Views on the objectives and role of water management have remarkably changed in the last years. The need of a complex water management that would consider all water users including agriculture and natural environment is often underlined. It is pointed out that agriculture and natural environment (including commercial forests) are basic consumers of precipitation water which is not considered in water and economic balances. More and more importance is attributed to the utilisation of waters from catchment basin and to application of non-technical measures of controlling water cycles. A large impact of agro-ecosystems and natural or semi-natural (forests, wetlands) ecosystems on water balance is underlined. This different approach to the problems of water management is expressed e.g. in Water Framework Directive of European Union devoted to surface and ground water protection. The directive attributes a great role to the protection of aquatic and water related ecosystems. More and more often it is realised that the total water resources are equal to the volume of atmospheric precipitation. Water management should involve not only the water in geological aquifers or river channels but also that which is retained in soil profile. Such elements of water balance as spatial distribution, interception, infiltration and recharge of ground water reservoirs, soil retention capacity, surface runoff and evapotranspiration depend largely on land use in a catchment. Through appropriate land use and catchment management, application of rational agro-technical methods, development of small retention, wetland restoration, and hampering water outflow from draining systems one may significantly affect water cycling in a catchment.
Small water resources of Poland, increasing water consumption, climate changes and requirements of environmental protection enforce the implementation of complex methods of water management and search for environmental-friendly methods of limiting economic losses caused by water deficit or excess. Saving water used for economic purposes and agriculture would permit better fulfilment of the needs of natural environment.
Uncertainties as to how the climate will change and how it will influence the necessities and trends of irrigation development lead to a number of serious questions to be answered in the near future. How irrigation and water systems will have to adapt to climate changes is a challenge that planners, designers and O&M services will have to cope with.
It is widely accepted that air temperature in Poland will increase of 2–4°C, however a total yearly precipitation will not vary yet its pattern during the year may change towards higher in winter and lower in summer. Evapotranspiration and crop water demand may rise due to both an increase in temperature and duration of crop growth cycles.
Three main factors are expected to exert an accelerating influence on the development of irrigation: increased frequency and intensity of droughts and long-lasting precipitation-free periods with the high insolation and high air temperatures resulting from climate change; the intensification of agricultural production (e.g. in horticulture, orchards, seed crops), being forced by both domestic and European free-market competition; the necessity of reaching high level of quality for the majority of agricultural products.
To mitigate negative effects of climate change and extreme events, appropriate adaptation methods and adaptation strategies should be developed and implemented in existing irrigation and water control systems. A number of technological and organisational steps should be taken to improve operation, management, administration and decision making processes.
In the projects of protection of soil-water environment there is a need to combine and process large amount of information from various disciplines to estimate parameters of phenomena and to determine the range and time table of necessary undertakings.
Due to complex assessment of processes taking place in aquifers, mathematical modeling is the best tool supporting evaluation off pollution in the ground water environment. It is also an effective method of forecasting the risk associated with the harmful impact of objects polluting grounds and grounds waters.
Significant application of mathematical modeling is the use for the enlargement of information gathered in the process of recognition and assessment of condition that prevail in soil-water environment. Results of modeling, if appropriately presented, could be an important element of decision support system in environmental management.
This paper describes procedures for developing an environmental remediation decision support system by linking CADD and GIS software with the hydro geological flow and transport models.
The runoff coefficient is one of the fundamental hydrological characteristics of a catchment. It indicates a share of the precipitation water that runs off from the catchment.
The results of the runoff coefficient calculation based on measurements carried out continuously in the Cerhovický Stream catchment over a considerable period of time, i.e. from 1988 up to 2006 are presented. The precipitation and runoff data in the catchment were used. Mean value of the runoff coefficient and the runoff coefficients for the agricultural and forest parts of the catchment are presented. The total mean runoff coefficient for the Cerhovický Stream is 0.19 with the standard deviation of 0.06. Mean runoff coefficient for the forest part is 0.13 and for the agricultural part – 0.24.
Differences between the years with a higher and a lower precipitation were followed as well. We also statistically evaluated possible hydrological changes caused by the construction of the highway and the market centre. For another possible explanation of quite high standard deviation of the mean annual runoff coefficient we followed the monthly runoff coefficient dependence on water temperature and of ground water table depth.
