Ethics and Policies

Peer Review & Publication

The manuscript evaluation and publication process of Golden Light Publishing® journals are as follows:

Pre-processing. All submissions will be initially assessed by the editor or an external expert assigned by the editor for suitability to the journal. The topic considered, format, and language of the submission are examined in terms of technical requirements and the journal's scope. For manuscripts that do not meet the requirements, the Editor requests revision from the authors. If the authors do not respond to the revision request within the time allowed, the article is deemed to have been withdrawn.

Referee evaluation. The manuscript evaluation process uses a double-blind peer-review system, in which the editor assigns two external independent referees to the submission. The editor may appoint a third (or more) reviewer when necessary.

The result of the evaluation can be rejection, revision, or acceptance. If the manuscript is rejected in line with the majority of the referees' opinions, the process is terminated, and the manuscript is rejected. Suppose corrections are necessary or there are some points to be highlighted/clarified. In that case, the author is requested to revise the manuscript within a reasonable time, taking into account the workload of the revision request in line with the referees' comments. If the article has been accepted by all referees, the editing stage is started. It is noted that the editor is responsible for the final decision regarding accepting or rejecting submissions.

Policy on Published Conference Proceedings. We welcome papers that expand on conference proceedings. To qualify, submissions must demonstrate significant expansion, providing at least 35% new material beyond the conference paper. Such expansion may include additional data analysis, an extended literature review, or novel interpretations. Authors should clearly cite the original conference paper and indicate its differences. They must confirm that no conflicting copyright applies. All conference-derived manuscripts undergo the journal’s standard peer review process, ensuring the same level of scrutiny as any original research.

Article editing and proofreading.  After acceptance, the manuscript will be sent to production for editing. When editing is completed, the corresponding author will receive the uncorrected proof of the manuscript for proofreading. The purpose of proofreading is to check for typesetting or conversion errors and the completeness and accuracy of the text, tables, and figures. Substantial changes in content, e.g., new results, corrected values, title, and authorship, are not allowed without the approval of the editor. Authors who do not respond within the time allowed are considered to have withdrawn their submissions. When the proofreading is ready for the author's check, the corresponding author is also requested to provide a written statement declaring permission for the manuscript to be published in the journal on behalf of all authors.

Publication. Volume, issue, and page numbers are assigned to the article, and the final Version of Record is published online. After publication, substantive changes will not be made silently. Any necessary correction, expression of concern, retraction, withdrawal, or removal will be handled transparently in accordance with the journal’s Corrections, Retractions, Expressions of Concern and Post-publication Discussion Policy.

Complaints and Appeals

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) is committed to addressing complaints and appeals fairly, transparently, confidentially, and without undue delay. Complaints and appeals will be handled in accordance with the journal’s policies ... Show all

Peer Review & Publication

The manuscript evaluation and publication process of Golden Light Publishing® journals are as follows:

Pre-processing. All submissions will be initially assessed by the editor or an external expert assigned by the editor for suitability to the journal. The topic considered, format, and language of the submission are examined in terms of technical requirements and the journal's scope. For manuscripts that do not meet the requirements, the Editor requests revision from the authors. If the authors do not respond to the revision request within the time allowed, the article is deemed to have been withdrawn.

Referee evaluation. The manuscript evaluation process uses a double-blind peer-review system, in which the editor assigns two external independent referees to the submission. The editor may appoint a third (or more) reviewer when necessary.

The result of the evaluation can be rejection, revision, or acceptance. If the manuscript is rejected in line with the majority of the referees' opinions, the process is terminated, and the manuscript is rejected. Suppose corrections are necessary or there are some points to be highlighted/clarified. In that case, the author is requested to revise the manuscript within a reasonable time, taking into account the workload of the revision request in line with the referees' comments. If the article has been accepted by all referees, the editing stage is started. It is noted that the editor is responsible for the final decision regarding accepting or rejecting submissions.

Policy on Published Conference Proceedings. We welcome papers that expand on conference proceedings. To qualify, submissions must demonstrate significant expansion, providing at least 35% new material beyond the conference paper. Such expansion may include additional data analysis, an extended literature review, or novel interpretations. Authors should clearly cite the original conference paper and indicate its differences. They must confirm that no conflicting copyright applies. All conference-derived manuscripts undergo the journal’s standard peer review process, ensuring the same level of scrutiny as any original research.

