Vol. 12, №3, 2020
The editorial board of RENSIT shares the principles of international financial policy of scientific journals Open Access and supports the standards for responsible publication of research papers developed with the participation of world experts on publication funding (APC = Article Processing Charge = payment for processing an article) and coordinated by clause 15 of the Guidelines of the International Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications - Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), http://publicationethics.org/.

The RENSIT journal is published by the All-Russian PUBLIC Organization of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences at the expense of payment for the processes of preparation and publication of articles APC by members of the editorial board and authors or for them - by organizations/foundations, etc.

Preparation and publication of the article includes scientific editing of the article, technical editing of its bibliographic list, professional translation of the abstract, keywords, article title, affiliations, as well as layout of the original layout (text placement, translation into vector format of pictures - graphs, figures, formulas , designations, their placement in the layout), placement of the article as part of the relevant issue on the journal's website, transfer of the layout of the issue to the printing house, payment for circulation, distribution of the printed (paper) issue (Russian Book Chamber, libraries, etc.).

The RENSIT journal editorial office sets APC at 200 (two hundred) US dollars per publication.

The author submits APC to the editor online after reviewing and accepting his article for publication.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Guidelines

15.1. Journal have policies and systems in place to ensure that commercial considerations do not affect editorial decisions, on processes for publishing sponsored supplements.
15.2. Reprints should be published as they appear in the journal unless a correction needs to be included in which case it should be clearly identified.
Best practice for editors would include:
  • publishing a general description of journal’s income sources (e.g. the proportions received from display advertising, reprint sales, sponsored supplements, page charges, etc.)
  • ensuring that the peer review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal
  • ensuring that items in sponsored supplements are accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and decisions about such supplements are not influenced by commercial considerations
16.1. Editors should have systems for managing their own conflicts of interest as well as those of their staff, authors, reviewers and editorial council members.
16.2. Journal have a declared process for handling submissions from the editors, employees or members of the editorial council to ensure unbiased review
Best practice for editors would include:
  • publishing lists of relevant interests (financial, academic and other kinds) of all editorial staff and members of editorial council (which should be updated at least annually).