Peer Review Policy

Innovation of Chemistry & Materials for Sustainability (ICMS) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific integrity, research ethics, and publication quality. All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous review and evaluation process within the Open Journal Systems (OJS-PKP) platform to ensure originality, accuracy, and relevance to the journal’s scope and objectives.

Single-Blind Peer Review Process

The journal follows a Single-Blind Peer Review system in which reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities. This model promotes objectivity in assessment while allowing reviewers to consider the work within its proper research context.

Number of Reviewers

Each manuscript is evaluated by a minimum of two (2) independent expert reviewers with relevant subject-matter expertise. Additional reviewers may be invited when deemed necessary by the Handling Editor to ensure balanced, thorough, and impartial evaluation.

Review Timeline

The standard review period is approximately four to five (4-5) weeks from the date of assignment. Reviewers are requested to submit their reports within this timeframe to maintain timely communication with authors and expedite the publication process

Conflict of Interest

All participants in the review process-including authors, reviewers, and editors-must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their objectivity or judgment. Conflicts may include, but are not limited to, financial, institutional, personal, or professional relationships.

The Handling Editor reviews all such disclosures and ensures that any potential conflicts are appropriately managed or that the reviewer is recused where necessary.

  • Reviewers who recognize a conflict of interest are required to decline the review invitation immediately.
  • Authors must declare all potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission.

This policy ensures transparency and preserves the integrity of the review process.

Reviewer Reports and Anonymity

All reviewer comments and recommendations are communicated to authors anonymously through the OJS system.

Authors receive detailed and constructive feedback aimed at improving the scientific and editorial quality of their manuscripts. Reviewer identities remain strictly confidential, and disclosure is prohibited unless explicitly authorized by the editorial office under exceptional circumstances.

Plagiarism and Research Integrity

ICMS maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or other forms of research misconduct. All submissions are screened using advanced plagiarism detection software integrated with Crossref Similarity Check prior to peer review.

If potential plagiarism or unethical practice is identified:

  • The manuscript will be placed on hold for an internal investigation by the editorial board.
  • Authors will be notified of the concern and provided an opportunity to respond.
  • Confirmed cases of plagiarism will result in immediate rejection and may be reported to the relevant institution(s) or funding bodies, consistent with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

Editorial Decision

Following completion of the peer-review process, the Handling Editor evaluates the reviewers’ recommendations and makes one of the following decision based on reviewers’ reports and the overall quality of the manuscript. Authors are notified of the decision along with reviewers’ comments:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Revision and Resubmission

Authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer comments and submit a detailed response to reviewers. Revised manuscripts may be subject to further review.

Conflicts of Interest

All participants in the peer review process (authors, reviewers, and editors) must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their work.

  • Authors must include a conflict of interest statement in their manuscript.
  • Reviewers should decline assignments if a conflict exists.
  • Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts arise.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose or use any unpublished information for personal advantage.

Ethical Oversight

ICMS follows COPE guidelines in handling ethical issues such as plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, and authorship disputes. Appropriate actions-including rejection, correction, or retraction-will be taken when necessary.

Final Authority over Editorial Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief retains the final authority over all editorial decisions to ensure that each manuscript is judged solely on its scientific merit, originality, and contribution to the field.
Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Susanta Banerjee Email: eic-icms@insuf.org; susanta@matsc.iitkgp.ac.in

Policy Updates

This policy may be updated periodically to ensure alignment with international best practices in scholarly publishing.