Article editing and proofreading.  After acceptance, the manuscript will be sent to production for editing. When editing is completed, the corresponding author will receive the uncorrected proof of the manuscript for proofreading. The purpose of proofreading is to check for typesetting or conversion errors and the completeness and accuracy of the text, tables, and figures. Substantial changes in content, e.g., new results, corrected values, title, and authorship, are not allowed without the approval of the editor. Authors who do not respond within the time allowed are considered to have withdrawn their submissions. When the proofreading is ready for the author's check, the corresponding author is also requested to provide a written statement declaring permission for the manuscript to be published in the journal on behalf of all authors.

Publication. Volume, issue, and page numbers are assigned to the article, and the final Version of Record is published online. After publication, substantive changes will not be made silently. Any necessary correction, expression of concern, retraction, withdrawal, or removal will be handled transparently in accordance with the journal’s Corrections, Retractions, Expressions of Concern and Post-publication Discussion Policy.

Complaints and Appeals

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) is committed to addressing complaints and appeals fairly, transparently, confidentially, and without undue delay. Complaints and appeals will be handled in accordance with the journal’s policies and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Complaints

Complaints may concern the journal’s policies, editorial procedures, peer-review process, publication ethics, staff conduct, editorial conduct, or the integrity of published content.

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office at info@goldenlightpublish.com. The complaint should include:

* the name and contact details of the complainant;
* the manuscript number, article title, or DOI, where applicable;
* a clear description of the issue;
* any relevant correspondence or supporting evidence; and
* the outcome or action requested by the complainant.

The Editorial Office will acknowledge receipt of the complaint within seven working days. The complaint will initially be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or another editor who has not been involved in the matter. The journal will normally aim to provide a reasoned response within 30 days. If additional investigation is required, the complainant will be informed of the expected timeframe.

Complaints concerning the Editor-in-Chief will be handled by the publisher together with an independent senior member of the Editorial Board. Complaints concerning the publisher will be referred to an independent editor or other suitably qualified person who has no involvement in the matter.

The identity of the complainant and all related information will be treated confidentially and disclosed only to persons directly involved in assessing the complaint, unless disclosure is required by law or necessary for a fair investigation.

Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant error occurred in the editorial or peer-review process or that relevant evidence was overlooked. An appeal must be based on substantive scientific or procedural grounds. Simple disagreement with the reviewers’ or editor’s assessment is not sufficient.

Appeals must be submitted within 30 days of the editorial decision and should include:

* the manuscript number and title;
* the decision being appealed;
* a detailed explanation of the grounds for the appeal;
* a point-by-point response to the issues considered incorrect or overlooked; and
* any supporting evidence.

The appeal will be considered by the Editor-in-Chief or by an independent editor who was not involved in the original decision. Where appropriate, additional advice may be obtained from an independent reviewer or Editorial Board member.

Submission of an appeal does not guarantee that the manuscript will be reconsidered or that the original decision will be changed. Only one appeal will normally be considered for each manuscript. The decision reached after consideration of the appeal will be final.

Submitting a complaint or appeal in good faith will not result in retaliation or disadvantage in current or future submissions.

ORCiD

Before publication, ORCiDs must be provided for all authors. If you already have an ORCiD, you will be asked to provide it. The ORCiD is not required for submission or peer review, but your article cannot be able to be published online until ORCiDs are provided.

Open Access, Copyright and Licensing Policy

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) is an open-access journal. All articles are made freely and permanently available online immediately upon publication. Readers may access, read, and download the published content without subscription or payment.

Copyright

Copyright in articles published by JCEMI is retained by the author(s), unless otherwise stated in the individual article. Authors grant the publisher, Dynamic Academy, operating through its Golden Light Publishing® brand, the right to publish and disseminate their articles and to identify Golden Light Publishing® as the original publishing brand.

The copyright holder and the applicable licensing terms are clearly indicated in each published article.

Licensing

Articles published under the journal’s current open-access model are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0):

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Under this license, users may copy and redistribute the published article in any medium or format, provided that:

* appropriate credit is given to the author(s) and the original publication in JCEMI;
* a link to the published article and the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license is provided;
* the material is used only for non-commercial purposes; and
* the published article is not modified, adapted, translated, remixed, or transformed for distribution.

Commercial use and the distribution of modified, adapted, or translated versions require prior written permission from the copyright holder.

The license statement displayed in the published version of each article governs the use of that article. Articles published under different copyright or licensing terms remain subject to the terms indicated in their respective published versions.

Third-Party Material

The CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license applies only to material for which the author(s) hold the necessary rights. Figures, tables, photographs, datasets, or other third-party material included in an article may be subject to separate copyright or licensing terms.

Authors are responsible for obtaining all necessary permissions for copyrighted material included in their manuscripts and for clearly identifying any material that is not covered by the article’s Creative Commons license.

Self-Archiving

Authors are permitted to deposit and share versions of their work in institutional or subject-based repositories, on personal or institutional websites, and through non-commercial academic platforms. The following conditions apply:

* Submitted Version: Authors may deposit the version originally submitted to JCEMI at any time. The deposited manuscript should be clearly identified as a submitted or preprint version and must not imply that it has been accepted or published by the journal.

* Accepted Version (Author Accepted Manuscript): Authors may deposit the accepted manuscript immediately after acceptance, without an embargo period. The deposited version should be identified as the accepted manuscript. Once the article is published, the complete bibliographic citation, DOI, and a link to the Version of Record should be added where possible.

* Published Version (Version of Record): Authors may deposit and share the final published Version of Record immediately upon publication, without an embargo period. The deposited version must remain unchanged, retain the original copyright and licensing notices, include the complete bibliographic citation and DOI, link to the journal’s published version, and be shared in accordance with the applicable CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.

No embargo period applies to self-archiving under this policy.

Financial Model and Revenue Sources

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) is owned and financially supported by Dynamic Academy and is published through its Golden Light Publishing® brand.

All operational and publishing costs of the journal are borne by Dynamic Academy. JCEMI does not currently derive revenue from manuscript submission fees, article processing charges, publication fees, subscriptions, pay-per-view access, advertising, sponsored content, institutional support, or reprint sales.

Submission, peer review, publication, reading, and downloading of articles are free of charge.

The journal’s financial arrangements do not influence editorial decision-making. Decisions on submitted manuscripts are based solely on their scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.

Advertising Policy

JCEMI does not accept or display paid commercial advertising and does not publish sponsored editorial content.

Journal notices, calls for papers, announcements of special issues, and information concerning the journal’s publishing activities are not considered commercial advertisements. Where such announcements are published, they are clearly distinguishable from scholarly and editorial content.

Editorial decisions are made independently of any commercial, financial, or promotional considerations. Neither the publisher nor any external organization may influence manuscript evaluation, peer review, or publication decisions for advertising or promotional purposes.

Direct Marketing Policy

JCEMI may communicate journal-related information through its website, opt-in email bulletins, calls for papers, professional networks, conferences, and other appropriate academic communication channels.

Any direct marketing or manuscript solicitation conducted on behalf of the journal must be truthful, accurately targeted, and unobtrusive. Invitations to submit manuscripts are sent only where the recipient’s academic expertise or research interests are reasonably relevant to the journal’s aims and scope.

Communications must not contain misleading statements concerning the journal’s indexing status, metrics, editorial processes, publication schedule, acceptance prospects, or publication charges. No communication may promise manuscript acceptance, expedited acceptance, or favourable editorial treatment.

Recipients may unsubscribe from optional communications or request not to receive further messages. Personal contact information is not sold or disclosed to third parties for commercial marketing purposes.

Direct marketing activities are kept entirely separate from editorial evaluation and peer-review decisions.

Ethics & Responsibility

Publication ethics are maintained during publication processes in all Golden Light Publishing® journals to ensure the best practice guidelines, and hence, the publisher, the editor, authors, and peer reviewers must abide by the ethical policies.

