Peer Review Process

Initial Editorial Evaluation

The handling editor reviews all manuscripts submitted to the editorial office to assess their alignment with the journal’s thematic focus and editorial policy. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s scope or violate its publication ethics are rejected prior to peer review. Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal’s formatting and structural requirements are returned to authors for revision and resubmission. If the manuscript passes the initial editorial check, it is forwarded for external peer review. Typically, the time for preliminary editorial review does not exceed one week from the date of receipt of the manuscript.

Double Anonymous Peer Review

All articles submitted to the journal Ekonomichna ta Sotsialna Geografiya undergo a double anonymous peer review process. This means that the reviewers do not know the identities of the authors, and the authors do not know the identities of the reviewers. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. If necessary, additional reviewers may be invited by the editorial team. Reviewers are selected by the editorial team based on their research interests and scholarly output, in accordance with the thematic focus of the manuscript.

Reviewers assess the following aspects: the presence of scientific novelty, the quality of the literature review on the research topic, the appropriateness and adequacy of the methods used, the validity of conclusions, the quantity and quality of visual materials (figures, tables), etc. Reviewers do not perform structural or language editing, but they may notify the authors and editorial team of any such issues they observe.

Editors serve as intermediaries in all communication between authors and reviewers during the review process. Editors reserve the right to withhold reviewer comments that contain subjective judgments, offensive language, or do not meet the journal’s editorial and ethical standards.

Based on the reviews received, the handling editor makes one of the following four decisions:

(1) Accept in the current form: No further changes are required from the authors.

(2) Minor revisions required: The manuscript is returned to the authors for minor corrections and then re-evaluated by the handling editor.

(3) Major revisions required: The manuscript is returned to the authors along with detailed reviewer comments and editorial suggestions. The authors must resubmit a revised version accompanied by a clear response to each reviewer comment. The revised manuscript may be evaluated by the handling editor alone or sent for one additional round of peer review (no more than one round of re-review is allowed).

(4) Reject without the option to resubmit

While reviewer recommendations are taken into account, the final decision on publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

The standard review period is one month.