About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The Revista de Economía del Caribe is a biannual publication of the Economic department of Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla (Colombia), which purpose is disseminate the results carried out in the area of economics. The Revista de Economía del Caribe is aimed to social science professionals and investigators whom are interested in the economic fundamentals applied to education, health, environment, job market, regional growth and institutions, among others aspects.

Peer Review Process

a) Articles submitted to Revista de Economía del Caribe should not be simultaneously submitted for evaluation in other journals or other means of publication.

b) The Revista de Economía del Caribe will only accept unpublished articles for publication, except those published as working documents. In the event that the same work or a similar version has been previously published in print or on the web, it is the authors' obligation to make it known to the Editorial Committee and to attach a copy of what was previously published.

c) Articles must be uploaded to the journal's OJS system, which requires the lead author to register and follow the steps presented. The registration link is: https://rcientificas.uninorte.edu.co/index.php/economia/user/register. Any additional information can be requested from the editor of Revista de Economía del Caribe, at the email rev-ecocaribe@uninorte.edu.co.

d) A first review by the editorial committee will establish the length, relevance, format and quality review of the article, to decide whether to refer it to external peer review or to reject it immediately. In case of being sent to peer review, the external referee(s) will review the document, which will be sent without names of the authors or institutional affiliations (blind peer review). The manuscripts will be evaluated for coherence, relevance, scientific rigor, clarity, and a concept (favorable or unfavorable) will be issued, following a format provided by the journal. Additionally, if necessary, suggestions will be made to the authors. The Editorial Committee will review the documents again taking into account the concepts of the reviewer and will send the results of this review to the authors. In case modifications are required in the article, the author will be asked to make each one of them. The articles that have satisfactorily completed this process will be accepted and will be sent to the Editorial for their final layout and publication.

e) We understand that, if a work is accepted for publication, the rights of printing and reproduction by any means belong to Revista de Economía del Caribe. However, any reasonable request from article authors to obtain permission to reproduce their contributions will be met.

f) It is also understood that the opinions and evaluations expressed by the authors in the articles are their sole responsibility and do not compromise Revista de Economía del Caribe.




Title of article


Date received


Date due


Reviewer name


TYPE OF DOCUMENT (Remark with “x”):

Investigation (  )

Reflection (   )

Literature review (   )

Other (   )


1. How do you qualify this article according to its rigorous, consistent and depth?

High quality (  )

Moderately quality (  )

Low quality (  )

2. How do you qualify originality of this article according to conceptual and theory formultaion, as well as its developtment and contribution?

Highly original (  )

Moderately originality (  )

It is not original (  )

3. How relevant and pertinent do you consider this article according to area of study?

Highly relevant (  )

Moderately relevant (  )

It is not relevant (  )

4. How do you rate the presentation of this article and its wording?

High quality (  )

Moderately quality (  )

It is not quality ( )


5. According to preview evaluation you consider that this article must be:

APPROVED (     )                                                                                         REJECTED (  )

6. In case to be APPROVED, the article needs:

No modifications (   )                   Minor modifications (   )             Profound modifications ( )

7. General concept and recommendations:

· General concept:

· Abstract:

· Introduction:

· Literature review and theoric framework

· Results:

· Tables and graphics:

· References:


8. Origin of reviewer

INTERNAL (    )                                                                                                  EXTERNAL (    )


Open Access Policy

This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.



Ethical Standards

Currently, Universidad del Norte publishes 10 journals. Publication of an article in an academic peer-reviewed journal serves several functions, one of which is to validate and preserve the "minutes" of research.

It is therefore of great importance that these "minutes" are accurate and trustworthy. The act of publishing involves many parties, each of which plays an important role in achieving these goals. It therefore follows that the author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher have responsibilities to meet expected ethical standards at all stages in their involvement from submission to publication of an article.

Editors will verify the originality of the submitted works through the use of anti-plagiarism software established by the Universidad del Norte at its internal network.

Universidad del Norte is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. We follow closely the industry associations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), that set standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet these requirements.

Below is a summary of our key expectations of editors, peer-reviewers and authors, which adhere to the publication ethics and malpractice policies outlined by COPE. More extensive resources are available from COPEand (WAME) .

1. Ethical expectations

Editors' responsibilities

• To act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.

• To handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

• To adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.

Reviewers' responsibilities

• To contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner

• To maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author. To not retain or copy the manuscript.

• To alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.

• To be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and to alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript.

Authors' responsibilities

• To maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by employer, funding body and others who might have an interest, to deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others.

• To confirm that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite those sources. Additionally, to provide the editor with a copy of any submitted manuscript that might contain overlapping or closely related content.

• To confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources. To obtain permission to reproduce any content from other sources.

• Authors must guarantee that any studies involving human or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate. Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy.

• To declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g. where the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process).

• To notify promptly the journal editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. To cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.

Publisher responsibilities

• Universidad del Norte shall ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined above.

2. Procedures for dealing with unethical behaviour

Identification of unethical behaviour

· Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.

· Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.


• An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate.

• Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

Minor breaches

• Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

Serious breaches

• Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

• Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.

• A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.

• Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.

• Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.

• A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.

• Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.

• Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.

• Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.



  • Universidad del Norte