Golden Light Publishing® journals conform to the principles below that are described by COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, not only transparency principles, but also best practices in scholarly publishing pointed out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Publisher

Golden Light Publishing® is committed to (a) maintaining the editorial independence of  journal editors, (b) supporting journal editors to run their journals ethically and transparently, and (c) maintaining an accurate and transparent academic record, including publishing corrections and retractions when necessary.

Author(s)

Authorship of the paper. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a vital contribution to the reported study, including conception, execution, design, and interpretation. All authors who made significant contributions to the submitted manuscript should be listed as co-authors.

Originality and plagiarism. The authors are responsible for the content, language, and originality of the manuscript they submitted. The authors should ensure that they have composed their original works entirely, and if they have used the study and/or words of other authors, that this has been conveniently cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, varying from “passing off” someone´s paper as the author's paper to copying or paraphrasing important parts of someone´s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research performed by others. Plagiarism in all its forms comprises unethical publishing behavior and is inadmissible. Before submitting a manuscript, it is strongly recommended to check for similarity using iThenticate or another tool to explore plagiarism.

Acknowledgement of funding sources. All funding sources for the research reported should be acknowledged thoroughly at the end of the manuscript (as a separate section of "Funding") before references.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest. All authors should reveal in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to affect the findings or interpretation of their manuscript. All financial support sources for the project should be disclosed as well. Disclosed examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be declared at the earliest stage possible, preferably within the manuscript text as a separate section of "Conflicts of interest" when submitting.

Reporting standards. The authors of the manuscript should present an accurate explanation of the study conducted and an objective discussion of its importance. Underlying data should be accurately given in the manuscript. A paper should include sufficient details and references to allow other researchers to repeat the study. Tricky or knowingly imprecise statements form unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Reviews and research articles should also be precise, original, and objective, and editorial opinion works should be described overtly as such.

Data availability and retention. Authors must comply with the journal’s Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy and include a Data Availability Statement in their manuscript. Authors are responsible for preserving the data, documentation, code, and other materials necessary to verify the findings of their work and for providing them to the journal when reasonably requested.

Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication. Submitted manuscripts must not be under consideration by any other journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently comprises unethical publishing behavior. The authors must also ensure that the article has not been published elsewhere before.

Principal errors in published studies. When an author becomes aware of a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author must promptly notify the journal and cooperate fully with any assessment and corrective action. Published errors and concerns will be handled in accordance with the journal’s Corrections, Retractions, Expressions of Concern and Post-publication Discussion Policy.

Reviewers

Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript assigned to them and send their comments in due time. If the manuscript is not in the reviewer’s field of interest, then the manuscript must be sent back to the editor so that the other reviewers can be assigned without loss of time.

Contribution. Reviewers are the main members contributing to the quality of the journal being peer-reviewed. The reviewers who feel unqualified to review the received manuscript must swiftly notify the editor and refuse to review that manuscript.

Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Objectivity standards. Reviews should be objectively performed. Personal criticism of the author is unsuitable. Reviewers should frankly express their aspects with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers should describe the relevant existing study that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also point out to the editor’s attention any vital resemblance or coincidence between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal information.

Disclosure & conflicts of interest. Reviewers should not take into account the manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest derived from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions linked to the manuscripts. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be utilized in any reviewers’ studies without expressing the written permission of the author. Exclusive information or opinions attained from the peer-review process must be maintained confidential and not used for personal benefit. Reviewers ought not to take into account manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest deriving from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions linked to the articles.

Editor

Objectivity. The Editor accounts for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal ought to be published. In this process, the authors of the manuscript are not distinguished based on his/her race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or citizenship by the editors. Editor's decision to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript for publication should be based merely on the importance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript, and also the convenience of the study performed in the manuscript to the coverage of the journal.

Confidentiality. The Editor must not reveal any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone but the corresponding author, reviewers/potential reviewers, and the publishing personnel. The editor will ensure that all material submitted by authors remains confidential during the review process.

Conflicts of interest & Disclosure. The Editor should avoid making decisions on manuscripts submitted from their institution, or by research collaborators, co-authors, or competitors. To avoid the possibility of bias, editors should recuse themselves if they have published with, collaborated with, or have been in a mentoring relationship with any author or contributor of the manuscript within the past three years.

