Management of Sustainable Development (MSD) follows a double-blind peer review process to ensure the academic quality, integrity, and relevance of all published content.

1. Type of Peer Review

MSD operates a double-blind peer review model, in which both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process. This approach helps ensure impartial and objective evaluations.

2. Reviewer Selection

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, absence of conflicts of interest, and lack of institutional affiliation with the authors.

3. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess submissions based on the following criteria:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope and sustainability themes
• Originality and significance of the research question
• Soundness of methodology and data analysis
• Coherence and clarity of the manuscript
• Validity of conclusions drawn from results
• Proper citation of related literature

4. Review Timeline

Reviewers are expected to submit their evaluations within 21 days of accepting the review invitation. Authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit within a comparable timeframe.

5. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ reports and editorial judgment, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

• Accept – The manuscript meets all criteria and is ready for publication.
• Minor Revision – Small changes are required before acceptance.
• Major Revision – Substantial modifications are needed and the revised manuscript will be re-reviewed.
• Reject – The manuscript is not suitable for publication.

6. Reviewer Confidentiality and Ethics

All reviewers agree to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts and must not use unpublished material for their own research. Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting the review task.

7. Recognition

MSD acknowledges the critical contribution of peer reviewers and supports a culture of open collaboration while respecting reviewer anonymity. With the reviewers’ consent, their names may be acknowledged annually by the journal. Furthermore, MSD facilitates the recognition of peer review activities through integration with Publons, enabling reviewers to receive credit for their work in a verified and confidential manner.