Редакция саясаты

Журнал тақырыбы

The main subject area of the journal is forestry, technologies and machines of forestry, problems of ecology and rational nature management (mainly forestry).

Бөлімдер мен бағыттар

FORESTRY

Scientific specialties in which scientific articles are published:

4.1. Agronomy, forestry and water management

4.1.2. Plant breeding, seed production and biotechnology (Agricultural Biological) [forestry topics]

4.1.6. Forestry, forestry, forest crops, agroforestry, landscaping, forest pyrology and taxation (Agricultural Biological Technical)

TECHNOLOGIES AND MACHINES OF FORESTRY

Scientific specialties in which scientific articles are published:

4.3. Agroengineering and food technologies

4.3.4. Technologies, machinery and equipment for forestry and wood processing (Technical Biological)

PROBLEMS OF ECOLOGY AND RATIONAL NATURE MANAGEMENT

Scientific specialties in which scientific articles are published:

1.6. Earth and Environmental Sciences -

1.6.19. Aerospace exploration of the Earth, photogrammetry;

1.6.21. Geoecology

Даты. События. Комментарии

Проблемы экологии и рационального природопользования. Биотехнологии

Рецензиялау

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal are subject to mandatory review.

1. The review of articles is carried out by members of the editorial board and the editorial board, as well as invited reviewers – leading experts in the relevant industry in Russia and other countries. The decision on the selection of a reviewer for the examination of the article is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief. The review period is 2-4 weeks, but it can be extended at the request of the reviewer.
2. Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review in case of an obvious conflict of interest affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of the review of the manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations on the further fate of the article (each decision of the reviewer is justified):

                 o the article is recommended for publication in this form;

                 o the article is recommended for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer;

                 o the article needs additional review by another specialist;

                 o the article cannot be published in the journal.

3. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the editorial board of the journal sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them (partially or completely). The revision of the article should not take more than 2 months from the date of sending an e-mail to the authors about the need to make changes. The article revised by the author is re-sent for review.
4. If the authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the editorial board in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review, even if there is no information from the authors refusing to finalize the article, the editorial board removes it from the register. In such situations, the authors are notified of the withdrawal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the deadline for revision.
5. If the author and reviewers have unresolved contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.
6. The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for reconsideration. A notification of refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
7. After the editorial board of the journal decides to publish the article, the editorial board informs the author about it and specifies the publication dates.
8. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of the article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

      9. Reviews are posted on the E-library website in closed mode with the consent of the reviewers and are provided              upon request to the Ministry of Education and Science and the Higher Attestation Commission.

Кезеңділігі

Is issued 4 times a year

Еркін қолжетімділік саясаты

Статьи этого журнала доступны всем желающим с момента публикации, что обеспечивает свободный открытый доступ к результатам исследований.

Periodicity

Is issued 4 times a year

Code of Ethics

THE AUTHOR'S CODE OF ETHICS

1) the author who submitted the manuscript of the article to the editorial office assumes responsibility for the novelty, reliability of the results of scientific research, for the reliability of contact information, agrees to the publishing license agreement;

2) copyright is reserved for the authors: the article accepted for publication is placed in the public domain;

3) the article should contain only original material reflecting the results of completed research by the authors, which have not been published or transferred to other editions; it is made according to generally accepted standards of scientific reporting (see the structure of the article);

4) it is allowed to publish the same article in other publications in case of its translation into another language only with the consent of the authors and publishers for re-publication and with a mandatory reference to the first edition;

5) when quoting works and/or fragments of text by other authors, they should be decorated with appropriate references to published works;

6) the editorial board may reject an article that violates the intellectual rights of third parties, the norms of scientific ethics or contains information of limited access, with notification to the authors and the organization that sent the article;

7) the authors should give an objective assessment of the state of the problem being solved, based on the analysis of previous publications, describe the methodology of work, the reliability of the results obtained, provide an accurate description of the proposed ways to solve the tasks and show the significance of the study;

8) a series of articles in which the results of a comprehensive study are published should be organized in such a way that the reader can get an exhaustive understanding of both the structure of the study as a whole and each of its aspects covered in the corresponding article;

9) authors must eliminate comments on the article made by the editorial board and/or reviewers in good faith and within the time limits set by the editorial board. If they disagree with the opinion of the reviewers, they give reasonable objections to the substance of the reviewer's comments;

10) if the analysis of the problem is based on confidential information (personal communication, reviewing of manuscripts, grants, etc.), then this information cannot be published without the consent of the persons who are its sources;

11) the author may inform the editorial board about conflicts of interest, including administrative, research and financial, related to his work. The editorial board should take this information into account when organizing the review and deciding on the publication of the relevant manuscript;

12) the author knows that publishing someone else's manuscript (part of it) under his own name, quoting or retelling its contents without reference to the source of borrowing, as well as other forms of misappropriation of the results of other people's research are considered plagiarism. Plagiarism in any form contradicts the norms of scientific ethics and is unacceptable;

13) the authors, at the end of the article, as a rule, express gratitude to all those who have contributed to the work in one way or another, but do not meet the criteria of authorship (for example, persons who provided purely technical assistance, assistance in writing the article, or managers who provided only general support). Financial and material support is noted;

14) at the end of the manuscript, the co-authors indicate the actual contribution of each co-author to the work (this, in particular, must be indicated in the documents when defending dissertations).

THE EDITORIAL BOARD'S CODE OF ETHICS

The editorial board assists the authors in improving the quality of the works submitted to the editorial board of the journal through scientific review and literary editing of articles.

The editorial board undertakes to make fair and impartial decisions, independent of commercial interests, and to organize an objective review process.

Editorial Board:

1) respects the honor and dignity of the authors, conducts correspondence correctly, ensuring goodwill, helping the authors, if necessary, to select a profile magazine;

2) maintains confidentiality by not disclosing information about the manuscript submitted to the editorial board of the journal to third parties, with the exception of reviewers. Correspondence with the author is confidential, as well as the content of negative reviews, which are communicated only to the author;

3) reviews all manuscripts submitted for publication without prejudice to their authors and does not disclose information about the manuscripts received by the editorial board to anyone, except for reviewers and editorial staff;

4) appoints a "blind" review to ensure an impartial review of the manuscript;

5) reviews are a confidential document used in the editorial board's decision to publish an article. When deciding on publication, the editorial board is guided by the peer reviewers' expert assessment, the reliability of the data presented and the scientific significance of the work under consideration;

6) ensures that reviewers are aware of the review rules;

7) organizes peer review aimed at the rapid publication of high-quality research while maintaining a rigorous but benevolent peer review process. Materials rejected as a result of the detection of insufficiency of the conducted research or lack of relevance in the review process are returned within a month;

8) adopts an editorial policy that ensures maximum transparency and full accountability to the author; if the review and review process takes longer, the authors are notified about it by e-mail;

9) protects the integrity of publications, making corrections if necessary, and issues reasonable refusals to those whose manuscripts do not comply with the "Code of Ethics of Scientific Publications";

10) protects the rights of third parties from unauthorized use of materials (plagiarism) – persons convicted of plagiarism are deprived of the opportunity to publish in the journal. The editorial board of the journal may make public on its pages the cases of plagiarism that have become known to it;

11) regulates editorial conflicts of interest, and take into account information received from the author about conflicts of interest, including administrative, research and financial, related to his work when organizing a review and deciding on the publication of the relevant manuscript.

12) in case of rejection of the manuscript or sending it for revision, the editorial board submits to the authors the reasons for its decision;

13) publishes an error message signed by the persons who discovered it, if sufficient evidence of the inaccuracy of the published materials is found;

14) does not allow materials with incorrect links and incorrect borrowings to be printed.