- Focus and Scope
- Section Policies
- Peer Review Process
- Publication Frequency
- Open Access Policy
- Archiving
- Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Focus and Scope
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy is intended to be an instrument to publish doctrinal and scientific aspects related to the interaction between public policy and law. We look for papers related to governance, integration, citizen participation, development and other issues involving the State, Society and Law.
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy follows three main editorial lines:
I) Democracy, Policies of State and Government and their related legal aspects: new trends in Constitutional and Administrative Law ; Theory of public policies ; Government system; Electoral system and citizenship; Political Party system and constitutional reform.
II) Economic and Social Development Public Policies and their relation to Law: Economic development and local/regional production policies; Sustainable development and environment; Human development and Administration of government action.
III) Public Policy Assessment: Theories of evaluation of public policy; Methodology of evaluation of public policies and development policies; Legal methodology of public policy analysis, Results of analysis of public policy, Research in sectorial public policy.
Articles published in the BJPP must fit into at least one of the themes mentioned above. Eventually, at the discretion of the editorial board, a special issue of the Journal can be prepared and dedicated to only one of the thematic axes, or even one of its subdivisions.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
The Brazilian Journal of Public Policy receives, free of charge, original articles in Portuguese, English and Spanish. No fees are charged during the evaluation and publication process. Thus, after peer review, articles are released at no cost to the author and the reader.
Section Policies
Artigos
Outros Temas
Edição Completa
Editorial
Poder Constituinte
Jurisdição constitucional e democracia
Constitucionalismo transformador e Ius constitucionale commune na America Latina, marco teórico
Novo contitutionalismo Latino-americano
Direitos fundamentais
Povos indígenas
Gênero, Raça e Direito
Direito Constitucional Ambiental
Seção I: Convidado Especial
Seção II: Dossiê Temático - Parte Geral: Aspectos Teóricos
Parte Geral: Aspectos Teóricos
Seção II: Dossiê Temático - Parte Específica: Incidências Concretas
Seção III: Temas Gerais
Direitos fundamentais, hermenêutica e meio ambiente
Direitos da natureza
Povos indígenas
Ecofeminismo
Instrumentos e incentivos para a concretização da proteção ao meio ambiente
Acesso à justiça em matéria ambiental
Mudanças climáticas
Políticas públicas: aspectos gerais
Políticas públicas e COVID-19
Políticas públicas e accountability
Políticas públicas em matéria de saúde
Outras políticas públicas em espécie
Temas Gerais
Novos institutos jurídicos de licitações e contratos
Resiliência democrática: contribuições do constitucionalismo transformador contra o retrocesso
Refundação democrática: contribuições do constitucionalismo transformador a uma nova ordem constitucional
Diálogo entre ordens internacionais e nacionais: o constitucionalismo transformador na América Latina
Diálogo entre ordens internacionais: o constitucionalismo transformador entre regiões
Povos indígenas e transformação
Grupos vulneráveis e transformação
Direitos humanos, empresas e transformação
Outras perspectivas sobre transformação
Licitações e contratos públicos: parte geral
Accountability e controle
Eficiência
Contratação pública no direito estrangeiro
Políticas públicas e institucionalidade
Políticas públicas, grupos vulneráveis e litígios estruturais
Políticas públicas e ação restaurativa
Diagnóstico e políticas públicas
Saúde
Trabalho
Gênero
Decolonialidade e contra-hegemonia
Problemas e perspectivas da relação entre o Direito Penal e o Direito Processual Penal
Políticas de proteção a grupos vulneráveis
Políticas públicas e ambiente digital
Temas diversos em políticas públicas
Políticas públicas, desenvolvimento e justiça
Políticas públicas em tecnologia
Políticas públicas em matéria alimentar
Políticas públicas em educação
Pública pública em saúde
Políticas públicas em saneamento
Política pública urbana
Políticas públicas ambientais
Políticas públicas direcionadas a grupos minoritários
Problemas e perspectivas da relação entre o Direito Penal, Direito Processual Penal e a política criminal
Fundamentos do sistema jurídico-penal
Direito Penal
Direito Processual Penal
Política criminal
Os contornos sistêmicos do Direito Administrativo Sancionador brasileiro e a sua relação com o Direito Constitucional
Políticas públicas, pobreza e desigualdade
Políticas públicas, indústria e finanças
Políticas públicas em meio ambiente
Políticas públicas em saúde
Políticas públicas voltadas à administração pública
Políticas públicas, justiça e formas alternativas de solução de controvérsias
Políticas públicas em matéria penal
Temas de Direito Constitucional e Eleitoral
Políticas públicas em desenvolvimento sustentável
Políticas públicas em direito digital
Políticas públicas em regulação financeira e fiscal
Intervenção de atores nacionais em políticas públicas
Políticas públicas em matéria de grupos minoritários
Outros temas em políticas públicas
Dossiê temático: Os Contornos Sistêmicos do Direito Administrativo Sancionador Brasileiro e a Relação com o Direito Cons
Políticas Públicas, Direitos das Mulheres, Infância e Adolescência
Políticas Públicas em Saúde
