Peer Review Policy

International Review of Sustainable Economics and Finance

Overview
IRSEF is committed to publishing high-quality, original, and impactful research in economics, finance, and sustainable development. Peer review is central to ensuring methodological rigor, scholarly integrity, and practical relevance. All submissions undergo a double-blind peer review process, ensuring impartiality and academic fairness.

Review Model: Blind Peer Review from 4 Experts in the same field (2 Internal & 2 External)
Author Anonymity: Reviewers do not know the authors’ identities
Reviewer Anonymity: Authors do not know the reviewers’ identities

This model ensures manuscripts are evaluated solely on scholarly merit, free from institutional, national, or personal bias.

Peer Review Workflow

  1. Submission & Initial Editorial Screening
    Upon submission through the official online portal, the editorial team conducts a preliminary review to verify:

    • Alignment with economics, finance, and sustainable development

    • Compliance with formatting, word count, and submission guidelines

    • Ethical approvals (where applicable)

    • Plagiarism screening using Turnitin or equivalent tools

    Manuscripts failing to meet these standards may be desk-rejected without external review.

  2. Reviewer Selection
    Qualified manuscripts are assigned to 2 Internal & 2 External reviewers based on:

    • Subject-area expertise and specialization

    • Research and publication experience

    • Absence of conflicts of interest

  3. Review Criteria
    Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

    • Originality and scholarly contribution

    • Methodological rigor and theoretical framework

    • Accuracy of data analysis and validity of findings

    • Relevance to economic, financial, or sustainability policy and practice

    • Clarity of writing and logical structure

    • Ethical compliance

    Reviewer recommendations include:

    • Accept

    • Minor Revisions

    • Major Revisions (with potential re-review)

    • Reject

  4. Editorial Decision
    The editorial team consolidates feedback and issues a decision letter, providing:

    • Clear outcome of the review

    • Detailed reviewer comments

    • Guidance for revisions (if applicable)

    • Suggested revision timeline (typically 2–4 weeks)

⏳ Timeframe
The average peer review process is 4–6 weeks, depending on:

  • Reviewer availability and response time

  • Article complexity and scope

  • Number of revision cycles

Authors are encouraged to submit revisions promptly to avoid publication delays.

Reviewer Ethics & Responsibilities

Conduct Guidelines:

  • Maintain confidentiality of manuscript content

  • Provide objective, constructive, and respectful feedback

  • Declare any conflicts of interest

  • Avoid discrimination or bias

Prohibited Actions:

  • Sharing manuscript content externally

  • Using unpublished data for personal gain

  • Direct communication with authors outside the editorial system

Appeals Process:

  • Authors may submit a formal appeal to the Editor-in-Chief

  • Must include justification and supporting evidence

  • Independent reviewers may be consulted

  • Final decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief

⚖️ Ethical Standards & Compliance
IRSEF adheres strictly to:

  • COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines

  • HEC Pakistan quality benchmarks for scholarly publishing

  • International best practices for peer-reviewed journals

Reviewer Recognition

  • Annual list of reviewers published (with consent)

  • Certificates of recognition available upon request

  • Top reviewers may be invited to join the editorial board

Conclusion
At IRSEF, the peer review process ensures that each publication meets the highest standards of integrity, academic rigor, and practical relevance. By combining ethical governance, double-blind review, and expert evaluation, IRSEF maintains trust, reliability, and excellence in economics and finance research.