Ethics and Policies

(A) Journal Policies

Current Horticulture is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and follows the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the publishing process (editors, authors, reviewers, and publishers) must adhere to these ethical standards.

The journal follows the ethical standards and practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) and DOAJ Best Practices

We are committed to safeguarding editorial independence by ensuring that advertising, reprint sales, or any other commercial interests have no influence on editorial decisions.

We are dedicated to educating researchers especially early career researchers-by providing comprehensive guidance and resources on publishing ethics and standards.

  1. Competing interests for editors
  • Editors of Current Horticulture are required to declare any financial or non-financial competing interests that may influence, or appear to influence, their editorial decisions. Examples include employment, consultancies, editorial roles, advisory positions, patent ownership, or other professional affiliations.
  • Editors must not be involved in the editorial processing of any manuscript in which they are authors, co-authors, collaborators, or have a personal or financial interest. They are also strictly prohibited from using confidential information gained through their editorial role for personal benefit. The following statement must be published with the manuscript: Given their role as [insert journal role title], [insert your name] had no involvement in the peer-review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer-review.  Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to another journal editor.
  1. Editorial Responsibilities
  • Editors are solely responsible for deciding which manuscripts are suitable for publication, guided by the scientific merit, relevance, originality, and importance of the work. They may consult reviewers, editorial board members, or society officers, and will ensure all decisions comply with ethical guidelines.
  • Editors must ensure a fair, timely, and unbiased peer review process. Each manuscript will typically be reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Editors must avoid the use of fraudulent reviewers and review any potential conflicts of interest among reviewers.
  • Manuscripts are evaluated purely on scholarly merit, without discrimination based on authors’ personal characteristics or beliefs. Editors are expected to maintain transparency, uphold honesty in reporting, and use the journal’s designated submission system for all communications.
  • The editor must not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services in which the editor has an interest.
  • All manuscript submissions and reviewer communications are treated confidentially. Editors must protect the identities of reviewers unless an open peer review policy applies. Unpublished content must not be used by editors for personal research without written permission from the authors.
  • Editors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest to the publisher and refrain from handling submissions where such conflicts exist (e.g., manuscripts authored by themselves, family members, or close collaborators). These submissions must undergo independent editorial handling, and any involvement must be clearly disclosed in the published article.
  • Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity of the published record. They must act promptly on allegations of misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, unethical research), coordinating with the publisher etc as needed. Appropriate actions may include issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.

 

  1. Reviewers Responsibility
  • Peer reviewers assist the editor in evaluating the scholarly quality, originality, and relevance of submissions. Their feedback also helps authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers are expected to identify any ethical concerns, including plagiarism, data duplication, or significant overlap with previously published work, and report them to the editor.
  • Reviewers should accept assignments only if they are confident in their expertise and can complete the review within the requested timeline. If unable, they should promptly inform the editor and decline the review.
  • Reviewers should provide constructive feedback within the agreed timeline.
  • Reviews should be constructive, objective, and respectful. Personal criticism is inappropriate. All comments must be supported with clear arguments. Suggestions to cite the reviewer’s own work should be made only when scientifically relevant.
  • Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative, or personal) and recuse themselves if the review cannot be unbiased.
  • Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal advantage. Reviewers may not contact authors directly. Any co-reviewing or use of AI tools must be approved by the editor in advance to maintain confidentiality and integrity.
  • Unpublished data or ideas obtained through peer review must not be used for the reviewer’s own research without the author’s explicit permission.
  • Further resources: Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers | COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics

 

  1. Author Responsibilities
  • Authors must present accurate, original, and objective accounts of their research, supported by appropriate detail and references to allow replication. Misrepresentation or fabrication of data is unethical and unacceptable.
  • Authors should retain original data for a reasonable period and must provide it upon request for editorial review or compliance with open data policies.
  • Manuscripts must be the authors' original work. Proper citation and permission are required when using the work of others. All form of Plagiarism, is strictly prohibited.
  • Authors must ensure originality and must not submit the same work to multiple journals simultaneously.
  • All claims must be supported with accurate, relevant, and verifiable citations. Excessive self-citation or citation manipulation is unethical. Suggested citations from editors or reviewers must be scientifically justified.
  • Only individuals who have made significant contributions to the study should be listed as authors. All authors must approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission. Others who contributed should be acknowledged appropriately.
  • Information obtained through confidential channels (e.g., peer review or grant review) must not be used without explicit permission from the source.
  • Authors must disclose any use of AI tools in writing or preparing the manuscript, figures, or images. Such tools must not replace critical analysis or authorship.
  • All authors must have significantly contributed to the research and must approve the final manuscript.
  • Research must follow ethical standards, including informed consent and institutional approval as per national guidelines.
  • Images must not be manipulated to mislead. Only minimal adjustments for clarity are acceptable. Authors may be required to provide original image data upon request.
  • All financial or personal relationships that could influence the work must be disclosed. Funding sources and their roles must also be declared.
  • Authors are obliged to promptly notify the journal editor of any significant errors discovered post-publication and cooperate in issuing corrections or retractions.

