Peer review process

The review process is a collaborative process that allows manuscripts submitted to the Economics Ecology Socium Journal to be evaluated and commented upon by independent experts within the same field of research. The evaluation and critique generated from peer review provide authors with feedback to improve their manuscript and, critically, allow the editor to assess the paper’s suitability for publication in the Journal.

Peer review quality standards

The Economics Ecology Socium Journal articles present new research themes, methodologies, and ideas to advance the field of environmental economics. The authors are encouraged to explore the less-explored facets of environmental economics, suggesting innovative conceptual or methodological approaches. Articles in the Economics Ecology Socium Journal aim to address disciplinary or knowledge gaps by incorporating theoretical and/or empirical contributions. The evaluation is based on the originality of the content and the degree to which it expands the understanding of economic, environmental, and social dynamics beyond existing frameworks.

Criteria for publication

The criteria for publication in the Economics Ecology Socium Journal are as follows:

Novelty: Manuscripts offer new and original contributions to the field of environmental economics. The research should present perspectives, approaches, or concepts that advance the existing body of knowledge.

Under-Researched Aspects: Authors are encouraged to focus on under-researched areas within environmental economics. The manuscript should delve into aspects of this field that have not been extensively explored, providing new insights and perspectives.

Conceptualization: Authors should propose innovative methodologies or conceptual frameworks for studying environmental economics. This could involve new ways of collecting data, analyzing information, or approaching theoretical constructs within the discipline.

Interdisciplinary Bridging: Manuscripts should contribute to bridging disciplinary gaps within the broader context of economics, ecology, and sociology. The research should demonstrate an understanding of the interconnectedness of these fields and offer insights that can enhance interdisciplinary collaboration.

Theoretical and Empirical Research: Articles should present a balance of empirical and theoretical work. Both aspects contribute to a comprehensive understanding of environmental economics, and the journal aims to publish manuscripts that effectively integrate these dimensions.

Critical Knowledge Gap Filling: The research should aim to fill critical knowledge gaps in the literature. This could involve addressing unanswered questions, resolving inconsistencies in the existing research, or providing solutions to practical challenges in the field.

Extent of Knowledge Extension: Articles will be evaluated based on the extent to which they extend knowledge about economic, environmental, and social development beyond current boundaries. The research should contribute to the evolution and expansion of the field rather than simply reiterating existing ideas.

Quality of Writing: The clarity and quality of writing are essential. Manuscripts should be well organized, articulate, and accessible to the journal's audience to facilitate effective communication of the research findings.

Authors submitting to the Economics Ecology Socium Journal should carefully consider these criteria in order to enhance the likelihood of their work being accepted for publication. 

Submissions undergo a thorough peer review process, ensuring that the research meets high academic standards. The evaluation included assessments of methodology, data analysis, interpretation of results, and overall contribution to the field.

Peer Review model

The assistant editors check formal and professional standards and pass the paper to a co-editor in the relevant research field.  All submitted papers are peer reviewed to select articles meeting the high standards of the Economics Ecology Socium Journal.

The manuscripts received by the editors are previously peered by members of the Editorial Board concerning the correspondence of the material to the outlined requirements. In the case of a positive previous evaluation the manuscript is sent for review to one or two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field.

The Journal practices a review procedure double-blind peer review: reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers .

The review output will be either accepted or rejected. Once rejected, a paper is not considered for review. The review process may take approximately 50 days to be completed. For accepted papers, authors should be requested by the editor to revise the text and minor changes, and the revised version should be submitted within 10 days.

The manuscript can be rejected without review by the editors in case:

  • the article does not correspond to the scope of the Journal;
  • the formatting of the article does not meet the requirements for publication in the Journal;
  • the manuscript does not correspond to the ethical obligations adopted for the scientific publication.

Stages of the peer review process

1. First, the articles received will be subject to a preliminary evaluation by the members of the Editorial Committee, the Executive Director and / or Principal Editor of the Journal, who will initially determine the relevance of their publication.

2. Once it is established that the article meets the thematic requirements and the formal requirements indicated in these instructions to the authors, it will be sent to the reviewer based on technical quality, relevance, originality, significance, international relevance and clarity. If necessary, an additional reviewer will be involved.

 3. In case of a discrepancy between the two results, the text will be sent to a third referee, whose decision will define its publication.

The results of the peer evaluation process and the respective opinions will be final in all cases.

Selecting referees

The process of selecting referees involves identifying and appointing individuals who will assess and review the submitted manuscripts for a journal which reviewers are typically selected from:

Editorial Board: Journal editors often have a pool of experts on their editorial boards or advisory panels. They may choose referees from among professionals with relevant expertise in the subject matter covered by the submitted manuscript.

Previous Reviewers: The journal maintains databases of experienced and trusted reviewers who have previously demonstrated their competence in providing insightful and constructive reviews. Editors may draw from this pool when selecting referees for specific submissions.

Author(s) Suggestions: Authors sometimes have the option of suggesting potential referees during the submission process. While editors may consider these suggestions, they typically ensure that referees have no conflicts of interest and possess the necessary expertise.

Research Networks:  Editors may tap into their own professional networks or academic communities to identify qualified reviewers. This approach can help ensure that referees have a solid understanding of the subject area.

Online Platforms: Editors can use online platforms that connect editors to potential reviewers. These platforms can provide reviewers with a searchable database based on their expertise, allowing editors to identify suitable reviewers for specific topics.

Reviewer Recognition

The Economics Ecology Socium Journal provides all reviewers with a formal recognition of your review in the Web of Science Reviewer Recognition System. All reviews will be added to the reviewers’  Web of Science Researcher Profiles.

Conflict of Interest Checks 

The editors ensure that the selected referees do not have any conflicts of interest with the authors or the research. This is crucial for maintaining the impartiality and integrity of the peer review process.

Editors assessed the availability and timeliness of potential referees. It is important to select reviewers who can provide timely and constructive feedback.

The goal of referee selection is to assemble a qualified and unbiased panel that can rigorously evaluate submitted manuscripts, contributing to the overall quality and credibility of the journal.

After reviewing the editorial board on the basis of the recommendation of the reviewer (reviewers) makes a decision:

  • to accept for publication in the form submitted by the authors;
  • to publish after an insignificant correction;
  • to  send the manuscript to the authors for processing (significant corrections and adjustments are necessary, after which the publication becomes possible);
  • to reject the manuscript, but specify to the authors that after substantial processing the manuscript can be submitted again;
  • to reject the manuscript without the possibility of processing it (as a rule, if there are no signs of the relevance of the topic of work for the development of the correspondent branch of science, in cases of conceptual scientific errors, the complete absence of elements of scientific novelty and practical significance, in case of revealing plagiarism).

The peer reviews all the material it receives  within two or three weeks of submission. Accepted articles are published on site of journal as they become ready.

The Economics Ecology Socium Journal provides open access to peer reviewed research as part of its commitment to readers and authors. Journal makes all our research articles freely available online and send them directly to The Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine.

Appeals Process

If your manuscript is rejected, and if you believe a pertinent point was overlooked or misunderstood by the reviewers, you may appeal the editorial decision by contacting the editor.

If you appeal to the editor and are not satisfied with the editor's response, the next step in the editorial appeal procedure is to contact the Chief Editorial board.


Prof. Dr. Viktor Koval  


Address: 65000, Ukraine, Odessa, Inglezi, 6.