Submissions

Author Guidelines

The Namibian Journal for Research, Science and Technology (NJRST) welcomes original, high-quality scholarly contributions that fall within the journal’s aims and scope. The journal publishes work that contributes to research, science, technology, innovation, humanities, social sciences, policy, development and related fields, with particular interest in research relevant to Namibia, Africa and wider international scholarly communities.

All manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s online submission system. Manuscripts should not be submitted by email unless specifically requested by the editorial office.

1. Before submitting

Authors should ensure that:

• the manuscript has not been previously published;
• the manuscript is not under consideration by another journal;
• all authors have approved the submission;
• the manuscript falls within the journal’s aims and scope;
• the manuscript follows these Author Guidelines;
• all required ethical approvals, permissions and consents have been obtained;
• all sources of funding and conflicts of interest have been disclosed;
• all references are complete and accurate;
• all tables, figures, images and third-party materials have the necessary permissions where required;
• the manuscript has been carefully checked for grammar, spelling, punctuation and clarity.

Submissions that do not comply with these requirements may be returned to authors before peer review.

2. Article types

NJRST considers the following types of submissions:

Original research articles

Original research articles report new research findings, methods, analysis or interpretations. They should present a clear research question, objective or problem; appropriate methodology; well-supported results; and a clear contribution to knowledge.

Review articles

Review articles provide a critical, structured and scholarly synthesis of existing literature on a defined topic. Reviews should explain their approach to identifying and selecting literature and should make a clear contribution beyond summarising existing studies.

Case studies

Case studies present detailed analysis of a specific project, intervention, organisation, community, technology, policy, method or practice. They should explain the broader relevance of the case and its contribution to knowledge, practice or policy.

Short communications

Short communications present concise findings, preliminary results, methodological notes or focused contributions that are of interest to the journal’s readership.

Book reviews

Book reviews critically discuss recent books relevant to the journal’s scope. Book reviews should identify the book’s main contribution, audience, strengths, limitations and relevance.

Special issue contributions

Special issue submissions must comply with the journal’s normal editorial, peer-review and publication ethics requirements.

3. Length of manuscripts

Full research articles should not exceed 6000 words, excluding references.

Unless otherwise agreed with the editors, authors should use the following guidance:

Full research articles should contain no more than six tables and/or figures in total, unless the editor grants permission for additional material.

4. File format and general formatting

Manuscripts should be submitted in Microsoft Word, OpenOffice or RTF format.

The text should be:

• single-spaced;
• in a readable 12-point font;
• left aligned;
• clearly structured with headings and subheadings;
• prepared using italics rather than underlining, except for URL addresses.

For full papers, NJRST recommends the following formatting:

• Title: left aligned, Book Antiqua, 12-point font, bold.
• Author names: initials and surname, left aligned, Book Antiqua, 10-point font, bold.
• Affiliations: department, institution and country, left aligned, Book Antiqua, 10-point font, regular.
• Abstract: left aligned, Book Antiqua, 12-point font, regular.
• Main text: readable 12-point font, single-spaced.

Authors should not rely on formatting alone to communicate structure. Headings and subheadings should be clearly labelled.

5. Manuscript preparation for blind peer review

To support blind peer review, authors should upload:

1. A title page, containing author and affiliation details.
2. An anonymised manuscript, with author-identifying information removed.

The anonymised manuscript should not include author names, affiliations, acknowledgements, funding details that identify the authors, or self-identifying statements such as “in our previous study”.

These details can be restored after acceptance.

6. Title page

The title page should include:

• manuscript title;
• full names of all authors;
• institutional affiliations of all authors;
• department, institution and country;
• ORCID iDs, where available;
• name and email address of the corresponding author;
• funding information;
• conflict of interest statement;
• acknowledgements, where applicable;
• author contribution statement, where applicable;
• data availability statement, where applicable;
• AI-use disclosure statement, where applicable.

The corresponding author’s email address must be provided. Telephone or cell phone contact details may be supplied to the editorial office where necessary, but they should not normally appear in the published article.

7. Author names and affiliations

Author names should be listed using initials and surname.

Example:

A.T. Sindano¹, B.C. Author² and D.E. Author³*

Affiliations should be listed below the author names.

Example:

¹Department, Institution, Country
²Department, Institution, Country
³Department, Institution, Country

The corresponding author should be clearly indicated.

8. Title

The title should be concise, informative and accurate. It should clearly reflect the content and focus of the article.

Avoid unnecessary abbreviations, overly broad titles or claims not supported by the manuscript.

9. Abstract

Research articles must include an abstract of 250–300 words.

The abstract should briefly state:

• the background or problem;
• the aim or objective of the study;
• the methods or approach used;
• the main findings;
• the significance or contribution of the work.

The abstract should help readers quickly understand the purpose, approach and main contribution of the paper. It should be understandable without reference to the full article. It should not include references, unexplained abbreviations, tables or figures.

10. Keywords

Authors should provide a maximum of 10 keywords below the abstract.

Keywords should be specific and should support indexing and discoverability.

11. Recommended structure for full research papers

Full research papers should normally contain the following sections:

1. Title
2. Author names
3. Author affiliations
4. Corresponding author contact details
5. Abstract
6. Keywords
7. Introduction
8. Materials and Methods / Methodology
9. Results
10. Discussion
11. Conclusion
12. Acknowledgements
13. Funding statement
14. Conflict of interest statement
15. Data availability statement
16. References

Alternative structures may be accepted where appropriate for the discipline, especially in humanities, social sciences, policy, review or conceptual articles. However, all manuscripts must still present a clear argument, method or approach, evidence base and contribution.

12. Introduction

The Introduction should:

• describe the research question, problem, objective or hypothesis;
• explain why the question or topic is important;
• locate the work within relevant literature;
• identify the gap or contribution;
• describe the approach used in sufficient detail for readers to understand the study;
• briefly indicate the conclusion or contribution of the paper.

The Introduction should not be a general essay. It should lead clearly to the purpose and contribution of the article.

13. Materials and Methods / Methodology

The Materials and Methods or Methodology section should describe what was done clearly enough for readers to understand and evaluate the study.

Where applicable, include:

• study design;
• setting or context;
• population, sample or data source;
• sampling strategy;
• instruments, tools or materials used;
• data collection methods;
• data analysis methods;
• software, laboratory methods or technical procedures;
• ethical approval details;
• limitations of the method.

Where a published method or protocol was followed, cite the original source. Any modifications to established methods should be described.

The section should provide the relevant information about the experiment, analysis or research approach. It is not necessary to reproduce the full details of a published protocol, but the protocol should be cited and any changes should be explained.

For humanities, social sciences, policy or conceptual articles, the section may be titled Methodology, Approach, Materials and Methods, Research Design, or another suitable heading.

14. Results

The Results section should present the findings clearly and logically.

Authors should:

• begin each main paragraph or subsection with a clear statement of the question or issue addressed;
• present findings accurately and without exaggeration;
• use tables and figures where they improve clarity;
• refer to all tables and figures in the text;
• avoid duplicating the same information in both text and tables;
• summarise key findings in the accompanying text.

Tables and figures should be numbered consecutively, for example Table 1, Figure 1.

Not all results require a separate table or figure. Where there are only a few numerical results or a simple conclusion, the findings may be described in the text.

15. Discussion

The Discussion section should interpret the findings and explain their significance.

It should:

• relate the findings to the research question, objective or hypothesis;
• compare the findings with relevant literature;
• identify the most important, significant or unexpected findings;
• explain the contribution of the study;
• discuss implications for research, policy, practice, technology, innovation or development where relevant;
• acknowledge limitations or weaknesses in the interpretation;
• avoid unsupported claims.

Where a study has specific objectives, the Discussion should address these objectives. Where a hypothesis was proposed, the Discussion should explain whether the findings support or reject the hypothesis.

The Discussion should not simply repeat the Results.

16. Conclusion

The Conclusion should briefly summarise the main contribution of the article.

It may include:

• the key findings or argument;
• the major points emerging from the discussion;
• the significance of the work;
• implications for future research, policy, practice or innovation;
• a final statement explaining how the work contributes to the field.

The Conclusion should not introduce substantial new evidence or literature.

17. Acknowledgements

Authors should acknowledge people, organisations or institutions that contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria.

This may include participants, consultants, technical assistants, language editors, data collectors, institutions, laboratories, communities or other contributors.

Authors should obtain permission from anyone named in the acknowledgements.

Funding sources must also be disclosed in the Funding Statement.

18. Tables and figures

Tables and figures should be clear, necessary and referred to in the text.

Authors should ensure that:

• tables and figures are numbered consecutively;
• each table and figure has a clear title or caption;
• sources are acknowledged where required;
• permissions are obtained for reproduced material;
• images are of sufficient quality for publication;
• abbreviations used in tables or figures are explained;
• tables are editable and not submitted as screenshots.

A maximum of six tables and/or figures is allowed for full research articles, unless otherwise approved by the editor.

19. Abbreviations

Abbreviations should be used sparingly.

Any abbreviation that is not standard should be written out in full at first mention, followed by the abbreviation in brackets. Abbreviations used in the title or abstract should be explained in the abstract and in the main text.

20. Language and style

Manuscripts should be written in clear, formal academic English.

Authors are responsible for checking grammar, spelling, punctuation and consistency before submission. Manuscripts that are not sufficiently clear for peer review may be returned to authors for language editing before being considered.

Authors may use professional language editing or proofreading services, but such services do not guarantee acceptance.

21. Referencing style

NJRST uses the APA referencing style.

Authors must ensure that:

• all in-text citations appear in the reference list;
• all references in the reference list are cited in the manuscript;
• references are complete and accurate;
• URLs or DOIs are provided where available;
• references are formatted consistently according to APA style.

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of references.

22. Ethical approval and informed consent

Research involving human participants, animals, health information, personal data, communities, institutions, Indigenous knowledge, traditional knowledge, environmental samples or sensitive information must comply with applicable ethical, legal and institutional requirements.

Where ethical approval was required, authors must state:

• the name of the ethics committee or approving body;
• the approval number or reference, where available;
• the date of approval, where available.

Where ethical approval was not required, authors should state this and explain why.

