Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Contribute to the dissemination of multidisciplinary research related to production systems, publishing articles involving different themes and reflect the great methodological diversity, disciplinary, interdisciplinary and geographic national and international research. As a second line of interest seeks to stimulate academic debate on development theme, highlighting the issue of public policy related to the various sectors of the economy, such as education, transport, leisure and sport and health. Also under another academic development approach is intended to understand the multifaceted process of relations between theory and practice in educational institutions, promoting the academic experiences and formational pathways that contribute to the materialization of the indivisibility of teaching, research and extension.

The RPD target audience is researchers and managers of the production area, as well as those who work in the development of extension workers activities and public policies the economy and the territory.

Costs related to journal hosting and maintenance of its repository are the responsibility of Centro Federal de Educação Tecnológica Celso Suckow da Fonseca.

 

Section Policies

Projects and Practices in Education

Intended for articles that present and evaluate extension projects, as well as pedagogical practices and themes related to the teaching work environment.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Development and Public Policies

Articles that present studies that contribute to the development of public policies in the transportation, health, education, sports, among others.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Productive Systems

Disseminate and communicate in the scientific community and society studies on productive systems. It is a section that presents relevant contributions in the following areas: Operations management and production processes; Logistics and Supply Chain; Transport; Operational Research; Quality; Product Marketing and Engineering; Organizational Strategy and Engineering; Economic engineering; Labor engineering; Materials technology; Innovation; Environment and Social Responsibility.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Associated Editors

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The journal adopts the integrity parameters on Scientific Activity Guidelines presented by the National Scientific and Technological Development Council (CNPq). These Guidelines are available at: http://www.cnpq.br/web/guest/diretrizes

In Submission Preparation Checklist, the journal asks the authors to sign that the article is original and not submitted as submitted to any other journal. The evaluation process of the submitted articles occurs in two steps, and passes through a dual review system (double blind review):

After a preliminary assessment of the Editor or editorial team, analyzing the appropriateness of the work, the text will be forwarded for consideration of two peer members of the Editorial Board, as the blind review system. In the case of a favorable and an unfavorable one third opinion of the Editorial Board will be consulted.

The evaluators will guide their judgment and opinion of the submissions assigned to them taking into consideration the following assessment guidelines:

1 - Title
A) Is the title consistent with the main idea of the article?

2 - General Aspects
A) Is the theme related to the Area in which it is inserted?
B) Is it relevant to the area?
C) Is the purpose of the work adequate?
D) Are the study boundaries established?
E) Is it an original contribution?

3 - Shape and Style
A) Is the extension acceptable? (Maximum of 20 and minimum of 10 pages, respectively)
B) Is the organization of the article in sections and subsections adequate? (Guidelines for authors in the journal)
C) Is the report clear, unbiased and non-wordy?
D) Is the written text adequate for spelling, syntax, construction of sentences and paragraphs?
E) Do the bibliographic references follow the orientation of the journal?
F) Are the Tables and Figures configured according to the orientation of the journal?

4 - Abstract / Abstract
A) Is the summary clear about the important points and the results of the work?
B) Is the extension adequate? (Maximum of 200 words)
C) Are the keywords appropriate?

5 - Literature Review
A) Is the literature review well organized, contains the classic references of the subject and is it recent?
B) Is the literature critically examined, representing the state of the art?
C) Is the relationship between the current problem and the previous research clear?
D) Do you follow the recommendation to use at least 65% of references from articles published in scientific journals?

6 - Methodology
A) Are the methods and materials used adequate and well presented?
B) Are they scientifically presented (allow the work to be reproduced)?
C) Is the methodology compared to those normally used in similar classical works?
D) If applicable, are the universe and the sample described?
(E) Is the method of sampling adequate and consistent?

7 - Results and Discussion
A) Are tables and figures used efficiently? All have call in text?
B) Were the methods used in the data analysis applied correctly and properly?
C) Does the article represent work effectively concluded with discussion?
D) Is the discussion relevant? Is it coherent? Does it show the preparation and knowledge of the author?
E) Did the article interest the reviewer?
F) Does the article contain reproducible results?

8 - Conclusions
(A) Are the findings clearly stated?
B) Do the research data support the conclusions?
C) Are the conclusions relevant to the current state of the art?
D) Are generalizations restricted to the universe from which the sample was extracted?
E) Is there a conclusion stating the relevance of the results and their implications (strengths)?
F) Does the conclusion suggest suggestions for future studies?

9 - Suggested Revisions (General Evaluator Comments):


After review, results can be: Accept Submission, Revisions Required, Resubmit for Review, and Decline submission.

Plagiarism verification with Copyspider.

Manuscripts with 05 (five) or more authors should specify in comments to the editor in submission, the individual responsibilities of all authors in the preparation work, according to the following template: "Author X is blamed for ... ; Author Y was responsible for ...; Author Z was responsible for ..., etc. "

 

Publication Frequency

In 2019 the modality of continuous publication of articles is adopted. It means that each article, after review and acceptance by peers, will be published immediately in the volume / section. Due to this special structure, the publication process will end in the last week of November. The articles approved between the last week of November and the month of December will be included in the volume of the following year.

