The paper deals with calibration of the simulation models of hydraulic part of an irrigation project. Calibrated simulation model can be used in design, reconstruction, enlargement or maintenance of the pressurized irrigation systems. Computer model of the water distribution system is a valuable tool which can assist engineers and planners in analyzing the hydraulic performance of water delivery systems. Calibration of the water distribution model consists in comparison of pressures and flows predicted with observed pressures and flows for known operating conditions (i.e., pump operation, tank levels, pressure-reducing valve settings), and adjustment of the input data for the model to improve agreement between observed and predicted values. In practice, given a set or sets of measured state variables, engineers apply trial and error techniques with their judgment to vary the parameters and accomplish this task. Trial and error techniques are tedious do not guarantee reasonable results. The paper introduces the methodology of determination of calibrated parameters automatically. Described methodology of calibration is based on optimizing procedures using the harmony search approach.
The abundance of water has certainly been a very important resource for the development of the Po Valley and has necessitated, more than once, interventions of regulation and drainage that have contributed strongly to imprint a particular conformation on the land. Already in Roman times there were numerous projects of canalisation and intense and diligent commitment to the maintenance of the canals, used for navigation, for irrigation and for the working of the mills. The need to control the excessive amount of water present was the beginning of the exploitation of this great font of richness that was constantly maintained in subsequent eras. In the early Middle Ages, despite the conditions of political instability and great economic and social difficulty, the function of the canals continued to be of great importance, also because the paths of river communication often substituted land roads, then left abandoned. After the 11th century A.D. the resumption of agricultural activity was conducive to the intense task of land reclamation of the Lombardian countryside and of commitment by the cities to amplify their waterways with the construction of new canals and the improvement of those already existing. The example given by Milan, a city lacking a natural river, that equipped itself with a dense network of canal, used in various ambits of the city life (defence, hygiene, agriculture, transport, milling systems) and for connections with the surrounding territory, can be considered as emblematic. In the surrounding countryside, the activity of the Cistercian monks of Chiaravalle represents one of the situations more indicative of how land reclamation and waterways contributed fundamentally to the organisation of the territory over the span of the ages.
The irrigation system control is identified as a complex hierarchical process of stochastic nature, at the head of which the uncertainties, caused by random variations of meteorological factors (climate) and diversion capacity regime from irrigation canals, were laid.
Under such conditions application of the determinate methods for irrigation system control regarding the effectiveness surrenders to the formalistic and empirical methods.
The most appropriate method is the developed by us, method of preventive control.
As a result of retrospective analysis, to each system status, for example, diversion capacity, it is fixed the factors which lead to its changes, for example, rain layer or total evaporation. To every consequence “factor – system status” it is fixed the indicator and it is determined the probability of its exceeding in retrospective series.
The control is in following of such indicator dynamics, forecasting of the most probably changes within system status and adjustment of the water delivery regime to canal reaches with diversion capacity regime from irrigation canals by means of standard preventive graphical chats of water flow control within hydraulic structures and pumping stations.
Use of such control method allows to minimize the uncertainty influence, also it does not require the major modifications in the design and engineering infrastructure.
As an exception can be the measures, directed to the increase of self-regulating qualities of irrigation systems, namely the ability of on-line water volume control, which is regulated in the idle capacities, provided in canal beds or special reservoirs.
The example of such decision in practice is the Kakhovskaya irrigation system in the South of Ukraine. The use factor of water resources on this system reaches 0.85, the technological discharge water does not exceed 7%, the deficit of productive moisture reserve in soil at the end of interirrigation period does not exceed 20% and all these data were obtained under adverse weather conditions.
Canal connecting Elbląg with Ostróda was built in the XIX century to transport corn to the port of Elbląg. Due to economic and political changes it never played its economic function. Now it is a tourist attraction. The canal is thus of some tourist value which is difficult to assess. Tourist value of the Elbląg Canal was assessed with the travel cost method (TCM) within the study carried out in 2003. The study allowed for estimating the object’s value based on its usefulness expressed by inclination to payment. Three groups of users were distinguished when analysing the demand for recreational canal’s services: tourists using ships of the Elbląg–Ostróda Navigation Company, individual sailors and anglers. Total tourist value of the canal calculated as NPV of the annual value of canal’s services depends on adopted interest rate. At a rate of 3.2% the value is 328 thous. PLN (73.9 thous. euro), at a rate of 4% – 282 thous. PLN (63.5 thous. euro), while at 8% interest rate it decreases to 160 thous. PLN (36.0 thous. euro).