Research involving human participants must include appropriate informed consent, privacy protection and confidentiality safeguards.

23. Authorship

All listed authors must have made a significant scholarly contribution to the work and must approve the submitted version.

Authorship should be limited to those who contributed meaningfully to the conception, design, execution, analysis, interpretation or writing of the manuscript.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:

• all authors have approved the manuscript;
• all authors agree to submission;
• all contributors are properly acknowledged;
• the author order is correct;
• all authors have disclosed conflicts of interest.

People who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged with their permission.

Changes to authorship after submission must be explained and approved by all affected authors.

24. Author contribution statement

NJRST encourages authors to include an author contribution statement, especially for multi-author manuscripts. For guidance, refer to CRediT (Contributor Role Taxonomy).

Example:

Author contributions: A.B. conceptualised the study. C.D. collected the data. A.B. and C.D. analysed the data. E.F. prepared the first draft. All authors reviewed, edited and approved the final manuscript.

25. Funding statement

Authors must disclose all sources of funding or support.

Where funding was received, include the funder name and grant number, where available.

Example:

Funding: This work was supported by [funder name] under grant number [grant number].

Where no funding was received, state:

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship or publication of this article.

26. Conflict of interest statement

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, professional, institutional or other interests that could influence, or be perceived to influence, the work.

Where there are no conflicts of interest, state:

Conflict of interest: The author(s) declare no conflict of interest.

27. Data availability statement

Authors should include a data availability statement where applicable.

Examples:

Data availability: The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Data availability: The data supporting the findings of this study are openly available at [repository name/link/DOI].

Data availability: The data are not publicly available because they contain information that could compromise participant privacy or confidentiality.

Data availability: No new data were generated or analysed in this study.

28. Use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools

Authors must disclose any use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of the manuscript or the research.

AI tools may not be listed as authors.

Where AI tools were used beyond routine spelling, grammar or formatting support, authors should state:

AI-use disclosure: During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of tool] to [purpose]. The author(s) reviewed, verified and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of the manuscript.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity and ethical compliance of the submitted work.

29. Plagiarism, originality and duplicate publication

Submissions must be original and must not be under consideration elsewhere.

Authors must not submit:

• plagiarised work;
• duplicate publications;
• substantially similar work already published elsewhere;
• manuscripts containing unattributed text, data, images or ideas;
• work that misrepresents sources, data or authorship.

Submissions may be screened using similarity-checking software. Similarity reports are used as editorial tools and are assessed by the editors.

30. Copyright and licence

Authors retain copyright and grant the Namibian Journal for Research, Science and Technology the right of first publication.

Published work is made available under terms consistent with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated.

This means that others may read, download, copy, distribute, share, adapt and reuse the work, including for commercial purposes, provided that the original author(s), article title, journal and licence are properly acknowledged.

31. Author fees

NJRST does not currently charge article processing charges, submission fees, editorial processing fees, page charges, colour charges or publication fees.

There is no fee payable at submission, during peer review, at acceptance or after publication. Editorial decisions are made independently of financial considerations.

If the journal introduces any author fees in future, the fees, waiver conditions and payment procedures will be clearly displayed on the journal website before they take effect. Authors who submitted manuscripts before the introduction of any new fees will not be charged retrospectively unless this was clearly communicated at the time of submission.

32. Submission process

Authors should submit their manuscripts through the online submission system.

During submission, authors will be asked to provide:

• manuscript title;
• abstract;
• keywords;
• author details;
• affiliations;
• ORCID iDs, where available;
• manuscript file;
• supplementary files, where applicable;
• funding information;
• ethical approval information, where applicable;
• conflict of interest statement;
• data availability statement;
• comments to the editor, where necessary.

Authors should ensure that the metadata entered into the submission system matches the manuscript.

To submit to the Articles section, authors should select Make a new submission to the Articles section on the journal website.

33. Submission preparation checklist

Before completing the submission, authors must confirm that:

• the submission has not been previously published and is not under consideration by another journal;
• the submission file is in Microsoft Word, OpenOffice or RTF format;
• the manuscript follows the Author Guidelines;
• the text is single-spaced and uses a readable 12-point font;
• tables and figures are placed within the text at appropriate points;
• URLs or DOIs for references have been provided where available;
• all authors have approved the submission;
• ethical approval and informed consent information has been included where applicable;
• funding information has been disclosed;
• conflicts of interest have been disclosed;
• the data availability statement has been included where applicable;
• the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools has been disclosed where applicable.

34. After submission

All submissions undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that are suitable for further consideration are sent for peer review.

The journal may decline or return manuscripts before peer review if they:

• fall outside the journal’s scope;
• do not meet the Author Guidelines;
• are not sufficiently developed;
• contain serious language or formatting problems;
• raise ethical concerns;
• show evidence of plagiarism or duplicate publication.

A request for revision does not guarantee acceptance. Revised manuscripts should be accompanied by a response explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.

35. Correspondence

All correspondence about submissions should be addressed through the journal’s online submission system. Where email communication is necessary, authors may contact the editorial office at:

mshahungu@ncrst.na

Updated: 21 May 2026