Skip to main content Skip to content
Cover
Energy and Environmental Sciences Open Access

International Journal of Sustainable Energy and Environmental Research

e-ISSN: 2306-6253 p-ISSN: 2312-5764 Code: IJSEER

Peer Review Policy

1. Purpose and Principles of Peer Review

International Journal of Sustainable Energy and Environmental Research (IJSEER) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality, research integrity, and publication ethics through a rigorous and transparent peer review process. Peer review serves as a critical mechanism for evaluating the originality, scientific validity, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of submitted manuscripts.

The primary objective of peer review is to ensure that published articles contribute meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge in sustainable energy, environmental research, climate change mitigation and adaptation, renewable energy technologies, environmental management, ecological sustainability, and related disciplines.

2. Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor before being sent for external review. During this stage, manuscripts are evaluated for:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;

  • Originality and significance of the research;

  • Scientific and methodological soundness;

  • Compliance with the journal's submission requirements;

  • Adherence to ethical and publication standards;

  • Quality of presentation and language.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's editorial and ethical standards may be rejected without external review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

IJSEER employs a double-blind peer review system, whereby the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. Authors are required to remove all identifying information from manuscripts and supplementary materials before submission.

Following the editorial assessment, manuscripts deemed suitable for review are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, and publication record.

The double-blind review process promotes fairness, objectivity, confidentiality, and impartiality in manuscript evaluation.

4. Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are requested to assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

4.1 Originality and Novelty

  • Contribution of the research to existing knowledge.

  • Innovation in concepts, methods, technologies, or applications.

4.2 Scientific and Methodological Quality

  • Appropriateness of research design and methodology.

  • Validity and reliability of data collection and analysis.

  • Adequacy of experimental procedures, models, or analytical techniques.

4.3 Relevance and Significance

  • Importance of findings for sustainable energy and environmental research.

  • Potential scientific, practical, technological, or policy implications.

4.4 Presentation and Clarity

  • Organization and structure of the manuscript.

  • Clarity of writing, tables, figures, and supporting materials.

  • Adequacy of references and literature review.

4.5 Conclusions and Interpretation

  • Whether conclusions are supported by evidence and data.

  • Accuracy and objectivity of interpretations and recommendations.

Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive and professional feedback that helps authors improve the quality of their work.

5. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Conduct reviews objectively, fairly, and within the agreed timeframe;

  • Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and associated materials;

  • Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment;

  • Identify relevant published work that has not been cited;

  • Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, ethical concerns, or other forms of misconduct;

  • Refrain from using unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

6. Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewers' reports and editorial assessment, the journal may reach one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revisions;

  • Accept with minor revisions;

  • Major revisions required;

  • Reject and encourage resubmission;

  • Reject.

The final decision regarding publication rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor.

7. Plagiarism Screening and Similarity Check

IJSEER is committed to publishing original research and preventing publication misconduct. All manuscripts are screened using iThenticate through the Crossref Similarity Check service before publication.

The journal does not accept:

  • Plagiarism;

  • Self-plagiarism;

  • Duplicate or redundant publication;

  • Fabrication or falsification of data;

  • Manipulation of images, figures, or research results;

  • Citation manipulation.

Cases of suspected misconduct are handled in accordance with the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

8. Conflict of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, institutional, professional, or personal relationships that could influence the research, review process, or editorial decisions.

Authors are required to provide a conflict of interest statement at the time of manuscript submission. Any disclosed competing interests will be evaluated by the editorial office and, where appropriate, published alongside the article.

9. Research Ethics and Human Participation

Research involving human participants, surveys, interviews, field investigations, or community-based studies must comply with recognized ethical standards and applicable regulations.

Where applicable, authors must:

  • Obtain approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethics Committee, or equivalent authority;

  • Include details of ethical approval within the manuscript;

  • Obtain informed consent from participants before data collection;

  • Protect participant privacy, confidentiality, and personal information.

The editorial office may request documentation verifying ethical approval and informed consent.

10. Data Integrity and Research Transparency

Authors are expected to present their findings honestly, accurately, and transparently. Data should not be fabricated, manipulated, or selectively reported.

Authors should retain original research data and provide access to supporting data when requested by editors or reviewers. The journal encourages the adoption of open science and data-sharing practices whenever appropriate and ethically permissible.

11. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to IJSEER are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose manuscript content or use unpublished information obtained through the review process for personal, academic, or commercial advantage.

Confidentiality obligations remain in effect both during and after the review process.

12. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a detailed justification to the Editor-in-Chief. Appeals are reviewed independently and fairly.

Complaints regarding editorial conduct, peer review procedures, publication ethics, or conflicts of interest are managed in accordance with COPE's Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

13. Publication Ethics and Research Integrity

IJSEER adheres to the principles and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and internationally recognized standards of responsible research and publication.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers share responsibility for maintaining honesty, transparency, accountability, and integrity throughout the publication process.

References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2021). COPE Core Practices. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2019). COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers

Committee on Publication Ethics, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), & World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). (2022). Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Available at: https://doaj.org/bestpractice

Crossref. (2024). Similarity Check Powered by iThenticate. Available at: https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). (2024). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Available at: https://www.icmje.org

Wager, E., & Kleinert, S. (2011). Responsible research publication: International standards for editors. In Mayer, T., & Steneck, N. (Eds.), Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment (pp. 317–328). World Scientific.

Eysenbach, G., & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ, 323(7321), 1103–1105. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1103