Many of already existing roads cross wetland river valleys. Also the roads nowadays planned are cutting through valuable wetlands. It is necessary to evaluate the range of their impact on the natural environment. This paper focuses only on the analysis of the road crossing impact on the groundwater level. Two options of crossing the wetlands were analyzed, building the road on embankments and in the bridge. It was assumed that the valley is filled with organic material under laid by permeable sands. Calculation results showed that building a road in the valley affects groundwater level only to the slight extend. Water conditions in the valley may be affected only during the construction of the road. Calculation results were confirmed by field observations.
It should be stressed that the object of this paper is the evaluation of water conditions. Environment might be influenced by other factors.
The research was set up in the Neretva River valley in the Southern part of Croatian Karst area, where implementation of modern hydrotechnical practices within the river catchment’s area led to intrusion of seawater to groundwater resulting in soil salinization in the delta. The region has great agro-ecological potential for intensive production of vegetables and Mediterranean fruits. Since the combination of the effects of saline groundwater and the use of this water for irrigation may have disastrous effects on the productivity of agricultural soils water, a project was started in order to set up a permanent monitoring network. The aim of this study was to determine the salt dynamics in the surface water on five locations which are considered as potential sources of the irrigation water (Modric canal, Neretva River near Opuzen, Crepina, Jasenska and Vidrice pumping station) during a 4-year period (1999–2002). The surface water samples had been collected on monthly basis and analyzed for all parameters required in the irrigation water quality classification. The results show considerable spatial and temporal variability of determined parameters. Thus, in the Neretva River near Opuzen, total salt concentrations in water ranged from 0.4 to 7.7 dS·m–1, and in Modric from 1.65 up to17.2 dS·m–1. Dominant cations and anions on all observed locations were Na+ and Cl–. Constantly high concentration of Na+ in sampled surface waters is of a special concern. Utilization of the water of such quality may cause problems related to the use of alkaline waters for irrigation, which can further cause permanent loss of fertile soil.
Two-third of the area of the Netherlands is flood prone. Storm surges at the North Sea, floods in the rivers, failure of secondary dikes, as well as heavy rainfall may cause flooding. Most of the flood prone areas rely for their existence on drainage by pumping, because their surface level may be permanently or during floods up to several metres below the surrounding water levels. During the past decades climate change is generally felt as a reason for major concern. However, the impacts of climate change on increase in extreme conditions may be up to 45% per century. If we look at the man-induced changes in land use, due to increase in population and rapid increase in the value of public and private property, then one may observe an increase of 100–1,000% per century. One should therefore wonder what would have to be our major concern.
In the paper the relevant processes are described, based on some characteristic data on water management and flood protection in the Netherlands. It is shown that impacts of climate change on water management and flood protection may be expected, but that such impacts can easily be accommodated during improvement works on water management systems and flood protection provisions that from time to time will be required. It will be much more important to take carefully into account the risk of flooding in the planning of land use development, especially for valuable types of land use like urban and industrial areas, green houses and recreation areas.
Irrigation in Croatia was until recently a neglected measure in food production, especially in continental part of the country. Development of drainage system in the last fifty years was more important due to the problems caused by floods and excess water in the fields. In the last decade the hydrological regime has been changed and drought events became as frequent as flood events, causing even more damage. Future development of agriculture in the northern counties of Croatia depends on the introduction of new, profitable crops which imply irrigation as an essential factor of future social and economic growth.
The first step in the implementation of irrigation was the development of National Irrigation Master
Plan as a framework for future activities.
According to the recommendations of the National Master Plan all counties have created County Irrigation Plans considering local natural conditions, social and economic background.
