Peer Review Process

Journal of Green Science and Technology (JGST) applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other.

All submitted manuscripts are processed through the following stages:

1. Initial Editorial Screening
Each manuscript is first evaluated by the editor to assess its suitability for the journal's aims and scope, compliance with the author guidelines, manuscript completeness, originality, academic quality, and potential ethical concerns. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements may be rejected before peer review.

2. Similarity and Research Integrity Screening
Manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection software and other editorial checks. Similarity results are interpreted by the editorial team and are not used as the sole basis for determining plagiarism or research misconduct.

3. Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, publication record, independence, and absence of conflicts of interest with the authors or manuscript.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review
The identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript independently and provide constructive recommendations to the editor.

The review considers, among other aspects:

  • relevance to the journal's aims and scope;
  • originality and scientific contribution;
  • appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology;
  • validity and clarity of the results;
  • quality of discussion and interpretation;
  • relevance and quality of references;
  • clarity and organization of the manuscript; and
  • compliance with research and publication ethics.

5. Review Recommendations
Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept;
  • Minor Revision;
  • Major Revision; or
  • Reject.

6. Revision by Authors
Authors are required to respond to reviewer and editor comments and revise the manuscript accordingly. Authors should provide a clear response to the comments and indicate the changes made in the revised manuscript.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when further evaluation is considered necessary.

7. Final Editorial Decision
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor, based on the reviewers' evaluations, the authors' revisions, and the journal's editorial and ethical standards.

Editorial decisions are independent and are not determined solely by reviewer recommendations.

8. Conflict of Interest and Editorial Independence
Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest. An editor who has a conflict of interest with a manuscript must not participate in the evaluation or final decision for that manuscript.

Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, reviewers, or individuals affiliated with the publisher are subject to the same editorial standards and independent peer-review process as other submissions.

9. Special Issues
Manuscripts submitted for Special Issues undergo the same initial screening, ethical assessment, double-blind peer review by at least two independent reviewers, revision process, and final editorial decision as manuscripts in regular issues.

Participation in a conference, seminar, workshop, or other academic event does not guarantee publication in JGST.

Editorial responsibility for Special Issues remains with the JGST Editorial Team.

10. Confidentiality
Editors and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author information, unpublished data, and all materials related to the peer-review process. Reviewers and editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, unpublished research materials, reviewer reports, or confidential editorial information to external generative AI or AI-assisted systems where such use may compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, or data protection. Generative AI or AI-assisted tools must not be used to generate peer-review reports, editorial assessments, recommendations, or publication decisions.

11. Peer-Review Integrity
JGST is committed to maintaining an objective, fair, independent, and confidential peer-review process. Any suspected manipulation of peer review, fabricated reviewer identities, inappropriate influence, or other misconduct related to the review process will be investigated and handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics policy.