The most apparent type of conflict of financial interest occurs when an editor or affiliated organization may benefit financially from a decision to publish or reject a manuscript. Financial conflicts may include salary, grants from a company with an interest in the results, honoraria, stock or equity interests in a company whose product is discussed in the article, and intellectual property rights (patents, royalties, and copyrights).

Other nonfinancial conflicts of interest should also be avoided or disclosed. Editorial decisions should be based on an objective and impartial consideration of the facts, exclusive of personal or professional bias. All decisions by editors should be based solely on the paper’s scientific merit, originality, and quality of writing as well as on the relevance to the journal’s scope and mission, without regard to race, ethnic origin, sex, religion, or citizenship of the authors. The Editor must disclose personal biases that may affect their editorial decisions.

Peer review process. The Editor must ensure that a double-blind peer review process is effectively performed for each manuscript submitted to the journal system.

Editorial Board Members

Everyone, including the Editorial Board, is committed to (a) promoting fairness and equality and opposing any form of discrimination, (b) promoting the transparency of and respect for the academic record, (c) respecting the confidentiality of others, and (d) being transparent about real or apparent competing interests.

Research Misconduct and Allegations

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. The editors and publisher will take reasonable steps to identify, prevent, investigate, and address misconduct in submitted and published work in accordance with the journal’s policies and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Research and publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

* plagiarism and self-plagiarism;
* fabrication or falsification of data, results, or research records;
* inappropriate manipulation or duplication of images;
* citation manipulation, including coercive or irrelevant citation practices;
* authorship misconduct or misrepresentation of author contributions;
* duplicate, redundant, or concurrent publication;
* undisclosed conflicts of interest;
* manipulation of the peer-review process;
* submission of manuscripts produced by paper mills or other fraudulent services;
* unethical research involving humans, animals, or personal data;
* misrepresentation, concealment, or unauthorized use of data; and
* any other conduct that compromises the reliability or integrity of the scholarly record.

Editors and reviewers must not request that authors add irrelevant citations for the purpose of increasing citations to a particular author, journal, institution, or publication.

Reporting Concerns

Concerns about a submitted or published article should be reported in writing to the Editorial Office at info@goldenlightpublish.com. Reports should identify the manuscript or published article and include a clear description of the concern and any available supporting evidence.

Anonymous allegations may be considered where sufficient and verifiable evidence is provided. Allegations made in good faith will be handled confidentially, and the identity of the person raising the concern will be protected to the extent reasonably possible.

Investigation Process

All allegations will undergo an initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or an editor who has no conflict of interest in the matter. Where the allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the investigation will be managed by the publisher and an independent senior member of the Editorial Board.

If the concern appears credible, the journal may:

* request an explanation and supporting documentation from the author(s);
* seek confidential advice from independent experts;
* examine original data, images, ethics approvals, authorship records, or peer-review documentation;
* suspend the editorial or publication process while the matter is investigated; and
* contact the author’s institution, research integrity office, funder, ethics committee, or other appropriate authority when a formal investigation is required.

The journal is responsible for protecting the integrity of the publication process and scholarly record. It does not replace the role of universities, employers, funders, or regulatory bodies in conducting formal investigations into research misconduct.

Authors and other parties involved in an investigation will normally be given an opportunity to respond to the concerns and relevant evidence before a final editorial action is taken.

Editorial Actions

Depending on the nature and severity of the findings, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

* reject or return a submitted manuscript;
* request correction or clarification;
* publish a correction, retraction, or expression of concern;
* withdraw an article before formal publication;
* notify the author’s institution, employer, funder, or relevant authority;
* restrict future submissions in cases of serious or repeated misconduct; or
* take any other action necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Editorial decisions will be based on the available evidence and relevant COPE guidance. Retractions and corrections are intended primarily to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record rather than to punish authors.

