Retraction Policy
1. Purpose and Principles of Retraction
Retraction of an article is the official procedure for annulling a previously published work in cases where significant violations of publication ethics and/or other circumstances have been established that preclude reliable use of the research findings.
The editorial board of the journal «Economic Strategy and Prospects of Trade and Services Sector Development» applies retraction for the purpose of:
• protecting scientific integrity and confidence in published findings;
• ensuring transparency and accountability in scholarly communication;
• preventing the dissemination of unreliable or incorrectly obtained/presented results.
The retraction procedure is conducted in compliance with the principles of objectivity, impartiality, evidence-based assessment, confidentiality, and proper communication with all parties.
2. Grounds for Retraction
2.1. Violations of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics
• plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or improper/unacknowledged borrowing;
• fabrication or falsification of data, results, or evidence;
• authorship manipulation (inclusion/exclusion of authors without a genuine contribution; "gift" authorship);
• submission of the same work (or a substantially similar one) to multiple publications, or duplicate publication without adequate justification;
• a concealed or unresolved conflict of interest that may have influenced the results or their interpretation;
• malpractice in peer review (fictitious reviewers, manipulation of the review process, etc.).
2.2. Significant Research Errors and Deficiencies
• critical methodological errors that render the conclusions unreliable;
• significant errors in data or calculations that cannot be corrected through the publication of a corrigendum or erratum;
• absence of proper attribution to primary data sources, or use of data without a lawful basis.
2.3. Violations of Rights and Legislation
• copyright infringement, unlawful use of third-party materials;
• violation of requirements regarding research involving personal/confidential data (where relevant to the work) and absence of the necessary permissions or approvals (where required).
3. Initiators of the Retraction Procedure
The retraction procedure may be initiated by:
• the author(s) (upon discovery of significant errors or violations);
• the editorial board or editorial committee;
• a reviewer;
• readers, the scholarly community, or institutions;
• other interested parties through an official communication to the editorial board.
4. Retraction Review Procedure
4.1. Receipt of Notification and Initial Assessment
Upon receipt of a notification of a possible violation, the editorial board:
• registers the complaint;
• conducts an initial assessment of its validity (analysis of facts, materials, sources, and possible technical verification);
• requests additional explanations and documents where necessary.
4.2. Investigation and Expert Involvement
If the suspicion is confirmed or requires in-depth verification, the editorial board may:
• establish a working group or appoint a handling editor without a conflict of interest;
• involve independent experts or editorial board members;
• contact the author(s)' institution(s) for an official position (where necessary).
4.3. Communication with Authors
The editorial board informs the author(s) of the nature of the allegations and provides an opportunity to:
• submit written explanations;
• provide primary data/materials substantiating the results;
• propose a correction, if the problem can be resolved without retraction.
5. Outcome Decisions
Based on the review, the editorial board may reach one of the following decisions:
• No grounds for action — the article remains unchanged.
• Publication of a Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum) — where errors do not critically affect the conclusions and can be corrected.
• Publication of an Expression of Concern — where an investigation is ongoing and the risks of unreliability are significant.
• Retraction of the article — where significant violations or unreliable results have been established.
The retraction decision is taken by the editorial committee (or the authorised editorial body) and recorded in the form of minutes/internal resolution.
6. Publication of the Retraction Notice
In the event of retraction, the editorial board:
• publishes a separate retraction notice on the journal website and/or in the next issue;
• the notice specifies: the article title, authors, and publication details; the reason(s) for retraction in accurate and evidence-based terms; the date of the retraction decision;
• ensures that the retraction is clearly and visually marked in the journal archive.
A retracted article is not deleted from the archive but is retained with a clear label indicating the status "Retracted" and a link to the retraction notice. This is consistent with the Ministry of Education and Science requirements for retaining the article in the archive with a notation of the retraction.
7. Interaction with DOI and Metadata (where applicable)
Where a DOI has been assigned to an article, the editorial board ensures that the retraction is reflected in the metadata and on the article page, so that readers can unambiguously ascertain the current status of the publication.
8. Appeal
Author(s) may submit a substantiated appeal against the retraction decision within the period established by the editorial board (recommended: up to 10 working days), providing evidence and explanations. The appeal is reviewed by the editorial board/committee with the involvement of independent experts (where necessary). The outcome of the appeal is final.
9. Relationship with Complaints and Ethics Policies
Retraction matters are considered in conjunction with:
• the Complaint Procedure,
• the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement,
• the Academic Integrity Policy,
• the Conflict of Interest Policy,
• the Artificial Intelligence Policy.
