H · Policy Assurance & Implementation

Regulatory, Recognition & External-Standards Compliance Assurance

Governs requirements that vary by journal, jurisdiction, recognition body or indexing service. Requires each journal to identify its applicable legal, regulatory, recognition, indexing and voluntary standards, assign responsibility, implement controls and monitor changes, while keeping changing numerical and operational criteria in journal-level documentation rather than in publisher policy. Requires that all claims of indexing, recognition, accreditation, membership or endorsement be currently supportable, and establishes how conflicts between external requirements and LMI policy are resolved.

Permanent identifier LMI-POL-028 Publisher + Journal Policy

Purpose and Scope

Journals operating under the LMI publishing framework are subject to requirements that differ between them and change over time: the law of the jurisdictions in which they operate, national recognition schemes, the criteria of indexing services and databases, and the voluntary standards they publicly claim to follow. This policy establishes how compliance with those requirements is identified, implemented, assured and claimed, without importing changing external criteria into the enduring text of this framework.

Identification of Applicable Requirements

Each journal shall identify and maintain a current record of the requirements applicable to it, covering: legal and regulatory obligations in the jurisdictions where it operates and publishes; national or sectoral recognition requirements it holds or seeks; the criteria of indexing services, databases and directories in which it is listed or has applied to be listed; the ethical and publishing standards it publicly states it follows; and any contractual obligations to institutions, societies, funders or service providers. For each requirement, the record shall identify the source, the person or role responsible, the controls by which compliance is achieved, the evidence retained, and the date of last verification.

Journal-Level Implementation

Detailed, changeable and journal-specific requirements shall be implemented and documented at journal level — in the journal’s own policies, its operating procedures and its compliance records — and not reproduced as permanent publisher rules. This includes numerical and operational criteria such as issue composition and article counts, author-frequency limits, editorial-board composition requirements, frequency rules, turnaround expectations, and any criterion tied to a particular recognition cycle or assessment period. A journal subject to national recognition or other regulatory criteria shall maintain documented procedures demonstrating compliance with the requirements applicable to that journal, and shall retain the evidence those requirements call for.

This policy does not restate the criteria of any external body. Where an external requirement imposes a higher standard than this framework, the journal shall meet it; where this framework imposes a higher standard, this framework governs, subject to the conflict provisions below.

Publisher Assurance

LMI shall require evidence, at intervals proportionate to risk and in any event before any application, renewal or public claim, that each affected journal has identified the applicable requirements, assigned responsibility for them, implemented and operated appropriate controls, reviewed the effect of changes in external criteria, and corrected identified non-compliance. This evidence forms part of the assurance activity under H2.

Truthful Claims

Neither LMI nor any journal shall claim indexing, recognition, accreditation, certification, membership, endorsement, impact metrics or affiliation unless the claim is currently accurate and supportable by evidence. In particular: a claim of listing or recognition shall identify what is held, by whom it is conferred and for what period, and shall be removed or amended promptly when it lapses, expires or is withdrawn; an application, submission or pending assessment shall never be presented as though it were a completed listing or recognition, and shall be described as pending if described at all; recognition tied to a defined cycle shall not be claimed beyond that cycle without verified renewal; and metrics shall be attributed to their source with the period to which they relate.

A crucial distinction shall be maintained in all public statements: following the guidance of a body is not the same as being a member of, accredited by, recognised by or endorsed by that body. LMI and its journals may state that a policy or practice is informed by or aligned with the guidance of an external organisation; they shall not, on that basis alone, assert membership, accreditation, endorsement or approval. Claims in marketing and promotional material are subject to the same requirement (F3), and inaccurate claims discovered shall be corrected promptly and recorded. This principle applies to websites, metadata, certificates, marketing and social-media content alike.

Monitoring Change in External Criteria

Compliance processes shall monitor material change in applicable law, recognition criteria, indexing requirements and voluntary standards, and shall assess the effect of such change on the journals concerned. Where change requires action, it shall be implemented through journal-level policy, procedure or evidence practice. A change in external criteria triggers review of this framework only where it affects an enduring publisher principle (H1); it shall not occasion wholesale rewriting of publisher policy.

Conflicts

Where a binding legal or regulatory obligation conflicts with a requirement of this framework, the conflict shall be escalated formally to the LMI governing body, recorded, and resolved by a documented decision — with legal advice where appropriate — that identifies which obligation prevails and why. Neither obligation shall be silently disregarded, and no person shall resolve such a conflict informally. Where the preference or criterion of an indexing service, recognition body or commercial partner conflicts with research ethics, participant protection or the integrity of the scholarly record, integrity prevails. Listing, recognition, ranking or metric advantage shall never be a reason to publish research that should not be published, to withhold a correction or retraction the record requires (G2), to misstate the journal’s practice, or to compromise the protections in this framework. Where such a conflict is material, it shall be recorded and reported to the governing body.

Standards and Guidance

Informed by the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, the COPE Core Practices, the ICMJE Recommendations, and the requirements of the national recognition and indexing bodies applicable to individual journals.