Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

HAUS is dedicated to innovative research in the field of architecture and urbanism by providing a platform for high-quality, peer-reviewed research in architecture, urban studies, and interdisciplinary domains.

The journal welcomes contributions that address Architectural and Urbanism Research in the following areas:

  1. Design and Theory: Theoretical explorations and critical analyses of the built environment and design methodologies.
  2. Educational Approaches: Innovations in education theories and practices and pedagogical strategies.
  3. History and Conservation: Historical studies of architecture, preservation, and conservation of heritage.
  4. Sustainability: Research on sustainable design principles and practices, economic, social, and environmental sustainability, and green building technologies.
  5. Social and Cultural Aspects: Research in society and culture in relation to the built environment. Environmental Behavioral studies
  6. Technology: Advances in digital tools, construction, technologies, material science, and their applications.

HAUS encourages interdisciplinary research that bridges architecture and urbanism with other fields. welcomes research that reflects the unique challenges, opportunities, and cultural variations and nuances across the globe. Submissions should contribute to the advancement of knowledge, propose new frameworks, or offer critical insights into existing practices.

By fostering scholarly discourse, HAUS aims to inspire researchers, educators, and architects to push the boundaries of the discipline and address the challenges of the built environment in the 21st century.

This publication follows a biannual schedule, with new issues published every six months. In addition to regular issues, HAUS aims to publish special issues dedicated to emergent and critical topics in the built environment. Guest editors will curate these special issues.

 

Section Policies

Editorials

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Research

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Brief Communication

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Review Article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Perspective

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Urban Pulse

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Books & Arts

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

News Item

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Q & A

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

HAUS maintains the highest standards of academic excellence and rigor. The journal employs a double-blind peer review process; all submissions are evaluated on academic merit, originality, and contribution to the field.

Reviewers are expected to:

  1. Maintain confidentiality – Do not discuss the manuscript with others.
  2. Ensure objectivity – Base evaluations on academic merit, without bias toward authors’ identity or affiliation.
  3. Provide constructive feedback – Aim to improve the manuscript with clear and actionable suggestions.
  4. Adhere to timelines – Complete reviews within the stipulated deadline. If delays occur, notify the editorial team promptly.
  5. Declare conflicts of interest – If you recognize the work or have a potential conflict, inform the editors immediately.

When reviewing a manuscript, assess the following key aspects:

A. Significance & Originality

• Does the research address an important question in architecture or urban studies?

• Does it contribute new knowledge, frameworks, or perspectives?

• Is the topic relevant to the journal’s scope and readership?

B. Title & Abstract

• Does the title clearly and accurately reflect the content of the paper?

• Is the abstract concise and informative, summarizing key research questions, methods, findings, and conclusions?

C. Research Methodology & Rigor

• Are the research questions/hypotheses clearly defined?

• Is the methodology appropriate and well-justified?

• For quantitative studies: Are data collection, sampling, and statistical methods robust?

• For qualitative studies: Are data sources, analytical frameworks, and interpretations rigorous?

• Are ethical considerations (e.g., consent, data privacy) properly addressed?

D. Analysis & Results

• Are the results presented clearly, accurately, and in an organized manner?

• Are figures, tables, and illustrations relevant and well-integrated?

• Are statistical analyses appropriate and assumptions met?

E. Discussion & Contextualization

• Does the discussion relate findings to existing literature?

• Are theoretical and practical implications well-articulated?

• Are study limitations acknowledged, and future research directions proposed?

F. Language & Clarity

• Is the manuscript well-structured and easy to follow?

• Is the writing clear, concise, and grammatically sound?

• Are technical terms and concepts well explained?

G. References & Citation Accuracy

• Are key studies and recent literature appropriately cited?

• Are references correctly formatted and complete?

• Does the paper acknowledge prior research without excessive self-citation?

Based on the evaluation, you will recommend one of the following decisions:

• Accept Submission— The manuscript is publishable with minor or no revisions.

• Revisions Required— The manuscript requires minor adjustments but is fundamentally sound.

• Resubmit for Review— The manuscript has potential but needs significant reworking.

• Decline Submission— The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or research contribution.

Ethical Considerations

• Plagiarism & Redundant Publication: If you suspect plagiarism, notify the editors immediately.

• Bias & Fairness: Ensure reviews are objective and free of personal or institutional biases.

• Data Integrity: If data inconsistencies arise, highlight them in your review.

• Confidentiality: Do not share or use manuscript content for personal research.

If you have concerns that should not be shared with the author (e.g., ethical issues, potential conflicts), include them in the confidential comments to editors' section.

 

Publication Frequency

This journal is published 2 times per year.

