About the Journal

I. GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT CES

The approach of CES is primarily legal, but it is also open to analyzes carried out from other perspectives, such as economics, business and sociology. The official languages ??of the magazine are Galician, Portuguese, Spanish and English.

CES is divided into the following four parts: (I) Doctrine; (II) Case law; (II.1) Comments; (II.2) Annotations; (III) Chronicle; (IV) Book reviews. It is published annually in a single volume throughout the fourth quarter of the year, so its information extends to news produced from May of one year to May of the following year. For this reason, next to the number of each volume are the two years on which each volume of CES reports.

II. GENERAL INFORMATION FOR AUTORS AND REVIEWERS

II.1.- EDITORIAL PROCESS AND PEER REVIEW

Original contest:

1.- CES will only accept original and unpublished research works written in Spanish, English, Portuguese or in Galician.

2.-Extraordinarily, works for the first time published in Spanish, Portuguese or Galician, that have originally been published in a different language of
the above mentioned, may as well be accepted.

3.- The authors undertake to respect the intellectual property rights laws and the evaluators to control and communicate any infractions they detect.

Deadline and acceptance of the originals:

1.- Before March 30 of each year, the author must notify to any person of the Editorial Board the intention to submit a work including the provisional title. Such notification must be made via email: cooperativismo.economiasocial@uvigo.es

2.- Except for very exceptional cases, the publication in the same volume of several works on subjects that are very close, prepared by the same author, is not allowed.

3.- The admission or inadmissibility of the proposal will be communicated by email before April 15. Once the proposal is accepted, the editing process will begin.

Peer review system:

1.- The works included in Part I and Part II.1 submitted to CES will undergo a confidential review by two experts who are not members of the editorial team, in accordance with the international criteria.

2.- This is a double blind evaluation. The reviewers will not know the identity of the author, neither the author the identity of the reviewers. Reviewers will take into consideration the originality and unpublished character of the article, the relevance of the chosen topic and its thorough treatment, the methodology used, the range of documentation handled and its validity, and the use of a clear style. 

3.- Reviewers must immediately notify to the editorial team the existence of substantial matches between the works submitted for assessment and others already published. If the reviewers propose modifications to the original, it will be the responsibility of editors—after notification to the author—monitoring the rewriting  of the article.

4.- Whether the article will not be accepted for publication, the original will be returned to the author together with the comments of reviewers. The editors will inform the authors as soon as possible, and always no later than September 15th,  about the rejection of an article.

5.- Publishing rights in all formats of the accepted and published articles are held by the University of Vigo. No remuneration is offered to authors or external reviewers for their collaboration with CES.

II.2.- TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS

Articles length:

Part I (Doctrine): minimum 20 and maximum 30 pages including footnotes;

Part II.1 (Case law comments): minimum 15 and maximum 20 pages;

Part II.2 (Case law annotations): minimum 3 and maximum 7 pages;

Part III (Chronicle): minimum 7 and maximum 10 pages;

Part IV (Reviews): minimum 3 and maximum 5 pages.


Abstract, key words and summary:

Authors submitting articles in English for inclusion in parts I, II.1 and III of CES, should include:

- An abstract no longer than 10 lines in English and in its translation to Galician, Portuguese or Spanish

- A table of contents of the article in English and its translation to Galician, Portuguese or Spanish   

- Three key words in English and its translation to Galician, Portuguese or Spanish 

- The title of work in English and its translation to Galician, Portugues or Spanish.

Affiliation:

Authors must indicate their professional status (Dr. Iur., Professor, Lawyer, Judge, etc.) and the name of the institution or organization they belong to. This information should be indicated in a footnote with the (*) symbol, and will be stated after the authors’ name at the beginning of each article. A postal e-mail address must also be provided.

Technical instructions for the submission of articles:

All articles must be necessarily submitted in an electronic file, in Word or equivalent format following the OJS system: https://revistas.webs.uvigo.es/index.php/CES/about/submissions 

The works must complying the following requirements:

-Font: Times New Roman; -Size: 12 (footnotes, 10); -Sheets DIN A4; -Space 1.5 (single in the case of footnotes); -Margins: 3-3-3-3.

Bibliographical references:

In sections I, II.1 and III, bibliographic citations will be made in footnote.

