Information clause

Pursuant to Article 13 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), we hereby would like to inform you that... Donload:   

 

GUIDELINES FOR THE AUTHORS 

Download:     

Geomatics, Landmanagement and Landscape (GLL) journal accepts only original English-language scientific papers relating to all aspects of spatial and environmental processes.

Preparation of the manuscript

1. Text volume: manuscript cannot exceed 12 pages (A-4 format), including tables and illustrations. The text should be written in 12-point font (Times New Roman), with line spacing of 1.5 cm, and 2.5 cm margins on each side.

2. Tables and illustrations: they must not be larger than 12.5 × 19.5 cm (format B-5). The tables should contain only relevant data with relevant statistical figures. Avoid repeating the results presented elsewhere in the body of text (e.g. charts). Each table with the accompanying heading, and each drawing identified by a number, must be described separately. Tables and drawings should be numbered in the order in which they appear in the text.

3. Template:

Title: concise, corresponding to the content.

Authors: In the multi-author paper, the order of names proposed by the authors is adopted.

At the bottom of the last page, provide first and last names, place(s) of work, e-mail address(es), ORCID, and full postal address(es) of all the authors who are submitting the article.

Abstract: a short summary (200–250 words) of the problem, containing basic information about the objective, methods, results, and main conclusions.

Keywords: up to a maximum of 6 words or phrases related to the main topic of the article.

Main body of the article: the text should consist of the following parts: introduction, subject of and methodology of the research, results, summary and conclusions. The objective of the research should be specified in the introduction.

References to literature: quotations in the text should be described in Latin alphabet with the author’s name and the year of publication, e.g. [Kowal 2000, Kowal and Nowak 2000, Baran et al. 2007]. The cited publications are to be listed at the end of the article according to the following standard:

• Ergenzinger P.E., de Jong C., Christaller G., 1994. Interrelationships between bedload transfer and river-bed adjustment in mountain rivers: an example from Squaw Creek, Montana. [In:] Process models and theoretical geomorphology. Ed. M.J. Kirkby. John Wiley & Sons New York, 141–158.
• Oliver M., Webster R., 1986. Semi-variograms for modelling the spatial pattern of landform and soil properties. Earth Surf. Proc. Landforms 11, 45–60.
• Rodrigo F.S., 2002. Changes in climate variability and seasonal rainfall extremes: a case study from San Fernando (Spain), 1821–2000. Theor. Appl. Climatol 72, 193–207.
• Young C.E. Jr., Klaiwitter R.A., 1968. Hydrology of wetland forest watersheds. Proceedings of the CUCOH Hydrological Conference, Clemson University, 28–29 March 1968, 29–38.

Bibliographic entries are given in Latin transcription (we do not use Cyrillic).

4.  Units: SI units should be used in the article. Complex units should be presented in the form of a product e.g. g·dm-3  (rather than g/dm3).

Publishing process

1. Authors should submit an electronic version of the article to the GLL magazine using the Editorial System. Internet domain for the system is: https://www.editorialsystem.com/gll/
2. Each article is reviewed by two reviewers, experts in the given field. One of the reviewers is from outside the scientific unit the author of the publication is affiliated with.
3. Information about the authors and reviewers is not shared with either of the parties during the review process (it is a double-blind review).
4. The list of reviewers is published on the journal’s website and in the last issue of a given year, or in the first issue of the following year.
5. The reviews, along with the manuscript containing corrections to the article, are available after logging in to the Editorial System.
6. The review form, which is filled out by the reviewer during the paper review process, is available on the journal’s website.
7. In cases where the article is returned to the author for correction, it must be corrected and sent to the publisher in an electronic version within 5 days. Otherwise the article will be considered withdrawn by the author. The author will be notified via the Editorial System if and when the publication is accepted.
8. The authors are required to submit a formal statement on the transfer of copyright, and a declaration that the article has not been previously published, is not currently prepared for publication in another journal, and that after being accepted for publication it will not be published elsewhere in the same form without the written consent of the publisher.
9. The responsibility for obtaining permission from the copyright owner to reproduce any copyrighted illustrations rests with the authors of the article.
10. The authors are required to disclose any information on the sources of funding for the research presented in the scientific paper submitted for publication in the GLL journal.
11. The final version of the article will be sent to the author for approval in electronic format. The publisher reserves the right to introduce abbreviations and/or corrections in the text.
12. The final version of the article should be returned to the publisher within 48 hours of receipt. Changes to the text should be limited to factual or typographical errors.
13. Each author will receive one copy of the journal’s issue.
14. Since 2018, a fee is charged for printing the articles in the GLL journal. The fee is PLN 307.50.   

