Editorial policy

Copyright and Licensing Guidelines

Authors must include a dedicated Copyright and Licensing section in their submission. This section must clearly state the following information:

Creative Commons License

• License Type: State the specific Creative Commons licence used by the journal: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International).
• https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en

Description of License Terms

• Permitted Uses: Users are allowed to share, copy, and redistribute the material in any medium or format, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the journal.
• Restricted Uses: The material cannot be used for commercial purposes. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

Copyright Ownership and Retained Rights

• Copyright © The Authors.
• Authors retain copyright of their work and grant Croatian Journal of Fisheries the right of first publication. Articles published in Croatian Journal of Fisheries are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer Review Process & Editorial Policies

All published articles undergo a rigorous peer-review process. The process begins with the manuscript submission and an initial editorial assessment. During this editorial screening, the Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript's alignment with the journal's scope and basic technical requirements.

If the manuscript passes the initial screening, the editorial team initiates the reviewer selection process. A minimum of two independent peer reviewers with relevant scientific expertise are invited to evaluate the manuscript.

The journal follows a single-anonymized review model (single-blind), where reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, while authors remain unaware of the reviewers’ identities to ensure anonymity during the evaluation.

During the active review process, reviewers are not financially compensated for their work on behalf of the journal. The peer-review process is conducted on a voluntary basis, in line with academic tradition and the shared commitment to upholding the quality and integrity of scholarly publishing.

The Journal strictly adheres to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, jointly published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). Authors and reviewers can access the full statement of these principles here: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing

The Journal adheres to the principles and ethical standards outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Reviewers and authors are highly encouraged to familiarize themselves with these principles by accessing the official COPE Core Practices at: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

Authors are fully responsible for the integrity and originality of their submissions. Each manuscript must be accompanied by a signed cover letter affirming that the work complies with the internal policies of their affiliated institutions and that it has not been submitted elsewhere. All submissions are subject to thorough checks, and in cases of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or duplicate submission, the Journal will act in accordance with COPE guidelines, ensuring that all relevant parties are duly informed.

Principles Peer Reviewers Should Adhere To:

• Review all articles objectively, without bias or favouritism based upon the origin of the article, gender, race, national origin, ethnicity, religious or political beliefs, sexual orientation or age of the authors, or commercial considerations. All evaluations must strictly comply with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, which can be viewed directly at: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers
• Review articles solely in subject areas in which they have expertise.
• Before consenting to review an article, ensure sufficient time and resource availability to complete a comprehensive assessment of the article in a timely manner.
• Decline to review articles that create a conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof, which can arise from the content of the article, its authors and/or its funders. When in doubt, peer reviewers should disclose the potential conflict of interest to the publisher and seek advice before proceeding with the review, following the COPE guidelines on undisclosed conflicts of interest available at: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/flowchart/undisclosed-conflict-interest-published-article
• Provide reviews that are constructive and impartial, devoid of any hostile, inflammatory, libellous, unfair or unnecessarily derogatory comments, in accordance with the COPE ethical standards for reviewer conduct which can be accessed at: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers
• During and after the peer review process, maintain the confidentiality of unpublished articles and refrain from discussing them with others.
• Refrain from using research or information contained in unpublished articles for any purpose, including personal gain or the advantage or disadvantage of any other person or organisation.
• Promptly disclose to an article’s editor that the article has not properly cited its sources, or contains errors or material omissions, allowing the editorial team to take action in line with COPE core practices for handling allegations of misconduct, accessible at: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/case/editorial-misconduct

Timeline and Decision-Making

The duration of the review process largely depends on the availability and responsiveness of the assigned Associate Editor and reviewers. While the standard expected timeline for completing reviews is three weeks, this period may be extended due to the reviewers’ and editors’ professional commitments. If an assigned Field Editor or reviewer is unable to take on the task, a replacement will be appointed, which may further influence the overall timeline.

Once the reviews are submitted, the editorial decision-making process begins. The Editor promptly evaluates the feedback and makes a decision regarding the manuscript’s potential acceptance. Following this, the manuscript revision procedures are initiated, where authors are required to address the reviewers' comments and submit a revised version. Based on the quality of the revisions, the Editor makes the final decision regarding final acceptance or rejection, adhering to the systematic workflows detailed in the COPE Flowcharts for journal editors, which can be found at: https://publicationethics.org/media/609/download?attachment

In cases where reviewers provide contradictory recommendations (e.g., one recommends acceptance while another recommends rejection), the Editor-in-Chief or the assigned Field Editor will carefully assess both arguments. Depending on the scientific merit of the comments, the manuscript may be accepted conditionally with a request for major revisions, rejected, or sent to a third, additional reviewer to secure a tie-breaking evaluation. Following this, the manuscript revision procedures are initiated, where authors are required to address the reviewers' comments and submit a revised version. Based on the quality of the revisions, the Editor makes the final decision regarding final acceptance or rejection, ensuring full compliance with COPE Council guidelines on editorial decisions and accountability, accessible directly at: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/editorial-independence

The journal provides open access to all content free of charge, with no article processing charges (APCs), publication fees, or any other review-related costs for the authors.