A paper qualified by the Editorial Team for printing must be an original work not published before in any other journal, monograph, or any other publication.
The submission of manuscripts is free of charge. Polish authors are requested to submit their manuscripts in Polish and English.
The Editorial Team reserves the right to refuse to publish manuscripts. Manuscripts intended for publication are not returned.
Papers submitted in English are prioritized and the Editorial Team reserves the right to translate the whole text or selected parts.
The Editorial Team reserves the right to abbreviate too long texts, limit the number of figures, tables, and charts as part of the editorial process and remove from the paper figures, photographs, and tables of poor quality if the author fails to provide their better quality versions upon request.
Full texts of papers are published in Open Access and each published research paper is provided with metadata and DOI number.
Authors of the papers receive one author’s complimentary copy.
Correspondence authors are obliged to specify co-authors and their contribution to the manuscript, as well as their affiliation, address, e-mail address, degree, and ORCiD number - ghostwriting.
When submitting a research paper both the authors and co-authors are obligated to fill in the declaration, and sent it via the editorial system https://www.editorialsystem.com/zeren.
When submitting a manuscript other than research paper, please send us a scan of the signed declaration at the following e-mail address: zer@ierigz.waw.pl or send the signed document to the address of the Editorial Office.

How to write a research paper?

When writing a research paper, attention should be paid to the following:

Length
Is the research paper not shorter than 10 pages (20 thousand characters with spaces) and　not longer than 20 pages　of typescript (36-40 thousand characters with spaces), including figures, tables, footnotes, and references?
Content quality
Does the paper have scientific, practical, or educational value?
Is the paper sufficiently interesting and novel?
Does the article add any new findings to the current state of knowledge on the issue?
Does the paper adhere to the journal’s standards?
Is the paper in line with the aims and scope of the journal?
Structure and clarity
Title: Is the title consistent with the problem presented in the article?
Abstract: Is the abstract within the limit of 150 -250 words?
Does the abstract include the aim of the paper, concise method description, key results and main conclusions?
Keywords: Are the from 3 to 5 relevant keywords?
Are the keywords precise? (General keywords, such as agriculture, Poland, etc., should be rejected.)
Are the keywords full phrases? (Using acronyms and abbreviations is not recommended. For example, use World Trade Organization rather than WTO.)
JEL codes: Are there from 3 to 5 relevant JEL codes?
Introduction: Does it clearly define the aim of the article?
Does it provide context, summarize research done so far, and include hypothesis(es)?
Materials and methods:
Were the research area and methodics properly explained?
Were the sample selection criteria clearly explained and justified?
Were the basic characteristics of the sample properly described?
Is the sample size suitable and representative?
Was the data collected regularly and comprehensively?
Are the statistical methods relevant?
Results:
Are the results important?
Is the data analysis appropriate?
Are the statistics correct?
Discussion and Conclusions:
Is the interpretation of results clearly presented and properly supported by evidence?
Are the conclusions significant and logically justified by presented evidence?
Graphics:
Are all the figures and tables in editable electronic form (Excel, Power Point)?
Are all the figures and tables adequate and necessary?
Are they easy to interpret and understand?
References:
Are the bibliography items selected for the paper sufficient and relevant to the discussed problems?
Does the reference list include all references cited in the paper?
Does the reference list include any references which were not cited in the paper? (If yes, please delete them.)
Is the reference list in line with the APA style?
Are all　English titles capitalized, e.g. Food Trade and the Costs of Non-Adoption of Genetic Engineering instead of Food Trade and the Costs of Non-Adoption of Genetic Engineering? (To capitalize the title you may use the tool “Capitalize My Title" https://capitalizemytitle.com/)
Language
Transparency of information:　Is the language used in the paper clear and concise?
Writing style:　Does the author use academic style and formal register?
Terminology:　Is the terminology consistent throughout the paper for better clarity?

The manuscript template is available here.

Submission of the manuscript

The submission and publication of manuscripts is free of charge.

If the manuscript is NOT a research paper, please send it to the following e-mail address: zer@ierigz.waw.pl or renata.grochowska@ierigz.waw.pl together with a scan of the signed copyrights declaration　(see above) and provide your full affiliation (name and address of the institution, e-mail, and phone number) and your ORCiD number.
If the manuscript is a research paper, please submit it via the editorial system (by clicking on the following link: https://www.editorialsystem.com/zeren or by the tab “Submit your paper” on the website of our journal. By uploading the manuscript file, please make sure that the final version of the manuscript, tables and figures, as well as the name of the file do not include the authors’ names and affiliations. Our journal uses double-blind peer review: i.e. authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity throughout the review process. For more detailed instructions concerning the editorial system click here.

