Submit your part

​Peer reviewers of this publication receive 20% discount on registration fees for 4 international scientific conferences annually:

Chapters are submitted on the website – email submissions are not accepted.

Each chapter is reviewed in a double-blind peer review process. The double-blind review process ensure that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during the peer review process. Authors do not know who conducted their reviews, reviewers do not know whose chapter they are reviewing.

Peer reviewers are pre-registered on the website. At the beginning of the review period, peer reviewers are requested to confirm that they are available to review the chapters.

Peer reviewers complete their review over the form which involves both multiple-choice selects and free-form comment assessments.

Peer reviewers should be prepared to provide some detail, particularly for negative evaluations. Reviewers can provide feedback for the authors, and also private feedback for the editors. Peer reviewers provide a critical assessment of the research, and may recommend improvements. Although the author may choose not to take this advice, it is highly recommended that the author address any issues, explaining why their research process or conclusions are correct.

Authors are notified by email if their chapter has been accepted.

Peer reviewers should be aware that the MINIMUM time required to review a chapter is at least 2 hours and significantly more time is common in order to do them justice. Peer reviewers should be prepared to provide some detail, particularly for negative evaluations.

Peer review of full chapters is NOT about correcting grammar, spelling, poorly written references. It is about reviewing the academic validity and relevance of the chapter! As a reviewer, if you find yourself correcting spelling, you are probably becoming bogged down in the detail, when you are meant to be assessing the “big picture”!

Full chapters are evaluated against the following criteria:

The title, abstract and keywords must accurately reflect the chapter’s contents.

The research must be relevant to the monograph theme/s.

The research methodology must be sound.

The chapter must be well-structured and clearly written.

References must be relevant and accurate.

MODERN MANAGEMENT TOOLS AND ECONOMY OF TOURISM SECTOR IN PRESENT ERABELGRADE

Best Chapter Award: International Thematic Monograph: Modern Management Tools and Economy of Tourism Sector in Present Era

Our principles for integrity, transparency, and responsible publishing — for authors, reviewers, and editors.

These instructions will ensure we have everything required so your submitted work can move through peer review, production and publication smoothly. Please take the time to read and follow them as closely as possible, as doing so will ensure your chapter matches the ethical requirements.

The ethic statements given here are based on Elsevier policy according to Publishing Ethics Resource Kit for publishing ethics and malpractice statement, the Cambridge journals ethical standards, COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, etc.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publisher concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Chapter

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In case there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the chapter, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also inform the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published chapter of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers who have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts should decline the invitation to review.

Confidentiality

Editor and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in editor’s own research without the author’s explicit written consent.
The publisher shall guarantee the high technical and professional quality of the publications and that good practice and ethical standards are maintained. If any of the above mentioned unethical behaviors are identified, an investigation will be initiated and pertinent actions will be taken. For more information about best publishing ethical behaviors, authors are referred to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines
International Thematic Monograph: Modern management tools and economy of tourism sector in present era (ITM) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.