Peer Review Policy and Process

Civil and Geoengineering Letters is committed to maintaining academic integrity and publishing high-quality research through a structured double-blind peer-review process. All submitted manuscripts are first assessed by the Editors-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor to determine their relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, academic quality, originality, and compliance with the journal’s editorial and ethical requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s scope, academic standards, or basic editorial requirements may be declined during the initial editorial assessment without external review. Research articles that pass this stage are sent for external peer review and are evaluated by at least three independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their subject expertise, academic qualifications, and absence of relevant conflicts of interest.

The journal operates a double-blind peer-review system. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. Reviewers are expected to provide independent, objective, critical, and constructive assessments of the manuscript, with particular attention to its originality, methodological soundness, validity of the results and conclusions, clarity of presentation, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality and should decline the review where such a conflict exists. All submitted manuscripts and associated materials must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information obtained through the peer-review process for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, figures, data, supplementary materials, or other confidential content to generative artificial intelligence or other third-party automated tools where this could compromise confidentiality. Generative AI must not be used to generate or substitute for an independent scholarly assessment or peer-review report.

Research articles submitted to special issues are subject to the same editorial standards and external peer-review process as regular submissions, including review by at least three independent reviewers. Guest Editors must not handle manuscripts where they have a relevant conflict of interest, including their own submissions. Such manuscripts are handled independently by an Editor-in-Chief or another suitably qualified editor with no relevant conflict of interest.

Following peer review, the handling editor evaluates the reviewers’ reports and the manuscript and makes an editorial decision based on the available evidence and independent academic judgement. Decisions may include acceptance, revision, or rejection. Where reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the handling editor may seek additional independent review where necessary.

Authors invited to revise a manuscript are expected to address the reviewers’ and editor’s comments carefully and provide a clear response to the points raised. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or, where appropriate, assessed by the handling editor or additional independent reviewers before a final decision is made.

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by authors’ identity, nationality, institutional affiliation, financial considerations, Article Processing Charges, or other factors unrelated to the academic merit, integrity, and relevance of the manuscript.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a reasoned appeal to the Editorial Office. Appeals are considered by the Editors-in-Chief or, where appropriate, by an independent editor who was not involved in the original decision. An appeal does not guarantee that the original editorial decision will be changed.

The peer-review process is conducted in accordance with recognised good editorial practice and COPE guidelines .

Review times may vary depending on the complexity of the manuscript, the availability of suitable reviewers, and the number of revision rounds required. The journal does not guarantee a fixed review period where doing so could compromise the quality or integrity of the peer-review process.

A manuscript is formally accepted only after it has satisfactorily completed the required editorial and peer-review process and has met the journal’s scientific, ethical, and technical requirements. Accepted articles subsequently undergo copyediting, formatting, and proofreading before publication online under the journal’s Gold Open Access model.

Through this structured and independent peer-review process, Civil and Geoengineering Letters seeks to ensure that published research is academically sound, ethically responsible, and relevant to the advancement of civil and geoengineering research.