Peer Review Policy

1. Introduction

The Journal of Economics, Governance and Sustainable Development (JEGSD) is committed to ensuring the quality, integrity, and scholarly value of all published articles through a rigorous peer review process. The journal employs a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed.

2. Type of Peer Review

Double-Blind Review

  • The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other
  • The process ensures objectivity and minimizes bias
  • It promotes fair and independent evaluation

3. Review Process

Step 1: Initial Editorial Screening

The editorial team assesses submissions for:

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope
  • Originality and scholarly quality
  • Compliance with submission guidelines

Manuscripts may be desk-rejected at this stage if they do not meet the basic criteria.

Step 2: Assignment to Editor

Suitable manuscripts are assigned to an Editor or Associate Editor with expertise in the subject area.

Step 3: Reviewer Selection

At least two independent reviewers are invited. Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Subject expertise
  • Academic qualifications
  • Publication record

Step 4: Peer Review

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge
  • Methodological rigor
  • Clarity and organization
  • Relevance to the field
  • Validity of results and conclusions

Step 5: Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept
  • Minor revisions
  • Major revisions
  • Reject

Step 6: Editorial Decision

The Editor makes a decision based on reviewer reports:

  • Accept
  • Revise and resubmit
  • Reject

Step 7: Revision Process

Authors are required to address all reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.

Step 8: Final Decision and Publication

Once accepted, manuscripts proceed to:

  • Copyediting
  • Formatting
  • Publication

4. Review Timeline

  • Initial screening: 1–2 weeks
  • Peer review process: 6–8 weeks
  • Final decision: approximately 8–12 weeks

5. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain confidentiality of manuscripts
  • Provide objective and constructive feedback
  • Declare any conflicts of interest
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe

6. Ethical Standards in Review

JEGSD adheres to the principles of Committee on Publication Ethics, ensuring:

  • Fair and unbiased review
  • Non-discrimination based on personal characteristics
  • Transparency and integrity in editorial decisions

7. Confidentiality

All manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents and must not be shared or used for personal advantage.

8. Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the review process where necessary.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal request with justification to:

editor@jegsd.org 

All appeals are reviewed independently and fairly.

10. Reviewer Recognition

The journal may:

  • Acknowledge reviewers annually
  • Provide certificates of review
  • Recognize outstanding reviewers

11. Policy Updates

This policy may be updated periodically to reflect evolving best practices in scholarly publishing.