Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilLa revueCode of ethics

Code of ethics

The journal’s scientific quality

The editorial board and the editorial advisory panel are responsible for all content published in the journal and constantly strive to improve its scientific quality. They ensure a regular turnover among reviewers and the scientific committee, as well as among their own members, to guarantee strict professional standards. They mention the affiliations of their own members and of the scientific committee on the journal's website.

Freedom of speech and scientific debate

The editorial board oversees the choices made by the guest editors of special issues to ensure an impartial selection of papers. It pays particular attention to papers and special issues that contribute to the scientific debate. Any paper presenting a relevant critique of a previously published paper in the journal may be submitted for publication. In addition, any author may respond to a critique against their paper published in the journal.

Relations with readers

The journal informs its readers of the measures taken to ensure that the papers submitted to the journal are subject to objective and impartial evaluation.

Whenever appropriate, the source of the funding for the research presented in the journal is mentioned.

Relations with authors

The board and panel’s decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on the importance, originality, and clarity of the paper, as well as on the validity of the study and its relevance with regard to the journal’s editorial line. Papers are selected solely on the basis of their intellectual or scientific merit, regardless of the authors’ personal characteristics or scientific affiliations. The editorial board’s decisions take into account the legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The process to submit a paper to the journal is presented on the journal's website and updated regularly.

Authors may appeal editorial decisions.

Should the reviewers consider that, due to its subject, approach, and diligence, a submission could be published, but does not meet the language or format standards of French-speaking scientific publications, the Revue international des études du développement may, in some cases, provide rewriting assistance.

Relations with reviewers

The reviewers’ missions are presented on the journal's website and updated regularly. The editorial board guarantees their anonymity.

The editors-in-chief ensure that suitable reviewers are selected for a given submission, that is, people who can judge the work and are free to disqualify competing interests. The editors-in-chief are committed to respecting the requests of authors who wish that a person not review their submission, provided that such requests are properly justified and feasible. They provide guidance to reviewers on what is expected of them, including the need to deal with submissions confidentially. They ask reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission. They encourage reviewers to comment on ethical issues and possible negligence with regard to research and publication standards in the submissions (for example, unethical research design, insufficient information on the protection of research subjects, or inappropriate handling and presentation of data). They encourage reviewers to comment on the originality of the submissions, and to flag any redundant publications and plagiarism. They are committed to communicating the entirety of the reviewers’ comments to the authors, unless their content is offensive or libelous. These guidelines are regularly updated and can be found on the journal’s website.

Relations with the editorial board and advisory panel members

The journal’s editors-in-chief and scientific committee provide new members of the editorial board with guidelines on what is expected of them, and keep existing members informed of new policies and developments. They inform them of the procedure for reviewing applications to the editorial board and the editorial advisory panel in order to guarantee that these applications are reviewed impartially. They thus ensure that the applicants are suitably qualified to contribute actively to the development and proper management of the journal. They regularly review the makeup of the editorial board, and give clear guidance to its members about their role and duties, which include acting as ambassadors for the journal, supporting and promoting it, seeking out the best authors and research, and actively calling for submissions. They encourage the editorial board and advisory panel members to attend and contribute to meetings, consult them periodically on the operation of the journal, inform them of any policy changes, and identify future challenges with them.

Political or commercial interests

The papers are selected on their academic merit and not on the commercial or political gain that they may bring. The editorial board also guarantees the independence of the journal from its publisher and its owner. A prospective new publisher cannot reverse a decision to publish a submission made by the previous publisher, unless serious problems are identified. If advertisements are published, they are clearly set apart from the journal’s scientific content.

Behavior contrary to publication ethics

The editorial board seeks to identify and prevent any unethical behavior. It is committed to investigating any complaint filed against the journal. The author must answer for the alleged breach of ethics, and the editorial board is always willing to publish corrections, apologies, or explanations, if need be. In the event of a disagreement, mediation should be considered.

Procedure in the event of behavior contrary to publication ethics

A complaint denouncing an unethical publication practice may be filed with the journal’s editorial board at any time, by anyone. The individual lodging the complaint must provide supporting evidence. Any complaint is taken seriously by the editorial board and investigated until resolution. Any complaint will be dealt with, regardless of the publication date of the paper concerned. Documents relating to the processing of this complaint will be kept on file by the editorial board.

