Articles review guide
  1. The papers are reviewed by two reviewers in line with the principles of double-blind review process, i.e. Authors and Reviewers do not know each other’s identity.
  2. The papers that failed to meet the basic requirements of linguistic correctness or are inconsistent with the editorial requirements can be sent back to the Author without review.
  3. Two external Reviewers, meeting the following criteria, are appointed to review the papers:
    • they are affiliated in a different unit than the Author of the paper,
    • they are not members of the editorial staff of the “Problems of Agricultural Economics”,
    • they are at least PhDs and have relevant scientific achievements to guarantee appropriate level of the review,
    • in case of papers prepared in a foreign language – at least one of the reviewers is affiliated in a foreign institution other than the institution of the Author’s nationality.
  4. After initial verification of the papers the Editorial Committee and Editor in Chief transfer them to Reviewers, who prepare, within agreed time, reviews on forms provided by the editorial staff. The Reviewers assess the paper given: its substantive content, correctness of the used method, logic of reasoning, coherence of contents with the topic, linguistic correctness, and relevant selection of bibliography.
  5. The review provides a clear final conclusion:
    • to publish the paper as it is,
    • to publish the paper after making the suggested corrections,
    • to reject the paper.
  6. The Reviewers review the papers in line with the principle of confidentiality and do not use the information obtained on the occasion before the paper’s publication.
  7. Notes of the Reviewers are sent to the paper’s Author. If the Reviewer makes the publication of the paper dependent on making corrections suggested by the Reviewer, the Author has to do so in line with the notes formulated by the Reviewer.
  8. The Author can respond to the Reviewer’s suggestions by presenting his/her justified opinion to the editorial staff.
  9. If both the reviews are positive, the papers are published.
  10. The decision on publication of a paper is made by the Subject Editors after prior consultation with the Editorial Board.
  11. Names of the Reviewers of individual issues are not made public.
  12. The editorial staff makes public the list of cooperating Reviewers on the website of the Journal.
  13. Download the form review