About the Journal
Focus and Scope
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy is intended to be an instrument to publish doctrinal and scientific aspects related to the interaction between public policy and law. We look for papers related to governance, integration, citizen participation, development and other issues involving the State, Society and Law.
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy follows three main editorial lines:
I) Democracy, Policies of State and Government and their related legal aspects: new trends in Constitutional and Administrative Law ; Theory of public policies ; Government system; Electoral system and citizenship; Political Party system and constitutional reform.
II) Economic and Social Development Public Policies and their relation to Law: Economic development and local/regional production policies; Sustainable development and environment; Human development and Administration of government action.
III) Public Policy Assessment: Theories of evaluation of public policy; Methodology of evaluation of public policies and development policies; Legal methodology of public policy analysis, Results of analysis of public policy, Research in sectorial public policy.
Articles published in the BJPP must fit into at least one of the themes mentioned above. Eventually, at the discretion of the editorial board, a special issue of the Journal can be prepared and dedicated to only one of the thematic axes, or even one of its subdivisions.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy receives, free of charge, original articles in Portuguese, English and Spanish. No fees are charged during the evaluation and publication process. Thus, after peer review, articles are released at no cost to the author and the reader.
Peer Review Process
The process of evaluating articles and reviews comprises two phases. First aimed at analyzing the suitability of the work to the editorial line (Editorial Board). The second on evaluation of the content and quality of work. This second phase is performed by the peer review process, that is, articles will be submitted for approval at least two independent reviewers, following a Double blind review. In other words, papers will be sent for evaluation without the author identifying himself or herself and authors would not be able to identify reviewers.
Reviewers have 15 days to answer, in order to be paid. Normally, authors will have an answer in a few days, but sometimes, it is needed to send the paper to various reviewers, and the final answer will take longer.
Publication Frequency
RBPP is a regular publication, quarterly published since vol 6. number 2, 2016. Each year a volume with three issues is published.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content since freely available scientific knowledge supports a greater global democratization of knowledge.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
To ensure honesty and academic integrity, the Brazilian Journal of Public Policy follows the Code of Conduct and Guidelines of best practices for Editors prepared by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE 2011). The commitment to ensure good ethical and deontological practices must be assumed by all the editorial staff, authors and reviewers.
Therefore, according to the recommendations established by the Committee on Publication Ethics, each of the parties involved in the evaluation process and publication of the proposed articles should, at least, commit to the following:
Editors duties:
• Be responsible for the content of the journal as a whole;
• Strive to meet the interests of readers, authors and members of the Editorial Board, as well as keep them informed about the objectives and editorial policy of the journal;
• Evaluate the proposed articles solely on their academic merits, disconsider the nature of the authors, their institution and their race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy.
• Do not use unpublished information for their own research without the express consent of the author;
• Ensure the existence of a fair scientific process of evaluation, impartial and timely, as well as transparency in Editing and publication of the manuscripts;
• Identify and report cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate publication
• Ensure the confidentiality of the manuscripts;
•Constantly improve the journal;
Authors duties:
• Submit articles with an objective discussion, resulting from an important research work. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Any form of plagiarism, fraudulent statements or knowingly inaccurate data are unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• Do not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal;
• Ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere, in any language, and that the authors have used the work and / or words of others, citing appropriately.
• Follow the laws and conventions of copyright. Material protected by copyright (eg, tables, figures or extensive quotes) should be reproduced only with proper acknowledgment and permission.
• In case of joint authorship, it should be guaranteed the consensus in approving the final version of the manuscript for evaluation or publication;
• When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his own published work, it is his obligation to immediately notify the Editorial staff of the journal and work with them to retract or correct the article.
Duties of Reviewers:
• Assist the editor in making editorial decisions;
• Ensure confidentiality during the peer review process;
• Demonstrate the existence of conflict of interest or impossibility in evaluation;
• Call the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any published article which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
• Prepare reviews without personal criticism to the author. Reviewers must clearly express their perspectives with arguments.
• Do not use for their own benefit the ideas obtained through the evaluation process;
• The recommendation to accept or reject an article should be based on its importance, originality and clarity, as well as the validity of the study and its integration within the scope of the journal;
• The review should be objective and recommendations should be based on solid arguments for the authors to improve the text.
• Recommend relevant publications when they are not mentioned;
• When the manuscript does not fit in the reviewer’ research area or when it is known that the deadline will not be met, he/she shall inform the editors;
• Respect deadlines.
For more information see the document bellow:
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from:
http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf
Sponsors
- FAP-DF
Journal History
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy is a publication organized by Uniceub’s Master and Doctoral Program in Legal Studies. Since 2012, the journal aims its internationalization by encouraging the proposals of articles by foreign researchers. Articles from all countries of the world are accepted. The journal is indexed in several international databases, with wide and free distribution. It is one of the only Brazilian journals listed in Expresso, one of the main legal articles delivery systems used in the United States.
The articles submitted are subject to different editorial stages. First, they are evaluated by the editors, in relation to the journal’s theme. Then they are evaluated by external reviewers (blindly peer review). In general, modifications are required to meet the journal's standards. If approved, the articles undergo the processes of language review, editing, layout formatting, all of which are carried out by specialized outsourced companies,. Finally, the articles are distributed consistently in the journal and published. In general, the publication occurs in up to three months from the time the article has been submitted, which may vary according to the response of reviewers.
