Complaints Policy

The journal “Land Management, Cadastre and Land Monitoring” upholds high standards of ethics, transparency, and good editorial practice. We provide a formal mechanism for submitting and handling complaints related to publications, peer review, or editorial conduct. Complaints are addressed in accordance with the principles of impartiality, confidentiality, and due process, with due regard to COPE recommendations.

 1. Scope

This policy applies to complaints concerning:

  • manuscripts at any stage of consideration (from submission to acceptance/rejection);
  • published content (errors, integrity concerns, legal matters);
  • the peer-review process and editorial decisions;
  • actions of editorial representatives, reviewers, or other individuals involved in the editorial process.

 2. Who May Submit a Complaint

A complaint may be submitted by:

  • authors, reviewers, and readers;
  • institutions/organisations associated with a specific manuscript or publication;
  • other parties who have reasonable grounds to believe that ethical standards or procedures may have been violated.

 3. Grounds for a Complaint

Grounds may include, but are not limited to:

  • suspected plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, or manipulation of results;
  • conflicts of interest or indications of biased/inappropriate peer review;
  • copyright infringement or unlawful use of materials;
  • violations of editorial procedures, the journal’s ethical standards, or academic integrity requirements.

 4. How to Submit a Complaint

Complaints must be submitted in writing to the journal’s official editorial email address and should include:

  • identification of the material (article/manuscript title, author(s), date, and, where available, DOI);
  • a clear description of the issue and specific claims;
  • evidence or references (where available);
  • the complainant’s contact details (anonymous complaints may be considered if they provide sufficient supporting evidence).

The editorial office acknowledges receipt of a complaint within 5 business days.

 5. Review Procedure

  • Complaints are reviewed impartially and confidentially by the editorial board or a specially appointed committee.
  • Where necessary, the editorial office may involve independent experts.
  • Individuals who are the subject of a complaint are generally given an opportunity to respond, provided this does not compromise the investigation.

Timeframes:

  • standard cases: up to 30 calendar days;
  • complex cases: up to 60 calendar days, with the complainant informed of the extension and the reasons for it.

 6. Decision and Possible Outcomes

Decisions are documented in writing and communicated to the complainant to the extent permitted by confidentiality requirements and personal data protection rules. If a breach is confirmed, the editorial office may take one or more of the following actions:

  • publication of a Correction/Erratum, an Expression of Concern, or a Retraction;
  • amendments to metadata and/or clear labelling of the affected publication on the journal website and distribution platforms;
  • notification of relevant institutions/organisations (where justified);
  • restrictions on participation in journal processes for individuals who violated journal policies (e.g., temporary/permanent removal from the reviewer pool), in accordance with internal procedures.

 7. Confidentiality and Data Protection

All information provided in a complaint is used solely for the purpose of handling the case and is treated as confidential. Access is limited to individuals directly involved in the review. Disclosure to third parties may occur only where there is a legal basis or where necessary to ensure due process (for example, communication with an institution in cases of confirmed misconduct).