In order to help develop a better understanding of relevant catchment processes, this paper presents the changes in physico-chemical features of the Wieprz River water during the spring snowmelt flood of 2006. The obtained results showed that the groundwater sampled from the springs and the water sampled from the river had a similar and quite stable composition of the basic physicochemical features in the period of solely groundwater feeding (the river is fed only with the water coming from underground sources). The physico-chemical composition of river water during snowmelt depended on the contribution of surface runoff in total outflow and the flood phase. The correlation coefficients between the discharge in the Wieprz River and the concentrations in the studied indices were significantly negative: pH, SEC, HCO3, Ca, Mg, Na, Sr, SiO2, Cl, SO4, F. Significantly positive correlations associated with an increase in discharge were observed in the case of: K, NO3, NO2, total organic carbon, chemical oxygen demand and biochemical oxygen demand. Step and bidirectional responses were noted during the snowmelt flood in the case of the content of NH4 and PO4.
Almost half (47%) of Latvian forest areas (3611 thousand ha) are considered degraded or partly improved by the hydro-technical drainage. The degradation is caused by very poor soil aeration due to waterlogged conditions. The location of waterlogged forests in Latvia is neither uniform nor occasional. Comparison of the abundance of waterlogged forests and the amount of atmospheric precipitation showed that the waterlogged forests are mainly located in areas with least precipitation. This hydrological phenomenon is connected with water discharge in drainage ditches: even during the dry summers of the years 1963, 1964, 1975, 1976 and 2002 in the drained forests with deep peat soils water flowed continuously in 1 m deep ditches and the discharge exceeded the amount of precipitation. Using the data from 182 sample plots in drained forests with the peat layer depth of 4.2 m, it was found, that coniferous forests are most productive in areas where the peat layer is most dense. One of the possible explanations for this phenomenon is that the most intensive paludification and formation of most dense peat layer are characteristic for the areas with intensive water discharge from confined aquifers. This discharge provides necessary mineral nutrients for the forest soil regardless of the peat layer thickness. The forest productivity may increase several times due to the enhancement of water movement in soil and to improved soil aeration by hydro-technical drainage. Also the flow regime of rivers connected with the drained areas changes considerably, mitigating extremely high and low flow events.
Premises for the construction of balance equations of water reserves in the saturation zone of forest soil are presented in this paper. Changes of soil water reserves are dealt with as an effect of the atmosphere-tree stand-soil balance at the assumption of constant ground water flow and negligibly small losses for infiltration down the soil profile below saturation zone. These assumptions are met in permeable lowland forest soils, particularly in areas where the aquifer is situated on relatively shallow impermeable substratum. Then, for snow-free periods, it is possible to: 1) combine the increment of soil water reserves with precipitation above tree crowns and with plant and litter interception and 2) combine the losses of soil water reserves with plant transpiration and evaporation from the soil surface. The periods of increments and losses of soil water reserves are determined from limnigraph records of ground water table depth in piesometers. Examples are given in the paper of equations identified by long term data from 13 soil profiles localised in pine forests on Pleistocene floodplain of the Dunajec River. The data included: ground water table depth, physical properties of grounds in soil profiles, and hydro-climatic conditions. The equations combine increments and losses of water reserves in the saturation zone with rainfall and deficits of air humidity measured on a midforest meadow.
The Włodawka River catchment of an area of 725 km2 covers the central and eastern part of the Łęczna-Włodawa Lake District. Evaluation of the role of hydrogenic areas in runoff creation was based on materials of the Department of Hydrography and the Institute of Meteorology and Water Management data. The analysis was conducted for selected catchments in which additional hydrometric measurements and water quality tests were done. Such parameters as: the share of hydrogenic surfaces in total catchment area, types of wetlands, their hypsometric location and position with reference to drainage streams were taken into consideration for evaluation. The degree of anthropogenic transformation of the marshland was expressed in terms of density and depth of the drainage ditches that dissect it. It was found that the drained gyttja of Krowie Bagno plays a considerable role in increasing the minimum discharge. Wetlands in the Włodawka River catchment influence the conditions of the runoff and water quality, which is noticeable, primarily, in the concentration of organic carbon, and of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds.
