Complaints and Appeals Policy

The Journal of Planner and Development (JPD) is committed to maintaining transparency, fairness, editorial integrity, and accountability throughout the submission, peer review, editorial decision-making, publication, and post-publication processes. The journal provides authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders with a clear mechanism for submitting complaints and appeals related to editorial procedures, peer review, publication ethics, and published content.

All complaints and appeals are handled in a fair, confidential, impartial, and documented manner. The journal considers complaints and appeals seriously, while preserving editorial independence and the academic judgment of editors and reviewers.

1. Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to complaints and appeals related to:

  • Editorial procedures and communication.
  • Peer review process and review delays.
  • Editorial decisions where a procedural error is alleged.
  • Possible factual misunderstanding or overlooked evidence.
  • Publication ethics concerns.
  • Conflicts of interest involving authors, reviewers, editors, or editorial staff.
  • Authorship, contributorship, or disclosure concerns.
  • Similarity, plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, image manipulation, or other research misconduct concerns.
  • Post-publication issues, including corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions.
  • Technical or access-related problems affecting submission, review, or publication.

2. General Principles

JPD handles complaints and appeals according to the following principles:

  • Complaints and appeals must be submitted in writing and supported by clear evidence or explanation.
  • All cases are treated confidentially and are shared only with individuals directly involved in assessment or resolution.
  • Editors involved in a conflict of interest must not handle the complaint or appeal.
  • Complaints and appeals are assessed based on evidence, journal policies, editorial procedures, and ethical publishing standards.
  • Submitting a complaint or appeal does not guarantee reversal of an editorial decision.
  • Disagreement with reviewers’ comments or editorial judgment alone is not sufficient grounds for appeal.

3. Complaints

A complaint may be submitted when an author, reviewer, reader, or other stakeholder believes that there has been a problem in the journal’s editorial process, peer review process, publication procedure, ethical handling, or communication.

Examples of complaints include, but are not limited to:

  • Unreasonable delay in editorial processing or peer review.
  • Failure to follow the journal’s stated editorial or peer review procedures.
  • Concerns about reviewer conduct, confidentiality, or objectivity.
  • Concerns about editorial conduct or conflict of interest.
  • Concerns about plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, citation manipulation, or unethical research practice.
  • Concerns about authorship, contributorship, funding disclosure, data availability, or ethics approval.
  • Errors in published articles that may require correction or clarification.

4. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal if they believe that an editorial decision was based on a procedural error, factual misunderstanding, or overlooked evidence. Appeals must provide clear academic justification and must identify the specific issue being challenged.

An appeal may be considered when:

  • The author identifies a possible procedural error in the review or decision-making process.
  • The author provides evidence that important information was misunderstood or overlooked.
  • The author demonstrates that the decision may have been affected by a conflict of interest.
  • The author provides a reasoned academic response showing that the decision may have been based on a material factual error.

Appeals based only on disagreement with reviewers’ opinions, dissatisfaction with rejection, or a request for another review without new evidence are not normally considered valid grounds for appeal.

5. How to Submit a Complaint or Appeal

Complaints and appeals should be submitted in writing to the editorial office through the journal’s official contact channel or through the journal’s online submission system, where applicable.

The complaint or appeal should include:

  • The manuscript title and manuscript ID, where applicable.
  • The name and contact information of the person submitting the complaint or appeal.
  • A clear description of the issue.
  • The specific policy, procedure, decision, or action being challenged.
  • Relevant dates, correspondence, documents, or evidence.
  • The requested outcome or clarification.

Appeals against editorial decisions should normally be submitted within 30 days of receiving the decision. Appeals submitted after this period may be considered only when there is a clear and justified reason.

6. Initial Assessment

The editorial office will acknowledge receipt of the complaint or appeal within a reasonable period, normally within five working days. The Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor, or an assigned editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the case falls within the scope of this policy and whether sufficient information has been provided.

If the complaint or appeal is incomplete, the complainant or appellant may be asked to provide additional clarification or supporting documentation.

7. Review and Investigation

Complaints and appeals will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor, assigned editor, or another appropriate member of the editorial team who has no conflict of interest in the case.

Depending on the nature of the case, the journal may:

  • Review the submission history and editorial records.
  • Review reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and decision letters.
  • Request clarification from editors, reviewers, authors, or editorial staff.
  • Consult an additional editor, editorial board member, or independent reviewer.
  • Refer ethical concerns to the journal’s Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.
  • Apply the journal’s correction, retraction, or withdrawal procedures where necessary.

8. Possible Outcomes

After reviewing the complaint or appeal, the journal may decide to:

  • Uphold the original editorial decision.
  • Request further clarification from the author, reviewer, or editor.
  • Reopen editorial assessment.
  • Invite an additional reviewer where justified.
  • Issue a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction where applicable.
  • Take corrective editorial or procedural action.
  • Reject the complaint or appeal if it is unsupported, repetitive, abusive, or outside the scope of this policy.

9. Final Decision

The journal will communicate the outcome of the complaint or appeal in writing. The response will provide an appropriate explanation of the decision, while respecting confidentiality and the integrity of the editorial and peer review process.

The decision after appeal is considered final. Repeated appeals on the same matter will not be considered unless substantial new evidence is provided.

10. Complaints About Published Articles

Complaints concerning published articles, including allegations of plagiarism, duplicate publication, unreliable data, image manipulation, authorship problems, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or serious errors, will be investigated according to the journal’s publication ethics and post-publication policies.

When necessary, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other post-publication notice. Such actions will be linked to the published article where applicable.

11. Confidentiality and Respectful Communication

All complaints and appeals must be communicated in a respectful and professional manner. The journal will not consider submissions that contain abusive language, personal attacks, threats, or unsupported accusations.

The identity of individuals involved in complaints and appeals will be protected as far as possible, consistent with fair investigation and editorial responsibility.

12. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field. Complaints and appeals are handled without influence from the author’s nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, political views, religion, personal relationships, or payment of publication fees.

13. Related Policies

Authors, reviewers, readers, and editors should also consult the following related policies: