The European Bulletin of Himalayan Research (EBHR) is edited on a rotating basis between France (CNRS), Germany (South Asia Institute) and the United Kingdom (SOAS). From 2019 to 2023, the EBHR is hosted at the Centre for Himalayan Studies at CNRS in France. EBHR is a double-blind, peer-reviewed journal devoted to research in the social sciences and humanities focusing on the extended Himalayan region. Publishing with and reading the EBHR is free of charge and all journal content is licensed under the Creative Commons BY 4.0 International License.
The European Bulletin of Himalayan Research (EBHR) publication ethics and malpractice statement has been written in accordance with COPE general guidelines http://publicationethics.org/.
Publication decisions
The editor(s) of the European Bulletin of Himalayan Research (EBHR) are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor(s) are guided in reaching their decision reviewers’ reports and may confer with reviewers and/or editorial board members in making this decision. They are also guided by the journal’s policies and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
It is the editors’ responsibilities to provide guidance to guest editors, authors, and reviewers about the peer-review processes and more generally about the expectations of the journal.
Fair play
All manuscripts will be reviewed based on intellectual content without regard for age, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, country of origin, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts submitted for peer-review are kept strictly confidential. The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, as appropriate. At no time will editors or reviewers utilize submitted materials without the consent of the authors.
Fundamental errors in published works
When a significant error or inaccuracy has been discovered in a published work (with or without the author notifying it), the journal editors will cooperate with the author to retract or correct the paper accordingly. If a correction is deemed appropriate, the editors reserve the right to correct the published material and include a dated erratum.
Complaints
It is the responsibilities of the editors to take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints are presented concerning a submitted or published manuscript. In cases of suspected misconduct, the editors consult with the Editorial Board and follow the COPE flowcharts, available at:
http://publicationethics.org/files/Full%20set%20of%20flowcharts.pdf.
Editorial Board members’ responsibilities
The Editorial Board plays the role of a Scientific Committee, and its members provide advice on editorial projects and commit to reviewing submitted manuscripts on a regular basis, based on area of expertise. Members of the Editorial Board also help solicit manuscripts and identify potential contributors, and endeavor to increase the visibility of the EBHR in their networks and institutions.
Editorial Board members are responsible for responding appropriately if ethical complaints are presented to them concerning a submitted or published manuscript, and in cases of suspected misconduct, the Editorial Board follows the COPE flowcharts (see above).
Guest editors’ responsibilities
Guest editors are responsible for:
• defining the subject matter and role of every article in a thematic issue;
• providing clear guidelines to authors regarding the topic and boundaries of their contributions and the overall design of the issue;
• establishing a timeline for draft paper submission, revision and final paper submission with the journal editors, and ensuring that all deadlines are met;
• writing the Introduction to the special issue.
Duties of authors
Multiple, or concurrent publication
Authors must guarantee that submitted manuscripts have not been published elsewhere, are not currently under review elsewhere, and have been submitted with the full knowledge of their institutional home. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Any manuscripts that do not meet originality requirements will be rejected without peer-review. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment 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.
Copyright
Necessary permission must be obtained by the authors for the reproduction of any illustration or other material already published. Authors should ensure they hold the copyright to whatever image, pictures, text or material they reproduce in their articles. EBHR will not be liable for any copyright breaches.
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. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
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 editors and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.
Copyright
During the submission process the authors are asked to agree to the terms of the Creative Commons BY 4.0 International License Copyright Notice, which will apply to the submission if and when it is published by this journal.
Duties of Reviewers
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors and excuse her/himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any 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 editors.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors’ attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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.
Click on the icon to download the full statement:
