AI and Generative-AI use

1. Purpose & Scope
This policy outlines the responsible use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Bard, DALL·E, MidJourney) in the preparation, review, and editorial handling of manuscripts submitted to the Town and Regional Planning Journal. While AI tools can assist with language editing and routine tasks, the Journal requires that all intellectual, analytical, and interpretative contributions to planning scholarship remain the responsibility of human authors, reviewers, and editors.

2. Authors
2.1 Acceptable Use
• Authors may use AI tools for language polishing, grammar correction, reference formatting, or stylistic editing, particularly where English is not the author’s first language.
• AI may not be used to generate substantive content such as problem statements, literature reviews, methods, analysis, findings, policy recommendations, or interpretations.
• AI must not be used to create or manipulate maps, figures, diagrams, or data unless it forms part of a clearly explained and justified research method.
2.2 Disclosure
• Any use of AI tools must be disclosed in a dedicated section entitled Declaration of AI Use before the references.
• Authors must specify:
    1. The tool(s) used and version (if known)
    2. The purpose of its use
    3. A statement that all outputs were critically reviewed, edited, and that the authors take full responsibility for the final manuscript
    Example wording:
“During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [TOOL NAME] to assist with [e.g. grammar and language editing]. After using this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content and take full responsibility for the work.”
• AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.
2.3 Restrictions
• AI-generated content must not be submitted without critical human oversight and editing.
• Synthetic data generated by AI (e.g. simulated survey results) are not permitted unless methodologically justified and transparently reported.
• Authors remain accountable for plagiarism, factual accuracy, and proper citation.

3. Peer Reviewers
• Reviewers must treat all manuscripts and associated files as strictly confidential. Uploading manuscripts (or parts thereof) into AI tools is prohibited.
• Reviews must be based on human expertise and judgment. AI may not be used to evaluate research quality, validity, or originality.
• Reviewers may, if they wish, use AI tools for minor language editing of their review text, but they remain fully responsible for the content and accuracy of the report.

4. Editors
• Editors may not upload manuscripts or reviewer reports into AI systems.
• Editorial decisions (accept, reject, revise) must be based on human scholarly judgment.
• Editors may use AI tools for routine tasks such as language editing of correspondence but remain accountable for accuracy and professionalism.
• If suspected misuse of AI occurs (e.g. undisclosed AI content, fabricated references, AI-generated data), editors may require clarification, request revisions, or take appropriate corrective action.

5. Compliance & Updates
• Manuscripts may be screened for signs of AI misuse (e.g. fabricated references, inconsistent writing patterns).
• Non-compliance with this policy may result in rejection, correction, or retraction.
• This policy will be reviewed annually to remain aligned with evolving AI technologies, ethical standards, and scholarly publishing practices in planning.