Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Sustainable Solutions (JSS) employs a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, relevance, and integrity of the articles published in the journal. Peer review is an essential component of scholarly publishing, facilitating the evaluation of research manuscripts by independent experts in the field.

Types of Peer Review:
Double-Blind Peer Review: The journal employ double-blind peer review for its publications. Both the identities of the reviewers and the authors are concealed from each other to minimize bias and ensure impartial evaluation.

Selection of Reviewers:
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, experience, and familiarity with the subject matter of the manuscript. The editorial board strives to appoint reviewers who have relevant academic qualifications, research experience, and a track record of publication in the field of sustainable solutions.

Reviewer Responsibilities:
1. Confidentiality: Reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the peer review process and refrain from disclosing any information about the manuscript or their review to third parties without prior consent from the journal.
2. Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are expected to provide fair, constructive, and impartial feedback to authors, focusing on strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement in the manuscript. Feedback should be specific, actionable, and supported by evidence from the manuscript.
3. Timeliness: Reviewers are requested to complete their reviews within the specified timeframe to ensure timely processing of manuscripts. If reviewers anticipate delays or require additional time to complete their review, they should notify the editorial office promptly.

Editorial Decision:
Based on the feedback received from reviewers, the editorial board makes a decision on the acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript. Authors are provided with detailed feedback from reviewers to guide revisions and improve the quality of their submission.

Appeals and Disputes:
Authors who disagree with the decision of the editorial board may appeal the decision by providing a detailed response addressing the concerns raised during peer review. The editorial board will reconsider the manuscript in light of the appeal and may seek additional input from reviewers if necessary.

Ethical Considerations:
All peer review processes adhere to the highest ethical standards, including confidentiality, impartiality, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may influence their evaluation of the manuscript.
The Journal of Sustainable Solutions is committed to fostering a fair, transparent, and constructive peer review process that upholds the standards of scholarly publishing and advances the dissemination of high-quality research in the field of sustainability.