Ethical guidelines for reviewers

Reviewers’ missions

The reviewers are selected for their intellectual and scientific expertise. They evaluate the manuscripts on their sole content, regardless of the authors’ personal characteristics or scientific affiliations. The assessment provided by the reviewers must be objective. They are required to flag any paper that is similar to the submission. Reviewers should, to the best of their knowledge, flag any significant publication related to the submission that has not been cited.

The journal is committed to developing, maintaining, and updating a database of suitable reviewers; to not calling upon reviewers who consistently produce discourteous, poor quality, or late reports; to ensuring that the database of reviewers reflects the community with regard to its editorial line and its field of research, and to adding new reviewers whenever necessary; and to using a wide range of sources to identify potential new reviewers (authors’ suggestions or bibliographical databases).

Conflict of interest

Editorial board members and reviewers must recuse themselves in the event of a conflict of interest with one of the authors or with the content of the manuscript under revision. In addition, reviewers who know that they are not qualified to evaluate a manuscript or that they cannot do so in a timely manner are required to notify the editorial board and recuse themselves.


The manuscripts received for evaluation are treated as confidential documents. No information about a manuscript submitted to the journal is disclosed to anyone other than the author(s), potential reviewers, and possibly the publisher. Reviewers agree not to keep or copy a manuscript received for evaluation.

Data use

Prior to their possible publication, the data presented in the submissions must not be used in the research work of an editorial board member or reviewer, without the author’s express, written consent.

Evaluation process

With the exception of book reviews, which are evaluated by the book review editor and discussed with the editorial board members, all submissions are evaluated according to a double-blind review: the author does not know the identity of the reviewers, and they do not know the identity of the author. There are at least two reviewers for each paper.

Should the reviewers express doubts or diverging opinions, the editorial board may call upon additional reviewers. Submissions that are contrary to the journal’s editorial line may also be rejected by the editorial board, without an evaluation report. Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial board makes one of the three following decisions, within a reasonable time after submission:

  • accepted without revisions ;

  • rejected ;

  • accepted subject to revisions.

In the latter case, the editorial board will make a final decision, be it positive or negative, depending on whether the author followed the reviewers’ suggestions and comments. Any manuscript accepted, upon initial submission, or after revisions by the author, is subject to editorial work in collaboration with the author. In any case, when making decisions, the editorial board takes into consideration the legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Ethical guidelines for authors

Original work and plagiarism

Authors must vouch for the originality of their paper and must not publish a text that would infringe on the Intellectual Property Code in any form whatsoever. False or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute behavior contrary to the ethics of scientific publication and, as such, are unacceptable. The journal will perform plagiarism detection (software and search for similar titles) on submissions when suspicions are raised; it commits to supporting authors whose copyright has been infringed on, or who have been victims of plagiarism, and to working with its publisher to defend the rights of authors and prosecute violators, for example by requesting retractions or the withdrawal of material from a website, whether or not the journal holds the copyright.

Multiple, redundant, or simultaneous publications

Authors agree not to submit a paper that has previously been published in another journal or a new paper that is exclusively based on work published elsewhere. Likewise, they agree not to submit their paper to several journals simultaneously.


Any citation or use of other authors’ work must be identified as such and accompanied by the appropriate references, presented according to the journal’s standards. Should authors wish to use information they have obtained privately (through conversations or correspondence), they should do their utmost to obtain authorization from their sources.


The list of authors must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, carrying out, or interpretation of the study presented in the submission to the journal, or to the writing of the text. All authors must be mentioned, with their affiliations, in alphabetical order or according to their degree of implication in the carrying out of the study or in the writing of the text. The corresponding author must ensure that only the appropriate co-authors are included in the list of authors, and that all the co-authors, after having read and approved the final version of their text, have agreed to submit the paper for publication.

Libelous language

Authors agree not to violate the rules of scientific debate in their submissions, and not to make libelous statements that could be interpreted as impugning the reputation of a third party.

Conflict of interest

Authors must declare any potential conflict of interest, whether professional or financial. All non-public sources of funding for the research presented in the submission must be mentioned explicitly.


Any author who discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own work after publication promptly informs the journal’s editorial board, and cooperates with it to publish an erratum, or even to withdraw their paper.

Data access

At the editorial board’s request, authors may have to provide the raw data related to their research. If the paper is based on cases involving real situations, authors will respect the anonymity of the individuals mentioned, or obtain their explicit agreement.

Print and digital publication

Upon submitting their paper, authors agree to authorize its dissemination in print and digital format – unless explicitly notified.

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search