For Authors

ATTENTION: In 2021 journal continues publishing under title Social Entrepreneurship Review.

The Editorial Board of “Social Economy” journal approves for publication the following papers in English (from 2021):

  • Academic articles and research reports,
  • Book reviews.

The Editorial Board approves only original papers previously unpublished in any other periodicals or books or being subject of evaluation in other journal.
The Journal does not charge for article submission, processing or publication.
Proposals of submissions should be sent to the Editorial address (see: Contact us).
The Editorial Board reserves the right to introduce – in consultation with the author – appropriate editorial modifications, including cuts if the paper exceeds the approved length.
The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject submitted papers. The Editorial Board does not return received papers. The authors are not paid for the publication of their articles.
Submissions from Programme Board and Editorial Board members are handled in the same way as for other authors.

Upon acceptance for publication, the author consents to transfer the copyright to the editor.
The author is authorised to use the content of the article published in the Journal in further scientific research provided s/he cites the source of the publication.

Self-archiving Policy
Author can archive pre-print (i.e. pre-refereeing) on any website. Author can archive post-print (i.e. final draft post-refereeing) on authors personal website, institutional open access repository, as well as academic social networks. Author can archive Publisher's version (PDF) in the above mentioned places. Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged with full citation linked to publisher version with DOI. Copy of License must accompany any deposit.

Appeal against editorial decisions
Authors have a right to appeal editorial decisions. The author not agreeing with the negative editorial decision basing on an article review, has two weeks, since the date of notification about the text not being accepted for publication, for replying with an official note asking for another evaluation of the text. In the note she/he should provide the reasoning on why the text should be approved. Once familiarized with the arguments, the Editorial Board keeps an initial decision (if the arguments are not convincing) or directs the text for another review (if the reasoning provided is convincing). The process of another review lasts up to 3 weeks starting from the date of a request for another article review.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The author of the paper is responsible for copyright violation and other issues related to the article. The author of the article should obtain relevant consent from other authors/editors/publishers to use excerpts from other publications, charts, graphics and similar sources. If the article has several co-authors, the author submitting the article for publication shall obtain relevant consent from other co-authors in order to meet the editorial requirements listed above.
Authors are obliged to provide complete information concerning sources of funding, the contribution of research institutions, associations and other entities ("financial disclosure").

Anti-Plagiarism Policy
Papers submitted to Ekonomia Społeczna will be screened for plagiarism using by the Crossref Similarity Check anti-plagiarism system with the iThenticate detection tools.

Ghostwriting and guest-authorship
In order to prevent ghost-writing and guest-authorship the Editorial Board requires the authors to disclose the contributions of individual authors to paper development (listing their affiliations and inputs, i.e. the information about the author of the concept, hypotheses, methods, protocols, etc. used in the writing of the paper), while the overall responsibility for the manuscript rests with the main author. Considering the fact that ghost-writing and guest-authorship are symptoms of scientific dishonesty, the editorial team shall report each such case to relevant bodies (academic units employing the authors, academic associations, academic editors’ associations etc.).
In case of doubts please read the following rules of The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): COPE Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

Peer review process
Each paper is anonymously submitted to two reviewers. The author receives their reviews irrespective of whether the article is approved for publication. If the paper is approved for publication, the author is requested to comment on the suggested modifications by the deadline set by the editorial team.
Evaluation criteria: precision of formulated objective, originality of research issues, theoretical background, quality of empirical research, originality of conclusions, the significance of development in scientific field confluent with the scientific profile of the Journal, attentive language, comprehensibility, punctuation; appropriate source selection.
Each review is issued ends with an unambiguous recommendation:
•    The article can be published in the present form.
•    The article can be published after introduction of minor modifications and addenda.
•    The article can be published after its re-edition and the consecutive review.
•    The article cannot be published.

Editorial requirements
Papers submitted for publication should meet the following formal requirements:

  1. They should be in Polish or in English.
  2. They should be emailed in electronic format (MS Word), including tables and charts (MS Excel or MS Word Chart Editor). If the article contains tables, charts or graphics saved using other software (e.g. Corel Draw, Statistica, SPSS), the author is expected to save them in .wmf or .eps formats with enclosed fonts and in 300 dpi resolution. The printed copy must include every national character and all the mathematical symbols.
  3. The Editorial Board kindly requests the author to enclose a completed and signed Author Statement form (doc, pdf).
  4. The Editorial Board kindly requests the authors to use the Harvard style of citation: [Author, year of publication, page], and bibliographical data as shown in the examples below:
    Hausner J. (2008). Public Governance. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
    Chapters in monographs:
    Hausner J. (2002). “From Ideal Bureaucracy to Public Governance”, in: J. Hausner, M. Kukiełka (eds), Studia z zakresu zarządzania publicznego. vol. II, Cracow: Cracow University of Economics.
    Mazur S. (2013). Institutional Change, Public Governance, no 2-3 (24-25).
  5. The article should be accompanied by a list of keywords (4-5 words) and an abstract (100-150 words) both in Polish and in English.The essential elements of the abstract are:
    Background: A simple opening sentence or two placing the work in context.
    Aims: One or two sentences giving the purpose of the work.
    Method(s): One or two sentences explaining the research methods used.
    Results: One or two sentences indicating the main findings.
    Conclusions: One sentence giving the most important consequence of the work.
  6. The total number of pages (including the bibliography presented in accordance with the requirements described above, the abstract and the keywords) should not exceed 22 standard pages (1800 characters per page).

Reviews of academic papers

  1. Only reviews of academic papers (by a single author, collective, a collection of documents, an edition of source documents etc.) can be approved for publication. Reviewed books should not be older than one year in the case of Polish publications and two years in the case of foreign-language ones.
  2. The review should contain complete bibliographical data of the book (name and surname of the author, title, publisher, place and year of publication, number of pages, appendices, etc.). The review may refer to several papers by the same author or to a similar research question. The reviewer should express his/her personal attitude towards reviewed paper (approval or criticism) and formulate conclusions (i.e. what the book contributes to a given scientific area, evaluation of scientific methodology, bibliography, presence or absence of an index, graphics, tables etc.). The reviewer may also evaluate the quality of publishing work (spell checking, editing, graphics etc.).
  3. Authors of reviews are expected to contact the Editorial Board in order to agree on the subject of the review and to obtain approval for publication.
  4. An individual review should consist of a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 11 standard pages (1800 characters per page).