This paper is going to present how is that process of integrated water resources management developing in the continental part of Croatia on the example of Osijek County Irrigation Plan located in the Danube river basin.
Lublin Upland and Roztocze region are known for the occurrence of a large number of springs of high yield. These springs are fed mainly from Cretaceous or Tertiary water-bearing horizon. In order to determine variability of springs’ yield, 61 selected springs were analysed in spring periods of the years 1998–2008. Collected hydrometric materials allowed for comparing average and extreme yield values of springs in various physiographic regions within the period of 11 years. Average value was 76.1 dm3·s–1, while the mean of the minimal yields was 44.7 dm3·s–1 and of the maximal – 132.7 dm3·s–1. Coefficient of irregularity of the springs’ yield ranged from 1.5 to 5.0, which may lead to the conclusion that the springs’ yield is constant or varies slightly. In some cases the irregularity was higher but it was determined by hydrogeological, meteorological and local factors.
Nutrient emissions by point and diffuse sources and their loads were estimated for the Odra catchment over the time period of the last 50 years by means of the model MONERIS. For nitrogen a change of the total emissions from 38 kt·a–1 N in the mid of 1950s a maximum of 105 kt·a–1 N in the early 1980s and a recent value of about 84 kt·a–1 N were estimated for the total Odra Basin. The share of the point source discharges on the total N emissions varied between 24% (1955) and 35% (1995). The emissions from groundwater and tile drained areas represent the dominant pathway (37–56% of total N emissions) during all investigated time periods. Emissions from tile drained areas increased from the mid of 1950s to end of 1980s by a factor of 20 and reached in this period the same amount as emissions by groundwater. For phosphorus the emissions changed from 4 kt·a–1 P in 1955 to 14 kt·a–1 P in 1990 and a recent level of 7 kt·a–1 P. Point source discharges caused between 36 to 66% of total P emissions and represent the dominant pathway for all investigated time periods. Erosion and discharges from paved urban areas and sewer systems was the dominant diffuse pathway of the total P emissions into the river system. The comparison of calculated and observed nutrient loads for the main monitoring stations along the Odra River shows that the average deviation is 12% for total phosphorus (1980–2000) and 15% for dissolved inorganic nitrogen (1960–2000). From the analysis it can be concluded that the present load of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) and total nitrogen (TN) of the Odra into the Baltic Sea is about 2.3 times higher than in the mid of 1960s. The maximum DIN load (1980s) was more than 3 times higher than in the 1960s. The change of the total phosphorus (TP) load is characterized by an increase from the 1955s to 1980 from 2 to 7 kt·a–1 P (factor 2.6). Around 2000 the TP load was 4 kt·a–1 which is only the double of the level of the 1955s
Along the paper the new method called Invertebrate Bankfull Assessment method (IBA method) of determination of bankfull discharge is presented. The investigation of bankfull discharge using IBA were performed within one Polish Carpathian stream in the mountain region: the Ochotnica Stream. As an index of bankfull the existence of certain species of invertebrates was used which are present and resistant to specific water discharge conditions. The borders within a cross section of the mountain stream with a gravel bed were defined where characteristic invertebrates are present which are recognized as bankfull borders. Finally three invertebrates benches (IB-ms) were recognized which are characterized by very specific invertebrate species. Bankfull discharge was calculated up to this IB-ms and corelated using Canonical Correspondence Analysis with other values of bankfull calculated for a cross section using different bankfull.
An increase of water retention in the programmes of small retention in the country to the year 2015 is estimated at 1141 million m3. It means annual mean increase of retention capacity by c. 60 million m3. Accomplishment of relevant actions in the years 1997–2007 allowed collecting 57 million m3 in lakes, c. 56 million m3 in artificial reservoirs, 18.5 million m3 in fishponds, c. 10.5 million m3 with the channel retention and over 2 million m3 in other investments. It makes total increase of water retention by 142 million m3 which is 12.4% of target retention and the mean annual increment of c. 13 million m3. The paper presents volumes of retained water, sources and structure of financing, mean unit costs of retention increments and the increase of retention capacity in particular voivodships (acc. to new administration division) in the years 1998–2007.
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