1. Purpose of Peer Review
The International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Research (IJSAR) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process. Peer review is a fundamental mechanism for ensuring the quality, validity, originality, and scientific integrity of published research.
The objective of peer review is to evaluate the academic merit, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and contribution of submitted manuscripts to the advancement of sustainable agriculture and related disciplines. Through this process, the journal seeks to publish high-quality research that contributes meaningfully to scientific knowledge, agricultural innovation, environmental sustainability, food security, and rural development.
2. Initial Editorial Screening
All manuscripts submitted to IJSAR undergo an initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor. During this stage, manuscripts are evaluated for:
-
Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
-
Originality and scholarly significance;
-
Compliance with the journal's submission requirements;
-
Scientific and methodological quality;
-
Ethical compliance and research integrity;
-
Clarity of language and presentation.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's editorial or ethical standards may be rejected without external peer review.
3. Double-Blind Peer Review Process
IJSAR follows a double-blind peer review system, whereby the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. Authors are required to prepare manuscripts in a manner that prevents the disclosure of personal identities, affiliations, or other identifying information.
Following successful editorial screening, manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent experts with relevant subject expertise in sustainable agriculture, agricultural sciences, environmental management, agribusiness, food systems, or related fields.
The double-blind review process promotes impartiality, objectivity, and fairness while minimizing potential bias associated with authors' institutional affiliations, nationality, gender, or academic status.
4. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are requested to assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:
-
Originality and novelty of the research;
-
Relevance to sustainable agricultural research and practice;
-
Scientific rigor and methodological soundness;
-
Adequacy and accuracy of data analysis;
-
Clarity and organization of the manuscript;
-
Appropriateness of references and literature review;
-
Validity of results and conclusions;
-
Ethical compliance and research integrity;
-
Contribution to existing knowledge and practical implications.
Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive comments that help authors improve the quality and impact of their work.
5. Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
-
Conduct reviews objectively, fairly, and professionally;
-
Provide constructive and evidence-based feedback;
-
Maintain confidentiality of all manuscript materials;
-
Disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality;
-
Identify relevant published work not cited by the authors;
-
Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, or other ethical concerns.
Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.
6. Editorial Decisions
Based on reviewers' recommendations and editorial assessment, the journal may reach one of the following decisions:
-
Accept without revision;
-
Accept with minor revisions;
-
Request major revisions and resubmission;
-
Reject with encouragement to resubmit after substantial improvement;
-
Reject.
The final decision regarding publication rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor.
7. Plagiarism Detection and Originality Verification
IJSAR is committed to publishing original research and preventing academic misconduct. All manuscripts are screened for similarity and originality using iThenticate through the Crossref Similarity Check service before acceptance and publication.
The journal does not accept manuscripts involving:
-
Plagiarism;
-
Self-plagiarism;
-
Duplicate or redundant publication;
-
Data fabrication or falsification;
-
Image manipulation;
-
Citation manipulation;
-
Any other form of research or publication misconduct.
Cases of suspected misconduct are handled in accordance with the principles and procedures established by 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, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the research or editorial process.
Authors are required to provide a conflict of interest statement during submission. Reviewers and editors with conflicts of interest must recuse themselves from the review or decision-making process.
9. Research Ethics and Human Participation
Research involving human participants, surveys, interviews, indigenous communities, farmers, or other stakeholders must comply with internationally recognized ethical standards and applicable institutional and national regulations.
Where applicable, authors must:
-
Obtain approval from an appropriate Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board (IRB);
-
Include details of ethical approval within the manuscript;
-
Obtain informed consent from research participants;
-
Ensure participant privacy, confidentiality, and voluntary participation.
The journal may request supporting documentation regarding ethical approval and participant consent during the review process.
10. Confidentiality
All manuscripts submitted to IJSAR are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose manuscript content, reviewer comments, or editorial decisions to unauthorized individuals.
Confidential information obtained during the review process must not be used for personal, academic, or commercial advantage.
11. Appeals and Complaints
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written justification to the Editor-in-Chief. Appeals will be evaluated objectively and may involve consultation with additional reviewers or editorial board members.
Complaints related to editorial conduct, peer review, publication ethics, or conflicts of interest will be addressed in accordance with COPE guidelines and the journal's publication ethics policy.
12. Publication Ethics and Research Integrity
IJSAR adheres to the principles of transparency, accountability, fairness, and integrity in scholarly publishing. The journal follows the COPE Core Practices and expects authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers to uphold the highest standards of ethical conduct throughout the publication process.
Through its peer review and editorial procedures, IJSAR seeks to ensure that all published articles are scientifically sound, ethically conducted, and capable of making a meaningful contribution to sustainable agricultural research and practice.
References
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 (COPE). (2021). COPE Core Practices. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
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/recommendations/
Wager, E., & Kleinert, S. (2011). Responsible research publication: International standards for editors. In T. Mayer & N. Steneck (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