Ethical guidelines

Conference proceedings Water resources and wetlands publishes researches on rivers and lakes ecosystem ecology, climate changing and water resources, coastal environment, deltas and wetlands, and water policies. Contributions are often in combinations determined by interdisciplinary study. Conference proceedings Water resources and wetlands promotes and respect the ethical principles of scientific publishing. These standards are essential to ensure quality and credibility of scientific publications. All manuscript are considered without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.
Romanian Limnogeographical Association and the partners are committed to maintain the statements of COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct).

Conference proceedings Water resources and wetlands are “double blind” peer reviewed.

The editors are responsible for:
• deciding to accept or reject a paper for publication based on the relevance for the proceedings, on the validity of the results, and on the clarity and originality;
• finding peer reviewers with a degree in the scientific relevant field;
• keeping the confidentiality of the manuscript while under review;
• publishing the paper open acces after the payement of the registration fee to the conference.

The authors are responsible for:
• opinions and views expressed in the paper proceedings, which are not the views of or endorsed by Romanian Limnogeographical Association or the partners;
• submiting original works which has not been published before (partly or in full) or has not been submitted to another journal for simultaneous consideration;
• obtaining permission to reproduce copyright material from other sources and appropriately cite or quote them if the manuscript (including figures, photos, on-line materials …);
• sharing collective responsability and accountability for the results by all co-authors;
• promptly notifying the editors when an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work in order to retract or correct the paper;
• properly acknowledging to individuals who provided help during the research and to research grants;
In addition: changes of authorship are not accepted after acceptance of a manuscript.
Important note: to avoid any form of plagiarism or self-plagiarims, each manuscript newly submitted will be checked regarding plagiarism using Anti-plagiat software.
Any manipulation of citations (e.g., citations not contributing to a manuscript's scientific content) is perceived as scientific malpractice.
In case of plagiarism the author(s) institution(s) may be informed.

The peer reviewers are responsable for:
• assisting the editors in taking the decision of publishing a submitted manuscript;
• preserving the confidentialitty of the manuscript and do not discussing it with others, unauthorized by the editors;
• conducting an objective review with supporting arguments;
• contributing to the improvement of the work by formulating suggestions to the authors;
• allerting the editors and authors in case of plagiarism;

Compliance with Ethical Standards
To ensure the ethical principles of scientific publishing, authors should include information regarding sources of funding and potential conflicts of interest (e.g., financial, multiple affiliation, intellectual property rights), identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use or make a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved animals.
The authors will include a statement that reflects what is recorded in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form(s). The corresponding author is responsible to collect the conflict of interest disclosure forms from all authors The authors should be prepared to collect documentation of compliance with ethical standards and send if requested during peer review or after publication.

Before submitting your article check carefully the instructions for authors. The peer review process starts with an internal decision. Proceeding papers can be rejected at this stage. This process normally takes a week. If the editor believes the paper may be of interest to our readers, it is then sent out for external “double blind” peer review. Each article (without the name of the author(s)) is sent to two reviewers for evaluation. The comments of peer reviewers will be sent to the author by the editorial board to make the recommended changes, if necessary. The peer reviewers' names are unknown to manuscript author(s). Peer reviewers are asked to give their opinion on a number of issues pertinent to the quality and suitability of a paper, and to judge papers on grounds of originality and importance. Upon peer reviewers' recommendations, the manuscript can be accepted, sent back to author for minor revisions, sent back to author to be resubmitted or rejected.