Peer Review Policy
Peer Review Policy
All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Global Economy undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of published research.
The journal follows a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.
Initial Editorial Screening
After submission, manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editor or members of the Editorial Board to determine whether the submission fits the aims and scope of the journal and meets basic academic standards.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s requirements may be rejected at this stage without external review.
Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:
• originality and contribution to knowledge
• methodological soundness
• clarity of analysis and interpretation
• relevance to the journal’s scope
• quality of presentation
Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during the review process.
Review Decisions
Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor may make one of the following decisions:
• Accept the manuscript for publication
• Accept with minor revisions
• Request major revisions and resubmission
• Reject the manuscript
Authors receiving revision requests are expected to submit a revised manuscript addressing reviewer comments.
Review Timeline
The journal aims to complete the peer review process within 4–8 weeks, although the exact time may vary depending on reviewer availability and the nature of the revisions required.
Final Decision
The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on the reviewers’ recommendations and the overall quality of the manuscript.
Ethical Review Standards
The Journal of Global Economy follows ethical standards recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure fairness, confidentiality, and transparency in the peer review process.
