Agronomy for Sustainable Development

Review this journal Show reviews

Journal info (provided by editor)

Issues per year
6
Articles published last year
58
Manuscripts received last year
553
% accepted last year
12
% immediately rejected last year
80
Open access status
optional
Manuscript handling fee?
no
Kind of complaint procedure
n/a
Two-year impact factor
4.53
Five-year impact factor
7.03

Aims and Scope

Agronomy for Sustainable Development (ASD) publishes original experimental, empirical and theoretical research articles, review articles and meta-analyses leading to enhanced sustainability for agricultural and food systems. The journal’s objective is to interface agronomy, cropping and farming system researches with ecological, genetic, environmental, economic or social sciences.
ASD promotes agroecology studies, participatory research and interdisciplinary approaches. It seeks to publish articles focusing on systems approaches, applied at field, farm, landscape, food systems and global levels.
Research articles should demonstrate a clear scientific breakthrough versus current knowledge, and should be discussed in an international context.

SciRev ratings (provided by authors) (based on 69 reviews)

Duration of manuscript handling phases
Duration first review round 3.5 mnths compare →
Total handling time accepted manuscripts 5.3 mnths compare →
Decision time immediate rejection n/a compare →
Characteristics of peer review process
Average number of review reports 2.6 compare →
Average number of review rounds 2.6 compare →
Quality of review reports 4.2 compare →
Difficulty of reviewer comments 3.3 compare →
Overall rating manuscript handling 4.0 (range 0-5) compare →

Latest review

First review round: 7.7 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
The quality of the reviews (including those from both peers and editors) is excellent. They certainly demand the highest standards and, based in our own experience, manuscripts should benefit from so many readings. The main problem in our process was the time required to achieve a final decision. We understand the pandemic times are significantly longer than usual and that the time reviewers take to submit comments is out of control of the journal. However, during our review process, most of the time was spent in the editors’ desks, with very minor additional input from them. Only at the very end of the review process we received significant suggestions from the editors. Excluding the time issue, the review process is top quality and is worth submitting MSs to ASD, specially when authors are under low pressures for keeping up publication rates (which is rarely the case).