The editorial board of the "Baltic Region" complies with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community. In our work, we rely on the recommendations of the Committee of Publication Ethics, the AIRP (Alliance of Independent Regional Publishers) Declaration "Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications", as well as the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishing houses. All parties engaged in the editorial and publishing process - authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher of the "Baltic Region" - should observe the principles of publication ethics.

1. Duties of the authors

1.1 Authors submitting a manuscript to the "Baltic Region" should ensure that they have written entirely original works, i.e. the text has not been published earlier and is not under review by another journal. If the article is based on the material previously published such as a blueprint, a preprint, or a working paper, the editorial board should be notified about it.

1.2 All co-authors are required to make a substantial contribution to the manuscript. Co-authors should agree on the final text of the manuscript and give their consent to submit the manuscript to the journal. A corresponding author collaborates with the editorial board on the preparation of the manuscript for publication and notifies all co-authors about possible changes in the manuscript provided they are required.

1.3 The journal has zero tolerance for plagiarism. Authors should cite publications that have influenced their work. All quotations must have proper references to their original texts. Plagiarism in any form, including copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another paper, claiming results of research conducted by others, is unacceptable.  

1.4 The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. They should also ensure proper citation and if they quote other works, all quotations should be appropriately cited, or quoted and permission obtained where necessary.

1.5 Authors are required to disclose any financial or other conflict of interest that could affect the evaluation of their manuscript. Examples of possible conflicts of interest are employment, consultancy services, shared ownership, honoraria, paid expertise, patents, grants, and other forms of funding. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

1.6 If the author finds errors or inaccuracies in the manuscript when the manuscript is being reviewed or after its publication, he/she should notify the editorial board as soon as possible. If the editorial board learns from a third party that the published work contains an error, the author has to promptly refute or correct the text, or provide the editorial board with evidence of the correctness of the published work.

2. Duties of the reviewers

2.1 Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two peer reviewers who are free to offer reasoned criticism regarding the level and clarity of the manuscript submitted, its relevance to the profile of the journal, and the novelty and credibility of the results.

2.2 A reviewer who is aware of his/her lack of qualifications to review a manuscript or who does not have sufficient time to complete the work within the deadline should notify the editor in good time.

2.3 Any work accepted for review is considered confidential. Manuscripts are not to be shown or discussed with others, except those authorized by the editorial board.

2.4 Reviews must be objective. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should clearly express their opinion and support it with relevant arguments.

2.5 It is the responsibility of the reviewer to identify fragments of published works cited without proper reference. Any assertion that an observation, conclusion, or argument has been previously made must be accompanied by an appropriate reference. The reviewer is obliged to draw the editor's attention to the similarity of the submitted manuscript with any other published work known to the reviewer.

2.6 Unpublished materials contained in the submitted work cannot be used in the reviewer's research without the written consent of the author. Confidential information obtained in the reviewing process must not be disclosed or used for personal benefit. 

2.7 The reviewer is obliged to refuse consideration of the submitted work if there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation, or any other kind of relationship with the authors and organisations related to the work.

3. Duties of the editors

3.1 The editor is solely responsible for the decision on the publication of the manuscript, relying on the cooperation of the reviewers and the editorial board of the journal. This decision should always be made based on the credibility of the work and its importance for researchers and readers.

3.2 The editor evaluates submitted papers, and their intellectual content, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the author.

3.3 The editor is obliged to refuse consideration of submitted work if there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation, or any other kind of relationship with authors and organisations related to the work (the editor's functions can be delegated to a member of the editorial board).

3.4 The editor should resolve conflicts that may arise and use all available means to resolve them.

3.5 The editor who has received convincing evidence that there has been a breach of ethics, or erroneous statements or conclusions in the published article shall respond as soon as possible by notification of changes, withdrawal (retraction) of publication, and other appropriate actions. All complaints of an ethical nature are subject to consideration, even if made several years after the publication.

3.6 The editor should not publish the article without an agreement with the authors.

3.7 The editorial board has no right to force authors to cite previously published articles in the "Baltic Region" to artificially improve scientometric indicators.

3.8 The editor plans the contents of the issues based on the order of manuscript submission, taking into account priorities for thematic sections and issues of the journal. The editorial board has the right to change the order of publication in accordance with the contents of forthcoming issues.

3.9 The editor has the right not to correspond with the authors concerning the final review results.

 4. Duties of the publisher 

4.1 The publisher should not influence the editorial policy of the journal.

4.2 The publisher should provide organisational, financial, intellectual, and legal support to the editorial board of the journal.

4.3 The publisher should ensure the timely publication of the issues of the journal.

5. Retraction of articles

5.1 In situations related to the withdrawal of articles, the editorial board and the publisher of the "Baltic Region" are guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE Retraction Guidelines) and AIRP Council of Ethics (Rule of Retraction of an article from publication).

5.2 An article can be retracted for the following reasons:

- publication of the same manuscript in several journals; 

- plagiarism;  

- errors in the manuscript or falsification of the data that cast doubt on its scientific value.

5.3 An article may be retracted following an official request of the authors with a reasoned explanation of the decision or on the initiative of the editorial board or the publisher based on their expertise. In the latter case, an official letter explaining the reasons for retracting the article is sent to the author (or to the lead author in the team of authors).

5.4 After the retraction, the article remains on the website of the journal as part of the issue and retains the DOI, but is marked as ‘retracted’. The same notice is made in the table of contents of the issue. The PDF version of the article is replaced by an identical version with a watermark indicating on each page that the article has been retracted.

5.5 The editorial board publishes a statement of retraction indicating the reasons and the date of retraction on the official website of the journal. The editorial board sends the notification of the retraction to the Scientific Electronic Library (elibrary.ru) and other bibliographic databases in which the journal is enlisted. Notification will be sent to the AIRP Scientific Publications Ethics Council for its inclusion in the Unified Database of retracted articles.