Research Institute for Social Enterprise Corporation (RISE) is a professional research group that serves its purpose
to contribute to the promotion of social enterprises, and thus regularly publishing and issuing high quality academic
journals is the main purpose that RISE needs to follow. To coincide with such declared actions, RISE decided to
publish a professional academic journal for social enterprises, and named it as "Social Enterprises Studies."
In order to make a sincere academic development of social enterprises, there must be equal evaluations,
acknowledgements of the values, and sharing of the content in regards to the results of academic research for social
enterprises. To be able to reach such desired goals, establishing a set of code of ethics for authors, editors, and
examiners of "Social Enterprises Studies" to follow is necessary for RISE to announce its desired ethics level in writing
research papers and editing academic journals. Furthermore, it will serve as an important role to inform and warn
the researchers working for social enterprises for their full dedication towards their professional responsibilities.
Thus, it is highly recommendable that all related personnel understand the ethical standard RISE promotes in
"Research and Publishing Ethics for 'Social Enterprises Studies'" concerning the process of writing, examining, and
editing academic papers.
Code of Ethics: Author
- Article 1 (Reporting Research Results)
- 1. Author must precisely and objectively inform research content and its importance,
and should not discretionally change the research results. Also, one should do one's best to verify whether
the same content has already been presented or not.
- 2. Results that contain sufficient academic value and its supportive overall argument should be comprehensively
included in the research paper. In the case of submitting a research paper with identical conclusions with
another paper already published, the thesis to be submitted should have significant academic value in its new
arguments. If possible, presenting research results in several different papers should be avoided as it degrades
the value of the research papers.
- 3. Proper citations and references should be given if the author uses research apart from his or her own,
or uses research material, opinion, and research result of what he or she has published before.
- 4. Citations of an unpublished academic paper or a research plan, or of materials attained from personal
contact need consent from the researcher providing the information.
- 5. When citing works of others or referring to other ideas, it should be clear whether right citations are used
and if reference page is clearly stated. Such signs should be able to tell the readers which parts are clearly
cited and which parts are solely creative thoughts of the author him/herself.
- 6. If the author wants to use materials gathered by another personnel, it is the author's duty to clearly state and
name the very first researcher of the collected material.
- 7. It is the author's duty to notify "Social Enterprises Studies" if a critical error is found
after the publishing of the paper.
- 8. The author has the duty to clearly state the source of their research fund and the relationship with the
institution supporting the fund. If the characteristic or relationship with the institution or the supporter is
precise and is appropriately described, the specific name or title of the institution or the supporter does not
have to be mentioned.
- Article 2 (Publication Relations)
- 1. The author will only be responsible for the research they have contributed to or have done themselves,
and those will be recognized as accomplishments.
- 2. The lead author of the thesis paper should receive consent from all co-authors that they will be participating
as co-authors. The order in which the names of the author(s) and/or translator(s) appear in the academic
paper or other publishing achievement should not be reflected by their relative position or rank and should
only be listed in the degree of contribution in the research. It is recommended for the co-authors discuss within
themselves in choosing the order of appearance, but granting unjust right to be author whom did not
contribute in making the thesis or not granting the right to be author whom contributed in making
the thesis should is not permitted.
- 3. The author should state their position at that time of carrying out their research, and if there should be any
change in their position during the submission, should they be properly stated in the footnote.
- Article 3 (Submitting Academic Paper)
- 1. In the submission of a paper written by two or more authors, the authors should reach to
an agreement whether to submit or not.
- 2. Papers published in another academic journal, papers submitted in another academic journal being reviewed,
and papers finalized for publishing should not submit for "Social Enterprises Studies."
- 3. Papers being reviewed or papers finalized for publishing for "Social Enterprises Studies' should not be able to
submit in other academic journals. In case that should happen, they should withdraw their submission before
they are officially given a notice finalizing their publishing.
- 4. One should give one's utmost efforts to reflect in one's paper the suggestions of the editing staff and review
staff from the review process, and if one should not agree with the suggestions, one should notify the head of
editing staff the precise reasons and its basis why.
- 5. Research Institute for Social Enterprise Corporation and SK Center for Social Entrepreneurship jointly owns
the intellectual property right for the papers published in "Social Enterprises Studies." Therefore,
a written permission from the head of editing staff is necessary to publish it in another journal.
