Peer Review Policy

Climate Crises and Environment (CCE) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the scientific quality, credibility, and integrity of all published research. The journal is committed to maintaining high academic standards in climate science, environmental studies, and sustainability research through a fair, transparent, and unbiased review system.

1. Review Model

CCE operates under a double-blind peer review system, in which:

  • The identity of the authors is kept hidden from reviewers
  • The identity of reviewers is kept hidden from authors

This ensures that all manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit, originality, methodological strength, and contribution to environmental research, without any form of bias.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial office to assess:

  • Relevance to climate science and environmental studies
  • Compliance with journal submission guidelines
  • Academic structure, clarity, and language quality
  • Plagiarism and similarity index screening
  • Basic ethical and research integrity compliance

Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum requirements may be rejected at the desk review stage without external peer review.

3. External Peer Review Process

Manuscripts that pass initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise in climate and environmental sciences.

Reviewers evaluate submissions based on:

  • Originality and scientific contribution
  • Research design and methodological rigor
  • Accuracy of data analysis and interpretation
  • Validity of results and conclusions
  • Relevance to environmental and climate challenges
  • Quality of references and academic writing

Based on reviewer feedback, the editorial decision may be:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

4. Review Timeline

CCE is committed to an efficient and timely review process:

  • 2 to 4 weeks for initial peer review feedback
  • Additional time may be required depending on revision requirements and author response

5. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback
  • Maintain strict confidentiality of submitted manuscripts
  • Identify missing citations or relevant prior studies
  • Report ethical concerns, plagiarism, or data inconsistencies
  • Declare conflicts of interest and decline review if necessary

6. Editorial Decision

Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editorial board member, based on reviewer recommendations and editorial evaluation. The decision is final and ensures fairness, transparency, and academic integrity.

7. Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not use unpublished material for personal research or disclose it to unauthorized individuals under any circumstances.

8. Commitment to Fair Review

CCE is committed to ensuring that all submissions are evaluated fairly and without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, or personal background. The journal upholds transparency, integrity, and ethical publishing practices at all stages of the review process.