceptable.
• Authors agree not to publish the manuscript (pre-print version of the article) elsewhere, and to place it on their own website, institutional repository or other pre-print server according to the journal's policy for self-archiving.
• Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could affect the results or interpretation of the manuscript.
• The source of any financial support must be disclosed.
• If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, he or she must immediately notify the editors of the journal and cooperate with them in withdrawing or correcting the manuscript.

Responsibilities of the reviewers

• Peer reviewing helps the journal’s editors and editorial board to make editorial decisions, and can also help the author to improve the manuscript through editorial communication with the author.
• Any invited reviewer who feels that he/she is not qualified to review the research described in the manuscript, or who is aware that he/she will not be able to provide a timely review, must inform the editorial team immediately, so that another reviewer can be appointed.
• Manuscripts received for peer review should be treated as confidential documents.
• Specific information or ideas obtained during the peer review process must be treated confidentially and not used for the reviewer’s own purposes.
• Reviewers must report to the editor of the journal if they discover copyright infringement or plagiarism in manuscripts.
• Proofreading should be carried out objectively and the recommendations should be backed up with clear arguments so that authors can use them to improve the article.
• Peer reviewers shall evaluate manuscripts on their content, regardless of the author’s race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious beliefs, nationality, political orientation or social class.
• Reviewers should not evaluate a manuscript that has a conflict of interest due to a competitive, collaborative, familial or other relationship with any author, company or institution that may be associated with the article.