All received articles by the “Economic Series of the Bulletin of L.N. Gumilyov ENU" journal editors are required anonymous peer-review. Based on the received reviews, the editorial board makes a final decision.
Articles review procedure:
1.The article sent by the author is submitted to the journal editors. The specialist of the scientific publications department responsible for the journal (editorial office) - the journal manager - checks the article for compliance with technical requirements. The author sends the article and a cover letter to the editors of the journal about the independent nature of the submitted article, agreement to checking the article for plagiarism and granting exclusive rights to the publisher.
2.The journal manager checks the article for unique with the automatic plagiarism check system.
According to the results, a brief electronic verification report is unloaded. If the percentage of article originality is less than 60%, then in addition to the verification report a full electronic report on checking the article for plagiarism is downloaded.
3.Then, the journal manager sends the article to the editor-in-chief/deputy editor-in-chief. The editor-in-chief/deputy editor-in-chief reviews the article for compliance with the journal topics. In the event of incompatibility, the editorial office sends the author a letter explaining the refusal of publication. On average, the initial review of the article takes 1.5 weeks.
4.Further, the editor-in-chief / deputy editor-in-chief identifies two reviewers who are not members of the journal editorial board (scientists or specialists in relevant topics) for each article that has passed the initial review. At the same time, the person responsible for the article from the editorial board is determined.
5.After this, the editor’s specialist submits the article with a brief electronic verification report to the reviewer in order to determine the possibility of publishing the article in a journal. If the percentage of originality of the text is less than the threshold level (60%), then the specialist of the editorial department, in addition to the short report, sends to the reviewer a full electronic report on checking the article for plagiarism.
6.The journal uses a one-sided “blind” review procedure, when the editors do not disclose the names of reviewers. The reviewer provides a substantiated review of the article to the journal editors, including the relevance of the topic being studied, the contribution of the author to the scientific field, the level of the results obtained. All reviews contain a recommendation to publish an article (with or without modifications) or refuse to publish. All reviews come to the editorial office.
7.Further, the specialist of the editorial department sends the reviews to the editor-in-chief / deputy editor-in-chief and the responsible member of the editorial board for the article.
8.In case of receipt of a review for revision with the consent of the editor-in-chief / deputy editor-in-chief and responsible for the article member of the editorial board, the journal manager sends the review to the author with the note “the article should be elaborated according to the reviewer's comments”. In this case, the author must submit a revised version of the article within two weeks.
9.All materials on the article (reviews, plagiarism report) are submitted to the editorial board meeting. The decision on the possibility of publishing an article in the journal is made by the editorial board of the journal on the basis of peer-reviews. Articles that have received a negative review are not accepted for reconsideration. On average, the decision on the publication is made within 2 months.
10.All reviews and the decision of the editorial board for the article are sent to the main author indicated in the metadata when submitting the article. The publication is carried out in the order of the general queue as soon as the material is ready. The editors have the right to form a queue in accordance with the headings of upcoming issues.
The policy on publication of the journal “Economic Series of the Bulletin of L.N. Gumilyov ENU” focuses on the traditional ethical principles of scientific periodicals, set out in the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics (Committee on Publication Ethics: COPE).
Submission of articles to the scientific publication office means the authors' consent to the right of the Publisher, L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, to publish articles in the journal and the re-publication of it in any foreign language. Submitting the text of the work for publication in the journal, the author guarantees the correctness of all information about himself, the lack of plagiarism and other forms of improper borrowing in the article, the proper formulation of all borrowings of text, tables, diagrams, illustrations.
The author(s) should provide a cover letter with the article to the journal editors.
Requirements for provided articles. The article
must be issued according to the requirements of the editorial board,
at the time of sending the article should not be published or be pending in another edition
must contain original research results,
must include the results only of the author work / team of authors (the inclusion of other persons is unacceptable). It is assumed that at the time of sending the article, all authors agree with the publication in this journal and do not object to the order of indication of the authors in the article,
• should include in the list of citations only those peer-reviewed sources that were actually used in the course of the study,
• should indicate all sources used (including the work of the author / team of authors).
All articles received for review must be viewed as a confidential document. A peer reviewer has no right to use unpublished article materials in his own research. The reviewer may send material to third parties only with the permission of the editor-in-chief,
According to the journal review policy, the journal uses a one-sided “blind” review procedure, when the authors' data are known to the reviewer. In this connection, the object of reviewing should be the results of the obtained research, and not the author/team of authors. Expert opinion should not depend on the gender, nationality, religion and other personal qualities of the author / team of authors,
The reviewer needs to submit an objective work assessment to the editor, if necessary, suggest options for improving the submitted material.
The reviewer must refuse to review the material, notifying the editor if he/she is not a specialist in the subject matter of the material.
Editor-in-Chief and members of the editorial board undertake
to work on the expansion of the geographical diversity of authors, to invite for publication specialists working in different organizations and countries,
pay special attention to the qualitative composition of articles
•in determining who is responsible for the article, make his reasoned decision by agreement (or disagreement) with the reviewers’ decisions on the article,
•participate in meetings of the journal editorial board, make decisions on determining the content of journal issues.
• identifies two reviewers who are not members of the journal editorial board (scientists or specialists in relevant topics) for each article that has passed the initial review for compliance with technical requirements,
• on the basis of peer-reviews and the conclusion of the responsible member of the editorial board, makes the final decision on the publication of the received material. The decision of the editor-in-chief is brought up for discussion by the editorial board.
• In his/her decision, the Editor-in-Chief is guided solely by scientific considerations and compliance with publishing standards. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board should not depend on the gender, nationality, religion and other personal qualities of the author/team of authors.