Peer Review Process

1. Peer Review Type

Technology and Advancement in Mining, Business and Natural Georesources applies a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This ensures an unbiased, fair, and objective evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.

2. Editorial and Review Process

Initial Screening (Desk Evaluation)

Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the Editorial Office to ensure:

  • Alignment with the journal’s scope in mining science, mineral and coal exploration, mining engineering, mining technology, mineral processing, extractive metallurgy, mining environment, mining economics and management, energy and mineral resources, natural georesources, sustainable mining, and related disciplines
  • Compliance with the author guidelines
  • Adequate academic quality, structure, and presentation
  • Compliance with applicable research and publication ethics

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic standards or fall outside the journal’s scope may be rejected without external review.

Plagiarism Check

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection tools to ensure originality and prevent academic misconduct.

Peer Review Process

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the topic, such as mineral and coal exploration, mining geology, mine planning, mining operations, mining engineering, mining geotechnics, mine ventilation and safety, mineral processing, extractive metallurgy, mining technology, mining environment, mine rehabilitation, mining economics and management, energy and mineral resources, natural georesources, sustainable mining, and related fields.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, professional experience, and relevant publication record. The review process follows recognized standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editor will make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

  • Relevance to mining science, technology, business, natural georesources, and related disciplines
  • Originality and contribution to mining and georesources research
  • Clarity of research objectives and research questions
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology
  • Quality and reliability of data, field observations, laboratory analyses, simulations, modeling, or other forms of technical analysis
  • Accuracy and relevance of technical references and supporting literature
  • Theoretical, technological, industrial, environmental, or practical contribution
  • Quality of writing and manuscript organization
  • Appropriate use of mining engineering principles, geological concepts, technological approaches, analytical methods, or other relevant scientific frameworks
  • Consideration of environmental, safety, economic, and sustainability aspects where relevant
  • Compliance with research and publication ethical standards

4. Review Timeline

Technology and Advancement in Mining, Business and Natural Georesources is committed to maintaining an efficient and timely peer review process:

  • Average review time: 1–3 weeks
  • First decision: approximately 2–4 weeks after submission

The review period may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, technical specialization, and the number of revisions required.

5. Ethical Standards and Transparency

This journal adheres to internationally recognized ethical standards and follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the submitted manuscript
  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest
  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback
  • Avoid using unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal or professional advantage
  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively without discrimination based on the authors’ identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, or other personal characteristics

6. Author Revisions

Authors must:

  • Address all reviewer comments carefully and systematically
  • Submit a detailed response to reviewers explaining how each comment has been addressed
  • Revise the manuscript within the specified timeframe
  • Ensure that revisions maintain the accuracy, originality, technical quality, and academic integrity of the manuscript

Failure to adequately address reviewer comments or comply with revision requirements may result in rejection of the manuscript.

7. Final Decision

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on:

  • Reviewer recommendations
  • Quality and completeness of revisions
  • Academic quality and originality
  • Methodological and technical rigor
  • Overall scholarly merit and relevance to the journal’s scope

The Editor-in-Chief may request additional review or consultation when necessary before making the final decision.

8. Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts will undergo:

  • Professional copyediting and proofreading
  • Layout and formatting
  • Final author proofreading prior to publication

All articles are published under an open access model, ensuring free and immediate access to readers worldwide.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal request with clear justification and supporting information. Appeals will be reviewed objectively by the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board.

An appeal should address specific concerns regarding the editorial or review process rather than simply disagreeing with the decision. The journal may seek additional independent assessment when considered necessary.

10. General Provisions

The journal may assign additional reviewers when necessary, particularly when a manuscript covers interdisciplinary topics or requires specialized technical expertise. The review period may be adjusted depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the technical scope of the research.

A rapid review process may be considered for manuscripts addressing time-sensitive or emerging issues in mining technology, critical minerals, energy resources, environmental management, sustainable mining, and related fields, subject to editorial capacity and reviewer availability.

Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts at any stage of the editorial and publication process if serious ethical concerns, plagiarism, research misconduct, conflicts of interest, unreliable or manipulated data, or other violations of publication standards are identified.