Each one volume per year has two issues, namley, one in June and one in December of each year.

Special issue could be issued separately sometime between the regular issues. This will be announced before publishing the special issue.

 

Open Access Policy

HAUS journal provides immediate open access to all content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. HAUS grants usage rights to others using the open license CC-BY-NC allowing for immediate free access to the work and permitting any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose.

 

Archiving

Currently, HAUS is not subscribing to long-term preservation service. However, in the short-term plan, HAUS will subscribe to CLOCKSS.

 

Publishing Ethics

HAUS is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and to supporting ethical research practices. HAUS adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. HAUS would like to refer reviewers to the Committee on Publication Ethics “COPE” Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. HAUS would also encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics "COPE" website. 

1. HAUS Statement on Publication Ethics:

2. Ethics guidelines for editors

  • The editors have to declare that by joining the editorial board there is no conflict of interest with any other institutes or journals.
  • The editors should maintain the transparency of the academic research & record, preclude professional needs from cooperating ethical standards, and always be willing to publish retractions, rectifications, and erratum when required. 
  • The editors should attempt to ensure timely peer review and publication process and should avoid unnecessary delays. 
  • The editors and other editorial board members should not be involved in editorial decisions on their own submitted work. They should be excluded from publication decisions when they are authors or even have contributed to a manuscript. 
  • The editors should give peer reviewers explicit guidance on their role and responsibilities and monitor their performances for quality and timeliness. 
  • The editor should ensure confidential handling of the submitted manuscripts and not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before their publication.
  • The editors should assess manuscripts for their scientific quality content, in an unbiased manner and free from any decisions based on discrimination of race, gender, geographical origin, or religion of the author(s). The editor should evaluate manuscripts regarding to their academic merit free of any self-interests. 
  • Promoting research rectitude must be preserved. If at any stage the publisher suspects any kind of misconduct in research, it should be investigated promptly in detail with suitable authority; and if any suspicious act of misconduct is observed in the peer review, it should be resolved with diligence. 

3. Ethics guidelines for reviewers

  • Peer reviewers should provide a detailed, constructive, comprehensive, evidenced, and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner on the scientific content of the submitted work. They should judge each manuscript on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, academic degree or institutional affiliation of the author(s). 
  • Peer reviewers should play an important role in identifying any ethical concerns or misconduct in their evaluation of submitted manuscripts; such as possible data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, any violation of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects, unethical research, redundant or duplicate publication, conflict of interests and notify the journal editor as the possibility of such problems exists. 
  • Peer reviewers should notify the journal editor about any financial or personal conflict of interest and declining to review the manuscript when a possibility of such a conflict exists. 
  • Peer reviewers have to declare any conflict of interest with any other institutes or journals.
  • Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the complete review process. 
  • Peer reviewers should indicate whether the writing is relevant, concise & clear and evaluating the originality and scientific accuracy.
  • Peer reviewers must avoid making statements in their report which might affect any person’s reputation. 
  • Peer reviewers are required to only agree to peer review manuscripts within their expertise and within a reasonable timeframe. 
  • Peer reviewers should notify the journal editor in the case of declining the review in any case. 
  • Peer reviewers are required to destroy submitted manuscripts and all related material after they have reviewed them.

4. Ethics guidelines for authors 

  • Authors should make publicly available all the results of their research and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports. 
  • Author(s) should warrant that the submitted manuscript is from their own original work, which does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, and it is free from any kind of plagiarism including their own previously published work. 
  • All authors named on the paper are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper although having different contributions. 
  • The work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s) at the same time. 
  • Author(s) must clearly declare any potential conflict of interest. 
  • Author(s) must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper. 
  • If asked to provide a list of suggested reviewers, author(s) must provide the correct details for suitable reviewers with the appropriate experience to review, ensuring that the suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest.
  • Proper acknowledgements to other work reported (individual/company/institution) must be given. Permission must be obtained from any content used from other sources.

5. Authorship and contributorship

HAUS is committed to ensuring the transparency of authorship and contributorship,  and follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

  • Authorship: Authors must have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the work; participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript; approved the final version; and agreed to be accountable for the integrity of the work.
  • Contributorship: All authors should clearly identify their contributions to the manuscript. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.
  • Authorship Changes: Any request to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be justified and approved by all authors concerned.
  • Authorship Misconduct: Guest, gift, and ghost authorship are not permitted. Any authorship disputes or suspected misconduct will be handled in accordance with COPE guidance.
  • Artificial Intelligence: AI tools and large language models cannot be listed as authors. Authors remain fully responsible for all submitted content and should disclose the use of AI tools where applicable.

6. Conflict of Interest

HAUS requires authors, reviewers, and editors to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the research, review, or editorial decision-making process.

  • Authors must disclose all relevant financial and non-financial conflicts of interest when submitting a manuscript, including financial relationships, employment, personal relationships, or institutional affiliations.
  • Reviewers and editors must disclose any conflicts that could affect their impartiality and should withdraw from handling a manuscript when an appropriate and objective assessment cannot be ensured.
  • If no conflict of interest exists, authors should include the statement: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

 

7. Data sharing and reproducibility

HAUS's approach to data sharing and research reproducibility follow the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  • Authors are strongly encouraged to make the data, code, and other materials supporting the findings of their articles available as supplementary files or through an appropriate data repository.
  • Data sharing is encouraged whenever possible, provided that it does not conflict with ethical, legal, confidentiality, or participant privacy requirements.
  • Authors are also encouraged to appropriately cite any data used in their research and to include a Data Availability Statement at the end of the manuscript.
  • The Data Availability Statement should explain whether and where the data supporting the study are available and specify any conditions or restrictions governing access. Where applicable, authors should provide a direct link or persistent identifier to the relevant dataset.

8. Ethical oversight

HAUS follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding ethical oversight. COPE states:“Ethical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and of business/marketing practices.”

  • In accordance with these principles, HAUS requires all research to comply with appropriate ethical, legal, and professional standards.
  • Research involving human participants or vulnerable populations must receive appropriate ethical approval and informed consent where required.
  • Research involving animals must comply with recognized standards for animal welfare and research ethics.
  • Authors must protect the privacy and confidentiality of participants and obtain appropriate consent before publishing identifiable personal information, images, or case details.
  • Journals also expect authors, editors, and other parties involved in the publication process to handle confidential information responsibly and to follow ethical standards in all publication-related and business practices.
  • Authors should provide details of ethical approval, including the approving institution or ethics committee and approval number, where applicable. The Journal may request supporting documentation when necessary.

9. Intellectual property

HAUS follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on intellectual property. COPE states: “All policies on intellectual property, including copyright and publishing licenses, should be clearly described. In addition, any costs associated with publishing should be obvious to authors and readers. Policies should be clear on what counts as prepublication that will preclude consideration. What constitutes plagiarism and redundant/overlapping publication should be specified.”

  • HAUS respects the intellectual property rights of authors and third parties. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions are original and do not infringe copyright or other intellectual property rights.
  • Authors must obtain appropriate permission – if needed - to reproduce or adapt copyrighted material, including figures, tables, images, or substantial portions of previously published works, and must provide proper acknowledgement of the original source.
  • The Journal does not accept plagiarism, duplicate publication, or inappropriate overlapping publication. Manuscripts containing such material will be handled in accordance with the Journal’s publication ethics procedures and relevant COPE guidance.
  • Copyright ownership, publishing licenses, and authors’ reuse and self-archiving rights are clearly stated in each Journal’s “Copyright and Licensing Policy”. Any publication fees, where applicable, are disclosed on the Journal website.

10. Post-publication discussions

  • HAUS accepts any comments and critiques from the readers by sending an email to the editor-in-chief.
  • The editorial team of each journal is committed to collecting all comments and criticisms related to each article and sending them to the author.
  • Authors are committed to responding to the readers within 4 weeks.

11. Correction and retraction

Articles can be retracted in the following cases:

  • A certain plagiarism is detected.
  • It reports on unethical research
  • There’s clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
  • The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
  • It contains material or data without authorization for use
  • Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)
  • The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

12. Complaints and appeals

  • HAUS welcomes any complaints against itself as a publisher, members of the editorial boards, and staff of HAUS or any journal published by APC.
  • Any complaints from any parties can be composed directly to Prof. Dr. Yasser Gaber (ygd@aast.edu), the Dean of Research, and manager of Academy Publishing Center (APC)
  • HAUS is committed to dealing with any complaints or appeals seriously, and giving a response within two weeks of receipt.

13. Allegations of research misconduct

HAUS allows reporting of research misconduct a published article or a manuscript under peer-review process. The following procedures can be followed for complaints of author misconduct:

  1. The editorial board of each journal receives a complaint that an article submitted to or published in the journal is suspected of containing research misconduct.
  2. The complainant needs to indicate clearly and directly the specific manner and details of misconduct
  3. The editorial board will conduct an investigation, during which time the editor of the journal and the corresponding author(s) of the suspected article will be in contact.
  4. The corresponding author(s) will be asked to provide an interpretation and any available evidence.
  5. If the author(s) of the suspected article accept the misconduct complaint, the editorial board will take an action depending on the status of the article:
    1. If the article has been published, retraction may be necessary to remedy the situation.
    2. If the misconduct is reported during the review process, the review process may continue, with the author(s) making the relevant changes.
    3. If there’s no response from the author (s) or an unsatisfactory explanation, the article may be permanently retracted or rejected.
  6. The complainant will be informed of the outcome once the issue is resolved.

14. Advertising

HAUS does not accept advertising or sponsorship on its website or social media accounts.

 

 

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

Digital Object Identifier

The HAUS is supported by Digital Object Identifier, DOI for each article from Cross Ref as listed in HERE.

The Code of the DOI of each article consists of the following format:

10.21622/HAUS.YYYY.VV.I.AAA

Where

10.21622       = Journal Identifier

RESD           = Journal name

YYYY            = Four digits for the year

VV               = Two digits for the Volume Number 

I                 = One digit for the Issue Number

AAA              = Three digits for the article ID

To look for the paper on line, search for this link

https://dx.doi.org/10.21622/HAUS.YYYY.VV.I.AAA

  

To look for the paper on line, search for this link

https://dx.doi.org/10.21622/HAUS.YYYY.VV.I.AAA

 

Articles Publishing Charges (APCs)

The journal is diamond open access and has no APCs.

 

AI usage policy

1. Transparency

Authors are required to fully disclose any use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools during the preparation of their manuscript. This includes specifying the name(s) of the AI tool(s) used and detailing how they were applied in the research or writing process. Transparency is expected from both authors and editors.

Likewise, HAUS journal commit to declaring any use of AI tools within the editorial workflow, including during initial review, peer review, language editing, and copyediting.

2. AI as author

In line with COPE, WAME and the JAMA Network guidelines; HAUS Journal do not permit AI tools to be credited as authors. AI tools cannot meet the criteria for authorship, particularly the requirement to take responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the work.

Accordingly, the following rules apply:

  • Any manuscript listing ChatGPT or any AI tool as a co-author will be rejected immediately.
  • Any manuscript citing a document that lists an AI tool (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, etc.) as an author will also be rejected.

3. Allowed AI use

The use of AI tools is acceptable in the following cases, provided their usage is transparently declared:

  • Text translation
  • Abstract generation
  • Conducting systematic literature reviews using recognized software (e.g., Elicit, ScienceOS, NotebookLM)
  • Formatting citations to comply with journal style
  • Language and grammar editing

4. Prohibited AI use

The following uses of AI tools are strictly prohibited:

  • Listing AI tools as co-authors
  • Creation of graphics or charts
  • Generating original scientific content, interpretations, or conclusions without thorough author validation
  • Fabricating, manipulating, or falsifying data or images using AI tools

5. AI detection tools

HAUS Journal depends on Grammarly Software to detect AI text generation in all received articles. If the submitted article includes a high percentage of prohibited AI uses, it will be rejected. In severe or repeated cases, the editorial board reserves the right to impose a submission ban on the author.

 

Pre-prints policy

1. Definition

Pre-prints are defined as manuscripts that have been made publicly available as preprints on recognized servers (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, SSRN) or on academic networks (e.g., Academia, ResearchGate). The pre-prints characteristics:

  • The preprint has not been peer-reviewed or accepted by another journal.
  • The content of the preprint matches the submitted manuscript or any deviations are clearly justified.
2. Acceptance conditions

HAUS Journal accepts the pre-prints under the following terms and conditions:

  • Authors must disclose the existence of the preprint at the time of submission, including the DOI or URL.
  • When the journal applies a blinded peer-review approach, having a preprint publicly available means the anonymity of the author is not guaranteed during the review process.
  • Authors should not make a self-citation for the pre-print version in the submitted version for publication.
  • In case of acceptance of the pre-prints, the authors are obliged to update the information associated with the preprint version to show that a final version has been published in the journal, including the DOI linking directly to the publication.

 

Ownership and Management

APC, Academy Publishing Center, is the publishing unit of The Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport (AASTMT). In accordance with the internal regulations, APC is the owner of HAUS and has the right to manage it. Additionally, APC has more rights:

  • Initiating new journals.
  • Appoint the editorial team of the journal, and then the editorial team is in charge of selecting the editorial and advisory boards.
  • Managing all financial-related matters.
  • Perform the related tasks other than the editorial work, such as plagiarism checking, AI checking, language checking, proofreading, reference control, and copyediting.
  • Promoting the content of the journals and indexing in the global databases.

 

Direct Marketing

HAUS does not have any direct marketing activities that are performed on its behalf. HAUS depends on our local mailing lists to promote the published content. The global standards of mailing lists are applied.