Editorial Standards

SL-SAG — Somaliland Strategic Advisory Group Last updated: May 2026

Our commitment

SL-SAG publishes policy analysis, research, and commentary to inform public debate about Somaliland and the wider Horn of Africa region. We are committed to accuracy, transparency, and intellectual rigour. We distinguish clearly between research, analysis, and opinion. We do not allow political relationships, donor interests, or personal associations to influence what we publish.

These standards apply to all content published on slsag.org, including articles, reports, briefings, data notes, and opinion pieces.

Types of content

Understanding what you are reading matters. All content on slsag.org is labelled with one of the following:

Research Empirical work based on original data collection, field research, or systematic literature review. Research articles describe methodology, data sources, and limitations. They are subject to internal peer review before publication.

Policy Analysis Examination of a policy question, drawing on established evidence and expert judgement. Analysis pieces present findings and, where appropriate, recommendations. They are clearly distinguished from research by the label "Analysis" and by the nature of the sourcing.

Commentary / Opinion The views of a named contributor, clearly identified as opinion. Commentary reflects the author's position, not necessarily that of SL-SAG as an institution. Every opinion piece is labelled "Opinion" and includes the author's name and a brief disclosure of relevant affiliations.

Data and Fact Sheets Short documents presenting verified statistics or structured factual information. Data sources are cited. These are not editorial products and do not carry opinion.

Research methodology

For research publications, authors are required to:

State the research question clearly at the outset.
Describe the methodology used (qualitative interviews, survey, document analysis, etc.) in enough detail that an informed reader can assess its validity.
Identify the limits of the research, including sample size constraints, access limitations, or potential sources of bias.
Cite all sources in a consistent format. Where sources are confidential (e.g., sensitive interviews), describe the source type and explain why anonymity is granted.
Provide underlying data or a data appendix where possible. Where data cannot be shared, explain why.

Source verification

All factual claims in published content must be verified against at least one primary or credible secondary source. Our standards by claim type are:

Statistical claims: Cite the original data source (government statistics, UN agency, independent survey). Do not rely on secondary summaries of data without checking the original.
Quotations: Attributed quotes must come from on-record sources unless there is a documented reason for anonymity. Off-the-record material may inform analysis but must not be presented as fact.
Historical claims: Verified against at least two independent sources where disputed history is involved.
Legal and official claims: Verified against the primary legal text or official document.

Editors may require authors to share source documentation before final approval.

Conflict of interest

SL-SAG requires all contributors — staff, fellows, and external authors — to disclose:

Funding received from any organisation related to the topic of the article, in the 24 months preceding publication.
Employment, advisory, or board roles with organisations referenced or relevant to the article.
Personal or financial relationships that a reasonable reader would consider relevant.
Any role in the policy, programme, or event being analysed.

Disclosures are published at the end of each article in a section titled "Disclosure." If no conflict exists, the article states "The author declares no conflict of interest."

Undisclosed conflicts identified after publication will result in correction or retraction, at the Editorial Committee's discretion.

Fact-checking process

All content passes through the following steps before publication:

Author submission — Article submitted via the contributor portal with sources attached or hyperlinked.
Desk review — The assigned editor checks scope, structure, and completeness. The author may be asked to revise.
Fact check — A second editor or designated fact-checker independently verifies key factual claims against sources. Disputed claims are returned to the author.
Editorial Committee sign-off — Articles for the Research and Policy Analysis categories require approval by at least one member of the Editorial Committee before publication. Opinion pieces require approval from the Editor-in-Chief or a delegated editor.
Legal review (where needed) — Content involving specific individuals, sensitive security matters, or legal interpretation is reviewed for defamation and legal risk before publication.

Who decides what gets published

The Editorial Committee has final authority over all publication decisions on slsag.org. The Committee comprises:

The Editor-in-Chief (Chair)
Senior editors responsible for each subject area
At least one external advisory member, rotated annually

Editorial independence: Publication decisions are made on editorial and academic merit alone. SL-SAG's funders, donors, and institutional partners do not have editorial approval rights. We will name any funder who requests, as a condition of funding, influence over editorial content — and we will decline that funding.

External contributions may be declined or withdrawn at any stage at the Editorial Committee's discretion, without obligation to explain reasons to the author.

Corrections policy

We correct mistakes promptly and transparently.

Minor correction (spelling, a changed figure, a broken link): corrected in the article with a note at the bottom reading: "Correction [date]: [brief description of change]."

Substantive correction (a factual error that affected the article's argument or conclusions): corrected with a prominent correction notice at the top of the article explaining what was wrong and what the correct information is. The correction is also noted on SL-SAG's social media channels if the original article was shared there.

Retraction: If an article is found to be based on fabricated data, undisclosed plagiarism, or a fundamental factual error that invalidates its conclusions, the Editorial Committee may retract it. Retracted articles are replaced with a retraction notice that explains why the article was withdrawn. We do not silently delete content.

To report a factual error: email support@slsag.org with "Correction request" in the subject line.

Sensitive topics

SL-SAG covers politically sensitive subjects, including security, governance, and human rights. When reporting on these topics, editors apply additional care:

Sources who face personal risk are anonymised, with explicit documentation of the reason on file.
Descriptions of violence or trauma are handled with care for the dignity of those involved.
Content that could place individuals at risk is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief before publication.

Contact

Editorial enquiries, correction requests, and permissions: support@slsag.org