Hydro‑Environmental Systems & Solutions (HESS) upholds a rigorous, transparent, and ethical peer‑review protocol—fully aligned with COPE principles—to ensure that every published article meets the highest standards of scientific integrity and scholarly excellence.
1. Review Model
Double‑Blind Evaluation
- Anonymity: Both authors’ and reviewers’ identities remain concealed. Manuscripts are stripped of identifying information prior to review.
- Impartiality: Reviewers assess submissions solely on scholarly merit—novelty, rigor, methodology, and clarity—without influence from authors’ reputations or affiliations.
- Ethical Alignment: HESS follows COPE guidelines: reviewers must maintain confidentiality, declare any conflicts of interest, and exercise impartial judgment.
2. Initial Screening and Similarity Check
- Scope & Format Compliance: Submissions are first checked by the editorial team for fit with HESS’s scope, adherence to formatting requirements, and completeness.
- Plagiarism Detection: Every manuscript undergoes a similarity analysis via iThenticate to verify originality and guard against duplicate publication.
- Reference Verification: Citations are examined for accuracy and completeness to uphold scholarly standards.
Manuscripts failing these criteria are returned to authors with guidance for revision before peer review.
3. Editorial Assessment
- Editor Triage: The Editor‑in‑Chief or an Associate Editor evaluates screened manuscripts for scientific quality, relevance, and alignment with HESS’s thematic priorities. The similarity rate is also evaluated.
- Desk Rejection or Advancement: Submissions may be desk‑rejected if out of scope or insufficiently rigorous; otherwise, they proceed to external review.
4. External Peer Review
- Reviewer Selection: Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent experts with domain‑specific expertise.
- Reviewer Responsibilities:
- Maintain strict confidentiality; no sharing of manuscript content.
- Provide objective, constructive feedback on originality, methodology, data interpretation, and presentation.
- Declare any use of AI tools in drafting reviews is prohibited—human expertise only.
- Editorial Contribution: Associate Editors may also comment to ensure coherence with journal standards.
5. Decision Making
- Synthesis of Reviews: The Editor‑in‑Chief considers reviewer recommendations (accept, revise, reject) alongside associate editors’ comments.
- Conflict‑Free Handling: Submissions from Editors or Board members are managed by an independent senior editor to avoid conflicts of interest.
- Final Determination: Decisions are communicated promptly, with clear guidance for revisions or appeal procedures.
- Timely Outcome: We aim to deliver an initial decision—whether acceptance, revision, or rejection—within 30 days of submission.
6. Appeals and Reconsideration
Authors may appeal a decision by submitting a reasoned request. Appeals are adjudicated by an independent panel of senior editors to ensure fairness and objectivity.
By adhering to this comprehensive peer‑review framework—prohibiting AI‑generated reviews, employing iThenticate for originality checks, and following COPE ethics—HESS guarantees the integrity, quality, and credibility of its published research.
Note:
Hydro-Environmental Sciences & Solutions (HESS) is led by an international Editorial Board of experts in hydraulics, environmental systems, agriculture, and sustainable land and water management. We welcome researchers and professionals from around the world—especially those in agriculture, water resources, and environmental engineering—to join our Editorial Board and contribute to the journal’s mission of advancing interdisciplinary science and practice.
To express your interest, please contact us.