Some areas intended for afforestation are characterised by a lack of moisture and mineral nutrients. One of the approaches to improve water retention capacity of soils is the use of hydrogels (polymer soil conditioners). The presented experiment was performed with 4 different methods of hydrogel applications and control in a post-industrial area – a dumping ground of the Brown Coal Mine Bełchatów (Forest District Administration Bełchatów). The Aquaterra product (pure hydrogel) and hydrogel with nutrients (TerraVit) produced by Terra-Gubin company were used in all experiments. From 292 to 306 one-year old seedlings of Pinus sylvestris L. of an average height of 80–101 mm were planted in each plot. The influence of hydrogel application method on successful afforestation and growth of seedling was analyzed after the first vegetation year. Maximum number of surviv seedlings (93.3%) was observed for hydrogel applied through roots coating, minimum (72.4%) for hydrogel with fertilizers applied under plants. Results obtained for pure hydrogel surface application (89.1%) and pure hydrogel applied under plants (85.3%) can be compared with results from control plot (89.7%). Mean heights of surviving seedlings were similar (128–130 mm) for root coating, and both methods of hydrogel application under plants, in contrast with surficial hydrogel application (117 mm) and control where they were minimal (111 mm). Mean height increments in surviving seedlings were minimum in control plot (31 mm), and similar (38–40 mm) for root coating and surface application. The best results of height increments (47 mm) were obtained when hydrogel mixed with fertiliser was applied under plants. To sum up, in view of plant survival the best method of polymer soil conditioner (hydrogel) application was root coating; this method gave also satisfactory increments of plant height.
The aim of this study was to delimit lacustrine deposits underlaying present peatlands. On this basis, the location of water bodies in late Pleistocene and early Holocene was recognized. The lakes’ occurrence was presented on the background of geomorphological conditions. Lacustrine deposits occur mainly in depressions of the northern part of the Knyszyńska Forest. They are placed in upper parts of the Czapielówka River, Jałówka River, middle Sokołda River and upper Kumiałka River catchments. The thickness of gyttja varies between 0.4 and 2.5 m. These are detrital, calcareous and clay-calcareous gyttjas. Lacustrine sediments fill the bottoms of various meltout depressions. The origin of these depressions, as well as the whole glacial relief of the terrain, is often linked to deglaciation of the Warta ice sheet. However, kame deposits in the Janów village are younger than Warta glaciation. Moreover, the catchment relief of the upper Kumiałka River is similar to the relief which originates from Vistulian glaciation. Besides, there are boulder deposits directly under the lacustrine deposits. These three facts indicate a younger age of the melt-out depressions in the upper Kumiałka River catchment.
During the past several years big changes have been observed in waste water disposal, noticeable particularly in the improvement of water protection and sewage treatment. An important element of waste water disposal still requiring improvement is a low development of sewage systems in rural and urban areas. The main problem is an increasing amount of sludge, high degree of sediment hydration and considerable ability to anaerobic decomposition, a lack of areas for managing sediments near big cities and deposits of sediments on storage areas. Selected issues of waste water disposal and sludge handling in the Mazovian Province against a background of waste water disposal and sludge handling in Poland were presented in the article.
OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
The ownership and management of the “Journal of Water and Land Development” (JWLD) belong to the Institute of Technology and Life Sciences – National Research Institute (https://www.itp.edu.pl/) and Polish Academy of Sciences (https://pan.pl/).
Editor-in-Chief – Professor Dr Hab. Mohamed Hazem KALAJI
Managing Editor – PhD, DSc, Associate Professor Adam BRYSIEWICZ
Authors’ duties
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have significantly contributed to the conception, project, execution, and interpretation of the results. All such contributors must be listed as co-authors. Other individuals who influenced key aspects of the study should be acknowledged or mentioned as co-workers. The author must ensure that all co-authors have been properly included, have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper, and have agreed to its submission for publication.
When it comes to changes in authorship, it is crucial that authors carefully consider the authorship list and order before the original submission, as changes are generally not considered by the editors of the “Journal of Water and Land Development” once the manuscript has been submitted. According to the journal’s policy, all authors must be listed in the manuscript and entered into the submission system. Any addition, removal, or rearrangement of authors should be made only prior to acceptance and only with the approval of the journal editor. Requests to change authorship must come from the corresponding author, who must provide a valid reason along with written confirmation from all authors, including those being added or removed, stating their agreement with the proposed changes. These requests must be submitted through a designated form (FORM), and those that fail to follow the instructions in the form will not be considered. Only under exceptional circumstances will changes be considered after acceptance. During the evaluation of such requests, publication may be paused. If approved after publication, changes will be documented through a corrigendum. Unauthorized changes to authorship may lead to rejection of the article.
