Peer Review Policy
Editorial Policy
The Journal of the Blue Economy & Sustainable Energy Development (JBESED) is committed to publishing high-quality, credible, and policy-relevant research on sustainable blue economy systems. Its editorial and peer review policies are designed to ensure scientific rigour, ethical integrity, and transparency throughout the publication process.
Peer Review Process
1. Roles and Responsibilities of Editors
Editors at JBESED play a critical role in maintaining the journal’s integrity and ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated fairly and rigorously:
· Editor-in-Chief
o Provides strategic direction and oversight of the journal’s scope and aims.
o Ensures editorial independence and adherence to ethical and scholarly standards.
o Makes final publication decisions based on reviewer reports and editorial recommendations.
o Supervises the editorial board and section editors.
· Section / Associate Editors
o Manage manuscripts in their subject areas and oversee the review process.
o Select qualified reviewers with relevant expertise and ensure balanced evaluation.
o Assess reviewer reports and recommend editorial decisions to the Editor-in-Chief.
o Ensure that interdisciplinary and policy-oriented manuscripts are assessed appropriately.
· Editorial Board Members
o Advise on journal scope, emerging research topics, and editorial standards.
o Serve as reviewers or guest editors and support quality assurance.
o Promote the journal’s academic and ethical standards internationally.
All editors are required to declare conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where impartiality could be compromised.
2. Stages of the Peer Review Process
JBESED implements a structured, double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality, transparency, and methodological rigor. The stages include:
1. Initial Submission and Editorial Screening
o The editorial office checks manuscripts for scope alignment, originality, completeness, formatting, and compliance with ethical standards.
o The Editor-in-Chief or Section Editor determines whether the manuscript should proceed to peer review.
2. Reviewer Selection
o Qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s subject matter are identified.
o Typically, two independent reviewers are assigned, with additional reviewers consulted for interdisciplinary studies.
o Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment.
3. Peer Review Evaluation
o Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:
§ Originality and novelty
§ Methodological rigor and analytical clarity
§ Interdisciplinary integration and contribution to sustainable blue economy research
§ Policy or practical relevance
§ Presentation, clarity, and logical structure
o Reviews are submitted confidentially, and authors remain anonymous to reviewers.
4. Editorial Assessment and Decision
o Section/Associate Editors evaluate reviewer reports, resolve conflicting assessments, and provide a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief.
o Possible decisions: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
o Editors provide constructive feedback to authors, emphasizing improvements in scientific rigor, clarity, and relevance.
5. Revision and Resubmission
o Authors address reviewer and editor comments, revising their manuscript as needed.
o Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review to ensure all concerns are addressed.
6. Final Decision and Acceptance
o The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on reviewer reports, editor assessments, and the quality of revisions.
o Accepted manuscripts proceed to production for publication.
7. Post-Publication Oversight
o Editors monitor published content for integrity, and investigate any reports of misconduct, errors, or ethical breaches.
o Retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern are issued as needed in accordance with COPE guidelines.