The SUSTINERE: Journal of Environment and Sustainability upholds the highest standards of academic integrity and research quality. To ensure the credibility and fairness of its publications, all submissions undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process conducted by a minimum of two independent expert reviewers, and in some cases three, depending on the complexity and subject of the manuscript.

 

Review Model

SUSTINERE operates a double-blind anonymized review process, in which both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation. This system ensures that all manuscripts are assessed solely on their scholarly merit, free from personal or institutional bias.

 

Initial Editorial Screening

All submissions are first screened by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Section Editor for suitability within the journal’s scope and compliance with formatting and ethical guidelines. Within 60 days of submission, the Editor conducts a preliminary assessment using plagiarism detection tool to identify potential cases of plagiarism or self-plagiarism. Only manuscripts that meet the journal’s quality, ethical, and technical requirements proceed to the external peer review stage.

 

Reviewer Selection and Assignment

Each suitable manuscript is assigned to at least two independent reviewers, and in many cases three, who possess relevant subject-matter expertise and a strong research background in the field. Reviewers are chosen for their academic qualifications, publication record, and familiarity with the manuscript’s topic. All reviewers are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review invitation.

 

Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts according to the following key criteria:

• Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope

• Originality and contribution to the field of environmental sustainability

• Methodological soundness and scientific rigor

• Quality and clarity of data presentation and argumentation

• Appropriateness of references and contextualization within the literature, and

• Significance of the findings for theory, practice, or policy.

 

Review Process and Outcomes

Following evaluation, reviewers submit a written report and a recommendation, choosing one of the following options:

• Accept without revision

• Accept with minor revisions

• Revise and resubmit for further review

• Reject

The Editor communicates reviewers’ comments and recommendations to the authors. Authors are expected to revise their manuscripts based on these comments and resubmit a revised version, accompanied by a detailed response letter addressing each point raised. The revised manuscript may be re-evaluated by one or more of the original reviewers before a final editorial decision is made.

 

Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript after considering the reviewers’ recommendations, the authors’ revisions, and the overall contribution of the work. The editorial team reserves the right to request additional revisions if necessary to meet the journal’s publication standards.

 

Ethical Standards

The Sustinere Journal follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to maintain confidentiality, declare conflicts of interest, and uphold the highest standards of integrity and fairness throughout the review process. Reviewers are prohibited from using unpublished material or ideas from manuscripts under review for personal advantage.

 

Duration of the Review Process

The initial editorial screening is completed within 60 days of submission. The full peer review process, including revisions and final decision, typically takes six to eight weeks, although the exact duration may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of revisions required.