1. Peer Review Process

ESSD operates a double-blind peer review process in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain strictly confidential throughout the review period. All submitted manuscripts must undergo this process before a publication decision is made.

Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) conducts an initial evaluation to assess the manuscript's suitability for the journal. Manuscripts passing this stage are assigned to a minimum of two independent reviewers, selected primarily from the Editorial Board based on their relevant expertise. For manuscripts covering specialized topics, the EIC may engage qualified external experts.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive assessments and to disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality. The EIC retains final decision-making authority based on the reviewers' reports. A favorable evaluation from one reviewer does not guarantee acceptance; substantive concerns raised by any reviewer may lead to rejection.

To safeguard impartiality, neither reviewers nor the EIC participate in decisions involving manuscripts they have authored, manuscripts by family members or close colleagues, or manuscripts related to products or services in which they hold a financial or personal interest.

2. Editorial Decision Process

Following peer review, the Editor-in-Chief issues one of the following decisions:

• Accept — The manuscript is accepted for publication as submitted or with minor editorial corrections.
• Minor Revision — The manuscript requires limited revisions addressing specific reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts are typically returned within 2 weeks.
• Major Revision — The manuscript requires substantial revisions and will undergo a second round of review upon resubmission.
• Reject — The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or falls outside its scope.

Authors can expect an initial editorial decision within 10 days of submission. The full review process, from submission to final decision, typically takes up to 100 days, depending on the complexity of the review and the timeliness of authors' revisions.

3. Appeal Process

Authors who believe an editorial decision was reached unfairly or without adequate consideration of their work may submit a formal appeal. Appeals must be submitted within 30 days of the decision notification and should include a clear, point-by-point response addressing the concerns raised during review.

Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is final. Note that disagreement with a rejection decision alone does not constitute grounds for appeal; appeals must present substantive new arguments or identify a clear procedural error.

To submit an appeal, contact the Editorial Office at: [email protected].

4. Article Types

ESSD accepts the following article types:

• Research Articles — Original empirical studies presenting new findings, methodologies, or evidence-based analyses within the journal's scope. Research Articles constitute the primary article type published by ESSD.
• Review Articles — Systematic or narrative reviews synthesizing existing literature on a topic within the journal's scope. Review Articles must offer novel synthesis or clear evidence-based conclusions and will not be considered if they merely summarize existing work without critical analysis or policy relevance.
• Case Studies — In-depth investigations of a specific project, site, policy, or initiative. Case Studies must demonstrate a transferable methodology and measurable environmental or sustainability outcomes to be considered.
• Technical Notes — Short papers reporting incremental findings, methodological innovations, or preliminary results with a clear applied dimension within the journal's scope.
• Commentaries — Short perspective pieces addressing emerging issues, recent policy developments, or significant research findings relevant to environmental science and sustainable development. Commentaries are by invitation of the Editorial Board only.

5. Publication Frequency

ESSD publishes two regular issues per year. In addition to its regular publication schedule, the journal actively encourages the submission of Special Issues addressing emerging themes, timely topics, or conference-based collections within the journal's scope. Special Issues are published throughout the year on a rolling basis and are subject to the same peer review standards as regular issues.

Key metrics:

• Average time to first decision: 10 days
• Average time from submission to acceptance: 100 days
• Acceptance rate: 50%
• All metrics are updated annually.

6. Submission Declaration

By submitting a manuscript to ESSD, the Corresponding Author confirms on behalf of all co-authors that:

• The work has not been previously published, except in the form of a preprint, abstract, published lecture, academic thesis, or registered report.
• The manuscript is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.
• All authors have approved the submitted version and accept accountability for its content.
• If accepted, the work will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in any language, without the journal's consent.
• The research was conducted with the approval of all relevant institutional or organizational authorities.

6.1. Jurisdictional Claims

ESSD maintains a neutral position on territorial disputes and jurisdictional claims. Maps included in manuscripts must depict only the area under study, accompanied by a note stating: "Map lines delineate study areas and do not necessarily depict accepted national boundaries." Authors must use the standard, verifiable name of their institution in all affiliations.

7. Authorship

Authorship carries both credit and accountability. To be listed as an author, each individual must meet all three of the following criteria:

• Contribution — Substantial involvement in the conception or design of the work, or in the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
• Drafting or revision — Active participation in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
• Final approval — Approval of the final version submitted for publication and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Contributors who do not meet all three criteria should be acknowledged in a dedicated Acknowledgements section. Gift authorship — listing individuals who have not contributed substantively — and ghost authorship — omitting individuals who have — are both considered forms of misconduct and are strictly prohibited.

Changes to authorship must be requested before publication and require the explicit approval of the Editor-in-Chief. The Corresponding Author must submit a written request stating the reason for the change, accompanied by confirmation from all authors — including those being added or removed. Unauthorized changes to the authorship list may result in rejection prior to publication, or a formal retraction or correction notice if the article has already been published.

8. Generative AI Policy

ESSD recognizes that AI tools have become part of the modern research and writing process. This policy distinguishes between assistive use, which does not require disclosure, and generative use, which does — along with uses that are not permitted at any stage of the editorial process.

8.1 Assistive Use (No Disclosure Required)

AI tools used solely to improve an author's own existing work — such as correcting grammar, improving sentence clarity, or refining structure — are considered assistive and do not require disclosure. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy and rigor of their submission regardless of such use.

8.2 Generative Use (Disclosure Required)

Any use of AI tools that produces original content — including text, references, data analysis, code, or visualizations that directly shape the manuscript's methodology, findings, or conclusions — must be disclosed at submission, specifying the tool used and how it was applied. This disclosure should be included in the manuscript's Acknowledgements section.

Examples of generative use requiring disclosure include:

• Assistance compiling or reviewing relevant literature
• Translation of source materials as part of the research process
• AI-assisted or AI-generated code used in the research
• Assistance generating data visualizations or representative illustrations
• AI-assisted error-checking of code

Authors are responsible for independently verifying the accuracy of any AI-generated content before submission, including confirming that all references and citations are real and correctly attributed — AI tools are known to occasionally generate inaccurate or fabricated citations.

8.3 Prohibited Uses

The following uses of AI are not permitted at any stage of the ESSD editorial process:

• Undisclosed use of AI to generate manuscript text, data, or findings
• Using AI to conduct interviews in place of actual human research participants
• Presenting AI-generated images as original research imagery
• Fabricating references or citations, whether AI-assisted or not
• Reviewers using AI to draft peer review reports, or uploading manuscript content to any AI tool, which constitutes a breach of confidentiality
• Editors using AI to generate editorial decision letters or summaries of unpublished manuscripts

8.4 Authorship

AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors under any circumstance. Authorship requires legal accountability and informed consent — responsibilities an AI system cannot hold.

8.5 Enforcement

Disclosed use of AI, in accordance with this policy, will not by itself result in rejection of a submission. However, if undisclosed or prohibited AI use is identified at any stage — including after publication — ESSD reserves the right to reject the submission or, if already published, pursue a correction or retraction in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics policy and COPE guidelines.

9. Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the objectivity of their research or its presentation. This includes but is not limited to funding from commercial entities, employment relationships, consultancy arrangements, stock ownership, honoraria, and personal relationships with individuals who may benefit from the research outcomes.

A competing interests statement must be included in all submitted manuscripts. Authors with no competing interests to declare should state: "The authors declare no competing interests."

Any competing interest identified after submission or publication must be reported to the Editorial Office immediately. Undisclosed conflicts of interest discovered post-publication may result in a correction notice or retraction, in accordance with COPE guidelines.

10. Funding Declaration

Authors must declare all sources of funding that supported the research presented in their manuscript. The funding declaration must identify each funding body by its full official name and specify its role — if any — in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of findings, or preparation of the manuscript.

If the research received no external funding, authors should state: "This research received no external funding."

Failure to disclose funding sources is considered a breach of publication ethics and will be treated in accordance with COPE guidelines.

11. Ethics Approval

Where research involves human participants, including surveys, interviews, or observational studies, authors must confirm ethical approval from the relevant institutional committee and provide the committee name and reference number. Informed consent must be confirmed for all participants.

12. Data Availability

Authors are required to include a Data Availability Statement (DAS) in all submitted manuscripts. The statement must specify where the data supporting the research findings can be accessed, and under what conditions if access is restricted.

Acceptable statements include:

• "The data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its supplementary materials."
• "The dataset used in this study is publicly available at [repository name and URL/DOI]."
• "The data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."

Authors whose research does not generate primary datasets — such as purely theoretical or modeling studies — should state: "No new data were generated in this study."

13. Post-Publication

Policies governing post-publication integrity — including corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern — are detailed on the Publication Ethics page. Authors who identify errors in their published work are responsible for notifying the Editorial Office promptly at [email protected].