Review Process and Criteria

Peer Reviewers:

The service of peer reviewers is vital to the strengthening the validity, effectiveness, and appropriateness of the articles published in the CSU Journal of Sustainability and Climate Change (JSCC). With your help, we will be able to successfully publish high-quality articles and give authors the experience of incorporating professional critiques into their work. This page will provide general guidelines and information for potential reviewers, and the relevant rubrics that reviewers will be expected to complete.


CSU JSCC utilizes a double-blind peer review process. Once the review is complete, a copy of the reviewer’s comments will be anonymously provided to the author to make their revisions. The special issue/conference proceedings for the This Way to Sustainability conference will not reject manuscripts that have been sent out for review. Authors will be given repeated chances to incorporate the recommendations into their manuscript. If the revisions are considerable and are not feasible to implement by the revision deadline, authors can resubmit their paper the next year. The goal of our process is for reviewers to help authors publish the highest quality work possible.

General Guidelines:

  • Read the manuscript carefully and provide constructive feedback to the author(s) and editor. Focus on key points and add valuable perspectives and suggestions.
  • Specificity is good but do not overly critique minutiae. Be helpful to the author by signifying directions for improvement.
  • If there are spelling and grammar errors, provide some examples but do not feel the need to correct the entire paper; there are editors who focus on this. The most critical element will be the summary/conclusions of your review of the article.
  • Feel free to express praise where applicable.
  • Keep the review anonymous by not providing any information about yourself to anyone but the editors.
  • Do not share, reproduce, distribute, or cite the article under review.
  • Please complete the review within 3 weeks of manuscript receipt.
  • Conflict of Interest: Do not review a proposal for which you may have a conflict of interest (COI). COI can be personal or institutional in nature, as illustrated below: