Cllick here to access the journal template. 

Issues to be Considered in the Writing Guide:

1. Ethics committee permission is required for research manuscript including survey or animal experiment studies.
2. A similarity report is mandatory for manuscript submission.
3. Conflict of Interest Statement should be added before the References section.
4. Ethics Committee Approval must be added before the References section.
5. Author Contribution Ratios should be indicated before the References section.
6. Acknowledgments or Acknowledgments (if any) should be added before the References section.

While establishing the ethical principles and responsibilities for the publication process of Eurasian Journal of Agricultural Economics (EJAE), the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) were taken into consideration. All partners involved in the process are obliged to comply with these principles. Detailed information can be found at https://publicationethics.org/.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Author(s)
• The work submitted by the author(s) must be original, not submitted to more than one journal at the same time, not published elsewhere, and must comply with scientific research and publication ethics.
• The author(s) may be asked for raw data on their manuscripts within the framework of the evaluation processes, in such a case, the author(s) should be ready to present the expected data and information to the editorial board and scientific committee.
• Author(s) should prepare their manuscripts in accordance with EJAE writing rules.
• In the event that the author(s) notices an inaccuracy or error in the manuscript under review, he/she has the obligation to inform the journal editor or the publisher and to cooperate with the editor in the correction or withdrawal process.
• All authors are expected to contribute to the study. Changing the author responsibilities (such as adding authors, changing the order of authors, removing authors, etc.) cannot be proposed for a study whose evaluation process has started.
 

Ethical Responsibilities of Referees
• The EJAE evaluation process is carried out with the principle of double blind reviewing. Reviewers cannot contact the authors directly, and the evaluation and comments are communicated through the journal management system.
• Only the work related to the field of specialization should be accepted for evaluation.
• They should evaluate with impartiality and confidentiality.
• If the referees think that the manuscript under evaluation faces a conflict of interest with the stakeholders during the evaluation process, they should refuse to review the manuscript and inform the journal editor.
• They should respect the confidentiality of the materials provided to them and should not discuss unpublished manuscripts with third parties or use the information in their own work.
• They should carry out the work they accept for review in a timely manner and within the framework of the above ethical responsibilities.
 

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
• Editors are responsible for all processes of the manuscripts submitted to the journal and should adopt the principle of independence in this process. They have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. They use this responsibility and authority in a timely and appropriate manner.
• Editorial decisions should be free from political, financial or personal influences. These decisions should be based on peer review appropriate to the quality and subject matter of the manuscript.
• Editors accept articles that are original and will contribute to the field, and reject incomplete and erroneous research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules and level.
 

Article Evaluation and Publication Process
• The manuscripts submitted to the journal are first pre-evaluated by the technical editors and checked for compliance with the scope of the journal and spelling rules. The editors have the right to decide to return the articles that they do not find qualified to be published in the journal to the author(s) without sending them to the referees. In addition, articles that do not comply with the spelling rules or inadequate language are returned to the author(s) for correction. Articles deemed appropriate are sent to at least two referees selected by the field editors. The referees may vote "rejection", "major revision", "minor revision" or "acceptance". The author(s) should take the reviewers' comments into account and explain the comments and criticisms one by one. They should also prepare a detailed explanation in case they disagree with the reviewers' criticisms. After the referees' positive opinions on the article are completed, the final evaluation of the publication is made by the Editorial Board. Articles accepted for publication are queued for publication.
• If the research envisages data collection through surveys, interviews, focus group studies, etc., it is requested that ethics committee approval has been obtained from ethics committees established for human research, and this approval should be stated or documented in the article. Articles that do not require ethics committee approval; research data used before 2020, produced from master's / doctoral studies (should be specified in the article).
• Similarity screening of the studies submitted to the journal by the authors should be performed and the similarity rate should be maximum 20% excluding references. Articles exceeding this rate are rejected directly by the editor without being evaluated. Plagiarism programs such as Turnitin, iThenticate etc., can be used for similarity screening.