Conflict of Interest Policy

Frontiers in Business and AI is committed to ensuring that all manuscripts are assessed and published fairly, objectively and transparently.

Authors, editors, editorial board members and reviewers must disclose any financial or non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence their research, judgment, review or editorial decisions.

A conflict of interest does not automatically prevent submission, review or publication. However, all relevant interests must be disclosed so that the journal can evaluate and manage them appropriately.

1. Definition of a Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest, also referred to as a competing interest, exists when a personal, professional, financial, institutional, academic or intellectual relationship could influence, or could reasonably appear to influence, an individual’s actions or judgment.

Conflicts may be actual, potential or perceived.

The existence of a conflict does not necessarily mean that misconduct has occurred. Failure to disclose a relevant conflict may, however, compromise the integrity of the editorial and publication process.

2. Financial Conflicts of Interest

Financial conflicts may include:

Employment or paid appointments.
Consultancy arrangements.
Advisory board membership.
Research grants or other funding.
Speaker fees or honoraria.
Travel grants or sponsored accommodation.
Stock, share or equity ownership.
Options or other financial interests.
Patents or patent applications.
Royalties or licensing income.
Paid expert testimony.
Gifts, services or other benefits.
Financial relationships with organisations that may benefit from or be disadvantaged by the research.

Authors must disclose relevant financial relationships existing during the conduct of the research and during the 36 months preceding submission, or for a longer period where the relationship remains relevant to the submitted work.

3. Non-Financial Conflicts of Interest

Non-financial conflicts may include:

Personal or family relationships.
Close friendships or personal disputes.
Supervisory or mentoring relationships.
Recent research collaborations.
Institutional affiliations.
Academic competition.
Professional rivalry.
Political or religious commitments.
Strongly held intellectual positions.
Membership of advocacy or interest groups.
Editorial or advisory roles.
Access to confidential or privileged information.
Any relationship that could reasonably affect impartial judgment.

Individuals should disclose a relationship whenever a reasonable reader might consider it relevant to the assessment or interpretation of the work.

4. Responsibilities of Authors

All authors must disclose any conflict of interest that may be relevant to the submitted manuscript.

The corresponding author is responsible for collecting disclosures from every co-author and including a complete Conflict of Interest Statement in the manuscript.

Authors must disclose:

Relevant financial relationships.
Relevant personal or professional relationships.
Employment and consultancy arrangements.
Patents or intellectual property interests.
Relevant institutional affiliations.
Funding sources.
The role of funders or sponsors.
Any involvement of a commercial organisation in the research.
Any other relationship that could reasonably be viewed as influencing the work.

Authors must make disclosures at the time of submission and update them if circumstances change during peer review or production.

5. Conflict of Interest Statements

Every submitted and published article must contain a Conflict of Interest Statement.

Where no conflict exists, authors should use the following wording:

“The authors declare that they have no competing interests.”

Where a conflict exists, authors should provide a clear and specific statement, for example:

“Author A has received research funding from [ORGANISATION]. Author B has served as a paid consultant to [ORGANISATION]. Author C declares no competing interests.”

A disclosure should identify:

The author concerned.
The organisation or person involved.
The nature of the relationship.
Whether the relationship is current or recent.
How the interest relates to the submitted work.

The journal may edit a disclosure for clarity but will not remove relevant information without the author’s agreement.

6. Funding Disclosure

Authors must identify all financial and material support received for the research or preparation of the manuscript.

The funding statement must include:

The name of each funder.
The grant or award number, where applicable.
The author who received the funding.
The role of the funder in the research and publication process.

Authors should use one of the following statements, as applicable:

“This research received no external funding.”

or:

“This research was funded by [FUNDER NAME], grant number [GRANT NUMBER].”

Authors must also state whether the funder or sponsor was involved in:

Study design.
Data collection.
Data analysis.
Interpretation of results.
Preparation of the manuscript.
Review or approval of the manuscript.
The decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

If the funder had no role, authors may state:

“The funder had no role in the design of the study; the collection, analysis or interpretation of data; the preparation of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the article for publication.”

7. Role of Commercial Sponsors

Research supported by a commercial organisation must be reported transparently.

