Good Governance (GG) recognizes authorship as an important academic responsibility that reflects a genuine scholarly contribution to the conception, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of research. The journal is committed to ensuring that authorship is assigned fairly, transparently, and responsibly. This policy is informed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly its COPE Discussion Document: Authorship, which emphasizes that authorship carries significant privileges, responsibilities, and accountability.

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to Good Governance, including original research articles, review articles, conceptual papers, case studies, and other scholarly contributions accepted by the journal. All authors are expected to understand and comply with the journal's authorship requirements before submission and throughout the editorial and publication process, consistent with COPE's recommendations on establishing and communicating clear authorship policies.

Authorship is reserved for individuals who have made a substantial intellectual or scholarly contribution to the work being reported. Contributions may include developing the research idea, formulating the research questions, designing the study, collecting or generating data, conducting analysis, interpreting findings, or making substantial intellectual contributions to the manuscript. COPE emphasizes that journals should define authorship criteria clearly and distinguish authorship from contributions that are more appropriately acknowledged; see the COPE Discussion Document on Authorship.

To qualify for authorship in Good Governance, each author must meet the journal's substantive contribution requirements, participate meaningfully in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content, approve the final version to be submitted or published, and agree to take responsibility for the integrity of their own contribution. Authors must also cooperate in addressing questions about the accuracy or integrity of the work. These criteria are informed by COPE's guidance that journals should establish transparent authorship requirements and ensure that named authors understand their responsibilities, as outlined in the COPE Discussion Document: Authorship.

Providing funding, holding a senior position, supervising a project, serving as a department head, providing administrative support, collecting routine data, proofreading, or offering technical assistance does not automatically qualify an individual for authorship. Such contributions should be acknowledged where appropriate if they do not meet the journal's authorship criteria. COPE discusses the distinction between authorship and acknowledgement in its discussion document on what constitutes authorship.

Every listed author must have made a genuine contribution to the manuscript and must be able to identify and explain their own contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that the work is presented accurately, that the sources used are properly cited, and that the manuscript does not knowingly contain fabricated data, falsified findings, plagiarism, or misleading statements. COPE emphasizes that authorship should reflect actual participation in the work and that authors must not violate the legal rights of others when producing a scholarly publication; see the COPE Discussion Document: Authorship.

All authors must review and approve the final manuscript before submission and must agree to its publication if it is accepted. Authors should communicate with one another throughout the preparation and submission process, resolve disagreements in good faith, and ensure that the final manuscript accurately represents their collective scholarly work. COPE recommends that journals consider obtaining an authorship declaration confirming that all named authors meet the stated criteria, that no eligible contributor has been omitted, and that each author's contribution is identified; see the COPE guidance on applying authorship at journal level.

Authors must disclose relevant funding sources, institutional support, and actual, potential, or perceived competing interests in accordance with the journal's submission requirements. Such disclosures help readers and editors assess the context in which the research was conducted and reported. COPE's Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors identifies authorship statements, funding information, competing-interest declarations, and confirmation of exclusive submission as relevant elements of a responsible editorial process.

The corresponding author is responsible for coordinating communication between the author group and the editorial office throughout submission, peer review, revision, and publication. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have approved the submitted manuscript, that author names and affiliations are accurate, and that the required authorship, funding, and competing-interest declarations are complete.

The corresponding author must not add, remove, or reorder authors without the knowledge and agreement of the affected authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all authors receive important editorial communications and that questions about authorship or the integrity of the manuscript are addressed promptly. COPE recommends that journals consider communicating with all named authors, rather than only the corresponding author, and obtaining agreement from all authors when changes to authorship are proposed; see the COPE Discussion Document on Authorship.

Good Governance requires authors to provide an accurate statement describing each author's contribution to the manuscript when requested by the journal. The statement should explain the substantive roles performed by each contributor, such as conceptualization, methodology, data collection, investigation, formal analysis, interpretation, drafting, critical revision, supervision, or project administration, where applicable.

Author contribution statements must reflect actual work performed and must not be used to justify honorary, guest, or otherwise inappropriate authorship. COPE recommends that journals consider requiring individual contribution statements and signed authorship declarations as measures to promote appropriate attribution and discourage ghost and guest authorship; see the COPE Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors.

Guest or honorary authorship occurs when an individual is listed as an author despite not meeting the journal's authorship criteria. Gift authorship involves granting authorship as a courtesy, reward, or obligation rather than on the basis of a qualifying contribution. These practices are inconsistent with Good Governance's commitment to fair and accurate attribution of scholarly work. COPE specifically advises journals to promote appropriate authorship attribution and discourage guest authorship; see the COPE Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors.

Ghost authorship occurs when an individual who has made a qualifying contribution is omitted from the author list without appropriate recognition or disclosure. Authors must not conceal the involvement of contributors who meet the journal's criteria, nor list individuals who have not made a qualifying contribution. COPE recommends that journals adopt clear policies and appropriate procedures to prevent both ghost and guest authorship; see the COPE guidance on ethical editing and authorship practices.

