Peer Review Process

The Advances in Economic Studies follows a rigorous, independent, and transparent double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and integrity of published research. Under this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review period to promote objective and unbiased evaluation.

Preliminary Editorial Review

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment to determine:

• Relevance to the journal's aims and scope
• Compliance with submission and formatting requirements
• Completeness of required documents and author declarations
• Compliance with ethical standards, including plagiarism screening

Timeline: The preliminary editorial assessment is generally completed within 7 days of manuscript submission.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are forwarded for double-blind peer review. Each submission is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant area of economics.

Reviewer Selection

• Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise and research experience
• Reviewers are required to disclose any conflicts of interest
• Individuals with potential conflicts are excluded from the review process
• The identities of reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process

Evaluation Criteria

• Originality and significance of the research
• Soundness of research methodology
• Quality of data analysis and interpretation
• Contribution to economic knowledge and practice
• Clarity, organization, and presentation of the manuscript
• Quality and relevance of references
• Compliance with ethical and scholarly standards

Review Timeline

The complete peer review process is typically completed within 30–45 days, depending on reviewer availability and the extent of revisions required.

Editorial Decision

• Accept without revisions
• Accept with minor revisions
• Major revisions required
• Reject

Final editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, reviewer recommendations, and the journal's editorial standards.

Ethical Standards and Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential. Ethical concerns and allegations of research misconduct are handled in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policy and the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Appeals and Queries

Authors may submit a formal appeal if they believe that a manuscript was not evaluated fairly. Appeals should include a detailed explanation and supporting evidence for reconsideration by the Editorial Board.