Authors must disclose:

The identity of the sponsor.
The nature and amount or category of support, where appropriate.
Whether the sponsor supplied products, software, data or services.
Whether sponsor employees participated in the research.
Whether the sponsor reviewed or approved the manuscript.
Whether the sponsor had the right to delay or prevent publication.
Whether the authors had independent access to the data.
Whether the authors retained control over the analysis and publication decision.

Commercial sponsorship does not automatically prevent publication. The journal will consider whether the research was conducted and reported with adequate independence and transparency.

8. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any conflict that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, their ability to provide an impartial assessment.

A reviewer should decline an invitation where they:

Have a close personal or professional relationship with an author.
Work at the same institution as an author.
Have recently supervised or been supervised by an author.
Have recently collaborated or published with an author.
Are directly competing with the authors.
Have a financial interest in the subject or outcome.
Are involved in a related dispute.
Have previously reviewed or advised on the manuscript.
Have access to information that could compromise anonymity.
Cannot provide an objective assessment for any other reason.

If a conflict becomes apparent after a reviewer has accepted the invitation or submitted a report, the reviewer must notify the editor immediately.

The editor will decide whether the review can be used or whether a replacement reviewer is required.

Reviewers must not use confidential manuscript information for personal, academic, professional or financial advantage.

9. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must disclose any conflict that may affect their handling of a manuscript.

An editor must recuse themselves where they:

Are an author or contributor to the manuscript.
Have a personal relationship with an author.
Work at the same institution as an author.
Have recently collaborated with an author.
Have supervised or been supervised by an author.
Have a financial or intellectual property interest in the research.
Are involved in a dispute or direct academic competition with an author.
Have previously advised extensively on the manuscript.
Cannot make an independent and impartial decision.

A manuscript involving a conflicted editor will be assigned to another qualified editor who has no relevant conflict.

The recused editor must not:

Select reviewers.
View confidential reviewer identities.
Participate in editorial discussion.
Recommend a decision.
Make or influence the final decision.

10. Submissions by Editors and Editorial Board Members

Editors and editorial board members may submit manuscripts to Frontiers in Business and AI, but such manuscripts will not receive preferential treatment.

Where an editor or board member is an author:

The manuscript will be assigned to an independent editor.
The author-editor will have no access to the editorial process beyond the access available to any other author.
At least two independent external reviewers will assess the manuscript.
The author-editor will not select reviewers or participate in the decision.
The published article will include a disclosure explaining the author’s editorial role and the independent handling process.

A suitable statement is:

“Author A is a member of the Editorial Board of Frontiers in Business and AI. The author had no involvement in the peer-review process or editorial decision for this article. The manuscript was handled independently by [EDITORIAL ROLE].”

The same safeguards apply to manuscripts submitted by employees, owners or representatives of Global Frontiers Press Limited.

11. Submissions by Reviewers

A reviewer’s previous or current service to the journal does not prevent the reviewer from submitting an article.

If a regular reviewer submits a manuscript:

The manuscript will be handled through the normal editorial process.
The reviewer-author will not participate in reviewer selection.
The reviewer-author will have no access to confidential editorial information.
Any relevant relationship with the handling editor or other reviewers must be disclosed.

The journal monitors the proportion of articles authored by editors, editorial board members and regular reviewers to minimise editorial endogeny.

12. Special Issues and Guest Editors

Guest editors must disclose all relevant conflicts before appointment and throughout the special-issue process.

A guest editor must not handle a manuscript where they:

Are an author or co-author.
Work at the same institution as an author.
Have recently collaborated with an author.
Have a close personal or professional relationship with an author.
Have a financial or intellectual interest in the outcome.
Cannot act impartially for another reason.

A conflicted submission will be assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or another independent editor.

Manuscripts authored by a guest editor must undergo independent external review. Guest-editor-authored papers may not exceed 25 percent of the special issue.

13. Institutional Conflicts

Shared institutional affiliation may create an actual or perceived conflict.

Editors and reviewers should not normally handle manuscripts submitted by authors from their current institution.