Individuals who have contributed to the research or manuscript but do not meet the authorship criteria may be acknowledged in an appropriate section, provided that their contribution is described accurately and they have agreed to be acknowledged. Examples may include language editing, technical assistance, administrative support, routine data collection, or general supervision where the contribution does not qualify for authorship.

Acknowledgement must not be used as a substitute for authorship when an individual's contribution meets the journal's authorship criteria. Conversely, individuals should not be listed as authors solely because they provided limited assistance or hold a senior position. COPE's authorship discussion document explains that contributions that do not meet authorship requirements may be recognized through acknowledgement, while emphasizing the importance of clear policies and appropriate attribution.

For research arising from student projects, theses, dissertations, institutional research, or collaborative projects, authorship must be determined according to the actual scholarly contributions of the individuals involved. Academic rank, supervisory status, funding responsibility, or institutional hierarchy must not be the sole basis for determining authorship or author order.

Students and supervisors should discuss authorship and expected contributions as early as practicable and revisit the agreement when contributions change. Where a student has made the principal intellectual and writing contribution, the author list should accurately reflect that contribution and applicable disciplinary standards. COPE notes that authorship conventions may differ between disciplines and that journals should state their criteria clearly, including where student and supervisor contributions are involved; see the COPE Discussion Document: What Constitutes Authorship?.

The order of authors should be agreed upon by all authors before submission and should reflect the nature and extent of their respective contributions, taking into account the conventions of the relevant academic discipline. Good Governance does not automatically assign first authorship or corresponding authorship on the basis of seniority, academic rank, funding, or supervisory position.

All authors should confirm that the final author order is accurate and mutually agreed. Any disagreement should first be addressed by the author group. If a dispute cannot be resolved, the journal may request a written explanation and supporting documentation and may refer the parties to their institution or another appropriate body where necessary. COPE's authorship discussion document addresses the need for clear authorship policies and appropriate procedures for handling changes and disputes.

Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after manuscript submission must be submitted to the editorial office with a clear explanation of the reasons for the proposed change. The request must include written agreement from all affected authors and confirmation from all authors that they approve the proposed authorship arrangement. The editor may request additional documentation before making a decision.

Changes to authorship will not be accepted solely to accommodate personal preference, institutional pressure, or a change in professional status. If the author group cannot reach agreement, the journal may suspend processing of the manuscript while the dispute is addressed. COPE strongly advises journals to obtain the agreement of all authors when changes to authorship are requested after submission or publication; see the COPE Discussion Document on Authorship.

For articles that have already been published, any proposed change to the author list must be supported by an appropriate explanation and agreement from the relevant parties. The journal will assess the request in accordance with its publication policies and may consult the relevant institution if the dispute cannot be resolved. COPE's authorship guidance provides recommendations for addressing authorship issues and changes to the published record.

Good Governance takes authorship disputes and allegations of inappropriate authorship seriously. Such concerns may involve omitted contributors, guest or gift authorship, ghost authorship, unauthorized changes to the author list, or disagreement over author order. The journal will assess the information provided, communicate with relevant parties where appropriate, and seek a fair and proportionate resolution.

The journal is not a substitute for an author's institution in determining employment relationships, contractual obligations, or disputed research contributions that require institutional investigation. Where an authorship dispute cannot be resolved through the journal's procedures, the editor may ask the relevant institution to investigate and provide guidance. COPE's authorship discussion document recommends clear journal-level policies and signed agreement from all authors for changes to authorship.

If an authorship concern is associated with suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or another potential breach of publication ethics, the journal may conduct a preliminary assessment and take further action in accordance with its publication ethics procedures informed by COPE Core Practices.

All authors may be required to provide or confirm an authorship declaration as part of the submission process. By approving the declaration, each author confirms that the stated contribution is accurate, that all listed authors meet the journal's criteria, that no eligible contributor has been improperly omitted, and that the final manuscript has been approved by all authors.

The declaration should also confirm that the authors agree to take responsibility for the integrity of their contributions and will cooperate in resolving questions about the accuracy or integrity of the work. COPE recommends that journals consider obtaining an authorship statement that identifies each author's contribution, confirms that all named authors meet the journal's criteria, and confirms that no deserving contributor has been omitted; see the COPE guidance on applying authorship at journal level.

The editorial team may review authorship information to ensure that the submitted author list, contribution statements, affiliations, and declarations are complete and consistent. Where the information is unclear or raises concerns, the editor may request clarification from the corresponding author and other authors before proceeding with peer review or publication.

The journal may pause the editorial process when a significant authorship concern remains unresolved. Any decision will be made fairly and with due regard for confidentiality, the rights of the individuals involved, and the integrity of the scholarly record. COPE's Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors recommends that journals establish clear authorship procedures and obtain the relevant declarations as part of manuscript submission and editorial management.

Good Governance is committed to ensuring that authorship accurately reflects scholarly contribution, that contributors receive appropriate recognition, and that all listed authors accept the responsibilities associated with publication. Authors are expected to follow this policy and to cooperate with the editorial team in resolving questions concerning authorship, contribution statements, and accountability.