Each new volume in continuous publication of the journal should start between the last fifteen days of the previous year and the first fifteen days of the current year for the volume.

In 2018 this journal received 68 articles and 22 of them were rejected (32%). In 2017, submissions totaled 52 submissions, 23 of which were rejected (44%).

 

Open Access Policy

Since jan/2019 this journal will publish sections with 5-20 articles by means of free and immediate access to its content, following the principle of global democratization of knowledge.

There is no fee for submission, evaluation, publication or access to articles published in this journal.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Revista Produção e Desenvolvimento adopts practices of respect for ethical conduct and procedures to avoid bad practices in scientific production.

The publisher has a duty to act on the suspected or alleged misconduct identified. This research extends to both submissions and published articles. This journal has as instruments: a) the principles and guidelines of scientific integrity of CNPq; b) COPE flowcharts to determine facts and determine the actions required in the resolution of cases; c) Scielo's withdrawal and concern recording procedures, which are based on the guidelines of international committees specializing in research ethics.

All parties involved in the publishing process, including editors, reviewers, authors and others, should be familiar with the ethics guidelines for publication proposed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be found at http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelinese


In general terms, the following
statements described below:

1) Responsibility of the authors
- The authors are responsible for the content of their articles, as well as for the copyright of images, videos, and any textual or complementary elements of their article.
- The authors have agreed to work for free in the peer-review process for this journal in the future.
- The authors declare that they have significant contribution to the research disclosed in their article, if applicable.

- A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

- The authors must offer to the journal retractions or corrections of possible errors.
- The authors must ensure that their text is original and must not submit the same text to more than one journal.

- The presentation of the Ethics Committee report of the researcher’s institution is mandatory if the article has been written based on a research that involves risks to participants.

2) The review process
- All the content of the journal is subjected to peer review by the method of double-blind peer review.
- Peer review is the process of having opinions on individual manuscripts of reviewers skilled in the field. This process is explicitly described on our website.
- The opinions should be as objective as possible and sufficiently grounded to improve the research and the text assessed.
- The reviewers should not have conflicts of interest when performing a review and they declare this in writing in the system of the journal.
- The reviewers should always address texts or excerpts already published and that have not been properly cited.
- All articles being reviewed are treated with confidentiality.
- The journal understands that any form of plagiarism is not acceptable and uses anti-plagiarism review tools.
- The final decision on the publication of an article is taken by the editors. Whenever an article has academic quality and meets the criteria established by the journal, it is forwarded to the double-blind peer review process, which is done by at least two reviewers.
- The only assessment criteria of the articles are their academic merit and their contribution to the improvement of the knowledge in the field; there is no discrimination of authors, for any reasons.
- Editors are not allowed to use information contained in the articles being reviewed without the explicit consent of the authors.
- The editors are available to answer any ethical question related to a submission.

3) Ethics in Publishing
- Editors take considerable efforts to avoid and prevent the publication of articles in which research misconduct occurred.
- Under no circumstances we encourage misconduct or allow them to happen.
- Any allegation of research misconduct is immediately investigated.
- The journal publishes errata to correct articles when necessary.
- The journal strives to publish corrections, clarifications, right of reply, retractions, and apologies when necessary.

4) Copyright and Universal Access
- The licenses used by the journals are described on the website.
- All articles are offered free of any access fees and are available in their entirety to any reader without the need of registration or password.

5) Other principles
- Information about property, copyrights, and/or management of the journal are explicitly indicated in the “about” section on the website of the journal.
The journal also adopts as guidelines of Integrity in Scientific Activity the Guidelines presented by the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). These Guidelines are available at the following address: http://www.cnpq.br/web/guest/directs
- This journal does not charge any fee for submission, assessment, or publication, but may require the translation of the article by the author.

 

6) Formation of the editorial team

The editorial team is composed of researchers with scientific prestige who represent the different theoretical visions related to the thematic sections proposed in the RPD. The activity of the members of this team is voluntary and unpaid.

The team is composed of an editorial board and ad hoc evaluators. The role of the members of this Committee is to support the Editor in his decisions in the editorial process.

The editorial board must necessarily be multi-institutional and composed of scientifically and geographically distributed specialists covering different regions of Brazil and / or other countries. Recruitment, follow-up and eventual replacement of members is done by the Editor. The members of this Council must hold a doctorate for at least two years and have significant scientific and technical production in their area of expertise.

The evaluating committee is responsible for analyzing and issuing opinions on articles submitted to the journal. The development of your activities should follow the guidelines of the peer review process. This group must necessarily be multi-institutional and composed of uniformly distributed experts. The process of recruiting, monitoring assignments and, eventually, replacing ad hoc evaluators is done by the Editor. The members of this group must have relevant bibliographic production and minimum degree of master and desirable doctor, issued by a Stricto Sensu Brazilian Postgraduate Program, recognized by CAPES or in Foreign Graduate Programs equivalent to Stricto Sensu in Brazil with quality Recognized. External ad hoc evaluators may be invited to issue opinions for possible special thematic editions or when not available evaluators are available and have the technical knowledge to evaluate a theme.