In Sections II.2 and IV the citations will be in text.

Abbreviations listed in the CES index are of mandatory use.

The work will have a last section with bibliography, case law and materials used, with reference to journal abbreviations and initials, periodical publications or legal texts that are not included in the CES index.

References to books should be made as follows: Author’s surname(s) and Initial of the author’s first name (in caps), Title of the work (in italics), Place of publication, Publisher, Year, page,  i.e. TATO PLAZA, A., A Lei de Cooperativas e a súa incidencia nas cooperativas de ensino, UCETAG, Pontevedra, 1999, pág. 11).

References to works published in journals should be made as follows: Author’s surname(s); Initial of the author’s first name (in caps); Title of the work (in single inverted commas); Journal abbreviation if listed in the CES index (if not, the full title must be given in caps); Volume and issue Nº. (where appropriate); Year (in brackets); and the specific page quoted

i.e. APARICIO MEIRA, D., «A relevancia do cooperador na governaçao das cooperativas», CES 35 (2012- 2013), pág. 27.

Once a first reference has been made to a book or an article in a journal, it will not be necessary to repeat the title of the article for consecutive references, and it will be enough to include the bibliographical letterhead with the page referred, i.e. APARICIO MEIRA, "A relevancia...", op.cit. páx. 28.

Failure to comply with these instructions:

Original articles submitted that not comply with these instructions shall be returned to their authors for the corresponding modifications or additions. If these are not made within the specified time period the article will not be published.

In all cases, the Editors reserve the right to make the corresponding corrections in order to ensure compliance with these instructions in those specific cases where the publication of the article would be considered to be a priority due to the interest or the value of its contents, regardless of any formal defects.

III.- ETHICAL CODE OF CES JOURNAL

These commitments are based on the action policies of Elsevier, as well as on the patterns and good practices that COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) recommends.

Obligations of the Editorial Board of CES.

The Editorial Board of CES must:

  1. Ensure the continuous improvement of the Journal.
  2. Ensure the quality of the articles that are published.
  3. Maintain the academic integrity of the contents of the Journal.
  4. Respect the freedom of expression.
  5. Be open to publishing corrections and do it if mistakes are detected, as well as publishing the retractions and corrections, and the needed apologies, if that was the case, following the recommendations published by COPE regarding this topic http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction% 20guidelines.pdf
  6. Preserve the anonymity of the selected evaluators in each case for the evaluation of the articles;
  7. Not putting, in any case, commercial interests before the intellectual and ethical engagements that the Journal assumes.
  8. Constantly review and ensure the fulfilment of the ethical engagements assumed by the Journal.
  9. Ensure the adoption of the appropriate measures to ensure the quality of the published contributions, and avoid the publication of plagiarisms and not-original works.

Obligations of the authors. 

  1. The manuscripts that the authors send for its publication in CES should contain the necessary data to allow its citation by other authors.
  2. The authors must send completely original articles, and if they have used in their work the works or words of others, these must be appropriately cited in the article.
  3. Plagiarism in any form, such as the reproduction of another person’s work as if it was a personal work, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of other work/s without citing them, are considered non-ethical and unacceptable conducts. If these take place, the Editorial Board of CES will adopt the appropriate measures, that generally include the communication to the author of the complaints or claims exposed, as well as later communications to the corresponding institutions or research organisms. If the non- ethical conduct is confirmed and it is discovered after the publication of the article, even though some years have passed, CES will proceed publishing a correction, retraction or another type of note that gives a record of the act.
  4. The authors must try not to publish, generally, the same research in more than one publication. The fact of sending simultaneously the same original to more than one review is considered an unacceptable conduct. The publication of an article in more than a review may be exceptionally justified, and in any case, this fact must be mentioned appropriately in the first reference published in the second publication.
  5. The work of other authors must be recognised, which is the reason of the need of citation in the manuscripts of the works that have been relevant for their own work. The information obtained by different channels from works published previously in a public way may only be used with the express consent of the corresponding author.
  6. If the authors discover a mistake or an important inaccuracy in their own published work, they must communicate this circumstance to the Board of CES and collaborate with the latter in the correction or retraction of the mistake made. If the Board of CES has knowledge of an important mistake in a work published through a third person, the author must, as soon as possible, send the corresponding retraction or correction, or accredit before the director of the Journal the veracity and correctness of the original article.
  7. Authorship of papers shall be limited to those people who have made significant contributions to determine, design and elaborate the work. All those who have significantlycontributed to the works shall be mentioned as co-authors. If other people have participated in substantive issues of the work, they shall be appropriately recognized in the paper. Authors shall ensure, where appropriate, that all co-authors are adequately included and, in any case, they shall make sure that nobody is unduly mentioned. Likewise, all authors shall have seen and approved the final versions of their works and its submission for publication.
  8. Authors shall state in their manuscripts if they have any conflict of interest, whether financial or substantial, which might affect in their publications and assessments. All funding sources of projects shall be indicated in the manuscript.

