Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The sole purpose of JSAS is to be a prestigious journal which contributes to scientific knowledge. In order to keep this purpose, JSAS, adopts and follows the publication policies of world’s prestigious scientific journals. All original and qualified works which may contribute to the scientific knowledge, are evaluated through a rigorous editorial and peer review process. Hereby, JSAS is an international, peer reviewed and scientific journal. It strictly depends on the scientific principles, rules and ethical framework that are required to this qualification.

JSAS is published as four issues per year, March, June, September and December and all publication policies and processes are conducted according to the international standards. JSAS accepts and publishes the research articles in the fields of economics, political economy, fiscal economics, applied economics, business economics, labour economics and econometrics.  JSAS, without depending on any institution or organization, is a non-profit journal that has an International Editorial Board specialist on their fields. All "Publication Process" and "Writing Guidelines" are explained in the related title and it is expected from authors to Show a complete match to the rules. JSAS is an open Access journal beyond its printed version.

Papers which are inappropriate to its scientific purpose, scope and fields are kindly rejected.

Any issue of JSAS welcomes all the subjects mentioned above. However, due to the exceptional decision of Editor or suggestions of Field Editors, JSAS publishes special issues based on a specific subject. The decision of publishing a special issue is given 6 months in advance and is announced to the science society to call for papers. JEPE does not accept any work which was previously published or submitted for publication elsewhere.

JSAS does accept any kind of work which is original and appropriate to the scientific ethic in its area of interest and holds all the requirements under the "Author Guidelines". JSAS can use all technics in order to prevent any attempt to plagiarism. JSAS rejects aforementioned work when any attempt to plagiarism is found and stops immediately and indefinitely connection with the author. Besides all the original articles, JSAS accepts and publishes Publicity Articles, Letter to the Editor, Conference Reports and Book Critics.

JSAS expects from all the works to follow the writing guidelines. All of them is mentioned below and JSAS expects all to be carefully read and perfectly carried out. JSAS also expects from authors to attach below mentioned documents (these documents should be printed out from the system, filled by authors’ hand writing and then signed and scanned)for their work:

1. Article and cover: Article should not contain any information(name, address, institution, e-mail address) about author(s). Besides, full article should be prepared according to the below mentioned writing guidelines and page numbers should not be given. Cover page should contain the title of article, information about the author(s)(if there is more than one author, for each of them-name, surname, title, institution, e-mail and address info, responsible author etc. should also be stated), abstract, key words and JEL codes. All the files should be sent in Word format. (Example: Full Manuscript, Cover Page)

2. Conflict of Interest Statement: For each article sent to JEPE, authors(for more than one author, the responsible author) are supposed to send a signed declaration in JPEG format in order to show there is not any conflict of interest between the institution/organization they work for and JSAS. (Please click here for the document.)

3. Declaration of originality: Author(or responsible author) should prepare a signed declaration in JPEG format in order to show that the proposed work did not publish anywhere before, did not send anywhere in order to be evaluated, so that all work  submitted must be author’s own work based on scientific ethic and must not be plagiarized from other sources. (Please click here for the document)

4. The data set: In all applied works, all the data in Excel file and the links of these resources in Word file should be send and also both of them together should be sent in Zip format. (click here for an example) - (click here for an .zip file).

5. Table, graphs and supplementary materials: All tables, graphs, figures, maps and other visual materials that stated in the article should be given in "a separate Word file". This separate file should also contain all the supplementary materials at the end of the article. (Click here for an example)

6.Copyright transfer: An article that was decided to publish, when it is in publishing process, a signed document in JPEG format is asked from the author to transfer the copyright. (Click here for an example)

An article which does not contain these supplementary files(excluding the document number 6. This document is requested from an accepted article when it is going to be published.), can not be evaluated and the author should correct deficiencies with JEPE Secretariat. When articles and supplementary materials are completed, the work is sent to the Editor.

JSAS publishes full articles either in English.


Section Policies

Front Matter

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

From The Editor

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Conference Notes

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Doctoral Thesis Summary

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Master Thesis Summary

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

According to the article subject and suitability to the JEL codes, two referees from the referee pool are specified. Referee assigned to an article is chosen from the referees who has the same academic or higher academic titles of the author. The identity of referee and author are never explained within any of the processes. Referees can give the decision as "accept", "reject" or "revision". When two referees disagree, the decision for applying to a third referee is depended to the Editor.

