The Editorial Board of the Journal of Strategic Economic Research ensures the proper, timely, and impartial consideration of all complaints and appeals received. Each submission is reviewed individually, in accordance with established procedures and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All decisions are made with due regard to the nature of the complaint, the evidence provided, and the complexity of the case.

The journal ensures a transparent and impartial procedure for handling complaints and appeals arising during editorial activity.

1. Submission of Complaints

The journal accepts complaints from authors, reviewers, readers, and other interested parties concerning:

• violations of academic integrity;
• failure to comply with editorial procedures;
• unethical conduct of participants in the publication process;
• possible errors or violations in already published materials.

Appeals, suggestions, and complaints are accepted in written form via the official editorial email address: econ-vistnyk@knutd.com.ua.

A complaint must:

• contain a clear, structured, and concise statement of the facts;
• define the nature of the alleged breach of publication ethics;
• provide sufficient information to allow a preliminary assessment of the situation;
• where available, be accompanied by supporting materials (documents, electronic correspondence, evidence of factual circumstances, etc.).

The editorial office reserves the right to decline consideration of a complaint if it:

• concerns issues that do not fall within the scope of the journal’s responsibility (personal disputes, internal institutional conflicts, private claims);
• is submitted in an offensive, aggressive, threatening, or defamatory form;
• contains no information that may indicate a violation of ethical standards;
• is intended to exert unjustified pressure on the editorial office, reviewers, or authors.

In such cases, the complainant will receive an official notice explaining the reasons the editorial office cannot consider the appeal.

Anonymous complaints may be considered if there are sufficient grounds for verification.

2. Consideration of Complaints

All complaints are considered confidentially, objectively, and without undue delay.

The Editor-in-Chief:

• conducts the initial review of the complaint;
• where necessary, involves members of the Editorial Board or independent experts;
• initiates an investigation in accordance with the principles of academic integrity and COPE recommendations.

During the review process, explanations may be requested from the parties concerned.

As a result of the review, the editorial office may:

• reject the complaint as unfounded;
• recommend the introduction of corrections;
• initiate additional peer review;
• refer the materials to the relevant institutions;
• initiate the article withdrawal (retraction) procedure.

The person who submitted the complaint receives a reasoned response regarding the outcome of its consideration.

3. Appeal Against Editorial Decisions

The author has the right to appeal an editorial decision regarding a manuscript in the following cases:

• rejection of the article;
• a requirement for substantial revision;
• disagreement with the results of the peer review.

An appeal must be submitted in writing and must include:

• a clear justification of the disagreement with the decision;
• reasoned explanations with reference to scientific data or the content of the review reports.

4. Consideration of Appeals

Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief together with members of the Editorial Board who were not involved in the initial decision-making process.

If necessary, additional independent reviewers may be involved.

As a result of the appeal review, the editorial office may:

• uphold the previous decision;
• revise the decision;
• send the manuscript for re-review.

The decision made following the appeal is final.

5. Principles of Review

The consideration of complaints and appeals is based on the following principles:

• impartiality;
• confidentiality;
• reasoned decision-making;
• compliance with the standards of academic integrity;
• transparency of procedures.

The journal guarantees that submitting a complaint or appeal will not negatively affect future interactions with authors or other participants in the publication process.

6. Timeframe for Consideration of Submissions

• all submissions are considered within up to 30 working days;
• in cases requiring additional verification, consultation with external experts, or in-depth analysis, the editorial office reserves the right to extend the review period with appropriate notice to the applicant.