Peer Review Policy

At the Center for Energy and Economics Studies, we are committed to ensuring the highest standards of quality and integrity in academic publishing. Central to this mission is the peer review process, which is designed to provide fair, unbiased, and constructive evaluation of submitted manuscripts. This policy outlines the principles and processes that govern the peer review of academic works published by our press.

1. Principles of Peer Review

Our peer review process is grounded in the following core principles to ensure fairness, transparency, and academic rigor:

Impartiality: Reviewers should provide evaluations based solely on the scholarly merit of the manuscript, free from any personal, professional, or financial bias.
Confidentiality: Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the review process. Manuscripts and related materials should not be shared or discussed with anyone outside the review process.
Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are expected to provide detailed, respectful, and constructive feedback aimed at helping authors improve the quality and clarity of their work.
Timeliness: Reviewers should adhere to agreed deadlines and complete their reviews in a timely manner to facilitate the efficient processing of manuscripts.

2. Review Process

The peer review process at Center for Energy and Economics Studies consists of the following key stages:

Submission and Initial Screening: Once a manuscript is submitted, the editorial team conducts an initial screening to ensure it meets the journal's scope and basic requirements. Manuscripts that pass this screening are sent to reviewers for peer evaluation.
Reviewer Selection: Editors select appropriate experts in the relevant field(s) of the manuscript to conduct the review. Potential reviewers are chosen based on their expertise, experience, and impartiality. We aim to ensure a balance between subject-specific knowledge and an objective approach.
Review Process: Reviewers assess the manuscript based on its originality, methodological rigor, contribution to the field, clarity of argument, and overall quality. They are asked to provide a detailed evaluation, including any suggestions for improvements or revisions.
Decision: Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editor makes a final decision on the manuscript, which could include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection. The decision and reviewers' comments are communicated to the author(s).
Revisions: If revisions are required, authors are expected to address all reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript within a specified period. The revised manuscript may undergo a second round of peer review if necessary.
Final Acceptance: Once the manuscript has passed the review process and all revisions have been completed satisfactorily, the manuscript is accepted for publication.

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the integrity and quality of published works. As a reviewer, you are responsible for:

Evaluating the manuscript based on academic rigor, originality, and significance to the field.
Providing clear, constructive feedback to assist the author in improving their work.
Maintaining confidentiality and not using the information in the manuscript for personal gain.
Disclosing any conflicts of interest that could compromise your impartiality in the review process.

4. Author Responsibilities

Authors submitting manuscripts to Center for Energy and Economics Studies are expected to:

Submit original research that has not been published elsewhere or under review at another journal.
Provide sufficient data and analysis to support the conclusions in the manuscript.
Address all feedback and revisions from reviewers in a timely and constructive manner.
Disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript.

5. Confidentiality and Ethical Considerations

Maintaining confidentiality is a cornerstone of the peer review process. Reviewers must not discuss or share any details about the manuscript or the review process with anyone not involved in the evaluation.
Additionally, reviewers should be aware of the ethical implications of their role, which includes avoiding bias, ensuring fairness, and respecting the intellectual property of others.

6. Conflict of Interest

All reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment. This includes personal, professional, or financial relationships with the authors or their institutions that may influence the review process. If a conflict of interest exists, reviewers must recuse themselves from the review process to ensure the impartiality of the evaluation.

7. Transparent Communication

We encourage open communication between reviewers, editors, and authors. If a reviewer encounters significant ethical concerns, inaccuracies, or issues during the review process, these should be communicated immediately to the editorial team. Reviewers should also notify the editorial team if they feel they are unable to complete the review in the agreed time frame.

8. Appeals

In cases where the author disagrees with the review outcome, they may appeal the decision. The editorial board will review the appeal, considering the reviewers' comments and the manuscript's suitability for publication. The decision of the editorial board will be final.

9. Reviewer Recognition

We value the critical contributions made by our reviewers. Those who provide timely, high-quality reviews will be acknowledged in our publications and may also receive reviewer certificates as a recognition of their efforts.

This Peer Review Policy ensures that the process of evaluating manuscripts at Center for Energy and Economics Studies is fair, ethical, and transparent, fostering an environment of academic rigor and scholarly integrity.