Ethical rules


Section I
The road to knowledge of every scholar is à long, complicated and unique process. It cannot be accurately planned or follow the path of other scientists. Academics go their own way in science, so the path that everyone leaves is unique. A position in the research area is held and accompanied by hard work, knowledge, professionalism and creativity. Training knowledgeable, capable, initiative and risk-oriented specialists requires linking the quality of education with research. Considering all this and following already established traditions, the publishing policy of the "Business World" Library fully complies with the accepted international standards on Publication Ethics. Publication standards and Ethical Behaviour Standards, as a prerequisite for quality papers, are valid for all parties in the publishing process.
The ethical rules for publication should be considered as part of the general ethical rules, applicable to scientific and professional areas, in addition to legal regulations and with a view to self-regulation of the scientific community. The ethical rules correlate directly with the mechanisms of personal ethics and professional conscience of scholars, their integrity and honesty.
The Editorial Board of the "Business World" Library fully shares and accepts as a guiding principle Elsevier's position on publishing ethics when reviewing, editing and publishing scientific papers, and by following the protection of copyright and prevention of cases of plagiarism. The Editorial Âoard fully complies with the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Section II
Publication decision
The Editorial Board of the "Business World" Library holds the responsibility for decisions taken to approve or reject manuscripts for publication. These decisions are made after submitting a manuscript and assessing its significance to researchers, practitioners and readers.
The Editor-in-Chief follows the policy of the Library's editorial board and complies with the legal requirements in force in terms of discrediting, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief accepts the submitted monographs, convenes the Editorial Board, specifying the date, venue and time of the meetings. The Editor-in-Chief offers the editorial board specific reviewers for each of the monographs, presents the paper together with the results of the test establishing its authenticity via the iThenticate system.
The Editorial Board approves the reviewers and takes decisions on acceptance or refusal to publish papers based on their significance, originality, clarity of the statement and in accordance with the conclusion defined precisely in the reviews on the qualities of the monographic work.
When making a decision, the Editorial Board may delegate rights to the Editor-in-Chief regarding consultations with other editors or reviewers.
Objective evaluation
The Editorial Board of the "Business World" Library evaluates the manuscripts taking into account their intellectual content regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality or political bias of their authors.
The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board should not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone except the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors or the publisher, if necessary.
Disclosure and prevention of conflicts of interest
The submitted unpublished papers should not be used in the scientific research of the Editor-in-Chief, the reviewers or any member of the Editorial Board without the explicit written consent of the author. Confidential information or ideas obtained in the process of peer review should be kept in secret and not be used for personal benefits. Chief Editors should require all parties to disclose any competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are disclosed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate actions should be taken, such as withdrawal of the published paper.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations of complaints
When notifications or complaints about violation of scientific ethics are filed, regarding a submitted manuscript or published monograph, the Editor-in-Chief together with the Editorial Board should take them into consideration and initiate adequate measures. Actions need to be taken in this regard, by informing the author of the published monograph about complaints filed against them. Authors should provide a written statement on the filed complaints. The technical secretary of the "Business World" Library should keep all incoming complaints for a period of five years, as well as the written statements of the authors of the manuscripts / published monographs.

Section III
Contribution to editorial decisions
The review as a scientific verification facilitates the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions, on the one hand, and helps the author improve the quality of the paper, on the other hand. As a formal scientific communication, the review is the core of the scientific method. This means that the major responsibility of the reviewers is to make an objective review of the publication.
Promptness (efficiency)
Any chosen reviewer, who considers that he/she is unable to make a review within the deadlines approved by the Internal Rules of the "Business World" Library, should notify the Editor-in-Chief and declare their refusal to participate in the review process.
All manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential documents. They should not be presented to or discussed with other persons, except those authorized by the Editorial Board.
Standards of objectivity
Manuscripts should be evaluated objectively. Personal criticism of the author is considered inappropriate. Reviewers should state their opinion clearly and support it with arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should ensure that any reference to sources of information or an argument in the reviewed monograph is accompanied by relevant citation. They should inform the author/s in case of similarities or overlapping of the scientific paper with other publications they have personal information about. Reviewers should identify an already published paper and results if they are not cited by the authors, as well as all forms of plagiarism.
Disclosure and prevention of conflicts of interest
It is unacceptable that the reviewer uses unpublished materials mentioned in a submitted manuscript as their own scientific research without the explicit written consent of the author. Confidential information or ideas obtained in the process of peer review should be kept in secret and not be used for personal benefits.
If the reviewer questions the scientific integrity of the author, he/she shall notify the Editor-in-Chief confidentially and in writing.

Section IV
Publishing standards
Authors must submit their manuscripts with consideration to the requirements regarding the format of publications as published by the Editorial board. Source data must be presented accurately in the monograph. It is considered as professional to adhere to the rules of scientific discourse and observe the requirements of the scientific area in which the paper will be published; therefore, the texts of the publications should contain a part presenting the author's goals and motivations, analytical and summary part and a conclusion. Each monograph must contain sufficient detail and references to enable other authors to cite and use it correctly. Deliberate inaccuracies are an instance of unethical behaviour and are therefore, unacceptable.
Data access and storage
Authors may be asked to provide unprocessed data related to the monograph under review and in any case, they must store such data for a certain period of time after the publication of their paper.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors must confirm that the contents of their submitted manuscript are original and that they have adequately acknowledged and cited any content reproduced from other authors. Authors must comply with the rules for referencing which the Editorial board has prescribed, since plagiarism exists in many forms, varying from unjustified copying and paraphrasing of a significant amount of content from other publications to declaring as one's own the results of other scientists' research. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and therefore, unacceptable.
Repetitive and duplicate publication and simultaneous submission
Authors must not submit as an initial publication or to more than one publisher manuscripts describing the same scientific research. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one edition is unethical publishing conduct and is therefore, unacceptable.
The work of other individuals must always be acknowledged appropriately. Authors must cite any publication that they have used whilst writing their paper. Information obtained in private, verbally or in writing, or via a discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without the explicit written consent of the source author. Information obtained in the process of providing confidential services, such as reviewing manuscripts or granting applications, must not be used without the explicit written consent of the author involved in these services.
Authorship of publications
Authorship must be attributed to research workers who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, conduct or interpretation of the published paper. Individuals with a substantive contribution must be named as co-authors. When other people have been involved in significant aspects of the research project, they must be acknowledged and listed as contributors. Co-authorship requirements and responsibilities must be observed by acknowledging not only senior positions and academic titles, but also the contribution of individuals. The author submitting a manuscript must confirm that all co-authors and participants have been named in the publication and have agreed on the final draft of the paper before its submission.
Conflicts of interest disclosure
All authors are obliged to declare any financial or other substantial conflicts of interest within their manuscripts that might be considered to have influenced the validity or interpretation of their work. Any sources of financial support to the project must be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest that should be declared include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patents or registrations, as well as any grants or other types of funding. Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed as soon as possible.
Key errors in published papers
Should an author identify a significant error or inaccuracy in a published paper of their own, they are obliged to notify the editor-in-chief immediately and cooperate to retract or correct their paper. When the editor or the publisher are informed by a third party that the published paper contains a substantial error, the author will be obliged to retract or correct their paper immediately or to present evidence of the accuracy of the original paper to the editor.

Section V
"Tsenov" APH strictly follows the edition approved by the Editorial board of the "Business World" Library.

The Ethical Rules of the "Business World" Library were adopted at a meeting of the Editorial board on June 1, 2017 (Protocol No. 24) and came into force on the date of their adoption.