Peer Review Policy

Polish Journal of Environmental Studies Politics, Economy and Industry (PJOESPEAI)
The Polish Journal of Environmental Studies Politics, Economy and Industry (PJOESPEAI), published by HARD Publishing Company, is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and scientific integrity. All manuscripts undergo a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality and significance of the research.

---

1. Initial Screening & Technical Integrity
Upon submission, every manuscript is subjected to an immediate internal assessment to verify its suitability for the journal.

• Plagiarism Detection: We use iThenticate (by Turnitin) to screen all submissions for originality. Manuscripts with high similarity scores or signs of redundant publication are flagged for immediate editorial review.
• AI Writing Detection: Using Turnitin’s AI detection technology, we screen for undisclosed generative AI content. The journal requires that all manuscripts represent original human scholarship.
• Editorial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief and Statistical Editor perform a pre-evaluation to ensure the research falls within the journal’s scope and meets formal formatting requirements.

2. Reviewer Assignment (Single-Blind Model)
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are moved to the formal peer review stage.

• The Single-Blind Protocol: We employ a single-blind review system. The identities of the reviewers remain anonymous to the authors, while reviewers are provided with the authors' identities to help identify potential conflicts of interest.
• Expert Selection: The Executive Editor assigns a minimum of two independent, external reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their specific expertise in environmental policy, economics, or industrial science.
• Ethics & Bias: All reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting the assignment to ensure a fair and objective evaluation.

3. Editorial Decision Process
The Executive Editor and the Editor-in-Chief jointly determine the fate of the manuscript based on the technical reports provided by the peer reviewers.

• Possible Outcomes:
  
  • Accepted for Publication: The paper is technically sound and requires no further changes.
  • Minor Revision: The author must make small corrections or clarifications.
  • Major Revision: The paper requires significant rework and may undergo a second round of peer review.
  • Rejected: The paper does not meet the journal’s scientific or ethical standards.
• Final Authority: The final decision regarding acceptance rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.

4. Mandatory Revision Procedures
If a manuscript is returned for revision, the following steps are required:

• Detailed Response: Authors must address every reviewer comment in a point-by-point format and provide a formal Explanation Letter.
• Final Verification: The Executive Editor verifies that all concerns have been addressed. The final accepted version may undergo a final integrity re-check before proceeding to production.