Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

Human Ecology is a peer-reviewed Russian journal with the main focus on research and practice in the fields of human ecology and public health.

The journal publishes original articles, review papers and materials on research methodology.

The primary audience of the journal includes health professionals, environmental specialists, biomedical researchers and post-graduate students.

Although we welcome papers from all over the world special attention is given to manuscripts on Arctic health research. 

The mission of the journal is to publish quality-assured research in all fields related to human ecology and to integrate research and researchers from Russian-speaking countries into the international scientific community.

Science Sections 

  • Research Methodology




Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The procedure for submitting manuscripts to the journal “Human Ecology”

1. Authors submit the manuscript signed by all the authors in electronic form.

2. The scanned cover letter addressed to the editor-in-chief in the prescribed form and  signed by the vice-rector for science or the head of the institution, is attached to the materials of the article.

3. The content of the article should comply with the unified requirements for manuscripts submitted to the scientific and practical journal Human Ecology (posted on the journal’s website).

4. The authors are responsible for the confidence and accuracy of the facts, quotations, proper names, correctness and completeness of the bibliographic data.

The procedure of manuscripts’ consideration and reviewing

1. All articles submitted to the editors are subject to review.

2. The manuscript submitted for publication shall be registered in the prescribed form.

3. The deputy editor-in-chief determines compliance of the article with the profile of the journal, as well as compliance with the heading indicated by the author. If the article does not correspond to the content specified by the author   the deputy editor defines the milestone. The executive secretary acquaints the members of the editorial –review board with the distribution of the articles by sections. When changing the heading declared by the author – the responsible secretary informs the authors of the article about it.

4. The executive secretary checks compliance with the typescript requirements. If the manuscript meets the profile of the journal, but does not meet the typescript requirements, it is submitted for review after the appropriate revision by the author.

5. In case the initial analysis reveals that the content of the article does not correspond to the specificity of the journal, the deputy editor-in-chief gives a motivated refusal to the author in publishing the article within 30 days by e-mail.

6. In case of a disputable situation in determining whether a manuscript conforms to a journal’s profile and section, this issue is submitted to the meeting of the editorial –review board for discussion. The decision to pass the manuscript for review is made within 14 days.

7. If the submitted manuscript complies with the requirements of the journal, the deputy editor-in-chief appoints two readers, one of whom is a specialist in the heading profile.

8. The executive secretary of the journal passes the manuscript, as well as a review form to the appointed readers.

9. Readers are required to submit a review within a period not exceeding 30 days. If the reader is unable to carry out the examination for any reason, he is obliged to inform about the refusal to review within three days of the article receipt. In this case, the article is sent for review to another reader review appointed by the deputy chief editor.

10. Control over the review’s time limits is carried out by the executive secretary of the journal.

11. The reader is fully responsible for the quality and objectivity of the manuscript’s review. Readers deal with the article as confidential material, strictly observing the right of the author to non-disclosure of information contained in the article before publication. Readers are not allowed to copy manuscripts for personal use. The author of the reviewed work is given the opportunity to get acquainted with the text of the review. The review is provided to the author of the manuscript at his request, without a signature and indication of the name, position, place of work of the reader. The name of the reader can be provided to the author only with the consent of the reader. The review with the reader’s indication can be provided at the request of expert boards in the State Commission for Academic Degree and Title of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. The review should contain a qualified analysis of the material, its objective reasoned assessment and sound recommendations. The reader may recommend the manuscript of the article for publication in this form; recommend for publication after making the recommended changes; recommend to refine the manuscript and re-consider after revision; do not recommend the manuscript for publication. If the reader recommends the manuscript of the article for publication after revision, taking into account the comments, recommends revising the manuscript and reviewing it after revision, or does not recommend the manuscript for publication, the review should indicate the reasons for the decision (motivated refusal; recommendations for revision). In case the readers differ on the point of the article, it is considered at a meeting of the editorial –review board.

12. After receiving a negative review, the final decision is made to refuse to publish the article by the deputy editor-in-chief, and, if necessary, by the editorial –review board.   If the article is rejected, the editorial staff sends the author a reasoned refusal indicated in the review. The editorial –review board has the right to send articles for additional reviewing.

13. The executive secretary of the journal includes a manuscript received a positive review in the working plan.

14. In case the review contains some comments that require revision, or the manuscript is rejected, the executive secretary of the journal informs the author about this.

15. After follow-up revision, the executive secretary submits the manuscript for re-review if recommended by the reader. A manuscript can be submitted for re-review no more than two times.

16. The editors should not disclose any information about the manuscripts submitted to anyone except the relevant author, readers, potential readers, other members of the editorial –review board.

17. The editors do not enter into negotiations with the author about negative reviews or rejection of articles.

18. The editors do not take any obligations concerning time limits of the submitted manuscripts publication.

19. Original reviews are to be kept in the journal’s editorial office for 5 years from the date of publication.

20. Manuscripts accepted for publication are not returned. Manuscripts that have received a negative review from the reader are not published and also would not be returned to the author.

21. The editorial staff communicates with the authors of the articles through the author responsible for the correspondence with the editors.

22. The authors themselves monitor information on the preparation of the manuscript for publication.

23. The manuscript approved by the editorial –review board is reviewed by the editor. All questions and changes are agreed with the author, responsible for the correspondence with the editors.


Open Access Policy

The articles in this journal are available to everyone since the publication that provides free and open access to research for the advancement of science and medicine.



The journal uses the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve all the published articles. The PKP PN is a part of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content.

Also, the journal makes full-text archives on the Russian Science Electronic Library (http://elibrary.ru/) platform.



  • Google Scholar
  • Ulrich's Periodicals directory
  • Russian Science Citation Index
  • Norwegian National Center for Research Data
  • Global Health
  • CAB Abstracts
  • ProQuest
  • InfoBase Index
  • EBSCO Publishing (EBSCOhost)
  • CyberLeninka


Publishing Ethics

Reporting standarts

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off another paper as the author(s) own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another(s) paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Only original works are acceptable for publication in "Human Ecology" journal. The journal does not allow any forms of plagiarism.

If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

The journal is using "ANTIPLAGIAT" (free edition) software for plagiarism detection in all Russian-language manuscripts. The Google Scholar is used for English-language manuscripts. Papers will be rejected from any stage of the publication process(even if the article were published already) if plagiarism will be fined.

Papers will be rejected from any stage of the publication process (even if the article were publishedalready) if plagiarism will be fined.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at http://www.icmje.org/

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Statement of Human and Animal Rights

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 and 2008. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.

When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked to indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the authors obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.


Publication Fee

Ekologiya cheloveka (Human Ecology) levies an article-processing charge of 10 000 RuR for residents of the Eurasian Economic Union (Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Russian Federation) and 20 000 RuR (~ $285 / €245) for residents of other countries per article accepted for publication. Tihe fee covers manuscript processing, journal production, Open-Access, online hosting, archiving and translation in some cases. The fee is paid only after acceptance of the manuscript. Please, contact our Editorial Office for details. 

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies