Reviewer Guidelines

Authors submitting to Future - Journal of Circular Economy and Resource Management (JCERM) are expected to meet the highest standards of academic rigor, clarity, and relevance to the field. Peer reviews are essential to ensuring the journal maintains its commitment to publishing impactful research on circular economy practices, sustainable resource management, and innovative strategies for reducing environmental impact. As a reviewer, your evaluation helps shape the journal’s contributions to advancing knowledge and practice in these fields.

1. Review Structure

A comprehensive review of a manuscript typically includes the following components:

  • Summary: A concise summary of the manuscript’s main contributions, emphasizing its novelty, relevance to circular economy and resource management, and potential impact.
  • Evaluation: A balanced critique addressing the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses in relation to the following key criteria: originality, practical and theoretical relevance, technical rigor, and quality of presentation.
  • Recommendation: A clear recommendation based on your evaluation (Accept, Minor Revision Required, Major Revision Required, Reject).
  • Detailed Comments: Constructive feedback aimed at improving the manuscript, addressing critical issues, and providing actionable suggestions. Confidential remarks to the Editorial Board may also be included if necessary.

Reviews are submitted anonymously to ensure fairness and transparency.

2. Criteria for Acceptable Papers

Manuscripts submitted to Future-JCERM must align with the journal’s focus on advancing research and practice in circular economy and resource management. The following criteria are essential for acceptance:

  • Originality: Manuscripts must present novel ideas, methodologies, or applications that contribute to advancing circular economy principles or resource management strategies.
  • Relevance and Impact: Research should address significant challenges or opportunities in achieving sustainability, highlighting its relevance to real-world environmental, industrial, or policy contexts.
  • Technical Rigor: The methods, models, or frameworks presented in the manuscript must be scientifically sound, well-validated, and reliable.
  • Quality of Presentation: Manuscripts should be clearly written, logically organized, and adhere to academic standards regarding structure, language, and citations.

Manuscripts that fall short in these areas may require substantial revisions or be rejected.

3. Expectations for Paper Content

An acceptable manuscript should include the following key elements:

  • Clear Motivation and Objectives: The manuscript should clearly articulate the research problem, its relevance to circular economy or resource management, and the study’s objectives.
  • Demonstration of Novelty: Authors should highlight what is innovative about their work, positioning it within the context of existing research and demonstrating how it advances the field.
  • Evidence of Effectiveness: Submissions must include robust empirical evidence, case studies, experimental results, or theoretical analyses demonstrating the practical applicability of the findings.
  • Policy and Practice Implications: Manuscripts should identify how the findings can be translated into actionable strategies or inform policymaking to advance sustainability goals.
  • Scientific Integrity: All claims must be substantiated through rigorous reasoning, reliable data, or theoretical validation.

4. Types of Submissions

  • Theoretical or Methodological Papers: These should propose new frameworks, models, or methodologies with clear implications for circular economy and resource management.
  • Experimental Papers: Authors should detail experimental designs, methodologies, and results, clearly interpreting how their findings contribute to sustainable resource use or circular practices.
  • Applications and Case Studies: Submissions should present practical implementations of circular economy principles or resource management strategies, emphasizing challenges, successes, and lessons learned.
  • Review Articles: These should synthesize existing research, identify gaps, and highlight emerging trends or challenges in the field of circular economy and resource management.

5. Comparative Analysis with Related Work

Authors are expected to position their work within the context of prior research. Manuscripts should provide a thorough review of related literature, highlighting how their study advances or challenges existing knowledge in the field.

6. Quality and Precision

  • Conciseness: Manuscripts should avoid unnecessary jargon and be presented in clear, concise language. Definitions and terms should be precise and consistently used throughout.
  • Technical Precision: Authors should ensure that all concepts, methods, and results are presented clearly, with sufficient detail for replication and evaluation.

7. Revisions and Review Process

  • Minor Revisions: Typically reviewed by the associate editor. Authors must provide a cover letter detailing how they have addressed reviewers’ comments.
  • Major Revisions: Manuscripts requiring significant revisions will be re-reviewed by the original reviewers to ensure that all concerns have been adequately addressed. Authors are expected to include a detailed response to reviewer comments.

8. Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review are confidential. Reviewers must not share or reference manuscripts without prior permission. Reviewer identities will remain confidential, and all communication with authors should occur exclusively through the journal’s editorial system.

9. Submission Instructions

Please ensure that your review follows the journal’s guidelines. Reviews should be submitted electronically via the journal’s submission portal. For questions or issues during the review process, contact the editorial team at jcerm@fupress.org.