Peer Review Process

The peer review process for articles submitted to the Structures, Infrastructure, Planning, Implementation, and Legislation (SIPIL) journal is designed to ensure the quality, credibility, and relevance of published works. The process consists of the following stages:

1. Initial Editorial Screening
   Upon submission, the editorial team reviews the manuscript to ensure compliance with the journal’s aims, scope, and formatting guidelines. Manuscripts are also checked for plagiarism and ethical standards.
2. Assignment to Reviewers
   Manuscripts that pass the editorial screening are assigned to at least two reviewers with expertise in structural engineering, infrastructure, urban planning, or related fields. Reviewer selection is based on subject relevance and professional qualifications.
3. Reviewer Evaluation
   Reviewers evaluate the manuscript’s novelty, methodological rigor, clarity, and overall contribution to the field. Special attention is given to research design, data analysis, interpretation of results, and the validity of conclusions.
4. Feedback and Recommendations
   Reviewers provide constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement. They also issue a formal recommendation to accept, revise, or reject the manuscript, while noting any ethical or originality concerns.
5. Author Revision
   Authors are given the opportunity to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewers’ comments. A detailed response letter is expected to explain how each comment has been addressed.
6. Editorial Decision
   The editorial board reviews the revised manuscript and the reviewers’ recommendations. A final decision is made to accept, request further revisions, or reject the manuscript.
7. Publication
   Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, layout, and final proofreading before publication in the scheduled journal issue. The entire peer review process is managed through the Open Journal System (OJS).