Peer Review Process

The IJDSCR is committed to upholding the highest standards of scholarly publishing. Our peer review policy is designed to ensure that published research is academically rigorous, ethically sound, and relevant to our readership. We follow a single-blind review process in which the identities of the reviewers remain confidential, but the authors’ identities are known to the reviewers. After Initial Editorial Assessment all submitted manuscripts undergo an initial scrutiny by the Editor to determine suitability in terms of relevance, scope, and quality. The Editor may reject papers that are clearly outside the Journal’s scope, fail to meet basic standards (e.g., significant methodological flaws, insufficient originality), or lack relevance to the field of disaster studies, climate change, risk sciences or associated interdisciplinary areas.

Manuscripts that pass initial scrutiny are assigned to two independent peer reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers must treat all manuscript information as strictly confidential. Reviewers assess scientific rigor, originality, methodological soundness, and clarity of presentation. Reviewers provide written, constructive comments on the manuscript, including suggestions for improvement (typically within 3–4 weeks). Based on reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the Editor could accept the manuscript for publication, or suggest Minor Revision when the manuscript is generally acceptable, but requires minor changes an dthe authors must address the reviewers’ and Editor’s comments, or suggest Major Revision when the manuscript is potentially publishable but requires substantial modifications. Authors must submit a revised manuscript with a point-by-point response to the reviewers, or may Reject the manuscript if it is not suitable for publication in the Journal due to major methodological issues, lack of originality, or insufficient contribution to the field.

Authors are encouraged to address reviewers’ comments thoroughly and transparently when submitted revised submissions. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the same reviewers, who evaluate whether the changes made adequately address previous concerns. But the Final Decision of acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor. Acceptance is granted only when the Editor is satisfied that the authors have addressed all major feedback and that the paper meets the Journal’s standards for publication. In rare cases where authors have strong grounds to believe that the review process or decision was unfair, they may submit an appeal to the Editor. The Editor will review the appeal, possibly consulting additional reviewers or the Editorial Board, and will communicate a final decision thereafter.