Ethical Oversight and Ethics Committee Approval

Ethics Committee Approval information (the title of the ethics committee, date, and number) must be stated in the method section and on the article's first/last page. In this regard, the following studies to be sent to our journal to be reviewed for publication must follow research and publication ethics, and they must include Ethics Committee Approval information:

* All qualitative or quantitative studies that included data collection from participants by questionnaire, interview, focus group study, observation, and experiment;
* All studies in which humans or animals (materials/data included) are used for experimental or any other scientific purposes;
* Clinical trials with humans;
* Trials with animals;
* Retrospective studies concerning the preservation of personal data.

For case studies, (1) information regarding the informed consent form must be present; (2) permissions from other individuals' scales, questionnaires, and photos must be taken and indicated; and (3) it must be stated that there is no copyright infringement for intellectual properties. Ethics Committee Approval is not necessary for review articles. 

For articles that are already in the evaluation process in the journal and have Ethics Committee Approval, the corresponding authors should add information regarding the Ethics Committee Approval to their articles if they are accepted for publication, as stated above. On the other hand, for a study whose data were gathered before 2020, that was produced from the author's MSc/PhD thesis (should be indicated in the article), which was submitted to the journal last year, and is accepted but not yet published, backdate Ethical Committee Approval is not required. However, if the article is accepted for publication, the corresponding author must submit a signed declaration stating that the journal is not responsible for any ethical infringements to be faced in his/her study and that he/she has full responsibility. Researchers not affiliated with universities must obtain Ethical Committee Approvals for their studies that require Ethical Committee Approval from the Ethical Committee in their region.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) supports transparency, reproducibility, and the responsible sharing of research data and other materials underlying published findings.

Authors should present their methods, assumptions, materials, analytical procedures, numerical models, experimental conditions, and statistical analyses in sufficient detail to allow qualified researchers to understand, evaluate, and, where reasonably possible, reproduce the reported work.

Research Data and Supporting Materials

Research data may include raw and processed data, experimental measurements, numerical model inputs and outputs, source code, algorithms, calculation files, survey instruments, images, videos, protocols, and other materials necessary to verify or reproduce the reported findings.

Authors are encouraged to deposit research data and supporting materials in a recognized disciplinary, institutional, or general-purpose repository that provides persistent access and a permanent identifier, such as a DOI.

Where data are deposited in a repository, the manuscript should include the repository name, permanent identifier, and direct link. Deposited datasets should also be formally cited in the reference list whenever possible.

Data Availability Statement

All published articles must include a Data Availability Statement. The statement should clearly indicate where and under what conditions the data and supporting materials can be accessed.

Authors may use one of the following statements or an appropriately modified equivalent:

“The data supporting the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name] at [DOI or permanent URL].”

“The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.”

“The data are not publicly available due to [ethical, legal, privacy, confidentiality, security, or commercial restrictions]. Requests for access may be directed to the corresponding author and will be considered subject to the applicable restrictions.”

“All data supporting the findings of this study are included in the article and its supplementary materials.”

“No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.”

“The data used in this study were obtained from a third party and are subject to the restrictions described in the manuscript.”

Statements indicating that data are available upon request should be used only where public repository deposition is not reasonably possible. Authors should provide an appropriate explanation when access to data is restricted.

Reproducibility of Experimental and Computational Research

Experimental studies should provide sufficient information about materials, specimens, equipment, instrumentation, calibration, loading conditions, measurement procedures, data processing, and uncertainty assessment to allow the work to be independently evaluated.

Numerical and computational studies should report the software and version used, model assumptions, material properties, boundary and initial conditions, discretization or mesh information, convergence procedures, validation methods, and other parameters necessary to evaluate the analysis.

Where custom computer code, algorithms, scripts, or input files are essential to the findings, authors are encouraged to make them available in a suitable repository. If the materials cannot be shared, the reason should be stated in the Data Availability Statement.

Restrictions on Data Sharing

The journal does not require authors to disclose data where sharing would violate:

* participant privacy or informed-consent conditions;
* legal or regulatory requirements;
* confidentiality or data-protection obligations;
* national security or public safety requirements;
* valid commercial or intellectual-property restrictions; or
* agreements governing third-party data.

Where possible, sensitive data should be anonymized or de-identified before sharing. Restrictions must be clearly explained in the manuscript and the Data Availability Statement.

The CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license applied to the published article does not automatically determine the licensing terms of separately deposited datasets, software, or other research materials. Authors are responsible for selecting and clearly stating the appropriate license for those materials.

Data Retention and Editorial Access

Authors should retain the data and supporting materials underlying their published findings for at least five years after publication, or longer where required by their institution, funder, applicable law, or disciplinary standards.

During peer review or after publication, the editors may request access to data, code, ethics documentation, original images, calculation files, or other supporting materials when necessary to verify the reported findings or investigate a concern.

Unreasonable refusal to provide requested materials may affect the editorial decision or may result in a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or another appropriate action in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policies.

Editors and reviewers granted access to confidential data must use such materials only for editorial evaluation and must maintain their confidentiality.

Corrections, Retractions, Expressions of Concern and Post-publication Discussion

Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, and completeness of the scholarly record. Concerns regarding published content will be evaluated objectively and in accordance with the journal’s policies and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Decisions concerning corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, withdrawals, or removals are made by the Editor-in-Chief and the publisher, with additional expert, institutional, or legal advice sought where appropriate.

Corrections

A correction will be issued when an error or omission affects the interpretation, accuracy, indexing, or integrity of a published article but does not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions. Errors introduced during the production process may be identified as an Erratum, while errors originating from the authors may be identified as a Corrigendum. Both are treated as formal corrections.

A correction notice will clearly identify the affected article and describe the nature and extent of the correction. The notice will be freely accessible, assigned its own DOI, and electronically linked to the original article. The original article will also be linked to the correction notice. Where the article itself is updated, the date and nature of the change will be clearly indicated. Substantive changes will not be made silently. Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect the meaning, interpretation, or metadata of the article may be corrected without a formal notice.

Retractions

An article may be retracted when its findings are no longer considered reliable because of a major error or research misconduct. Grounds for retraction may include, but are not limited to, data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, redundant or unauthorized publication, unethical research, serious authorship violations, manipulation of the peer-review or publication process, or substantial errors that invalidate the article’s findings.

Retraction decisions will be made following an appropriate investigation and in accordance with COPE guidance. Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond; however, author agreement is not required when the available evidence justifies retraction.

A retracted article will remain available as part of the scholarly record but will be clearly and prominently identified as retracted. A freely accessible retraction notice will state the reason for the retraction, identify who initiated it, distinguish between error and misconduct where possible, and be electronically linked to the article. The notice will have its own DOI. Retractions are intended to correct the scholarly record and protect readers, rather than to punish authors.

Expressions of Concern

The journal may publish an Expression of Concern when there are substantial concerns about the reliability, integrity, or ethical status of an article but the available evidence is inconclusive, an institutional investigation is ongoing, or a final decision cannot be reached within a reasonable period.

The Expression of Concern will be freely accessible and linked to the article. When additional evidence becomes available, it will be replaced or followed by an appropriate resolution, such as a correction, retraction, or notice stating that the concerns were not substantiated.

Article Withdrawal and Content Removal

Withdrawal applies primarily to accepted manuscripts or early online content that has not yet become the final Version of Record. Withdrawal may be considered in exceptional circumstances, including accidental duplicate publication, serious ethical violations, or legal restrictions.

A published Version of Record will be removed only in very exceptional circumstances, such as a binding legal requirement, a serious violation of privacy or confidentiality, defamatory content, or content that presents an immediate and substantial risk of harm. Whenever legally and technically possible, the article’s bibliographic information and a notice explaining the reason for removal will remain publicly available.

Post-publication Discussion

Readers, authors, and other interested parties may submit evidence-based concerns or comments about published articles to info@goldenlightpublish.com. Submissions should identify the article, preferably by title and DOI, and provide a clear explanation and relevant supporting evidence.

The journal will assess the concerns and may invite the authors to respond. Where appropriate, scholarly comments and author responses may be published as correspondence, a Discussion and Reply, or another editorial notice. Such contributions may be subject to editorial assessment and peer review. Unsubstantiated, defamatory, abusive, or personally directed allegations will not be published.

Post-publication discussions may lead to no further action, clarification, correction, an Expression of Concern, or retraction, depending on the evidence. Appeals concerning these decisions will be handled under the journal’s Complaints and Appeals Policy.

Specific Conflict of Interest Policies

Submission by the Editor. When an editor of our journal is the author (or co-author) of a manuscript, that individual is entirely excluded from any stage of review or editorial decision-making for that paper. To ensure impartiality, the review process is entrusted to another appropriate member of the editorial board. During this procedure, an editorial board member with no conflicting interest is assigned by the editorial office. This individual coordinates all communications with authors and peer reviewers and provides the final decision, free from any influence by the editor-author.

Submission from the same institution. A paper submitted by the author at the same institution as the editor will be handled by two independent referees who do not have a conflict with the review and are not affiliated with the same institution as the submitting author. The editor implements the acceptance/rejection/revision decision made by the referees without any intervention in their comments. In such circumstances, masking is done so that independent reviewers cannot see the author(s) of the article.

Personal relationships. A paper submitted by a family member of the editor, or by an author whose relationship with the editor might create the perception of bias (e.g. in terms of close friendship or conflict/rivalry), will be handled by two independent external referees. The editor implements the acceptance/rejection/revision decision made by the referees without any intervention in their comments. In such circumstances, masking is done so that independent reviewers cannot see the author(s) of the article.

Previous review. If an editor is assigned to a manuscript for review for which they had previously rendered a decision for another journal, then the editor should state they need to recuse themselves due to a previous review connection with that article without any further explanation or detail needed.

Generative AI Policy

The Journal adheres to the principles and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to ensuring transparency, accountability, and integrity in scholarly publishing. The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the preparation, review, and publication of manuscripts is governed by the following policy.

Use of AI Tools by Authors

Authors may use Artificial Intelligence (AI)–assisted tools as supportive aids during the research and writing process, including but not limited to literature discovery, reference organization, language editing, and structuring of ideas, provided that:

* AI tools do not replace the authors’ own scientific judgment, interpretation, or decision-making.
* The intellectual contribution, formulation of research objectives, hypotheses, methodologies, analyses, and conclusions remain the sole responsibility of the authors.
* AI tools are not used to fabricate or falsify data, results, images, or references.
* AI tools cannot be listed as authors.

Authors remain fully and solely responsible for the accuracy, originality, and ethical integrity of all content submitted to the Journal, including any content produced with AI assistance.

Any use of AI tools must be clearly and transparently disclosed in the manuscript (e.g., in the Acknowledgements or a dedicated AI usage statement), specifying the tool(s) used and the purpose and extent of such use.

Research Integrity and Originality

The use of AI tools must not compromise:

* the authenticity and traceability of data,
* the reproducibility of research findings,
* appropriate citation and attribution practices.

Manuscripts that are substantially or entirely generated by AI without meaningful human intellectual contribution and oversight are considered to violate publication ethics and will not be considered for publication.

Use of AI Tools by Reviewers and Editors

In line with COPE guidance on confidentiality and peer-review integrity:

* Reviewers and editors must not upload manuscripts, peer-review reports, or confidential materials into AI systems or third-party platforms that may store, process, or reuse such data.
* Editorial decisions and peer-review evaluations must be made exclusively by qualified human experts.

Ethical Oversight and Misconduct

Any undisclosed, inappropriate, or unethical use of AI tools—including but not limited to fabricated data, images, or references—will be handled in accordance with the Journal’s ethical procedures and COPE guidelines. Such cases may result in manuscript rejection, correction, retraction, or other appropriate actions.

Policy Review and Updates

Given the rapid evolution of AI technologies, this policy will be periodically reviewed and updated. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to comply with the most current version published on the Journal’s website.

Digital Archiving and Preservation

All published journal content is retained in digital form on cloud-based servers managed by Golden Light Publishing. Backup copies are maintained within the publisher-controlled cloud infrastructure to protect the journal’s content against technical failure, accidental data loss, or service interruption and to enable restoration when necessary.

At present, Journal of Construction Engineering, Management & Innovation (JCEMI) does not participate in an independent third-party digital preservation service. The journal is evaluating participation in a recognized long-term preservation network to ensure continued access to its published content in the event that the journal ceases publication.

Show less