Guideline for Editors in Peer Review of Manuscripts

    All manuscripts submitted to the International Journal of Georesources and Environment (IJGE) have to be peer reviewed, normally by an editor plus two qualified reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief or a Section / Executive Editor will select an editor based on the content of the manuscript to conduct peer review.
All editors must comply with IJGE policies and should be familiar with their duties and responsibilities. Editors in charge of manuscripts review should also be familiar with the requirements given in Instructions to Authors and the evaluation criteria in Peer Review Policies and Criteria. It is important for the editor to select appropriate, well qualified and responsible reviewers to ensure quality and timeliness.

Operation Procedure and Schedule in Manuscripts Review

  1. All manuscripts are to be submitted to IJGE by email to
  2. The IJGE office will send an acknowledgement message to the corresponding author upon receipt of a manuscript.
  3. The appropriateness and format of manuscripts will be previewed for compliance with the Journal requirements. Manuscripts which do not meet the basic requirements will be returned for revision.
  4. A manuscript which meets the basic requirements will be forwarded to an appropriate section within one (1) week, where the Executive Editor (or an assigned Associate Editor) will conduct the process of peer review.
  5. The editor in charge of review will be responsible for timely completion of the review process, as follows:
    1) Select two reviewers based on the selection criteria given below within one (1) week and send them an invitation with abstract, instructing them to conduct the review within a specified time frame (normally not more than four weeks). Reviewers are required to respond within one (1) week indicating their availability.
    2) Forward the full manuscript, the Peer Review Policies and Criteria and a Reviewer Report form to the reviewer, once the reviewer has accepted the invitation.
  6. Each reviewer is required to evaluate the manuscript according to the criteria in the Peer Review Policies and Criteria, make an unbiased recommendation, and send the Reviewer Report with comments in confidence to the editor in charge within four (4) weeks.
  7. If both reviewers have consistent recommendations, the editor in charge will consider the feedback from both reviewers, make his/her own impartial recommendation, and report within one (1) week to the Executive Editor or the Editor-in-Chief, as the case may be, together with reviewers’ reports.
  8. In the case that a manuscript received inconsistent recommendations from two reviewers, the editor in charge may seek opinions from a third reviewer or conduct own review before making a recommendation. In the case that a manuscript received contradicting recommendations from the two reviewers, it will only be sent to a third reviewer for a 3rd opinion if the content of the manuscript is considered valuable to the Journal.
  9. If a manuscript needs revision, the editor in charge will send it back to the corresponding author for revision within a specified time frame (normally not more than two weeks) and ensure the revision being satisfactory. The revised manuscript may require re-review on different levels as given in the Peer Review Policies and Criteria.
  10. In an exceptional situation where the editor in charge of a manuscript found him/herself in a position unable to make an impartial decision due to reasons beyond his/her control, the editor should notify the Executive Editor and/or the Editor-in-Chief promptly, as appropriate. In that case all materials and the manuscript will be handed over to the Executive Editor or the Editor-in-Chief, who or a delegate will review and make a final recommendation.
  11. The Editor-in-Chief will consider all feedback and recommendations, make a final decision on acceptance or rejection and then inform directly the corresponding author the outcome within one (1) week, with a copy to the editor in charge.
  12. If a manuscript is accepted “as is” by the Editor-in-Chief, it will be forwarded to the publisher for copyediting and publication.
  13. The finalized paper will be published after proof read by author(s).
    Note: All records in the review process should be well kept by the editor in charge. The final decision of acceptance for publication will however be made by the Editor-in-Chief to maintain the Journal standards and consistency.

Selection Criteria of Reviewers

1). Reviewers for a manuscript must have expertise in the relevant field.
2). Reviewers should be at arm’s length from the authors. “Arm’s length” here means “having not worked together, not collaborated in a project, and not co-authored in any publication in the past four (4) years”.
3). If all authors of a manuscript are from the same non-English speaking country, at least one reviewer should be from an English speaking country.
4). Typically one reviewer is from the Editorial Board and another may be from the list provided by author(s) or an internal database.


    Reviewers are required to complete the review and submit a review report within four (4) weeks from the date receiving the manuscript. At the end of three weeks, the editor in charge may start sending reminders to the reviewers.
     The editor in charge is required to notify the Executive Editor and the Editor-in-Chief with the review outcome, or an update if not completed, within two months.

Manuscripts Solicited / Recommended by an Editor

  For manuscripts solicited by an editor, he/she may take care of the whole review process described in Steps 1 - 10 above and should notify the IJGE office at Steps 2 and 5 for record. Once the review and revision, if required, are completed, the editor shall send his/her recommendation, through the Executive Editor to the Editor-in-Chief, together with the final version of the manuscript and reviewers’ reports.