Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The main purpose of publishing the Journal is to highlight the current state of certain problems of architecture, applied art and design, the Higher School of Architecture and Civil Engineering of Russia and to publish previously unpublished scientific works that have reliability, relevance, as well as theoretical or practical significance in these areas.

Individual issues of the Journal can be thematic or targeted (publications based on materials of student conferences, young scientists; issues dedicated to congresses, anniversaries of faculties, departments, etc.).

The Journal may also provide a place for short scientific reports, discussions, reviews of monographs, textbooks.

The planned volume of advertising is in accordance with the advertising legislation of the Russian Federation. The magazine contains advertisements that are directly related to architecture, arts and crafts and education.

The journal is published once a year (until 2018, once a quarter (four times a year)) with articles on the following thematic specialties:


  • 05.23.20 Theory and history of architecture, restoration and reconstruction of historical and architectural heritage;
  • 05.23.21 Architecture of buildings and structures. Creative concepts of architectural activity;
  • 05.23.22 Urban planning, planning of rural settlements.

Applied arts and design:

  • 17.00.04 Fine and decorative-applied arts and architecture
  • 17.00.06 Technical aesthetics and design
  • 17.00.09 Theory and history of art




Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The Editorial Board of the journal carries out peer review of all submitted manuscripts and materials to assess their quality. All peer-reviewers are to be specialists in the corresponding scientific fields. Peer reviews are kept by the Editorial Board for three years. The purpose of peer review is improve the quality of scientific publications in the journal, to ensure they meet specific criteria, to check them for accuracy and assess the validity of the research methodology and procedures, to promote materials of high theoretical and practical value.

The author submits his/her manuscript (еto the attention of the Editor in Chief) written and formatted in accordance with the authors’ guidelines hosted on journal.samgasu.ru. The manuscript submitted for publication should not contain classified information. If the information presented is classified the manuscript can be rejected and acknowledge not eligible for public access.

After being submitted all materials are checked to ensure they meet general publication criteria of the journal within three days. The Editor in Chief can reject the materials as advised by the Executive Secretary if they do not correspond to the scientific fields or topics of the journal or if the manuscript format guidelines are violated. In this case the materials are returned to the author(s) via e-mail accompanied with the statement: The materials do not meet the criteria established by the Editorial Board.

In case the materials meet all criteria and requirements, the Executive Secretary registers the submitted manuscript in the «Registration log book». Then the manuscript goes to the Editorial Board and it appoints a peer reviewer to evaluate the manuscript. A peer reviewer should not work in the same department with the author.

All types of manuscripts and papers submitted are subject to peer review.

If the author is not a full-time SSTU employee or applicant, his/her manuscript can be accompanied with an independent review done by an independant review (not a SSTU emploee either). This independent review should be signed by a person with a scientific degree. The review is to be signed and stamped by the official representative of the Institution / Organization in which the reviewer works.

For independent peer reviewing the Editorial Board establishes Peer Reviewing Institution with the members of the Editorial Board and leading Russian specialists in the corresponding scientific fields being its peer reviewers. The members of this Peer Reviewing Institution are approved by the Editor in Chief.


Publication Frequency

The journal is published once a year (until 2018, once a quarter (four times a year)).


Open Access Policy

Статьи этого журнала доступны всем желающим с момента публикации, что обеспечивает свободный открытый доступ к результатам исследований и способствует прогрессу науки и медицины.



The journal uses the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve all the published articles. The PKP PN is a part of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content.



The journal indexing in:

  • Russian Science Citation Index - is a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The SCIENCE INDEX project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
  • Google Scholar
  • Ulrich's Periodical Directory


Publication Ethics


Editorial board of the journal "Innovative Project" adhere to the ethical norms approved by international scientific society. The following documents are recognized as defining ethical policy of the journal:

  1. Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
  2. Recommendations of the Committee on Publication ethics (COPE).


Editorial team makes a decision which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision for publication of each article is basedupon its scientific relevance, authenticity, clarity of presentation and compliance of the research topic with the scientific direction of the journal.

Dealing with the question of paper acceptance, the editorial boardis guided by the policy of the journal taking into account the existing copyright legislation, avoiding cases of libel and plagiarism. Editorial assessment of the manuscript is conducted regardless of race, ethnic background, gender, religious beliefs, nationality or political philosophy of the authors.


The editorial staff has personal responsibility for the disclosure of any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding authors, reviewers, potential reviewers and publishers.


The editorial staff must not use the unpublished materialpresented in authors' manuscripts in their own research without the written consent of the authors.


Plagiarism is a serious violation of Editorial Ethics.

Manuscripts submitted to the journal "Innovative Project" are tested for plagiarism using "ANTIPLAGIAT" system. Identifying plagiarism is a part of scientific review. In case of unauthorized borrowings and low coefficient of text originality, the editors make a decision to reject the paper.

Furthermore, the editorial boardmay receive written notifications of plagiarism from different sources — readers, professional and social organizations, government structures and establishments. According to the international standards, on receiving such a message, the editorial board must send a letter of response with information about the initiation of editorial investigation and its time frame (1—2 months).

The editorial board is obliged to consider any claim for the facts of unethical behavior, even if it is received years after the article publication.

After finishing the investigation, the editorial staff must inform the person or organizationreportingabout the fact of plagiarism about the decision and actions taken.

In case ofminor plagiarism, the editorial board informs the author about the revealedfact ofplagiarism and receives written explanations.

If the author’s violation is qualified as unintentional,the editor only makes a comment and notifies about the impermissibility of repeated violation.

If the violation is qualified as deliberate or repeated, the editorial boardpublishes updating report in the next issue of the journal. The updating report includes the fullreference to the previously published paper and citation of all the borrowed fragments with the references to the original sources.

In case ofsignificant plagiarism,the editorial boardinitiates the process of retraction of the author’s article.

The retraction results are presented in both print and electronic versions of the journal.

The editors must report about the fact of retraction to allthe databases in which the journal is indexed.

The editors observe regularly updated informationon international retractions via the blog http://retractionwatch.com.


The journal publishes only the results of the researchesconducted according to thestandards of biomedical ethics.

The manuscripts should indicate all the risks (manifested and potential) that were posed to the objects of study (people or animals).



Reviewing procedure supports the editors in making editorial decisions and alsocan help the authors to improve the submitted manuscript.


If the reviewer selected by the editor does not have sufficient qualifications for reviewing the manuscript or realizes that he/she does not have the opportunity to produce a review within the time limits specified by the editorial board, he/she must immediately notify the editorial office and withdraw from further review process.


Any material received for review must be treated as a confidential document. The submitted materials must not be shown to or discussed with other people without prior consent of the editorial board.


Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewer’s opinionshould be expressed clearly, with supporting points.


Reviewers should identifythe cases when relevant published works were not citedin the manuscript or were not indicated in the reference list. In addition, the reviewermonitors if all the statements,conclusions and ideas that were borrowed from other papers are accompanied by correspondingsource reference. If the reviewer noticesany substantial similarity between the manus­cript under consideration and any other known published paper, he/she is obliged to inform the editorial board about this fact.


Undisclosable information and ideas that the reviewer receives during the review of the manuscript are considered confidential, and therefore cannot be used by the reviewer for personal purposes. The reviewer has no right to review the manuscripts in respect of which he/she has a conflict of interests due to competitive, collegial or any other connections with the authors of the manuscript, as well as companies or institutions related to the manuscript.RESPONSIBILITY OF AUTHORS


If the article is based on an original study, the authors must provide reliable results of the conducted work and an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The manuscript should contain all the key data, as well as accurate description of the details of the study and links to ensure the reproducibility of the results. Falsification of data or knowingly incorrect statements in the manuscript are considered unethical and unacceptable.


In addition to the manuscript, the editors have the right to request original data from the authors. The author is obliged to allow access to it (provided that this access will not violate the confidentiality of the participants of the experiment, as well as the personal or corporate rights of the dataowners).


Authors mustsubmit only original works. Referring to the works of other authors, the author must observe accuracy in citing and indicating the source. Publications that have significantly influenced the preparation of the research or defined its format should also be mentioned in the article.


Materials describing the content of the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Sending a manuscript to more than one journalis considered unethical and unacceptable.

Copyrighted materials that have already been publishedcannot be submitted for publication. Likewise, submitted materials under consideration cannot be sent to another journal for publication as a copyrighted article.

When submitting an article, the author should inform the editor about all previous submissions of the paper, which can be considered as duplicating or double publication.

The author is obliged to warn the editor that the manuscript contains information published in previous reports or submitted for another publication.

In these cases, the new article should contain references to the preceding material.


The list of authors should include only those who have made a significant contribution into

  • concept and design of the research, acquisition and interpretation of the data;
  • drafting the work or its critical revision aimed at improving the quality;
  • final approval of the version to be published.

The contribution of each author should besufficient to take public responsibility for the corresponding part of the content of the article.

Participation in providing funding or selecting material for the article is not sufficient for authorship.

The overall management of the research team is not recognized as sufficient for authorship either.

All persons indicated as authors must approve the final version of the manuscript, as well as its submission to the journal for publication.


When submitting a manuscript to the journal, all the authors sign a Form for Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest concerning any existing financial or other significant conflicts of interest that may be regarded as having affected the results of the study or their interpretation. Furthermore, all sources of funding for the described work should be specified.


If the experimental research included people or animals as the objects of study, the authors are obliged to report in the manuscript that all stages of the research were conducted in accordance with the legislation and regulatory documents. The manuscript should reflect that voluntary informed consent was obtained from all people who were the objects of study.


Based on the results of the review, the article may be sent to the author for revision. Authors should actively participate in the review process, respond promptly to questions and, if necessary, correct the manuscript in accordance with the requirements of the reviewer.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies