Reviews for "Journal of Cleaner Production"

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
Journal of Cleaner Production 6.7
weeks
7.1
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: I was a little worried regarding handling time from reading the other comments here on SciRev. However, my experience with JCP was very good. The submission to first decision time was excellent and the reviewer's comments were useful and of high quality. It was my first experience with this journal, but I would definitely consider it again in the future.
Journal of Cleaner Production 7.3
weeks
13.3
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: The overall review process was very efficient and the review reports were very constructive.
Journal of Cleaner Production 33.9
weeks
39.9
weeks
n/a 2 1
(bad)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: The whole review process took too long. In the resubmission of the manuscript (where extensive changes were made), the editor said that he received two conflicting reviews, one reviewer was satisfied with the changes, the other acknowledged the changes but thought it was still not ready for publication. This whole process took almost a year and it would be good to have an input earlier on.
Journal of Cleaner Production 7.8
weeks
31.7
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: It took time to publish in this journal but I think JCL consider quality and rigour in Publication.
Journal of Cleaner Production 13.4
weeks
21.0
weeks
n/a 5 2
(moderate)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: Referee reports in second round were of poor quality, but it also seems that the editor considered the paper to be not within the aims and scope of the journal - which is of course ok, but usually this gives you a desk rejection.
Journal of Cleaner Production 36.0
weeks
40.7
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: The overall process was quite long. It took almost 1 year for the article to be published. The reviewers comments were sensible and the suggested changes improved the quality of the paper.
Journal of Cleaner Production 5.3
weeks
5.3
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: In this case, it went on well. In another manuscript, reviewing time went more than 20 weeks.
Journal of Cleaner Production 3.3
weeks
3.3
weeks
n/a 4 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Dr. Huising and Dr. Klemes do great job in taking the manuscript, handling and finding reviewers and maintaining a fast communication in all aspects. JCP was the most efficient journal that I have worked with so far. I can assure you that you will receive iniitial feedback in less than 2-2.5 months