_View_ Latest Issue -''

1. Introduction

Berkala Ilmiah Pertanian (BIP) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and research integrity. This statement describes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, editorial board members, reviewers, and the publisher, namely Universitas Jember.

The journal follows established publication ethics principles, including relevant guidance and best practices from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applicable ethical standards for research involving human and animal participants.

The journal uses a double-anonymized peer-review system, in which the identities of authors are concealed from reviewers and the identities of reviewers are concealed from authors throughout the peer-review process. All parties involved in the publication process are expected to protect the confidentiality and integrity of this system.

2. Responsibilities of the Publisher

Universitas Jember, as the publisher of Berkala Ilmiah Pertanian (BIP), is committed to maintaining the integrity and independence of the journal's editorial and peer-review processes.

The publisher:

• supports the journal in maintaining appropriate ethical standards;

• provides the editorial team with appropriate support for handling ethical issues and allegations of misconduct;

• ensures that editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising, commercial interests, institutional interests, or other financial considerations;

• respects the independence of editorial decisions;
  supports the editors in investigating suspected research and publication misconduct; and

• cooperates with other journals, publishers, institutions, and relevant organizations when necessary to address ethical concerns.

• Advertising, sponsorship, printing, or other commercial activities must not influence editorial decisions or the evaluation of manuscripts.

3. Editorial Responsibilities

3.1 Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and/or designated editors are responsible for making decisions regarding the publication of submitted manuscripts. Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript's originality, scientific validity, methodological rigor, significance, relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with the journal's ethical and publishing requirements.

Editors may consult reviewers, members of the editorial board, or other experts when making editorial decisions. Editorial decisions must not be based on the author's nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, political views, institutional affiliation, or other personal characteristics.

Editors must comply with applicable laws and regulations concerning copyright, plagiarism, defamation, and other legal matters.

3.2 Fair and Impartial Peer Review

The journal is committed to conducting peer review fairly, objectively, independently, and in a timely manner.

Under the double-anonymized peer-review system:

• reviewers are not informed of the identity of the authors;

• authors are not informed of the identity of the reviewers;

• manuscripts must be prepared in a manner that does not unnecessarily reveal the authors' identities;

• reviewers must not attempt to identify the authors of manuscripts under review;

• authors must not attempt to identify reviewers through the content of reviewer comments, editorial correspondence, or other means; and

• editors must take reasonable measures to preserve anonymity throughout the review process.
  
  

Authors should remove identifying information from the manuscript, including author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, ORCID identifiers, and other information that could reasonably reveal their identities. Such information should be provided separately through the journal's submission system when required.

When citing the authors' own previous work, authors should do so objectively and appropriately and should not deliberately omit relevant citations merely to preserve anonymity. Editors may request revisions to citations or other manuscript elements when necessary to maintain the integrity of the double-anonymized review process.

3.3 Confidentiality

Editors must keep submitted manuscripts and all information relating to the peer-review process confidential.

Editors must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial board members, publisher, or other individuals who are legitimately involved in the editorial process.

Reviewers' identities and confidential comments must not be disclosed to authors or other unauthorized persons.

3.4 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not handle manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from personal, professional, financial, collaborative, competitive, or institutional relationships.

If an editor has a conflict of interest, the manuscript should be assigned to another qualified editor who has no such conflict.

The journal must have appropriate procedures to ensure that manuscripts authored by editors, editorial board members, or individuals closely associated with the journal receive independent and impartial review.

Editors must not use unpublished information obtained through manuscript submission for their own research or personal advantage.

3.5 Editorial Independence

Editors are responsible for editorial decisions independently of commercial, political, institutional, or personal interests. Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly and ethical considerations rather than commercial or other external pressures.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

4.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review helps editors make informed decisions and helps authors improve the quality, clarity, and scientific rigor of their manuscripts.

Reviewers should provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based assessments of the manuscript.

4.2 Reviewer Selection and Expertise

Reviewers should accept assignments only when the manuscript falls within their area of expertise and when they can complete the review within the required timeframe.

A reviewer who believes that they lack sufficient expertise should promptly inform the editor and decline the invitation.

4.3 Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

• disclose the manuscript or any part of it to another person without authorization from the editor;

• share reviewer comments or editorial correspondence outside the journal's review process;

• use unpublished information, data, methods, or ideas obtained from the manuscript for personal or professional advantage; or

• contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript without permission from the editor.

• Because the journal uses double-anonymized peer review, reviewers must not attempt to discover the identity of the authors.

4.4 Objectivity and Constructive Review

Reviews must be conducted objectively and impartially. Reviewers must not allow personal characteristics or opinions concerning the authors, including nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, political views, institutional affiliation, or other personal characteristics, to influence their assessment.

Reviewer comments should be clear, professional, respectful, and supported by appropriate scientific reasoning. Personal attacks, insulting language, discriminatory comments, or hostile and inappropriate criticism are unacceptable.

4.5 Identification of Relevant References

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors when such citations are necessary to support the manuscript's arguments or place the research in context.

Reviewers should notify the editor if they identify substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and previously published work or another manuscript of which they are aware.

Requests for citations must be scientifically justified and must not be made primarily to increase the reviewer's own citations or the journal's citation metrics.

4.6 Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting or completing a review.

A reviewer should decline an assignment when there is a conflict arising from, for example:

• a current or recent collaboration with one or more authors;

• a close personal or professional relationship with an author;

• direct competition involving the research;

• financial or institutional interests related to the manuscript; or

• any other circumstance that could reasonably compromise impartiality.

If a potential conflict becomes apparent after the review has begun, the reviewer must inform the editor immediately.

5. Responsibilities of Authors

5.1 Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate and complete account of their research and provide an objective discussion of its significance.

