About the Journal
Focus and Scope
The IJSEPM is an international interdisciplinary journal in Sustainable Energy Planning and Management combining engineering and social science within Energy System Analysis, Feasibility Studies and Public Regulation.
The journal focuses on:
- Energy System analysis of the transition to sustainable energy systems. This includes specific scenarios, models and analyses at local, regional, country and global level as well as studies of theories, methodologies, and software tools used in such transition analyses.
- Economics, Socio economics and Feasibility studies including theories and methodologies of institutional economics as well as specific feasibility studies and analyses of the transition to sustainable energy systems.
- Public Regulation including theories and methodologies as well as specific analyses and proposals in the light of the implementation and transition into sustainable energy systems.
About the publisher
The IJSEPM was developed in 2014 by the founding editors, professors Poul Alberg Østergaard and Henrik Lund from the Sustainable Energy Planning research group at the Department of Planning at Aalborg University. The journal is owned and managed by this research group while formally published by Aalborg University Press.
Editorial address: IJSEPM, Aalborg University, Room 1.324, Rendsburggade 14, 9000 Aalborg, Denmark
Publisher address: Aalborg University Press, Kroghstræde 3, 9220 Aalborg Ø, Denmark
The IJSEPM is index by SCOPUS. Find the current CiteScores below.
Geography, Planning and Development
Energy Engineering and Power Technology
Commitment to peer review and editorial oversight
All work published in the IJSEPM is subjected to peer review under full editorial oversight. The editors of the IJSEPM are fully committed to having solid and independent reviews for work published. The editors are committed to ensuring that papers are handled firmly but fair - and has confidence in the peer reviewing process as an appropriate manner for advancing science with the journal's scope.
The IJSEPM strives to follow the guidelines laid out by COPE in Core Practices.
Peer Review Process
Papers submitted to IJSEPM are subject to peer review for originality and scientific quality in the context of related research. Reviews are single-blind, external and a minimum of two reviewers are used in the process. This applies regardless of whether articles have been submitted to normal or special issues. The final decision on submitted manuscripts rests with the editor in chief or with a co-editor. This also applies in case of special issues. The IJSEPM does not operate with guest editors for special issues, thus selection of reviewers and decisions are handled by normal editors.
First reviews are generally completed in 30-50 days. The timing of publication depends on severity of reviewer comments as well as on the number of required review rounds.
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. There are no Article Processing Charges for authors publishing in the journal.
Articles published in International Journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management are following the license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License: Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivs (by-nc-nd). Further information about Creative Commons
Authors can archive post-print (final draft post-refereering) on personal websites or institutional repositories under these conditions:
- Publishers version cannot be stored elsewhere but on publishers homepage
- Published source must be acknowledged
- Must link to publisher version
Publication Frequency and Quantity
The IJSEPM operates with a non-fixed publication schedule with typically four publications per year.
Over the first 10 years of existence, the IJSEPM has received more than 900 submissions, and has generally published 20-40 articles per year
Publication Ethics & Publication Malpractice statements
The IJSEPM is committed to ensuring the highest ethical standards within publishing and any publication malpractice is clearly prohibited. This section details the policy and commitment of the IJSEPM with respect to seven areas of publication ethics and definition of appropriate practise.
- General duties and responsibilities of editors
- Conflict of interest
- Reviewers' Ethics
- Retraction policy
The IJSEPM firmly supports these basic principles regarding editors:
1.1. Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals.This means the editors should
1.2. strive to meet the needs of readers and authors;
1.3. strive to constantly improve their journal;
1.4. have processes in place to assure the quality of the material they publish;
1.5. champion freedom of expression;
1.6. maintain the integrity of the academic record;
1.7. preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
1.8. always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
Copied verbatim from the Code of Conduct and Best Practise Guidelines for Journal Editors Version 4 Approved 7th March 2011 Published March 2011 by COPE
Conflicts of interest
- Editors cannot handle submissions where they themselves are among the authors. Such submission must be handled by editors from another institution.
- Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest – see further in the section “Reviewer ethics” below)
- Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed in the acknowledgements section.
The IJSEPM firmly supports these basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere. Peer reviewers should:
- only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
- respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal
- not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
- declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
- not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality,religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
- be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments
- acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
- provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
- recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct
All bullet point are copied verbatim from COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers by Irene Hames on behalf of COPE CouncilMarch 2013, v.1
Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. While pertinent that due credit is given to all significant contributors in the form of co-authorship, it is also pertinent that co-authorship is only given to significant contributors as co-authorship implies accountability for the work. Less significant contributors may be mentioned in the acknowledgements or treated as any other reference if contributing, e.g., solely with data or other information. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author that all appropriate co-authors are duly listed and that all co-authors accept responsibility of the article - e.g. but not limited to by reading and confirming the final version of the article before submission as well as after changes induced in the review process.
Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works. Any work or words of others must be appropriately cited or quoted. If plagiarism is detected in published material, the material will be retracted (see also “Retraction Policy”)
The IJSEPM firmly supports these basic principles regarding retraction of articles:
- They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
- It constitutes plagiarism
- The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
- It contains material or data without authorisation for use
- Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)
- It reports unethical research
- It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
- The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (aka, conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.
Notices of retraction should:
- Be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (ie, in all online versions)
- Clearly identify the retracted article (eg, by including the title and authors in the retraction heading or citing the retracted article)
- Be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment)
- Be published promptly to minimise harmful effects
- Be freely available to all readers (ie, not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers)
- State who is retracting the article
- State the reason(s) for retraction
- Be objective, factual, and avoid inflammatory language.
Retractions are not usually appropriate if:
- The authorship is disputed but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings
- The main findings of the work are still reliable and correction could sufficiently address errors or concerns
- An editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction, or is awaiting additional information such as from an institutional investigation (for information about expressions of concern see
- Author conflicts of interest have been reported to the journal after publication, but in the editor’s view these are not likely to have influenced interpretations or recommendations, or the conclusions of the article.
Copied verbatim from the COPE Retraction guidelines — English, Version 2: November 2019, Available at DOI: 10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
Digital Preservation Policy
Aalborg University Library, hosting IJSEPM, strives to preserve the digital contents of all hosted open access journals. For short term preservation, contents is daily backed-up to on- and off-site locations. For long term preservation, all hosted material is archived in the Danish Netarchive as required by the Danish Legal Deposit Law.
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.