16-Complaints Policy

16.1 Complaints

The Business & Economic Review (BER) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of editorial integrity, transparency, and ethical publishing. BER values constructive feedback and takes all complaints and concerns seriously, whether they come from authors, reviewers, readers, or third parties.

This Complaints Policy outlines the procedures for lodging, addressing, and resolving complaints related to:

  • Editorial decisions
  • Peer review processes
  • Author, reviewer, or editor conduct
  • Alleged misconduct or policy violations
  • Publication ethics and academic integrity

BER ensures that complaints are handled fairly, transparently, and without retaliation.

16.2  Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to complaints concerning:

  • Unfair editorial decisions
  • Delayed or non-responsive peer review
  • Conflicts of interest not disclosed
  • Plagiarism or duplicate publication
  • Misconduct by authors, editors, or reviewers
  • Authorship disputes
  • Errors in published content
  • Breaches of confidentiality
  • Violations of journal policies

Note: Complaints regarding commercial issues (e.g., billing for APCs) are handled under the APC Policy.

16.3  Who Can Submit a Complaint?

Complaints may be submitted by:

  • Authors (current or former contributors)
  • Peer reviewers
  • Editorial board members
  • Readers
  • Librarians, institutions, or funders
  • Third-party observers or whistle-blowers

Anonymous complaints are accepted but must include sufficient detail to allow investigation.

16.4  Submitting a Complaint

16.4.1 Method of Submission

Complaints form must be submitted in writing via:

16.4.2 Required Information

To ensure timely investigation, the complaint should include:

  • Complainant's full name and contact information (unless anonymous)
  • Description of the issue
  • Names of individuals involved (if applicable)
  • Relevant manuscript or article ID, title, and DOI
  • Supporting evidence (emails, screenshots, documents)

16.5  Complaint Investigation Process

16.5.1 Initial Review

Upon receipt:

  • The complaint is logged by the Managing Editor
  • A confirmation email is sent to the complainant
  • The issue is assessed for validity and scope

16.5.2 Investigation

If the complaint is actionable:

  • It is assigned to a senior editor or ethics panel
  • Both parties (complainant and respondent) may be contacted for further information
  • Editorial records, peer review reports, and email correspondence may be examined
  • Confidentiality is maintained at all stages

16.5.3 Resolution

Depending on the outcome:

  • An explanation, apology, or corrective action may be offered
  • For complaints involving misconduct, further steps may include:
  • Retraction or correction of a published article
  • Removal of a reviewer or editor from duties
  • Notification of author institutions or funders

All parties are informed in writing of the final decision.

16.6  Appeals Process

If a complainant disagrees with the resolution:

  • They may submit an appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision
  • Appeals must include new evidence or reasoning for reconsideration
  • A separate independent editor or external advisor may be consulted
  • The final appeal decision is binding and communicated within 3–4 weeks

16.7  Complaints Related to Editorial Decisions

Authors who believe an editorial decision was:

  • Biased,
  • Unjustified, or
  • Based on a flawed review process

…may file a formal complaint. BER will:

  • Re-evaluate the decision internally
  • Consider independent editorial review
  • Allow resubmission or transfer (if appropriate)

Editorial judgment on manuscript merit remains the editorial board’s final prerogative unless procedural error is identified.

16.8 Complaints Related to Review Delays

Authors concerned about unusually long review times may:

  • Inquire about the manuscript status
  • File a complaint if no substantive response is received after repeated contact

The editorial office will investigate and respond within 5–7 business days, including reasons for delay and steps taken to expedite the process.

16.9 Confidentiality and Protection

BER ensures that:

  • All complaints are treated confidentially
  • Whistle-blowers are protected from retaliation
  • Investigations are impartial and based on evidence
  • Outcomes are documented securely

Complainants may remain anonymous, but doing so may limit the scope of investigation if supporting documentation is lacking.

16.10  Misuse of the Complaints Process

While BER welcomes constructive complaints, it does not tolerate:

  • Malicious, abusive, or harassing communication
  • Intentionally false allegations
  • Attempts to manipulate editorial decisions

Such conduct may result in:

  • Dismissal of the complaint
  • Restriction from future submissions
  • Notification to affiliated institutions (if serious)

 

16.11  Institutional Cooperation

In complex or unresolved cases involving academic misconduct, BER may:

  • Request assistance from the author's institution or funder
  • Share evidence confidentially with research integrity officers
  • Cooperate with institutional investigations and implement their recommendations

16.12 Annual Review of Complaints

  • BER reviews complaint trends annually
  • Findings are reported to the Editorial Board

Improvements to policies, editorial training, and review procedures may be implemented in response to complaints