Individuals listed as authors must have made a significant intellectual contribution to the research and the preparation of the manuscript. All authors share responsibility for the integrity of the work and must approve the final version prior to publication. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged in an “Acknowledgements” section.

Any change in authorship during peer review or after acceptance must be agreed upon by all listed authors and submitted with a clear justification to the Editor-in-Chief. JCDSF encourages the inclusion of a brief “Contributor Statement” describing the role of each author, particularly for community-based and participatory research.

Authors must ensure that:

• The manuscript is original and does not duplicate any prior publications, including their own.
• The work is not under consideration, in review, accepted, or in press elsewhere.
• The submission does not contain unlawful, defamatory, fraudulent, or otherwise illegal material.
• Research involving human participants, communities, or vulnerable groups complies with applicable ethical standards and has obtained necessary approvals where required.

Violation of these conditions constitutes misconduct. The journal and publisher reserve the right to take appropriate action, which may include rejection, retraction, or other corrective measures.

All submissions undergo an initial editorial screening to assess scope, quality, and completeness. Manuscripts deemed suitable are evaluated through a double-blind peer-review process involving at least two external experts with relevant expertise in community development, sustainability, or related fields.

Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the final selection is made by the editorial office. Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors, and author identities are not disclosed to reviewers in order to minimize bias.

After receiving the reviews, the Editor-in-Chief will decide whether to:

• Accept
• Request minor revision
• Request major revision
• Reject

Authors are informed of the reasons for the decision. Revised manuscripts may be sent for additional review, depending on the extent of the revision and the editor’s assessment.

The journal aims to issue a first decision within approximately 40–60 days, although timelines may vary based on reviewer availability and the nature of the manuscript. Non-research submissions (such as editorials, reflections, or brief communications) may be assessed solely by the Editor-in-Chief.

Authors who believe that a rejection decision was made in error may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. The appeal should clearly explain the grounds for reconsideration and respond to key review comments where appropriate.

Appeals are evaluated by an Editorial Board member who was not involved in the original decision. Only one appeal is permitted per manuscript, and the resulting decision is final.

The journal accepts supplementary materials that support the main article, such as datasets, survey instruments, community engagement tools, multimedia files, or extended appendices. Supplemental information should be submitted together with the manuscript.

Supplementary materials are not formally peer-reviewed, but may be checked for relevance and appropriateness. Authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy and content of supplemental files, and a disclaimer may be applied where appropriate.

The journal encourages authors to make their data available in suitable repositories to promote transparency, reproducibility, and future research reuse. Depositing data in recognized repositories (e.g., those that assign DOIs or similar persistent identifiers) allows datasets to be cited within the article and independently.

For community-based research, authors are encouraged to consider ethical implications of data sharing, including privacy, consent, and agreements with participating communities.

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reuse any content that has been previously published or created by others, including figures, tables, photographs, or substantial text excerpts. Proof of permission must be provided to the editorial office upon request and must comply with copyright and licensing requirements.

A conflict of interest (COI) may arise from personal relationships, institutional affiliations, financial support, or other circumstances that could influence judgement during the research or publication process.

Authors must disclose any potential COIs in the manuscript and to the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers must inform the editor of any COIs that could affect the fairness of their assessment. Editors will recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a COI exists.

The journal follows international best practices regarding the ethical use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including generative AI tools (e.g. large language models, code generators, image generators). AI systems cannot be listed as authors, and responsibility for the content of the article rests solely with the human authors.

Authors must:

• Clearly disclose any use of AI tools in the preparation of the manuscript (e.g. language editing, coding assistance, figure generation, data processing), specifying the tool and the nature of its use in the Methods, Acknowledgements, or a dedicated “Use of AI tools” statement.
• Ensure that AI-generated text, images, or code are carefully checked for accuracy, originality, and compliance with ethical standards. Authors remain fully responsible for the correctness of all content, citations, and data.
• Not use AI tools to fabricate, manipulate, or misrepresent data, images, or results. Any such practice will be treated as serious research misconduct.

Reviewers and editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts or confidential material into public AI tools in a way that could compromise anonymity, confidentiality, or intellectual property. Where AI-based tools are used to support language checking or summarisation, reviewers and editors retain full responsibility for their assessments and decisions.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work is original and that all sources are properly cited. The journal uses similarity-checking tools (such as Crossref Similarity Check/iThenticate) to identify potential plagiarism or inappropriate reuse of material.

Confirmed plagiarism or copyright infringement is treated as misconduct and may lead to rejection, retraction, or further action in accordance with international ethical guidelines.

Editors exercise full independence in selecting manuscripts for review and making publication decisions. Editorial judgements are not influenced by the publisher, sponsors, or external agencies, and are based solely on scholarly merit and relevance to the journal’s scope in community development and sustainable futures.

Editors are responsible for maintaining confidentiality throughout the review process, ensuring fair and unbiased evaluation of all submissions, and providing decisions in a timely manner.

Editors must uphold ethical standards, avoid conflicts of interest, and safeguard the integrity and reputation of the journal by declining to accept manuscripts that do not meet quality or ethical expectations.

The publisher supports the journal by providing the technical, administrative, and policy framework necessary for high-quality scholarly communication. This includes maintaining digital infrastructure, archiving, data protection, and ensuring compliance with ethical and legal standards.

The journal publishes all articles under an Open Access model, typically using a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence or equivalent. This allows readers worldwide to access, share, and reuse content with appropriate attribution.

Authors retain copyright in their work while granting the journal the right of first publication. Open Access maximizes the visibility, usage, and impact of published research and contributes to equitable global knowledge dissemination on community development and sustainable futures.

The journal currently operates as a fully Open Access journal with no Article Processing Charges (APCs). Authors are not required to pay fees for submission, peer review, publication, or online access.

All publication-related costs are supported internally. If APCs or other fees are introduced in the future, the updated policy and fee structure will be clearly communicated on the journal website in advance.

The journal may participate in the Crossmark initiative to provide readers with a reliable way to verify the current status of published content. By clicking the Crossmark logo on an article, readers can access information about updates, corrections, or other changes to the publication record.

If significant errors are identified after publication, the journal may issue a correction, erratum, or retraction, as appropriate. Authors and readers are encouraged to report potential errors to the Editor-in-Chief or publisher.

Reported issues are investigated to determine whether a correction, clarification, or retraction is required in order to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in handling alleged misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, redundant publication, and breaches of confidentiality.

Manuscripts under investigation may be placed on hold. Confirmed misconduct may result in rejection, retraction, and notification of relevant institutions or funding bodies, in line with COPE guidelines.

Authors, reviewers, and readers who have concerns or complaints related to the journal, editorial process, or published content are encouraged to contact the editorial office or publisher directly.

Complaints will be handled promptly, fairly, and, where necessary, escalated to a senior editorial or publishing representative for resolution.