Peer Review

Review policy The Journal of Himalayan Greenprint follows the double blind peer review process. Reviewers and authors identities remain undisclosed to reviewers, to ensure blind review.

Each submission is subject to an initial editorial review in order to assess originality, general methodological soundness and relevance to the journal's scope. Manuscripts that meet these criteria are then assigned to external reviewers qualified to evaluate the content.

Peer reviewers assess manuscripts on the basis of:

• Relevance and originality of the research question

• The suitability of techniques and the caliber of data analysis

• Clarity and precision of the findings and analysis

• Consistency in the evidence, conclusions, and conversation

Once submitted, a first evaluation aims completion within two to three weeks. Timing shifts based on how complex the work is or if expert readers are reachable.

When reviewers send in their notes, the editorial team takes them into account. Should concerns arise, writers might receive requests to adjust their work. After modifications are made, reviewers may take another look. Both editorial judgment and professional input are used to determine what is published.