Journal Policies


Peer Review Policy

CSID Journal of Infrastructure Development conducts a peer-review to ensure the quality of publication in the journal. It consists of initial review, double-blind review, and the decision by the editor.

Initial review: The editor evaluates the submitted manuscript to determine the content suitability for the journal. All submitted manuscripts to CSID Journal of Infrastructure Development are checked for plagiarism using iThenticate. Manuscripts with content that are not suitable to the journal or found to have a high percentage of similarity will be returned to the author(s).

Peer review: Submitted manuscripts that have passed the initial review are processed to a double-blind review, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during the review process. The journal assigns a minimum of two reviewers to evaluate and provide a recommendation for the manuscript. In assigning the reviewers, the editor is responsible to avoid conflict of interest during the review process.

Decision: The editor makes a final decision on the acceptability of a manuscript based on the comments and recommendations of reviewers.

Decisions categories include:

  1. Reject - Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to the journal.
  2. Accept with Major Revisions - Manuscript will be review again after some major modifications are made.
  3. Accept with Minor Revisions - Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in the journal under the condition that minor modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made prior to publication.
  4. Accept - Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.

{ top }

Duties of Editors, Reviewers and Authors

The following statements describe the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal: the editor, the reviewer, and the author.

Duties of Editors

  1. Fair play; Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, or citizenship. The journal and Editor-in-Chief have full authority regarding the editorial content of the journal, timing of publication and not determined by other institutions outside of the journal itself.
  2. Confidentiality; The Editor, the Editorial Board Members, and any editorial staffs will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
  3. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.
  4. Decision on the publication of articles: Editors will take responsive action when ethical concerns are posed with respect to the submitted manuscript or published article. Any recorded act of unethical publishing activity would be prosecuted, even if it is discovered years after publication. The journal will publish a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other relevant notes, when ethical concern is well-founded.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Contribution to editorial decision: Peer review assists the editors and the editorial board in making editorial decisions while editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  2. Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process so that the journal can contacted alternative reviewers.
  3. Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the editor. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Confidentiality also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
  4. Standards of objectivity: Reviewers should treat every manuscript under their investigation objectively. Reviewers express their views clearly with supporting arguments without no personal criticism of the author.
  5. Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors/editorial board member's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. Reviewers both in-charge and those who decline invitation also not allowed to use unpublished materials from submitted manuscript for their own research without written consent of the authors.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
  2. Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  3. Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  4. Multiple and concurrent publications: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  5. Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  7. Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Authors cannot use the information collected under confidential services, such as reference manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained express written permission from the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
  8. Peer Review: Authors are obliged to engage in the peer review process and cooperate to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "major or minor revisions", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
  9. Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

{ top }

Copyright and Open Access Policy

Copyright Notice and Licensing

Author(s) retain copyright of articles published in this journal, with first publication rights granted to .

All journal content is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License that allows others to use the articles for non-commercial purposes with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Open Access Policy

This journal is an open-access journal that provides immediate, worldwide, barrier-free access to the full text of all published articles without charge readers or their institutions for access. Readers have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all articles. This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

{ top }

Article Processing Charge

This journal does not levy any submission or processing charge for the author(s) to submit and publish their manuscript in this journal under regular edition.

{ top }