 

  1. Plagiarism and Misconduct Policy
  • Current Horticulture is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and integrity. All submitted manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere. Plagiarism in any form is strictly prohibited. Submissions are routinely screened using plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts showing similarity (excluding references and standard phrases) may be rejected or returned for revision.
  • In addition to plagiarism, other unethical practices such as data fabrication, falsification, duplicate submission, authorship manipulation, and peer review interference are treated as serious misconduct. Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest, funding sources, and ensure proper acknowledgment of contributions.
  • If misconduct is suspected, the editorial team will investigate in line with COPE guidelines. Confirmed cases may result in rejection, retraction, author sanctions, and institutional notification. Corrections or expressions of concern may be issued as appropriate.
  • Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of their work. By submitting to Current Horticulture, authors agree to abide by this policy. The journal follows international standards and guidelines for handling publication ethics. Any concerns regarding ethical violations should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief.

 

  1. Conflict of Interest Policy
  • All authors, reviewers, and editors involved in the publication process of Current Horticulture are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence, or appear to influence, their responsibilities. Conflicts may include financial relationships, personal or professional connections, academic competition, or any other interests that could affect objectivity. Authors must include a clear statement of any conflicts of interest (or explicitly state “no conflicts to declare”) within their manuscript. Reviewers and editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where such conflicts exist. A conflict of interest declaration will be published in every article to ensure transparency and uphold the integrity of the peer review and publication process.
  1. Inclusive Language Policy
  • Current Horticulture encourages all authors to use inclusive language in their manuscripts. Inclusive language respects diversity, promotes equality, and avoids bias, stereotyping, or discrimination based on age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability, or health condition. Authors should avoid unnecessary references to personal characteristics unless they are directly relevant to the research. Gender-neutral language is preferred—for example, using plural nouns such as “researchers” or “farmers” instead of gender-specific pronouns like “he” or “she.” Descriptors that may imply one group is superior to another should be avoided. Language should be free from slang, cultural assumptions, or stereotypes and should not make presumptions about the beliefs or backgrounds of readers. These guidelines are intended to help authors communicate respectfully and effectively with a global and diverse audience and are aligned with international standards in scholarly publishing.

 

  1. Jurisdictional Claims Policy
  • Current Horticulture maintains a neutral stance on territorial disputes or jurisdictional claims, including those related to maps and institutional affiliations. We respect the choices made by authors in designating territories or identifying their affiliations in submitted and published content. However, to ensure clarity and global accessibility, authors must ensure that any maps included in their submissions are accurate and relevant to the study area. Maps should only display the geographic region directly involved in the research and must not extend beyond the actual study boundaries. A clear note should be added stating: “Map lines delineate study areas and do not necessarily depict accepted national boundaries.” This helps to avoid misinterpretation and ensures compliance with international publishing standards. During the peer review or editorial process, authors may be asked to revise maps that do not adhere to these guidelines.

 

  1. Data Sharing and Reproducibility
  • Current Horticulture supports transparency, reproducibility, and the validation of scientific findings. Authors are encouraged to deposit their research data in recognized public repositories where applicable and provide relevant accession numbers or links in the manuscript. Upon reasonable request, authors should be prepared to share raw data, analytical protocols, and other relevant materials to enable verification of the results. All experimental methods and analyses must be described in sufficient detail to allow other researchers to reproduce the findings.