After receiving the article, a Referee has maximum six weeks of time in order to prepare the evaluation reports. Unless some exceptional cases this time schedule can not be exceeded. All kind of delays based on the exceptional cases, Referees can take 2 weeks of additional time. If the evaluation report is not prepared after the end of this additional period, the article is withdrawn from the referee and will be sent to other referees.

All referees evaluate an article according to its ethic rules, scientific quality, contribution to the literature, methodology, and writing style and language. At the same time every referee has right to control the article for plagiarism.

Editor, without an exceptional case, bases on the referee evaluation reports and decisions for the publication of the article.

The disputes between referee and the author, without giving out their identities, are conducted through Editor and/or Field Editor. Editor and/or Field Editor can participate to the scientific content of the disputes.

Scientists that are asked for being a referee for an article, based on the reasonable excuses that are given to the Editor, can be withdrawn from refereeing process within one week after the article have been received. When editor and/or field editor think that a referee does not accord to JSAS processes and/or they are convinced that the referee violates the discipline, they can regrettably break all the connection with the referee.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.



This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...



It is a process starts from the first acceptance of the article, the auditing of the article, article suitability to JSAS rules and finishes by complementing all the other documents beyond the article. If an article is not proper to the rules, Secretariat is responsible to contact kindly with the author in order to correct the deficiencies. An article that is completed properly is delivered to the Editor within one week. The Secretariat takes an accepted article in publishing queue with Copyright transfer form, and then send the article that is in the last stage of its publishing process to the Editor with a publishing reference number. If the Secretariat coincidentally determines plagiarism, informs immediately the Editor and the article is directly rejected. The Secretariat is only responsible to refuse the articles in plagiarism by informing the Editor. (secretarial@ksplibrary.org)


Editors and Field Editors

After correcting the deficiencies in the article, article is transferred to the Editor and then the Editor evaluates the article if there is plagiarism and whether or not it suits to JSAS publishing area and policies. If the article is evaluated positively, the article is sent to the field Editors with JEL codes. The Editor and the Field Editor, in consensus, specify two referees in order to evaluate the article. The identity of referees is only known by Editor and Field Editor and do not declare to the third persons. An article, if it is not found suitable for JSAS, could be rejected from Editor or Field Editor without sending to the referees. Editor is fully responsible about the publishing process of the articles. However, beyond some exceptional circumstances, JSAS Editor prefers being in line with the decision of referees for publication as a policy. (jsas@ksplibrary.org)


Publication Process

There are four stages for an article that is sent for publishing to JSAS: Secretariat, Editor, Field Editors and Referee Evaluation. The authors can not contact to the referee at all. For all other kinds of communication:  secretarial@ksplibrary.orgjsas@ksplibrary.org and for each field editor, communication can be made through the e-mail addresses that is given by JSAS.

An article uploaded to the system through OJS, firstly arrives to JSAS Secretariat. At that stage, the article is controlled to the eligibility of general writing and reference rules, page lay-out/size, adjustments as tables and graphics, and whether all supplementary documents attached to the article is perfectly completed or not. When all the rules under the section "Author Guidelines" are fulfilled, the article is sent to the editor latest one week of time. If there are deficiencies, Secretariat can not send the article to the Editor unless it is fully completed and stays in connection with the author to correct the deficiencies. Expected documents and adjustments at the stage of Secretariat are completed with the kind warnings and guidance of the Secretariat. Secretariat does not have an authority to refuse the article, but they are authorized not to transfer the article to the editor unless the deficiencies are completed.

Second stage: Perfectly completed articles that was sent to the Secretariat (latest within one week) and the article corrected for the deficiencies are delivered to Editor. The article and its appendices are controlled again. Article is controlled for plagiarism by the editor. The subject and content of the article based on the suitability to JSAS are reviewed. Articles that fit for the content and policy of JSAS and successfully passed from plagiarism test are sent to JSAS field editors that are chosen to JEL codes. Any article that has plagiarism in some way or some degree is definitely refused; no more articles from the corresponding author are never accepted and JSAS indefinitely stops the communication with the corresponding author. Editor review is completed one week of time at most and the article is sent to the field editor.

At third stage, the field Editor review the article last time after all the controls done in the first two stages. Any kind of problems found by the field editor is corrected in connection with the author. Fully completed article is sent within one week to two referees (for double-peer reviewing) that fit to JEL codes in accordance with the subject of the article in order to evaluate the article scientifically. Any information about the authors to the referees or about the referees to the authors can not given. Fully completed article according to JSAS policies, fields and rules is ready for the refereeing stage within 3 weeks.

As a final stage, the article is sent to the double-blind referees and they have six weeks of time in order to analyse and write their report. A referee, who does not write the report in six weeks of time, is taken away automatically from the article and its contribution is ended. A referee who can not complete its report due to some reasonable excuses, could have additional 2 weeks of time by informing Editor. The referee can reject the article, request some revision or accept it. The referee delivers its report to the Field Editor and then the Field Editor delivers the report and the final decision to the author and editor as soon as possible.

The author has two weeks of time when he is asked to make some corrections by the referee. If referees want to see the corrected article again, the corrected article is sent to the referee by the field editor and the referee controls all the corrections within two weeks and gets the final outcome. If referee comes through the conclusion that the points he/she mentioned in his/her report is not evaluated carefully by the author, the referee prepares an additional reporting order to deliver to field editor. This additional report is immediately delivered to the author and the author is expected to finish all corrections and adjustments within one week. Referee can write a report five times to ask for corrections and/or adjustments about the article. Communication is always made through corresponding field editor. Referee has to give its final decision by the third and final report and without asking a new correction at that time it is declared that the article is accepted or rejected. All of these debates about the article can continue maximum one year. If the decision of one of the blind referee is issuable and non-issuable from the second referee, the article is sent to third referee and this referee is expected to write a report and give his/her decision within 4 weeks. All stages and processes that first two referees have are also valid for the third referee.


Suggestions for Authors

Please try to complete all requested documents and writing rules for delivering an article. This helps you both by speeding up the evaluation process of the article and provides convenience for publication. Every evaluation process (secretariat, editor, field editor) of the article please do not hesitate to contact. You can contact with the corresponding person by his/her JSAS e-mail address. If article has an history (a conference note, it is turned into an article after proceeding in a conference, article is prepared to show the outcomes of a research Project or generated from a thesis work, etc…), please declare this situation with a postscript. If you do not get any feedback from the Editor about your article within six weeks, you can contact immediately. We kindly suggest to the experienced authors to read all the directives carefully and applying them as it is stated. You have right of defense to reply the comments coming from Editor or Referee and the comments are groundless/unnecessary. You can write your defencs about the article and when you send it to the Editor, your defense is delivered to Referees and the reply of the referee will be waiting. This reply is also transferred to the author and at the end of these correspondences a final decision is given. Debates between author and editor (through the opinions of Referee) can be sustained at most two years and is ended based on the debates. Authors as long as following the scientific methods and providing scientific proofs are free to put forward every kind of idea. Responsibility of the ideas belongs to the author, and it does not reflect the opinions of JSAS. JSAS is very sensitive about plagiarism. Even in the smallest indication of plagiarism, JSAS indefinitely stops all the connection with the author and rejects any article that has the name of the author(s) even in the Secretariat stage.


Writing Rules

JSAS follows APA format as citation system. (Please click for APA examples.)

For all the writing rules "Annotated Sample Manuscript" can refer to the year.

JSAS has 40 pages of limit for an article. References are included in this limitation but this limitation can be exceeded with possible appendices.

Full articles should be written in Word Format, font type as Times New Roman, size 11 points font with single spaced lines. In a Word document, page margins from left and right should be 4,5 cm for top margin, 3 cm for bottom margin. There is no space among the paragraphs. Indent should be “0,5 cm” in the first line of the paragraphs. Title of the article should be written in Times New Roman size 16 point as centered. All text, excluding tables, equation, graphs and maps should be justified.

Article should contain a short abstract that includes minimum 100 words and maximum 300 words. Abstract should be in Times New Roman size 10 point. The title of the article should be clear, explicit, original and represent the content of the article. In accordance with the title, 3-5 JEL codes and 3-5 key words should be given.

