Review policy
Cornous Environmental Sciences covers medical and environmental studies spanning ecology, biodiversity, environmental sciences, and geosciences, with a strong emphasis on soil and water contamination, conservation biology, natural resource management, and sustainable soil and water conservation practices. The journal addresses industrial waste pollution, pharmaceutical and food contaminants, heavy metals, pesticides, radiation studies, and environmental toxicology, supported by advanced environmental analytical methods. It also includes emerging areas such as environmental nanomaterials, bioremediation and phytoremediation, renewable energy solutions, waste management and recycling innovations, carbon sequestration techniques, and pollution mitigation strategies. Furthermore, the journal highlights climate change impacts, agriculture–environment interactions, environmental engineering, environmental education initiatives, and the application of artificial intelligence in environmental management.
Editorial Process for Manuscripts
Initial Screening
The editorial team will conduct the initial validation of the manuscripts to verify and confirm the following.
(i). Aims & scope consistency and relevance to readers
(ii). Format of the article as per the journal’s requirement
(iii). Qualities of the article (plagiarism freeness, AI Writeup, ethics of the publications and suitability for publication).
(iv). Clarity of presentation and readability standards on Methodologies, Results, Discussion and Conclusion
If needed, the editorial team will return the manuscript to the corresponding author for modifications to consider the manuscript for review.
If the manuscript does not fulfill the above qualities, the editorial team will rejects the manuscript (after getting concern from the chief editor).
The qualified manuscripts will be assigned a suitable Academic Editor with subject specialization for the qualified manuscript.
Peer review process
The academic editor will review the manuscript for research, methodologies, data quality, originality, content, and write-up consistency, including numerical values and their units, across the manuscript's sections.
Since the citations should be reliable, the following reviews will also be conducted at this stage.
(a). Check for the presence of the article for the citations given in the manuscript
(b). Check for the relevance to the content and citations
(c). Check for the DOI's redirection to the article URL
(d). Cross-checking the citations and the list of references to check the year and the author's name consistency
If any revision is required, the corresponding author will be informed of the revision to get the revised manuscript. If the manuscript contains any false information, it will be rejected by the academic editor.
The selected manuscripts will be assigned to reviewers for the review process.
Double-blind review will be conducted. The identity of the authors and reviewers will not be known to each other.
Reviews are being conducted confidentially. The independent reviewers will be assigned from the reviewers registered with our submission portal and reviewers collected from academic manuscripts.
The reviewers will review the manuscripts at our online article submission portal (PKP OJS-based). Login credentials will be provided for the reviewers who accepted the review invitation.
Functions of Reviewers
(a). Evaluate the reliability and soundness of the methodology.
(b). Assess whether the study design, sample size, statistical analyses, and experimental procedures are appropriate, reproducible, and aligned with the research objectives.
(c). Provide constructive suggestions for improvement, including identifying missing controls, inadequate replication, or inappropriate statistical applications.
(d). Examine the entire manuscript, tables, figures, results, discussion, and conclusions to ensure clarity and accuracy.
(e). Verify that the numerical values in tables match the textual descriptions.
(f). Confirm that the interpretations and conclusions are directly supported by the presented data.
The academic editor collects at least two review reports from the review process. After analysis of the reviewer's comments, the academic editor will send the following to the corresponding author.
Acceptance
Requires Minor Corrections
Requires Major Revision
Rejection of the Manuscript (with reasons)
In the event of manuscript revision requirements, the manuscript will be sent to the corresponding author by the academic editor, along with the reviewers' comments and the required revisions requested by the reviewers. The academic editor will decide whether further review is needed for the manuscripts, based on the recommendations given by the reviewers.
Then, the academic editor will decide the manuscript's status based on the author’s replies and reviewers’ recommendations during the revisions.
Accepted manuscripts will again be subjected to the following evaluation by the production staff
(a). Check for the DOI's in the reference list and redirection to the article URL
(b). Cross-checking the citations and the list of references to check the year and the author's name consistency
Finally, the bookmarking of citations and references will be carried out before sending the galley proof to the corresponding author.