Research data, methods, analyses, and results must be reported accurately. Manuscripts should contain sufficient methodological detail and appropriate references to allow the research to be understood and, where appropriate, reproduced.

Fabrication, falsification, deliberate misrepresentation, and other forms of research misconduct are unacceptable.

5.2 Data Availability and Retention

Authors should retain appropriate research data and supporting materials for a reasonable period after publication.

Where ethically, legally, and practically appropriate, authors should make underlying data available to editors, reviewers, or other researchers upon reasonable request. Any data sharing must comply with applicable privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, and ethical requirements.

5.3 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their submitted work is original.

All sources, ideas, data, quotations, and substantial contributions derived from the work of others must be appropriately acknowledged and cited.

Plagiarism, including substantial unattributed copying of text, ideas, data, images, or other material, constitutes unethical publication behavior.

The journal may use appropriate similarity-detection tools and editorial procedures to identify suspected plagiarism or other forms of inappropriate duplication.

5.4 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal.

Authors should not publish substantially the same research in multiple publications unless there is a legitimate and clearly disclosed reason, such as an appropriate secondary publication that complies with relevant ethical standards.

Any related manuscripts, previous publications, or reports arising from the same research should be disclosed to the editor when relevant.

5.5 Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must appropriately acknowledge all sources that contributed to the development of the manuscript.

Authors must cite publications that materially influenced the research, analysis, interpretation, or conclusions.

5.6 Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the research, acquisition or analysis of data, interpretation of results, or other substantive aspects of the work and who have participated sufficiently in drafting or critically revising the manuscript and approved the final version.

All individuals who meet the journal's authorship criteria should be included as authors, while individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria should be appropriately acknowledged.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:

• all listed authors have made appropriate contributions;
  
  

• all authors have approved the submitted manuscript;
  
  

• all authors agree to its submission and publication;
  
  

• the author list is accurate; and
  
  

• relevant contributions and potential conflicts of interest have been properly disclosed.
  
  

Changes to authorship after submission should be made only with the agreement of all authors and in accordance with the journal's procedures.

5.7 Anonymization for Double-Anonymized Peer Review

To preserve the integrity of the double-anonymized review process, authors must prepare manuscripts without unnecessary identifying information.

The main manuscript should not contain:

• author names;

• institutional affiliations;

• email addresses;

• ORCID identifiers;

• acknowledgments identifying individuals or institutions;

• funding information that directly identifies the authors or their institutions, where anonymity would reasonably be compromised; or

• other information that unnecessarily reveals the identity of the authors.
  
  

Identifying information required for publication or editorial administration should be submitted through the appropriate separate fields or files in the journal's submission system.

Authors must not intentionally disclose their identity to reviewers during the review process.

5.8 Hazardous Materials and Human or Animal Subjects

If a study involves hazardous chemicals, procedures, equipment, or other potentially dangerous materials, authors must clearly describe relevant safety precautions and comply with applicable regulations and institutional requirements.

Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable ethical standards, laws, regulations, and institutional requirements.

Where required, authors must provide evidence of approval from the relevant ethics committee or institutional review board and must include an appropriate ethics statement in the manuscript.

For research involving human participants, informed consent must be obtained where required. Authors must protect participants' privacy and confidentiality and must avoid publishing personally identifiable information unless appropriate consent has been obtained and disclosure is ethically and legally justified.

5.9 Disclosure of Funding and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation.

All sources of financial support must be disclosed. Where applicable, authors should state the role of the funder in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit the manuscript.

If the research received no specific financial support, authors should provide an appropriate statement to that effect.

6. Peer-Review Integrity and Communication

All communication relating to peer review must be conducted through the journal's designated editorial channels unless the editor authorizes otherwise.

Authors and reviewers must not attempt to circumvent the double-anonymized review system.

Reviewers must not disclose their identity to authors, and authors must not attempt to identify reviewers. Editors may take appropriate action if either party attempts to compromise reviewer or author anonymity.

The journal reserves the right to investigate suspected manipulation of peer review, including fabricated reviewer identities, inappropriate reviewer recommendations, undisclosed conflicts of interest, coercive citation practices, or unauthorized communication between authors and reviewers.

7. Fundamental Errors in Published Articles

If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published article, they must promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate in correcting the article or, where necessary, retracting it.

If the journal becomes aware of a significant error through a third party, the authors are expected to cooperate fully with the editor in investigating the matter and determining whether a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is appropriate.

8. Research and Publication Misconduct

The journal takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. Potential misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

• fabrication or falsification of data;

• plagiarism;

• duplicate or redundant publication;

• inappropriate authorship or authorship disputes;

• undeclared conflicts of interest;

• manipulation of citations;

• manipulation or falsification of the peer-review process;

• unauthorized disclosure of confidential information; and

• unethical research involving human or animal subjects.
  
  

When an allegation is raised, the journal will assess the matter fairly and confidentially and may request relevant information or documentation from the authors, reviewers, institutions, or other appropriate parties.

Where necessary, the journal may follow applicable COPE procedures and communicate with the authors' institutions or other relevant organizations.

9. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

When an error or ethical problem is identified after publication, the journal will determine the appropriate editorial action based on the nature and significance of the issue.

Possible actions include:

• publication of a correction or erratum;

• publication of an expression of concern; or

• retraction of the article.
  
  

The journal will maintain a transparent record of substantive corrections and retractions and will not remove published articles from the scholarly record except where removal is required by applicable legal or ethical considerations.

10. Commitment to Publication Integrity

Berkala Ilmiah Pertanian (BIP) is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, confidentiality, and independence of its publication process.

All authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and the publisher share responsibility for maintaining high standards of research and publication ethics. The journal will regularly review its policies and procedures to ensure that they remain consistent with recognized standards of scholarly publishing and the requirements of its double-anonymized peer-review system.