Reviews for "Agronomy for Sustainable Development"

Journal title Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
(click to go to journal page) 1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome Year
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 10.9
weeks
15.1
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2021
Motivation: The editor is very responsible, and the manuscript processing speed is also very fast. The opinions of the review experts are very professional. After two revisions, the quality of the article has been greatly improved, and the article was received smoothly.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 13.1
weeks
17.4
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2021
Motivation: The review process was efficient and very constructive.
The feedbacks from the reviewers and the editors helped us a lot to improve the article.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 39.1
weeks
44.1
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
3
(good)
Accepted 2019
Motivation: The reviewing process was too long; it took many months to receive the first round of comments by the reviewers. Fortunately, the comments and suggestions were very useful and helped to improve the quality of the manuscript.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 18.3
weeks
26.0
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted 2021
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 11.0
weeks
18.4
weeks
n/a 4 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2021
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 17.4
weeks
34.7
weeks
n/a 5 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2020
Motivation: Though the reviewing process took quite a long time, the comments from the reviewers were very useful for my manuscript. I felt that my manuscript was significantly improved after the revisions. Once again, I am really appreciate all reviewers for their excellent comments.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 15.2
weeks
23.2
weeks
n/a 5 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Motivation: I was impressed on the quality of the review reports received. The manuscript was hugely improved and also my current work has improved a lot thanks to the many things learned through the review process. The editors looked for many reviewers and were very committed to help improving the work instead of just accept/reject, which is very rare. Overall, the best one could hope for from a publication experience.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 7.7
weeks
37.3
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2021
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).
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 4.6
weeks
5.1
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2021
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 18.6
weeks
27.9
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2021
Motivation: Reviewers were real experts in the field of agronomy
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 12.9
weeks
21.1
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2021
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 9.7
weeks
19.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2021
Motivation: Went relatively fast.
Good comments from reviewers and field editor.
Number of reviewer good with 3
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 14.6
weeks
31.1
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2021
Motivation: The review process was constructive, courteous, and overall adequate. The editor responded quickly to inquiries regarding issues with submission system. The reviews and editors acted in a timely and helpful manner that improved the quality of the manuscript. Overall a rewarding a experience - that I can recommend.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 10.9
weeks
17.1
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 8.7
weeks
13.1
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 16.1
weeks
23.7
weeks
n/a 4 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 15.2
weeks
26.2
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 16.9
weeks
24.7
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 26.4
weeks
32.0
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 9.0
weeks
23.0
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2020
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 21.1
weeks
32.3
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted 2020
Motivation: The quality of the reviews was good, the reviewers and the editor gave mostly helpful and fair comments and the management of the manuscript was efficient but the whole review process took too long. Waiting for 8 months from submission to acceptance is a bit too much.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 11.7
weeks
36.6
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2019
Motivation: The reviewers were serious and knowledgeable of their disciplines. Even though they clearly indicated that they liked the topic, they were persistent in trying to help us improve the paper quality of the paper. After the three revisions, the quality of our paper has improved substantially.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 31.1
weeks
31.1
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2019
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 10.6
weeks
27.9
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2019
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 17.4
weeks
21.7
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2018
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 19.7
weeks
31.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2019
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 21.7
weeks
40.1
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2018
Motivation: Editorial feedbacks were prompt, succinct, reasonable and courteous. Any time lapses may have been due to reviewer lags and schedules which editors might not be in control of.
Would be good for the journal to allow at least an extra figure and one extra table
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 14.7
weeks
25.0
weeks
n/a 4 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2019
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 12.9
weeks
21.1
weeks
n/a 4 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2019
Motivation: The formatting requirements for the journal are somewhat onerous, and would make me hesitate before submitting there again (e.g. strict limitations on number of figures with no option for supplementary materials, unusual format for figures, integrated results/discussion sections). However, the review process was relatively speedy and requests from the editors were reasonable. The editors were diplomatic about reviewer comments deemed unnecessary or irrelevant.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 17.4
weeks
27.1
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted 2019
Motivation: Review process is so long!
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 13.3
weeks
13.3
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected 2017
Motivation: The review process is too long compared to other journals.
Reviewers accept the paper (with various remarks), but the Editor decided to reject it.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 21.9
weeks
25.7
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2018
Motivation: The whole process took a reasonable time (a bit more than 6 months) and review quality was good and improved the manuscript. I appreciate that the journal is also asking to improve the paper visibility by adding an image and a blog post.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 14.7
weeks
21.4
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted 2019
Motivation: The editors at this journal are lovely and helpful with good constructive advise. However the whole process takes too long overall compared to other journals and so while I have enjoyed publishing in this journal (four times now) I will likely try elsewhere with my papers next time, for a quicker result.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 10.4
weeks
26.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2018
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 12.9
weeks
25.0
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2018
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 26.0
weeks
42.2
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2017
Motivation: I think the revision process was perfect and allowed me learn more about writing and submitting scientific work. Thanks
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 15.6
weeks
34.3
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2018
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 17.3
weeks
17.7
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2018
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 15.3
weeks
17.1
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2018
Agronomy for Sustainable Development 15.0
weeks
24.6
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted 2018