The following ethical standards should always be observed in the process of publishing research articles in the journal The Bulletin of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (the Journal). The Journal's policy agrees with the principles of scientific publication ethics approved by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).


Reporting standards

Authors of articles based on original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The article should provide sufficient detail and references to make research reproducible. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they submit entirely original works. If works and/or words of other authors are used, appropriate references should be provided.  Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple or concurrent publication

All the works authors submit to the Journal must be original. An author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. An author should not submit for consideration in another journal a paper that has been published previously.

Publishing certain kinds of articles (e.g., translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors concerned must come to an agreement on a secondary publication that must contain the same data and its interpretation as the primary work. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite all publications that have influenced the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without their explicit written permission.


Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.  The corresponding author should ensure that all the co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editors and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper. If the editors learn from a third party that a published work contains an error, the author is obliged to retract the work or correct the error within the shortest possible time.


Publication decisions

It is the responsibility of the editors to decide whether to publish an article, taking into consideration the opinions of reviewers. The decision is based on the scientific significance of the work in question.


Unless there is a necessity to do so, the editors will not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to third parties, other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers and the publisher.

Vigilance over published articles

The editors presented with convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in an article are erroneous should arrange the prompt publication of a correction or retraction of the article.


Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions and may also assist authors in improving their works. The publisher supports the view that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.


Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of an author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly and provide arguments supporting them.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify all significant published works relevant to the topic and not included in the bibliography of the manuscript. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also draw the attention of the editors to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which the reviewers have personal knowledge.


The publisher should follow the principles and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of the Journal in performing their ethical duties under these guidelines.

The publisher should assist the editors in dealing with complaints about ethical aspects of published materials and also in communications with other journals where this is useful to editors.

The publisher should be prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.


© Vestnik Instituta Ekonomiki Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk, 2021 - 2024

32, Nakhimovskiy Prospekt, Moscow, Russia 117218, Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Phone.: +7 (499) 724-13-91, E-mail: