All manuscripts submitted to GREENOVA (Global Conference on Environmental, Energy, and Natural Resources Innovation for Sustainable Development) are subject to a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the evaluation process.
The peer-review workflow is designed to ensure academic quality, originality, and relevance to the conference scope and is conducted as follows:
Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the official conference submission system.
Initial Editorial Screening
The Editorial Board conducts a preliminary assessment to evaluate the manuscript’s scope alignment, academic quality, and compliance with submission guidelines. At this stage, manuscripts may be rejected without external review if they do not meet basic requirements. All submissions are subjected to a plagiarism screening using Turnitin prior to further processing.
Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewer selection is based on subject relevance and the absence of conflicts of interest. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript’s scientific rigor, methodology, originality, and clarity.
Editorial Decision and Notification
Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor communicates one of the following decisions to the author: acceptance, revision, or rejection.
Revision and Resubmission
Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ and editors’ comments and resubmit the revised version. Revised manuscripts may undergo further evaluation to ensure that all comments have been adequately addressed.
Final Decision
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on reviewers’ recommendations and editorial judgment. The decision on revised manuscripts is final.
Proofreading and Publication
Accepted manuscripts proceed to the copyediting, proofreading, and publication stages in accordance with the editorial standards and publication ethics of E3S Web of Conferences.
A complete peer-review round consists of the process from initial submission through the first editorial decision. Based on reviewers’ evaluations, editorial decisions may include:
Accepted
Accepted with Minor Revisions
Accepted with Major Revisions
Rejected