Provision of Research Ethics




Article 1 (Name)
This is called as The Provision of Research Ethics in The Korean Environmental Sciences Society (KENSS).

Article 2 (Purpose)
The purpose of this provision is to deliberate inappropriate behavior by a member of The Korean Environmental Sciences Society (now, using as society) in Research Ethics Committee (now, using as committee.)

Article 3 (Conducting Research)
The member should follow the provision of research ethics for study planning and performing as well as should not do inappropriate behavior and cheating on study.
① cheating on study is counterfeiter, falsification, and plagiarism in the process: proposal, performance, result report, and examination.
1. Counterfeiter: Presenting bastardly nonexistent data and research results.
2. Falsification: Seriously distorting research content and result by fabrication, modifying, and eliminating data and result.
3. Plagiarism: Pirating other's writing and research content (process, result, record) without proper approval and quotation.
② Followings are realized as inappropriate behavior.
1. Reasonable author allocation: Without legitimate reason, author's right is not given who contribute to data and research results. Because of gratitude and privileges, the right is granted who didn't contribute to data and research results.
2. Duplicate posting and publication: Publishing and submitting paper, reported already, to another journal.
3. Suppressing, aiding and abetting, conniving a cheating.
4. Making a false statement about author's academic background, career, qualification, research and result.
5. Harming informant and interrupting intentionally investigation about suspecting one's or other's cheating.
6. It is approved as cheating by Ethics committee or damaging to research honesty.

Article 4 (Deliberative process)
The committee deliberates research ethics of members by following process.
1. Raising a violation of research ethics: the committee chairman can make sure of credibility after gathering relative data when it raises a question of research cheating, improper behavior, or ethics provision.
2. Convening the committee: the chairman introduces a bill in a committee if it is verified.
3. A preliminary investigation: after passing through preexamination in 30 days, introduced bill is decided whether it violates or not.
4. Main investigation: if it is declared, a committee deliberates and resolves after going through examination in 60 days. Not only a committee can get advices from concerned department to invest but organize a special committee by experts of inside and outside society if needed. Vocation opportunities have to be given to an examinee during an inquiry.

5. Deciding: deliberation and resolution is effective by a majority of the current member in a committee.
6. Notifying to the committee: a chairman informs the deliberative result to the board of directors.

Article 5 (Council deciding and notice)
The board of directors decides a disciplinary measure through the deliberative result from the committee, and then notify to the person concerned. Depending on the situation, the result can be announced to external agencies or the petitioner.

Article 6 (Record and Proclamation)
The investigation must be recorded and stored, and the result has to be proclaimed.

Article 7 (Disciplinary measure)
① A disciplinary measure by the ethics committee obeys article 28, Chapter 8 of articles of society.
② The suspension of qualification from paragraph 2, article 28,
Chapter 8 means restriction of the following.
1. submission and publication to journal.
2. action as a board member of society.
3. authority and quotation of a paper.
4. other rights from the society.

Article 8 (Raising objection)
1. A disciplined member can raise objection by documents in 1 month from notice if he/she decides a disciplinary measure by the ethics committee is unfair.
2. After checking the feasibility of objection, a disciplinary measure can be reconsidered by article 4 in this document.

Article 9 (Identification protection)
1. The identification of a complainant for research cheating can't make public.
2. The identification of an examinee can't open until determining as research cheating.

Article 10 (Editing and ethics for examiners)
1. The examiner evaluates accurately a submitted manuscript requested by the editorial committee in the society by the stipulated time, and notifies a result to the editorial committee. If the content of a submitted manuscript is a different field to one's specialty, inform the editorial
committee immediately.
2. The examiner evaluates objectively a submitted manuscript without one's academic belief and relationship with authors. The manuscript can't be evaluated as rejection by a difference to one's view, interpretation without objective basis as well as can't be evaluated with unread properly.
3. The examiner should respect author's personality and independence as an expert and intellectual. Moreover, he/she realizes importance of trust and respect between authors. In the evaluation sheet, it is included with evaluation result and a part to make up with specific reasons. Polite, mild expressions should be used instead of belittled or improper words.
4. The secret of a paper to examine protected thoroughly. It is not recommended to show and discuss with others about the content of a manuscript besides asking for advice about evaluation. Quotation is not permitted without author's agreement before publishing.

Article 11 (Pledge of research ethics)
Submitting "Pledge of research ethics" is a duty to check contributor's compliance with the provision of research ethics.

Article 12 (Revision)
The revising of this provision is following the process of provision amendment on the society. Supplementary provision
This provision takes effect from the enacted date.
1. Revised provision (July 29, 2011) enacts in July 29, 2011.