Reviewers Policy

Review Policy

At Current World Environment, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic publishing. Our peer review process ensures that every submission is evaluated for its quality, scientific rigor, and contribution to the field of environmental sciences.

Peer Review Process

We employ a double-blind peer review model, where both the reviewers’ and authors’ identities remain anonymous throughout the process. This approach is designed to ensure impartiality and prevent any bias in the evaluation of manuscripts. Our review process follows several key principles:

Confidentiality: The identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to each other, ensuring objective and unbiased feedback.
Editorial Mediation: The editorial staff act as intermediaries, facilitating all communication between authors and reviewers to maintain fairness and transparency.
Unbiased Evaluation: Reviewers assess manuscripts based solely on their academic merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Key Aspects of the Peer Review Process

Review Model: Double-blind, ensuring that both the reviewer and the author remain anonymous.
Initial Screening: Submissions undergo a preliminary evaluation by the editorial team to assess their suitability for the journal before being sent for peer review.
Peer Review Timeline: The peer review process generally takes 1-2 weeks, but it may vary depending on the complexity of the paper and the availability of reviewers.
Communication: All interactions between reviewers and authors are mediated through the journal’s editorial office.
Revisions: Authors may be asked to revise their manuscript based on the feedback provided by reviewers. These revisions will be re-evaluated before a final decision is made.
Final Decision: Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editor will make the final decision on whether to accept, reject, or request further revisions to the manuscript.

Role of Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical role in upholding the quality and integrity of the journal. Their responsibilities include:
Providing objective, constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts.
Evaluating the originality, clarity, and methodological soundness of the research.
Ensuring that the manuscript aligns with the journal’s ethical standards and scientific rigor.
Recommending improvements or suggesting rejection based on the quality of the submission.
Our reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the relevant subject areas of environmental sciences.

Ethical Guidelines

Current World Environment strictly adheres to the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for ethical peer review practices. This includes maintaining confidentiality, avoiding conflicts of interest, and ensuring that reviewers provide fair and constructive feedback.

For further information, please refer to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. These guidelines help safeguard the integrity of the peer review process and ensure the highest standards of ethical conduct.

Use of Author-Suggested Reviewers: Inclusion in Future Review Opportunities

At Current World Environment, we maintain a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality and uphold the integrity of scholarly publishing. As part of this commitment, we do not send submitted manuscripts to author-recommended reviewers at the time of submission.

However, we recognize that author-suggested reviewers can contribute valuable expertise to our review process. When an author provides reviewer suggestions, we evaluate their credentials and, if deemed suitable, add them to our reviewer database. These reviewers may then be invited for future guest reviews when their expertise aligns with a submitted manuscript.

This approach ensures a fair and unbiased review process while also expanding our reviewer pool with qualified experts recommended by our contributing authors.

Editorial Contribution

All research articles, review articles, and short communications submitted to Current World Environment undergo a rigorous peer-review process. However, editorials, which are submitted by members of the Editorial Board, are not subject to external peer review. These articles are internally reviewed by the editorial team before publication and provide expert opinions, insights, or perspectives on key topics in environmental sciences.

Reviewer Contributions

While peer review reports are not published, the journal acknowledges the significant contribution of reviewers in upholding the quality of our published research. We recognize their efforts in providing detailed and constructive feedback.

Ownership of Reviews

All peer reviews conducted are considered the property of Current World Environment or affiliated third parties. The journal reserves the right to make editorial decisions based on the feedback received.

Current World Environment follows a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the quality and integrity of published research. However, peer review reports are not published alongside the articles. Review decisions and feedback are provided directly to the authors through the editorial team as part of the standard review process.

For any further queries, you can email us at info@cwejournal.org