Instructions for Reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to review for the Polish Journal of Environmental Studies: Politics, Economy, and Industry (PJOESPEAI). Your specialized expertise is vital to maintaining the high scientific quality and integrity of our interdisciplinary journal.

1. The PJOESPEAI Peer Review Model (Semi-Blind)
PJOESPEAI employs a semi-blind review process:
• Reviewer Anonymity: Your identity will remain strictly confidential to the authors.
• Author Disclosure: The manuscript you receive includes the names and affiliations of the authors. This is provided so you can properly assess any potential conflicts of interest, but it must not influence your objective scientific judgment.

2. Ethical Obligations and Conflicts
Please notify the Executive Editor immediately if you face a Conflict of Interest (COI) that compromises your objectivity. This includes relationships stemming from competition, recent collaboration, or institutional links with the authors. You must also treat the manuscript as a confidential document.

3. Reviewer Deliverables
Your review must be submitted in a single document format containing two parts, mirroring the journal's review form structure:

A. Standardized Checklist (Scorecard)
Please complete the standardized sections of the review form. Your responses in this part are visible to the editors and inform the final decision.

Evaluation Category	Required Assessment
Overall Recommendation	Select one: Accept, Accept after minor changes suggested by reviewer, Accept after major changes suggested by reviewer, or Reject.
Section Quality	Evaluate the quality of sections like Abstract, Introduction, Figures, Tables, and References (Good, Needs Improvement, etc.).
Importance of Results	Assess the significance of the findings.
Data Verification	Do the methods/data sufficiently verify the conclusions? (Yes/No).
Length Appropriateness	Is the manuscript length appropriate for its content? (Yes/No).
Publication Type	Specify the final publication format (e.g., Original full paper, Review article).
Linguistic Correctness	Evaluate grammar, structure, and vocabulary.

B. Detailed Written Report
Your written report provides the essential, evidence-based justification for your scorecard and should be divided into two sections as designated on the form:

I. Confidential Information for Editors (Not Visible to Authors)
• Provide a brief, honest summary of the manuscript's overall quality and a candid assessment of its suitability for the PJOESPEAI scope (Policy, Economy, and Industry focus).
• Mention any ethical concerns or potential data integrity issues for the Executive Editor's attention.

II. Information for Authors (Visible to Authors)
This is the primary feedback shared with the authors for revision. It must be professional, courteous, and specific.
1. Summary: Briefly summarize the core contribution of the manuscript (1-2 sentences).
2. Major Comments (Critical Flaws):
o List 3-5 critical, structural, or conceptual issues that must be resolved. These should focus on:
- Methodology: Rigor, appropriateness of statistical models, or justification of control variables (as seen in your example form).
- Interdisciplinary Relevance: Alignment of the findings and discussion with the Politics, Economy, or Industry dimensions of the journal's scope.
o Example: "The tables must be reformatted to conform precisely to the PJOESPEAI journal style."

3. Minor Comments (Clarity and Style):
o List specific issues related to writing, grammar, figure clarity, and adherence to formal journal guidelines.
o Reference specific locations (e.g., Line 45, Table 3) for ease of revision.
Your objective evaluation contributes significantly to the quality of PJOESPEAI. Thank you for your service.