01 Commitment to the Scholarly Record

JPG aims to keep the scholarly record reliable, transparent and traceable. After publication, valid scientific concerns are evaluated on their merits. Editorial notices are used to communicate material changes without concealing the existence or bibliographic identity of an earlier publication.

02 Types of Post-Publication Action

Minor typographical changes that do not affect interpretation may be corrected according to editorial production procedures, with a clear change history when warranted.

03 Procedure for Corrections, Expressions of Concern and Retractions

• A concern is reported by an author, reader, editor or institution through the Contact Editorial Office page.
• An editor without a material conflict of interest checks the evidence and contacts the author(s), normally providing an opportunity to respond.
• Where required, the journal consults external experts or the relevant research institution.
• The Editor-in-Chief determines whether a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or no action is justified.
• The notice identifies the affected publication and states the reason in a factual, proportionate manner while respecting legal and privacy constraints.
• Where technically possible, the notice and article are linked through OJS metadata, DOI records and article landing pages.

A retracted article normally remains accessible as part of the scholarly record and is prominently marked as retracted; the notice should be freely accessible. Removal is reserved for exceptional circumstances involving legal, privacy or serious safety concerns.

04 Post-Publication Discussion

JPG welcomes substantive, evidence-based scholarly responses to published papers, including comments on methods, spatial datasets, the reproducibility of GIS analyses, remote-sensing classification, interpretation or ethical aspects of field research.

• Submitting a response: contact the editorial office and identify the article title, DOI, precise scientific concern and supporting evidence.
• Editorial assessment: the editor evaluates relevance, civility, scientific merit and potential competing interests.
• Author response: where appropriate, authors may be invited to respond and provide additional data or methodological clarification.
• Publication route: a substantive response may be handled as correspondence, a public editorial notice or an article-linked clarification, subject to the journal’s available OJS workflow and editorial decision.

Personal attacks, defamatory statements and disclosure of private or confidential material are not acceptable.

05 Preservation of Notices and Historical Content

Corrections, expressions of concern and retraction notices should remain connected to affected articles across the current OJS platform and, where feasible, across migrated archive locations. An article’s publication history, DOI and status should be updated consistently.

Authors who detect a significant error in their own published article are encouraged to notify the editor promptly, even when they believe it can be corrected without retraction.

06 Complaints and Further Guidance

Disagreements about an editorial action may be raised through the Research Integrity policy. For external ethical guidance, consult COPE Retraction Guidelines.