References should be written in Times New Roman 10 points with single spaced lines. Indent should be “0,5 cm” in the first line of every references. There should not be any space or blank line among the references. APA rules are valid for giving references and reference information. (Click here for APA examples.)

Footnotes should not be given within the full text, if it is needed to do, this should be written as an end-not before the references in Times New Roman 10 points with single spaced line without an indent.

Starting from the introduction all the titles in the article should be numerated with Arabic figures (1,2,3, etc.). Numerated first level-heads should be written Times New Roman 14 points in bold with indent 0,5 cm. All other subheadings (1.1. or 1.1.2 etc.) should be Times New Roman 12 points in italics-normal with 0,5 cm. indent. Although references are not numerated, the title of References should be in font size 14, in bold. For all the titles in the text only the first letter of the word should be upper-case letter, and the rest should be lower- case letter.

Tables are titled and numerated sequentially, if any explanation or referencing are needed, it should be mentioned under the table. Tables should be prepared in Excel format and then placed at the relevant part of the article. Tables are to be prepared in Times New Roman 11 points with single space line without any indent. Number of the tables should be written in bold with upper-case letters, and only the first letters of the title with upper-case letters in italics. Explanations should be written in Times New Roman in 10 points with single spaced line without any indent. Graphics are also numerated sequentially and titled. The number and the title of the graphics should be positioned under the graphic area. Graphics and tables can not be positioned vertically, they can be placed horizontally on the page (full page and the writing rules should remain same) that has only the graphic and the table.

If citation from the resource is too long, it should be written as a separate paragraph using with quotation marks in Times New Roman in 10 points. Long quotation can be described as citation of 5 and more than 5 lines from the original resource.

All itemizations about one topic should be written that every item at one line without any space or blank among the lines but with 0.5 cm indents. A number, letter or bullet can be used by each item based on the authors’ wish.

Equations must be prepared by using "Word’s Equation Editor" and each equation should be numerated. Equations must be written from the paragraph indent and indent must be from the inside, and the number of the equations must be aligned to the right hand side of the page and end of line in parenthesis.

The authors’ due to the contributions to the article can be given under the title of "Thanks" before References section.

Please check Sample Manuscript where all the writing rules can be found. (Click here for Sample Manuscript)

Especially for an applied article, the articles of last 3 years that is written in the relevant JEL codes should be seen and if needed, they should be cited. It is kindly recommended that at least 30% percentage of the number of total cited sources should be taken the articles which covered by SSCI-Index.

Authors, who want to publish their articles, should send their articles digitally on JSAS web-page. Any other delivery forms does not take into consideration.

Please do not hesitate to contact jsas@ksplibrary.org (secretarial@ksplibrary.org) or for all issues about publication process and before.


Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice

KSP Journals (Journals of Economics and Political Economy – JEPE; Journal of Economics Library – JEL; Turkish Economic Review – TER; Journal of Economics Bibliography – JEB; Journal of Economic and Social Thought – JEST; Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences – JSAS) is a double-blind, peer-reviewed publications. Since inception, the KSP Journals has been committed to delivering high quality research output and upholding high standards with respect to publication ethics and publication malpractice. In line with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the KSP Journals has developed the following criteria for all of the relevant parties involved in the entire publication process.

A. Our Ethical Guidelines

   For the Editor:

1. The Editor shall not discriminate against any author based on race, religion, gender, age, ethnicity, political belief, sexual orientation, country of origin, etc.

2. The Editor shall remain committed to ensuring that all manuscripts are evaluated fairly and objectively; thus, the decision to accept or reject a manuscript shall be based solely on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the KSP Journals.

3. In publishing special issues, the Editor shall keep in mind that the size of the contents, the number of papers, and their ratio to notes may be different from those of regular issues. Nonetheless, the review and revision process for all special issues will ensure that all submissions and associated materials are evaluated fairly and objectively, and the decision to accept or reject will be based solely on academic standards.

4. The Editor shall not disclose any information about any manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewer, potential reviewer, arbiter, or editorial advisors.

5. For the smooth functioning of the KSP Journals, in some exceptional situations, the Editor may make discretionary decisions, but in doing so, shall not deviate from the stated policy of transparency, fairness, and impartiality.