- Article 4 (Violation Behaviors)
- 1. The following acts are determined as violations of the code of ethics of the association:
The act of dismissing publishing ethics based on related laws, regulations, and social rules such as forgery,
falsification, plagiarism, unjust indication of authors of an academic paper ("Forgery" is falsely making up
data or research result that do not exist; "Falsification" is artificially manipulating research material, equipment,
and process, or discretionally deleting or modifying data to distort research content or result; "Plagiarism" is
an act of using other's ideas, research content, or result without legal consent or citation; "Unjust indication
of authors" is "not providing" the right to be author for the person who has rightfully contributed to the
research or the result, or "providing" the right to be stated as author as an appreciation or respect for those
who have not contributed.); the act of intentionally disrupting the investigation of oneself or other's illegal
actions stated above, or harming the informant; and actions that are far from the boundary of general
acceptance from the academics.
Code of Ethics: Editing Staff
- Article 4 (Responsibility of the Editing Staff)
- 1. Editing staff should hold full responsibility for determining the publishing of submitted papers,
and respect the author's personality and their independence as a scholar.
- Article 5 (Fairness in the Process of Editing)
- 1. The editing staff should not have any preconceptions towards the author's gender, age, and institutions they
belong to, and should not have any personal relationship involved. They should solely and strictly be based on
the quality of the paper and the rules for submission. If there should be a submission from an editing staff,
another editing staff should be in charge of the evaluation.
- Article 6 (Requesting Examiner)
- 1. The editing staff should request the evaluation of the thesis to an examiner who is professional in their field
and has ability to make a fair judgment. The editing staff can consult a third party who has professional
knowledge and has ability to make a fair judgment to get advice about the quality and precision of the thesis.
However, if it is evaluated as inappropriate for the academic journal, it will not be reviewed and sent back.
- Article 7 (Nondisclosure of Authors)
- 1. The editing staff holds no right to open the contents of the theses to the public other than to the
examiner before the publishing of the theses.
Code of Ethics: Examiner
- Article 8 (Deadline)
- 1. The examiner should evaluate the academic paper, requested from the editing staff/committee of the
academic journal, within a certain period of time, and should inform the evaluation result to the editing
staff/committee. If one thinks they are inappropriate, one should promptly notify the editing staff/committee.
- Article 9 (Justice in Reviewing)
- 1. The examiner should hold high scientific and academic standards while evaluating, and should maintain
objectivity and justice. The examiner should not force personal academic principle or be swayed by
personal relationship with the author.
- 2. The examiner should not eliminate academic papers which lack sufficient evident. A detailed explanation
should be noted in the evaluation paper expressing the examiner's opinion about the thesis and explaining
where the thesis needs improvements.
- 3. The examiner should closely pay attention to whether importantly related research results and materials are
precisely cited in the submitted paper. By any chance will the thesis in deliberation be very similar to another
thesis already published in the academic journal, the examiner should give detailed notice to
the head of editing staff.
- Article 10 (Maintenance of Secret)
- 1. The examiner should keep secret about the thesis they are examining.
It is not favorable to show or discuss about the thesis with another personnel unless a special advice is needed.
Also, one should not cite the thesis without author's consent before the publishing of academic journal
that contains the thesis.
and Actions for Violations in the Code of Ethics
- Article 11 (Reporting Violation)
- 1. One has the right to anonymously notify the head of editing staff of "Social Enterprises Studies" if one finds
violation in papers published in "Social Enterprises Studies." The head of editing staff holds a duty to
protect the reporter's identity.
- Article 12 (Forming a Deliberation Board)
- 1. When a violation of the code of ethics is reported, the head of editing staff should organize a deliberation
committee to take reasonable actions regarding the seriousness of the violation.
- 2. The head of editing staff will serve as the chairman of the deliberation committee, and the chairman will
appoint 6 deliberation members who can be neutral and fair during the deliberation. The chairman serves the
right to protect the anonymity of the members.
- Article 13 (The Right to Summon)
- 1. The deliberation chairman will be given the right to summon, in writing, the authors of academic papers who
have been reported for violating the code of ethics.
- Article 14 (Action Taken for the Result of Discussion)
- 1. Whether there was a violation in the code of ethics is determined when 5 or more members reach an
agreement from the total of 7 deliberation members including the deliberation chairman. The academic paper
determined as violating research ethics will not be allowed to be published in "Social Enterprises Studies."
For those which have already been published, they will be expunged from the research thesis list of "Social
Enterprises Studies," and RISE will notify it to the members and academic institutions. To the author who has
violated research ethics will be given a penalty for three years banning the right to publish in
"Social Enterprises Studies."
Miscellaneous Code of Ethics
- Article 1 (etc.)
- 1. Without further ado, other undecided regulations are to be judged depending on related laws,
regulations, and social rules.
- Regulation enforced 1 Mar. 2008.
Regulation enforced 15 Jul. 2013.
Regulation enforced 31 Mar. 2014