The Atlantic Renewal Institute is committed to producing and publishing work that reflects intellectual rigor, independent judgment, transparent sourcing, and constructive engagement with complex public questions. These standards apply to all research papers, policy papers, essays, commentaries, and other substantive publications issued by ARI.

EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE

ARI’s publication decisions are based on intellectual merit, relevance, analytical quality, and consistency with the Institute’s editorial standards.

Authors are not required to express a single institutional position. ARI encourages reasoned disagreement and the examination of competing perspectives. External partners, donors, or collaborators may not determine the findings, conclusions, or publication outcome of any work issued by the Institute.

The views expressed in each publication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the institutional position of ARI, its leadership, Advisory Council, Fellows, or partners.

PUBLICATION CRITERIA

Submissions are evaluated according to the following criteria:

• Relevance to ARI’s areas of research and public interest.

• Clarity and coherence of the central argument.

• Analytical depth and intellectual originality.

• Appropriate and responsible use of evidence.

• Accuracy and transparency of sources.

• Recognition of relevant limitations, uncertainties, and competing interpretations.

• Ability to contribute meaningfully to public, academic, or professional discussion.

ARI may decline work that does not meet these standards or that falls outside the Institute’s editorial scope.

REVIEW PROCESS

Every submission undergoes an initial editorial assessment to determine its relevance, originality, structure, and compliance with ARI’s standards.

Substantive publications, including research papers and policy papers, are reviewed by one or more individuals with relevant academic or professional knowledge. Depending on the nature and complexity of the work, ARI may request additional review, factual verification, methodological clarification, or revision before publication.

When appropriate and practicable, reviewer identities may be withheld from authors to promote independent assessment. ARI will identify a publication as peer-reviewed only when it has completed a review process that reasonably supports that description.

Final publication decisions are made by the Research Director in coordination with the Executive Director. Acceptance into an ARI program or Fellowship does not automatically guarantee publication.

EVIDENCE AND SOURCING

Authors must distinguish clearly between verified facts, interpretation, inference, and opinion. Material claims should be supported by reliable and appropriately cited sources.

Whenever possible, authors should prioritize primary sources, official records, original datasets, legislation, judicial decisions, and peer-reviewed research. Secondary sources may be used when they are relevant and credible.

Data, quotations, and references must be represented accurately and in context. Authors must not fabricate, manipulate, selectively omit, or mischaracterize evidence in a manner that could materially mislead readers.

PLAGIARISM AND ORIGINALITY

All submissions must constitute original work or properly acknowledge the contributions and ideas of others. Plagiarism, fabricated citations, falsified information, undisclosed duplication, and misrepresentation of authorship are incompatible with ARI’s standards.

Authors must inform ARI if substantially similar work has been published elsewhere or is under consideration by another publication.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Authors and reviewers must disclose any financial, professional, political, organizational, or personal interest that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their analysis or judgment.

A disclosed interest does not automatically prevent publication or participation in the review process. ARI will assess whether the interest can be appropriately managed or whether reassignment, additional review, or public disclosure is necessary.

Reviewers must not evaluate work when a conflict could materially compromise, or appear to compromise, their independence.

USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Artificial intelligence tools may be used for limited supporting tasks such as proofreading, translation, organization of information, or technical assistance. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, reasoning, citations, and conclusions of their work.

AI systems may not be identified as authors. The undisclosed use of AI to generate substantive analysis, fabricate evidence or citations, or replace the author’s independent intellectual contribution is not permitted.

ARI may request disclosure when the use of artificial intelligence has materially influenced the research, drafting, analysis, or presentation of a publication.

CORRECTIONS AND RETRACTIONS

ARI is committed to correcting substantive errors promptly and transparently. Authors, readers, and reviewers may report potential inaccuracies to the Institute.

Minor typographical or formatting corrections may be made without a formal notice. Material corrections that affect the interpretation of a publication will be identified and dated on the publication page or within the revised document.

ARI may withdraw or retract a publication when evidence of plagiarism, fabrication, serious methodological failure, undisclosed conflicts, or other significant violations of these standards undermines the integrity of the work.

AUTHOR REVIEW AND CONSENT

Before publication, authors are given an opportunity to review the edited version of their work. ARI will not publish a substantive contribution without the author’s approval of the final text.

Editorial changes may improve structure, clarity, style, and consistency, but they must not materially alter an author’s argument or conclusions without consultation.