Authors must disclose all sources of funding for their study, as well as the involvement of scientific institutions, associations, and any other entities. They must also disclose any significant conflicts of interest that could influence the outcomes or interpretation of the study.
In the case of applying AI and AI-assisted technologies in the work, the author is obliged to make a proper declaration within the manuscript. This declaration must include the name of the AI tool or service used and the reasons for its use. Importantly, AI cannot be credited as an author of the manuscript. Since texts generated with the use of AI may be fragmentary or incorrect, the author—who remains fully responsible for the entire submitted article—is obliged to carefully review any AI-generated content and make necessary corrections before submission.
Authors reporting original research should provide an accurate and detailed account of the work performed, along with an objective discussion of its significance. All source data must be accurately presented in the manuscript, and sufficient detail and references should be included to allow others to replicate the study. Deliberate falsification or misrepresentation is unethical and will not be tolerated by the editors.
Authors should also be ready to provide the raw data used in their study for editorial review if requested and must retain this data for a reasonable period after publication.
In terms of publication ethics, authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Simultaneous submission of the same paper to multiple journals is considered unethical and is prohibited.
Proper citation is essential; authors must always acknowledge and cite all works that influenced the development of the manuscript and confirm any use of other authors’ work.
If an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is their responsibility to promptly notify the Editorial Office.
Only original works should be submitted. Authors must ensure that all cited authors and quoted material are properly credited and referenced. Any instances of ghostwriting or guest authorship are considered forms of scientific misconduct and will be addressed accordingly, including notification of relevant authorities. All indications of scientific dishonesty or breaches of ethical standards will be thoroughly documented by the Editorial Office.
Editors’ duties
Editors assess submitted manuscripts solely based on their academic value, including significance, originality, validity of the study, and clarity, as well as their alignment with the journal’s focus. This evaluation is conducted without consideration of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic background, nationality, religion, political beliefs, or affiliations. Editorial decisions regarding publication are independent of governmental policies or any external influences. The Editor-in-Chief of JWLD holds complete authority over the journal’s editorial content and the scheduling of its publication.
Editors refrain from utilising AI or AI-assisted technologies for decisions that require critical analysis or the formulation of substantive opinions. They and the editorial team will keep all information related to a submitted manuscript confidential, only sharing it with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, relevant editorial advisers, and the publisher as necessary.
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information from a submitted manuscript for personal research purposes without the explicit written permission of the authors. Any privileged information acquired during the manuscript review process will remain confidential and not be exploited for personal gain. In cases where there is a conflict of interest, such as competitive or collaborative relationships with authors, editors will recuse themselves and assign the manuscript to another editorial board member.
All manuscripts under consideration for publication will undergo peer review by at least two experts in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief will determine which manuscripts are published based on the validation of the work, its relevance to researchers and readers, feedback from reviewers, and adherence to legal standards regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with fellow editors or reviewers in this decision-making process.
Additionally, journal editors may seek guidance on submitted papers beyond technical reviews, particularly regarding ethical concerns or issues involving data or materials accessibility. This advisory process typically occurs concurrently with the technical peer-review.
Reviewers’ duties
Peer review plays a crucial role in aiding editors with their decision-making and can also help authors enhance their manuscripts through communications facilitated by the editorial team.
If any reviewer feels unqualified to assess a manuscript or realises they cannot complete the review promptly, they should inform the editor and withdraw from the process.
All manuscripts reviewed must be regarded as confidential and should not be shared or discussed with anyone unless authorised by the editor.
Reviews need to be conducted impartially. Personal criticisms of the author are not acceptable. Reviewers should clearly articulate their opinions and back them up with solid reasoning.
Reviewers are also responsible for identifying relevant works that have not been referenced by the authors. Any claim that a finding, derivation, or argument has been previously noted should include the appropriate citation. Additionally, reviewers should inform the editor if they notice significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript in question and any other published work they are aware of.
Reviewers must refrain from using AI to make decisions that require critical thinking or to form substantive opinions regarding the manuscript.
Any privileged information or insights gained during the peer review process must remain confidential and should not be exploited for personal gain. Reviewers should avoid evaluating manuscripts where there exist conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or any other relationships with the authors, organizations, or institutions involved.
Editors treat any misconduct by reviewers with seriousness and will address any claims of confidentiality breaches.
