Peer Review Process

The Waste Treatment and Environmental Remediation (WTER) Journal follows a rigorous review process for each accepted manuscript. The journal employs a Single-Blind Peer Review Process, where the reviewers are aware of the authors' identities, but the authors do not know the reviewers’ identities.

Each manuscript submitted to WTER undergoes an evaluation by the editorial team and is then assigned to registered reviewers for detailed review. Reviewers are allocated a maximum of 10 working days to complete their evaluations, while the overall review process may take up to 21 days. If a reviewer is unable to complete their task within the designated time frame, the Chair of the Editorial Board will appoint an alternate reviewer to ensure timely processing.

During the review, reviewers provide critical evaluations on several aspects, including:

  • Alignment between the title, abstract, introduction, discussion, and conclusion.
  • Originality and novelty of the research.
  • Scientific impact and significance.
  • Quality and relevance of the references cited.

 

REVIEW PROCESS WORKFLOW:

  1. Submission:
    Authors submit their manuscript electronically through the journal’s submission system.
  2. Initial Evaluation:
    The editor conducts a preliminary review to ensure the manuscript complies with the journal’s guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be rejected or returned to the authors for revision before proceeding to peer review.
  3. Single-Blind Peer Review:
    The manuscript is assigned to at least two qualified reviewers who evaluate its scientific merit, originality, clarity, and overall quality.
  4. Editorial Decision:
    Based on reviewers' comments, the editor makes a decision to:
    • Accept the manuscript.
    • Request revisions (minor or major).
    • Request resubmission after significant changes.
    • Reject the manuscript.
  5. Author Notification:
    The editor communicates the decision to the authors, along with the reviewers' feedback and any required revisions.
  6. Production:
    If accepted, the manuscript proceeds to the production stage, where it undergoes formatting, layout design, and proofreading.
  7. Publication:
    The finalized manuscript is published in the journal, either online or in print. The sequence of publication is determined by the acceptance date and geographical diversity of the authors.

 

Here is a more detailed explanation of each step:

 

DETAILED PROCESS EXPLANATION:

  1. Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts electronically through the journal's system. The editor initially evaluates the submission to determine its suitability for the journal’s scope. Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s focus or fail to meet submission guidelines are promptly returned to the authors.
  2. Pre-check: The editor reviews the manuscript for completeness, formatting, ethical compliance, and plagiarism. Incomplete or improperly formatted manuscripts are sent back to the authors for correction before proceeding to the next stage.
  3. Peer Review: The manuscript is sent to at least two reviewers who assess its scientific rigor, originality, and clarity. Reviewers may suggest revisions to improve the manuscript's quality and provide constructive feedback to the authors.
  4. Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the editor decides whether to accept, request revisions, or reject the manuscript. Authors are notified of the decision, and for revision requests, detailed feedback is provided to guide the improvement process.
  5. Production: Once accepted, the manuscript is sent to the production team for final formatting and layout preparation, including the addition of figures, tables, and other elements. The manuscript is also proofread for any residual errors.
  6. Publication: The completed manuscript is published in the journal, either in print or online. The publication sequence considers the acceptance date and aims to maintain a balance in the geographical distribution of authors.