 

  1. Authorship Policy
  • Current Horticulture expects authors to carefully consider and finalize the list and order of authors at the time of original submission. All authors listed in the manuscript must meet the journal’s authorship criteria and be included in the submission system. All authors must approve the submitted and final versions of the manuscript.
  • Changes to authorship—including the addition, removal, or rearrangement of authors—are generally not allowed after submission. Any request for such changes must be made by the corresponding author before acceptance of the manuscript and must include a valid reason for the change, along with written confirmation from all authors involved (including those being added or removed) stating their agreement with the proposed change. Requests must be submitted using the official authorship change form. Incomplete or improperly submitted requests will not be considered. Changes to authorship after acceptance are permitted only in exceptional circumstances and may delay the publication process. If the manuscript has already been published, approved authorship changes will be reflected through a corrigendum. Unauthorized authorship changes may result in rejection of the manuscript or retraction of the published article.

 

  1. Handling Allegations of Misconduct
  • Current Horticulture is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. Allegations of research or publication misconduct—such as plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, authorship disputes, or peer review manipulation—will be investigated promptly and confidentially in accordance with the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal will ensure a fair and unbiased review of all claims, giving authors the opportunity to respond. If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions will be taken, which may include rejection of the manuscript, retraction of a published article, notification to authors affiliated institutions or funders, and potential bans on future submissions. The integrity of the scientific record and transparency in addressing ethical concerns are central to our editorial policy.

 

  1. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern
  • Current Horticulture is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. If an error is identified in a published article that affects the understanding, interpretation, or reliability of the data or conclusions, a correction (erratum or corrigendum) will be issued. In cases where significant errors, ethical violations, or research misconduct are confirmed—such as data fabrication, plagiarism, or duplicate publication—the article may be retracted. Expressions of concern may be published when an investigation is ongoing but unresolved. All corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern will be clearly labeled, openly accessible, and directly linked to the original article to ensure transparency for readers and researchers.

 

  1. Appeals and Complaints Procedure
  • Current Horticulture provides authors with the opportunity to appeal editorial decisions and raise concerns about the editorial or peer review process. Authors who wish to appeal a rejection must submit a written request to the Editor-in-Chief, clearly stating the reasons for the appeal and providing a detailed justification, including evidence to support their case. Appeals will be reviewed objectively and may involve consultation with additional editors or external reviewers. Complaints regarding the peer review process, editorial handling, or ethical concerns should also be directed to the Editor-in-Chief (editorcurrenthort@gmail.com). All appeals and complaints will be handled promptly, fairly, and in accordance with the journal’s commitment to transparency, professionalism, and ethical publishing standards.
  1. Copyright and Licensing
  • Current Horticulture is an open-access journal, and all articles are published under the CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. This allows others to read, share, and adapt the published content for non-commercial purposes, provided appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the journal.
  • SHRD has no objection to the use of published material for academic or non-commercial purposes, as long as proper acknowledgment is given to the source and credit is clearly attributed to the journal and SHRD. Commercial use of content without prior permission is strictly prohibited.
  • For licensing inquiries or reuse beyond the scope of CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, please contact the editorial office.

 

  1. Archiving and Preservation Policy
  • Current Horticulture is committed to the long-term preservation and accessibility of all published content. To ensure continued availability of scholarly material, even in the event of journal discontinuation, we utilize trusted digital archiving and preservation systems.
  • Authors are permitted to deposit all versions of their manuscript—including the preprint, the author’s accepted manuscript, and the published version (Version of Record)—in institutional or subject-specific repositories, without any embargo.
  • All published articles in Current Horticulture are assigned DOIs and are accessible in perpetuity through the journal website. Authors are also encouraged to deposit their final published articles in their institutional repositories and personal research archives, provided proper citation to the original source is included.
  • We are actively exploring integration with open and cost-free preservation networks such as PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN), which is compatible with Open Journal Systems (OJS) and provides free archiving services for open access journals.
  • For queries related to archiving and preservation, please contact the editorial office (email: editorcurrenthort@gmail.com).

 

(B) Editorial Process (Peer review)

Current Horticulture, journal uphold a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and ethically sound research in the field of horticultural science. The journal employs a double-blind peer review system, where both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process.

  1. Objective of Peer Review

The primary aim of the peer review process is to:

  • Evaluate the scientific quality, originality, clarity, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.
  • Provide constructive feedback to authors for manuscript improvement.
  • Maintain the integrity of the scholarly record and support ethical publication practices.
  1. Peer Review Model: Double-Blind
  • Double-blind review ensures anonymity of both authors and reviewers.
  • Authors are expected to remove identifying information from their manuscripts during submission.
  • Each manuscript will typically be reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field.
  • Reviewers are selected based on expertise, impartiality, and experience in the relevant field.
  1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first screened by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to assess:

  • Suitability for the journal’s scope.
  • Compliance with submission guidelines.
  • Plagiarism (checked using similarity detection tools like Turnitin or iThenticate).

