Guide for Reviewers

Supporting Quality and Integrity in Scholarly Publishing

The International Journal on Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly quality through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer-review process.
This guide outlines the roles, responsibilities, and best practices expected from reviewers.

1. Role of the Reviewer

Reviewers play a crucial role in ensuring the scientific quality, originality, and relevance of manuscripts submitted to the journal.
Your assessment supports editorial decision-making and helps authors improve their work.

As a reviewer, you act as:

• An independent evaluator of scientific merit

• A constructive advisor to authors

• A guardian of ethical and methodological standards
  
  

2. Scope of Review

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts within the journal’s scope, including but not limited to research in:

• Food science and food technology

• Agriculture and crop production

• Soil science and land management

• Animal science and livestock systems

• Agricultural engineering and precision agriculture

• Natural resource management and sustainability

• Environmental and climate-related agricultural studies

If a manuscript falls outside your expertise, please decline the review invitation promptly.

3. Ethical Principles

Reviewers must adhere to the highest ethical standards:

Confidentiality

All manuscripts and related materials are confidential and must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal advantage.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest (financial, professional, or personal) and decline the review if necessary.

Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal criticism of the authors.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are encouraged to consider the following aspects:

a. Originality and Contribution

• Is the research novel and relevant?

• Does it contribute meaningfully to food, agriculture, or natural resource sciences?
  
  

b. Scientific Rigor and Methodology

• Are the methods appropriate and well described?

• Are data collection and analysis scientifically sound?
  
  

c. Results and Discussion

• Are results clearly presented and interpreted correctly?

• Are conclusions supported by the data?
  
  

d. Presentation Quality

• Is the manuscript well structured and clearly written?

• Are figures and tables appropriate and informative?
  
  

5. Review Structure

A high-quality review typically includes:

1. Brief Summary
   A short overview of the manuscript and its main contribution.

2. Major Comments
   Substantive issues related to methodology, analysis, interpretation, or originality.

3. Minor Comments
   Suggestions on clarity, formatting, grammar, or minor technical corrections.

4. Confidential Comments to the Editor
   (Optional) Comments regarding ethical concerns or overall recommendation.
   
   

6. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend one of the following:

• Accept

• Minor Revision

• Major Revision

• Reject

Final editorial decisions are made by the Editor.

7. Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to submit their review within the assigned timeframe, typically 2–4 weeks.
If additional time is required, reviewers should inform the editorial office promptly.

8. Use of AI Tools

Reviewers may use AI tools to assist with language clarity or structure assessment, but AI tools must not be used to generate review content or make scientific judgments.
Any use of AI assistance should comply with the journal’s ethical guidelines.

9. Reviewer Recognition

The journal acknowledges the valuable contributions of reviewers through:

• Reviewer certificates

• Annual acknowledgement on the journal website

• Recognition as academic service
  
  

10. Communication with the Editorial Office

For questions regarding the review process or technical issues, reviewers are encouraged to contact the editorial office through the journal’s official communication channels.

Thank You for Your Contribution

The editorial team sincerely appreciates the time and expertise contributed by our reviewers.
Your efforts are essential to advancing high-quality research in food, agriculture, and natural resource sciences.