Peer review

The procedure for reviewing scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the journal:

  1. Scientific articles submitted to the editorial board are subject to compulsory peer review.
  2. The editor-in-chief determines the compliance of an article to the profile of the journal.
  3. If an article does not correspond to the subject of the journal, the author reports that it is impossible to publish it.
  4. The technical secretary determines the conformity of the article and the registration requirements.
  5. An article is returned for revision with the right of re-submission if it does not meet the requirements.
  6. After reviewing an article (which corresponds to the subject matter of the magazine and is executed in accordance with the requirements), the editor-in-chief sends it to a reviewer who conducts research on this topic and has at least one publication over the past three years. The publications must be included in the List of scientific professional editions of Ukraine, or foreign publications included in the Web of Science Core Collection and / or Scopus, or have monographs or sections of monographs issued by international publishers belonging to categories A, B or C according to the classification of the Research School for Socio- Economic and Natural Sciences of the Environment (SENSE).
  1. Type of review - double blind (anonymous). Articles, sent to reviewers, are private property of the authors and include confidential information. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles, as well as submit articles for review to another specialist;
  2. The review period should’t last for more than two weeks;
  3. The reviewer evaluates:
  • the correspondence between the content of an article and its title;
  • the completeness of the use of global experience when reasoned the problem, subject, main ideas, goals and objectives of the study;
  • scientific novelty and originality of research results;
  • methodological value, availability, completeness of disclosure and substantiation of newly created approaches, methods and means of scientific research;
  • practical value of research results.
  1. All materials submitted for review are tested for plagiarism on a mandatory basis. 
  2. The reviewer provides his opinion on the publication of an article:
  • an article is recommended for publication;
  • an article is recommended for publication  after  a follow-up revision - the author sends the text of the review with the proposal to make necessary changes and additions to the article or easonably refuses to take the comments of the reviewer into consideration. In the later period an article is considered for the purpose of meeting the requirements of the reviewer;
  • the publication of an article is not recommended - the refusal is sent to the author, the article is not proposed for re-consideration.
  1. Reviews, signed by ordinary or digital electronic signature, shall be kept in the editorial office for three years at least.