Former institutional relationships may also require disclosure where the relationship is recent, close or directly relevant.

Large multi-campus or multi-hospital organisations will be evaluated individually. The journal will consider whether the individuals work in the same department, research group, reporting structure or collaborative network.

14. Intellectual Conflicts

Expertise and scholarly opinions do not automatically constitute conflicts. However, an intellectual conflict may exist where an individual:

Has publicly taken an extreme or inflexible position directly concerning the manuscript’s central claim.
Is personally involved in a highly contentious dispute with the authors.
Has a direct interest in promoting or discrediting a particular theory, method or product.
Is reviewing work that directly challenges their own commercialised method or patented technology.
Cannot evaluate the evidence independently.

Editors and reviewers should disclose such circumstances and allow the journal to determine whether recusal is necessary.

15. Article Processing Charges and Waivers

Article Processing Charges and waiver decisions are handled separately from editorial assessment.

Payment or non-payment of an Article Processing Charge must not influence:

Initial editorial screening.
Reviewer selection.
Peer-review reports.
Revision requests.
Acceptance or rejection.
Publication priority.

Editors and reviewers should not be informed of an author’s payment or waiver status unless the information is necessary for an administrative reason unrelated to editorial judgment.

An editor, editorial board member or reviewer who has a financial interest linked to APC income from an individual article must not participate in its editorial decision.

16. Gifts and Personal Benefits

Editors, reviewers and journal staff must not request or accept gifts, payments, services or personal benefits offered in exchange for favourable editorial treatment.

Authors must not offer incentives to reviewers, editors or staff.

Legitimate conference hospitality or minor professional courtesies must not influence editorial decisions and should be disclosed where a reasonable person might consider them relevant.

17. Failure to Disclose a Conflict

If an undisclosed conflict is identified before publication, the journal may:

Request an explanation.
Require an updated disclosure.
Assign a new editor or reviewer.
Disregard an affected review.
Obtain additional independent review.
Suspend consideration.
Reject the manuscript where the omission materially compromises trust.

If an undisclosed conflict is identified after publication, the journal may:

Publish a correction.
Add or amend a Conflict of Interest Statement.
Issue an Expression of Concern.
Reassess the editorial and peer-review process.
Retract the article where the conflict is connected to serious misconduct or unreliable findings.
Notify an institution, employer, funder or other relevant organisation.

The action taken will depend on the seriousness of the omission and its effect on the research or publication process.

18. Confidentiality

Conflict-of-interest information will be handled confidentially during editorial assessment but may be shared with:

Editors responsible for the manuscript.
Relevant journal staff.
Independent reviewers or advisers where necessary.
Institutions, funders or ethics bodies during a formal investigation.
Legal or regulatory authorities where required.

Relevant author disclosures will be published with the article.

The journal cannot guarantee confidentiality where disclosure is necessary to investigate misconduct, comply with legal obligations or protect the scholarly record.

19. Reporting an Undisclosed Conflict

Anyone who believes that an author, reviewer, editor or journal representative has failed to disclose a relevant conflict may contact:

Frontiers in Business and AI Editorial Office
Email: journals@gf-press.com

The report should include:

The title or manuscript number of the relevant work.
The name and role of the person concerned.
A description of the possible conflict.
Supporting documents, links or other evidence.
The reporter’s contact details, where possible.

Good-faith reports will be considered fairly and without retaliation. Anonymous concerns may be reviewed where sufficient verifiable evidence is provided.

20. Review and Resolution

The journal will evaluate reported conflicts according to their nature, seriousness and potential effect on the research, review or editorial decision.

The assessment will be conducted by an editor or senior representative without a relevant conflict.

Affected individuals will normally be given an opportunity to respond before a final determination is made.

Where necessary, the journal may obtain independent advice or refer the matter to an institution, funder, ethics committee or other appropriate body.

21. Contact Information

Questions about competing interests or disclosure requirements should be directed to:

Frontiers in Business and AI Editorial Office
Email: journals@gf-press.com
Publisher: Global Frontiers Press Limited
Address: Room 313, 3/F, 143 Wai Yip Street, Kwun Tong, Hong Kong S.A.R., China