Policy on the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools

Purpose and scope

JGTEL welcomes rigorous, original scholarship on global trade, ethics, and law. We recognise that authors may use generative AI and other AI-assisted tools (for example, large language models, chatbots, and image generators) when preparing manuscripts. This policy sets out how such tools may—and may not—be used, to protect research integrity, transparency, confidentiality, and trust in the scholarly record.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, and editors, and covers AI use in writing, analysis, figures, and the peer-review process.

1) Authorship, responsibility, and human oversight

AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Authorship requires accountability for accuracy, integrity, originality, and approval of the submitted version—responsibilities AI systems cannot assume. Only humans may be credited as authors.

Authors remain fully responsible for the manuscript. If any part of a submission is drafted, edited, translated, coded, summarised, or otherwise supported by AI, the human author(s) remain accountable for:

factual accuracy (including legal and regulatory claims),
the quality and originality of analysis and argument,
complete and correct citations,
ensuring that no confidential or protected material is improperly disclosed.

Human oversight is required. AI output must be treated as a starting point, not an authority. Authors must review, verify, and revise AI-assisted text and outputs, as these tools can produce plausible-sounding but incorrect, incomplete, or biased material.

2) Transparency: when and how to disclose AI use

JGTEL requires clear, specific disclosure of any use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools that materially contributed to the submitted work.

What to disclose
Please state:

Tool name and version (if available) (e.g., ChatGPT/GPT-4.x; Claude; Gemini; Midjourney; Copilot; etc.).
What you used it for (e.g., language refinement; restructuring; translating; drafting an early version of a section; generating code; supporting data visualisation; summarising sources).
How much it contributed (briefly—what parts were affected and what human checks were applied).

Where to disclose (important for double-blind review)

For the anonymised manuscript: include a short disclosure in a “Declaration of AI Use” section immediately before the References (recommended), written so it does not reveal author identity.
For the title page (non-anonymised file): you may repeat the disclosure under Acknowledgements (optional).

What does not usually require disclosure
Routine tools that do not generate substantive new content—such as standard spelling/grammar checkers or reference managers—generally do not need disclosure. If, however, a tool generates or rewrites substantial passages, a disclosure is required.

Template: Declaration of AI Use (copy/paste)

During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [TOOL NAME] for [PURPOSE—e.g., language editing; restructuring paragraphs; drafting an early outline of the introduction]. All AI-assisted content was reviewed, edited, and verified by the author(s), who take full responsibility for the final text and all cited sources.

If AI contributed to figures, tables, or code

[Figure/Table/Appendix] was produced with assistance from [TOOL NAME] for [PURPOSE]. The author(s) validated outputs for accuracy and reproducibility and provide sufficient detail for verification.

3) Permissible uses (with appropriate disclosure)

AI tools may be used responsibly for purposes such as:

Language and clarity support (improving readability, grammar, and style).
Early-stage drafting or restructuring of non-core text, provided the authors supply the intellectual content, analysis, and final wording.
Brainstorming and outlining (e.g., generating headings or alternative structures).
Coding, data handling, or visualisation assistance, only where the results are independently checked and are reproducible, and the method is described clearly in the manuscript (and/or appendices or supplementary files).
Summarising literature as an aid, provided authors verify accuracy and cite original sources (AI outputs are not a substitute for reading and citing the underlying works).

4) Prohibited uses

The following are not permitted:

Fabrication or falsification

generating or altering data, evidence, or results;
inventing cases, statutes, treaties, quotations, datasets, or references;
producing citations that do not exist or that misrepresent the source.

Plagiarism or misappropriation

presenting AI-generated text as wholly original scholarship without disclosure where required;
reproducing protected content without proper quotation, permission, and citation.

Replacing the author’s core intellectual contribution
AI cannot substitute for the author’s original analysis, interpretation, argumentation, or normative judgement—especially in legal reasoning and ethical evaluation.

Breach of confidentiality or rights

uploading confidential, proprietary, sensitive, or personally identifiable information to third-party AI services without a lawful basis and the necessary permissions;
sharing manuscript content in ways that compromise double-blind review or copyright.

5) Peer review and editorial confidentiality (reviewers and editors)

Because JGTEL uses double-blind peer review, reviewers and editors must treat manuscripts and review materials as confidential.

Do not upload any part of a submitted manuscript, supplementary files, reviewer reports, or editorial correspondence into publicly available or third-party generative AI tools. This includes “just improving wording” in a review report or decision letter.
Reviewers and editors must not use AI tools to make, automate, or outsource the substantive scholarly evaluation of a manuscript. The judgement and accountability in peer review remain human responsibilities.

6) How JGTEL will respond to concerns or misuse

Non-compliance with this policy may be treated as a publication-ethics issue. Actions may include:

requesting clarification, documentation, or revision (including fuller disclosure);
rejection prior to publication;
publication of a correction or expression of concern;
retraction in serious cases;
notifying relevant institutions or bodies where appropriate.

JGTEL will consider intent, severity, and impact on the scholarly record when determining outcomes.

7) Policy review

AI tools and norms are evolving quickly. JGTEL will review and update this policy periodically to reflect new risks, capabilities, and best practices in scholarly publishing.