 

Obligations of CES with regard to the publication process.

  1. The publication process of the Journal will be published and properly updated, so authors could have all the information that they need, and it may only be altered for duly justified reasons. In particular, the functioning of peer review process, which shall be followed by all authors, will be adequately published.
  2. Decisions concerning approval or rejection of papers for their publication shall be based only and exclusively on their quality; that is, their clarity, originality and importance, as well as on their adaptation to the purpose and the scope of the Journal.
  3. The Editorial Board of CES bears ultimate responsibility for the decision of which papers will be finally published.
  4. Under no circumstances papers would be rejected due to criticism or differing views of majority positions and/or opinions expressed by members of CES, provided that the papers have all the due quality, if they justify their positions and do not insult other people.
  5. Furthermore, the decision of approval or rejection will be always communicated to the author within the time stated in the publication rules. Such decision shall always be motivated, especially in cases of rejection, and it cannot be changed afterwards, unless there have been serious problems in the publication process, which shall be properly justified. In any case, the changes in the structure of CES shall not affect the decisions adopted previously, regarding to approval or rejection of papers submitted for publication.
  6. The Editorial Board of CES shall not provide information about papers submitted for its possible publication to someone other than the author, reviewers of the paper or members of the Scientific Board of CES, if necessary.
  7. Not published papers shall under no circumstances be used in researches carried out by members of the organizational structure of CES or by any other people that could access the text by virtue of the provisions set forth in the previous paragraph, unless they have express permission of the author.
  8. Any information or ideas drawn from the review process shall be kept secret and they shall never be used for personal purposes.
  9. The Editorial Board and the Secretariat of CES shall abstain from reviewing manuscripts of authors with whom they could have a conflict of interest, due to close relationship or connection with the authors or their institutions.
  10. Authors shall communicate their relevant interest and the Editorial Board of CES shall publish the corresponding corrections, in the event that some of them have not been revealed before the publication.

 

Peer review process.

  1. Proper peer review of articles is considered an essential element of CES. The reviewers assist the CES Board in the decisions about the publication of articles and, through the communication with the author, also contribute to the improvement of the article.
  2. Articles will be reviewed by at least two reviewers.
  3. Reviewers should act objectively, and make judgments and assessments that are clear and precise, sufficiently reasoned and impartial. Likewise, conflicts of interest of any kind (personal, academic, commercial, etc.) will be avoided. In particular, reviewers should indicate the relevant publications not cited by the author in the manuscript, as well as possible partial or total similarities or identities of the manuscript with other articles already published which the reviewer has personal knowledge of.
  4. If a reviewer does not consider himself sufficiently qualified to evaluate a particular manuscript, or knows that he cannot do so within a reasonable time, he must immediately notify the CES Editorial Board.
  5. In any case, the evaluation process will be subject to strict conditions of confidentiality. Neither the reviewers nor the authors will know their respective identities, thus avoiding the conflicts of interest that may occur. In this respect, the CES Board shall have a strict duty of confidentiality. Likewise, reviewers should treat manuscripts received as confidential information, and should not display or discuss them with third parties, unless expressly authorized by the CES Board.
  6. Unpublished articles may not be used under any circumstances in researches of the reviewers, without the express consent of the author. The information or ideas obtained through the evaluation by the reviewers should be kept secret and should not be used under any circumstances for personal benefit.
  7. The reviewers should abstain from evaluating manuscripts in which they may be in a situation of conflict of interest as a result of the existence of close relations or connections with the authors or with their institutions of ascription.

 IV.-COPYRIGHT

CES content is published under the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)