Review Guidelines

Please complete the review report form which will be used to directly inform the decision as to the suitability of the manuscript for the ECOLAB, and to suggest guidelines for any future revisions identified.

In making your report, please ensure that you provide a clear verdict on the paper:

  • Accepted
  • Minor revisions required (the revised manuscript will not normally be returned to you for checking)
  • Major revisions required (you will normally receive the revised manuscript for re-review)
  • Rejected 

Please ensure that you detail your required revisions clearly, and provide an overall evaluation of the paper that is explicit, courteous and respectful to the author(s), and indicative of the standards expected for publication in a journal concerned with forest socio-economics and environment which cover: Environmental quality, research and study of environmental quality, environmental monitoring, water quality, air quality, B3 quality, vibration, toxicology, environmental laboratories.

In your evaluation, please pay particular attention to the following:

  • The originality of the subject matter, and whether the manuscript would be of interest to the international, academic and practitioners readership of the ECOLAB
  • The theoretical contribution made by the manuscript
  • Whether the manuscript draws on an appropriate range and depth of literature (If not please indicate which sources of literature should be included by the author in future)
  • Whether methods employed are rigorous, ethical, and suitable for the topic under investigation.
  • Whether the findings presented are subjected to suitable analysis and sound conclusions draw
  • Does the manuscript clearly identify any implications for future activism and/or developing theories or activism for peace and social justice? Are these implications consistent with the findings and conclusions of the manuscript?
  • Is the piece well presented and organized? Does the manuscript clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.  Is the paper written in a manner, which is non-ableist, non-speciesist, non-sexist, non-homophobic, non-classist, non-racist, non-colonialist, unlikely otherwise to cause offence, and appropriate for an international academic journal?

ECOLAB holds to the utmost respect, love, and care when reviewing manuscripts. While we do take off the names of the submitter, we do ask the reviewers to keep their name and e-mail contact on the Reviewer’s Comment Sheet in-order for the author to contact the reviewer directly for assistance and advice. This we feel and argue is the most productive and useful reviewing process for advancing the field of peace studies.