Publishers’ duties
In instances of alleged or confirmed scientific misconduct, fraudulent publications, or plagiarism, the publisher will work closely with the editors to address the issue and amend the article in question. This may involve the swift publication of an erratum, a clarification, or, in the most serious cases, retraction of the affected work. Furthermore, alongside the editors, the publisher will take responsible measures to identify and prevent the publication of papers involving research misconduct, and will never condone or knowingly permit such misconduct to occur.
The publisher is dedicated to the ongoing availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by collaborating with organisations and maintaining a digital archive.
Corrections, retractions and updates after publication
Sometimes after an article has been published it may be necessary to make a change. This change will be made after careful consideration by the journal’s editorial team to make sure if there are grounds for these changes.
Aside from cases where a minor error is concerned, any necessary changes will be accompanied by a post-publication notice, which will be permanently linked to the original article. These changes can be in the form of a Correction notice, an Expression of Concern, a Retraction, and in rare circumstances, a Removal.
The purpose of linking post-publication notices to the original article is to provide transparency around any changes and to ensure the integrity of the scholarly record. Note that all post-publication notices are free to access from the point of publication.
Authors should notify us as soon as possible if they find errors in their published article, especially errors that could affect the interpretation of data or reliability of information presented. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure consensus has been reached between all listed co-authors prior to requesting any corrections to an article.
If, after reading the guidance, you believe a correction is necessary for your article, please contact the Editorial Office journal@itp.edu.pl.
Correction notice
A Correction notice will be issued when it is necessary to correct an error or omission, where the interpretation of the article may be impacted but the scholarly integrity or original findings remains intact.
A correction notice, where possible, should always be written and approved by all authors of the original article.
Please note that correction requests may be subject to full review, and if queries are raised, you may be expected to supply further information before the correction is approved.
Major and minor errors could be distinguished. For correction notices, major errors or omissions are considered changes that impact the interpretation of the article, but the overall scholarly integrity remains intact. Minor errors are considered errors or omissions that do not impact the reliability of, or the readers’ understanding of, the interpretation of the article.
Major errors are always accompanied by a separate correction notice. The correction notice should provide clear details of the error and the changes that have been made to the published version. Under these circumstances, Editorial team will:
Minor errors may not be accompanied by a separate correction notice. instead, a footnote will be added to the article detailing to the reader that the article has been corrected.
Concerns regarding the integrity of a published article should be raised via email to the Editorial Office journal@itp.edu.pl.
Retractions
A Retraction will be issued where a major error (e.g., in the methods or analysis) invalidates the conclusions in the article, or where it appears research or publication misconduct has taken place (e.g., research without required ethical approvals, fabricated data, manipulated images, plagiarism, duplicate publication, etc.).
The decision will follow a full investigation by the journal’s editorial team. Authors and institutions may request a retraction of their articles if they believe their reasons meet the criteria for retraction.
Retractions are issued to correct the scholarly record and should not be interpreted as punishments for the authors.
The COPE guidance can be found here https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing
Retraction will be considered in cases where:
Where the decision has been taken to retract an article, Editorial team will:
Article removal
An Article Removal will be issued in rare circumstances where the problems cannot be addressed through a Retraction or Correction notice. Editorial team will consider removal of a published article in very limited circumstances where:
In the case of an article being removed from “Journal of Water and Land Development” website, a removal notice will be issued in its place.
Expressions of concern
In some cases, an Expression of Concern may be considered where concerns of a serious nature have been raised (e.g., research or publication misconduct), but where the outcome of the investigation is inconclusive or where due to various complexities, the investigation will not be completed for a considerable time. This could be due to ongoing institutional investigations or other circumstances outside of the journal’s control.
When the investigation has been completed, a Retraction or Correction notice may follow the Expression of Concern alongside the original article. All will remain part of the permanent publication record.
Expressions of Concern notices will be considered in cases where:
The Expression of Concern will be linked back to the published article it relates to.
EDITORIAL PROCEDURE
Preliminary evaluation
All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editors to ensure they meet the requirements and editorial policy of the “Journal of Water and Land Development” (JWLD). Submissions that are incomplete or not formatted according to the journal’s guidelines will be returned to the authors with recommendations for correction. Upon successful registration on the editorial platform, authors will receive a reference number for their manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief or a designated Section Editor reviews every submission and assigns it a priority status, resulting in one of the following decisions: (a) the manuscript is forwarded directly for peer review; (b) the manuscript is returned to the authors with suggestions for revising the presentation of data; or (c) the manuscript is rejected. If the authors revise the manuscript adequately, it will be sent to at least two independent reviewers. This preliminary evaluation phase typically takes 1 week.
Authorship statement
As part of the submission process through the editorial platform, authors must confirm the originality of their work, validate the listed authorship, agree to copyright transfer, and accept the terms of the peer review process.
Conflict of interest
Authors are required to disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission. This information is treated confidentially during the review process and does not influence editorial decisions. Similarly, reviewers and editors must disclose to the Editor-in-Chief any relationships that could be perceived as conflicts of interest in relation to a manuscript under review.
Review process
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to independent experts for peer review. The Editorial Office retains the right to select appropriate reviewers. Typically, reviewers return their feedback within 3–4 weeks of submission. Authors are expected to address and respond to all reviewer comments thoroughly.
The objective of the peer review is to provide a qualified evaluation of the manuscript’s scientific quality. Reviewers offer constructive feedback to help authors improve their work and enhance its suitability for publication. While confidential remarks to the editors are considered, comments intended to improve the manuscript should also be shared with the authors.
It is important to note that review times can vary depending on factors such as the availability and responsiveness of reviewers, the complexity of the manuscript, and the extent of revisions needed.
Acceptance
The review process at JWLD follows a double-blind model, ensuring that both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous. Manuscripts are accepted for publication only after receiving favourable recommendations from independent reviewers. Reviewers are asked to complete a standardised "Reviewer’s Questionnaire" and provide a clear recommendation regarding the manuscript’s suitability for publication.
If there is a significant difference of opinion among reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief may: (a) share all reviews among the reviewers for additional insight, (b) seek further opinions from additional reviewers, or (c) carefully weigh all feedback and make a balanced final decision. To support this process, reviewers are encouraged to provide detailed justifications for their recommendations. Reviews that clearly outline both strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript are especially valuable.
If a revised manuscript is submitted or if authors believe their arguments were misunderstood during review, reviewers may be asked for further comments. However, the Editorial Office is cautious about repeated reviewer contact to avoid undue pressure and will assess the necessity and relevance of any follow-up requests.
In the case of rejection, authors have the right to appeal if they believe the reviewers have misunderstood or overlooked key aspects of the manuscript. Editors will then evaluate whether the appeal justifies reconsideration.
Common reasons for rejection
Manuscripts may be rejected outright—without being sent for peer review—if they are of insufficient quality. Common reasons for rejection include:
Complaints and appeals
A complaint may arise over the conduct of editors and/or peer reviewers. Some possible reasons for complaints are:
An appeal is a formal request to reconsider a decision taken by the journal. It might be related to decisions in regular journal operation (e.g. a manuscript being rejected) or to a verdict taken by a team investigating a particular situation (e.g. a published manuscript being retracted due to suspected data manipulation).
The authors submit a formal complaint/appeal to the journal principal contact by email or post (journal@itp.edu.pl). Within a week, the journal will form an investigation group consisting of at least three Editorial Team members (not previously involved in handling the manuscript in question) and report back their names and how they can be contacted.
The actual investigation time may vary depending on the complexity of the case. The investigation team provides fair opportunities to all parties involved to explain their motives and actions. The purpose of the investigation is to establish whether misconduct took place (as reported or in the light of new circumstances discovered), whether it was performed deliberately or as a genuine mistake, and to estimate the scale of its negative consequences.
Based on the facts collected, the investigation team decides on the corrective actions to be taken as well as whether some penalty is to be applied to the person who performed the misconduct. Depending on the misconduct severity, the penalty may range from a reprimand to an expulsion from the reviewer pool/editorial board and a report being sent to the institution to which the person in question is affiliated.
The authors are informed about the investigation outcome upon its completion.
In its work, the investigation group relies on the recommendations and guidelines provided by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/appeals
In complex cases, an external ethical advisor might be called for.
Guidance from COPE ( https://publicationethics.org/ ):
Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers (English)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9
Sharing of information among editors-in-chief regarding possible misconduct
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.7
How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.1
Text recycling guidelines for editors
URL: http://publicationethics.org/text-recycling-guidelines
A short guide to ethical editing for new editors
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.8
Guidelines for managing the relationships between society owned journals, their society, and publishers
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.2
Retraction guidelines
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
Journal of Water and Land Development List of reviewers 2024