At the Economic Sciences, we take the quality and accuracy of our published research very seriously. We believe that the peer review process is essential in ensuring that the articles we publish meet the highest standards of scholarship and rigor.

Our peer review process is designed to be fair, transparent, and rigorous. Here are the key features of our peer review policy:

1. Double-Blind Review: All articles submitted to our journal undergo a double-blind review process, meaning that the identities of the author(s) and the reviewers are kept confidential from each other. This helps to ensure that the review process is fair and unbiased.

2. Expert Reviewers: We carefully select reviewers who have expertise in the topic area of the article under review. Our reviewers are typically academics, researchers, or practitioners with relevant expertise and experience.

3. Rigorous Review Criteria: Our reviewers are asked to evaluate articles based on a set of criteria that includes the originality and significance of the research, the clarity and coherence of the argument, the quality of the methodology and data analysis, and the overall contribution to the field.

4. Timely Review Process: We strive to provide authors with a timely review process, typically aiming to provide feedback within 4-6 weeks of submission.

5. Revision and Resubmission: If an article is accepted pending revisions, the author(s) will have the opportunity to revise and resubmit their article. We will then conduct a further review to ensure that the revisions have addressed the feedback provided by the reviewers.

6. Editorial Oversight: Our editorial team is responsible for overseeing the peer review process and making final decisions on whether to accept or reject articles for publication. The editorial team may also provide guidance and feedback to authors during the review process.

We believe that our peer review policy is an essential component of our commitment to publishing high-quality research and analysis. We are committed to continuously improving our peer review process to ensure that it remains rigorous, fair, and transparent.