Guidelines for Editors and Reviewers

Last updated: 01 February 2024

AAES code of conduct and best practice statement is based on the COPE Guidelines.

Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science (AAES) editorial decisions are not affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors.

Guidelines for Editors

The role of the editor(s) is paramount in the editing, peer-reviewing, and decision-making processes involved in publishing articles submitted to AAES journal. Editors are esteemed individuals who meticulously scrutinize the content of submitted articles and provide their expert assessment of the quality, novelty, and integrity of the work. Additionally, they offer guidance on any necessary changes to optimize the publication outcome. AAES expects its editors to adhere to the following guidelines:

  • Confidentiality and Assistance: Editors must ensure the confidentiality and protection of all data received for publication. They should also assist authors in the manuscript revision process as needed.
  • Timely Processing: Editors should carry out their duties diligently and promptly, without causing unnecessary delays in the publication process. This includes acknowledging receipt of manuscripts, assigning manuscript numbers, allocating reviewers, making decisions based on reviewers' comments, and communicating effectively with the editor-in-chief, reviewers, and authors.
  • Assessment of Manuscripts: Editors are responsible for conducting thorough evaluations of submitted manuscripts, both initially and after revisions. They should suggest any further modifications deemed necessary for the improvement of the article. Additionally, editors should assign manuscript numbers upon submission and acknowledge authors for their submissions.
  • Reviewer Assignment and Peer Review: Editors are tasked with assigning appropriate reviewers to each submitted article based on their expertise and the manuscript's discipline. They should ensure that author identities are removed from the manuscript before sending it for peer review.
  • Communication with Authors: Editors should promptly communicate reviewers' comments to the corresponding authors and invite them to revise the manuscript accordingly. They should also provide necessary assistance to authors during the revision process. Once satisfied with the quality of the manuscript, editors should declare their decision to proceed with publication.
  • Decision Transparency: Editors are encouraged to provide clear justifications for rejecting articles, ensuring that decisions are not influenced by external factors. Timely responses from editors are crucial to maintaining publication timelines.
  • Reviewer Management: In cases where reviewers are unavailable or unable to contribute to the peer review process, editors should promptly assign suitable replacements to ensure efficient and high-quality peer review.
  • Communication with Editor-in-Chief: Editors should promptly communicate any issues, concerns, ethical dilemmas, or obstacles encountered during their work to the Editor-in-Chief for timely resolution.

Adhering to these guidelines ensures the smooth and efficient operation of the editorial process, ultimately leading to the timely and high-quality publication of articles in the Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science.

Guidelines for Reviewers

Peer review is an indispensable process in ensuring the publication of original, high-quality content with significant value. The journal Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science operates as a peer-reviewed international journal, wherein original articles undergo rigorous evaluation by potential reviewers within the field. This evaluation entails a thorough assessment by individuals possessing similar expertise and competence, ensuring the integrity and credibility of the publication. Through peer review, the quality, performance, and credibility of published work are upheld and enhanced. Furthermore, this process serves to guide authors in meeting established disciplinary standards, thereby minimizing unwarranted claims, interpretations, and dissemination of irrelevant findings. Reviewers are entrusted with maintaining the confidentiality of manuscripts and refrain from sharing any details regarding the peer review process. Reviewers must accept review assignments only if they possess the requisite subject expertise and capabilities. Constructive assessments of manuscripts are expected, with reviewers providing clear explanations and support for their comments to facilitate understanding by both editors and authors. Utilizing easily understandable language is encouraged to enhance the efficiency of the peer review process, while timely reviews are essential to prevent delays in publication. For comprehensive guidelines on the peer review process, reviewers are directed to refer to the detailed COPE guidelines.

As a reviewer for the journal Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science, you play a crucial role in ensuring the quality and integrity of published research. Below are guidelines to help you conduct thorough and constructive peer reviews:

  • Objective Evaluation: Your feedback assists the editor in determining whether an article meets the standards for publication. Provide your overall opinion and specific observations on the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses.
  • Constructive Feedback: Offer courteous and constructive comments without personal remarks. Focus on identifying deficiencies and suggesting improvements to enhance the quality of the research.
  • Justification of Judgments: Clearly explain and support your assessments to help both editors and authors understand the rationale behind your comments. Distinguish between personal opinions and evidence-based evaluations.
  • Critical Analysis: Evaluate the manuscript for critical and comparative analysis, emphasizing the integrity and novelty of the research. Ensure that the study aligns with the journal's scope and contributes significantly to the field.
  • Ethical Considerations: Remain impartial and avoid bias based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, or political beliefs. Disclose any conflicts of interest to the editor promptly and maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
  • Plagiarism and Ethical Concerns: Report any suspicions of plagiarism, fraud, or ethical violations to the editor, providing detailed evidence and explanations.
  • Specific Recommendations: Provide detailed suggestions for improvement, including comments on the layout, structure, methodology, statistical analysis, language, and referencing.
  • Timely Review: Complete your peer review analysis within the specified timeframe to ensure timely publication decisions.
  • Confidentiality: Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process. Refrain from using or sharing any confidential information obtained from the manuscript.
  • Uniformity and Impartiality: Conduct the peer review process with consistency and impartiality to maintain the journal's standards and credibility.

Your dedication to conducting thorough and fair peer reviews contributes significantly to the advancement of scientific knowledge. We appreciate your commitment to upholding the integrity of the publication process. To become a reviewer for the Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science, please write an email to the journal office at Your contributions are invaluable in maintaining the journal's reputation for publishing original and impactful research.