6. The Editor shall be ethically obligated to pursue any and all cases of alleged misconduct on the part of the author(s) or reviewer(s). The Editor shall (a) make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper and thorough investigation is conducted and (b) make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.

7. Editor, tüm yazıları iThanticate ve Grammerly altyapıları üzerinden intihal denetimine tabi tutar. Editör, tespit ettiği intihal girişimlerini web sayfasından ilan eder. Yayın sürecinin diğer aşamalarında da tespit edilen intihal girişimleri Editör tarafından web sayfasından ilan edilir.

   For the Reviewers:

1. Reviewers shall be objective and constructive in their evaluation of all manuscripts and return reviews within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame.

2. Reviewers shall respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review during or after the peer-review process.

3. Reviewers shall notify the Editor immediately of any misconduct on the part of any author(s) (e.g. plagiarism, tempering of data, or any other unethical activities).

4. Once a reviewer declares any potentially conflicting or competing interests (which may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, religious, etc.), the reviewer shall be excused from reviewing any manuscript(s) of relevant interest.

   For the Authors:

1. Authors shall take public responsibility for the content of their manuscript by submitting only original and unpublished works, by citing content reproduced from other sources, and by obtaining permission to reproduce content from other sources when applicable.

2. Authors shall confirm the authenticity of data used in the study and shall be obligated to provide the entire set of raw data to the editorial office for verification upon request.

3. Authors shall confirm that the manuscript has not been submitted simultaneously to any other publishing outlet.

4. Co-authors shall provide significant contributions in the data collection and/or writing process of an original manuscript.

5. Corresponding authors shall maintain consistent communication with all co-authors and shall be responsible for ensuring that all authors read and approve the final version of the manuscript.

6. Authors shall identify all funding sources pertaining to the research reported in the manuscript with written acknowledgement immediately following the conclusion of the related paper.

7. Authors shall ensure that studies involving human or animal subjects are carried out according to the relevant institutional, local, and internationally accepted guidelines (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of Laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals), shall provide assurances that all research has been approved by an appropriate body (e.g. research ethics committee, institutional review board) where one exists, shall obtain written informed consent for publication from appropriate individuals, and shall protect the confidentiality of individual information obtained in the course of research.

8. Authors shall notify the managing editor or publisher promptly of any errors, inaccurate or misleading statements relative to one’s publication and shall make correction(s) with due prominence either by publishing an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or by withdrawing the paper.

9. Authors shall declare any potentially conflicting or competing interest that could be considered or viewed as exerting undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process.

   For the Publisher:

1. KSP Journals shall ensure that the JEPE, TER, JEST and JSAS publication process shall always remain sound and solid and shall comply with the standards outlined above.

B. Our Policy Regarding Malpractice

1. As soon as any alleged misconduct or unethical behaviour on the part of any author(s) or reviewer(s) comes to the attention of the editorial office, the Editor shall immediately begin a proper and thorough investigation. The accused shall be given an adequate opportunity to defend his/her actions and explain his/her position. Based on the available evidence, if it is ascertained that the breach is minor, the Editor shall give to the accused a written stern warning not to repeat the infraction in the future.

2. However, if the breach is determined to be of a serious nature, then the Editor shall inform the editorial advisors within the KSP Journals and a proper and thorough investigation will commence. The accused shall be given an adequate opportunity to respond to any allegation(s) of wrong doing. Based on available evidence, if the accused is found to be guilty of misconduct, then, in addition to a stern warning note, the employer of the accused shall be notified about the incident and/or the wrongdoer shall be permanently placed on a blacklist with regard to the KSP Journals.

3. Alternatively, in the event that the available evidence does not lead to a finding of wrongdoing, the accused will be notified in writing of the conclusion of the investigation.

4. In dealing with ethical breach, the KSP Journals shall not discriminate against any accused based on race, religion, gender, age, ethnicity, political belief, sexual orientation, country of origin, etc. All allegations shall be taken seriously and treated in the same manner until a final decision or definitive conclusion is reached.

5. The investigation process shall be carried out in such a way that details of the incident do not spread beyond those individuals with a need to know.



Creative Commons License
This article licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license