Manuscripts that do not meet basic quality or ethical standards may be rejected at this stage.

  1. Reviewer Selection
  • Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.
  • Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, publication record, and lack of conflicts of interest.
  • The journal avoids selecting reviewers suggested solely by the authors unless they are also independently identified as suitable by the editor.
  1. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate the manuscript’s scientific quality, originality, methodology, relevance, and clarity.
  • Provide unbiased, respectful, and constructive feedback.
  • Identify any ethical concerns, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or conflicts of interest.
  • Submit their reviews within the suitable deadline (30 Days).
  • Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and not share, use, or disclose manuscript content for personal or professional benefit.
  1. Editorial Decision Process

After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the handling editor will:

  • Consider the reviewers’ recommendations.
  • Decide whether to accept, revise (major or minor), or reject the manuscript.
  • Provide a clear editorial decision along with constructive comments to guide authors.

The editorial team retains the right to make the final decision, even in cases where reviewer opinions differ.

  1. Revisions and Resubmission

Authors receiving revision requests must:

  • Submit a revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response addressing all reviewer comments.
  • Clearly indicate changes made in the revised manuscript (e.g., using tracked changes or highlighted text).

Revised manuscripts may be sent for a second round of review, especially after major revisions.

  1. Appeals and Disputes

Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe the review was unfair or biased. Appeals should be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief with detailed justification. All appeals will be assessed objectively and fairly.

  1. Confidentiality and Ethical Compliance
  • All peer reviews are confidential.
  • The journal does not disclose reviewer identities unless both reviewer and author consent to open peer review.
  • Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and decline to review if a conflict exists.
  1. Recognition of Reviewers

We appreciate the valuable contributions of our reviewers. The journal may acknowledge reviewers annually or through suitable platforms, while maintaining confidentiality where applicable.

The peer review process is fundamental to the journal’s mission of publishing trustworthy and impactful horticultural research. We continuously strive to make this process transparent, fair, and timely for all contributors.

For more information or to volunteer as a reviewer, signup and select the available as reviewer. For more detail contact the editorial office at: editorcurrenthort@gmail.com

(C) Open access policy

Current Horticulture is an open access journal committed to the free and global dissemination of scientific knowledge in horticultural science. The journal is official publication of Society for Horticultural Research and Development (SHRD) and operates under the principle that publicly funded research should be freely accessible to all.

Key Features of Our Open Access Policy:

  • Immediate Access: All articles published in Current Horticulture are freely and immediately available online upon publication. There is no embargo period.
  • No Registration Required: Readers are not required to register or create an account to access or download articles. The full text of all published content is available without restriction on Journal website (Articles and Issues)
  • Licensing: Articles are published under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license, which allows users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles for non-commercial purposes, as long as proper attribution is given to the original authors and source.
  • No Paywalls: The journal does not charge subscription fees or impose access barriers. Authors retain copyright of their work while granting the journal the right to publish.
  • Author Fees: Current Horticulture does not charge any article processing or publication fees (APCs). However, to support the journal’s sustainability and activities, at least the corresponding author must be a member of the Society for Horticultural Research and Development (SHRD) at the time of article acceptance. Details on SHRD membership fees and how to join are available at: [Insert direct link to SHRD membership page]. There are no submission fees, and membership does not affect editorial decisions, which are based solely on scientific merit.

This policy ensures compliance with DOAJ’s definition of open access and supports greater visibility, discoverability, and impact of published research.

(D) Copyright and Access

The copyright of all articles published in Current Horticulture is vested with the Society for Horticultural Research and Development (SHRD). SHRD retains the right to enter into agreements with national or international organizations for the purposes of reprography, photocopying, electronic or digital storage, and dissemination of published material.

SHRD permits the use of content published in Current Horticulture for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the Society. Any reproduction or use of material for educational, research, or informational purposes must include proper citation acknowledging SHRD as the copyright holder.

The journal issue and individual articles are available to readers immediately upon publication free of charge to read, download and share. Authors are encouraged to share their submitted versions (preprints), accepted versions (postprint), and/or published versions (publisher versions) freely under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.