Peer Review
The Journal of Geoeconomics maintains the highest standards of peer review while increasing the efficiency of the process. All research articles published undergo full peer review, key characteristics of which are listed below:
- All scholarly articles are reviewed by at least two independent and suitably qualified experts. This requirement applies to Original Research Articles and Reviews, Short Research Articles, Policy Reports, Policy Proposals, and Cases and Insights, including Data Insights, Case Studies, Exercises and Simulations, and Foresight Analyses. Book reviews, editorials, publisher’s notes, corrections, retractions, and other non-research content undergo appropriate editorial review and are clearly identified by article type.
- The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process. Reviewers are selected on the basis of relevant subject-matter or methodological expertise and must disclose any actual or potential competing interests.
- All publication decisions are made by the Editors-in-Chief on the basis of the independent reviewer reports provided.
- Members of the Editorial Board lend insight, advice and guidance to the Editors-in-Chief generally and to assist decision making on specific submissions.
- Managing Editors, Associate Editors and Editorial Assistants provide the administrative support that allows the Journal of Geoeconomics to maintain the integrity of peer review while delivering rapid turnaround and maximum efficiency to authors, reviewers and editors.
The Journal of Geoeconomics employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic and policy-oriented scholarship. Manuscripts are reviewed by two independent academic experts, with additional input from policy community experts as needed. This approach guarantees that publications are not only academically robust but also highly relevant to contemporary policy debates. Reviewers are required to adhere to the Journal's Ethics Policy, including observing COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. Reviewers and editorial staff are expected to remain vigilant for any signs of misconduct and report concerns to the editorial office immediately.
The Journal of Geoeconomics is committed to a timely and efficient peer-review process:
- Our goal is to provide authors with an initial decision within 6 to 8 weeks of submission.
- To streamline the review process and minimize redundancy, we encourage authors who have previously submitted their manuscript to another journal and undergone peer review to share the decision letters and reviewer reports (where confidentiality allows). This helps our editors assess the work more efficiently. However, the editorial team reserves the right to seek additional reviews, and in most cases, at least one further review will be conducted.
- Authors may opt for a no-revision review, ensuring they will not receive a decision requiring substantial revisions. Manuscripts needing major changes under this option will be rejected rejected rather than sent back for revision.
Our approach aims to uphold the integrity of scholarly publishing while making the review process as transparent and efficient as possible.
Special issues, thematic collections, and other content curated by guest editors are subject to the same editorial and external peer-review requirements as regular submissions. The Editor-in-Chief retains responsibility for all such content. Submissions authored by guest editors are handled independently. Articles authored by a guest editor or guest editors may comprise no more than 25% of the relevant special issue or collection.
Reviewers and editors must comply with the Journal’s Ethics Policy and applicable Committee on Publication Ethics guidance. Suspected misconduct, undisclosed conflicts of interest, plagiarism, data fabrication, citation manipulation, or other integrity concerns must be reported to the editorial office.