Outros temas em políticas públicas
Políticas públicas em saúde, temas emergentes e polêmicos
Políticas públicas em saúde e indústria farmacêutica
Políticas públicas em saúde, pandemia e questões correlatas
Políticas públicas e novas tecnologias
Políticas públicas e judicialização
Grupos Vulneráveis e Políticas Sociais
Desenvolvimento e Gestão Publica
Justiça, administração e concretização de direitos humanos
Governança e políticas públicas
Peer Review Process
The process of evaluating articles and reviews comprises two phases. First aimed at analyzing the suitability of the work to the editorial line (Editorial Board). The second on evaluation of the content and quality of work. This second phase is performed by the peer review process, that is, articles will be submitted for approval at least two independent reviewers, following a Double blind review. In other words, papers will be sent for evaluation without the author identifying himself or herself and authors would not be able to identify reviewers.
Reviewers have 15 days to answer, in order to be paid. Normally, authors will have an answer in a few days, but sometimes, it is needed to send the paper to various reviewers, and the final answer will take longer.
Publication Frequency
RBPP is a regular publication, quarterly published since vol 6. number 2, 2016. Each year a volume with three issues is published.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content since freely available scientific knowledge supports a greater global democratization of knowledge.
Archiving
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and allows them to create permanent archives of the journal for the preservation and restoration
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
To ensure honesty and academic integrity, the Brazilian Journal of Public Policy follows the Code of Conduct and Guidelines of best practices for Editors prepared by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE 2011). The commitment to ensure good ethical and deontological practices must be assumed by all the editorial staff, authors and reviewers.
Therefore, according to the recommendations established by the Committee on Publication Ethics, each of the parties involved in the evaluation process and publication of the proposed articles should, at least, commit to the following:
Editors duties:
• Be responsible for the content of the journal as a whole;
• Strive to meet the interests of readers, authors and members of the Editorial Board, as well as keep them informed about the objectives and editorial policy of the journal;
• Evaluate the proposed articles solely on their academic merits, disconsider the nature of the authors, their institution and their race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy.
• Do not use unpublished information for their own research without the express consent of the author;
• Ensure the existence of a fair scientific process of evaluation, impartial and timely, as well as transparency in Editing and publication of the manuscripts;
• Identify and report cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate publication
• Ensure the confidentiality of the manuscripts;
•Constantly improve the journal;
Authors duties:
• Submit articles with an objective discussion, resulting from an important research work. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Any form of plagiarism, fraudulent statements or knowingly inaccurate data are unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• Do not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal;
• Ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere, in any language, and that the authors have used the work and / or words of others, citing appropriately.
• Follow the laws and conventions of copyright. Material protected by copyright (eg, tables, figures or extensive quotes) should be reproduced only with proper acknowledgment and permission.
• In case of joint authorship, it should be guaranteed the consensus in approving the final version of the manuscript for evaluation or publication;
• When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his own published work, it is his obligation to immediately notify the Editorial staff of the journal and work with them to retract or correct the article.
Duties of Reviewers:
• Assist the editor in making editorial decisions;
• Ensure confidentiality during the peer review process;
• Demonstrate the existence of conflict of interest or impossibility in evaluation;
• Call the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any published article which the reviewer has personal knowledge.
• Prepare reviews without personal criticism to the author. Reviewers must clearly express their perspectives with arguments.
• Do not use for their own benefit the ideas obtained through the evaluation process;
• The recommendation to accept or reject an article should be based on its importance, originality and clarity, as well as the validity of the study and its integration within the scope of the journal;
• The review should be objective and recommendations should be based on solid arguments for the authors to improve the text.
• Recommend relevant publications when they are not mentioned;
• When the manuscript does not fit in the reviewer’ research area or when it is known that the deadline will not be met, he/she shall inform the editors;
• Respect deadlines.
For more information see the document bellow:
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from:
http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf
