Reviewer Guidelines for the Journal of Sustainable Technologies and Infrastructure Planning

Introduction

Thank you for agreeing to serve as a peer reviewer for the Journal of Sustainable Technologies and Infrastructure Planning. Your expertise and critical evaluation play a crucial role in maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal. The following guidelines are designed to assist you in conducting a thorough and fair review.

1. Confidentiality

• Maintain the confidentiality of the review process: Do not discuss the manuscript or share it with anyone outside of the review process.
• Ensure that all manuscript and review details remain confidential both during and after the review process.

2. Conflict of Interest

• Declare any potential conflict of interest with the author(s) or the manuscript's content. This includes any professional, financial, or personal relationships that might bias your review.
• If you believe you cannot provide an objective review, inform the editor and recuse yourself from the review process.

3. Assessment Criteria

• Evaluate the manuscript's originality, relevance, and contribution to the field of sustainable technologies and infrastructure planning.
• Assess the validity of the methodology, the accuracy of the results, and the soundness of the conclusions.
• Consider the clarity and coherence of the presentation, including the quality of writing, figures, and tables.
• Ensure the manuscript adheres to ethical guidelines, including proper attribution of sources and avoidance of plagiarism.

4. Constructive Feedback

• Provide constructive feedback, offering specific suggestions for improvement where necessary.
• Critique the content of the manuscript, not the author(s).
• Avoid dismissive or derogatory comments; focus on providing clear, objective, and reasoned feedback.

5. Timeliness

• Adhere to the review timeline provided by the journal. If you anticipate a delay, inform the editor as soon as possible.
• Complete your review within the agreed timeframe to ensure a timely publication process.

6. Review Report

• Structure your report clearly, summarizing the main findings of the manuscript and your evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses.
• Provide a recommendation regarding the publication of the manuscript (accept, revise, reject).
• Justify your recommendation with specific references to the manuscript and the assessment criteria.

7. Post-Review Process

• Be available for follow-up questions or to review revised versions of the manuscript, if requested by the editor.
• Respect the final decision made by the journal's editor(s).