Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Sustainability and Community Empowerment (JSCE) undergo an initial editorial screening followed by double-blind peer review. The review process is intended to assess the scientific quality, relevance, originality, methodological soundness, and contribution of each manuscript to the field of sustainability and community empowerment.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the editors to determine whether it:

  • falls within the journal's Focus and Scope;
  • meets the journal's basic submission and formatting requirements;
  • presents sufficient originality and scholarly contribution;
  • follows appropriate research and publication ethics; and
  • meets the minimum standards required for peer review.

Manuscripts that are clearly outside the journal's scope, do not meet the basic requirements, or have substantial deficiencies may be rejected at the initial screening stage without external peer review.

Manuscripts that meet the initial requirements are assigned to peer reviewers.

Type of Peer Review

JSCE applies a double-blind peer review process. The identities of the authors are not disclosed to the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors.

Each manuscript is generally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Relevance and originality of the study;
  • clarity of the research problem, objectives, and contribution;
  • adequacy and appropriateness of the theoretical or conceptual framework;
  • methodological rigor and transparency;
  • appropriateness of data analysis;
  • clarity and coherence of the results and discussion;
  • consistency between findings and conclusions;
  • relevance and accuracy of references; and
  • compliance with relevant research and publication ethics.

Reviewers may also provide suggestions to improve the clarity, presentation, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.

Reviewers are not expected to undertake extensive language editing or copyediting. Authors remain responsible for the linguistic quality and clarity of their manuscripts.

Editorial Decision

Reviewers provide recommendations to the editor. The final decision regarding publication is made by the editorbased on the reviewers' comments, the quality of the manuscript, and the journal's editorial standards.

Possible editorial decisions include:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to respond to the reviewers' comments and revise the manuscript accordingly. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when considered necessary.

The editor may consult additional reviewers or members of the Editorial Board when necessary.

Confidentiality

The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the double-blind review process. Reviewers are expected to treat manuscripts and all associated information as confidential documents and must not use, share, or disclose unpublished information from the manuscript without permission.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should decline an assignment if they have a conflict of interest that could affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their impartiality. Reviewers should inform the editor of any potential conflict before accepting the review.

Review Timeline

JSCE aims to process manuscripts as efficiently as possible. The duration of the review process may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the need for revision.