Studies and researches applied to wine sector, as well as the management skills needed for the competitive development of wine companies, require an increasing international approach.
The mission of this journal is to bring together academic researchers and business professionals interested in the economics and politics of wine around the world, and bring about a worldwide opinion on the current issues that the wine sector faces.

Types of paper

Contributions falling into the following categories will be considered for publication: Full Lenght Articles (Original research articles (complete report on original research), Review Articles (substantial overview of the existing literature) and Case Studies articles), Discussions , Book Reviews and Conference Reports

Please ensure that you select the appropriate article type from the list of options when making your submission. Authors contributing to special issues should ensure that they select the special issue article type from this list.

Referees
Please submit (in the "comments for the Editor") the names and institutional e-mail addresses of several potential referees.  Note that the editor retains the sole right to decide whether or not the suggested reviewers are used.

Peer Review Process

This journal operates a single blind review process. All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final.

Open Access Policy

Wine Economics and Policy provides immediate open access to its content. Our publisher, Firenze University Press at the University of Florence, complies with the Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of Open Access: By “open access” , we mean the free availability on the public internet, the permission for all users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of the articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain is to guarantee the original authors with control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited. We support a greater global exchange of knowledge by making the research published in our journal open to the public and reusable under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY-4.0). Furthermore, we encourage authors to post their pre-publication manuscript in institutional repositories or on their websites prior to and during the submission process and to post the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version after publication without embargo. These practices benefit authors with productive exchanges as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

JUST ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPTS

In response to the requests of our scientific community, WEP is glad to make articles available online after acceptance.

After peer-review and revision, the Just Accepted Manuscripts will be posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication, and author proofing. This is a service we offer to the research community in order to to expedite the dissemination of scientific information as soon as possible after acceptance. Just Accepted Manuscripts will be given a header, an article ID, a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), and will show an “Accepted Manuscript” watermark across each page. Finally the Just Accepted Manuscripts will be removed from the website, the article will be assigned to a forthcoming issue and published both online and in hard copy. The DOI will always remain the same, to make sure that all citations will correctly link to the final paper.

PUBLICATION FREQUENCY

Papers will be published two times per year: in June and December.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

Authors who publish with Wine Economics and Policy agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY-4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in Wine Economics and Policy.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

PUBLICATION ETHICS

Responsibilities of Wine Economics and Policy's editors, reviewers, and authors concerning publication ethics and publication malpractice are described in FUP Publication Ethics & Publication Malpractice Statement 

WEP Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based, in large part, on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The relevant duties and expectations of authors, reviewers, and editors of the journal are set out below.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

By submitting a manuscript to a WEP Journal, the author(s) warrant that the manuscript is their own, original work and that it has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere. They also warrant that the sources of any ideas and/or words in the manuscript that are not their own have been properly attributed through appropriate citations and/or quotes. An author should not normally publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in multiple journals or publication venues. Such redundant publication is generally considered to constitute unethical publishing behavior, and if discovered may result in a manuscript under consideration being rejected, or a published article being retracted. Authors of manuscripts reporting on original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, accompanied by an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and the making of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and may be cause for rejection or retraction of a manuscript or published article. Where the manuscript reports on commercial software, hardware, or other products, authors must include a declaration at the beginning of the manuscript in which they must either state that no conflict of interest exists or describe the nature of any potential conflict. All sources of financial support for the research should also be disclosed in the manuscript. The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication with WEP the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International”. This license allows the author(s) to retain the copyright and allows anyone to download, reuse, re-print, modify, distribute and/or copy the final version of the papers. The works must be properly attributed to its author(s). It is not necessary to ask further permissions both to author(s) or journal board, although you are kindly requested to inform the Journal Board for every reuse of the papers. Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. The authors’ names should be listed on the article in order of their contribution to the article, and all authors take responsibility for their own contributions. Only those individuals who have made a substantive contribution should be listed as authors; those whose contributions are indirect or marginal (e.g., colleagues or supervisors who have reviewed drafts of the work or provided proofreading assistance, and heads of research institutes/centers/labs) should be named in an “Acknowledgments” section at the end of the article, immediately preceding the Reference List. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the article, and that all listed co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its publication. Where an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in an article of his/hers that has been published in a WEP journal, he/she has an obligation to promptly notify the editors and cooperate with them to correct the article or retract it as appropriate.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS

Reviewers work for the journal on a volunteer basis. Given that most of these individuals are in full-time employment, their reviewing activities for FUP journals must, by necessity, not be their top priority. Reviewers are free to decline invitations to review particular manuscripts at their discretion, for example, if their current employment workload and/or other commitments make it prohibitive for them to complete a review in a timely fashion and to do justice to the task in the available timeframe. They should also not accept manuscript review assignments for which they feel unqualified. Reviewers who have accepted manuscript assignments are normally expected to submit their reviews within three weeks. They should recuse themselves from the assignment if it becomes apparent to them at any stage that they do not possess the required expertise to perform the review, or that they may have a potential conflict of interest in performing the review (e.g., one resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript). Privileged information or ideas obtained by reviewers through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents, and must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor. When conducting their reviews, reviewers are asked to do so as objectively as possible, refraining from engaging in personal criticism of the author(s). They are encouraged to express their views clearly, explaining and justifying all recommendations made. They should always attempt to provide detailed and constructive feedback to assist the author(s) in improving their work, even if the manuscript is, in their opinion, not publishable. Reviewers should identify in their reviews relevant published work that has not been cited by the author(s), together with any instances in which proper attribution of sources has not been provided. They should call to the responsible editor’s attention any major resemblances between a manuscript under consideration and other published articles or papers of which they are aware, as well as any concerns they might have in relation to the ethical acceptability of the research reported in the manuscript.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORS

The Editor has ultimate responsibility for deciding if a manuscript submitted to a FUP journal should be published, and in doing so is guided by the Journal’s policies as determined by the journal editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with the Associate Editor and other members of the editorial team, as well as with reviewers, in making publication decisions. The editors will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). They will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the FUP editorial board members, as appropriate. Additionally, the editors will make every effort to ensure the integrity of the blind review process by not revealing the identity of the author(s) of a manuscript to the reviewers of that manuscript, and vice versa. When evaluating a manuscript for publication, in addition to considering standard criteria pertaining to the rigor of the manuscript, the quality of its presentation, and its contribution to humanity’s stock of knowledge, the editors will also seek evidence that ethical harms have been minimized in the conduct of the reported research. They will question whether the benefits outweigh the harms in the particular study’s case. Since FUP welcomes the submission of manuscripts from any country, it is necessary to recognize that laws and regulations regarding research ethics and ethical approval vary worldwide. As such, the editors may need to seek clarification in this regard with the author(s) and request that they supply a letter from the relevant institutional ethics committee or board that approved the research. The editors will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing an expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in FUP journals. They are committed to working closely with research organizations and institutions in line with COPE’s advice on Cooperation between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity Cases.

CORRECTIONS AND RETRACTIONS

In accordance with the generally accepted standards of scholarly publishing,  Wine Economics and Policy does not alter articles after publication: "Articles that have been published should remain extant, exact and unaltered to the maximum extent possible".
In cases of serious errors or (suspected) misconduct  Wine Economics and Policypublishes corrections and retractions (expressions of concern).

Corrections
In cases of serious errors that affect or significantly impair the reader’s understanding or evaluation of the article,  Wine Economics and Policy publishes a correction note that is linked to the published article. The published article will be left unchanged.
Retractions 
In accordance with the "Retraction Guidelines" by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)  Wine Economics and Policy will retract a published article if 
  • there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation)
  • the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  • it turns out to be an act of plagiarism
  • it reports unethical research.
An article is retracted by publishing a retraction notice that is linked to or replaces the retracted article.  Wine Economics and Policy will make any effort to clearly identify a retracted article as such.
If an investigation is underway that might result in the retraction of an article  Wine Economics and Policy may choose to alert readers by publishing an expression of concern.
 
COMPLYNG WITH ETHICS OF EXPERIMENTATION

Please ensure that all research reported in submitted papers has been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, and is in full compliance with all relevant codes of experimentation and legislation. All papers which report in vivo experiments or clinical trials on humans or animals must include a written statement in the Methods section. This should explain that all work was conducted with the formal approval of the local human subject or animal care committees (institutional and national), and that clinical trials have been registered as legislation requires. Authors who do not have formal ethics review committees should include a statement that their study follows the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki

ARCHIVING

 Wine Economics and Policy and Firenze University Press are experimenting a National legal deposition and long-term digital preservation service.