Rules for the design of articles

  • When typing an article, the following should be taken into account: font — Times New Roman, size — 14 pt., line spacing — one and a half, formatting — width, paragraph indentation — 1.25 cm, margins — 20 mm, numbering is mandatory at the bottom of the page.
  • The size of the article: up to 15 pages.
  • Articles of postgraduates and applicants for the degree of Candidate of Sciences are additionally signed by the supervisor/consultant.
  • The article should contain the following elements, designed in accordance with the requirements of the journal:
    • o UDC index;
    • o title of the article in Russian and English;
    • o the author's(s) surnames and initials in Russian and English;
    • o abstract in Russian;
    • o high-quality translation of the abstract and title of the article into English;
    • o 5-10 keywords in Russian and English;
    • o a list of references (at least 15 sources, including at least 5 foreign sources in a foreign language), arranged in alphabetical order with mandatory indication of the bibliographic data of the source;
    • o the article should contain footnotes to the literature, designed according to the list of references in square brackets.
  • The Editorial Board recommends referring to articles from journals on global citation indexes (Scopus, Web of Science) in the list of references.

After verification, a copy of the article signed by the author(s) and the originals of all accompanying documents are provided to the address: 129337, Moscow, Yaroslavskoe Shosse 26, building G, office 604. Editorial Office of the scientific and technical journal "Real Estate: Economics, Management". The paper version must fully correspond to the electronic one.

Recommendations for the preparation of the abstract of the article

The abstract in the periodical is a source of information about the content of the article and the research results presented in it.

The abstract performs the following functions:

  • provides an opportunity to establish the main content of the document, determine its relevance and decide whether to refer to the full text of the document;
  • provides information about the document and eliminates the need to read the full text of the document if the document is of secondary interest to the reader;
  • used in information, including automated, systems for searching documents and information.

The abstract (abstract) to the article should be:

  • informative (do not contain common words);
  • original;
  • informative (reflect the main content of the article and research results);
  • structured (follow the logic of the description of the results in the article);
  • compact (fit into a size of 200 to 250 words).

The abstract includes the following aspects of the content of the article:

  • subject, purpose of the work;
  • the method or methodology of the work;
  • results of work;
  • scope of the results;
  • conclusions.

The sequence of presentation of the content of the article can be changed, starting with the presentation of the results of the work and conclusions.

The subject, topic, and purpose of the work are indicated if they are not clear from the title of the article.

It is advisable to describe the method or methodology of the work if they differ in novelty or are of interest from the point of view of this work. The abstracts of the documents describing the experimental work indicate the data sources and the nature of their processing.

The results of the work are described extremely accurately and informatively. The main theoretical and experimental results, actual data, discovered relationships and patterns are presented. At the same time, preference is given to new results and data of long-term significance, important discoveries, conclusions that refute existing theories, as well as data that, according to the author, have practical significance.

Conclusions can be accompanied by recommendations, assessments, suggestions, hypotheses described in the article.

The information contained in the title of the article should not be repeated in the text of the abstract (abstract). Unnecessary introductory phrases should be avoided (for example, "the author of the article is considering ...").

Historical references, if they do not constitute the main content of the document, a description of previously published works and well-known provisions are not given in the abstract (abstract).

In the text of the abstract, syntactic constructions peculiar to the language of scientific and technical documents should be used, and complex grammatical constructions should be avoided.

Significant words from the text of the article should be used in the text of the abstract (abstract).

 

Peer review procedure

  1. The reviewing of all articles published in the Journal is an obligatory procedure. The reviewing allows to comply with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community and to prevent any violations of these rules in personal work as well as in relations with all participants of the science publication process.
  2. Articles received by the editorial office and meet the formal criteria are considered at editorial board meeting for correspondence to the Journal’s profile and to determine the range of reviewers.
  3. All articles that correspond to the Journal’s profile are send for double-blind peer review. Reviewing can be performed by editorial board members and outside experts, who determine the development of scientific thought, have their own scientific schools and followers in Russia and abroad, who made a significant contribution in different areas of law science, and highly cited in academic circles university experts who have been published in relevant subject areas.
  4. Reviewer evaluates:
    • Whether the article corresponds to the scientific journal specialization, whether the article’s content corresponds to the article’s topic.
    • The relevance of the topic.
    • Whether the article has the scientific problem statement.
    • Consideration of what problem makes the content of the article.
    • Whether the author is suggesting something new, scientific innovation.
    • Whether research results are convincing, and presentation of the material is logical.
    • Whether research results corresponds to initial scientific problem statement.
    • Terminological unambiguity.
    • Author’s knowledge of scientific literature about discussed issues, including international experience.
    • Particular qualities of authors writing style and language (if the article’s language and style is apprehensible, the necessity of additional scientific and literary editing, etc.)
  5. The review should contain specific conclusions:
    • Whether it would be beneficial to publish the article taking into account previous publications and researches on the matter
    • Pluses and minuses of the article as well as what the author should change or add to the article
    • The final qualification for publishing must be either ‘Recommended’ or ‘Recommended for publishing provided that the author eliminates the minuses pointed out by the reviewer’ or ‘Not recommended’.
  6. The review is to be in printed form; it is to be signed by the reviewer and certified with a seal of his\her affiliating institution.
  7. The expert returns his review to the Editorial Board within 15 days. The review provides his recommendations on accepting or rejecting the manuscript for publication.
  8. The reviews on the received materials are sent to authors by e-mail.
  9. If the manuscript is not accepted for publication the Editorial Board sends the author its motivated refusal.
  10. The article which is not recommended for publishing cannot be considered again.
  11. A positive review on the article is not a sufficient condition for its publication. The editorial board takes a final decision on reasonability of publishing.
  12. After the article is admitted for publication, the editorial board informs the author about this fact and specifies the publication date.
  13. The review’s originals are kept in the editorial office for 5 years.

Treatment of manuscripts

  1. Manuscripts are accepted according to the following schedule:
    • for № 1 (March) — deadline: January 1 of the current year;
    • for № 2 (June) — deadline: April 1 of the current year;
    • for № 3 (September) — deadline: July 1 of the current year;
    • for № 4 (December) — deadline: October 1 of the current year;
  2. The articles are accepted for consideration provided that they conform to the requirements for the authors’ editions and are accompanied with the supporting documents.
  3. The executive secretary notifies the authors of receiving the articles within 14 days by e-mail, checks for compliance with formal criteria and conducts a check for text originality using the “Anti-Plagiarism” system. The executive secretary corresponds with authors about making corrections if necessary. After corrections are made, the executive secretary refers the articles to Chief (Research) Editor and to the editorial board of the Journal.
  4. The editorial board considers received articles. The editorial board determines whether the article corresponds to the Journal’s profile. Articles that meet the formal requirements are sent for reviewing. The editorial board informs authors about results of reviewing. Information about the plan of publishing authors report after consideration of articles peer-reviewed at the regular meeting of the editorial board.
  5. The Editorial Board has a right to reject an article if it does not meet the requirements or does not fit the scope of the Journal.
  6. The editorial board sends a reasoned refusal to an author if his/her article was not accepted for publishing.
  7. The editorial board determines whether the article corresponds to the journal’s profile. Then, the article is sent for compulsory reviewing. (review procedure for manuscripts submitted).
  8. The Editorial Board has a right to do scientific and literary editing of an article, shorten it (subject to agreement by the author) or, if the topic of the article is interesting for the Journal, return it to the author for revision.
  9. The Editorial Board does not discuss its decisions with the authors of rejected manuscripts, manuscripts are not returned.