The journal North Economic Review is published online, once a year, in October. The manuscripts must be submitted until 1st of July in order to be included in the issues published in October.
All submissions must be entirely original, not previously published, and must not be proposed simultaneously to other journals.
Papers must be submitted in English, at the following e-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org. Please specify your name and the title of your paper in the body of your e-mail.
The papers published in NER have no length restriction (as long as the text is concise and comprehensive) and must comply with the Template available for download here. The template includes detailed explanations of all styles and formats required. Papers not conforming to the journal style will be returned.
Before publication, authors of accepted manuscripts must fulfill, sign, scan and send a Statement at the following e-mail address: email@example.com.
All published papers will be available with free full text access on the site of the journal: http://ner.cunbm.utcluj.ro.
All articles published in North Economic Review are subject of double blind peer-review. Selection for inclusion in the journal will be based upon quality, originality, and relevance, in the judgment of the review process.
After submission, one of the editors verifies all articles for conformity with the journal’s purpose and requirements and informs authors about the results of this stage. The manuscripts that comply with journal’s requirements are sent to specialized reviewers. Reviewers are asked to fulfill an evaluation report of each paper based on a set of criteria presented below.
(1 – 10)
|The author is familiar with the existing state of knowledge
|The topic is relevant to the scope of the journal
|This is a new and original contribution
|The paper makes a valuable contribution to the theory and practice of Economic Sciences
|The title is appropriate
|The abstract and keywords are adequate
|The paper is logically and technically correct
|The interpretations and conclusions are sound and justified by the results
|The paper is well presented and organized
|The writing style / English is clear and understandable
|The references are adequate
Besides giving a score for each criterion, reviewers should include their observations, comments and suggestions for improvement in the report. Also, each reviewer should announce the Editor whether or not is willing to get back the revised version of the paper in order to approve the corrections. If differences higher than 3 points occur between the evaluations of two reviewers, the paper is send to a third reviewer. The reviewers’ identity remains anonymous for authors.
After this process, authors receive reviewers’ observations and suggestions together with the decision of the editorial board as follows:
- Accepted without any changes
- Minor revisions are required
- Major revisions are required
The final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a paper is taken by the editor in chief.
The plagiarism policy
Papers submitted to North Economic Review will be checked against plagiarism. If plagiarism or data fabrication is detected, the manuscript will be immediately rejected. Our journal discourages any attempt of plagiarism and reserves the right to refuse articles from authors who have been found guilty of plagiarism.
North Economic Review does not charge publication or processing fees from the Author(s).
Publication ethics statement
Authors should ensure that their manuscript is original, contains real data, cites all used sources, and has not been published / considered for publication elsewhere. Plagiarism, simultaneous submission of manuscripts to more than one journal, data fabrication, image manipulation and republishing content that is not novel constitute unethical behavior and are not tolerated.
Reviewers must keep confidential all received manuscripts and allocate sufficient time for conducting the review. They are not allowed to use and share the ideas or other parts from the manuscripts. Reviews should be objective and the recommendations must be clearly formulated so that authors can improve the papers by using them. The reviewers have the responsibility to inform the editor if they notice any kind of conflicts of interest that may influence the reviewing process.
Editors are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. They must keep confidentiality upon each submitted paper and are not allowed to use unpublished information in their own research. Editors must keep the anonymity of reviewers and avoid any conflicts of interest. Editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. If ethical complaints regarding a submitted or published paper occur, editors must take immediate and reasonable measures by following COPE’s guidelines (or equivalent).
Names and email addresses of authors, reviewers and editors will never be distributed without their explicit permission. Upon request, a user’s email address is removed from our journal mailing lists. All data held about the user will be made available to the user upon request.