Ethical Clearance & Research Ethics Policy

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their research has been conducted in accordance with applicable laws, institutional requirements, disciplinary standards, ethical principles, permits, and professional responsibilities in the jurisdiction or jurisdictions where the research was performed.

Ethical approval does not by itself guarantee publication. ALFI may decline to publish research when the Editorial Team identifies serious ethical concerns even when authors present an approval document, particularly where the research appears inconsistent with responsible research practice or where the approval does not adequately cover the activities reported in the manuscript.

Research involving identifiable individuals, consumers, farmers, workers, business operators, community members, producers, panelists, interview participants, survey respondents, or other human participants must comply with applicable human-research ethics requirements.

Where institutional ethical review is required, authors must identify the approving ethics committee, institutional review body, or other competent authority and provide the approval or protocol number where one was issued.

The manuscript should explain relevant measures taken to protect participant autonomy, privacy, confidentiality, dignity, safety, and voluntary participation.

Where informed consent is applicable, participation must be voluntary and based on sufficient information about the nature and purpose of the research, relevant procedures, reasonably foreseeable risks or burdens, use of participant information, and the participant's right to decline or withdraw where applicable.

The manuscript should state that informed consent was obtained where appropriate. Where a competent ethics body approved a waiver or modification of consent, authors should disclose this and provide sufficient justification or documentation when requested by the journal.

Consent to participate in research does not automatically constitute permission to publish personally identifiable information, recognizable photographs, detailed case descriptions, audio-visual material, or other information from which an individual may reasonably be identified. Specific publication consent may be necessary where identifiable participant material is reported.

Authors must protect personal and confidential information collected during research. Names, precise locations, contact information, images, business-sensitive information, farm-level confidential data, or other potentially identifying details should not be disclosed unless scientifically necessary, ethically permissible, and appropriately authorized.

Data anonymization or de-identification should be used where appropriate. Authors should recognize that combinations of indirect identifiers may still make participants, farms, companies, households, or communities identifiable.

Research involving children, economically dependent participants, employees, students, marginalized communities, individuals with limited decision-making capacity, or other participants who may be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence requires particular ethical attention.

Authors should explain relevant safeguards and must comply with applicable requirements concerning parental permission, guardian consent, participant assent, voluntary participation, recruitment, compensation, confidentiality, and protection from inappropriate pressure.

Agricultural and food-system research frequently involves surveys, interviews, focus groups, observations, participatory research, market studies, farm-level data collection, consumer studies, or community-based research. Such studies may constitute human-participant research even when no clinical intervention is involved.

Authors are responsible for determining whether ethical review, informed consent, privacy safeguards, organizational permission, or another form of oversight is required by their institution or jurisdiction and must report the relevant ethical arrangements transparently.

Studies in which participants taste, consume, smell, handle, or otherwise interact with experimental food products must give appropriate attention to participant safety, informed consent, allergens, dietary restrictions, product safety, microbial or chemical hazards, and other foreseeable risks.

Authors should not expose participants to products that are known or reasonably suspected to be unsafe for human consumption solely for the purpose of generating research data.

Where institutional ethics review is required for sensory or consumer testing, authors must obtain the relevant approval before participant recruitment or testing begins.

Research involving livestock, poultry, laboratory animals, aquaculture species, wildlife, or other animals must be conducted in accordance with applicable animal-welfare legislation, institutional requirements, veterinary standards, and ethical-review procedures.

Where formal animal-ethics review is required, the manuscript must identify the approving committee or competent authority and provide the approval or protocol number where available.

Authors should report sufficient methodological information to permit readers and reviewers to evaluate animal selection, housing or production conditions where relevant, experimental procedures, handling, sampling, interventions, welfare monitoring, anesthesia or analgesia where appropriate, humane endpoints, and methods of euthanasia where applicable.

Where applicable to the research design, ALFI encourages consideration of the principles of replacing animal use where scientifically appropriate alternatives exist, reducing the number of animals to that necessary for valid scientific inference, and refining procedures to minimize unnecessary pain, distress, injury, or adverse welfare effects.

Research conducted on commercial farms or under ordinary livestock-production conditions is not automatically exempt from ethical or welfare responsibilities. Authors must obtain appropriate permission from farm owners, managers, institutions, or other responsible parties and must determine whether animal-ethics approval is required for interventions, sampling, handling, experimental feeding, or other research procedures.

Routine husbandry or observational research should still be designed and reported in a manner that avoids unnecessary harm and accurately describes relevant welfare conditions.

Research involving biological specimens, microorganisms, pathogens, genetically modified material, animal tissues, plant materials, environmental samples, or other biological resources must comply with relevant biosafety, biosecurity, transport, collection, access, and institutional requirements.

Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permits or approvals and for implementing appropriate containment, handling, storage, disposal, and personnel-protection measures where hazardous biological material is involved.

Agricultural field experiments must be conducted with appropriate authorization from landowners, institutions, farm managers, government agencies, conservation authorities, or other responsible bodies where such permission is required.

Collection or use of protected, endangered, regulated, proprietary, or access-controlled plant or genetic materials must comply with relevant legal and institutional requirements. Authors should provide permit information where applicable.

Research methods should also consider environmental impacts where experiments involve pesticides, fertilizers, genetically modified materials, invasive species, or interventions capable of affecting surrounding ecosystems.

Where ethical approval was required and obtained, manuscripts should normally identify the name of the approving body, relevant institution, approval or protocol number where available, and any other information necessary to demonstrate that the reported research was covered by the approval.

Some research may not require formal ethical approval under applicable institutional or national rules. Examples may include certain analyses of fully anonymized public datasets, some non-interventional observational activities, or other categories formally exempted by an appropriate institution or authority.

Where the ethical status of a study may reasonably be questioned, authors should state why formal review was not required and, where available, provide documentation of exemption or determination from the relevant ethics body. An author's personal assertion that approval was unnecessary may not be sufficient where applicable institutional requirements indicate otherwise.

Where ethical approval was required before research began but was not obtained, later retrospective approval does not ordinarily remove the original ethical concern. ALFI may decline such work even if authors subsequently obtain an administrative letter or retrospective endorsement. Exceptional circumstances will be evaluated according to applicable regulations, documentation, and the nature of the research.

Ethical approval applies to the protocol reviewed by the approving body. Material changes to participant recruitment, interventions, sample collection, animal procedures, study locations, risks, data use, or other ethically significant elements may require amendment or additional approval.

Authors must not cite an ethical approval document that does not adequately cover the research actually reported in the manuscript.

Research conducted across multiple institutions, regions, or countries must comply with applicable ethical and legal requirements at the relevant research sites. Approval from one institution does not automatically replace local approval, authorization, or permission where additional review is required.

Authors should be prepared to explain the ethical oversight structure for multi-site studies and provide relevant documentation where requested.

ALFI may request copies of ethical approval letters, exemption determinations, participant-information documents, consent forms, animal-ethics approvals, permits, biosafety approvals, field authorizations, or other relevant documentation where necessary to verify ethical compliance.

Documents provided for editorial verification are treated as confidential editorial materials and will not ordinarily be published unless disclosure is required for transparency, permitted by the relevant parties, or necessary under an applicable legal or ethical process.

Reviewers who identify a potential research-ethics concern should inform the responsible editor confidentially. Reviewers should identify the specific concern and, where possible, explain why additional documentation or editorial assessment may be necessary.

Where ethical approval appears absent, invalid, fabricated, incomplete, retrospective without adequate justification, or inconsistent with the research reported, ALFI may pause editorial processing and request clarification or supporting documentation.

Serious concerns may be referred to the authors' institution, ethics committee, research-integrity office, relevant authority, or another competent body for further investigation.

Depending on the evidence and publication stage, inappropriate research may result in manuscript rejection, suspension of processing, correction, Expression of Concern, retraction, or another appropriate editorial action.

Publication does not prevent ALFI from investigating credible ethical concerns. Where an issue identified after publication affects the ethical legitimacy, reliability, or integrity of the research, the journal will assess whether post-publication action is required.

Appropriate action may include a correction, clarification, Expression of Concern, retraction, institutional referral, or another transparent notice in accordance with ALFI's Corrections & Retractions Policy and Allegations of Misconduct Policy.

Authors remain responsible for the ethical conduct and accurate reporting of their research even when the study received approval from an ethics committee, institutional review body, animal-care committee, or other authority. Ethical oversight supports responsible research but does not transfer responsibility for misconduct, inaccurate reporting, or protocol violations away from the researchers.

Where relevant, the final article should provide sufficient ethical information for readers to understand how the research was reviewed and conducted. Ethical approval statements should be consistent across the manuscript, published PDF, supplementary information, and metadata where such information is recorded.

Agriculture, Livestock, and Food Industry (ALFI) is affiliated with Yayasan Kalidaka Cendikia Nusantara and formally published by WISE Pendidikan Indonesia. Institutional affiliation, publishing support, funding, or editorial position does not exempt any author or manuscript from ALFI's ethical-clearance and research-integrity requirements.

This Ethical Clearance & Research Ethics Policy should be read together with ALFI's Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, Allegations of Misconduct Policy, Authorship & Contributorship Policy, Conflict of Interest & Competing Interests Policy, Corrections & Retractions Policy, Data Sharing & Reproducibility Policy, and other applicable editorial policies.