Ethical principles

PL

The rules below have been developed on the basis of the COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, which can be found in the following website: publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf

I. The authors’ responsibilities

Authorship of the work

The authors of the work are the persons who contributed the most to the idea or the project of its creation, participated in its implementation and/or the interpretation of research results. The co-authors of the work are all other persons who participated in its creation. Collaborators are the persons who have influenced some of the significant aspects of the given scientific paper. The author should make sure that all of the co-authors and collaborators have been listed in the work, that they have seen and approved the final version thereof, and agreed to submit it for publication.

Ghostwriting is a situation in which someone performs most of the work related to the given publication, while his/her identity as the co-author is not disclosed, nor was he/she mentioned in the acknowledgments attached to the work.

Guest authorship is a situation in which one or several authors are assigned to a given publication, while their actual contribution to the work is insignificant or irrelevant.
Ghostwriting and guest authorship are manifestations of scientific misconduct. All detected instances of such behaviour will be revealed, including notification of relevant entities (such as institutions employing the authors, and professional associations). The manifestations of scientific misconduct, especially any breach or violation of the ethics of scientific research, will remain documented in the Editorial Office.

Disclosure of research funding sources and of any conflict of interest
The author should disclose all sources of research funding in his/her work, as well as the contribution of scientific and research institutions, associations and other entities, and any significant conflict of interest that may affect the results or the interpretation thereof.

Research reporting standards
Authors of the papers based on original research should present a detailed description of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its meaning. Source data should be presented in the paper.

Data access and storage
Authors may be asked to provide source data used in the work for editorial evaluation; therefore they need to store the relevant data within a reasonable period of time after the publication.

Multiple, unnecessary, or competitive publications
As a rule, the author should not publish materials describing the same research in more than one journal or original publication. Submitting the same work to more than one editorial office at the same time is an unethical act and as such, it is not allowed. It is also considered unethical to submit an article, which is a translation of a text that had already been published.

Declaration of sources
The author should cite publications that influenced the creation of the given work, and each time, he/she should declare the use of any work by other authors.

Essential errors in the published works
If the author discovers a fundamental error or inaccuracy in his/her work, he/she is obliged to notify the editors of that fact as soon as possible.

Originality and plagiarism
The author submits only the original work to the Editorial Office. He/she should make sure that the names of the authors quoted in the work and / or the excerpts from the cited works have been correctly identified, listed or mentioned. Plagiarism is treated as unethical and unacceptable behaviour.
Any violation of the abovementioned ethical principles is a reason to reject the paper.

II. The Editors’ responsibilities

Duties of the editors
The editors are aware of the principles of the journal’s operation, including how to deal with unethical practices.

Decision to publish
The scientific editor is obliged to comply with the current law in the field of defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor is responsible for decisions regarding whether to publish submitted work. The decision to publish an article is based on reviews, and it may be consulted with subject editors and/or reviewers.

Selection of reviewers
The Editorial Office ensures the proper selection of reviewers, and monitors the correctness of the review process. The Editorial Office ensures that the review process is conducted in an impartial manner. At least two independent reviewers are designated, who are experts on the subject matter of the reviewed article.

Confidentiality
In order to provide objective and reliable evaluation, articles are reviewed in a double-blind review process. In accordance with the publishing procedure, a member of the editorial team may not disclose information about the submitted work to any other person than its author, the reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial co-workers, and the publisher. Unpublished articles or their fragments may not be used in the own research conducted by the editorial team members or reviewers without the author’s consent expressed in writing.

Discrimination
When deciding whether or not to accept an article, the criteria include its originality, scientific quality, and consistency with the subject matter of the journal, and not the origin of the author, his/her nationality, ethnicity, political views, gender, race, or religion. In the area of counteracting discrimination, the editors adhere to the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and the law in force within the territory of the Republic of Poland.

III. The reviewers’ responsibilities

Editorial decisions
The reviewer supports the scientific editor and subject editors in making editorial decisions, and he/she can also support the author in improving his/her work. The reviewer has an advisory capacity, which means that the final decision regarding whether to accept the work for publication is taken by the scientific editor.

Punctuality
Any selected reviewer who is not able to review the work, or who knows that a timely submission of such review will not be possible, should inform the editorial secretary of that fact.

Objectivity standards
Reviews should be made objectively. Any personal criticism of the author is considered improper. Reviewers should express their views clearly, and present adequate arguments to support them.

Confidentiality
All reviewed papers must be treated as confidential documents. They may not be shown or discussed outside of the editorial board. They may not be used by the reviewer for any kind of benefit.

Anonymity
All reviews are made anonymously, and the Editorial Office does not share the authors’ personal data with the reviewers.

Conflict of interest
The reviewers should not review any works where there exists a conflict of interest resulting from a relationship with the author, company or institution related to the work under review.

Confirmation of sources
The reviewers should indicate publications, which the author of the work failed to cite. The statement that the observation, source or an argument had been discussed previously should be supported by an appropriate quote. The reviewer should also inform the editorial secretary of any significant similarities or partial overlapping of the reviewed work with any other work published and known to him/her, or any suspicion of plagiarism.