Peer Review Policy for Socio-Economic Planning Sciences
The practice of peer review is designed to ensure that high quality scientific material is published.
It is an objective process at the heart of competitive academic publishing, and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees thus play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of "Socio- Economic Planning Sciences," with all manuscripts peer reviewed using the following procedure:*
Initial manuscript evaluation
To begin, the Journal Editor briefly reviews all manuscripts. Rejections at this initial stage can be due to material being insufficiently original, having serious scientific flaws, having significantly poor presentation in terms of quality of writing/English, and/or simply falling outside the Journal's Aims and Scope. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least two experts for formal review, as described below. Authors of rejected manuscripts will be informed within 6-8 weeks of submission.
At this point, the Editor generally sends the paper to one of the Journal's Associate Editors, who then chooses two referees to formally review the manuscript. He also retains the option of choosing referees himself, and/or seeking additional suggestions for qualified reviewers from appropriate sources.
Type of peer review
This Journal employs a single blind review, where the referees remain anonymous throughout the process.
Selection of referees
Based on their expertise/experiences, referees are closely matched to the paper's topic, methodology, etc. If it is difficult to obtain a referee under such guidelines, and the paper falls within the special expertise of the Editor, or one of the Associate Editors, then they may act as a referee.
Referee reports
Referees are asked to evaluate whether, at minimum, the manuscript:
- is original;
- is methodologically sound;
- has importance/value to the Journal's audience, and beyond;
- follows appropriate ethical guidelines;
- has results that are clearly presented, with well-supported conclusions;
- correctly/effectively references previous relevant work;
- offers a clear and logical flow of thought.
Referees are not expected to correct or edit manuscripts, as language improvement is not part of the formal peer review process.
Length of the review process
Referees will be asked to deliver their reviews within three months of manuscript receipt.
Should the referees' reports fundamentally contradict one another, a further expert opinion will be sought. In case of a substantial delay, another referee will be nominated and asked to review the paper. Revised manuscripts will be returned to the initial referees when available from the author(s), and if necessary/appropriate.
Final report
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication will be sent to the corresponding author along with any recommendations made by the referees.
The Editor's decision
Referees advise the Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Becoming a referee for "Socio- Economic Planning Sciences"
If you are not currently a referee for Socio- Economic Planning Sciences," but would like to be added to the list of possible referees for this title, please contact the Editor-in-Chief.
The benefits of refereeing include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work within your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual statement in the Journal. You may also cite your work for the Journal as part of your professional activities.
*NOTE: Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, Conference Organizers or Scientific Committees. On request from the Editorial Office, authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process.
