Peer Review Policy

All articles in the Journal of Environmental Geography are peer-reviewed. The submitted manuscripts should meet the following general criteria:
•    of great importance in the field
•    novelty in the field
•    well-founded conclusions
All submitted manuscripts are read by the editorial staff. Papers that seem to meet the editorial criteria are sent for formal review. Papers out of the aims and scope of the Journal are rejected without external review.
Manuscripts are sent to generally two reviewers. Based on the reviewer’s advices and comments, the editors make a decision according to the following possibilities:
•    accept with or without editorial revisions
•    invite authors to revise their manuscript considering the reviewer’s comments
•    reject
In cases, where reviewers disagree with each other on the acceptance of the paper, a further reviewer is asked to give an opinion about the manuscript.
The selection of the reviewers is crucial part of the publication process. The decision is generally based on many factors, including expertise, reputation and experiences in the given field. The reviewer’s evaluation form contains the main aspects of the reviewing process. The primary purpose of the review is to provide information to the editors on the acceptance of the paper and the appropriateness of the professional content. Furthermore, the review should call the attention of the authors on the weaknesses of the manuscript, thus authors can revise them according to the comments or can understand the reasons of rejection. In this way, they can improve the manuscript for publication elsewhere. However, referees are not obliged to provide a detailed, constructive advice to authors of papers that do not meet the criteria of the journal.
The Journal of Environmental Geography prefers rapid editorial decisions and publications and makes an effort to give a valuable service to both authors and the scientific community as a whole. Therefore, reviewers are asked to respond within a maximum of two months.
The reviewers and the authors remain anonymous throughout the review process and beyond. The comments of the reviewers are sent to the authors without any modifications. Reviewers are asked to avoid statements that may cause needless offence. All reviewers undertake to keep submitted manuscripts and associated data confidential and not to redistribute them.
If the language of the article is poor and the paper contains many grammatical errors making the understanding difficult, the reviewers do not need to correct the English. They are asked to call the attention of the Editor.