Editorial policy


Types of articles eligible for publication

CCPA publishes peer-reviewed papers dealing with various aspects of public administration issues.

These include:

  1. Reviewed papers– these undergo a review and may be categorised as the following:
    • original scientific paper – the paper contains original research conducted by the author and/or the author’s original conclusions, and represents a contribution to a specific area of science;
    • review scientific paper – the paper offers a synthesis and a review of the situation in a particular area or of a particular topic; it contains an appropriate review of the scientific literature, but it does not contain the results of original research conducted by the author or original ideas;
    • preliminary scientific report – the paper contains initial results of the research conducted by the author, but it does not make an elaborate contribution to a specific area of science;
    • professional paper – the paper contains an overview of a particular area or topic, but it is oriented towards practical implementation and does not contain scientific elements.

    Prior to publication, papers are categorised in the corresponding journal sections. The Editorial Board decides on the categorisation upon the suggestions made by the reviewers and proposal of the editor-in-chief, the assistant editors, and the executive editor. The review is a double-blind process that guarantees the anonymity of authors and reviewers alike.

    Papers are published in Croatian or English, and only exceptionally in another language (Slovenian, German, French, Italian, Spanish, orPortuguese). The Editorial Board shall arrange for translations or longer paper summaries in Croatian, and provides language-editing and proofreading services for accepted papers free of charge. The Editorial Board alsoreservesthe right to intervene in the content of the paper in case the writing does not satisfy the technical requirements of the journal or when this is necessary in order to avoid legal responsibility. Finally, the Editorial Board reserves the right to amend parts of the text which are not necessary for the paper itself, which are not in accordance with the standards of scientific journals, or which contain statements that mayresult in some form of responsibility of the Editorial Board.

  2. Book and journal reviews in the interdisciplinary field of public administration – these do not undergo a review.

Exceptionally, when the Editorial Board findsit appropriate, a special volume published as a supplement to the journal maybe issued. This volume may contain:

  •  Court and administrative practice – includes analyses, reviews, and translations of relevant court sentences and decisions of Croatian and European courts and administrative bodies. These types of textsdo not undergo a review,
  • News on conferences and reviews of scientific and professional symposiums and round tables  – these provide readers with information on the latest events in the field of public administration and the public sector in Croatia and worldwide. This category does not undergo a review,
  • Glossaries – provide concise explanations of the most important topics in the interdisciplinary field of public administration and do not undergo a review,
  • Other texts dealing with aspects of public administration – such as interviews, strategies, and the like, which do not undergo a review. 


Review process

Papers undergoing categorisation in Croatian and Comparative Public Administration undergo two double-blind reviews. At least one of these needs to be performedby a reviewer from outside of Croatia. Reviewers are renowned international and Croatian scientists and university professors. Reviewers must possess at least a PhD in the relevant field. Non-Croatian reviewers are generally from countries outside the territory of the former Yugoslavia, if the language of the paper or the language competences of the reviewer permit this. If it is not possible to find reviewers outside the territory of the former Yugoslavia, a reviewer fluent in Croatian is chosen. When a paper deals with a country-specific topic, a reviewer from that country is selected. 

The review report is completed in writing and the reviewers recommend anappropriate categorisation for the paper (original scientific paper, review scientific paper, preliminary scientific report, or professional paper).  

In case of conflicting reviews, the paper undergoes a third, and if necessary a fourth review.  

The reviewers’ comments are delivered to the author without the reviewers’ names. In case of any comments on part of the reviewers, the authorsare expected to amend and/or update their papers with regard to the instructions of the reviewers. 

The Editorial Boardmakes a final decision on the categorisation of the papers, based on the papers themselves, the reviewers’ recommendations, and theproposal of the Editor-in-Chief, the assistant editors and executive editor. The meetings of the Editorial Board are held four times a year, prior to the publication of every issue. If the first review suggests that the paper is a professional paper and the Editor-in-Chief, theassistant editors, and the executive editor agree with this categorisation proposal, the paper is not reviewed further. 

The Editorial Board also supervises the citation used in the paper in order to reduce the possibility of plagiarism.


Instructions for reviewers 

Papers undergoing categorisation in the journal Croatian and Comparative Public Administration undergo two double-blind reviews. At least one review needs to be written by a reviewer from outside Croatia.

Reviewers are renowned international and Croatian scholars and university professors. The reviewer must possessat least a PhD in the relevant field. In case the paper deals with a country-specific topic, a reviewer from that country is chosen.

The paper is sent to the reviewers without any data that could indicate the author(s) of the paper. In addition, the reviewers receive a review form.

The reviewers are under obligation to protect the anonymity of the review process and not to disclose any information of the authors that might come to their knowledge.

The reviewers shall give their assessment of the paper based on their professional knowledge and respecting the rules of professional ethics. The reviewers shall examine in particular the topic of the paper, its scholarly and practical contribution, the methodology implemented, and the results obtained. The reviewers shall also give their assessment of the technical part of the paper, especially regarding the accuracy of citations, the reference list, and the use of the appropriate bibliography. The reviewers are under obligation to report any suspicion of plagiarism.

Once the review is written, the reviewers shall recommend the appropriate categorisation of the paper from the following:

  • original scientific paper – the paper contains original research conducted by the author and/or the author’s original conclusions, and represents a contribution to a specific area of science;
  • review scientific paper – the paper offers a synthesis and a review of the situation in a particular area or of a particular topic; it contains an appropriate review of the scientific literature, but it does not contain the results of original research conducted by the author or original ideas;
  • preliminary scientific report – the paper contains initial results of the research conducted by the author, but it does not make an elaborate contribution to a specific area of science;
  • professional paper – the paper contains an overview of a particular area or topic, but it is oriented towards practical implementation and does not contain scientific elements.

Apart from categorisation, the reviewers shall give one of the following recommendations:

  • Publish without any changes;
  • Publish with changes stated in the review;
  • Reject the paper

The reviewers’ comments are delivered to the author without the reviewers’ names (anonymously). In case the reviewers recommend any changes, the author is expected to amend and/or update the paper with regard tothe instructions of the reviewers.

The Editorial Boardshall make the final decision on the categorisation of the papers, based on the papers themselves and upon the recommendations of the Editor-in-Chief, the Assistant Editors, and the Executive Editor. The meetings of the Editorial Board are held four times a year, prior to the publication of every issue. If the first review recommends that the paper be categorised as a professional paper, and the Editor-in-Chief, the Assistant Editors, and the Executive Editor agree with the proposed categorisation, the paper shall not be reviewed further. In the case of conflicting reviews, the paper shall undergo a third and, if necessary, a fourth review.

The reviewers are expected to deliver their reviews in two weeks’ time.


List of reviewers

List of reviewers


Publication costs

Publication of the paper in the journal is free of charge.

The journal covers the costs of the review process, editorial preparation of the text, proofreading and graphic design, translation of the summary, and printing costs.

Each author is entitled to one free hard copy of the issue of the journal in which their paper has been published. Delivery costs are covered by the journal.