Copyrights

The copyrights belong to the Institute of Agricultural Economics and Food Economy - National Research Institute (Instytut Ekonomiki Rolnictwa i Gospodarki Żywnościowej – Państwowego Instytutu Badawczego, IERiGŻ-PIB).

Peer review process

A detailed description of the peer review process

Type of review process: The journal uses double-blind peer review: i.e. authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity throughout the review process. There are at least two reviewers for one article.
Manuscript submission: The correspondence author submits the research paper to the journal via on-line editorial system, while all manuscripts which are not research papers are sent to the executive editor via e-mail.
First evaluation by executive editor: The manuscript that failed to meet the basic requirements of linguistic correctness or is inconsistent with the editorial requirements or does not fit into the thematic profile of the journal is rejected without review.
Invitation to reviewers: After initial verification, the executive editor and subject editors select reviewers, who prepare, within an agreed time, reviews by filling in forms provided via on-line editorial system.
Reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, availability and the principle of confidentiality (they do not use the information obtained during the review before the paper’s publication).
They assess the manuscript given its substantive content, correctness of the used methods, logic of reasoning, coherence of contents with the topic, relevant selection of references, etc.
The review is submitted to the journal with recommendations to:
- accept without any changes,
- accept upon minor changes suggested by the reviewers,
- accept upon major changes and re-review,
- reject.
Executive editor sends comments of the reviewers to the author of the manuscript. If the reviewer makes the publication of the manuscript dependent on his/her corrections, the author has to do so in line with the comments formulated by the reviewer. The author can also respond to the reviewer’s remarks by presenting own justified opinion to the Editorial Team and reviewers.
Decision: The decision on manuscript’s publication is taken by the executive editor and subject editors after prior consultation with the Advisory Board.
Names of the reviewers for respective issues are not made public. The Editorial Team placed the list of all reviewers cooperating with the journal on the website.
Further steps: If accepted, the manuscript is submitted for publication. If it is rejected, the executive editor sends back to the author all comments from reviewers and the Advisory Board to help improve the manuscript. It could be sent by the author again as a new version. In order to guarantee the highest quality of publications, the Editorial Team uses the Crossref Similarity Check tool.

Guidelines for Reviewers

Dear Reviewers,
thank you for your interest in our journal. We would kindly request you to evaluate a manuscript and provide a constructive and honest feedback to authors on their paper via our editorial system https://www.editorialsystem.com/zeren. By accepting our invitation to review a paper, you are required to observe the principle of confidentiality and not to disclose any information concerning the manuscript to third parties before its publication.
Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej / Problems of Agricultural Economics uses the double-blind review system, according to which authors and reviewers are anonymous to each other. The names of the reviewers for respective issues are not made public. The list of cooperating reviewers is available on the website of the journal http://www.zer.waw.pl/List-of-reviewers,997.html

Before reviewing

Please bear the following in mind:

Do you have time to review the manuscript?
The review of a paper should be finished within 3-4 weeks. If you cannot meet the deadline, please contact the Executive Editor (renata.grochowska@ierigz.waw.pl) or the Managing Editor (marta.guzik@ierigz.waw.pl) as soon as possible.
Does the manuscript you are going to review match your　specialty fields?
If the manuscript concerns a topic which does not sufficiently match your area of expertise, please contact the Executive Editor. You are welcome to suggest suitable alternate reviewer.
Are there any potential conflicts of interests?
It is essential to inform the Executive Editor or the Managing Editor about any conflict of interest, e.g. if you can guess who the author of the manuscript is, before reviewing the manuscript.
Are there any misconducts?
Should you know of any alleged research and/or publication misconduct, such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data falsification, misappropriation of ideas, impropriety of authorship, etc., please notify the Executive Editor or Managing Editor as soon as possible.

The review

When reviewing the research paper, attention should be paid to the following:

Content quality
Does the paper have scientific, practical, or educational value?
Is the paper sufficiently interesting and novel?
Does the article add any new findings to the current state of knowledge on the issue?
Does the paper adhere to the journal’s standards?
Is the paper in line with the aims and scope of the journal?
Structure and clarity
Title: Is the title consistent with the problem presented in the article?
Abstract: Is the abstract between 150 and 250 words?
Does the abstract include the aim of the paper, concise method description, key results and main conclusions?
Keywords: Are the from 3 to 5 relevant keywords?
Are the keywords precise? (General keywords, such as agriculture, Poland, etc., should be rejected.)
Are the keywords full phrases? (Using acronyms and abbreviations is not recommended. For example, use World Trade Organization rather than WTO.)
JEL codes: Are there from 3 to 5 relevant JEL codes?
Introduction: Does it clearly define the aim of the article?
Does it provide context, summarize research done so far, and include hypothesis(es)?
Materials and methods:
Was the research area and methodics properly explained?
Were the sample selection criteria clearly explained and justified?
Were the basic characteristics of the sample properly described?
Is the sample size suitable and representative?
Was the data collected regularly and comprehensively?
Are the statistical methods relevant?
Results:
Are the results important?
Is the data analysis appropriate?
Are the statistics correct?
Discussion and Conclusions:
Is the interpretation of results clearly presented and properly supported by evidence?
Are the conclusions significant and logically justified by presented evidence?
Graphics:
Are all the figures and tables adequate and necessary?
Are they easy to interpret and understand?
References:
Are the bibliography items selected for the paper sufficient and relevant to the discussed problems?
Does the reference list include all references cited in the paper?
Does the reference list include any references which were not cited in the paper? (If yes, please delete them.)
Is the reference list according to the APA style?
Are all English titles capitalized, e.g. Food Trade and the Costs of Non-Adoption of Genetic Engineering instead of Food Trade and the Costs of Non-Adoption of Genetic Engineering ? (To capitalize the title you may use the tool “Capitalize My Title” https://capitalizemytitle.com/)
Language
Transparency of information: Is the language of the paper informative and concise?
Writing style: Does the author use academic style and formal register?
Terminology: Is the terminology consistent throughout the paper for better clarity?
Length
Is the research paper not shorter than 10 pages (20 thousand characters with spaces) and not longer than 20 pages of typescript (36-40 thousand characters with spaces) including figures, tables, and footnotes?
Evaluation
Please give your recommendations to:
- accept the paper without any changes,
- accept the paper upon minor changes suggested by the reviewers,
- accept the paper upon major changes and re-review,
- reject the paper.

Submission of reviewer‘s reports

All reviews should include detailed comments for the authors, particularly when rejection or major changes are recommended. The reviewers submit their reports via the editorial system. In order to review and evaluate the paper, please log as reviewer into your account by clicking on the following link　https://www.editorialsystem.com/zeren. More detailed instructions concerning the editorial system are available here. Your full review (including your name and surname) will be visible to the Executive Editor, Subject Editor, and Managing Editor.

Editorial Policy

Publishing ethics of Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej / Problems of Agricultural Economics

The journal adheres to the principles on publication ethics according to the guidelines designed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All members of the editorial team of Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej / Problems of Agricultural Economics, within the scope of their respective duties, are committed to keep high scientific and ethical standards and undertake all possible steps to avoid negligence. Papers, submitted to the quarterly, are assessed by editors and reviewers as regards reliability, ethical standards and contribution to the development of science.

Publication ethics for members of the editorial team

Criteria and responsibility for publication of papers
Decisions on publication of papers are taken by the editor-in-chief in consultation with the subject editor. The decisions of both editors are taken on the basis of indications and detailed assessment of at least two reviewers of the paper, independent and anonymous for the author. Depending on the needs, the opinion of the journal’s Editorial Board is also taken into account. The decision is taken bearing in mind the risk of possible libel of third parties, breach of copyrights and other intellectual property rights, plagiarism or self-plagiarism and doubts concerning the authorship or co-authorship of a paper, termed as ghostwriting and guest authorship.

Fair play
Papers sent to the editorial office are assessed based on content-related criteria and publication ethics. The assessment is not affected by personal factors, such as sex, faith, race, origin, nationality or political beliefs of authors.

Confidentiality
Members of the editorial team are not allowed to disclose any information on the papers submitted for publication to other people than – at respective stages of the publication procedure – authors, selected reviewers, authorized editors and representatives of the publisher.

Preventing conflicts of interest between editorial team members
Papers that were not published cannot be used by members of the editorial team in part or in whole without written consent of their authors.

Preventing and handling research misconduct
Editors are obliged to act if they suspect or were reported about research misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification or plagiarism, with regard to both published and unpublished manuscripts.

In order to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts in which research misconduct has occurred, the Managing Editor verifies the submitted manuscript using a plagiarism checker (Similarity Check). In the case of detecting any similarities between a submission and content existing in the database of the text comparison tool (iThenticate), the similarity report is analyzed and the author is requested to make appropriate corrections to the text and clarify the situation. If the author fails to provide corrections and/or clarifications or refuses to do so, the Executive Editor makes a decision to reject the paper in the editorial system and the paper is not published in the journal. The author is notified thereof by the editorial system and by e-mail.

Having received information on suspected research misconduct in an already published paper, the Executive Editor investigates the allegations. If the allegations are substantiated, the Editor contacts the author and demands an explanation and appropriate corrections. If the explanation is satisfactory, they discuss the conditions on which the corrected version will be published. However, if there is no satisfactory clarification or there is no reaction form the author, the Executive Editor makes a decision to retract the controversial paper and informs the author about it. In both cases, the readers are informed of the situation by placing a disclaimer and official apologies on the website.

Subsequently, the Editor in Chief notifies the author’s superiors and public authorities of committing an offense. In the case of plagiarism, the Editor in Chief should also alert the publishing house which published the manuscript containing the plagiarized passages.

Publication ethics for reviewers

Participation of reviewers in editorial works
The reviewers are tasked with providing support to editors in decisions on approval for publication, sending back for corrections or rejection of a paper. Opinions on the issue should be univocal.

Promptness
Reviews shall be submitted on a deadline agreed in advance. If the reviewer is in conflict of interest or because of other reasons cannot review the paper or meet the deadline for review – the reviewer shall be obliged to immediately inform the editorial office on the fact.

Confidentiality
Papers received from the editorial office are confidential. It is unacceptable to disclose them to third parties or to discuss with them the contents or conclusions of the papers – except for an authorized representative of the editorial team. The reviews are anonymous, which means that the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers of their papers and reviewers should not know the identity of the authors. Reviewers are not allowed to disclose information on receipt of specific papers for review to any persons from outside the editorial team.

Preventing conflicts of interest
Papers received for review cannot be used by reviewers, in part or in whole, for personal gain. In case of conflicts of interests reviewers have to immediately inform the editorial office on the fact.

Preventing and handling research misconduct
Reviewers must immediately alert the Editorial Team of an alleged research misconduct and communicate any doubts or reservations concerning the originality of the submitted manuscript. In such situation, both review and publishing processes are withheld and an investigation is pursued. If the investigation shows no misconduct, the Executive Editor contacts the reviewers and explains the situation to them. If the allegations are substantiated, the Editor contacts the author and demands an explanation and appropriate corrections.

Reliability of sources
In the review, the reviewers have to identify and indicate the sources that the authors failed to mention, although they should have. The reviewers have to also inform the editorial staff on a significant similarity, partial overlapping of the reviewed work with other publications, regardless of the author, or possibly on other unauthorized borrowings and suspected plagiarism.

Publication ethics for authors

Authorship of a paper
All persons mentioned as authors or co-authors should have a key share in the paper preparation, significantly contributing to its elaboration from the stage of idea to the concept and execution and drawing conclusions. Other persons that could have an impact on some important aspects of the paper can be mentioned as collaborators but not co-authors of the paper. Ghostwriting and guest authorship are a manifestation of scientific misconduct, are unethical and illegal. Identified manifestations of such misconduct shall be publicly disclosed by the editorial office and communicated to respective entities, especially parent institutions of the authors and alleged authors. An author submitting a paper shall also be obliged to make sure that all of the persons mentioned as co-authors approve of the final version of the paper.

Preventing conflicts of interest
The authors reveal in their paper all sources of project funding, contribution of institutions, organizations and other entities or other reasons for conflict of interest, which could have affected the interpretation or conclusions following from the paper.

Reliable presentation of research reports
Authors, presenting in their papers the results of empirical research, shall be obliged to reliably describe the performed research works and objectively interpret results. Data forming the grounds for the key conclusions should be presented in enough detail to allow for identification of data sources, to make it possible to repeat the research, if needed. Intentional inaccurate or unreliable presentation, commenting and interpretation of data and research results is unethical and illegal. The authors should be prepared to provide unprocessed source data for the needs of review for a year after the publication.

Paper originality
The authors present for publication solely their own original papers, unpublished before, in whole or in vital parts, in any authorship composition. The authors guarantee that the paper submitted for review was not submitted for publication in any other journal, joint paper or any other publication. The authors are obliged to inform the editorial team on the degree of originality in a relevant statement.

Reliability of sources
The authors are obliged to indicate (quote) publications, which were used in the course of paper preparation.

Errors in published papers
If authors find in the published papers fundamental errors or mistakes affecting the interpretation and conclusions they are required to immediately inform the editorial office therefore.

eISSN:: 2392-3458
Language:: English

Publication timeframe:: 4 times per year
Journal Subjects:: Business and Economics, Political Economics, Microeconomics, Macroecomics, Economic Policy, Business Management, Industries, Agribusiness, Food Industry

Journal RSS Feed