Review Process

The process of peer-review and publication in the interactive scientific journal eEarth (eE) differs from traditional scientific journals. It is a two-stage process involving the scientific discussion forum eEarth Discussions (eED), and it has been designed to use the full potential of the internet to foster scientific discussion and enable rapid publication of scientific papers.

Initial access review by competent editors assures the basic scientific and technical quality for papers published in eED. Subsequent interactive discussion and public commenting by the referees, authors and other members of the scientific community is expected to enhance quality control for papers published in eE beyond the limits of the traditional closed peer-review. Also in cases where no additional comments from the scientific community are received, a full peer-review process in the traditional sense, but in a more transparent way, is assured before publication of a paper in eE.

The individual steps of the eE process of peer-review, publication and interactive discussion are described below, and complementary illustrations are given in the following flow chart .

1. Submission of Original Manuscript and Editor Assignment

   An original manuscript is submitted electronically and within a few days it is assigned to the chief editor in charge of the field. He/she assigns the manuscript to an Associate Editor covering the relevant journal subject areas (for details see finding an editor).

2. Access Review

   The Associate Editor is asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is within the scope of the journal and whether it meets a basic scientific quality. He can suggest technical corrections (typing errors, clarification of figures, etc.) before publication in eED. Further requests for revision of the scientific contents are not allowed at this stage of the review process but shall be expressed in the interactive discussion following publication in eED.

3. Technical Corrections

   The authors have the opportunity to perform technical corrections, which may be reviewed by the Associate Editor to verify requested corrections and prevent further revisions, which are not permitted at this stage.

4. Publication of Discussion Paper in eED

   After final acceptance the manuscript is typeset by the Copernicus Publications Production Office, proofread by the authors, and published as a discussion paper on the eED Website. Public accessibility, archiving and citability are guaranteed from this moment on (usually about 2-8 weeks after submission).

5. Open Discussion (8 weeks)

   Upon internet publication the paper is opened for Interactive Public Discussion during which Referee Comments (anonymous or attributed), Author Comments (on behalf of all co-authors), and Short Comments by any registered member of the scientific community (attributed) are published alongside the discussion paper; for details see Interactive Public Discussion.

6. Final Response

   At the end of the open discussion the authors are asked to respond with final Author Comments. After 4 weeks (expandable to 8 weeks) or upon submission of a revised manuscript the final response phase is terminated, and the discussion paper and interactive comments are archived. Before submission of a revised manuscript for publication in eE, the authors are supposed to have answered the Referee Comments and relevant Short Comments cumulatively or individually.

7. Submission of Revised Manuscript

   Submission of a revised manuscript for publication in eE (second publication stage) is not mandatory, but encouraged and expected unless the access peer-review and Interactive Public Discussion have revealed severe deficiencies of the discussion paper which cannot be resolved by revisions. In general the revised manuscript should be submitted not later than 4 to 8 weeks after the end of the open discussion.

8. Peer-Review Completion

   In view of the access peer-review and the Interactive Public Discussion, the Associate Editor either directly recommends to the chief editor in charge the acceptance/rejection of the revised manuscript for publication in eE or consults referees in the same way as during the completion of a traditional peer-review process. If necessary, additional revisions may be requested during peer-review completion by the Associate Editor and/or the chief editor in charge until a final decision about acceptance/rejection for eE is reached.

9. Publication of Final Revised Paper in eE

   In case of acceptance the final revised paper is typeset and proofread. Then it is published on the eE Website with a direct link to the preceding original paper and interactive discussion in eED. All publications (original paper, interactive comments, final revised paper) are permanently archived and remain accessible to the open public via internet and the final revised paper is also accessible as print copy.

The timing indicated above is a guideline which may have to be modified according to the availability and response times of editors, referees, and authors. The submission of comments and replies which continue the discussion of scientific papers beyond the limits of immediate interactive discussion is encouraged. Such peer-reviewed comments undergo the same process of peer-review and publication as described above, i.e. after publication and discussion in eED they may also be published in eE if sufficiently substantial. If a manuscript that has been published as a discussion paper in eED is not accepted for publication as a final paper in eE , the authors have several options to proceed as outlined under Frequently Asked Questions, Point 7.