Peer Review Policy

1. Purpose The Eco AgriTech Frontiers Journal (EATFJ) upholds a rigorous and transparent peer review process that ensures the publication of high-quality, scientifically sound, and original research. The peer review policy aims to maintain the integrity, credibility, and academic standards of the journal while providing constructive feedback to authors.

2. Peer Review Process EATFJ follows a Triple-blind peer review process, meaning that both the identities of the authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the review process. This process ensures that the evaluation is unbiased and based solely on the quality of the work.

The process includes the following steps:

  • Submission: Authors submit their manuscript through the journal’s online submission system.
  • Initial Screening: The editorial team conducts an initial screening to assess the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope and basic compliance with submission guidelines.
  • Reviewer Selection: The editorial team assigns the manuscript to at least two independent, qualified experts in the relevant field of research. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic credentials, and impartiality.
  • Review Process: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for originality, scientific rigor, clarity, relevance, and contribution to the field. They also assess the methodology, analysis, and conclusions of the study. Reviewers provide detailed feedback and recommendations on whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.
  • Decision: Based on the reviewers’ feedback, the editorial team makes a decision on the manuscript. The options are:
    • Accept as is: The manuscript is accepted for publication without revisions.
    • Minor revisions: The manuscript is accepted pending minor revisions based on reviewer feedback.
    • Major revisions: The manuscript is accepted pending major revisions, and the revised manuscript is re-reviewed.
    • Reject: The manuscript is rejected if it does not meet the journal’s standards or is outside the scope of the journal.
  • Author Notification: Authors are notified of the decision, and any required revisions are communicated. If revisions are necessary, authors are expected to submit the revised manuscript within a specified timeframe.

3. Reviewer Guidelines Reviewers are expected to:

  • Assess the manuscript objectively, based on scientific merit and without personal bias.
  • Keep the manuscript confidential and avoid using any data or ideas from the manuscript for personal gain.
  • Provide constructive and detailed feedback to help authors improve their work.
  • Evaluate the ethical aspects of the research, including proper citation, data integrity, and ethical conduct.
  • Disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where appropriate.

4. Confidentiality The peer review process is strictly confidential. Reviewers are not permitted to disclose the content of the manuscript to others or to use the information for personal or professional advantage. Authors are also expected to keep the identity of their reviewers confidential.

5. Conflicts of Interest Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could potentially bias their evaluation of the manuscript. Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to:

  • Professional or personal relationships with the authors.
  • Financial interests in the topic of the manuscript.
  • Any other factors that may compromise the impartiality of the review process.

If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer will be removed from the review process and replaced with another qualified expert.

6. Editorial Independence The editorial team of EATFJ is committed to maintaining editorial independence. The decision to accept or reject a manuscript is based solely on its scientific merit and relevance to the journal’s scope. The journal will not accept influence from external sources, including sponsors, advertisers, or other stakeholders.

7. Publication Ethics EATFJ adheres to established guidelines for publication ethics and expects authors and reviewers to follow ethical standards in their work. These include:

  • Avoiding plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification.
  • Ensuring proper citation of sources and acknowledgment of prior work.
  • Conducting research ethically, including obtaining proper approvals from relevant bodies (e.g., ethics committees, funding agencies).

8. Appeals Process Authors have the right to appeal the editorial decision regarding their manuscript. Appeals should be submitted in writing, detailing the reasons for the appeal, and will be reviewed by the editorial board. The decision of the editorial board regarding appeals is final.

9. Open Peer Review (Optional) EATFJ may implement an open peer review system in the future, where the identities of reviewers and authors are made public. In such cases, reviewers will be encouraged to provide transparent and constructive feedback in a manner that promotes academic dialogue and collaboration.

10. Reviewer Recognition EATFJ values the contributions of peer reviewers in maintaining the quality of the journal. To acknowledge their efforts, reviewers may be recognized on the journal’s website and in the acknowledgment section of published issues. Reviewers may also be invited to participate in special issues or editorial boards in the future.