Peer Review Process

Editorial Policy

Peer Review Process

The International Journal of Education and Skills for the Green Economy uses a rigorous and impartial peer-review process to evaluate the quality, originality and relevance of submitted manuscripts.

Review model

IJESGE applies a double-anonymous peer-review process. The identities of the authors are not disclosed to reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

Editorial decisions are based on the academic merit of the manuscript and are made without discrimination on the basis of nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, political opinion, religion or other personal characteristics.

Review procedure

1

Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system and confirm compliance with the submission requirements.

2

Initial screening

The editorial office checks the manuscript for completeness, relevance to the journal’s scope, basic academic quality and compliance with technical requirements.

3

Editorial assessment

The editor evaluates the manuscript’s originality, scholarly relevance, methodological suitability and potential contribution to the journal.

4

Reviewer selection

Suitable independent reviewers are selected according to their expertise, research experience and absence of relevant conflicts of interest.

5

Peer review

Normally, each manuscript is assessed by at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers submit comments for the authors and recommendations for the editor.

6

Editorial decision

The editor considers the reviewers’ reports and makes the final decision. Reviewer recommendations inform but do not determine the editorial decision.

7

Revision

When revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response explaining how each reviewer comment was addressed.

8

Final evaluation

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated directly by the editor, depending on the extent and nature of the revisions.

Possible editorial decisions

  • Accept submission: the manuscript is accepted without substantive revision.
  • Revisions required: limited revisions are required before a final decision.
  • Resubmit for review: substantial revisions and an additional review round are necessary.
  • Decline submission: the manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.
  • Submit elsewhere: the manuscript may be academically valid but falls outside the journal’s scope.

Evaluation criteria

Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts according to the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope
  • Originality and significance of the contribution
  • Clarity of the research objectives or questions
  • Appropriateness and transparency of the methodology
  • Quality and validity of the analysis
  • Logical relationship between evidence and conclusions
  • Engagement with relevant scholarly literature
  • Ethical compliance and research integrity
  • Clarity, organization and academic quality of the presentation

Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports and editorial correspondence are confidential. Reviewers and editors must not share, reproduce or use unpublished material for personal or professional advantage.

Conflicts of interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose relationships or interests that could affect their impartiality. Where a relevant conflict exists, another qualified person will be assigned.

Reviewer conduct

Reviews must be constructive, evidence-based, respectful and submitted within the agreed period. Personal criticism, discriminatory language and unsupported allegations are unacceptable.

Editorial independence

The Editor-in-Chief has responsibility for the final decision on publication. Decisions must be based on academic quality, relevance, originality, ethical compliance and the reliability of the research.

Institutional, commercial or personal interests must not influence editorial decisions. Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members or individuals associated with the journal are subject to the same review requirements and are managed by an independent editor.

Appeals and concerns

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual or procedural error affected the outcome. An appeal must provide a clear academic justification and respond specifically to the relevant editorial or reviewer comments.

Appeals do not guarantee reconsideration or acceptance. They are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or another editor who was not directly responsible for the original decision whenever practicable.

Ethical standards

The journal’s peer-review procedures are guided by internationally recognized principles of publication ethics, confidentiality, fairness, editorial independence and responsible scholarly communication.

Policy owner: Editorial Office of the International Journal of Education and Skills for the Green Economy

Effective date: 2026

Last reviewed: August 2026